Ballard- Baptismal Challenge

[Steve-o]

30 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Was anyone taught the principle of asking if something is NOT true. IOW the prayer would seek a spiritual confirmation if something wasn't true (I'm thinking Moroni 10:4). Or similarly, study it out in your mind and make the decision and then ask for confirmation by asking something like "if this isn't true, or isn't the right thing, please let me know by the spirit."

It's a difference in phrasing the question. It assumes truth or that a decided path is appropriate unless the spirit prompted otherwise.

So instead of seeking a spiritual confirmation that God wants you to do something affirmative (like get baptized) you seek a spiritual witness to tell you if something is wrong or improper. So if the prayer is phrased..."God, the missionaries are teaching me about the church and have challenged me to be baptized on XXX date. If you don't want me to be baptized please let me know by the spirit" a no-response prayer would be viewed as an affirmative answer.

Was anyone else ever taught this way of praying?

I was.

Please don't tell me I was taught in church to pray wrong.

[The Nehor]

24 minutes ago, Raskolnikov said:

Nehor,

This is starting to get borderline personal now. I didn't plan on engaging with this at length or at depth, but I am astonished that you simply can't acknowledge that missionaries may have gotten the idea to invite people to be baptized as early as possible, at least in the first or second meeting, based on the written instructions that Salt Lake gave to them. Fine, you want to discard 30+ years of express instructions to missionaries to have the people make the baptism commitment as "as early as possible" as having something to do with the current practice of missionaries. But, just look at Preach my Gospel. The six lessons are now collapsed into four, and though they are more free form now, the formal instructions at the end of each lesson contain instructions to invite people to be baptized. 

Lesson 1 - "During this or any other lesson, do not hesitate to invite people to be baptized and confirmed. To prepare people for an invitation to be baptized and confirmed, teach the doctrine of baptism and testify often of the importance of all people being baptized by authority, of receiving a remission of sins, and of the wonderful gift of the Holy Ghost. You might say, “As the Lord answers your prayers and you feel that this message is true, will you follow the example of Jesus Christ by being baptized?” The invitation to be baptized and confirmed should be specific and direct: “Will you follow the example of Jesus Christ by being baptized by someone holding the priesthood authority of God? We will be holding a baptismal service on (date). Will you prepare yourself to be baptized on that date?”"

Lesson 2 - "The invitation to be baptized and confirmed should be specific and direct: “Will you follow the example of Jesus Christ by being baptized by someone holding the priesthood authority of God? We will be holding a baptismal service on [date]. Will you prepare yourself to be baptized on that date?”"

Lesson 3 - "The invitation to be baptized and confirmed should be specific and direct: “Will you follow the example of Jesus Christ by being baptized by someone holding the priesthood authority of God? We will be holding a baptismal service on [date]. Will you prepare yourself to be baptized on that date?”"

Lesson 4 - "The invitation to be baptized and confirmed should be specific and direct: “Will you follow the example of Jesus Christ by being baptized by someone holding the priesthood authority of God? We will be holding a baptismal service on [date]. Will you prepare yourself to be baptized on that date?”"

So, the instructions to these missionaries, now younger and arguably less prepared, are still the same. Invite, invite and invite. Don't hesitate. Even after the first lesson do not hesitate. "Be bold and confident as you invite people to make commitments (see Alma 38:12). Boldness shows your faith that obedience to the Lord’s commandments brings blessings" (page 196).

I fully support Elder Ballard's focus on preparing people to make lifelong commitments and feel that should be the new standard. However, the fact that people are invited early and often shouldn't be blamed on "these missionaries" or "some missionaries." It would take one conversation with almost any former missionary to know exactly where this practice came from - it came from Salt Lake and the missionary department in the written instructions that they were given and in countless meetings, lessons and instructions they received based on those instructions. Let's just call a spade a spade and move on.

Yes, it is still an option “As directed by the Spirit”. He Is obviously concerned it is being done when it is not directed by the Spirit or when the person has had no spiritual experience. It is not rocket science.

For many years it was encouraged. Yes, it was. When I was out it was in the First Discussion only when prompted by the Spirit and supposed to be done in the Second.

I do not doubt that there were missions that overly encouraged early baptismal commitments. I knew missionaries who did it out of misguided zeal. If you were encouraged to do First Discussion baptismal commitments by Mission Leaders when not prompted and did it you were wrong and your leaders were wrong. It happens. You are probably blameless. It cannot be blamed on the apostles who gave the materials we had that did not mandate that. Going beyond obedience into excess is a common failing of the Saints. If it is good to sometimes extend an early invitation it would be better to always do it. If it is good to wear Sunday clothes to church it is better to wear them all day. If giving 10% is good giving 50% is better.

And yeah, it is kind of personal. You are baselessly demeaning the missions of those who served in the past (including me and many of my friends) by suggesting we were all in error, somehow suggesting that error was passed down for decades, and we are indirectly responsible for an error today. Then you slander an apostle by claiming he was an author of the original error and is now suffering from dementia or is outright lying to rewrite history for some motive that no one has bothered to explore beyond wanting to speak evil of an apostle.

[SettingDogStar]

15 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Those really were abbreviated lessons. I remember being trained in both the MTC and again in the mission to do the diagram discussions which covered a ton of ground in just 15 minutes. I have no problem accepting that I made mistakes teaching on my mission. But I wasn't unique, in fact we were trained to do things that way. It seems my primary mistake was trusting leadership and doing what I was trained to do.

I know this wouldn’t work now days but sometimes I wonder if we should just hand missionaries a Book of Mormon and say “go for it!” That’s basically what they do in the old days and it worked really well 😂

[Raskolnikov]

5 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

I am so sure you do agree with it because you still in your last paragraph think he is somehow blaming you for something. He talks about what is needed before an invitation and is concerned that missionaries are jumping the gun. If you were jumping the gun and inviting baptism to someone who has had no spiritual experience then yeah, you messed up. If not, you are following what was said then and what was said now.

Also, I went ahead and checked Preach my Gospel. The baptismal commitment question was moved to lesson 3 out of 5 and this was revised quite a while ago so it is fair to ask why people think it is a requirement to ask earlier. It is very unlikely to be mission traditions carried down from our day infecting the present (missions have short memories due to turnover) so why are they asking in the First Discussion unless prompted by the Spirit?

Also, how does this have anything to do with our missionary service?

Nehor,

This appears to be getting less productive since you are now speaking out of both sides of your mouth and simply stating falsehoods.

"If you were jumping the gun and inviting baptism to someone who has had no spiritual experience then yeah, you messed up. If not, you are following what was said then and what was said now." Thank you for emphasizing my point that there is blame and judgment on missionaries who invited early, even though done strictly in accordance with the written instructions given to them by the Church. But, please show me where in the missionary instructions that have been in place since 1986, either in Preach My Gospel or the in six lesson Uniform System for Teaching the Gospel", the missionaries are told not to invite someone who hasn't had a spiritual experience or that the spiritual experience is a prerequisite.  I am curious, but can cite you examples to the contrary.

Also, you clearly didn't check Preach My Gospel. I already quoted exactly where the instruction to make the baptismal commitment invitation was in each and every lesson. I can't even begin to understand where you think that the commitment question was moved from lesson 3 to 5. Here are links to the current version on the Church's website:

Lesson 1 - https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/preach-my-gospel-a-guide-to-missionary-service/lesson-1-the-message-of-the-restoration-of-the-gospel-of-jesus-christ?lang=eng

The very first text box includes "Baptismal Interview Questions" and it ends with the text box entitled "Invitation to be Baptized" which I quoted above.

Lesson 2 - https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/preach-my-gospel-a-guide-to-missionary-service/lesson-2-the-plan-of-salvation?lang=eng

This lesson again beings with a text box including "Baptismal Interview Questions" lists that one of the invitatinos for the lessons is "Will you follow the example of the Savior and baptized on (date)?" and the lesson ends with a text box entitled  "Invitation to be Baptized" which I quoted above.

Lesson 3 - https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/preach-my-gospel-a-guide-to-missionary-service/lesson-3-the-gospel-of-jesus-christ?lang=eng

This lesson again beings with a text box including "Baptismal Interview Questions" lists that one of the invitatinos for the lessons is "Will you be baptized a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on (date)? Will you be confirmed and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost?" and the lesson ends with a text box entitled  "Invitation to be Baptized" which I quoted above.

Lesson 4 - https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/preach-my-gospel-a-guide-to-missionary-service/lesson-4-the-commandments?lang=eng

This lesson includes the express invitation in a text box entitled "Invitations" of "Will you be baptized and confirmed?" and also includes the text box entitled "Invitation to be Baptized" which I quoted above.

Lesson 5 - This one, wholly contrary to what you stated above, is the only lesson that doesn't include the baptismal invitation commitment.

[SettingDogStar]

1 minute ago, Raskolnikov said:

Nehor,

This appears to be getting less productive since you are now speaking out of both sides of your mouth and simply stating falsehoods.

"If you were jumping the gun and inviting baptism to someone who has had no spiritual experience then yeah, you messed up. If not, you are following what was said then and what was said now." Thank you for emphasizing my point that there is blame and judgment on missionaries who invited early, even though done strictly in accordance with the written instructions given to them by the Church. But, please show me where in the missionary instructions that have been in place since 1986, either in Preach My Gospel or the in six lesson Uniform System for Teaching the Gospel", the missionaries are told not to invite someone who hasn't had a spiritual experience or that the spiritual experience is a prerequisite.  I am curious, but can cite you examples to the contrary.

Also, you clearly didn't check Preach My Gospel. I already quoted exactly where the instruction to make the baptismal commitment invitation was in each and every lesson. I can't even begin to understand where you think that the commitment question was moved from lesson 3 to 5. Here are links to the current version on the Church's website:

Lesson 1 - https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/preach-my-gospel-a-guide-to-missionary-service/lesson-1-the-message-of-the-restoration-of-the-gospel-of-jesus-christ?lang=eng

The very first text box includes "Baptismal Interview Questions" and it ends with the text box entitled "Invitation to be Baptized" which I quoted above.

Lesson 2 - https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/preach-my-gospel-a-guide-to-missionary-service/lesson-2-the-plan-of-salvation?lang=eng

This lesson again beings with a text box including "Baptismal Interview Questions" lists that one of the invitatinos for the lessons is "Will you follow the example of the Savior and baptized on (date)?" and the lesson ends with a text box entitled  "Invitation to be Baptized" which I quoted above.

Lesson 3 - https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/preach-my-gospel-a-guide-to-missionary-service/lesson-3-the-gospel-of-jesus-christ?lang=eng

This lesson again beings with a text box including "Baptismal Interview Questions" lists that one of the invitatinos for the lessons is "Will you be baptized a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on (date)? Will you be confirmed and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost?" and the lesson ends with a text box entitled  "Invitation to be Baptized" which I quoted above.

Lesson 4 - https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/preach-my-gospel-a-guide-to-missionary-service/lesson-4-the-commandments?lang=eng

This lesson includes the express invitation in a text box entitled "Invitations" of "Will you be baptized and confirmed?" and also includes the text box entitled "Invitation to be Baptized" which I quoted above.

Lesson 5 - This one, wholly contrary to what you stated above, is the only lesson that doesn't include the baptismal invitation commitment.

I’ve only been home about a year from my mission and I, my wife, and my good companions can all testify to the fact of how pressured we were to get them to commit to a date on the first or second lessons. Elder Holland fisted our mission and taught this exact principle to our mission and our mission leaders.

[Raskolnikov]

3 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

And yeah, it is kind of personal. You are baselessly demeaning the missions of those who served in the past (including me and many of my friends) by suggesting we were all in error, somehow suggesting that error was passed down for decades, and we are indirectly responsible for an error today. Then you slander an apostle by claiming he was an author of the original error and is now suffering from dementia or is outright lying to rewrite history for some motive that no one has bothered to explore beyond wanting to speak evil of an apostle.

I was one of those missionaries and served in one of those missions. It is Elder Ballard who is suggesting we were all in error and that he can't fathom how it came to be. I quoted from the written materials given to each missionary to show how it may have come to be. I am not responsible for an error (if it is, we aren't even discussing that here), but I don't like being told that I am by someone who was involved in a quorum that had oversight over what the missionaries were given to read.

As to slander. Please tell me where I claim he was the author? I haven't even hinted as much. I claimed he had dementia? Really? I said he is outright lying? Where?

This has gone completely off the rails now and you are resorting to ad hominem attacks, baseless allegations and inflammatory rhetoric. And so it ends. Yikes. 

[CV75]

18 minutes ago, SettingDogStar said:

I think he’s also taking it really personally. We’re not attacking Elder Ballard or saying that we shouldn’t have invited investigators on the first lesson, so long as they had a spiritual experience. All were saying is thst we’re confused as to why Elder Ballard seems to think that it wasn’t Salt Lake pressuring the missionaries to invite that quickly.

How was Salt Lake pressuring the missionaries?

[SettingDogStar]

3 minutes ago, Raskolnikov said:

I was one of those missionaries and served in one of those missions. It is Elder Ballard who is suggesting we were all in error and that he can't fathom how it came to be. I quoted from the written materials given to each missionary to show how it may have come to be. I am not responsible for an error (if it is, we aren't even discussing that here), but I don't like being told that I am by someone who was involved in a quorum that had oversight over what the missionaries were given to read.

As to slander. Please tell me where I claim he was the author? I haven't even hinted as much. I claimed he had dementia? Really? I said he is outright lying? Where?

This has gone completely off the rails now and you are resorting to ad hominem attacks, baseless allegations and inflammatory rhetoric. And so it ends. Yikes. 

Yeah I think we need to chill. It’s just some confusion and some questions, it’s not an attack. We were taught certain things on our mission and were confused on how Elder Ballard doesn’t know we were taught those things. This isn’t complicated.

[rockpond]

3 minutes ago, Raskolnikov said:

I was one of those missionaries and served in one of those missions. It is Elder Ballard who is suggesting we were all in error and that he can't fathom how it came to be. I quoted from the written materials given to each missionary to show how it may have come to be. I am not responsible for an error (if it is, we aren't even discussing that here), but I don't like being told that I am by someone who was involved in a quorum that had oversight over what the missionaries were given to read.

Apparently this is the strategy when mistakes are made or additional light/knowledge is received:

We don't know how missionaries got the idea that they should be inviting investigators to get baptized so soon in the process.

We don't want this same sex marriage policy that seems to create hate and contention.

We never hid the other First Vision accounts.

And so it goes.

[SettingDogStar]

1 minute ago, CV75 said:

How was Salt Lake pressuring the missionaries?

Through the material. It wasn’t direct but it was in the material given to missionaries that highly encouraged you invite on the first or second lessons. It’s been quoted above. It had little to no mention of making sure your investigator had a spiritual experience but simply told you to invite them boldly to be baptized when you taught the lesson.

I’m not saying that it’s wrong to do that, I’m just pointing out that it was from the material that Salt Lake gave the missionaries that caused the culture to start forming.

[The Nehor]

13 minutes ago, Calm said:

Given there is some variation of interpretation of the article, maybe it would be best to wait until the full talk to make sure the Churchnews reported didn't leave out something critical or their paraphrase was just enough off to add confusion.  

This is assuming it will be released, is this likely?

Stop being the voice of reason. I am having fun.

13 minutes ago, rockpond said:

He said that it was "never [their] intention".  Never.  Not since PMG was published and the old discussions removed from use.  Never.  And Elder Ballard was in the Quorum of the Twelve in the timeframe I am speaking of.

Was there an excess of inappropriate invitations to baptism since the days when PMG was first put out? I have no idea. If the problem is recent why would he talk about it before?

15 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

He may be talking about new material but he claims not to know how it all started. The leadership started it decades ago. It started with training us OLD FARTS to preach the gospel and invite in certain ways. Now he's shocked that people still do that and can't figure out why they are inviting too early. Really?  We old farts all group up learning things a certain way and now our children are missionaries. Old farts like us are now mission presidents and bishops and in other leadership positions. He is blaming us and it's pretty disheartening.

We did not “all” learn that. I did not. I was taught to invite on the First Discussion if prompted, invite on the Second no matter what, and keep inviting on the rest if they had concerns or wanted to know more first. If they refused to keep or make any commitments including things like reading the Book of Mormon and praying I was taught to drop them.

He is not blaming anyone. If he was he would not be saying he is not sure where the current problem came from. He would just say it. And if some OLD FARTS cannot cope with correcting errors they were taught (such as compulsive early invites) or discarding the practices of the past as new light comes and implementing new practices better suited to our day or even just plain better then they might want to find a church without new revelation.

I thought the sifting of the church would come through difficult changes in church culture, programs, and practices but if a change in the missionary manual and a minor correction in missionary practice is causing offense......yikes. The story of Thomas Marsh and the milk strippings gets less and less ridiculous all the time.

[SettingDogStar]

2 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Apparently this is the strategy when mistakes are made or additional light/knowledge is received:

We don't know how missionaries got the idea that they should be inviting investigators to get baptized so soon in the process.

We don't want this same sex marriage policy that seems to create hate and contention.

We never hid the other First Vision accounts.

And so it goes.

Bold statements. Not entirely wrong either.

[HappyJackWagon]

4 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

Stop being the voice of reason. I am having fun.

Was there an excess of inappropriate invitations to baptism since the days when PMG was first put out? I have no idea. If the problem is recent why would he talk about it before?

We did not “all” learn that. I did not. I was taught to invite on the First Discussion if prompted, invite on the Second no matter what, and keep inviting on the rest if they had concerns or wanted to know more first. If they refused to keep or make any commitments including things like reading the Book of Mormon and praying I was taught to drop them.

He is not blaming anyone. If he was he would not be saying he is not sure where the current problem came from. He would just say it. And if some OLD FARTS cannot cope with correcting errors they were taught (such as compulsive early invites) or discarding the practices of the past as new light comes and implementing new practices better suited to our day or even just plain better then they might want to find a church without new revelation.

I thought the sifting of the church would come through difficult changes in church culture, programs, and practices but if a change in the missionary manual and a minor correction in missionary practice is causing offense......yikes. The story of Thomas Marsh and the milk strippings gets less and less ridiculous all the time.

You were taught to invite on the Second discussion "no matter what"? Me too.

But what if the investigator hadn't felt the spirit? Would you still invite? Isn't this what Elder Ballard is claiming to have never intended and doesn't know where it began: missionaries inviting investigators to be baptized without feeling the spirit. And you are defending his statement while also claiming you were taught to invite no matter what. Interesting.

ETA- Would you feel better if I conceded that he wasn't blaming anyone in particular, but was really just deflecting blame from the leadership, including himself. I can see that.

Edited June 27, 2019 by HappyJackWagon

[Raskolnikov]

 

2 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

The story of Thomas Marsh and the milk strippings gets less and less ridiculous all the time.

Oh, the irony that this should be the fable that you point to. It is almost too perfect.

[Robert F. Smith]

4 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

......................... 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.

All good points.  However, I would like to see you produce a timeline of the various missionary policies implemented in the past 50 years.  What sort of stages have they gone through?  Has it always been numbers?  What was Ballard doing all that time?

[Calm]

35 minutes ago, SettingDogStar said:

We’re not attacking Elder Ballard o

Terms like gas lighting and this below appear to claim or imply Elder Ballard is lying to me, which imo,qualifies as an attack.

Quote

...I have to wonder how honest he is being....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?...

 

[Robert F. Smith]

12 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Apparently this is the strategy when mistakes are made or additional light/knowledge is received:

We don't know how missionaries got the idea that they should be inviting investigators to get baptized so soon in the process.................

Would it be helpful to describe the various missionary strategies adopted by the LDS Church over the years (not just some local yokel mission president) and rate them for success or failure?  Moreover, would it be a good idea to compare those strategies with those of competing religious groups?

Have there in fact been shifts from one sort of emphasis or method to another over the years?  Or has it always been a melange of variations on only one method and one strategy all along?

[mapman]

24 minutes ago, rockpond said:

Apparently this is the strategy when mistakes are made or additional light/knowledge is received:

We don't know how missionaries got the idea that they should be inviting investigators to get baptized so soon in the process.

We don't want this same sex marriage policy that seems to create hate and contention.

We never hid the other First Vision accounts.

And so it goes.

It's interesting how similar the uncertainty expressed by Elder Ballard over this is to the repeated insistence of "we don't know" with how the priesthood ban began. This despite that we've known for a while now how the priesthood ban began, and I would assume it wouldn't be too hard to find the origins of this either. In any case, the important thing is that it is something that was taught by the leaders of the church. Perhaps if Elder Oaks weren't so insistent that the church never apologizes we wouldn't have all these lame attempts to divert responsibility from the leaders of the church.

It sounds like they are trying to reform some of the bad practices in the mission, which I wholeheartedly welcome. The thing that bothered me the most on my mission was when other missionaries treated baptism flippantly like something that belongs to them, or something they can stick on their resume for being advanced in leadership. I felt like I was blessed to be able to play a part in their baptism, a sacred and life-transforming event in their lives. I wonder if some returned missionaries now feel regret for being too pushy with people.

Edited June 27, 2019 by mapman

[The Nehor]

37 minutes ago, Raskolnikov said:

Nehor,

This appears to be getting less productive since you are now speaking out of both sides of your mouth and simply stating falsehoods.

"If you were jumping the gun and inviting baptism to someone who has had no spiritual experience then yeah, you messed up. If not, you are following what was said then and what was said now." Thank you for emphasizing my point that there is blame and judgment on missionaries who invited early, even though done strictly in accordance with the written instructions given to them by the Church. But, please show me where in the missionary instructions that have been in place since 1986, either in Preach My Gospel or the in six lesson Uniform System for Teaching the Gospel", the missionaries are told not to invite someone who hasn't had a spiritual experience or that the spiritual experience is a prerequisite.  I am curious, but can cite you examples to the contrary.

Also, you clearly didn't check Preach My Gospel. I already quoted exactly where the instruction to make the baptismal commitment invitation was in each and every lesson. I can't even begin to understand where you think that the commitment question was moved from lesson 3 to 5. Here are links to the current version on the Church's website:

Lesson 1 - https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/preach-my-gospel-a-guide-to-missionary-service/lesson-1-the-message-of-the-restoration-of-the-gospel-of-jesus-christ?lang=eng

The very first text box includes "Baptismal Interview Questions" and it ends with the text box entitled "Invitation to be Baptized" which I quoted above.

Lesson 2 - https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/preach-my-gospel-a-guide-to-missionary-service/lesson-2-the-plan-of-salvation?lang=eng

This lesson again beings with a text box including "Baptismal Interview Questions" lists that one of the invitatinos for the lessons is "Will you follow the example of the Savior and baptized on (date)?" and the lesson ends with a text box entitled  "Invitation to be Baptized" which I quoted above.

Lesson 3 - https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/preach-my-gospel-a-guide-to-missionary-service/lesson-3-the-gospel-of-jesus-christ?lang=eng

This lesson again beings with a text box including "Baptismal Interview Questions" lists that one of the invitatinos for the lessons is "Will you be baptized a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on (date)? Will you be confirmed and receive the gift of the Holy Ghost?" and the lesson ends with a text box entitled  "Invitation to be Baptized" which I quoted above.

Lesson 4 - https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/preach-my-gospel-a-guide-to-missionary-service/lesson-4-the-commandments?lang=eng

This lesson includes the express invitation in a text box entitled "Invitations" of "Will you be baptized and confirmed?" and also includes the text box entitled "Invitation to be Baptized" which I quoted above.

Lesson 5 - This one, wholly contrary to what you stated above, is the only lesson that doesn't include the baptismal invitation commitment.

I said it was moved to “lesson 3 out of 5” in case anyone did not know it went from 6 to 5 lessons. I did not say it was moved from 3 to 5. Since you misread me on that most of your accusations of me lying fall apart.

29 minutes ago, Raskolnikov said:

I was one of those missionaries and served in one of those missions. It is Elder Ballard who is suggesting we were all in error and that he can't fathom how it came to be. I quoted from the written materials given to each missionary to show how it may have come to be. I am not responsible for an error (if it is, we aren't even discussing that here), but I don't like being told that I am by someone who was involved in a quorum that had oversight over what the missionaries were given to read.

As to slander. Please tell me where I claim he was the author? I haven't even hinted as much. I claimed he had dementia? Really? I said he is outright lying? Where?

This has gone completely off the rails now and you are resorting to ad hominem attacks, baseless allegations and inflammatory rhetoric. And so it ends. Yikes. 

I was responding in the aggregate to all the posters attacking Elder Ballard and all those accusations were made....most of them explicitly. I admit the dementia one was extrapolation from someone claiming memory problems I think the intent to insinuate it was there.

I have not made a single ad hominem attack. Ad hominem attacks are made on people’s character to discredit what they say. I strived to discredit them and then made the attacks on the side to speculate on their motives. The arguments works just as well without the speculation. It was insulting but it was not ad hominem. I have no idea what the baseless allegations are about. I am refuting baseless allegations. As to inflammatory rhetoric I cop to inflammatory (it is one of my key posting attributes) but not to the pejorative meaning of rhetoric.

Edited June 27, 2019 by The Nehor

[HappyJackWagon]

3 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

All good points.  However, I would like to see you produce a timeline of the various missionary policies implemented in the past 50 years.  What sort of stages have they gone through?  Has it always been numbers?  What was Ballard doing all that time?

You want me to produce a timeline for the past 50 years that describes changes in missionary policies as well as Elder Ballard's activities during that time? Sounds like a massive assignment. I think I'll pass.

It would be interesting to see how the training shifted during that time. I served my mission in the early 90's but I suspect many of these expectations, training methods started during the early 80's just based on conversations I've had with others. For example, I know for sure that it was very different in the late 60's when my father served, and the 70's when my uncle served.

Beyond just missionary work, things in the church seemed to change quite a bit that affected my generation that doesn't seem to have impacted the previous generation, and in ways the church seems to be trying to correct now. Whether it was correlation, missionary teaching etc, there seems to be a difference in the experience of many in my generation verses other generations. But then, I only really know my own experience so maybe I'm wrong

[The Nehor]

17 minutes ago, HappyJackWagon said:

You were taught to invite on the Second discussion "no matter what"? Me too.

But what if the investigator hadn't felt the spirit? Would you still invite? Isn't this what Elder Ballard is claiming to have never intended and doesn't know where it began: missionaries inviting investigators to be baptized without feeling the spirit. And you are defending his statement while also claiming you were taught to invite no matter what. Interesting.

ETA- Would you feel better if I conceded that he wasn't blaming anyone in particular, but was really just deflecting blame from the leadership, including himself. I can see that.

I did not invite without a spiritual experience. I had some companions who did. Then again I tried not to teach the second discussion until there was some kind of spiritual experience and commitments were being made and kept. There were a few times where I rearranged the order of the discussions. Sometimes I did the third or fourth discussion before the second.

My first mission president said to always invite in the second discussion no matter what but was big on not teaching it until they were progressing by keeping any commitments. My second president was looser and often made the comment that if we were a stronger people we would be sent out with just the scriptures. He did encourage the baptismal commitment on the second unless judgement or the Spirit suggested otherwise.

To your ETA - No, and I am curious as to why someone has to be blamed.

[rockpond]

22 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

 

Was there an excess of inappropriate invitations to baptism since the days when PMG was first put out? I have no idea. If the problem is recent why would he talk about it before?

 

I have no idea.  That’s not the issue.

Elder Ballard said that they never had any intention of early baptismal invites and yet the materials we were given as missionaries encouraged us to invite people to be baptized in the first and second discussions (which in my mission could have been the doorstep/street first discussion and a follow up second discussion at their home or a member’s home before they had ever stepped foot in church). 

Is he saying that he had no knowledge of what was in the missionary discussions published by the church and taught to us in the MTC?

We’ve got another person on this thread saying that Elder Holland was telling he and his wife as missionaries to invite to baptize starting in the first and second discussions.  Who is the “we” that Elder Ballard speaks of that never had such intentions?

[The Nehor]

23 minutes ago, Raskolnikov said:

 

Oh, the irony that this should be the fable that you point to. It is almost too perfect.

I can assure you the irony was intentional. Part of the purpose there was self-deprecation and a gentle mocking of church culture in general. Glad you picked up on it. Was worried it was too subtle.  

Edited June 27, 2019 by The Nehor

[bluebell]

Nevermind.  I was confused.

Edited June 27, 2019 by bluebell

[rockpond]

12 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Would it be helpful to describe the various missionary strategies adopted by the LDS Church over the years (not just some local yokel mission president) and rate them for success or failure?  Moreover, would it be a good idea to compare those strategies with those of competing religious groups?

Have there in fact been shifts from one sort of emphasis or method to another over the years?  Or has it always been a melange of variations on only one method and one strategy all along?

I’m confident that every mission, mission president, and missionary had variations in how they taught/invited and/or instructed others to teach and invite. 

But the instructions given in the six discussions were clear that we could invite in the first discussion and should invite in the second.