Conference tecrus::mormonism

    The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is operated with an
    unpaid "lay" ministry, and not a "professional" paid ministry. 
    
    Each congregation, called a ward, has as its leader a Bishop, who is an
    ordinary male member of the congregation, who has been called by
    revelation and ordained to the office of Bishop by one holding the
    proper authority to do so. The Bishop leads the ward, and administers
    the affairs of the Kingdom therein, but does so without pay. He
    provides a living for his family by attending to his chosen vocation,
    whatever it be, and doing the Lord's work on evenings and weekends. 
    
    Likewise several wards are organized into a stake, which is led by a
    stake president. He, like the bishop, works for a living in his chosen
    employment, and does the Lord's work after hours. 
    
    We send many thousands of missionaries throughout the world to serve
    for one to two years, and they are not paid for their labors, except by
    the blessings that come from serving God and one's fellow man. 
    
    We believe that the scriptures teach that Christ's church should be
    operated in this manner, and that men should not be paid for preaching
    the word of God. 
    
    This topic is to discuss the lay ministry of the church. 

    Rich
    

    Assertion: 
                                                                         
         People should not be paid money to preach the Word of God. 
         
    Why:
    
         It was not so in the New Testament church. 
         
         It sets up a conflict of interest, because it becomes economically
         motivating for the preacher to say what people want to hear. 
    
         There is the danger of popular preachers building an empire for
         their own Glory and gain, and not the glory of God.
         
         It puts an economic burden on the followers of Christ.
         
    What is the alternative?
    
         Those who preach should do so freely, and in addition to their
         regular occupation, which should be the source of their income.

    The Bible Supports this concept:
         
    Peter taught:
    
         Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight
         thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre,
         but of a ready mind; 
         
         Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to
         the flock. 
         
         ...be clothed in humility: for God resisteth the proud, and giveth
         grace to the humble. 
         
         Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he
         may exalt you in due time: 1 Peter 5:2-3,5-6 
         
    Paul taught:
                 
         I have coveted no man's silver, or gold, or apparel. 
         
         Yea, ye yourselves know, that these hands have ministered unto my
         necessities, and to them that were with me. 
         
         I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring ye ought to
         support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how
         he said It is more blessed to give than to receive. Acts 20:33-35

    To the Corinthians:
             
         Even unto this present hour we both hunger, and thirst, and are
         naked, and are buffeted, and have no certain dwellingplace; 
         
         And labour, working with our own hands: being reviled, we bless;
         being persecuted, we suffer it: 1 Cor 4:11-12 
         
    Paul taught that, while those that minister in the temple are to be
    supported by the offerings there, those that preach should do so
    without charge. 
                  
         Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of
         the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are
         partakers with the altar? 
         
         Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel
         should live of the gospel. 
         
         But I have used none of these things: neither have I written
         these things, that it should be so done unto me: for it were
         better for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying
         void. 
         
         For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of: for
         necessity is laid upon me; ye, woe is unto me, if I preach not the
         gospel! 
         
         For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against
         my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me. 
         
         What is my reward then? Verily that, when I preach the gospel, I
         may make this gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my
         power in the gospel. 
         
         For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant
         unto all, that I might gain the more. 1 Cor 9:13-19 
         
    And to the Thessalonians:
    
         For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not
         ourselves disorderly among you; 
         
         Neither did we eat any man's bread for naught; but wrought with
         labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable
         to any of you: 
         
         Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample
         unto you to follow us. 
         
         For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any
         would not work, neither should he eat. 2 Thess 3:7-10 
         
    Paul's work was making tents:
    
         After these things Paul departed from Athens, and came to Corinth;
         
         And found a certain Jew named Aquila, born in Pontus, lately come
         from Italy, with his wife Priscilla; (because that Claudius had
         commanded all Jews to depart from Rome:) and came unto them. 
         
         And because he was of the same craft, he abode with them, and
         wrought: for by their occupation they were tentmakers. 
         
         And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and persuaded the
         Jews and the Greeks. Acts 18:1-4 
         
    Qualifications of a bishop:
    
         Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but
         patient, not a brawler, not covetous; 1 Tim 3:3 
        
    Is such a church found anywhere, where those that preach are not paid
    for doing so? The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is such a
    church. 
    
    Witnessing of Christ,
    Rich

    The Book of Mormon also speaks against "priestcrafts".
         
         And the Gentiles are lifted up in the pride of their eyes, and
         have stumbled, because of the greatness of their stumbling block,
         that they have built up many churches; nevertheless, they put down
         the power and miracles of God, and preach up unto themselves their
         own wisdom and their own learning, that they may get gain and
         grind upon the face of the poor. 
         
         And there are many churches built up which cause envyings, and
         strifes, and malice. 
         
         He commandeth that there shall be no priestcrafts; for, behold,
         priestcrafts are that men preach and set themselves up for a light
         unto the world, that they may get gain and praise of the world;
         but they seek not the welfare of Zion. 
         
         Behold, the Lord hath forbidden this thing; wherefore, the Lord
         God hath given a commandment that all men should have charity,
         which charity is love. And except they should have charity they
         were nothing. Wherefore, if they should have charity they would
         not suffer the laborer in Zion to perish. 
         
         But the laborer in Zion shall labor for Zion; for if they labor
         for money they shall perish. 
         
         2 Ne 26:20-21,29-31      

    It was prophesied that, because of priestcrafts Jesus would be
    crucified: 
               
         But because of priestcrafts and iniquities, they at Jerusalem will
         stiffen their necks against him, that he be crucified. 
    
         2 Ne 10:5
         
    When Jesus visited ancient America, he taught that priestcraft would be
    one of the causes that the fullness of the gospel would be taken away: 
                                                                          
         And thus commandeth the Father that I should say unto you: At that
         day when the Gentiles shall sin against my gospel, and shall
         reject the fullness of my gospel, and shall be lifted up in the
         pride of their hearts above all nations, and above all the people
         of the whole earth, and shall be filled with all manner of lyings,
         and of deceits, and of mischiefs, and all manner of hypocrisy, and
         murders, and priestcrafts, and whoredoms, and of secret
         abominations; and if they shall do all those things, and shall
         reject the fullness of my gospel, behold, saith the Father, I will
         bring the fullness of my gospel from among them. 
         
         3 Ne 16:10
         
    The church of God in the Book of Mormon had a lay ministry: 
                                                               
         And when the priests left their labor to impart the word of God
         unto the people, the people also left their labors to hear the
         word of God. And when the priest had imparted unto them the word
         of God they all returned again diligently unto their labors; and
         the priest, not esteeming himself above his hearers, for the
         preacher was not better than the hearer, neither was the teacher
         any better then the learner; and thus they were all equal, and
         they did all labor, every man according to his strength. 
         
         And they did impart of their substance, every man according to
         that which he had, to the poor, and the needy, and the sick, and
         the afflicted; and they did not wear costly apparel, yet they were
         neat and comely. 
         
         Alma 1:26-27
         
    In His name,
    Rich
                         

    RE: .1  "conflict of interest"
    
    To me this is one of the strongest "sociological" reasons against
    a paid ministry.
    
    While there are many very good ministers that practice out of a
    very generous heart, this issue comes up often.
    
    For example, when you work closely with the local parrish how do
    you feel, who do you talk to when your own family needs are not
    really being met. You know there are not enough funds available....
    
    When choosing how to spend your time (no one ever seems to have
    enough) which rates a higher priority, the person who is distraught
    and destitute or the wealthy lady's tea time?
    
    Then consider how the parishoners feel.  Because they know of this
    potential conflict of interest, and because there are probably things
    that they personally don't agree with, there is a strong motivation
    to start just such talk "behind the back".
    
    Furthermore, people have a tendancy to think of the minister's time
    as a comodity that they have paid for and hence have a right to.
    
    When there is a paid minister, the size of the parrish must be larger
    to be able to afford the salary. This further complicates the
    possibility of the minister being able to meet the needs of all
    this larger group of people.
    
    The alternative, Lay Ministry, is not an easy thing to propose.
    Consider how much time the average parishoner gives to his church
    in organizations that have a paid minister. How would one ever propost
    to make the transition? It is very difficult to get more than a
    small handfull of people to give much time in such an organization.
    
    Yet, if there were an organization that started out with no paid
    ministry, that had smaller parrishs (wards), that had a well known
    expectation of everybody helping out, it might work out very well.
    In fact, one can't easily critize the minister (bishop) for not being
    always available because he has the same responsibilities as oneself
    and more. The leaders can with a clear conscience stand up and tell
    everyone what is needed financially since not one dime goes into
    their pockets, in fact they contribute at the same rate as everyone
    else.
    
    When asked to help out one feel reticent not to agree since everyone
    else is working hard too. In fact there is likely to be a sense
    of extra respect toward the leaders (bishopric) who shoulder even
    more responsibility that most.
    
    Another factor is that in this organization, there is not a regular
    preachment from the same person all the time.  Consider how hard
    it is to have one individual exhorting the group to repent and change
    their lives on a weekly basis and not give the impression of "Holier
    than Thou".
    
    I am confident that it would be next to impossible to turn an
    organization to Lay Ministry in fact the very leaders would be in
    a real career crisis if they were to even consider it, but I am
    glad that someone (Heavenly Father) had the foresight to create
    such and organization (The Church of Jesus Christ) and I have had
    the privedlege of associating with it.
    
    Your brother,
    Len
    
    

    I have just received a calling to be the Ward Clerk. I am interested to
    know if anyone has some good pointers on how to be effective as a Ward
    Clerk. Perhaps you have been a Ward Clerk, or someone in your family
    has been, or you have worked closely with a Ward Clerk before and you
    have some ideas that worked well. 
    
    I'll be doing this calling in addition to serving as Gospel Doctrine
    instructor, so I'm sure it will keep me busy.
    
    Rich

    Rich,
    
    Make sure your financial and membership clerks are trained and doing
    their job.  This is half the battle.  The other have is to keep
    things well organized.  And don't skip priesthood to work in the
    office.  Do it after or before church.  Remember your priorities.
    Read the handbook from front to back when you get it.  Both the
    General Handbook and the Priesthood Handbook.  The Welfare Handbook
    would be of benefit also.  Learn what every other position in the
    ward is responsible for and determine how you need to support them
    in their callings.  You will have much interaction with most of
    the leaders in the ward.  Especially when it comes to quarterly
    reports.  No one ever turns them in on time and most never tract
    the info they need to fill it out.  Be prepared to help them with
    the base numbers, you'll get those in the reports from Salt Lake.
    A good clerk is very valuable in a ward, but not very visible.
    Good luck

    Rich,
    
    Our clerks are very good.  Sometimes too good.  You need to resist
    the urge to spend long evenings working on records when you should
    be spending time with your family.  Completing Church reports and 
    records is never more important than family.  Also, the idea about
    being familiar with the other callings is very good advice.  At
    the same time, remember that the Bishop is in charge and may not
    always choose to do things 'by the book', according to what he senses
    are the needs of individuals and the promptings of the Spirit.
    He will, however, appreciate any suggestions where he may not recall
    Church policy.  Also, the Ward Clerk tends to be is the keeper of
    the keys.  If you are in that kind of position, make *sure* you know
    who has keys.  Often, members forget or will make unathorized
    duplicates.  One other thing, when people change callings, they
    are supposed to turn their stuff over to whomever takes over.  They
    usually forget.  Oh, well.  There's probably more ...  I'm sure
    you'll do fine.  Maybe if I get called as a Ward Clerk you can give
    me some pointers ...
    
    Steve

    Re .2 and .3
    
    Thanks for the pointers. I think they'll be very helpful.
    
    Rich

This isn't about being a clerk, but I thought some of you might enjoy a
personal reminiscence about callings. 
    
    
    About ten months after I had met the first Mormon in my life and eight
    months after my baptism, the Bishop extended a call to serve as
    Elders' Quorum instructor. Each week I was to provide a lesson for my
    brethren in the Quorum. What?? Me?!?
    
    I was scared to death. Most of these guys had been members all their
    lives and knew all this doctrine stuff 10^23 times better than I did.
    The previous instructors were always excellent at fielding questions
    and coaxing comments. There was a priesthood lesson manual, but I
    hardly understood what half the topics were about. What little I knew
    only underlined to me how much I did *not* know. 
    
    But mainly, I had come to respect my fellow Quorum members as solid,
    dedicated, spiritual people whose respect, in turn, I badly wanted to
    cultivate. Standing up in front of them with the intent of *me* trying
    to teach *them*, well, I might as well put on a clown suit and do a
    juggling act each week. 
                            
    I put the Bishop off, telling him how 'unsure' I was about this idea. I
    doubted very much that someone so inexperienced in the gospel should be
    asked to teach it. Could I please have some time to ask the Lord for
    confirmation that this is what He wanted me to do? If I *knew* -
    without doubt - that the Lord would be with me on this, then that would
    be one thing, but just saying O.K. without consulting the Lord seemed
    unwise at the very least. 
    
    Some very frevent prayers were offered over the next few days. No
    answer. It was wailing-and-gnashing-of-teeth time. I talked to several
    people. They all said not to worry because: 1) the teacher learns more
    than the teachees, 2) the Spirit will guide you, and 3) the Bishop is
    inspired, so this must be what the Lord wants you to do. Right? Various
    scriptures were pointed out. There! Don't you feel better now?
    
    But there was no answer from the Lord. The next week a temporary
    teacher gave the lesson. I tried to imagine myself up there. I tried
    to think what answers I would give to the questions being asked.
    The Elders' Quorum president later told me he watched me during
    that meeting and that I was as white as a sheet.
    
    More prayers. Still no answer from the Lord. The Bishop was firm and
    said that despite a lack of 'credentials' I should accept. The Bishop,
    however, was no match for my fear and doubt. I stalled him again. What
    was I going to do? Why is there no answer? Did the absence of an answer
    mean that this was not what I was supposed to do? Or did it mean that
    the Lord had spoken through the Bishop and that was that? Or did it
    mean I was to rely on my own judgment? 
    
    I just did not have the faith or the experience to know the answer. So
    I used reason. It occurred to me that there were only two ways to
    decide, accept or refuse. If I accepted, it would be purely on faith -
    in God, in the Church, and in its local leaders. If I declined, it
    would be the opposite. I would be showing a pure lack of faith. From
    a logical point of view, if faith was to be exercised there was
    only one way to go. 
    
    I swallowed hard and told the Bishop I would accept. He said he
    was thrilled, that faith precedes the miracle, and that I would
    start this coming Sunday. Arrgh!
    
    More prayers. This time it was different. The Spirit was there to help.
    The fear was still there, but the doubt left my mind. Doubt was
    replaced with guidance, answers, and inspiration! During the lesson, I
    was quite nervous, but there was another factor that helped a geat deal
    that I should have considered earlier: the love that existed in that
    Quorum. Eventually the fear left as well. 
    
    Since that time, it has continued to be a humbling experience, because
    from the beginning I have relied on the Lord to send His Spirit to help
    me teach those weekly lessons. Learning how to *depend* on the Spirit
    has taught me a great deal about drawing on the powers of heaven in
    other ways and on other occasions. 
    
    Before preparing for every lesson, I kneel and ask the Lord for His
    help and guidance. I always give Him the opportunity to select the
    topic, and through prayer and answer, (and sometimes more dramatically
    - but I won't go into that here) He makes it known what the Quorum
    should discuss that week. I can no longer count the number of times
    that people have come up to me after a lesson and told me that it was
    'just what I needed to hear.' 
    
    Whatever success or inspiration I have had is due solely and completely
    to the Lord. The Lord does direct this Church - not just at the highest
    levels, but also at the lowest. He wants to help us in our callings,
    and when we 

       1) make ourselves humble enough to accept His guidance, and

       2) exercise our faith to know it is right, 

    He will make us instruments to accomplish His purposes. How obvious it
    is now the lesson the teacher had to learn. 
    
In His Name,
/kevin    

    Re: .5
    
    Thanks for entering that, Kevin. I found it very inspirational.
    I think you are right that the Lord sometimes will try our faith,
    to see if we will trust in Him, and then, if we do, he will answer
    that trust abundantly.
    
    Rich

    re: .5
    
    Very nice, Kevin!  I can really identify with the circumstances.
    A little over a year ago I was Second Counselor in the Elder's Quorum.
    I was (eventually) fat and happy in my calling.  Then, I was asked
    to teach Seminary.  The Spirit confirmed that this was a calling
    I should accept, so I accepted.  One Sunday morning my wife and
    I met with the Second Counselor in the Stake Presidency.  I assumed
    (in spite of little inklings that it might be something else) it was 
    related to my upcoming teaching call and that it would be a
    motivational meeting.  It wasn't.  I was asked to serve in the
    Bishopric and was set apart that afternoon.  The Spirit confirmed
    to me in an instant that I should accept this calling.
    
    An obvious question arises.  Why did the Spirit confirm that I should
    accept the calling as a Seminary teacher, and then, before I serve
    in that capacity, confirm that I should accept another calling instead?
    Well, I think that part of this can be answered in the story of
    Abraham (Genesis 22:1-19).  Sometimes, our willingness to serve
    the Lord needs to be tested.  I knew that serving as a Seminary
    teacher would be a tough calling for me, but I willingly submitted
    to the will of the Lord.  And, it was confirmed to me that I should
    accept the calling, not necessarily that I would be serving.
    I speculate that it may have been necessary in order for the other 
    calling to be extended.  Another reason may be that the Lord does 
    not desire to 'command in all things'(D&C 58:26-33), so I believe that 
    sometimes leaders can get confirmation from the Spirit on more than
    one name for a given calling because any one of the names would be a 
    good choice that the Lord would support.  And, it is possible for
    regional and local leaders to have conflicting confirmation on the 
    callings that should be extended to a particular person.  I suppose 
    there can be several reasons for this depending on the particular 
    situations.  One might be that in order to preserve the agency of the 
    leadership and confidentiality of personal information, He does not 
    always convey the will and intent of the regional leaders to the local 
    leaders and vice versa.  Another might be that the individual involved
    is in need of some kind of testing or development (D&C 95:5).  In the
    end, the Lord will confirm to all what is most appropriate, once a 
    conflict is discerned (D&C 132:8).  
    
    
    Steve

      I believe callings are part of many choices we have in life.Someone
    has to do the work in the church,and sometimes there isnt enough
    members to do it.Have you ever felt that you shouldnt accept a calling?
    We are taught that we should accept any callings given us,which
    i dont agree with.I believe the Lord has given us the ability to
    make choices,whether right or wrong,and we should use our own judgement
    as to whether we will accept a calling.I really cring when i hear
    people say "well,i'm sure the lord had a reason for me to do this".I
    believe that person let the lord do his thinking for him,instead
    of himself,as the lord intended.
    
    Peace
    Michael
    
    

    Basically, I agree with Mike, except that the Church doesn't teach
    that we should accept all callings given.  My dad served in a calling
    once that he eventually had to turn down.  It was taking him away
    from his family too much.  He was good at the calling.  But,
    at the time it would have conflicted with his duties as father and 
    husband.  We do have to make a choice, right or wrong, as Mike
    suggested.  And, sometimes it's a choice between good and better.
    It's very personal and varies with the circumstances.

    Steve    

    
    
     Perhaps i misunderstood concerning callings as far as the churches
    teachings,but,i certainly got the feeling that to refuse a calling
    was like telling the lord "No".There was a definite pressure to
    accept whatever you were asked to do.I believe the Lord leaves it
    to the leaders of the church to make decisions,and,to us as individuals
    to decide if we can do the job or not.I believe the lord will guide
    us if we ask,but,the ultimate decision is ours.
    
    Peace
    Michael
    

    Yeah, Mike.  I think we're on the same wavelength.  I think that
    sometimes members in leadership positions, or any other positions
    where they must ask other members for support, become accustomed
    to getting support when they need it and forget that there is
    personal agency involved.  That's their fault, not the Church's.  
    If I ask the Lord if a particular member would be good for a 
    particular calling, I can seek a yes or a no answer.  But, if 
    I were to ask if a particular member will *accept* a calling, now 
    we're assuming a question that I may not get an answer to.  Sometimes, 
    when a person turns down a calling they are saying 'no' to the Lord.  
    But, usually that hasn't been the case in my experience.  I've usually 
    seen callings turned down because those involved figured they couldn't 
    handle it in addition to their other responsibilities.  I don't see 
    any shame in that.  Sometimes they want to turn the calling down
    because they don't feel they are 'good enough' for the calling, but
    the Lord knows differently.  I feel it quite appropriate in such cases 
    for the leadership to help them to understand that they are good for 
    the calling.  More often than not, we grow into the callings rather
    than step into callings that we can already do with full competence.  
    
    Steve

    
    
      It does seem like we have some of the same feelings and ideas
    about callings,Steve.I agree with what you say,of coarse,our leaders
    are learning to lead as well,so,i understand that they will grow
    as a result of their callings.If you think about it,i suppose any
    calling will give you leadership experience to one degree or another.
      I think that if the lord appeared to us personally and asked us
    to do a job,it would be hard to refuse.:^).I believe that even if
    we are saying "NO" to the Lord,that he is understanding and loving
    enough to accept that,and perhaps,would say to us "well,O.K. I accept
    your decision,but,I will give you other opportunities in the future.You
    can count on it:^).I Love you."
    
    
    Peace
    Michael
    

    Ayup!  :-)
    
    Steve

I think it is important that Priesthood leaders establish an atmosphere of
trust and 'listening' between themselves and the members.  If circumstances
develop (either circumstances that may not be known to the leaders when a
call is issued or circumstances that change later on) that make it difficult
for one to serve, that person should feel free to talk to the appropriate
leader.  Through prayerful discussions, a solution can hopefully be found
that will satisfy the needs of both the person giving service and the leader
needing the service.

When I moved to New England from Phoenix, I was called as Scoutmaster and also
as Blazer scout leader, and I served in the two capacities for about a year.
During that time, my reviews here at work brought out the fact that I needed
to attend night school to bolster my background in Software Engineering.
However, I knew that time-wise I couldn't attend school and serve in the two
callings.

I discussed the matter with the Bishop's counselor over the two Scout programs.
He agreed that I should go to school, and I was released as Scoutmaster and
retained as Blazer leader.

I had a Bishop in Phoenix who was a school Superintendent and needed for his
professional career to finish his doctorate.  However, as Bishop he had no
time for school.  He discussed the matter with the Stake President, and the
President chose to release him as Bishop.

Serving as volunteers in the Church is a two-way street, and honest
communications between us and those we interact with is the key to success.

Allen

    
     I have been a member of several organizations,and,as a member i
    participated actively in them.In all of them,including the LDS church,
    i have noticed that most of the work is done by a small minority
    of individuals,and,mostly the same ones.Some have 2 or 3 callings
    at once.So what do you think the reasons are for this?Even in this
    notes file the participation is by a very small part of those who
    read it.What are some of the keys to getting participation in the
    church?I have some ideas that i will add as we develop this,but
    how about someone starting things off?
    
    Peace
    Michael
    

    I think you raise a good point, Mike. Most people are content to watch,
    rather than participate, in almost any endeavor. Some reasons that come
    to mind: 
    
    1- Fear. Fear of failure, fear of criticism, fear of the unknown.
    
    2- Laziness. Some people are not inclined to exert themselves.
    
    3- Too Busy. Some people are so busy participating in some things that
       they simply can't participate in others. 
    
    4- Choice. Some people simply choose not to participate, even though
       they may have no fear, laziness, nor lack of time. I guess it's
       just not a priority to them.
    
    
    I do happen to believe that the LDS church is blessed with a membership
    that is more inclined to participate than many others. For example,
    where I served on my mission, there was a State Church, even supported
    by tax dollars, and estimates I heard had about two percent of the
    church membership being "active". 
    
    On the other hand, I think overall the LDS church sees a level of
    activity of somewhere around half the members. Since the church has a
    lay ministry, most active members realize that they need to help out,
    and are willing to serve, when asked. 
    
    How to get more participation in church service? I think the number one
    key is: Ask. People will often respond when asked in a kind way to help
    out. For example, in our ward, there are some people who never come to
    church, but are glad to help out in other ways. We even have some
    non-members who are helping out.
    
    Another important key is to show appreciation, and, above all, to avoid
    criticism. People's feelings are tender, and need to be handled with
    care. 
    
    So much for my thoughts on the subject.
    
    Rich

	Regards.. I hope this finds you and yours in good health..

		I always like the '' other '' meaning of LDS during
my Scouting involvement in the MIA, '' Lets Do Something.. ''

May God be with you..

- Ed -
    

    Why do few participate in Notes?  Here's my answer (for what it's
    worth):
    
    It is 9:45.  I have just put 5 kids to bed; one more to go.  I want
    to read in the Ensign and scriptures, write in my journal before
    going to bed by 10:30. Earlier this evening I hung a mirror for
    my daughter, stained a bookcase for my wife, painted a window for
    my son, took the kids to the store for treats.  
    
    I am so busy being a father and husband that most of the time is
    used up.  I love reading Notes, but do not have the time to contribute
    to it that I would like.
    
    I appreciate those of you who do contribute so much, especially
    in the form of historical or doctrinal research.
    
    I am not complaining about my lot, just glad there are fellow Saints
    who contribute.  When it is my time to contribute, I relish  the
    opportunity to do so.
    
    Paul

    I am enjoying participaitng in this conference even if all I do
    is read and consider.  
    
    I feel that there are some excellent entries.  I like yours Rich
    especially.  My reasons for participating are I like to feel a 
    link with others of my Faith and I can see I am in excellent company
    and hope some of it will rub off on me.  
    
    Last sunday at Elders Quorum (how do you use dec spell) meeting
    I noticed that there was a different teacher and because he called
    on me I felt stirred to participate and vounteered several ideas
    after that.  I guess you can say he drew me out.  I was content
    to observe and let the usual group of friends interact but this
    man reached out and pulled many of us into a rewarding exchange.
    So I guess one way to precipitate participation is to reach out.
    
    I too appreciate the contributions of those who have made so many
    excellent entries.  Thank you for sharing.   
 
    Love in Christ
    
    -gary

    Thank you for the kind words, Gary.
    
    I found your comment interesting about the Elders Quorum meeting,
    where you were 'drawn out'. It takes a good teacher to do that well,
    and classes like that are very enjoyable.
    
    By the way, you can use DECspell by pressing <DO> and entering the
    command 'spell'. At least it works for me. It even suggests the
    correct spelling for you. 
    
    In Christ's Love,
    Rich
        

    Another thought on this topic...
    
    I have noticed that those church activities that are the most
    successful are generally those where lots of people have been asked
    to *DO* something. 
    
    They are much more likely to show up if they have a role to play
    in the success of the activity beyond just being there. Usually
    they will be glad they were included, too.
    
    Rich
    

    
      I Appreciate everyones participation and excellent comments.I
    actually used one method at the beginning of this note by opening
    things up and then,asking for people to help.
      I have been inactive for a while,and,i have thought about why
    I am not participating:
      
      1.Hurt.I experienced a very painful divorce and when i needed
    some support and asked for it,no one seemed to care enough to help.
    So i think this comes under Fear,of being hurt again.
      
      2.Change of location.I moved to a different area,and,so far,they
    havnt shown that they need me,even though i have offered to help.I
    ask the gentleman about what is happening and he doesnt know.I think
    this goes under ASKING and letting the member know they are NEEDED
    and that they are IMPORTANT.
    
      3.I am very busy working on my music,and,i dont have the time
    to be real active,but,i could do something,especially if it involved
    music.I have indicated this to the high priest that visits me once
    a month for a half hour.This is not recognizing a way in which you
    can involve a member,even if it is a small way,it gets them involved.
    Knowing what a persons interests are is important,even if you dont
    get them to come to services,you can get them involved in something
    they are interested in,and think about other things later.In this
    way too,you utilize peoples talents and they have more confidence
    in what they are doing,and less fear of failing.
    
      So,how about some other comments from some of you who have been
    quiet up to now,and,of course those of you who have been participating.
    Thank-you all.
    
    
    Peace
    Michael

    Mike, A suggestion: You might try meeting with the Bishop or writing
    him a letter expressing a desire to participate, though perhaps in a
    limited way right now. My guess is that he is not aware of your
    desires. 

    Rich

    
      Well,you know i dont have any imformation on the new ward at all.I
    dont even have home teachers assigned to me.You see,this is my point,
    i have never been contacted by the Bishop or anyone else in the
    ward,except for the gentleman that comes once a month.You see,I
    have been a home teacher and a priesthood leader,and i have taught
    in Elders Quorum,and I have seen how the home teaching program works.
    The priesthood manual teaches how to involve members,and is an
    excellant source of guidance.There is just one thing that it cant
    teach,and that is caring and having a genuine interest in the other
    members of the ward.A lot of times home teachers accept the calling,
    but are not really able to make the committment of the heart.
      I was always taught that it is the inactive members that should
    be kept in touch with before the active ones.
      Another thing i wanted to add to my comments is that i have some
    different beliefs now and so i am hesitant about talking about them.
    I have been able to contact the spirit world,and talk with spirits
    on the other side,including my first wife,who died in 1986 by taking
    an overdose of sleeping pills.I have learned some things that are
    outside the belief system of LDS.I know things are a bit different
    from traditional beliefs.A lot of what is taught is correct,but,there
    are some things that are a bit different.I am not sure how i would
    handle this,if i was active again.
      Well, i dont want to get off the topic here,so i may have another
    one soon,to talk of other things.
    
    Peace
    Michael
    

	Here's kind of a strange one. The other night my wife and I were
discussing the different callings that we had served in. And she wondered
if there is a way to find out exact dates of when somebody was called and
then released from different callings. If we had stayed in the same ward
all of our lives the solution would be easy, but since we are like most
LDS families we have changed wards several times. Does anyone know if this
information can be obtained from church headquarters or does one have to
go back to the original ward's records?

	I have just been called to teach the 12 year olds (one of which
is my son, lucky him). I have taught Star A's and Star B's before, both 
were a extremely rewarding experience, but never a group of older kids. This 
is a Sunday School class so I'll have both boys and girls. I want to make 
this an exciting class, one that they'll want to go to not have to got to.
I have several ideas for the class, but I welcome any suggestions and/or 
thoughts that anyone may have. Needless to say I am excited about teaching 
these kids.
 
	Also, I just sent away for the latest version of PAF for my rainbow.
I know that I will receive the IBM kit and have to return the diskettes.
The question is; How well does this program really work on the rainbow and
are there any significant problems or bugs to watch out for? Thanks in 
advance for your input.

Frank
(Bro. Mueller)   
    

    Re: Note 215.0 by QBUS::MUELLER

    Hi Frank,
    
>	Here's kind of a strange one. The other night my wife and I were
>discussing the different callings that we had served in. And she wondered
>if there is a way to find out exact dates of when somebody was called and
>then released from different callings. If we had stayed in the same ward
>all of our lives the solution would be easy, but since we are like most
>LDS families we have changed wards several times. Does anyone know if this
>information can be obtained from church headquarters or does one have to
>go back to the original ward's records?
    
    I believe that the only time that information on ward officers is
    submitted to church headquarters is at ward conference time, when the
    ward officers are sustained. This information is not complete, however,
    and I believe only contains the presidencies of the various ward
    organizations. Most wards that I have lived in do not keep a permanent
    record of any kind that would contain this type of information. Usually
    the information on who is serving in what callings in the ward and when
    they served is dept in pretty temporary forms, and is not retained for
    long periods. The best way to keep track of such things is in your own
    personal journal, which we have all been encouraged to keep, of course. 
    
>	Also, I just sent away for the latest version of PAF for my rainbow.
>I know that I will receive the IBM kit and have to return the diskettes.
>The question is; How well does this program really work on the rainbow and
>are there any significant problems or bugs to watch out for? Thanks in 
>advance for your input.
    
    I'm trying to figure out what PAF  for, with no luck. If it is software
    for the IBM PC, then chances are that it will not run at all on your
    Rainbow. 
    
    Regards, 
    Rich

    It seems that the LDS church depends heavily upon volunteers to
    function. While there is a note on callings earlier in this
    conference, the discussion focused on how to determine what
    callings an individual had completed (where are callings recorded)
    rather than the process itself. I'm interested in the process.
    Could someone help me understand:

    - How are individuals are chosen for these positions or callings?

    - How are they trained to handle the responsibilities of these
      positions?

    - Why do they do it? That is what is the motivation to take on
      additional work in this very complicated world?
    
    - How is it handled when an individual is not handling the
      responsibilities of a position or calling well?

    From an outsider's viewpoint, the church appears to work very
    well. I'd like to understand both how and why it does.

    Dan Kusnetzky

Howdy, Dan!

Good questions.  I'll take a shot.

>    - How are individuals are chosen for these positions or callings?

	Basically, one or more names are suggested for a calling, usually 
	(but not always) based upon who is available and capable of doing
	or learning the job.  The names are usually suggested by
	organization leaders, members of the Bishopric, or others as 
    	appropriate.  After a decision is made by the Bishopric, the names 
    	are prayerfully considered and spiritual confirmation sought.  If 
    	confirmed, the calling is extended.  If not confirmed, other 
    	possibilities are considered.  

	Being in the Bishopric, I have experienced this confirmation of the
	Spirit in callings.  Often, more than one name will receive 
	confirmation for a calling, leaving us to decide among several good
	choices.  Sometimes, there is no confirmation.  This leads to delays
	in filling of assignments.  But, as we have found out on more than one
	occasion, there are usually reasons for this.  I have experienced
	a lack of confirmation when I thought there should be one.  And, I have
	experienced confirmation when I did not expect it.  I have not 
	experienced an occasion at any time when the Bishopric did not reach
	unanimity about confirmations, though I suppose that can happen 
	as well.  

	The consistence of spiritual confirmations has been a
	testimony-builder for me.  I have more than once been unable to get
	spiritual confirmation on a calling while thinking the other members
	of the Bishopric were, only to find later than they were getting the
	same feelings.  

	Also, it is good to keep in mind that the confirmation is indication
	that the calling should be extended - NOT that it will be accepted,
	that the person will be successful at it, or that the person is
	necessarily worthy of it.  I have seen, for example, a good brother
	who failed to succeed in a calling resulting in the uncovering of 
	a long-held flaw in character.  He was released, but is better now
	than before because we have been able to address the flaw and get 
	him back on track.  In another example, a call was extended to a 
	sister that was not worthy to fulfill a calling.  Again, this caused
	the problems to surface so that they could be dealt with.  Seeing
	these people begin to flourish as a result of apparent failure in 
	callings restores my faith that the Lord really does know what He
	is doing and that His hand is in all things.

>    - How are they trained to handle the responsibilities of these
>      positions?

	Most people are successful in the callings they accept.  For most
	callings, there are instruction manuals available.  But, the
	instructions are found mostly while on knees in prayer.  Training
	is provided on a weekly or monthly basis in leadership meetings.
	Some training is provided in special classes.  For example, I took 
	what they call a Teacher Development class when I was about 18.  

	And, you usually tap the experiences had in other callings to assist
	with current callings.  For example, I was at one time a Single Adult
	leader.  This helps me tremendously as I work with the Single Adult
	leaders in our Ward.  I have on several occasions taught children in
	Sunday School classes.  This helps me a lot as I work with the Sunday
	School President and occasionally teach a class - sometimes at a 
	moment's notice.  Since my youth I have occasionally been encouraged 
	to give a talk during Sacrament services.  This helps me now when
	it's my turn to conduct services or to call on speakers.  The
	examples continue, but you get the idea.

>    - Why do they do it? That is what is the motivation to take on
>      additional work in this very complicated world?

	I guess you have to take a deep breath and experience it to really
	understand.  You lose yourself in service to others in a calling.
	Often, you have to make sacrifices of time, effort and other 
	resources.  But, you feel good being able to help and be helped by
	others.  And, with every calling comes the opportunity to have the
	special closeness of the Spirit, prompting you on a daily basis and
	giving you strength to do well in everything, not just your callings.
	The Lord is there to comfort you.  You begin to think of the welfare 
	of others, perhaps more than of yourself.  

	You couldn't pay me to do my calling.  It's too hard, and payment
	would be too temporary and would not match my investment.  But, 
	I've had people take me aside in confidence and thank me for what
	the Lord has done for them through me.  I've felt an intense love
	for those who have served as hands of the Lord in helping me and my
	family.  We are blessed when we can share each other's burdens and
	learn to truly love each other as the Lord intended.  These are 
	lasting blessings.  And, the nearness of the Lord that results 
	is an eternal blessing.  I would easily give up everything I had 
	rather than lose that nearness or these other blessings.

>    - How is it handled when an individual is not handling the
>      responsibilities of a position or calling well?

	First, we provide all the support and encouragement that we can.
	We give a person every opportunity to fail and finally succeed in
	a calling.  This usually includes interviews to give the person
	opportunity to report on how they are doing and receive guidance,
	counsel, encouragement and access to other resources.  It is seldom 
	expected that a person will be equal to a calling at the outset.

	When I have had a person who continues to perform unacceptably, 
	I have usually taken them aside confidentially and discussed it.  
	It is seldom that they are incompetent.  In fact, I've never met 
	someone that was incompetent for the calling.  Usually, something 
	else is wrong.  This becomes an opportunity to find out what the real 
	problem is and address it.  The decision to extend a release is usually 
	by mutual agreement and is seldom accompanied by hostility or
	embarassment.  Rather, public and humble thanks are typically 
    	rendered for all efforts made to fulfill a calling, successful or
	not.  Failure in a calling, as with other personal details, is 
    	confidential and not made public more than necessary.

	Releases are seldom extended as a result of poor performance in a 
	calling.  They are usually extended because someone is moving, because
	they are needed in other positions, because their circumstances have
	changed and so forth.  Typically, releases are extended along
	with extensions of new callings.  This is often not hard to do
	since there are a lot of tasks that need to be done for a Ward to
	run smoothly.  A change in a calling can result in several changes 
    	before it's all over, so adjustments in callings are frequently
    	made.  Typically, we will extend or release 2 or 3 people per
        week and seldom because someone did a bad job.

	I hope this has been of some interest and help.  Feel free to ask
	any questions.  It is probably a topic of interest to most members.


	Steve

>    - How are they trained to handle the responsibilities of these
>      positions?

I'm going to limit most of my comments to the context of teachers.  A similar
discussion can be given by someone for leadership training.

The Church has set up a pretty sophisticated procedure for training its
teachers.  First, let me comment that the Mormon Church is a centralized church
and this centralization makes possible a high degree of correlation in the
lessons and a high level of background material.  The same lessons (at least
in English speaking countries; I don't know about the others) are taught in
all Wards on basically the same schedule.  Each class has a teachers manual
that outlines the basic objectives of the lessons and gives ideas for
implementation.  Each building has a library containing a lot of AV aids, and
the manuals reference the AV materials that are recommended for each lesson.
The Church publications (Ensign, New Era, and Friend magazines and the Church
News supplement) frequently contain background information for the lessons.
The lessons are correlated over a four-year cycle such that the lessons in the
various organizations have a common theme and support each other.

The teacher manuals provide the first-level training.  The background material
in the Church publications provide the second-level training; included in this
level are books about teaching techniques that are published by individual
people.  These books are not sponsored by nor authorized by the Church, but they
contain much helpful advise and are written by educators and others experienced
in teaching.  A third-level training is provided by teacher-development or
training classes.  These classes are a one-time training seminar for several
weeks of weekly lessons in which the person is trained in specific techniques.
A fourth-level training is provided by periodic training classes known as
"inservice" meetings.  Sometimes these are taught by Ward officers for members
of their organizations and sometimes by Stake leaders for people from the Wards.
They might be held monthly or perhaps quarterly, depending on the structure of
the organization.

One question that needs to be address is "How effective is the system in
helping new people become effective teachers."  The materials provided by the
Church in Salt Lake are excellent!  The general committees that plan the 
materials are staffed by people who are volunteers themselves but who have
much background (frequently a professional background) in teaching.  The
results of the committees are approved by the General Authorities, and this
gives assurance that the content is within the accepted framework of doctrine
and practice.  Likewise, the various Stake Inservice meetings I've attended
over the years have also been excellent, and the Ward Inservice meetings are
usually good too.  As you would expect with a volunteer organization, mistakes
are made and people exhibit human failings, so the lower in the Church hierarchy
one goes, the less quality one would expect to find.

Sometimes people might take the Teacher training class in anticipation of future
callings, but in most cases people are called to a teaching position and begin
teaching with little background or preparation (I'm referring to a persons
beginning as a teacher).  As the person teaches his or her first class, they
attend Inservice meetings and receive help, and when the class is available
they can take the Teacher training class for additional help.  I expect that
most Bishops would try and place people with no teaching background in the
younger classes, although those classes may have more of a discipline problem.

One of the most important aspects of this volunteer system is that we are all
literal brothers and sisters and Mormons have a high level of fellowship and
love among themselves.  We realize that so-and-so is new to teaching and is
struggling with the class, and we have empathy with them and do as much as we
can to help them.  We also realize that our time to teach a class will probably
come in the future and that we will be struggling with our class, and this
realization helps us desire to strengthen the teacher of our class through
active and positive participation.

On a scale of 1 to 10, I would give the Church an 8 for its teaching program.

Allen

>    - How are they trained to handle the responsibilities of these
>      positions?

I gave the Church a good rating for its teacher development program, but I
can only give it a 4 for its leadership development.  The Church is
structured as a volunteer organization, and Leadership training is critical.
Unfortunately, the excellent guidelines from Salt Lake don't make it down
to the troops very well.  I'm sure that others will have a different 
perspective than I have of this, and I hope they will post their views so
we will get a balanced idea of leadership training in the Mormon Church.

As we would expect from a centralized organization, the Church in Salt Lake
recognizes the need for strong leaders, and it provides excellent guidelines
and leadership manuals.  I give them an 8 for their results.

I'm very critical of Stake and Ward leaders for failing to implement the
lofty goals from Salt Lake.  I'm going to take as an example a Deacons Advisor
in a Ward.  For the benefit of the non-LDS, let me explain that Deacons are
boys 12-14 years of age.  They have been ordained to the Aaronic Priesthood
and are learning about priesthood duties through weekly meetings of their
"quorum" and through opportunities for service.  One boy is called by the
Bishop to be the President of the Deacons Quorum, and he recommends two boys to
be his counselors and a third boy to be Secretary (these three are also called
by the Bishop).  An adult is called to be an advisor to the Quorum.

If the leadership duties relative to the Deacons Quorum are functioning as
the General Authorities in Salt Lake desire, the following would occur each
week.

1.  The Advisor and the President would meet in a planning session.  The
    Advisor would help the President plan two meetings: a Presidency meeting
    and the Quorum meeting.  This planning would include becoming aware of the
    things to be done in those meetings and the creating of agendas for the
    meetings.  Included would be discussions of possible solutions for the
    problems that have been identified, how responsibilities could be delegated
    to the Counselors, which Quorum members need special attention, possible
    service projects, etc.

2.  The President would meet with his two Counselors and the Secretary and
    plan the activities for the Quorum during the next few weeks.  The 
    President would conduct this meeting using the agenda established in the
    meeting with the Advisor.  The three members of the Deacon's presidency
    would discuss the activities and members of the Quorum and decide on
    specific projects, activities, etc. to be presented to the Quorum for
    discussion.  The leadership responsibilities would be divided between the
    three boys.  The Secretary would take detailed minutes and serve as a
    mind-jogger later on so things aren't forgotten.

3.  The weekly Quorum meeting would be held on Sunday with a member of the
    Presidency conducting.  This meeting would consist of two phases: First,
    discussions of assignments, service projects, etc. with the Quorum
    deciding on specific activities as proposed by the Presidency and
    possibly amended by the group with the approval of the Presidency.
    Second, a lesson designed to help the young boys grow in their callings
    as Priesthood holders; this lesson is usually given by the Advisor, and he
    frequently will enlist the help of the boys in giving mini-lessons.

4.  Service projects, assignments from the Bishop, etc. are conducted under
    the direction of the Quorum Presidency.

This all sounds nice on paper, but I've never been in a Ward where it was
implemented very well.  The pattern that I've observed is that a man is
called as Deacons Advisor and is given the lesson manual and told to go to work.
He frequently will not be told about Stake meetings that he should attend.
He almost never is told about the structured leadership role that I described
above and that he should perform in training his young Deacons.  In all my
years in the Church I've never seen *one* case where a Priesthood Advisor was
*trained* in how to be a "shadow" leader to the boys in his quorum, and I think
this is real sad!  Case in point:  A while back, a man in my Ward was called
to be Deacons Advisor.  He was a relatively new member of the Church and
didn't have the advantage of being a Deacon when he was young.  He didn't know
that the Quorum President should conduct the weekly Quorum meeting, and he
conducted it himself; the Bishops counselor involved with the Deacons had to
take him aside and explain a few things to him.  This new Advisor did not
know that he was to train the Quorum Presidency in their duties, and as far
as I know he never met with the Presidency to plan agendas, etc.  I sat in
the Quorum meetings as Scoutmaster during this time, and I wanted to cry as
I saw this good brother make mistake after mistake in his role as Advisor.
I wanted to cry because it was embarrassing to him, but the problem was not
his.  He was a Latter-day Saint of only a year and didn't know any differently.
The problem was caused by the Bishopric and the Stake leaders for not
training him in his duties!  I think that this example is more the norm than
the exception.  

The Church already has the structure to give excellent leadership training to
its people.  For example, it would be wonderful if the good brother who was
called as Deacons Advisor could have completed a training session conducted by
the Stake Aaronic Priesthood committee *prior* to his beginning as Advisor.
This would have taken about a month and would have given him a great start
in his calling.  It would have been wonderful if the Bishopric counselor 
could have spent a couple of hours with him and reviewed details of his
responsibilities; maybe the Bishopric counselor did that, I don't know of
course, but I do know that the Advisor made a lot of obvious mistakes that
could have and should have been avoided.  The man involved is no dummy, and
this leads me to believe that the leadership training did not occur.

There are two factors involved with all of this that I would like to comment
on to put things in a better perspective.  First, Bishops usually need to
quickly fill positions and may not have a lot of time to train people *prior*
to their beginning their callings.  This is a real problem with volunteer
organizations, and the Bishops hope that on-the-job experience will help the
person get "up to speed".  Second, volunteer organizations always have a
serious problem in that volunteers are human and make mistakes.  We all have
our own personalities and have "blinders" on and don't clearly see the problems
that confront us.  The good brother I spoke of was not experienced in teaching
teenage boys and wasn't relating to them very well in his lessons.  Since I
was visiting the class as Scoutmaster, I (in private of course) volunteered to
alternate the lessons with him, hoping that he might learn from my methods
of teaching teens.  The good brother, however, had his blinders on and thought
that he should give all the lessons and kindly refused my offer of help.

This has been a critical reply, and I expect some LDS will be upset with me.
That's fine, I appreciate and understand their concern, and I hope they will
post their experiences with leadership training in the Church so the non-LDS
will get a balanced view.

Allen

    I sort of agree with what Allen has said.  I do think it depends on the
    organizations involved and how much time is put into the callings. 

    Let me relate how some organizations operate in our ward.  My wife is a
    counselor in the primary and is heavily involved in what is happening
    there. When a call is extended to a person, the member of the
    presidency who has jurisdiction over the area the newly called person
    is going to work is responsible to orient and train that person.  I
    don't know all the specifics involved in what the training covers, but
    I do know that in addition to the orientation session, they hold
    monthly inservice meetings for the primary staff.  Also, in addition to
    inservice meetings, the primary presidency hold weekly leadership
    meetings to administer the affairs of the primary.  Also she contacts
    her people once a week to see how things are going. 

    On the other hand, our sunday school organization is a mess right now.
    We have a presidency who has been together for several months and they
    have not had any staff meetings yet.  They have one planned for
    september. 

    One thing I have noticed is that generally speaking, the primary and
    relief society tend to be better organized than some of the
    organizations which are run by men.  My gut feeling is that this is due
    to the fact that women are encouraged to stay home and raise the
    family.  Doing that, they have a little more time than the men, who are
    encouraged to go out and earn a living in addition to handling a busy
    calling.  In our ward's primary presidency, none of the sisters work
    outside the home and only one is going to school part time. This allows
    them to have a bit of flexibility as far as scheduling meetings and
    doing things.  The sunday school presidency on the other hand has one
    counselor who works on sunday and is putting 65-70 hour work weeks in.
    That means he has a difficult time meeting with the rest of the
    presidency and it puts a burden on the other members of the presidency. 

    One thing that affects how smoothly a ward is run is based on the
    turnover rate and how stable the membership of the ward is.  We have a
    very high turnover rate in our ward due to the lousy economy and also
    the strong military presence in our ward boundaries.  Our ward
    boundaries are directly north of an Air Force base and way north east
    of an Army base. 

scott

    
    Thank you for an interesting peek into a subject that I found puzzling.
    
    One aspect of my life is to be one of the leaders of a religious
    organization that is structured very differently from the LDS church.
    
    While I realize that the physical organization says very little about
    the content of a religious teaching, it is something of interest to me.
    The LDS organization is still not quite clear but the fog is beginning
    to lift. In the past few replies several words were used that appeared
    to have meanings in the context of the LDS organization that seem
    different in the context that I'm familiar with. Would one of you
    please be so kind as to define:
    
    counselor
    
    in-service meetings

    being a member of the presidency (I'm used to thinking of President
                                      used as the title of one person)
    
    relief society (I think that I have a handle on this one from previous
                    notes)

    Thanks!
         Dan Kusnetzky

Hi Dan,

First, let me define the term "organization".  As used below, an organization
is a structure within the congregation or ward.  Examples are the Sunday School,
the Primary (children age 1 1/2 through 11),and Mutual (youth age 12 through 17,
or through High School graduation).

>    counselor
    
A Counselor is an assistant to the person in charge of an organization.  For
example, the person responsible for the Sunday School in a ward is the Sunday
School President.  He has two men who assist him, and they are his Counselors.

>    in-service meetings

In-service meetings are periodic training meetings designed to provide training
and guidance to the workers in an organization.  Organizations usually have
In-service Leaders who give the monthly training.  Both wards and Stakes
provide In-service training, depending on the organization involved.

>    being a member of the presidency (I'm used to thinking of President
>                                      used as the title of one person)
    
You are right, Dan.  "President" is the title of one person.  That person and
his or her counselors comprise the Presidency or ruling body for that
organization.


>    relief society (I think that I have a handle on this one from previous
>                    notes)

Relief Society is the woman's organization of the Church, while the Priesthood
is the men's organization (note that the word "Priesthood" is used in two
ways: the authority from God to perform his ordinances, and the organization
of men who hold the Priesthood).  The charter of the Relief Society is to
provide compassionate service, to prepare women for their role as homemakers
and mothers, and to train them for these things.

Here is a snapshot view of a "typical" ward or congregation.  The ward has
about 150 families.  The pastor is an ordained Bishop.  He has two men who
assist him, and they are his counselors.  They are responsible to the Stake
President for the spiritual and temporal well-being of the ward members. (a
Stake is a geographical area comprising a number of wards).

The Bishopric (the Bishop and his counselors) call people to staff various
teaching and leadership positions.  The basic organizations in the ward are
the Sunday School, Primary, Mutual, Relief Society, and Priesthood Quorums.
There are actually two Mutuals, one for the young women and one for the young
men.  Each of these organizations has a Presidency of three people and a
teaching staff as needed.  The Priesthood Quorums are divided into two groups.
Within the Aaronic Priesthood, there are Deacon Quorums, Teacher Quorums
(this use of the word "Teacher" refers to an ordained office in the Aaronic
Priesthood not to a classroom teacher), and Priest Quorums.  The Bishopric
is responsible for these Quorums and calls Quorum Presidencies and Advisors.
There are also Melchizedek Priesthood Quorums consisting of Elders and High
Priest Quorums, but these Quorums come under the jurisdiction of the Stake
President.

Within the Ward, there are also clerks who keep track of the membership,
statistical, and financial records.  In addition, there are special committees
such as an Activities committee that provides certain activities during the
year.  Scouting is an official part of the Church, and Scout meetings are
held during the weekly Mutual meetings.  A Music Committee correlates and
plans the music within the organizations.  A Library Staff provides a nice
collection of AV aids and equipment, and duplication services for classroom
handouts.

All worthy men who hold the Priesthood are expected to serve as Home Teachers.
Home Teachers are responsible for several families and represent the church to
those families.  Home Teachers meet with the families at least once a month,
teach the Gospel to the families, and do other things that might be needed to
assist the head of the homes.  In past years, I've helped the families I
home teach move to new houses, paint rooms, weed gardens, etc.  Usually, a man
will be paired with an Aaronic Priesthood holder as Home Teaching companions
so the boy can be trained by the man in Home Teaching responsibilities.

The Relief Society sisters are involved in a program called "Visiting Teaching"
in which all the women in the ward are visited monthly; Visiting Teachers
only visit women while Home Teachers visit whole families.

There are enough teaching and leadership roles in a ward to give all ward
members who will accept assignments (and most do if they are attending meetings
more or less regularly) the opportunity to serve their brothers and sisters.
In fact, some wards are so short-handed that people have several callings, and
there is a real risk of burnout.  To avoid burnout, callings are usually
changed every couple of years or less (except the poor Bishops keep their
callings for much longer).  This frequent changing does keep variety in ones
activities and helps avoid burnout, but it also increases the need for 
leadership training since it takes about a year for one to learn a calling
such that he or she can be productive; just as the person is beginning
to feel comfortable, the calling is changed.  Sometimes I've been real glad
for a change because I wasn't doing very well with a calling....

All of the people who staff the callings in a Ward or Stake serve without
pay and have their own occupations to provide for their needs.  My Bishop
works for DEC as an engineer.  The Bishop before him was a Sergeant at Ft.
Devens.

Allen

    RE: .6

    Allen,

    Thanks for that run down of term definitions. That gave me a much
    clearer picture.

    How religious teachings organize the administrative/support structure
    necessary to allow the spiritual side room to work really fascinates
    me.
    
    Dan Kusnetzky
    

Re: .2

I agree that the Church Teacher Training Program is outstanding. Many years
ago I was thinking about becoming a college professor. So I talked to one
Professor that I respected (Charles Alley of Alley and Atwood fame if there
are any old Electrical Engineers listening). I asked how one would get training
for the teaching aspect of that kind of career. He said that there is little of 
that given to technical professors, but that the best program he knew of was
the Teacher Development Program of the church.

Re: .3

I believe that the church leadership training program is probably the very best.
To understand this you have to remember who is being trained. The training of 
the deacons is only one part of it. The training of the new member is another 
part and the training of the several people that support and work with him
is also part of it.  So the success is hard to measure. It is certainly not just
whether or not the rather fine program listed there is implemented.

We just had a Pancake Breakfast for the 4th.  At 7:00 AM I got a call asking
how to set up to cook the stuff. The person in charge had not made all the 
arrangements before hand. But believe it or not, it all worked. People came,
people enjoyed themselves, and they got fed. not as soon as they might have,
and yet it worked. Why because of the unbelievable willingness to help out
that is trained into members of this church, and I don't mean just a few, but
most of them eventually. And you can bet that the person that did not make
the plans before hand learned, but without anybody embarrasing him or giving
him a bad time.

One of the biggest lessons of my learining as leadership was when I asked for
a person to be an advisor to the Explorers because I knew him and was sure that
he could do a good job. The Bishopric agreed and this man accepted the call.
Then it turned out to really be too much for him at that time in his life. I
suppose that he learned something from this, I suppose that the bishopric 
learned something from this. But I know I really learned to carefully seek
inspiration for a calling and not just go by what seems good to you. But it
was a graphic lesson that I will never forget. It has already been over 20
years. The Lord's way can make the point very well by letting us experience it.

Your Brother Len
 

    Len,
    
    Thanks for sharing those stories. Experience is not only the best
    teacher, it is the ONLY teacher.
    
    	Dan K.

Hi, all,

Just some random thoughts about this subject:

- Steve gave a very good response to Dan K.'s questions. I would just
add that while all the talk about the Spirit and revelation and
inspiration may possibly sound hokey to some people, to Mormons these
things are as real as concrete. No kidding. The flip side, of course,
is that in treating Divine guidance as a common event, we sometimes
also take it for granted. 

- The motivation that Mormons have to perform a calling is directly 
related to their testimony of the reality of the Gospel. Once you come
to *know* that God lives, that Jesus Christ is His Son, and that there
is a purpose to life and a plan of salvation, well, being asked to
conduct a weekly meeting in support of that plan is no big deal. In 
fact, you're *happy* to do it. 

- The testimonies of the members are collectively the backbone of the
Church. Without them, there is no motivation to do anything. With 
them, it gives a motivation strong enough to overcome daunting 
obstacles.

- I am fond of repeatedly pointing out to people that "Efficiency" is
*not* one of the three missions of the Church. "Perfecting the Saints" 
*is*, which implies a certain amount of imperfection to begin with. 

- Callings are the Lord's way of helping us learn about service in
general, which is the highest calling. 'Learn' is the key word. One
can learn from failure at least as much as from success. It is only 
when one does not learn anything at all that the true failure takes
place. 

- Those of us who have to deal with a person who is less than 
optimum have a chance to learn too. We learn the need for patience,
the importance of humility even when we think we know better, the
virtue of faith that everything will turn out OK in the end, and the
blessing of loving feelings for those who serve us - all of which I
need very much to keep learning about. 

- Points 2 through 6 illustrate how an organized administrative/
support structure gives the spiritual side the necessary room to work
that Dan K. asked about. 

- Allen's reply with its detailed listing of committees, seminars, 
levels of training, meetings, frameworks, etc. implies that the Church 
is a highly complex organization. It is. And then some.

- Regarding leadership callings, it may seem that calling untrained -
or worse, uninformed - people from the grass roots to such positions
is dangerous nonsense. On the contrary, it is the singular genius of
the Church. At the grass roots level, the grass roots are *involved*.
You're the big frog, although your pond may be small. And it is
precisely because your authority is commensurate with your
responsibility that you feel a sense of ownership for your work. 

- RE .4: Whether a person is a woman or a man has no bearing on
whether they have more time, nor on how effective they are at their 
callings. I defy anyone to show me a woman who stays at home with her
kids who has more time to spend on callings than does her husband. The
most that can be said is that the marriage partner who stays at home
*might* be more flexible about when some things get done, but even
that cannot be generalized. 

Regards,
/kevin

    RE .10
    
    Kevin,
    
    Thanks for adding your 2 cents worth. I have a personal relationship
    with Spirit and can easily understand working with it in that fashion.
    I agree that the most personal spiritual growth is developed through
    loving service.
    
    	Dan K.

I think all of the replies made so far have brought out important points.

Re .8

Len, The example you gave of the pancake breakfast illustrates some of the
points I would like to bring out, so I hope it is OK with you that I use
your example as a focus for my thoughts; I'm not trying to embarrass anyone,
and if I do, I hope they will forgive me.


>We just had a Pancake Breakfast for the 4th.  At 7:00 AM I got a call asking
>how to set up to cook the stuff. The person in charge had not made all the 
>arrangements before hand.

From the training viewpoint, I'm wondering why the person above the one in
charge did not review the planning a few days before the event.  That is,
the person in charge had a weakness in that he did not know all of the
things that had to occur before the cooking could take place, and it was the
responsibility of the one above that person in the organization to discover
ahead of time that that weakness existed and to help the other person solve
the problem before the event was ready to begin.  

Since we are all volunteers, and inexperienced ones to boot, it is critical
that we train our people to do proper project planning and follow through,
because our inexperience increases the probability that Murphy will step in
as he did in the pancake breakfast.  

One possibility is that the person above did attempt to review the planning but
the other person did not fully comprehend what was going on.  This type of
communication problem is common between people.  One thing that contributes
to this communication problem is when person A says to the other, "How are
things going with the breakfast?"  The other person says, "Fine".  The
first person replies, "Good, see you on the 4th".  The first person thinks
he or she has reviewed the plans and that everything is ship-shape.  The
second person is unaware that disaster awaits, and they are both surprised a
few days later when the truth dawns on them.


>                          But believe it or not, it all worked. People came,
>people enjoyed themselves, and they got fed. not as soon as they might have,
>and yet it worked. Why because of the unbelievable willingness to help out
>that is trained into members of this church, and I don't mean just a few, but
>most of them eventually.

I think this is one of the strengths of the Church, that we have enough love
for each other that we overlook mistakes and enjoy the activity as much as
we probably would have if the mistakes hadn't occurred.  That behavior of
your people, Len, was the great success of your breakfast!


>                         And you can bet that the person that did not make
>the plans before hand learned, but without anybody embarrasing him or giving
>him a bad time.

Experience of this type does help us learn, but I would guess that he still
felt embarrassed (but grateful that people ignore his mistakes).  And, I
would guess that that person would have liked to have avoided the problems if
he could have.

All of my comments in this note are about my concern for the lack of training
in the Church, so to me the important part of the breakfast is not why the
person in charge made the mistakes--the answer to that is obvious: lack of
experience due to the Church being a volunteer organization.  To me, the
important part to focus on is why the person above did not review the planning
a few days before the event and discover the problems before they occurred.
Is it because the person above tried to review but the other person did not
comprehend?  Is it because the person above was too busy to worry about it?
Is it because the person above had never been trained such that he knew that
he should worry about it?  Is it because the person above was overconfident
that the other person could handle everything by himself?  Is it because the
person in charge resented "interference" from the one above?  Finally, the
question that the Bishopric should be asking is what type of training could
we provide to our leaders so that similar problems will not occur again?

Allen

It is fine for mistakes to be made, etc.  The problem comes when the same
mistakes keep being made.  This is where the training Allen keeps talking
about that doesn't get implemented very well comes in.  I would hope that
those who hold leadership callings at any level would strive to be trained
according to the model that comes from SLC and also strive to provide this
training to those who are under their responsibility.  I say this as an
offender.  I am the blazer scout leader/blaze primary teacher (which
translates to an Assistant Scoutmaster for 11 year old Boy Scouts as well
as the teacher of said Boy Scouts and 10 year old boys on Sunday for
religious training.  One weekness I have in life is a lack of organization.
This spills over into my callings.  I am trying to start to do better and
to provide training for my scouts who are leaders as well as seek training
for myself.  But it is hard.

Chad

    I think that the Peter Principle tends to be applied well in Church 
    callings.  That is, it seems that whenever you really begin to do
    a calling well, that's about when you'll probably be released and
    thrust into a more challenging situation.  As pointed out earlier,
    this probably has to do with perfecting the Saints rather than with 
    running the Church efficiently.  Allen's points are quite valid.
    There needs to be more training and use of effective management 
    techniques, especially at higher levels.  Looking at it from another
    perspective, barring catastrophic failures (which are seldom - a
    miracle in itself!) active members are in a wonderful environment, one 
    that puts them high on the learning curve as long as they remain
    active.  Were it not for the faith of the members and divine
    intervention, this organization would probably have toppled years
    ago.  :-)

    

		Callings, and especially those of leadership, come from the
	Lord, Jesus Christ, as head of this church.  Any servant duly set
	apart and anointed by servants of the Lord represent the Lord.  I
	as a home teacher represent the Lord. I as a teacher in any capacity
	represent the Lord.  We are called to do his work, and it is more
	important in our attitudes than as to how we do it.  There is also a
	lot of delegation of stewardship (new concept!).  This says it all,
	really.  Stewardship.  That is the only difference between everyone
	in the church.

		At what point does a leadership position step in?  When asked,
	that is when.  The Lord always knows what we need, but He will wait
	until we ask before He gives it to us.  Or if an interview points out
	a teaching situation.  But if a leader does the job for a delegated 
	stewardship, then that leader might as well release the person from 
	the given stewardship.  You see, both people are in a learning 
	situation.  Oh, the church has lots of manuals and detailed training
	aids, but what it all boils down to is whether or not the called
	person carries out their stewardship in the Lord's prescribed manner.

		Also, those in the church who are critical of leaders not
	doing their jobs should re-read President Benson's talk on pride.
	Now, I am not saying that all leaders are doing their jobs, but I 
	will say that your attitude toward them is incorrect.  What gave you
	the right to judge them?  Is it your stewardship?  Only when leaders
	step outside the bounds the Lord has set in the scriptures can we
	really say something to a leader without condemnation.  Paul tells
	us that some can only have milk and not meat.  When you are converted,
	do you strengthen your brethren?  Our attitudes and how we feel should
	be in direct correspondence with the scriptures.  Otherwise, we are
	only setting ourselves up for inactivity. (I speak from experience on
	this one!)

		So let us go to the scriptures and look at a couple.  I leave
	everyone with the Lord's entreatment to study the scriptures and find
	out the rest for yourselves.

		In D&C 107:99 we find that there is a responsibility for every
	person to not depend on someone else to tell them what to do, 
	"Wherefore, now let every man learn his duty, and to act in the office
	in which he is appointed, in all diligence."

		This is then re-iterated in D&C 58 : 

	26. For behold, it is not meet that I should command in all things;
	    for he that is compelled in all things, the same is a slothful 
	    and not a wise servant; wherefore he receiveth no reward.
	27. Verily I say, men should be anxiously engaged in a good cause,
	    and do many things of their own free will, and bring to pass
	    much righteousness;
	28. For the power is in them, wherein they are agents unto themselves.
	    And inasmuch as men do good they shall in nowise lose their
	    reward.
	29. But he that doeth not anything until he is commanded, and 
	    receiveth a commandment with doubtful heart, and keepeth it 
	    with slothfulness, the same is damned.

		So let us all allow every person on earth their God given 
	right of free agency to fail or succeed as they see fit.  Let us
	worry about our own stewardship before we caste stones at others
	whom we are judging to be right or wrong.  Now there is a righteous
	judgment that must be made, but I do not believe that judgment is
	righteous when we criticize others for failings we perceive.  Let
	the Lord judge their stewardship and let us worry about ours.

    RE .15

    BSS::RONEY (I'm sorry to be so impersonal - you didn't sign your reply)

>		Callings, and especially those of leadership, come from the
>	Lord, Jesus Christ, as head of this church.  Any servant duly set
>	apart and anointed by servants of the Lord represent the Lord.  I
>	as a home teacher represent the Lord.

    Although your belief that callings work this way seems both sincere and
    heartfelt, I want you to understand that my query wasn't about the
    AUTHORITY behind church callings. My interest is organizational in
    nature NOT religious.

    The LDS church appears very successful in inducing its members to
    voluntarily take part many different types of functions and
    responsibilities. I want to understand in much greater detail the
    workings this process as well as the supporting structures for those
    functions/responsibilities.

    What can you add to the information already mentioned?

	Dan Kusnetzky

    RE .16

>	My interest is organizational in nature NOT religious.

>	The LDS church appears very successful in inducing its members to
>	voluntarily take part many different types of functions and
>	responsibilities. 

>	I want to understand in much greater detail the workings this 
>	process as well as the supporting structures for those
>	functions/responsibilities.

>	What can you add to the information already mentioned?


	Dan,
		That is just the point.  The church has an organizational
	structure that is to *back up* the RELIGIOUS aspect.  The reason that
	people put their time and talents into service in the church is
	because of that religious belief.......  I would encourage you to
	read the Book of Mormon and see why the people there did as church
	members do now.

	Charles

    Charles,

    While I thank you for your quick reply, I see that we're not
    communicating - we're talking AT one another. Heavy sigh.

    I've studied the Book of Mormon and several of the other books usually
    recommended to interested people (the teachings of many other religions
    too). I've visited the centers in Navoo, IL., Independence, MO., and
    several other places in my travels. I've had many long, pleasant,
    interesting hours of discussion with members of both LDS and RLDS
    concerning their view of the worlds. Where I've been and what I've read
    is not the point.

    Those books, as you pointed out, describe the religious foundations of
    the LDS church. While it was very interesting to come to understand the
    foundations of the LDS church, spirit was leading me down a different
    path this life. My personal relationship with Spirit is not the point
    either.

    I'm very interested in how people find God and the gentle voice of
    spirit in their own lives. Each path that I've explored taught me more.
    What I've learned of the many ways God speaks to the heart of each soul
    isn't the point either.

    The point was that I was interested in how the volunteer organization
    worked. Religious orientation aside, the church is an organization of
    people working together towards a common goal. The organization was my
    interest. Just as it is not necessary to understand the inner workings
    of an automatic transmission to drive a car and drive it well, it is
    not necessary to understand the religious beliefs to understand how the
    basic structure of a religious organization works. The structure is my
    interest.

    My appreciation goes out to the other folks who took the time to
    explain in simple, clear terms the structure of the LDS church as they
    saw it.  It helped me appreciate the understanding of human nature that
    the founders of the church had.

    	Dan K.       

Hi Dan,

I wanted to make an observation about Charles' comments in this note.  It
is true that he was talking about the religious feelings behind LDS serving
in the Church and that you are seeking information about organizational 
matters, but I think that his comments are appropriate.

One important organizational matter that all volunteer organizations must have
is a way to attract motivated people and then to keep them motivated as they
serve within the organization.  I think that Charles was trying to bring out
that LDS serve as volunteers in the Church because of their religious conviction
that their Church is true.  This conviction gives them the motivation to
spend many hours in service, and as Charles mentioned, the organization of
the LDS lay-ministry is designed to give everyone opportunities to serve
Jesus Christ through serving each other.  For example, Wards are divided to
keep them small and thus increase the number of opportunities to serve and
also to increase the fellowship obtained.  It is common to find individual
LDS doing things in their Church callings that they would never do in other
volunteer organizations.  For example, people who are very shy and literally
afraid of speaking in public accept callings to teach classes and speak in
Sacrament meeting; their religious feelings about the Church and about 
themselves cause them to do things that are hard for them to do, and in
so doing they grow and become more like Christ.

I hope these comments help you understand us a little more.

Allen

    I don't know if this has been mentioned, but people's willingness
    to serve in the church have to do with there convictions.  I don't
    remember who said it, Paul H. Dunn or Marvin J. Ashton, but someone
    said we have to catch the vision.  Once a person catches the vision
    and is committed to the church and its teachings, they serve more
    willingly.  
    
    Another thing our bishop does to get support for the various activities
    is to get people to buy into a program or activity.  This way they
    are more willing to participate and learn to not take things for
    granted.  The payment is usually a small amount, $1 or $2 but enough
    to teach.  To illustrate his point, he cited an incident where a
    daughter went to BYU and was asked to contribute to ward budget
    and said "Budget?, What's that?".
    
    I don't know if my last point relates to the topic, but the main
    thing I wanted to point out is to catch the vision.
    
    scott

    Thanks to everyone who has offered their comments. I've got a clear
    picture now.
    
    	Dan K.

    Having been away for a couple of weeks on vacation, I have read
    this discussion with interest. I would also like to add a few comments.
    
    I have witnessed the problems with the training of leaders that Allen
    mentioned, but I want to say that it is not always so, and that it need
    not be so. There are regular opportunities for ward leaders, priesthood
    leaders, and leaders of the various ward organizations to be trained.
    These training and instructional meetings are organized and conducted
    by (generally) experienced stake leaders. The problem is that
    attendance at such sessions is not as good as it should be. Often,
    those who most need the training are not the ones who attend the
    training session. Those who do attend receive the benefit of the
    training. Those who do not miss out. 
    
    As Allen alluded to, I agree that one of the most effective training
    opportunities is the "stewardship interview". This is where the leader
    meets one-on-one with one of the people that reports to him/her. This
    is the person's chance to report on his calling. Progress is discussed,
    goals are set, problems are aired, counsel and support are given. Since
    these interviews are scheduled as needed, sometimes they are neglected.
    If they are held, they are a big factor in helping a person to be
    successful in his/her volunteer service. 
    
    In the stewardship interviews that I have been involved in, I have
    found the best ones are the ones where specific goals, actions, and
    details are discussed, and not generalities. 
    
    Rich

    Interesting discussion, brethren.  I, as some of you know, have
    no priesthood in my home and cannot speak of the quorums.  In any
    case I could only speak of personal experience here, although I can
    make a good case for learning from the experiences of others.
    
    It is impossible to separate the spiritual from the organizational.
    Earlier, the analogy of a transmission was used.  I am automotively
    ignorant so will use a kitchen analogy.  One might say: Ann, I don't
    want to discuss yeast.  I want to discuss how to make flour into
    light bread."  Can't be done!
    
    If I recall correctly, I have filled the following callings (more
    or less in chronological order) so far, that is during my nineteen
    years in the Church:
    
    	Visiting Teacher
    	Relief Society (RS) Social Relations Teacher
    	Visiting Teacher
    	Junior Sunday School Teacher, Course 4 (before Sunday Primary)
    	Primary Inservice Leader
    	Choir President
    	Junior Sunday School Chorister
    	RS Social Relations Teacher
    	Visiting Teacher
    	Sacrament Meeting Chorister
    	RS Cultural Refinement Teacher
    	RS Homemaking Teacher
    	Primary Chorister
    	Primary Special Assistant (working with one special needs child)
    	Visiting Teacher
    	RS Inservice Leader
     	RS Homemaking Teacher
    	(currently) Visiting Teacher
    	(currently) RS Spiritual Living Teacher
  
    My calling as Spiritual Living teacher is my favorite calling so
    far (though most of my callings have been my favorite at the time).
    I teach every other week, with occasional spaces due to the Church
    calendar, and I love it!  As has so often been said, I have gained
    far more than I can possibly have given through this calling.  It
    is a joy to me, and a rest from the often frantic pace of the world.
    
    The other RS teachers and I work full time outside the home, and
    are wives and mothers, as are two members of the RS Presidency and
    our Inservice Leader, so the pace is often hectic.  Nevertheless, 
    presidency meetings are held weekly, board meetings monthly, and 
    individual interiews monthly or as requested.  The sisters under
    whom I serve are imbued with the desire for Christlike service.
    Our continuing concern is for our sisters in the ward boundaries,
    and our prayerful concern goes far beyond those boundaries.
    
    I teach for about thirty minutes, and the biggest challenge is to
    stay within the time constraints.  There is so much we have to share
    with one another, and so little time!  My calling is a part of my
    life, and as I read, converse, make it from day to day, I find that
    part of my awareness evaluates events, conversations, news items,
    etc., from the standpoint of my calling.  My manual overflows with
    notes to myself and references to articles or experiences with which
    I will embellish the lessons, and illustrate the beautiful truth
    they contain.
    
    Every other week I spend between six and twelve hours preparing
    the lesson (assembling and reviewing the recommended audio/visual
    aids, selecting - prayerfully - the materials and thoughts which
    will be presented to my sisters).  The last four to eight hours
    of that time are spent on the Saturday before I teach, putting my
    notes and material in final order and beginning my fast.  I think
    that if I had one to two hours to teach, I could probably prepare
    in two to four hours total, but I've found that the less actual
    teaching time, the more preparation is required.
    
    During the year I have served in this calling, many things have gone
    awry in my personal life.  Throughout the turmoil, my calling has
    been a source of comfort and of great joy, reminding me that I am an
    eternal creature and that the sorrows and disabilities of this life
    are (or can be, if we don't cling to them) temporary.
    
    Recently the RS Education Counselor, under whom I serve directly,
    asked if the calling was putting excessive pressure on me and if
    I would therefore favor the calling of another sister to share the 
    teaching load with me.  It took me aback, because of the great serenity I
    have received - far greater than the mere hours of preparation given.
    My first thought was "No way!"  When I sit among the sisters as
    their teacher, my spirit is healed and sustained by their love and
    compassion.  I selfishly did not want to give up even a bit of that.
    Upon mature - I like to think :) - consideration I told her that first 
    I could not deny another sister that same joy and peace which I
    receive through the calling, and second it is her responsibility as 
    counselor to inquire of the Lord and thus discover the correct way.  
    The decision will probably be made in August for implementation in 
    September and I am eager (no longer apprehensive) to know the results. 
    I see great blessings either way.  
    
    My patriarchal blessing states, among many other things, that I will 
    have the opportunity to serve many callings and that they will be 
    the source of great joy and satisfaction to me.  I bear my testimony 
    of the truthfulness of that statement, in the name of the Savior, amen.
    aq
                         

RE: < Note 256.23 by FEISTY::QUAYLE "i.e. Ann" >

Dear Ann,

I have a few reactions to your note: 

First, it was a good example, especially to me, of how to correctly
approach a calling - with fasting and prayer, faith and patience. And it
showed how we can expect success as a result, even though it may not be
immediate. 

Second, while it may seem like quite a feat to rattle off in chronological
order all the callings you've had in nineteen years, I can see how it
wouldn't be hard to do at all. Although I've been a member for only about
three years, all the five callings I've had are vividly etched in my mind.
There is something about the experience of service through the Church that
is like no other experience. It is unforgetable. 

Third, I understand and appreciate what you mean about how one's current
calling can be the most favorite one ever. It seems like there is a
definite progression in how we go from one calling to the next. If our
present callings in our present circumstances had been given to us years
ago, without having had the experience of our previous callings, most of us
would be terribly unhappy and terribly unprepared. This inspired
progression helps us not only gather the technical knowledge necessary for
future callings, but also gives us the needed spiritual maturity and
preparation. 

Thank you, Ann, for your note. I'm sure you'll agree that the way in which
callings work is but another testimony of the reality of the gospel and the
truthfulness of the Church. 

/kevin 

    Yeah, I'm not as excited about the other callings I've had as I
    am about the one I have now.  It's always been that way.  :)
    
    Steve

    Hi Dan K.
    
    I believe you are the Dan I used to see at CHM (Riverneck Road,
    Chelmsford, MA) when I worked there a couple of years ago.  You
    stopped a couple of times to chat and admire the colored photos
    I had up on my wall of the LDS Washington, DC Temple.  It sure
    is nice hearing from you again.  I don't often get the chance to
    participate in this conference due to workload, but I was really
    excited to see your name and question(s) here.
    
    You may not remember what I told you at CHM about my converting
    to Mormonism 6 years ago, but I'll give you a little testimony
    straight from my heart about how I feel about callings and how
    they were given to me as a fresh new convert.
    
    My religious background is very mixed.  I spent the first 20 years
    as a Protestant (Congregational Church).  My parents had different
    religions (Mom/Catholic and Dad/Protestant).  Neither of them ever
    attended Church except on Easter to show off our new clothes.  My
    brothers and I soon grew tired of being driven to Sunday School and
    dropped off.  Therefore, we complained and they allowed us to quit
    going.  We occasionally (my brothers and I) went to church with my
    grandparents who lived next door as they were avid church-goers.  When
    I met my husband in 1962, I decided to change to his religion so
    we'd be of the same faith (he was Catholic).  We'd go on occasion
    and still my knowledge of the gospel was very little.  It was not
    until I converted to Mormonism in 1983 that I was given the chance
    by the Lord to become as a child again, and learn the gospel while
    teaching it to the children.  My first calling was to take the roll
    of those attending each week (Sunday School Secretary).  My second
    calling about two years later was to teach very small children in
    the Primary who were 4-5 year olds.  At first I nearly DIED when I
    was asked to accept this calling.  How in the world could I teach
    these little souls anything about the gospel when I didn't even know
    about it myself?  However, I had faith that the Lord knew what he was
    doing with me, so I accepted.  Do you know what happened to me Dan? 
    I was being taught by MYSELF while I was also teaching the little ones.
    Was I teaching them heavy doctrine?  Absolutely not, they were too
    young to absorb it.  I was given a Church manual for their age group
    and the lessons were absolutely wonderful.  I was learning the basics
    along with them and obtained my foundation and strong testimony during
    the two years I taught them.  What did we learn?  The lessons were 
    simply wonderful and wonderfully simple.  They were taught all about 
    their bodies and to thank the Lord for their eyes to see with, hands, 
    feet, noses to smell with, thankfulness for the food He has given us to 
    eat, all the wonders of the world, why we have parents and how to love 
    and respect them, how to cherish a friendship with little friends in 
    school or in our neighborhoods, how to share and not be selfish, etc. etc. 
    etc. Yup, all the necessary basics and it was WONDERFUL.  The best thing was
    that I got to hug them and love them and they in returned loved me
    back.  The Lord sure knew what He was doing when I was called to that
    position.  I entered like a scared little child and walked out of there
    full of the most wonderful knowledge.  All the knowledge I was lacking
    all my life.
    
    My second calling was editor of our Ward newsletter.  You can bet
    that all the secretarial knowledge I'd gained at Digital and my past
    job experiences sure prepared me for that calling.  I was only at this
    calling six months when the Bishop asked me to accept another calling
    and be released as the editor.  It wasn't released because I was not
    fulfilling my calling, it was because the Lord again wanted me to teach
    the little ones.  So, here I am again, teaching the precious little
    children and again being allowed to love them and receive their love
    through hugs and smiles.  It's amazing how brilliant these little
    children really are at such a young age.  Sometimes I feel inadequate
    when I'm teaching a lesson and one contributes his knowledge to the
    lesson and I discover he knows more than I do (I must confess, I don't 
    know it all just because I'm a 6 year convert).  
    
    This rambling on may not have contributed to the answers you are
    seeking in this note, but I felt a desire to share this with you.
    
    Hope our paths cross again sometime soon Dan.
    
    Penny Sousa
    Ultrix Engineering Group
    Spit Brook Road, Nashua, N.H. (ZKO)
                     

    A while ago I was talking with our bishop.  He mentioned what our newly
    called relief society president said.  I don't know the actual quote,
    but she said something which I now call the 20-30-50 rule.  20% of the
    people do all the work.  30% of the people just want to be regular
    protestants and not do anything.  50% of the people just don't care.
    
    I don't think this is limited to church work and lds congregations.  I
    suspect it is also the way things are in the work force.  Look around. 
    There are people who do things and people who watch things and people
    who wonder what is happening.
    
    scott

    
    The undertaker is the only person who ought to take names off the
    church roll.
    
    Church members are stockholders in the church, not merely spectators.
    
    Judging by the way some church members live, they need fire insurance.
    
    A sickly saint is likely to be a healthy hypocrite.
    
                                          RM