How would you repurpose the resources of COJCOLDS?

[_moinmoin]

Why are missionaries not allowed to read books minus the very few mission approved books such as the scriptures, Jesus the Christ, and stuff like that? Why avoid the internet and websites such as MD?

Individual mission presidents have their own specific rules, but my two allowed me to read books outside of the "approved missionary reading list."

I don't think it's anything nefarious. I think that, when you take tens of thousands of young missionaries, you have to have baseline rules (no TV, movies, swimming, unauthorized music, etc.) to promote discipline and focus. There is even less self-discipline and focus today in 2015 than in years past (try teaching teenagers in school --- many cannot stay off of their electronic devices --- they are addicted). I think wise mission presidents (like mine! :) ) allow exceptions on a case-by-case basis, depending on the trust and maturity. My last mission president gave me permission to go to a Roger Whitaker concert in my city, but I went home before it happened (I extended, but my extension didn't end up being as long as I hoped).

As far as missionaries (especially 2015 missionaries) using the internet, I think that the tendency to waste vast amounts of time is the biggest reason to limit it. Bigger than potential misuse (pornography, etc.) or potentially running into things that could cause doubts or concerns. Again, as a teacher, I see how addicted to wasting time on devices kids are today. This would be a much bigger concern to me than misuse.

[_moinmoin]

I know right? It's not like there is actually other stuff to do to help people besides digging wells for them and it's not like there is any other volunteer work organization that has managed to put 18 year olds to work successfully.

Missionaries already do a lot of service --- a lot more than when we served (those of us who did). In some areas, they are piloting strictly service with no proselyting (they did this in my area for a time).

Ultimately, the purpose of the Church's missionary program is a combination of growing the Church and providing experience for the missionaries. Service is a part of that, but not the primary part (I know some are advocating for this). The intent isn't for it to become a two-year Peace Corps or Habitat for Humanity experience.

[_Ceeboo]

in my opinion - the opportunity is clearly there for these young people to be monumentally helpful to human beings across the entire globe.

In addition to the basic needs that come in a variety of flavors - those that would potentially be helped would forever be grateful to those young LDS people who provided said assistance.

And guess what - those fine young men and women who are volunteering to help happen to be LDS - So who do you think would benefit - on the broader scale - across the many countries?

The LDS church, of course.

It's an absolute win-win. Those who could really use help get it and the LDS church gets the credit for helping. Credit that they would have absolutely deserved.....in my opinion.

I think I will ask my friend Maklelan to see if he could set up a meeting with Ceeboo from the MDB and the Q12.

If such a meeting were to happen, I think I can get this done!

Peace,
Ceeboo

[_moinmoin]

I don't think it's either-or (either do service only missions, with no proselyting, or just proselyting). I think the best service is found by the missionaries themselves.

On my mission, we found an elderly lady who had no interest in our message. When we asked her if there was anything we could do to help her, she asked if we could take out her garbage. She was essentially an invalid. She ate a diet heavy on fish and potatoes, and her garbage consisted of fish parts, potato peelings, and adult diapers. The smell was unbelievable. She asked if we could go to the store for her, and this began frequent service. She would give us money and a shopping list, we would bring her groceries back and take out her garbage. In return, she clipped whatever she could find about David Hasselhoff (she loved him, and figured that we did, too). There were way too many articles about David Hasselhoff concerts in Germany . . .

A good friend of mine, a cowboy (he breaks wild horses for a living), joined the Church when the missionaries came by. He told them he was busy (he was dropping an engine into a truck). When they offered to help, he said, "Seriously? In those clothes?" They insisted, and spent hours helping him. Their white shirts and slacks were ruined with grease, and he was impressed by their seriousness. He and his wife were baptized, and he is a very stalwart member.

I think service found by the missionaries is more effective than systematized, "corporate" service.

[_Fence Sitter]

I know right? It's not like there is actually other stuff to do to help people besides digging wells for them and it's not like there is any other volunteer work organization that has managed to put 18 year olds to work successfully.

Missionaries already do a lot of service --- a lot more than when we served (those of us who did). In some areas, they are piloting strictly service with no proselyting (they did this in my area for a time).

Ultimately, the purpose of the Church's missionary program is a combination of growing the Church and providing experience for the missionaries. Service is a part of that, but not the primary part (I know some are advocating for this). The intent isn't for it to become a two-year Peace Corps or Habitat for Humanity experience.

So you acknowledge that 18 year olds could actually be used to dig wells?

The whole point of the OP is to ask people how they would re-purpose the resources of the church. When someone suggested that missionaries could dig wells you said "I don't think it's realistic to think that 80,000 18-22 year-olds can meaningfully help with skilled mechanical undertakings like sinking and setting up wells" Are you now backing away from that statement? Obviously it is realistic because the Peace Corps is doing it.

Most of us here know the "purposes" of the missionary program. We are suggesting what we would do with those same missionaries. I am of the opinion that a service mission would accomplish the goals you suggest ("growing the Church and providing experience for the missionaries") much more effectively than proselytizing do. Instead of walking around knocking on doors or spending time in the internet trying to talk people into joining the church, we should get out there and show people, by example, the kind of service a church with Christ's name in it, should be doing. While gross convert numbers would probably drop, even significantly, the net retention numbers would be a lot higher.

[_Sethbag]

A good friend of mine, a cowboy (he breaks wild horses for a living), joined the Church when the missionaries came by. He told them he was busy (he was dropping an engine into a truck). When they offered to help, he said, "Seriously? In those clothes?" They insisted, and spent hours helping him. Their white shirts and slacks were ruined with grease, and he was impressed by their seriousness. He and his wife were baptized, and he is a very stalwart member.

Why didn't they strip off their white shirts and work in their garmies?

PS: I ran into our bishop from the Olten Gemeinde while out riding our bikes. He was pumping gas into his car at the gas station - with only his garment top on, aside from his pants and shoes. We were kind of shocked and acted like we'd just seen a topless woman or something, and he picked up on it and got kind of embarassed, and then tried to blow it off with a comment about how he was just out for a few minutes or whatever. Kind of funny when you think about it, but I was a little scandalized by it at the time.

[_SuperDell]

First, I would become prophet so I could control all the money.
Then I would bring back Polygamy so I could have my choice of all the young hotties.

Then I would start a PR Campaign trumpeting the church as the worlds #1 Totally Awesome Religion!

[_moinmoin]

So you acknowledge that 18 year olds could actually be used to dig wells?

Sure they could. We used to live on acreage in the desert, and our well was 800 feet deep. It would be kind of hard for anyone to dig a well like that and lay pipe without equipment and training.

The whole point of the OP is to ask people how they would re-purpose the resources of the church. When someone suggested that missionaries could dig wells you said "I don't think it's realistic to think that 80,000 18-22 year-olds can meaningfully help with skilled mechanical undertakings like sinking and setting up wells" Are you now backing away from that statement? Obviously it is realistic because the Peace Corps is doing it.

That's a good point. You're right that the original thread topic was a "what if?" about repurposing resources. I suppose the sky's the limit under that . . . :)

Most of us here know the "purposes" of the missionary program. We are suggesting what we would do with those same missionaries. I am of the opinion that a service mission would accomplish the goals you suggest ("growing the Church and providing experience for the missionaries") much more effectively than proselytizing do. Instead of walking around knocking on doors or spending time in the internet trying to talk people into joining the church, we should get out there and show people, by example, the kind of service a church with Christ's name in it, should be doing. While gross convert numbers would probably drop, even significantly, the net retention numbers would be a lot higher.

That's possible, and many people feel that way. I find that most people who feel strongly about it either don't support the Church's goals and want it to change, or, if they are pro-Church, they are at some level embarrassed by missionaries proselyting (or don't want to proselyte themselves), and seek a "low key" service option.

I agree 100% with you on social media missionary work by missionaries. I think the only effective social media missionary work is when it's genuine friendship with people's actual network of friends. And, when it "happens," and isn't direct "missionary work."

When I was talking to one of the missionaries who really liked social media missionary work and asked him how it worked (he was, quite honestly, lazy and liked it because it wasn't really talking to people), he said he trolled chat rooms and commented, trying to draw comments and have more extended discussions. I thought, "What a waste of time during a mission!" There is training and there are controls in place now, but I don't know the details (it was just barely introduced, and the pilot program will be rolled out soon in our mission). I'm not a fan.

[_canpakes]

We DO FAR more with our wealth than you think we do to help those in need.

Not quite. Do the math, using the Church's own numbers. Based on what the Church reports to have provided in humanitarian aid over the last two decades compared against a very conservative membership trend line, CoJCoLDS aid totals up to less than 5 dollars per year, per member (using the Church's stated membership numbers would result in an even lower number). You can conclude what you will about where the rest of your tithing goes.

I remember reading one of DCP's columns in which he was challenged with this figure. He basically stated that he would write someday about how those numbers weren't, in his opinion, the most accurate analysis. Some time has passed and it would appear that he hasn't yet been able to cobble together an alternative 'more accurate' conclusion.

[_Lemmie]

A good friend of mine, a cowboy (he breaks wild horses for a living), joined the Church when the missionaries came by. He told them he was busy (he was dropping an engine into a truck). When they offered to help, he said, "Seriously? In those clothes?" They insisted, and spent hours helping him. Their white shirts and slacks were ruined with grease, and he was impressed by their seriousness. He and his wife were baptized, and he is a very stalwart member.

Why didn't they strip off their white shirts and work in their garmies?

PS: I ran into our bishop from the Olten Gemeinde while out riding our bikes. He was pumping gas into his car at the gas station - with only his garment top on, aside from his pants and shoes. We were kind of shocked and acted like we'd just seen a topless woman or something, and he picked up on it and got kind of embarassed, and then tried to blow it off with a comment about how he was just out for a few minutes or whatever. Kind of funny when you think about it, but I was a little scandalized by it at the time.

I had a great-uncle, retired superior court judge, who, toward the end of his life, felt no need to wear anything around the house but his one-piece old-fashioned garments. Since I grew up seeing that, it seemed semi-normal to me, like walking around in pajamas. As an adult, however, I now understand why the adults around him were always saying things like, "let's go put on some pants, shall we?"