Ballard- Baptismal Challenge

[filovirus]

Late "90s mission here to Central America. We were instructed by our mission president to invite for baptism within the first 5 minutes of the first discussion. We were even taught to say something similar to "we will be holding holding baptism 2 weeks from this Sunday. If you come to know what we are teaching is true, will you be baptized on (such and such date). I averaged about 2 baptism a week throughout the duration of my mission. Anywhere from an 8 year old who we would just get a parent's signature, to families who would be investigators for months. Unfortunately ,the majority of my baptism were of the younger variety. If I were to bet, I would say that 90-95% of the people I baptized went inactive within a year of their baptism. Of this, I feel somewhat ashamed.

When I was Ward Mission Leader, I tried my hardest to make sure our local missionaries did not make the same mistakes that I feel I made. Quick baptisms! I am glad the culture has changed and is continuing to change.

As far as gaslighting, I'm not sure. I would probably give the benefit of the doubt, but I find I am a very trusting person. I don't believe the apostles are whitewashing or deceiving the members.

[ALarson]

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I don’t see anything well-intended about impugning the honesty of an apostle, accusing him of “gaslighting,” (which, by definition, is malicious deception), etc. I make no apology for defending him against such slander. 

Well, the personal attacks and name calling from both sides (so to speak...) are wrong, IMO....and the mods have done a good job from what I've seen here.

But, overall the discussion has been interesting and I think mostly civil.   This discussion is also a great example of how diverse the experiences can be when serving a mission.  I tend to believe much of this has to do with who the Mission President was and how he interpreted the instructions given.  

I think it's good if the current leaders clarify (and make changes where necessary to correct past mistakes or problems they now see) and I honestly believe that was Elder Ballard's intentions with what he stated.  I do hope any new practices will help improve the low retention rate and I support our leaders doing this.

Edited July 1, 2019 by ALarson

[alter idem]

On 6/27/2019 at 9:50 AM, HappyJackWagon said:

On my mission we were required to report numbers. Lots and lots of numbers: number of discussions, number of golden questions, number of baptismal challenges, number of investigators at church, how many baptisms etc. etc. It was most definitely a highly regimented program full of reporting on behaviors. It's a good way to hold people accountable to doing the things the leadership wants done.

These things all started with the Mission President, and then funneled down through the AP's, Zone leaders, district leaders.  Sometimes we reported weekly, sometimes daily. It was clearly an expectation that by the 2nd discussion every investigator should be invited to be baptized. The thinking at the time was that a challenge from a representative of Christ would help the investigator feel the spirit and choose to join the church. I recall vividly that by the end of the 2nd discussion we would challenge each person to be baptized. We would pray with them. "How do you feel?" They might say something like "Good." or "relaxed" and we would respond with something like "That's the spirit testifying to you that God wants you to be baptized. Will you follow Jesus and be baptized?"  Or they might respond with something like "I don't really feel anything" and we would respond with "Do you think God would tell you if it was wrong? If you don't feel God telling you it is wrong, then it is right. That's the spirit."

It was a bit of a hard push sales approach. No question about it. It was definitely part of my mission culture, but also the mission culture of virtually all of my friends as well. After my mission I've served as ward mission leader, EQP, HPGL, Bishop, YMP, High Council and in all of these positions I had regular interaction with the missionaries. Except for the past 10 years where I've seen an easing away from this hard sales method, I remember many discussions with missionaries privately or in council meetings and they also had the expectation placed on them that they were to challenge for baptism by the end of the 2nd discussion UNLESS the spirit prompted them not to.

So when Elder Ballard says this...

...I have to wonder how honest he is being. He's been a part of the missionary committee. He was involved in the creation of Preach My Gospel. But he doesn't know where these practices began? I'm incredulous.

Can someone please help me understand how he could make a statement like this and millions of members not view it as disingenuous? Yes, there's the caveat about feeling the spirit, but missionaries are trained and directed how to "help investigators recognize the spirit" and "overcome objections" which can become a manipulation of the investigator.

IF they really want to dramatically increase retention rates then there is a lot of work to do. Getting away from an almost blanket requirement of challenging people for baptism by lesson 2 is a very good start. But that good effort is overshadowed by a claim that "church leaders don't know where these practices began". Leaders have got to be better than that IMO.

Sounds like you were in one of those missions run by a Mission Pres. who was into numbers.  I have a relative who had such a difficult time on his mission because he was in one of these missions that it really caused him problems later.  I think it's a symptom of some of the CEO type A personalities that often are called as mission presidents.

I can believe Pres. Ballard is unsure where these ideas come from, because that was not what they were suggesting, but when a Mission Pres. is given the charge to step up the mission work, they may decide to do it like a business.  I also  believe that when General Authorities come to visit, everyone puts on their best show--like a Potemkin Village, it looks great when they come, everything runs as it should and the leaders are on their best behavior.  The General Authority goes away not always seeing what's really happening--unless he is praying for discernment and looking for problems, something they may not do all the time.

[Amulek]

17 minutes ago, filovirus said:

Late "90s mission here to Central America. We were instructed by our mission president to invite for baptism within the first 5 minutes of the first discussion.

Late 90's mission here to Seattle, WA. I remember having a discussion with my mission president once where he related to me that, when he was called, he was told that there was only one measure he should consider when determining his success as a mission president: where the missionaries who were called to serve under his authority wound up in 30 years.

I assumed similar instructions were likely given to other mission presidents as well, but I think it's just difficult for some people to break from what they know. For instance, the president prior to the one I primarily served under was a CEO of a major construction firm and from what I was told by older missionaries (always something to be taken with a grain of salt, mind you, but there was a pretty broad consensus) was that he was much more...Franklin Covey / number-oriented than his replacement. 

My perception is that the church has been moving away from that kind of management style for quite some time now, and to the extent that it still persists I think it's fair to say that it isn't because of what the leaders of the church intend.  

 

[Duncan]

To put it mildy my mission was HUGE into numbers and as bad as it was the worst story I heard came from a man who served in Chile. He said they had this giant cut out of that Second coming of Jesus painting and the missionaries who baptized had their photos on Jesus' right hand with those that didn't on his left and he told me he would cry he couldn't baptize. He said a visiting GA saw this and got rid of it and i'm assuming scolded the MP

[bluebell]

Just now, Duncan said:

To put it mildy my mission was HUGE into numbers and as bad as it was the worst story I heard came from a man who served in Chile. He said they had this giant cut out of that Second coming of Jesus painting and the missionaries who baptized had their photos on Jesus' right hand with those that didn't on his left and he told me he would cry he couldn't baptize. He said a visiting GA saw this and got rid of it and i'm assuming scolded the MP

That's horrible.

[bluebell]

I served in Northern CA in the late 90s and had the best mission president possible.  We reported numbers every week but other than occasional mission-wide number goals (which were a focus but not pushed), it was not a focus.  I remember the baptismal challenge being at the end of the 2nd discussion, which I thought was weird.  We were asked to follow the discussion format but it was largely left up to us on whether or not we felt the person was ready to consider it.  I never had anyone commit to baptism at that time but they always said they would worry about that once they knew more.  We always supported them in that.

Interestingly, one of the only parts of the Missionary Guide that I still remember was the part where it talked about not viewing people as numbers and contrasted the negative example of the missionary who, when asked how many he had baptized, responded with 5! (or whatever the number was) with the good example of the missionary who responded "well, let's see, there was Mary from my first area, and then Jacob who lived next door to us, and the Jensen family from Mexico,..."

So right from the MTC my perspective (what I felt I had been taught) was that numbers served a purpose but were not what was really important.

[JulieM]

3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

As I recall it’s not an invitation to be baptized there and then, but to prepare oneself for some specified future date. No conscientious missionary is going to baptize or approve someone for baptism who has not reached the requisite level of preparation by the time that date arrives. Nor would he or she ignore a prompting from the Spirit not to extend a baptism invitation to one who is not ready for it.

Scott, in a perfect world this would be the way 18 and 19 year olds are.  But in talking to my husband about this thread he admitted that the pressure on his mission from his leaders to get baptisms was very intense and he knew of no missionary who’d not celebrate and rush any investigator into baptism if they gave the nod in the first or second discussion (and they’d firmly believe that’s what the spirit was telling them to do).  Unless there were serious, obvious sins going on, there was no way the missionary would tell someone they needed to wait because the spirit didn’t confirm (because they needed to baptize!!!)

My husband regrets baptizing many of those he did on his mission (or at least not waiting, teaching them more and making sure they really were committed to fully living the gospel).  He knows of no one he baptized that didn’t stop attending and some with bitter feelings.  Rushing most into baptism can be disastrous I think, so this is good to instruct to wait.

Edited July 1, 2019 by JulieM

[Danzo]

I was about 3 quarters into my mission before I realized that reporting numbers and the mission rules (the administrative rules, not the worthiness rules) were really unnecessary and unimportant.   The last part of my mission, we decided to stop worrying about proselyting hours, people we talked to, discussions, schedules etc and just focus on bringing people to Christ.  Once we started doing that, we were able to have more success (as measured by all of the metrics we ignored) than I had the entire mission previously.  I don't really know that it something that can be taught, but something that I had to learn for myself.  When I think back on it, I don't know that having the mission president tell me to ignore the rules and number, and  follow the spirit would have been as effective as me discovering it for myself.  

It is almost as if the mission rules, and number report was a crutch that I leaned on until I really learned how to be a missionary. 

 

 

[SettingDogStar]

32 minutes ago, Danzo said:

I was about 3 quarters into my mission before I realized that reporting numbers and the mission rules (the administrative rules, not the worthiness rules) were really unnecessary and unimportant.   The last part of my mission, we decided to stop worrying about proselyting hours, people we talked to, discussions, schedules etc and just focus on bringing people to Christ.  Once we started doing that, we were able to have more success (as measured by all of the metrics we ignored) than I had the entire mission previously.  I don't really know that it something that can be taught, but something that I had to learn for myself.  When I think back on it, I don't know that having the mission president tell me to ignore the rules and number, and  follow the spirit would have been as effective as me discovering it for myself.  

It is almost as if the mission rules, and number report was a crutch that I leaned on until I really learned how to be a missionary. 

 

 

That's what the OG missionaries did! No numbers and no reports. There was great rejoicing in the saving of souls not in the accomplishment of number goals. Though I do agree that maybe some number counting could be good to get some missionaries going, like an "Aaronic missionary law."

[Scott Lloyd]

5 hours ago, JulieM said:

Scott, in a perfect world this would be the way 18 and 19 year olds are.  But in talking to my husband about this thread he admitted that the pressure on his mission from his leaders to get baptisms was very intense and he knew of no missionary who’d not celebrate and rush any investigator into baptism if they gave the nod in the first or second discussion (and they’d firmly believe that’s what the spirit was telling them to do).  Unless there were serious, obvious sins going on, there was no way the missionary would tell someone they needed to wait because the spirit didn’t confirm (because they needed to baptize!!!)

My husband regrets baptizing many of those he did on his mission (or at least not waiting, teaching them more and making sure they really were committed to fully living the gospel).  He knows of no one he baptized that didn’t stop attending and some with bitter feelings.  Rushing most into baptism can be disastrous I think, so this is good to instruct to wait.

I purposely put the word “conscientious” as a qualifier for “missionary,” realizing  that some do not behave conscientiously, but being optimistic enough to believe that many do, especially when properly instructed and led. 

I further believe it is the intent of President Ballard and the other Church leaders to promote the high standards of convert baptism readiness that you say only transpire in “a perfect world,” hence the statements by President Ballard at the mission leadership seminar.  

Finally, I find it more than a little ironic that President Ballard is getting blamed on this thread for the development of a general attitude of laxness in such baptism readiness, even though he declares (credibly, in my view) that he doesn’t know how or when such an attitude originated and even though he is working, through his address at the mission leadership seminar, to eliminate such an attitude. 

Edited July 2, 2019 by Scott Lloyd

[SettingDogStar]

6 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I find it more than a little ironic that President Ballard is getting blamed on this thread for the development of a general attitude of laxness in such baptism readiness,

Maybe I didn't read the thread well enough but I don't think its President Ballard being blamed for the culture of laxness. I think he was being blamed for somehow not being aware how it started, which he obviously didn't have anything to do with. I don't think he was doing either but I that's the accusation.

Edited July 2, 2019 by SettingDogStar

[Scott Lloyd]

9 minutes ago, SettingDogStar said:

Maybe I didn't read the thread well enough but I don't think its President Ballard being blamed for the culture of laxness. I think he was being blamed for somehow not being aware how it started, which he obviously didn't have anything to do with. I don't think he was doing either but I that's the accusation.

They’re saying the culture of laxness stemmed from how the printed missionary lessons were written/arranged under President Ballard’s (and others’) watch. That strikes me as a bad rap. Nothing I’ve seen quoted here from the Church countenances rushing a person into baptism before he or she is ready. 

[The Nehor]

4 hours ago, Duncan said:

To put it mildy my mission was HUGE into numbers and as bad as it was the worst story I heard came from a man who served in Chile. He said they had this giant cut out of that Second coming of Jesus painting and the missionaries who baptized had their photos on Jesus' right hand with those that didn't on his left and he told me he would cry he couldn't baptize. He said a visiting GA saw this and got rid of it and i'm assuming scolded the MP

Yikes....

My first Mission President was a corporate type but while he was big on hitting metrics he would come down hard on people who cut corners to get baptisms. He was big on retention and was vindicated when President Hinckley gave his broadcast on retention while he was out and got even more focused on it.

My second was a CES guy and he was big on teaching us doctrine.....all of it with the belief that knowing it was more motivating then focusing on practice. Greatest teacher I have known in my life so far outside of a few General Authorities.

Edited July 2, 2019 by The Nehor

[Hamba Tuhan]

6 hours ago, filovirus said:

Late "90s mission here to Central America. We were instructed by our mission president to invite for baptism within the first 5 minutes of the first discussion.

Thanks for sharing. This certainly provides context for what Pres Ballard was counselling against in the training. I would hope that everyone could agree that this is not something that he or other Church leaders have put into the discussions or any training materials.

[Hamba Tuhan]

5 hours ago, JulieM said:

But in talking to my husband about this thread he admitted that the pressure on his mission from his leaders to get baptisms was very intense ...

My husband regrets baptizing many of those he did on his mission (or at least not waiting, teaching them more and making sure they really were committed to fully living the gospel).  He knows of no one he baptized that didn’t stop attending and some with bitter feelings.

Your husband -- and some others on this thread -- certainly had a very different experience to what I did. I'm everylastingly grateful for the experience I had. It laid the foundation for everything good that has come into my life as a Church member thereafter. When we get things wrong in the Church, it hurts pretty much everyone involved.

[Hamba Tuhan]

13 hours ago, The Nehor said:

I would also do more street meetings.

Oh man, I loved street preaching as a missionary.

Quote

I would play more soccer with the kids and teens in the area. That got us in more doors then knocking on them.

We always stopped to play kickball with the kids in street just because it felt like what the Lord would have done, but you're right about how many doors it opened up too. Such happy memories!

[Rain]

 

6 hours ago, SettingDogStar said:

That's what the OG missionaries did! No numbers and no reports. There was great rejoicing in the saving of souls not in the accomplishment of number goals. Though I do agree that maybe some number counting could be good to get some missionaries going, like an "Aaronic missionary law."

My first mission president asked for numbers. I do think your Aaronic law idea has merit with him. My understanding was there was a lot of problems in the mission when he arrived. It makes sense to me after meeting someone who had been there just before my MP arrived. This former missionary told us he couldn't believe how strict my MP was about all sorts of things. "He wouldn't even allow missionaries go the movie theater!"

Those numbers helped the mission turn around. 

Three months before I went home the new MP came and stats were now about names. Who did you teach? What did you teach her?  

Those who were newer got down on the 1st MP. I had seen the mission change a LOT and recognized that many of the missionaries needed those numbers in order for the change to occur. 

[SettingDogStar]

1 hour ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

Your husband -- and some others on this thread -- certainly had a very different experience to what I did. I'm everylastingly grateful for the experience I had. It laid the foundation for everything good that has come into my life as a Church member thereafter. When we get things wrong in the Church, it hurts pretty much everyone involved.

I regret probably a majority of things I did on my mission, the way I approached situations and the gospel. However I LOVED my mission and it formed the foundation of my testimony and my relationship with Christ. 

Having regret doesn’t mean it we don’t appreciate what happened and how it shaped our lives.

[Hamba Tuhan]

1 hour ago, SettingDogStar said:

Having regret doesn’t mean it we don’t appreciate what happened and how it shaped our lives.

Oh, absolutely! Making mistakes is essential to our learning and growth. But I've seen too many people hurt in really bad ways when people systematically try to do the Lord's work in other than the Lord's way.

[california boy]

15 hours ago, Duncan said:

did you ever know Elders Woolley, Olsen, or Gross?

Absolutely.  Elder Wooley was my companion.  Elder Gross was in my zone.  Not sure if I remember Elder Olson.  How do you know these guys?  Did you serve at the same time?

As a side note, Elder Wooley. said he was related to Spencer W. Kimball and the W stood for Wooley, something I didn't know and something I never forgot.

If anything, this thread has brought back great memories of missions.  It feels like we are fighting over some really insignificant issue and loosing site of how wonderful being on a mission can be.

Edited July 2, 2019 by california boy

[Duncan]

8 minutes ago, california boy said:

Absolutely.  Elder Wooley was my companion.  Elder Gross was in my zone.  Not sure if I remember Elder Olson.  How do you know these guys?  Did you serve at the same time?

As a side note, Elder Wooley. said he was related to Spencer W. Kimball and the W stood for Wooley, something I didn't know and something I never forgot.

If anything, this thread has brought back great memories of missions.  It feels like we are fighting over some really insignificant issue and loosing site of how wonderful being on a mission can be.

Small world! hahahaha! I had a companion named Elder Olsen from "Missourah" and we ate at the Woolley's all the time and I take it Elder Olsen's dad knew this Elder Woolley but he didn't seem to know him for some reason, I don't know! He was or is a lawyer but he owned a company that made surfboards, nice guy. Elder Gross is in my Stake and i've known him my whole life, his health isn't great , Ron Gross. I served in LA in the late '90's. I agree with how fun missions can be and being with companions that before your mission you would probably never have anything to do with but you learn to get along with them and see life from their view. Funnily enough one of my companions is now a big Chef and makes all these mouth watering dishes and puts them on FB, he worked at Whistler, BC even which is nothing to sneeze at. The WHOLE time I was with him he made me froot loops and cheerios and that stuff and he knew how to do all that???????  I feel more upset about that than this stuff! hahahahahhaha!

[california boy]

17 minutes ago, Duncan said:

Small world! hahahaha! I had a companion named Elder Olsen from "Missourah" and we ate at the Woolley's all the time and I take it Elder Olsen's dad knew this Elder Woolley but he didn't seem to know him for some reason, I don't know! He was or is a lawyer but he owned a company that made surfboards, nice guy. Elder Gross is in my Stake and i've known him my whole life, his health isn't great , Ron Gross. I served in LA in the late '90's. I agree with how fun missions can be and being with companions that before your mission you would probably never have anything to do with but you learn to get along with them and see life from their view. Funnily enough one of my companions is now a big Chef and makes all these mouth watering dishes and puts them on FB, he worked at Whistler, BC even which is nothing to sneeze at. The WHOLE time I was with him he made me froot loops and cheerios and that stuff and he knew how to do all that???????  I feel more upset about that than this stuff! hahahahahhaha!

That is very touching and exciting to hear some bit of news after all these years.  I thought Elder Gross's first name was Gordon, but hey, it has been 50 years and while he was in my zone, he was never my companion. Sorry to hear his health is not good.  Sadly, I have lost touch with all those guys through the years.  I was so close to some of them.  I still picture them in my. mind as if time has stood still for 50 years and they are still 19 with the world and their life ahead of them.  I wish I was better in keeping in touch.

 I honestly loved my mission.  It really makes me sad when I hear someone had a bad experience.  

[ALarson]

11 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Finally, I find it more than a little ironic that President Ballard is getting blamed on this thread for the development of a general attitude of laxness in such baptism readiness, even though he declares (credibly, in my view) that he doesn’t know how or when such an attitude originated and even though he is working, through his address at the mission leadership seminar, to eliminate such an attitude. 

Well, now it appears you're just making up imaginary accusations against President Ballard.  Or can you provide a link to where anyone here has claimed that he is responsible for the practice he's attempting to correct?

 

[rockpond]

18 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

As I recall it’s not an invitation to be baptized there and then, but to prepare oneself for some specified future date.

It is an invitation to be baptized on a specific future date.  And the invitation is what President Ballard commented on.

Again, he said: “it was never our intention to invite people to be baptized before they had learned something about the gospel, felt the Holy Ghost, and had been properly prepared to accept a lifelong commitment to follow Jesus Christ,” said President Ballard.