Status of the Church 2.0

[MacGyver]

11 minutes ago, bluebell said:

And women who have been endowed specifically have the priesthood in their homes.

Says who? 

If they have a husband or son in their home who has the priesthood then they have the priesthood in their home, otherwise they don't.

[MacGyver]

2 minutes ago, Olmec Donald said:

See History of the Church, volume 4, pages 602-607, which is Joseph's second address to the Female Relief Society, in which he "gave a lecture on the Priesthood showing how the sisters would come in possession of the privileges, blessings, and gifts of the Priesthood." (From Joseph's journal entry on page 602).

He was obviously referring to the endowment. But if they have would in the future "come in possession of the privileges, blessings, and gifts of the Priesthood," then they obviously weren't born with this. 

4 minutes ago, Olmec Donald said:

Which is more likely:  That we do not yet have the complete picture, or that HALF of the people performing PRIESTHOOD ORDINANCES in the temple are NOT priesthood holders?  

I think we don't have the complete picture and also that all the women who administer ordinances in the temple are working under the authority of the temple president or their husbands and don't actually hold the priesthood.

[MacGyver]

28 minutes ago, rchorse said:

People know when they're only being visited out of obligation or duty.

We still have assigned families. And people know that when the people who are assigned to them reach out it's because they have been assigned. The new system doesn't change this. 

[Olmec Donald]

4 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

He was obviously referring to the endowment. But if they have would in the future "come in possession of the privileges, blessings, and gifts of the Priesthood," then they obviously weren't born with this. 

Might a literal descendant of Aaron also benefit from instruction on how he would "come in possession of the privileges, blessings, and gifts of the Priesthood" if he were unaware of his birthright?

4 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

I think we don't have the complete picture and also that all the women who administer ordinances in the temple are working under the authority of the temple president or their husbands and don't actually hold the priesthood.

If all that's needed to perform priesthood ordinances is permission, then why not allow men who are unordained to do so?  

[MacGyver]

2 minutes ago, Olmec Donald said:

Might a literal descendant of Aaron also benefit from instruction on how he would "come in possession of the privileges, blessings, and gifts of the Priesthood" if he were unaware of his birthright?

Even literal descendants of Aaron still had to be ordained. They weren't just born holding the priesthood.

3 minutes ago, Olmec Donald said:

If all that's needed to perform priesthood ordinances is permission, then why not allow men who are unordained to do so? 

The roles and requirements for men and women are different. 

[Rain]

1 hour ago, MacGyver said:

You won't grow to truly love and serve those who you have stewardship over if you rarely visit them

That is true.  Good thing the church didn't tell us to visit less.

1 hour ago, MacGyver said:

and no one is expecting you to or pushing you to get out of your comfort zone and do it. 

Speak for yourself.  I, and others I know, don't go because we are being pushed to go.  We go because God first loved us and taught us to love others.

I get it. a lot of people really struggle with getting out.  I really believe a great part of that is because it was set up to not be responsible unless you got pushed.  You see it all around - you set up a meeting and the people tell you to remind them like they are children and have no way to do it on their own.  Doctors offices text, email and call about appointments.  It is so weird to me because when I have an appointment or meeting I put it on my own calendar and set up a reminder.  But we really need to teach people to be responsible  for their own selves and not rely on everyone else for the reminders and the push.  But that's going to take time to get people past that.  

Bluebell brought up the part of the plan where leaders are supposed to contact every 3 months now and ask about ministering.  This is an excellent bridge from contacting every month to having us act like adults and take care of it on our own.  I realize that not every presidency does this, but I do know my RSP does call every once in awhile and ask how my sister is.  

So we lessen the push and then increase our teaching on what it means to be to minister.  And it's going to be a little depressed in some areas because of that.  But in other areas you will start to see things flourish. Because when people get the doctrine and grow to love the people they start to look for real needs.

 

1 hour ago, MacGyver said:

Are those who struggled with ministering more or less likely to do it with less accountability?

First, they have NO less accountability.  They have fewer people checking on them.  There is a subtle, but real difference there.  

People who struggled with it will not do the true meaning of it less because they were unlikely to be doing it in the first place.  It was a check mark and a chance to get a stamp of approval for them when they reported.  Oh, they might have visited more, but I've been visited enough to tell you that for way too many I was just the checkmark box which really just wasted my time.   Now give me Mary as a a ministering sister who understood  and I would love her to visit any time and I would bet she does it no less now despite her health and disability.

Then you have people in the middle.  Who are starting to get the real thing, but don't quite have the full understanding yet.  They are the ones who need help.  But as we continue to teach the doctrine then they will understand more and more and their visits and all the other things they do will provide what they need to understand more.    

It doesn't get fixed by pushing them with a phone call and deadline.  It is a much slower, deeper fix of helping people understand.  

Edited January 20, 2022 by Rain

[Rain]

1 hour ago, Raingirl said:

Shouldn’t being accountable involve more than just a report a few times a year? Especially when a large number - perhaps even the majority- of those reports are simply to report that absolutely nothing was done. 

I think being accountable goes along with repentance and should be a daily kind of thing.

[bluebell]

30 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

Says who? 

If they have a husband or son in their home who has the priesthood then they have the priesthood in their home, otherwise they don't.

Pres. Nelson. In the October 2019 general conference.  It was in one of those talks that you said you are familiar with.

Now, may I clarify several additional points with respect to women and priesthood. When you are set apart to serve in a calling under the direction of one who holds priesthood keys—such as your bishop or stake president—you are given priesthood authority to function in that calling.

Similarly, in the holy temple you are authorized to perform and officiate in priesthood ordinances every time you attend. Your temple endowment prepares you to do so.

If you are endowed but not currently married to a man who bears the priesthood and someone says to you, “I’m sorry you don’t have the priesthood in your home,” please understand that that statement is incorrect. You may not have a priesthood bearer in your home, but you have received and made sacred covenants with God in His temple. From those covenants flows an endowment of His priesthood power upon you. And remember, if your husband should die, you would preside in your home.

As a righteous, endowed Latter-day Saint woman, you speak and teach with power and authority from God.

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

Women don't need to be ordained to have priesthood authority.  

 

EVERY calling in the church is delegated priesthood authority!

We are ALL set apart by the laying on of hands!

[bluebell]

44 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

Yes, I believe this has happened multiple times throughout church history. 

The question is whether or not "God [still] wanted them to do" what they were no longer being expected to do by the First Presidency and their local leaders.

 

You believe that the prophet and apostles have done what they knew God did not want because it was easier on the members?  (asking so that I know I'm understanding you correctly).

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, MacGyver said:

Are those who struggled with ministering more or less likely to do it with less accountability?

So President Nelson was a dummy who did not think through the effects of lowering the standards and was not inspired to do so, he just thought it might be nice.

I don't think so.

It was a burden.  A phone call is fine, and growing Christlike is a voluntary decision, not an excuse for someone else to nag you about your shortcomings.

I made and received those accountability calls, and they did not encourage emulating Christ on either side.

All they did is encourage guilt on one side and on the other side, pride

Edited January 20, 2022 by mfbukowski

[MacGyver]

4 minutes ago, bluebell said:

You believe that the prophet and apostles have done what they knew God did not want because it was easier on the members?  (asking so that I know I'm understanding you correctly).

No, I'm saying that the First Presidency has made changes that eased the members responsibilities and required less of of them. I believe this is simply a fact of history.

But the question is always whether or not God still expected the members to do what they were no longer being told to do. 

I will give you an example. It use to be that the gospel doctrine teacher in the ward had to teach each Sunday. Now, they only teach twice a month and in my ward we now have two gospel doctrine teachers, so they only teach once a month. The expectation for a gospel doctrine teacher is now only 25% of what it use to be. Is this better or worse for the spiritual well-being and growth of the Gospel Doctrine teacher? Does God really want the Gospel Doctrine teacher to only have to study and prepare a lesson once a month now instead of 4 or 5 times? Maybe. Maybe not. 

[MacGyver]

4 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

So President Nelson was a dummy who did not think through the effects of lowering the standards and was not inspired to do so, he just thought it might be nice.

That's not what I said. 

But the effect of this change is that those who already struggled to get out of their comfort zone and minister are even less likely to do it. 

[Olmec Donald]

7 hours ago, MacGyver said:

Even literal descendants of Aaron still had to be ordained. They weren't just born holding the priesthood.

A literal descendant of Aaron is born holding the right to the office of bishop, whereas anyone else has to be called and set apart and ordained as such.  That part is priesthood by birthright.  D&C 107:16-17 (sorry for the large print, I'm not trying to shout):

"No man has a legal right to this office, to hold the keys of this priesthood, except he be a literal descendant of Aaron.

"But as a high priest of the Melchizedek Priesthood has authority to officiate in all the lesser offices, he may officiate in the office of bishop when no literal descendant of Aaron can be found, provided he is called and set apart and ordained unto this power by the hands of the Presidency of the Melchizedek Priesthood."

7 hours ago, MacGyver said:

The roles and requirements for men and women are different. 

Outside of the temple, at this time, that seems to be the case.

But in the endowment ceremony, including in the performance of priesthood ordinances which the endowment ceremony is largely comprised of, that difference mostly if not entirely disappears.  There used to be differences in one covenant, but I'm under the impression those differences have been removed (I haven't been there for a while).

I may be mistaken in the details of exactly how women come into possession of priesthood, but by the time they enter the Celestial Room they have clearly been saying and doing things which would have been terribly out of place for a non-Priesthood-holder.  And in the absence of any formal ordination OR formal authorization to perform priesthood ordinances, the process of elimination leads to my conclusion that they've had it all along.

 

Edited January 21, 2022 by Olmec Donald

[T-Shirt]

The old Home Teaching system was not a very effective program.  It put unnecessary pressure and guilt on men to do something that was, frankly, often unnecessary.  Most people don't need to be visited every month in their home.  Heck, most people don't want to be visited every month in their home.  Before the change, as a High Priest group leader, I told the group that I didn't care about statistics and didn't care if we had zero visits  each month.  What I cared about was if each brother knew his families, knew their needs and wants, kept in contact with them and ministered to them according to their needs.  In addition, I cared about whether the families trusted them enough to reach out when needed, because they had built a relationship of love and friendship.  The new system of ministering is much more conducive to this.

Edited January 20, 2022 by T-Shirt

[mfbukowski]

3 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

That's not what I said. 

But the effect of this change is that those who already struggled to get out of their comfort zone and minister are even less likely to do it. 

Of course it is not what you said.  I can read.  You did not comprehend the point though. Bluebell is making the same point, and it seems not to be getting through 

[mfbukowski]

26 minutes ago, Olmec Donald said:

I may be mistaken in the details of exactly how women come into possession of priesthood, but by the time they enter the Celestial Room they have clearly been saying and doing things which would have been terribly out of place for a non-Priesthood-holder.

Remember that all the washing and annointing and naming and clothing  ordinances are done by women to women. Those are done before the communal presentation to both men and women is done. 

The authority is given when they are set apart 

Edited January 20, 2022 by mfbukowski

[bluebell]

26 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

No, I'm saying that the First Presidency has made changes that eased the members responsibilities and required less of of them. I believe this is simply a fact of history.

Thanks for clarifying.  I agree.  I think the run it by God though before they do it, and that they don't do it unless they feel like it's acceptable to Him.

Quote

But the question is always whether or not God still expected the members to do what they were no longer being told to do.

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by this as it pertains to the topic.  Do you mean whether or not God  still expects the members to do monthly visits, or whether or not God still expects them to take care of and support and serve the people they are assigned to minister to?

I do think that God still expects us to take care of and support each other, but I don't believe the new system makes that harder to do.  The old system didn't work very well (it was fairly abysmal in some circles). 

Quote

I will give you an example. It use to be that the gospel doctrine teacher in the ward had to teach each Sunday. Now, they only teach twice a month and in my ward we now have two gospel doctrine teachers, so they only teach once a month. The expectation for a gospel doctrine teacher is now only 25% of what it use to be. Is this better or worse for the spiritual well-being and growth of the Gospel Doctrine teacher? Does God really want the Gospel Doctrine teacher to only have to study and prepare a lesson once a month now instead of 4 or 5 times? Maybe. Maybe not. 

I never really thought about the growth that God wants the gospel doctrine teacher to accomplish.  I can't answer that question.

I think though that if someone is called to be gospel doctrine teacher for his growth alone (and not for what is best for the ward) then he will find ways that provide that growth if he asks God for help, regardless of how many times he teaches a month.

I used to teach RS once a month and I know that with old lesson manuals it was not hard to spend three weeks studying the lesson and putting it together.

I spend 8+ hours a month right now studying the come follow me lessons each month, even though GD doesn't happen every week.  The material is there, if we want to spend the time with it.

[Raingirl]

3 hours ago, bluebell said:

If they are reporting that nothing was done then the RS and EQ are supposed to step in and intercede, either doing the ministering themselves or assigning new ministers who will do it. 

And I guess opinions will vary on it but I think that reporting every three months is a pretty good system.  It takes a few months to get to know people and build a relationship with them.  And to work out how the personalities that have been assigned to care for each other are meshing.  

Ministers are supposed to reach out to the RS or EQ anytime there is a need that they should know about.  They should not be waiting for a quarterly interview to get the presidencies involved if that is useful.  I know that I've texted by RS president multiple times in one month once concerning a sister when her family had covid and her husband ended up in the hospital.  To let her know what was going on, that meals had been set up, and what else might be needed.

I have never seen what you mention in the first paragraph done in any of the wards I’ve been in. And the only re-assigning I’ve seen was the constant re-shuffling of assignments in visiting teaching. It was like there was some sort of rule that all assignments had to be changed every few months. If you were lucky enough to get someone who actually did anything- whether it was an actual visit or phone call (both extremely rare), or just a copy of the lesson mailed every month  - you knew you had to enjoy it while it lasted, because the assignment wouldn’t last more than six months at most. 
 

In my current ward, I’ve never had any contact from anyone about anything. 

[bluebell]

2 minutes ago, Raingirl said:

I have never seen what you mention in the first paragraph done in any of the wards I’ve been in. And the only re-assigning I’ve seen was the constant re-shuffling of assignments in visiting teaching. It was like there was some sort of rule that all assignments had to be changed every few months. If you were lucky enough to get someone who actually did anything- whether it was an actual visit or phone call (both extremely rare), or just a copy of the lesson mailed every month  - you knew you had to enjoy it while it lasted, because the assignment wouldn’t last more than six months at most. 

I can't imagine a RS presidency knowing that large amounts of women in their ward are not receiving any contact with the church and not caring.  That has not been my experience in the 8 or so wards that I've been a member of as an adult.  But  none of us are perfect and VT/ministering is a hard thing to organize.  Sometimes people don't follow through like they should.  I'm sure I've been guilty of that too.

That always annoyed me too, the constant changing.  We tried really hard not to do that when I was RS president.  My current ward does a good job not shuffling people around.  I had my last minister sister/visiting teach for years.  I've had my current list to minster to for years now as well.  It really does help.  It takes time to build relationships.

Quote

In my current ward, I’ve never had any contact from anyone about anything. 

Who have you spoken to about it?

[Raingirl]

1 minute ago, bluebell said:

I can't imagine a RS presidency knowing that large amounts of women in their ward are not receiving any contact with the church and not caring.  That has not been my experience in the 8 or so wards that I've been a member of as an adult.  But  none of us are perfect and VT/ministering is a hard thing to organize.  Sometimes people don't follow through like they should.  I'm sure I've been guilty of that too.

That always annoyed me too, the constant changing.  We tried really hard not to do that when I was RS president.  My current ward does a good job not shuffling people around.  I had my last minister sister/visiting teach for years.  I've had my current list to minster to for years now as well.  It really does help.  It takes time to build relationships.

Who have you spoken to about it?

Just because you can’t imagine it, doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.  From the wards I’ve been in, the wards friends are in, even from comments from other posters here, it’s far from an unusual occurrence. 
 

I’ve contacted the appropriate people.  I have no trouble making allowances for in-person visits due to the pandemic, but no contact at all? No response? 

[bluebell]

2 minutes ago, Raingirl said:

Just because you can’t imagine it, doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen.  From the wards I’ve been in, the wards friends are in, even from comments from other posters here, it’s far from an unusual occurrence. 

That's true for all of us, right?

Just because you have had the bad luck to never see it work well, doesn't mean it doesn't work well or correctly in many wards.  If my experiences don't discount yours (and I agree, they don't) then yours don't discount mine either.

Quote

I’ve contacted the appropriate people.  I have no trouble making allowances for in-person visits due to the pandemic, but no contact at all? No response? 

I suppose the only option then is to keep trying, with both everyone in the RS, the EQ, and the bishopric.  

[Raingirl]

21 minutes ago, bluebell said:

That's true for all of us, right?

Just because you have had the bad luck to never see it work well, doesn't mean it doesn't work well or correctly in many wards.  If my experiences don't discount yours (and I agree, they don't) then yours don't discount mine either.

I suppose the only option then is to keep trying, with both everyone in the RS, the EQ, and the bishopric.  

Oh, I totally believe that different things happen in different wards. Or for different people in the same wards. Or for women from men. I never stated that. Why would you assume that someone simply relating the facts of their own experiences means they think everyone has the same experience? Is someone who has a different experience than your’s not allowed to speak? We’re not even dealing with differing opinions here, we’re dealing with actual differing experiences.  Bully for you that everyone in your ward is perfect. 
 

“Keep trying” is not the only option. Leaving is also an option. 

[bluebell]

33 minutes ago, Raingirl said:

Oh, I totally believe that different things happen in different wards. Or for different people in the same wards. Or for women from men. I never stated that. Why would you assume that someone simply relating the facts of their own experiences means they think everyone has the same experience? Is someone who has a different experience than your’s not allowed to speak? We’re not even dealing with differing opinions here, we’re dealing with actual differing experiences.  Bully for you that everyone in your ward is perfect. 
 

“Keep trying” is not the only option. Leaving is also an option. 

It seems like I’ve hit a nerve, sorry. That wasn’t my intention.  Every ward has its problems.  

Yep. Leaving is an option. I meant it was the only option for someone with a testimony, which I assumed was applicable to you.

[MacGyver]

4 hours ago, bluebell said:

I think the run it by God though before they do it, and that they don't do it unless they feel like it's acceptable to Him.

I'm sure they do pray about their decision and feel inspired before they make any changes. But I also think that they are human and can make mistakes. I don't believe in prophetic infallibility, especially without a clear published revelation with the words of God, which we haven't had in over 100 years. 

4 hours ago, bluebell said:

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by this as it pertains to the topic.  Do you mean whether or not God  still expects the members to do monthly visits, or whether or not God still expects them to take care of and support and serve the people they are assigned to minister to?

Because I don't believe in prophetic infallibility, to me there is always a question of whether or not any decision they make is really the will of God. When they appear to lower the expectations, and then I see what I believe is a negative impact, it makes me wonder whether God really inspired the change. Maybe he did. It's always possible that God allowed them, or even instructed them, to lower the expectations in order to remove condemnation for not living up to the higher ones. But that would still be moving in the wrong direction in my opinion. 

4 hours ago, bluebell said:

I never really thought about the growth that God wants the gospel doctrine teacher to accomplish.  I can't answer that question.

I think though that if someone is called to be gospel doctrine teacher for his growth alone (and not for what is best for the ward) then he will find ways that provide that growth if he asks God for help, regardless of how many times he teaches a month.

I used to teach RS once a month and I know that with old lesson manuals it was not hard to spend three weeks studying the lesson and putting it together.

I spend 8+ hours a month right now studying the come follow me lessons each month, even though GD doesn't happen every week.  The material is there, if we want to spend the time with it.

I get what you are saying and I agree that we still have the ability to study and learn and grow, even when less is expected of us, but when I see people being asked to do much less than they were previously, I think of the following quote by Joseph Smith:

"Let us here observe, that a religion that does not require the sacrifice of all things, never has power sufficient to produce the faith necessary unto life and salvation."

I believe that what Joseph Smith said is true. If the church asks us to sacrifice less and less, then at some point our religion will no longer have the ability to produce the faith necessary to obtain salvation.