Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Discussions toward a better understanding of LDS doctrine, history, and culture. Discussion of Christianity, religion, and faith in general is welcome.
User avatar
græy
Posts: 917
Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2016 2:52 pm
Location: Central TX

Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Post by græy » Tue Jan 21, 2020 2:23 pm

There have been lots of revolutionary changes in the church these past couple of years. I'm so glad I take my vitamins regularly, or all this change could have been really hard to handle.

In another thread Linked commented that he though the change to ministering was at least an attempt to get members to be more serviceable towards each other, rather than living by the old home teaching monthly checkbox. I really do agree with that. In theory, ministering should be much more friendly, more sincere, and more to the needs of the individuals and families being ministered to. But theory and practice are almost never in sync. I'll come back to this.

Among the more recent changes, the YM presidency has been given the pink slip. The bishopric is now the YM presidency AND the bishopric. But bishops and their counselors already had a VERY full plate. So to help relieve the poor bishop, members are now being taught both directly and indirectly to approach their RS President, or EQ President for any and all needs outside of worthiness issues. Request for financial support from fast offering funds are now funneled to the bishop through EQ and RS, not vice-versa. Testimony issues are now to be taken up with EQP and RSP, not the bishop. Family struggles (that don't require confession or worthiness interviews) are to be supported by EQP and RSP.

Direction for the members to approach their EQP or RSP has come from a 70 at our recent stake conference, and from the SP at recent ward conferences. RSPs and EQPs have also been instructed by stake leadership to teach members during ministering interviews that the EQP and RSP are the front line of ward support outside of worthiness issues. The message is basically, "Unless you need to confess sins, don't talk to you bishop." I assume this is being drummed into other stakes and wards in a similar fashion.

In theory, if the needy members stop seeking out the bishop, and the bishopric can stop weekly visits to the most needy families, then the bishopric would finally have time to engage the YM. Apparently, YW don't matter so the bishopric still won't be involved in their activities.

One bishop even went so far as to explain to me that as he and other bishops looked back over the past 3-5 (or sometimes more) years, they had spent hundreds of hours in meetings counseling adult members which almost never yields any positive result for those members. Bishops are essentially wasting the vast majority of their time working to help members who just won't change anyway. But the YM! Those precious future leaders of the church are still young and susceptible to brainwa.... er... love and support from the bishopric! So let the bishopric focus on the youth, and push the adults to the EQ and RS and their ministers.

Here's the problem with all of this. It isn't really going to work. Ministering is still seen as assigned or forced friendship. People will say ministering is being done if they happen to be friends with those they're assigned to, but otherwise, no one tries anymore than they did under home teaching. Without ministering happening the EQP and RSP are blind. People used to approach the bishop when they had troubles or needs. But they just don't think like that WRT the RSP or EQP. When no one volunteers information that they are in need, and ministers are unwilling to spy on them, the information just doesn't come out. Members are being told not to visit the bishop, which means now they're just not talking to anyone at all.

And the YM? They're even less motivated to come to the weekly PISS activities because why work on someone else's goal? Or if the activity is focused on your own goal, who really cares if you accomplish it besides yourself anyway?

And now, we all just sit in the mud and sink together.

Or maybe I'm just too cynical today.
I'm better than dirt... well most dirt. Not that fancy store bought stuff, I can't compete with that... full of nutrients and everything. -Moe Sizlack

User avatar
Brent
Posts: 456
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2016 9:39 am

Re: Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Post by Brent » Tue Jan 21, 2020 3:01 pm

Curiously the Bishop is the President of the Aaronic Priesthood and that's why he has 1st and 2nd assistants who come from the Priest's quorum. As long as 20 years ago when I was EQP I was taught that I was "the Bishop" except for worthiness issues to the Elders in the ward. I had to go to families and sit in their kitchens and do the household budget with them, we (EQ) ramrodded replacing a roof, cleaning up yards, etc...

The Stake Presidency was very clear that the physical well being of families in the EQ was the EQP responsibility.

As far as ministering it is and will be impossible to separate it for the entrenched idea of Home Teaching. You are assigned families. You are to visit them. You are to report. If it walks like a duck, quacks and swims like a duck...it's a duck. Ideally friends in the ward should be able to watch out for each other and use the EQP as a contact point to report and support needs.

When I was YMP I had to wrestle with some Bishop's Counselors who wanted to be the big cheese and that's OK because it makes sense from a organizational standpoint to have the Aaronic Priesthood presidency shepherd the Aaronic Priesthood.

User avatar
Corsair
Posts: 2931
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:58 am
Location: Phoenix

Re: Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Post by Corsair » Tue Jan 21, 2020 3:20 pm

The new program just barely started. We had the last Eagle Board of Review in our ward recently and bishops church-wide are still figuring out how they will move forward. The former scoutmaster is still an adviser in YM and he is taking the YM on a solid hike soon. I would like to see such activities continue.

The next question is, "How will we know that this change worked?" The LDS church is sometimes good and thinking long term. But they won't stick with a failing program forever. What metrics will they gather to know that things are moving in the right direction? The former YM president recently noted that he knew that the YM knew the right answers to all of the questions we might ask, but he was not at all convinced that they had a solid testimony to accompany those answers.

I'm far from convinced that indicators like temple attendance and meeting attendance would be truly useful, but it's better than most of what they can measure. Tracking YM and YW going on missions would be more reliable, as long as they tracked the rate of missionaries who also come home early. Temple marriages and raising the next generation in the LDS church is more in line of what they want. Waiting for the ten year results of this experiment will probably be what President Bednar uses for the next round of revelation.

User avatar
alas
Posts: 1603
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:10 pm

Re: Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Post by alas » Tue Jan 21, 2020 3:42 pm

Prediction, the lonely will get lonelier, the fringe will get more fringe, the abused will have one less person to go to, and the YW will start leaving in droves, and the YM will be that much more rotten and entitled.

Now, one good thing, my experience as RSP was that people came to me with problems like “my husband is out of work and I can’t buy groceries and the baby is out of diapers.” In fact, the women came to me with things that I had to refer them to the bishop because it required confession. Now, the men, I suppose always went to the bishop with things like that. In my experience (which I found out years later that my bishop was derelict in his duties) the bad communication was that the bishop was TOO involved with the men and young men for the RSP to convince him that welfare stuff had to be done. I won’t go into my past bishop’s screw ups, but what I have seen in other wards in that the young men were a plenty high priority getting more than their fair share of ward time and resources. But the YW, Primary, and RS were struggling for budget, for access to the building (gym especially) and for staffing, while the boys were given the biggest budget for scouting, the best teachers, and would literally bump the RS out of the gym so they could play basket ball. (yes, that has happened)

I remember feeling resentment as a YW that the only good SS teacher our class had had was taken away to teach the 3 inactive deacons. 15 active girls were not worth as much as 3 rebellious and inactive boys. It didn’t work because he couldn’t get those boys to come out either. I heard a conversation explaining why the girls lost the SS teacher as “those boys are our future priesthood” and I had to assume that the girls as the future mothers were chopped liver. Now, the boys will get even more attention from the “best people” in the ward. The girls are going to resent it because they see the relative importance placed on the bishop’s time and the women’s time.

Now, I want to point out something. It says in the D&C that the bishop is president of the priest quorum. Stake president of the HPs and EQP is a stake calling. OK, no problem....except the way the church was originally set up in Joseph Smith’s time when D&C was written, was that priests were not boys, but adult men. Elders were adult men. A inversely priesthood given to all men in the church and even little boys did not seem to be the idea. The duties of deacons seem to be adult duties, not the duties that 11 year old boys can handle. Priesthood as described in D&C seems to be for a select group of leaders, not for every Tom, Dick, and Harry who is a member, sort of like all the other churches do it.

This discrepancy between what the D&C outlines and what we do creates a problem where the structure as outlined puts the leader of the whole congregation as president of a class of children. While we are at it, let’s make the RSP teach primary. I don’t think God even intended to make 11 year olds deacons, but that deacons should be more what they are in other denominations. “Teachers” they should be the ones teaching, obviously. But teen boys shouldn’t be teaching adult SS and priesthood classes. Priests they should deliver the sermons, and do the ordinances such as baptism, just like Catholic priests do. Adults doing adult responsibilities. The teen boys should be alter boys. Yup, alter boys, who help with the sacrament and are in sort of training for serving as priesthood when they become adults.

But we have a bad case of “priesthood creep” where the age of ordination got younger and younger, and to give all the priesthood boys and men something to do, they made counting attendance a priesthood only calling, organizing SS priesthood only, and pretty soon there are not positions for women because 75% of callings require priesthood. Why? Well because all the men get priesthood and need tasks.

The church has too many chiefs and not enough Indians. And now, the structure just got made more lopsided because they put the leader of the congregation teaching children because rather than seeing that the structure is not being done as instructed, we elevate boys to the most important group in the congregation as if the group of priests is really the ward counsel.

So, my prediction is that this isn’t going to work as well and they will keep the YM until after their missions at which point they get demoted in importance to normal members of the congregation and told not to talk to the bishop, who up until they get back from their missions is sort of a glorified best friend. This demotion to nobody will hurt their over inflated ego and they won’t get over it and by 30 will 90% be inactive.

The YW will see that they are not near as important as the boys and resent it. They will never even transition into RS. The friend groups and social interactions of YW will keep them going until they finish up YW and that transition to RS which is hard now will just not happen. They are expected to no longer need peers and are dropped into a huge group of adult women where they cannot seem to make friends at the exact time when friends go off to college and they lose that old peer group, they suddenly become one out of several hundred women and are lost in the shuffle.

The adult women, well the adult women are used to being low woman on the totem pole, so it won’t effect them much, but as the YW drop out and never make the transition to RS, the RS will just grow old and die.

But the church is so desperate to find ways of keeping the YM, that they neglect everyone else.

User avatar
Palerider
Posts: 1847
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 8:44 am

Re: Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Post by Palerider » Tue Jan 21, 2020 4:04 pm

Double post
Last edited by Palerider on Tue Jan 21, 2020 5:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily."

"Truth will ultimately prevail where there is pains to bring it to light."

George Washington

User avatar
Palerider
Posts: 1847
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2016 8:44 am

Re: Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Post by Palerider » Tue Jan 21, 2020 5:15 pm

Reading these first two posts makes me cringe in remembering what ward life is like..... :?

You know sometimes you can "organize" something to death and nothing really gets done. There just has to be a better way to help people than what's being described above.
"There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily."

"Truth will ultimately prevail where there is pains to bring it to light."

George Washington

annotatedbom
Posts: 139
Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2019 6:39 pm
Contact:

Re: Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Post by annotatedbom » Tue Jan 21, 2020 8:25 pm

græy wrote:
Tue Jan 21, 2020 2:23 pm
People will say ministering is being done if they happen to be friends with those they're assigned to, but otherwise, no one tries anymore than they did under home teaching. . .

Or maybe I'm just too cynical today.
Dear, dear Graey,

I think you're being much too cynical, regarding ministering at least. When did that change? Was it about two years ago now? As far as I can tell it is working beyond expectations in the A-BoM household. Before ministering, the home teachers visited us fairly regularly. Nice small talk, but nothing of real help or service. (I'm not knocking them. I actually love those guys, but the assigned friends thing doesn't work as you mentioned.)

Now, since the change, the home teachers stopped coming, and we have not had one. single. visit. from a ministering brother the entire two years. I don't know how it could get better than that :D I strongly support the Church in this change!

In all seriousness though, yes, it's still broken. I think they ought to ask for volunteers to visit and those that want to be visited. No pressure whatsoever. There are people who benefit from such visits, like many an elderly person I presume. Why not match up those who really want to serve with those who really want/need the service? But then, what do I know, being a heathen who's lost all contact with the Spirit®.

User avatar
1smartdodog
Posts: 415
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 5:51 pm

Re: Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Post by 1smartdodog » Wed Jan 22, 2020 8:16 am

You can reorganize the chairs on the Titanic but so what. Constantly changing programs that rely on volunteers is a no win for everyone. The few that will do it soon become overwhelmed.

The world has changed. You can no longer expect unqualified people to deal with real world problems for free.

The church is going to have a professional full time clergy to address the future. Even then it will be difficult. There can still be volunteers but i think at least the bishop and stake president need to be full time. And not a former lawyer or electrician unless they go through real training.

The church may have to crack open that 100 billion dollar bank account if it wants to be dynamic in the future.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
“Five percent of the people think; ten percent of the people think they think; and the other eighty-five percent would rather die than think.”
― Thomas A. Edison

User avatar
Evil_Bert
Posts: 107
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 7:40 am
Location: Northern Nevada

Re: Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Post by Evil_Bert » Wed Jan 22, 2020 11:03 am

In my ward I see the YM program flailing. The Bishopric has taken control, but is also still meeting with members during the activities. The BP is now calling or trying to call "specialists" to assist. They called an outdoor specialist and tried to call yours truly as the activities specialist. I was asked to be in charge of coordinating activities and be there to assist the YM at activities and to help teach on Sunday. I guess they miss my smiling (smirking) face at church.

My 13 year old son was thrilled with the cake decorating activity when the BP sent the young men to meet with the young women because they didn't have anything planned. I am sure that he will really want to keep going in the coming years.
Illegitimi non carborundum.

User avatar
Advocate
Posts: 92
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 10:14 am

Re: Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Post by Advocate » Thu Jan 23, 2020 7:37 am

In theory, if the needy members stop seeking out the bishop, and the bishopric can stop weekly visits to the most needy families, then the bishopric would finally have time to engage the YM. Apparently, YW don't matter so the bishopric still won't be involved in their activities.
I had to assume that the girls as the future mothers were chopped liver. Now, the boys will get even more attention from the “best people” in the ward. The girls are going to resent it because they see the relative importance placed on the bishop’s time and the women’s time.
I want to push on this a bit, and I'm particularly interested in hearing from Alas (I don't always agree with you, but you have a lot of great insights).

I agree that YW historically have gotten the short end of the stick when it comes to budgets. Some excused this unfairness as necessary due to the cost of the boy scout program. I'm seeing change on that in our ward such that budgets are equal.

I'm not sure I agree that YW feel like chopped liver because the Bishop (or his counselors) spend more time with YM than YW. My daughter is in the oldest class (what we used to call laurels) and my wife is the YW President. From hearing what my duaghter, wife, and daughter's friends say, they don't really want the Bishop or his counselors around. A major reason why they enjoy their activities is because they can engage in "girl talk" (my term, not theirs) during the activity. When a man is present for the activity, it puts a major damper on that sort of comradery (i.e. "girl talk") and makes the activity less fun due to the changed atmosphere of having the opposite sex present (even the married Bishop).

So do we really think that YW feel like second class citizens because the Bishop spends more (really 90%) of his youth time with the YM and not the YW?

User avatar
alas
Posts: 1603
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 2:10 pm

Re: Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Post by alas » Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:45 am

Advocate wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 7:37 am
In theory, if the needy members stop seeking out the bishop, and the bishopric can stop weekly visits to the most needy families, then the bishopric would finally have time to engage the YM. Apparently, YW don't matter so the bishopric still won't be involved in their activities.
I had to assume that the girls as the future mothers were chopped liver. Now, the boys will get even more attention from the “best people” in the ward. The girls are going to resent it because they see the relative importance placed on the bishop’s time and the women’s time.
I want to push on this a bit, and I'm particularly interested in hearing from Alas (I don't always agree with you, but you have a lot of great insights).

I agree that YW historically have gotten the short end of the stick when it comes to budgets. Some excused this unfairness as necessary due to the cost of the boy scout program. I'm seeing change on that in our ward such that budgets are equal.

I'm not sure I agree that YW feel like chopped liver because the Bishop (or his counselors) spend more time with YM than YW. My daughter is in the oldest class (what we used to call laurels) and my wife is the YW President. From hearing what my duaghter, wife, and daughter's friends say, they don't really want the Bishop or his counselors around. A major reason why they enjoy their activities is because they can engage in "girl talk" (my term, not theirs) during the activity. When a man is present for the activity, it puts a major damper on that sort of comradery (i.e. "girl talk") and makes the activity less fun due to the changed atmosphere of having the opposite sex present (even the married Bishop).

So do we really think that YW feel like second class citizens because the Bishop spends more (really 90%) of his youth time with the YM and not the YW?
If the girls program is really given equal treatment in other ways, where the bishop is won’t be a problem. You are right that the girls don’t want a man in their activities. Or even at girls camp. What they want is for their program to be equal to the boys program. So, if the only difference is where the bishop is, the girls won’t care. But in the past, there have always been other differences too, and I think the fact that boys are *valued* more is what is resented, not the physical location of the bishop. Where the ward’s heart is, so to speak, rather than where the ward’s bishop is. And as head of the ward, do you REALLY think the bishop will give the girls equal priority ...say when they have too few good leaders and they have to pull sister X out of YWs because her husband is in YM’s and someone needs to be home with the toddlers? They will have to bend over backwards not to keep treating the boys as somehow more important and valued when in fact they are more valued because they are “our future priesthood” and this whole church is a church by men for men and women are an auxiliary.

See, it isn’t a problem of where the bishop is. It is a problem that the boys are valued more. And that shows up in lots of ways that men don’t notice, or if they do they think it is a good thing, like on missions when even the sister missionaries are told not to bother teaching a single mother because the church really needs men for priesthood positions. So, the sister missionaries are supposed to find single men, flirt to convert, when teaching men is so much harder due to mission rules where they have to take a third sister with them. Because men are more valued. Women are chopped liver.

But the part of this that I didn’t talk about is that for those boys who enjoyed the scout camps and such, this will be a real demotion as far as fancy activities go. See, the girls on the church’s insurance could only travel X miles for girls camp and activities. Nothing like scuba diving was ever approved because the church doesn’t want to cover such things on church insurance. The boys Scout activities were cover by Boy Scout insurance. That didn’t have the travel and activity restrictions the girls were always under. So, activities are not going to be as fun, varied, and exciting under this new whatever it is program because the church is footing the insurance bill.

So, the girls are not coming up in the world with this new more equal program, but the boys will most likely be going down to closer to equal. The boys will be on the same budget as the girls and most will find it less fun. So, the YM will lose interest and stop going. Having the bishop attend their boring activities isn’t an improvement.

User avatar
Jeffret
Posts: 904
Joined: Mon May 29, 2017 6:49 pm

Re: Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Post by Jeffret » Thu Jan 23, 2020 11:03 am

alas wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:45 am
But the part of this that I didn’t talk about is that for those boys who enjoyed the scout camps and such, this will be a real demotion as far as fancy activities go. See, the girls on the church’s insurance could only travel X miles for girls camp and activities. Nothing like scuba diving was ever approved because the church doesn’t want to cover such things on church insurance. The boys Scout activities were cover by Boy Scout insurance. That didn’t have the travel and activity restrictions the girls were always under. So, activities are not going to be as fun, varied, and exciting under this new whatever it is program because the church is footing the insurance bill.

So, the girls are not coming up in the world with this new more equal program, but the boys will most likely be going down to closer to equal. The boys will be on the same budget as the girls and most will find it less fun. So, the YM will lose interest and stop going. Having the bishop attend their boring activities isn’t an improvement.
It will be interesting to see if those same restrictions end up being placed on the boys as the girls have experienced.

There has been a tendency for boys in the Mormon scouting units to have more dangerous scouting experiences than in regular scouting units. The BSA has a lot of safety rules for potentially dangerous activities published in the Guide to Safe Scouting. Some are outright prohibited (laser tag, for one example). There have long been stereotypes about Mormons not adhering to these rules, sometimes with disastrous consequences. Mormons have a tendency to feel that whatever they feel good about or whatever suggestion occurs in church overrides secular rules. For example, the BSA has strict rules on anything involving guns (or throwing any kind of projectile, really). Our troop has done rifle shooting events following the rules. I've heard many instances in Mormon troops where they just grab some guns and go shoot without proper certifications and oversight.

Think about Trek. Scouts do a number of physically demanding activities, but I've never heard of anything with as many purposeful hazards as Trek.

alas might be right and the boys will be further restricted as to what they can do. My guess is that it remain very unequal. Under the guise of "if we want to do it, it must be right" Mormon kids will continue to be put into unnecessarily dangerous situations. Girls will continue to be relegated to gender-based activities (after all gender is eternal).

When my wife was Laurel president she got tired of her brothers getting to do all the cool trips. She organized a week trip to a beach house. There's no way they'd allow that now.
"Close your eyes, for your eyes will only tell the truth,
And the truth isn't what you want to see" (Charles Hart, "The Music of the Night")

User avatar
Advocate
Posts: 92
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2016 10:14 am

Re: Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Post by Advocate » Thu Jan 23, 2020 11:18 am

alas wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 10:45 am
Advocate wrote:
Thu Jan 23, 2020 7:37 am
In theory, if the needy members stop seeking out the bishop, and the bishopric can stop weekly visits to the most needy families, then the bishopric would finally have time to engage the YM. Apparently, YW don't matter so the bishopric still won't be involved in their activities.
I had to assume that the girls as the future mothers were chopped liver. Now, the boys will get even more attention from the “best people” in the ward. The girls are going to resent it because they see the relative importance placed on the bishop’s time and the women’s time.
I want to push on this a bit, and I'm particularly interested in hearing from Alas (I don't always agree with you, but you have a lot of great insights).

I agree that YW historically have gotten the short end of the stick when it comes to budgets. Some excused this unfairness as necessary due to the cost of the boy scout program. I'm seeing change on that in our ward such that budgets are equal.

I'm not sure I agree that YW feel like chopped liver because the Bishop (or his counselors) spend more time with YM than YW. My daughter is in the oldest class (what we used to call laurels) and my wife is the YW President. From hearing what my duaghter, wife, and daughter's friends say, they don't really want the Bishop or his counselors around. A major reason why they enjoy their activities is because they can engage in "girl talk" (my term, not theirs) during the activity. When a man is present for the activity, it puts a major damper on that sort of comradery (i.e. "girl talk") and makes the activity less fun due to the changed atmosphere of having the opposite sex present (even the married Bishop).

So do we really think that YW feel like second class citizens because the Bishop spends more (really 90%) of his youth time with the YM and not the YW?
If the girls program is really given equal treatment in other ways, where the bishop is won’t be a problem. You are right that the girls don’t want a man in their activities. Or even at girls camp. What they want is for their program to be equal to the boys program. So, if the only difference is where the bishop is, the girls won’t care. But in the past, there have always been other differences too, and I think the fact that boys are *valued* more is what is resented, not the physical location of the bishop. Where the ward’s heart is, so to speak, rather than where the ward’s bishop is. And as head of the ward, do you REALLY think the bishop will give the girls equal priority ...say when they have too few good leaders and they have to pull sister X out of YWs because her husband is in YM’s and someone needs to be home with the toddlers? They will have to bend over backwards not to keep treating the boys as somehow more important and valued when in fact they are more valued because they are “our future priesthood” and this whole church is a church by men for men and women are an auxiliary.

See, it isn’t a problem of where the bishop is. It is a problem that the boys are valued more. And that shows up in lots of ways that men don’t notice, or if they do they think it is a good thing, like on missions when even the sister missionaries are told not to bother teaching a single mother because the church really needs men for priesthood positions. So, the sister missionaries are supposed to find single men, flirt to convert, when teaching men is so much harder due to mission rules where they have to take a third sister with them. Because men are more valued. Women are chopped liver.

But the part of this that I didn’t talk about is that for those boys who enjoyed the scout camps and such, this will be a real demotion as far as fancy activities go. See, the girls on the church’s insurance could only travel X miles for girls camp and activities. Nothing like scuba diving was ever approved because the church doesn’t want to cover such things on church insurance. The boys Scout activities were cover by Boy Scout insurance. That didn’t have the travel and activity restrictions the girls were always under. So, activities are not going to be as fun, varied, and exciting under this new whatever it is program because the church is footing the insurance bill.

So, the girls are not coming up in the world with this new more equal program, but the boys will most likely be going down to closer to equal. The boys will be on the same budget as the girls and most will find it less fun. So, the YM will lose interest and stop going. Having the bishop attend their boring activities isn’t an improvement.

Thanks for your reply Alas. A lot of good points and I can definitely see women feeling less valued due to certain comments.

In response to your comments and generally the thread about the new YM program, I agree. It seems like the YM program is being degraded rather than upgraded. It's a big risk that YM leaders won't adequately plan and will just show up and have many nights playing basketball in the gym.

User avatar
nibbler
Posts: 595
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 7:12 pm

Re: Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Post by nibbler » Fri Jan 24, 2020 8:16 pm

Corsair wrote:
Tue Jan 21, 2020 3:20 pm
The former YM president recently noted that he knew that the YM knew the right answers to all of the questions we might ask, but he was not at all convinced that they had a solid testimony to accompany those answers.
And that, IMO, is one of the larger problems with church, one of the things that makes our meetings so boring. The primary goal of most of what we do at church is centered around ensuring all members hold a very specific set of beliefs.

Most of the time only a small fraction of our meetings are about community building and helping one another live better, happier lives. The rest of the experience feels like sating the insecurities of a narcissistic organization; instead of reassuring someone that constantly asks, "Do you love me? Do you love me?" the Sunday experience has us constantly reassuring one another that the church is true. It's an extremely insecure faith.

What does a true church do? Gaze at our navels, that's what we do.
We see things not as they are, but as we are ourselves. - H.M. Tomlinson

User avatar
moksha
Posts: 3267
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2016 4:22 am

Re: Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Post by moksha » Sat Jan 25, 2020 6:45 pm

They're even less motivated to come to the weekly PISS activities...
That is an unfortunate acronym.


Having the bishop attend their boring activities isn’t an improvement.
Especially since the bishop is the one who has been designated to pass moral judgments.
Good faith does not require evidence, but it also does not turn a blind eye to that evidence. Otherwise, it becomes misplaced faith.
-- Moksha

Reuben
Posts: 1274
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2017 3:01 pm

Re: Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Post by Reuben » Sat Jan 25, 2020 8:35 pm

(Duplicate)
Last edited by Reuben on Sat Jan 25, 2020 8:44 pm, edited 2 times in total.
You were born to trust, not fear. It is your birthright.

Reuben
Posts: 1274
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2017 3:01 pm

Re: Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Post by Reuben » Sat Jan 25, 2020 8:44 pm

nibbler wrote:
Fri Jan 24, 2020 8:16 pm
Most of the time only a small fraction of our meetings are about community building and helping one another live better, happier lives. The rest of the experience feels like sating the insecurities of a narcissistic organization; instead of reassuring someone that constantly asks, "Do you love me? Do you love me?" the Sunday experience has us constantly reassuring one another that the church is true. It's an extremely insecure faith.
What are you doing channeling my thoughts, man? I'm not even dead yet. Seriously, though, I could have written that by transcribing some thoughts I've intermittently had.

The thing about this special brand of narcissism is that it thrives only within a certain range of isolation. If there's too much isolation, then there's little insecurity because there are few external threats. If there's not enough isolation, then members have a lot of opportunities to evaluate the "we're God's gift to humanity" messages against reality.
You were born to trust, not fear. It is your birthright.

User avatar
2bizE
Posts: 1799
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 9:33 pm

Re: Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Post by 2bizE » Sat Jan 25, 2020 11:51 pm

A bishop I know was called as a new bishop in September. Prior to that he was YM Pres. Li With the changes to YM, he is now bishop and YM Pres. Didn’t see that one coming.
Can some one remind me again why the bishop leads the ward?
~2bizE

User avatar
Corsair
Posts: 2931
Joined: Fri Oct 14, 2016 9:58 am
Location: Phoenix

Re: Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Post by Corsair » Mon Jan 27, 2020 8:48 am

2bizE wrote:
Sat Jan 25, 2020 11:51 pm
Can some one remind me again why the bishop leads the ward?
It's the whole "Judge in Israel" role that the LDS church must use since bishops were in the early apostolic church. Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches have a legitimate claim of apostolic authority based on a succession of bishops back to Peter. Meanwhile, the role of YM president is a recent invention even if the duties have kind of been moved to the Bishop.

Thoughtful
Posts: 1113
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 9:54 pm

Re: Ministering, YM, EQ, and the Bishopric

Post by Thoughtful » Tue Jan 28, 2020 9:59 pm

Corsair wrote:
Tue Jan 21, 2020 3:20 pm


I'm far from convinced that indicators like temple attendance and meeting attendance would be truly useful, but it's better than most of what they can measure. Tracking YM and YW going on missions would be more reliable, as long as they tracked the rate of missionaries who also come home early. Temple marriages and raising the next generation in the LDS church is more in line of what they want. Waiting for the ten year results of this experiment will probably be what President Bednar uses for the next round of revelation.
In the late 90s at least one GA was telling people that the purpose of going on a mission was not missionary work but temple, and membership retention.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests