Has the raised bar been beneficial to missionary work?

[Surfah]

I blame the overpaid BYU student teachers at the MTC.

[Pheidippides]

My mind rebels at this thought, and I disagree because the young LDS men I know with great social skills are not like that (unless they are all also very good liars). But neither your position nor mine is provable, I guess.

Anecdotally I can tell you that my experience (well, not mine) backs this up as a probability (the very good liar bit). But that in turn doesn't mean that they didn't serve missions either, for reasons that become obvious. In both cases speaking in terms of probabilities and not painting every socially decent missionary with that brush.

[mUUser]

I always felt some sorrow that I didn't serve a FT mission, but after serving for four years as WM and WML, I'm convinced the missionary program is broken, and needs a complete overhaul -- top to bottom.

Of course, i don't carry that regret around anymore.

[Moliere]

I always felt some sorrow that I didn't serve a FT mission, but after serving for four years as WM and WML, I'm convinced the missionary program is broken, and needs a complete overhaul -- top to bottom.

Of course, i don't carry that regret around anymore.

I think this is a common thought among many Mormons. That thought is apologized through the belief that a mission is not as much for converts as it is for the missionary. How many times have you heard a missionary say he (meaning himself) was the most important convert he had on his mission?

I personally wouldn't say it's broken, but it's definitely not well designed to further its intention of bringing in converts to the church. There are better ways of reaching out and preaching and converting.

I always liked the way my mission president handled the work. We were required to do 5 different activities everyday. He didn't want us tracting/contacting 10 hours a day and getting into a rut. With a 10 hour work day, that meant you usually didn't spend more than 2 hours doing one activity. One can only tract and contact for so long each day. My MP did not want missionaries to carry their weekly tracting hours as a badge of honor. We had to be creative, which usually ended up with us doing a lot of service. We had no limit on service hours as long as they were for non-members and we were required to do at least 8 hours of service a week.

Thinking back on it, we did not have a very high amount of problem missionaries or at least not that I knew of (of course I wouldn't be the best one to know). Very few got sent home (I can think of two during my 2 years). I wonder if the approach taken by my MP helped raise the bar in our mission.

[Indy Coug]

I think this is a common thought among many Mormons. That thought is apologized through the belief that a mission is not as much for converts as it is for the missionary. How many times have you heard a missionary say he (meaning himself) was the most important convert he had on his mission?

I

Well, since I didn't have any converts, if I didn't have that to hang my hat on that one, I'd have to hang something else.

[BigPiney]

I always liked the way my mission president handled the work. We were required to do 5 different activities everyday. He didn't want us tracting/contacting 10 hours a day and getting into a rut. With a 10 hour work day, that meant you usually didn't spend more than 2 hours doing one activity. One can only tract and contact for so long each day. My MP did not want missionaries to carry their weekly tracting hours as a badge of honor. We had to be creative, which usually ended up with us doing a lot of service. We had no limit on service hours as long as they were for non-members and we were required to do at least 8 hours of service a week.

I like this approach.

[LA Ute]

I like this approach.

So do I.

[Indy Coug]

I always liked the way my mission president handled the work. We were required to do 5 different activities everyday. He didn't want us tracting/contacting 10 hours a day and getting into a rut. With a 10 hour work day, that meant you usually didn't spend more than 2 hours doing one activity. One can only tract and contact for so long each day. My MP did not want missionaries to carry their weekly tracting hours as a badge of honor. We had to be creative, which usually ended up with us doing a lot of service. We had no limit on service hours as long as they were for non-members and we were required to do at least 8 hours of service a week.

I would have killed for that approach.

[TripletDaddy]

As a bit of a related sidebar, if you had an investigator friend that wanted to learn more about the Church, would you refer this friend to the missionaries, assuming that you like the current set of missionaries in the ward?

I probably would not. Not sure it is a great idea to turn over basic teaching duties to 19 year olds with little teaching, Church, public relations, or life experience.

I know that all convert baptisms are required to receive the discussions, so eventually I would arrange for those. But at this stage of my life, I think I would basically take it upon myself to shepherd friends through the process. I would also want my wife to be a part of it so she could give her point of view. There is really nothing covered in the discussions that a member cannot teach or answer, plus there isn't the added awkwardness to "close the sale" and there is no pressure on my friends because we move entirely at their pace. If the process takes a year before I even bring up a baptismal invite, then no worries. I don't mind because I am not getting transferred and I am not reporting my numbers every week at a Zone meeting. By the time I set up the required missionary discussions, it would mostly be a formality.

I wonder if many members are already taking this approach? What would you do?

[wuapinmon]

As a bit of a related sidebar, if you had an investigator friend that wanted to learn more about the Church, would you refer this friend to the missionaries, assuming that you like the current set of missionaries in the ward?

I probably would not. Not sure it is a great idea to turn over basic teaching duties to 19 year olds with little teaching, Church, public relations, or life experience.

I know that all convert baptisms are required to receive the discussions, so eventually I would arrange for those. But at this stage of my life, I think I would basically take it upon myself to shepherd friends through the process. I would also want my wife to be a part of it so she could give her point of view. There is really nothing covered in the discussions that a member cannot teach or answer, plus there isn't the added awkwardness to "close the sale" and there is no pressure on my friends because we move entirely at their pace. If the process takes a year before I even bring up a baptismal invite, then no worries. I don't mind because I am not getting transferred and I am not reporting my numbers every week at a Zone meeting. By the time I set up the required missionary discussions, it would mostly be a formality.

I wonder if many members are already taking this approach? What would you do?

This is exactly what we do. We support the missionaries, we write our testimonies in copies of the Book of Mormon for them to hand out, but we don't give referrals. We did that here, and they baptized one of our friends before he was ready. He's now divorced and has left the Church and moved from Hartsville.

[LA Ute]

As a bit of a related sidebar, if you had an investigator friend that wanted to learn more about the Church, would you refer this friend to the missionaries, assuming that you like the current set of missionaries in the ward?

I probably would not. Not sure it is a great idea to turn over basic teaching duties to 19 year olds with little teaching, Church, public relations, or life experience.

I know that all convert baptisms are required to receive the discussions, so eventually I would arrange for those. But at this stage of my life, I think I would basically take it upon myself to shepherd friends through the process. I would also want my wife to be a part of it so she could give her point of view. There is really nothing covered in the discussions that a member cannot teach or answer, plus there isn't the added awkwardness to "close the sale" and there is no pressure on my friends because we move entirely at their pace. If the process takes a year before I even bring up a baptismal invite, then no worries. I don't mind because I am not getting transferred and I am not reporting my numbers every week at a Zone meeting. By the time I set up the required missionary discussions, it would mostly be a formality.

I wonder if many members are already taking this approach? What would you do?

I've always kind of thought that what you describe is how it's supposed to be done. That's exactly how my wife and I approach missionary work.

[RC Vikings]

I personally wouldn't say it's broken, but it's definitely not well designed to further its intention of bringing in converts to the church. There are better ways of reaching out and preaching and converting.

I always liked the way my mission president handled the work. We were required to do 5 different activities everyday. He didn't want us tracting/contacting 10 hours a day and getting into a rut. With a 10 hour work day, that meant you usually didn't spend more than 2 hours doing one activity. One can only tract and contact for so long each day. My MP did not want missionaries to carry their weekly tracting hours as a badge of honor. We had to be creative, which usually ended up with us doing a lot of service. We had no limit on service hours as long as they were for non-members and we were required to do at least 8 hours of service a week.

Thinking back on it, we did not have a very high amount of problem missionaries or at least not that I knew of (of course I wouldn't be the best one to know). Very few got sent home (I can think of two during my 2 years). I wonder if the approach taken by my MP helped raise the bar in our mission.

Is it possible to make this MP in charge of the missionary program.

[YOhio]

I'm reminded of an experience I had attending the baptism of a woman who had been excommunicated 20 years prior for reasons unknown. That entire time this woman's mother had been nightly praying and regularly fasting that she would return to the church, even when it apparently seemed very unlikely. The baptism was a neat experience and everyone was so happy to have this sister return to the church of her youth. Then one of the Elder's spoke and read a scripture from Alma 36, where Alma recounted his conversion story and spoke of joy in the fruits of his labors. The Elder then dramatically paused, looked at the sister and said, "Behold, the fruits of my labor." I was floored at the arrogance.

[TripletDaddy]

I've always kind of thought that what you describe is how it's supposed to be done. That's exactly how my wife and I approach missionary work.

Is your sense that the average member thinks that this is how it should be done? I would argue that the perception is that we hand referrals over the missionaries. As members, we are encouraged to host discussions in our home, but the missionaries do the teaching. We are encouraged to fellowship and be warm towards investigators, but the answering of questions/concerns is primarily the missionary's job.

I think the notion of getting up at the pulpit and proclaiming that it is ok, if not preferable, to wait a year or as long as it takes before making a baptismal invite would give most mission presidents an aneurysm.

You and I may take a similar approach to missionary work but I am not sure that this is the approach that the current missionary program tacitly endorses.

[LA Ute]

Is your sense that the average member thinks that this is how it should be done? I would argue that the perception is that we hand referrals over the missionaries. As members, we are encouraged to host discussions in our home, but the missionaries do the teaching. We are encouraged to fellowship and be warm towards investigators, but the answering of questions/concerns is primarily the missionary's job.

I think the notion of getting up at the pulpit and proclaiming that it is ok, if not preferable, to wait a year or as long as it takes before making a baptismal invite would give most mission presidents an aneurysm.

You and I may take a similar approach to missionary work but I am not sure that this is the approach that the current missionary program tacitly endorses.

Good question. I think the key is that members are supposed to prepare their friends to be taught the lessons, and I think that's officially the program (but I have not read any manuals and it's been a long time since I was WML). There's lots of individual play in that program, though. Some people are prepared more quickly than others, and some take a long time. Obviously, some members are better at preparing than others. Others are more courageous (or bold? not always a good thing) than others. Some just want the missionaries to handle things, answer questions, etc. (and I don't think that is the program, or should be).

What most of us (including me) struggle with is the courage or fortitude or whatever it takes to make the invitation to be taught. If we are "preparing" people for years and years while their kids grow up and opportunities are missed, and we never can quite pull the trigger, then I think we are chickening out. (I fault myself for doing this sometimes.) But I still think what you describe, if done diligently and without chickening out, is the right way to be missionary-minded. There also is, and probably always will be, pressure from missionaries to "give us people to teach, now."