No Home Teaching = No Temple Recommend

[creekster]

Here's what I think the church should do with HT: take the Ensign and burn it. Drop the lesson bit. Take the concept of month visits and trash them too. Instead, have a monthly reporting cycle where the EQ calls the HT and asks about the families. How is X doing? What about Y's illness? Are there any needs at Z's house? And also make it clear that they need not wait if there are needs.

In other words, make this about the goal and results and not the process. This is the way it seems many are going anyway.

For most poeple that would be fine. But for single sisters and sisters with non-member spouses or antagonisitc spouses I think VT can be very helpful, as the sisters tend to open up more readily to the VT sisters than the HT brethren in my experience. So they separate attention can be useful to them (and to the ward in trying to help them).

[jay santos]

ftr: I think home teaching is a great program. I've been involved in great activation experiences as a home teacher and as an EQP--as rewarding as my missionary conversion experiences. I've been in a position to give service to active families in a way that never could have happened without the home teaching calling. I think it's a brilliant program. PITA most of the time, and a lot of times it's active home teacher doesn't give a crap about it teaching active family who doesn't give a crap about it (right now that describes all of the above: me as home teacher, my family, my home teacher, and my family as receiver). But a lot of times it is the conduit for some very meaningful service.

[Jeff Lebowski]

For most poeple that would be fine. But for single sisters and sisters with non-member spouses or antagonisitc spouses I think VT can be very helpful, as the sisters tend to open up more readily to the VT sisters than the HT brethren in my experience. So they separate attention can be useful to them (and to the ward in trying to help them).

That could still happen. Ditto for male-male interaction. This is one of the reasons I think the current model (in-home visit, Ensign, prayer) is so ineffective. No way Brother X is going to open up to me in front of the wife and kids about his financial/work/etc. problems. You have to create a bond of friendship and trust and then provide opportunities for more intimate interaction.

ftr: I think home teaching is a great program. I've been involved in great activation experiences as a home teacher and as an EQP--as rewarding as my missionary conversion experiences. I've been in a position to give service to active families in a way that never could have happened without the home teaching calling. I think it's a brilliant program. PITA most of the time, and a lot of times it's active home teacher doesn't give a crap about it teaching active family who doesn't give a crap about it (right now that describes all of the above: me as home teacher, my family, my home teacher, and my family as receiver). But a lot of times it is the conduit for some very meaningful service.

Absolutely. Don't abandon it. Optimize it.

[Sullyute]

Yep, that my understanding as well. The ward teachers visited monthly and their vists included standardized messages (but I don't remember on what level the messages where standardized). I believe this program originated in the 1910-1920s. I think a few wards/stakes in Utah started the program and success led to church wide adoption.

The church is full of programs (welfare and primary are famous ones) that started at the local level and worked their way up the ranks to become general church programs.

[Katy Lied]

Yes!

Let husbands and wives work together.

This would also stop a lot of ward gossip. Cross-gender ward gossip is rare.

I also think facebook friending your HT families gathers a lot more info about your families than monthly visits.

[creekster]

That could still happen. Ditto for male-male interaction. This is one of the reasons I think the current model (in-home visit, Ensign, prayer) is so ineffective. No way Brother X is going to open up to me in front of the wife and kids about his financial/work/etc. problems. You have to create a bond of friendship and trust and then provide opportunities for more intimate interaction.



Absolutely. Don't abandon it. Optimize it.

Oh I agree. But it would be more difficult to do if you eliminate the VT program. I think my bishop optimizes it pretty well as described above.

[Moliere]

Good point. Now that you mention it, I remember flipping through Ward Teachers' Messages in old copies of the Improvement Era in the basement of Sam Weller's.

Were Ward Teachers the same as Home Teachers?

The earliest for of home teaching that I've ever read about occurred during the Mormon Reformation in the 1850s. That was the time when BY was concerned about the saints level of commitment and he engaged the Teachers Quorum members (no not 14-15 year olds as we know them today) to travel around to ward members houses and inviting them to commit themselves again to the gospel. This resulted in many getting rebaptized and also an influx in polygamy.

Home teaching is like every other program in the church. It is a great concept that can be incredibly useful if allowed to be tailored to specific circumstances. The problem, more often than not, is that the people implementing the program feel that the rules given around the program are rigid since they come from the prophet (hence God) and they are reluctant to bend the rules to fit their circumstances.

[creekster]

This would also stop a lot of ward gossip. Cross-gender ward gossip is rare.

.

Hmmmm. I suppose it eliminates gossip in a companionship, but you would still have a man and a woman getting the info and each of them could still gossip with their gender cohort should they be so inclined.

[Northwestcoug]

Here's what I think the church should do with HT: take the Ensign and burn it. Drop the lesson bit. Take the concept of month visits and trash them too. Instead, have a monthly reporting cycle where the EQ calls the HT and asks about the families. How is X doing? What about Y's illness? Are there any needs at Z's house? And also make it clear that they need not wait if there are needs.

In other words, make this about the goal and results and not the process. This is the way it seems many are going anyway.

This is a great idea. I would add drop any statistical measurement of HT. And if you absolutely have to have a percentage, keep it on the ward level, and abolish stake-wide reporting. Does anyone have regular positive experiences reporting visiting details to EQ or HP leaders? Do members' needs get met by this route? My experience is that reporting is a chore, usually useless, and something that neither the HT or priesthood leader wants to do.

This got me thinking to how the needs of members are being discovered. The members' needs seemed to usually be broadcasted in PEC/ward council. Most of the time it was either the HPGL or EQP being diligent and calling/visiting the members in need. From my POV, the minority of needs were discovered by the preferred HT to EQP/HPGL reporting route. I wonder if you completely retooled the HT program in line with the above principle, if you would see more of the needs being met the way leaders would like it to happen.

Finally, although I would love to see this happen, I suspect that we will never see a retreat from the 'all members are to have regular HT visits' mentality. It has the general conference seal of approval, and decades of church-wide practice. Can anyone here think of a recent church program of similar magnitude that has significantly changed in scope?

[Indy Coug]

Because of such large HT lists, we had a modified approach in my previous stake:

1. Top priority is to visit the families that you know have additional needs/challenges
2. Visit other families as time allows
3. For those not visited in month 1, prioritize the unvisited against the families identified in #1.
4. Try to visit each family at least once a quarter.

The overriding emphasis was visiting those that needed help the most and setting priorities accordingly. Even though this essentially set the bar below 100% monthly HT, the HT numbers actually picked up with this approach and I dare say the "effectiveness" increased even more than just raw numbers.

[snowcat]

In the last two years, I've taken a different approach to hometeaching. We've been inviting our families over for dinner and getting to know them like friends. It's made life here in this small ward much more bearable. I generally feel friendship with both spouses in two of my families. They'll call us to hang out now.

We still have a spiritual message, but it's more of a discussion. We don't always get together, but there's a sense of belonging that wasn't there before. But, you can't force that, and thankfully, I have some families who can relate to my family well. Those not in that position might have a harder time, but this is working for me.

I think that hometeaching can be an effective gauge of one's dedication to duty, but should that duty be compelled by interpreting a temple covenant to which we are not currently subject in order to fit your stake's agenda? I do not believe that it should because there is only a tenuous hermeneutical interpretation of temple covenants to back up the denial of a pretty important spiritual benefit of belonging to the Church.

I wish you were my home teacher.

[Sullyute]

I would add drop any statistical measurement of HT. And if you absolutely have to have a percentage, keep it on the ward level, and abolish stake-wide reporting. Does anyone have regular positive experiences reporting visiting details to EQ or HP leaders? Do members' needs get met by this route? My experience is that reporting is a chore, usually useless, and something that neither the HT or priesthood leader wants to do.

President Monson:

Where performance is measured, performance improves. Where performance is measured and reported back, the rate of improvement accelerates.

[Indy Coug]

President Monson:

Based on my temple attendance, God isn't too into reporting.

[Northwestcoug]

President Monson: Where performance is measured, performance improves. Where performance is measured and reported back, the rate of improvement accelerates.

With all due respect to President Monson (and countless other authorities, both general and local), has the home teaching performance improved significantly in the last few decades? Have we become better home teachers? In what concrete areas have you seen an accelerated rate of improvement? If so, could someone please tell my EQP's, Bishops, stake leaders, etc. of the last 20 years? Please let them know about the progress made. Becuase they are still making an almost intolerable 3rd hour even less tolerable, by constantly trying to improve our performance.

[Indy Coug]

Becuase they are still making an almost intolerable 3rd hour even less tolerable, by constantly trying to improve our performance.

That's probably what happened during that 120 year period leading up to Noah observing how long people could tread water.