How would you reform the LDS mission program?

[_Buffalo]

Obviously the LDS Mission program has tremendous problems. In the first world they have difficulty getting any converts, and in the third world the vast majority of converts leave shortly after joining. And many of the missionaries themselves are often left despondent and scarred by the cult conditioning used in the current program (I don't use that term lightly - it applies to the LDS mission program by any definition of the word cult). Others seem to do okay.

How would you reform things? Obviously the 60's IBM salesforce/Jim Jones combo isn't working.

I'd start by shifting missionaries away from the first world. They're wasting their time here. The only converts they get are people on the fringes, people who tend not to be stable, and who are burdens on wards. People who tend not to Google.

In the third world, I'd take a more honest approach, rather than the deceptive milk before meat approach (otherwise known as bait and switch). Investigators should have to wait at least a year before baptism, and should have to be active during that year. Frank discussions of early church history should be included, including the details of polygamy and the various concepts of God arrived at. Historical figures should be treated as people, not as demigods whose only flaws were losing their patience from time to time.

I'd drop the numbers game. High pressure numbers goals only encourage abuse, baseball baptisms and priest-craft. But I'm not sure what I'd replace it with.

[_aranyborju]

I would drop the uniform. I always felt like Jules Winfield and Vincent Vega out for a hit job when I went tracting.

[_Morley]

Make all missions service missions.

[_Analytics]

I'd make missions 100% community service. Update the uniform to Dockers and a polo.

Their entire mission would consist of helping people in the temporal world: working at shelters, food kitchens, cleaning trash along highways, painting the houses of widows, etc. I'd give them pretty broad descrition in figuring out how they can help the communities in their areas and then making it happen.

If while they are serving anybody expresses an interest in their religion, they can offer to come by on Sunday for a discussion.

[_Buffalo]

Make all missions service missions.

This would probably be the best solution. Christian service is the best way to raise the profile of the church, and would probably make better converts too.

[_Analytics]

Make all missions service missions.

This would probably be the best solution. Christian service is the best way to raise the profile of the church, and would probably make better converts too.

Not only better converts, but probably more of them, too.

[_stemelbow]

If my intent was to convert the most people...I'd clone you and DJ to go out and complain about us until everyone converts.

[_Aristotle Smith]

Regarding the community service approach, although this sounds nice, I think it's a non-starter for several logistical and practical reasons.

First is that a lot of humanitarian service work involves some level of secular training at the supervisory level, the worker level, or both. I think we all forget how little 19 year olds know and how little the LDS church actually trains them. The mission presidents while more experienced tend to be MBAs and lawyers who also have no know how in humanitarian service. Humanitarian service is going to require training in things like medicine, basic nursing, construction management, public health, etc.

Second, even humanitarian work that doesn't require training requires continual presence. Maybe not all workers need to be permanent, but you really need to have people at the management/supervisory level who can run projects long term. This pretty much requires that at least some of the people involved in the work have made it a long term career choice. I don't think that's a palatable choice for the LDS church.

Third, the LDS church would have to cooperate with other humanitarian agencies and be subordinate to them in many cases, at least initially. This means that LDS missionaries would be taking orders from organizations like Catholic Relief Services or World Vision International, and I don't think the LDS church takes kindly to taking orders from other church organizations. They might be able to get around this by working with local governments, but that opens up all kinds of problems. Often in problem areas the governments are part of the problem and even if they are not, the LDS church might be perceived as supporting the government which causes all kinds of problems if/when governments change hands.

Fourth, LDS church growth would take a severe hit for at least several years, maybe permanently. Because the church is so triumphalist with its growth statistics that it's easy to forget that 1) there are not that many LDS church members and 2) missionary work is largely bailing water from a sinking ship in many areas. If the missionaries stop evangelizing, my guess is that in the short term it would really hurt membership numbers. While those on this board would be quick to say it's a good thing, it's simply not an acceptable option at the COB.

[_Aristotle Smith]

Regarding shifting missionaries to third world countries away from first world countries. Again, I think the problem with doing this arises from how the LDS church runs its operations.

I think you are correct to point out that if you want to add lots of butts in pews, the only way to do this quickly is in the third world. And, you need to do this quickly because the third world is rapidly getting internet access, and then the window is going to be closed.

The problem is that the LDS church tends to view third world congregations as cost centers, not as revenue neutral and certainly not revenue generators. There is a way around this of course: simply let the local congregations set up shop and run the congregations with local labor, customs, materials, etc. Every other church does this because it's simply the only way to run a local congregation without creating a never ending money pit. The problem for the LDS church is that this would lead to loss of control at the local congregation level, which is completely unacceptable to Salt Lake. Other churches don't mind this because church for them is largely about getting the message out, how local churches are run just isn't as important to them. While for the LDS church, subordination to the hierarchy is priority #1.

There is also the problem that the LDS church has problems with local leadership. It simply can't train enough men fast enough to provide good local leadership. Other churches get around this problem in two ways. One, have long term career missionaries provide local leadership for extended periods of time. Two, provide local leaders with intensive theological training in preparation for career ministry. Both options are non-starters for the LDS church.

[_Buffalo]

If my intent was to convert the most people...I'd clone you and DJ to go out and complain about us until everyone converts.

Seriously though, is there anything you'd change about the missionary program?