Your home for discussing politics, the restored gospel of Jesus Christ, and the principles of liberty.
https://ldsfreedomforum.com/
Thanks for replying, iWriteStuff. I wanted to do a poll, but didn't see how to set one up.iWriteStuff wrote: ↑February 23rd, 2018, 9:40 amNope. And usually I go solo. Same with the guy who visits us.
Can't speak for everyone, but I have a HT companion, as does the individual assigned to my family. I/he just can't get the companion to come along for the visit.EmmaLee wrote: ↑February 23rd, 2018, 9:49 amThanks for replying, iWriteStuff. I wanted to do a poll, but didn't see how to set one up.iWriteStuff wrote: ↑February 23rd, 2018, 9:40 amNope. And usually I go solo. Same with the guy who visits us.
None of the high priests in either ward in our town have home teaching companions assigned to them - so they either go by themselves every month, or more often, their wives go with them (in addition to visiting the 4-5 women they have on their visiting teaching routes). I wondered if this is a regional thing out here in the Twilight Zone, or if it's Church-wide.
Why do you think most (?) men are not being assigned a companion to go with? Not enough men/YM to go with them or what? I haven't researched this in the D & C yet, but do you know offhand where (if?) home teaching is discussed in the scriptures? Thanks!
Okay, I looked it up in the Church Handbook and here's what it says -iWriteStuff wrote: ↑February 23rd, 2018, 9:56 amI think HT is a somewhat modern invention, meaning last 100 years or so... someone better versed in the history of its development would know better than I.
Psalm 142:
1 I cried unto the Lord with my voice; with my voice unto the Lord did I make my supplication.
2 I poured out my complaint before him; I shewed before him my trouble.
3 When my spirit was overwhelmed within me, then thou knewest my path. In the way wherein I walked have they privily laid a snare for me.
4 I looked on my right hand, and beheld, but there was no man that would know me: refuge failed me; no man cared for my soul.
5 I cried unto thee, O Lord: I said, Thou art my refuge and my portion in the land of the living.
6 Attend unto my cry; for I am brought very low: deliver me from my persecutors; for they are stronger than I.
7 Bring my soul out of prison, that I may praise thy name: the righteous shall compass me about; for thou shalt deal bountifully with me.
That's a beautiful scripture, but I'm not sure what the correlation is to the RS doing home teaching (which is a priesthood responsibility), and I don't want to put words in your mouth - so can you elaborate some, please, Bruce? I can see that this scripture would work for visiting teaching, as well; but none of the husbands go visiting teaching with their wives - at least not that I've ever heard of, and definitely not in our two wards.BruceRGilbert wrote: ↑February 23rd, 2018, 12:50 pmPsalm 142:
1 I cried unto the Lord with my voice; with my voice unto the Lord did I make my supplication.
2 I poured out my complaint before him; I shewed before him my trouble.
3 When my spirit was overwhelmed within me, then thou knewest my path. In the way wherein I walked have they privily laid a snare for me.
4 I looked on my right hand, and beheld, but there was no man that would know me: refuge failed me; no man cared for my soul.
5 I cried unto thee, O Lord: I said, Thou art my refuge and my portion in the land of the living.
6 Attend unto my cry; for I am brought very low: deliver me from my persecutors; for they are stronger than I.
7 Bring my soul out of prison, that I may praise thy name: the righteous shall compass me about; for thou shalt deal bountifully with me.
We had this come up when I was in the Stake Relief society presidency. We had a ward where the HP's and Elders set up the hometeaching so that women were assigned to go with their husbands and they also assumed that the women would do visiting teaching at the same time for those sisters. There were feelings among the Relief society that this might be okay for some, but other sisters did not like it and felt it did not meet their needs. They wanted it separate.EmmaLee wrote: ↑February 23rd, 2018, 12:46 pmOkay, I looked it up in the Church Handbook and here's what it says -iWriteStuff wrote: ↑February 23rd, 2018, 9:56 amI think HT is a somewhat modern invention, meaning last 100 years or so... someone better versed in the history of its development would know better than I.
https://www.lds.org/handbook/handbook-2 ... ng&_r=1#74
7.4 Home Teaching
Under the bishop’s direction, quorum and group leaders oversee home teaching. They instruct home teachers in their duties and inspire them to perform these duties well.
Home teaching is a priesthood responsibility of teachers, priests, and Melchizedek Priesthood holders. Accordingly, home teachers are assigned by priesthood leaders. They are not called, sustained, or set apart.
7.4.2
Organizing Home Teaching
A household that is headed by an elder usually has home teachers from the elders quorum. A household that is headed by a high priest usually has home teachers from the high priests group. When a household is not headed by a Melchizedek Priesthood holder, the bishopric determines whether that household should have home teachers from the elders quorum or the high priests group. In making this decision, the bishopric may consult with the priesthood executive committee and ward council.
In organizing home teaching, quorum and group leaders prayerfully discuss the needs of individuals and families. Leaders discuss ways home teachers can watch over and strengthen these members, consulting with the priesthood executive committee and ward council as needed. Leaders also consider factors such as distance, travel, and safety.
Based on these discussions, leaders assign a companionship of two home teachers to each household where possible. They obtain the bishop’s approval for each companionship and each home teaching assignment.
Quorum and group leaders assign the most effective home teachers to members who need them most. When assigning home teachers, leaders give highest priority to new members, less-active members who may be the most receptive, and others who have the greatest need for home teachers, such as single parents, widows, and widowers. It is often helpful to assign a youth leader to a family where a young man or young woman is experiencing special challenges. Home teachers should be assigned to converts before the converts are baptized.
After consultation with the elders quorum president, high priests group leader, and Young Men president, a member of the bishopric extends home teaching assignments to teachers and priests. They are assigned as companions to Melchizedek Priesthood holders.
Aaronic Priesthood holders participate with their companions in watching over and caring for the members they visit. This may include making appointments, sharing messages, and giving service. This experience helps them with their priesthood training, including mission preparation (see D&C 84:106–7).
Elders quorum leaders in young single adult wards assign home teachers to each member in the ward. Single members who live together as roommates may be visited at the same time. However, home teachers should focus on serving the individuals and should report on each person separately.
With approval from the bishop in exceptional cases, Melchizedek Priesthood leaders and Relief Society leaders may assign a husband and wife as a companionship where visits by a couple are needed. Couples report these visits as home teaching and visiting teaching. Normally, young parents are not given such an assignment because it takes them away from their children.
The bold, underlined part is interesting. "Exceptional cases", I guess includes almost everyone in our two wards. No one in our Bishopric, or our high priest's group or RS presidency, has ever talked to me at all about being my husband's home teaching companion. The friends I've asked about this say the same - no one has ever talked to them or asked them - it's always just assumed that the wife will go, which doubles the amount of families she's expected to visit every month - which just seems a bit strange, considering home teaching is a priesthood responsibility.
Interesting - and a bit shocking at the over-reach. I don't blame your RS pres. for being frustrated. It sounds like this was intentionally organized that way in your area - as opposed to it just being assumed the wife will go in our area. Yes, I can't imagine ANY of the women here wanting their visiting teaching visit to be done by a husband/wife couple - they would throw a fit.AI2.0 wrote:We had a ward where the HP's and Elders set up the hometeaching so that women were assigned to go with their husbands and they also assumed that the women would do visiting teaching at the same time for those sisters. There were feelings among the Relief society that this might be okay for some, but other sisters did not like it and felt it did not meet their needs. They wanted it separate.
The Rel. Soc. Pres. in this ward was very frustrated, even in tears at times over trying to keep the visiting teaching from being completely ruined as priesthood leaders controlled how it was done. She felt that she could not do her calling and wanted to be involved in the decisions regarding visiting teaching. We discussed it with the Stake Pres, showed him in the handbook where it says that it is for exceptional cases, but that in this ward it was the norm. The Stake pres. talked to the priesthood leaders in this ward and this was changed to where there were only a handful that continued this pattern, all the others went to normal home teaching with a companion (not their wife) and the women had separate visiting teaching routes.
Pointing out the rules in the handbook was an effective way to deal with problems which sometimes arose in the wards we worked with.
EmmaLee;EmmaLee wrote: That's a beautiful scripture, but I'm not sure what the correlation is to the RS doing home teaching (which is a priesthood responsibility), and I don't want to put words in your mouth - so can you elaborate some, please, Bruce? I can see that this scripture would work for visiting teaching, as well; but none of the husbands go visiting teaching with their wives - at least not that I've ever heard of, and definitely not in our two wards.
Thanks, Bruce; I figured that was what you were meaning. I agree wholeheartedly with the part I bolded above. But I have mixed feelings on the notion that women are generally more righteous than men - and maybe that's because I am a woman, and my friends and associates are women, and the bulk of the people I interact with at Church on Sunday (and other Church-related activities) are women. If I'm totally honest, I would rather spend that time with most of the men I know, rather than the women. Why? Because I'm not a man-hater or a gossiper, and that tends to be the way things go in many (not all) of the settings where it's just the women. I'm not - NOT - wanting this to turn into a man vs. woman thread, please, for the love of all that is holy. I was mainly just curious if other areas have the wives do home teaching, too. We've lived in the same two wards for 30 years now (they keep realigning the boundaries every 2-3 years, literally, so we are back and forth in the two different wards fairly often, and all without ever moving house, lol) - and some things are done.... differently than I've seen in other areas of the country, so I was curious if this was one of them. Thank you again for your input.BruceRGilbert wrote: ↑February 23rd, 2018, 1:21 pmEmmaLee;EmmaLee wrote: That's a beautiful scripture, but I'm not sure what the correlation is to the RS doing home teaching (which is a priesthood responsibility), and I don't want to put words in your mouth - so can you elaborate some, please, Bruce? I can see that this scripture would work for visiting teaching, as well; but none of the husbands go visiting teaching with their wives - at least not that I've ever heard of, and definitely not in our two wards.
As I have attended many Ward Councils, I have sat in awe at the righteousness of the Relief Society women. It seems that they have always been more diligent, thoughtful and caring in executing their responsibilities. It is the Priesthood Holder of which I have concern. It is of little wonder that there will and have been more righteous women than men. No Priesthood Holder, in my opinion, should go to the house of a single sister by himself. It is against the "order" of things and begs for "compromise." God bless those sisters who do "double duty," who so very often carry the burdens far greater than they ought - many have proven to be the "salvation" of their husbands in things unforeseen.
EmmaLee wrote: ↑February 23rd, 2018, 1:37 pm Here's another example of strangeness (or at least, it seems strange to me) - our RS president pulled me aside a couple of Sunday's ago, and asked me if I would accept such-and-such a calling in the RS. I was a bit stunned, as I thought it was a function of the Bishopric to extend callings. I smiled and said, "Sure; I'd be happy to." I never did hear from anyone in the Bishopric. The next Sunday, the Bishopric counselor who was conducting sacrament meeting had me stand up and he read my name to be sustained in this new calling! So is that a "thing" now, too? That the RS (or fill-in-the-blank) president can extend callings?
Yeah, my husband was pretty stunned when I told him she'd done that. I never did hear from anyone in the Bishopric, and it's been 3 weeks this coming Sunday that she "extended" the call to me, lol. Have to say, this is the first time in my life anyone outside of a Bishopric member has done anything like that. I've been in several RS presidencies (and YW and Primary presidencies, too), and we've always done it 'by the book' - sometimes the president would include her counselors in praying about possible teachers, etc., sometimes she didn't include us - but never would she herself talk to the woman in question, let alone before the Bishop did. I do have to wonder if age is maybe a factor in some of the way things are done in the Church around here, especially lately - I have no idea, but that does seem to be one constant - and that is that all our leadership, from the stake presidency to our Bishop to our RS president, are all under 45 years old (RS president is barely 30, and our Bishop just turned 40). Ah well. I only bring some of these things up because I'm curious if similar happens elsewhere.AI2.0 wrote: ↑February 23rd, 2018, 3:35 pmEmmaLee wrote: ↑February 23rd, 2018, 1:37 pm Here's another example of strangeness (or at least, it seems strange to me) - our RS president pulled me aside a couple of Sunday's ago, and asked me if I would accept such-and-such a calling in the RS. I was a bit stunned, as I thought it was a function of the Bishopric to extend callings. I smiled and said, "Sure; I'd be happy to." I never did hear from anyone in the Bishopric. The next Sunday, the Bishopric counselor who was conducting sacrament meeting had me stand up and he read my name to be sustained in this new calling! So is that a "thing" now, too? That the RS (or fill-in-the-blank) president can extend callings?
That's definitely not how it's supposed to be done--that's a breach in protocol. The RS President does not issue calls, though she may propose names to the Bishop, but he makes the decision, after prayerfully considering it. Then it is the responsibility of a member of the Bishopric to extend the call. It sounds like things are being run in a lax manner in your ward.
EmmaLee wrote: ↑February 23rd, 2018, 4:26 pmYeah, my husband was pretty stunned when I told him she'd done that. I never did hear from anyone in the Bishopric, and it's been 3 weeks this coming Sunday that she "extended" the call to me, lol. Have to say, this is the first time in my life anyone outside of a Bishopric member has done anything like that. I've been in several RS presidencies (and YW and Primary presidencies, too), and we've always done it 'by the book' - sometimes the president would include her counselors in praying about possible teachers, etc., sometimes she didn't include us - but never would she herself talk to the woman in question, let alone before the Bishop did. I do have to wonder if age is maybe a factor in some of the way things are done in the Church around here, especially lately - I have no idea, but that does seem to be one constant - and that is that all our leadership, from the stake presidency to our Bishop to our RS president, are all under 45 years old (RS president is barely 30, and our Bishop just turned 40). Ah well. I only bring some of these things up because I'm curious if similar happens elsewhere.AI2.0 wrote: ↑February 23rd, 2018, 3:35 pmEmmaLee wrote: ↑February 23rd, 2018, 1:37 pm Here's another example of strangeness (or at least, it seems strange to me) - our RS president pulled me aside a couple of Sunday's ago, and asked me if I would accept such-and-such a calling in the RS. I was a bit stunned, as I thought it was a function of the Bishopric to extend callings. I smiled and said, "Sure; I'd be happy to." I never did hear from anyone in the Bishopric. The next Sunday, the Bishopric counselor who was conducting sacrament meeting had me stand up and he read my name to be sustained in this new calling! So is that a "thing" now, too? That the RS (or fill-in-the-blank) president can extend callings?
That's definitely not how it's supposed to be done--that's a breach in protocol. The RS President does not issue calls, though she may propose names to the Bishop, but he makes the decision, after prayerfully considering it. Then it is the responsibility of a member of the Bishopric to extend the call. It sounds like things are being run in a lax manner in your ward.
Pretty much exactly what I said to my husband on our way home from Church that day! Seems more like a calling of desperation than inspiration - kind of like I'm doing someone a favor or something, ha.AI2.0 wrote: ↑February 23rd, 2018, 5:09 pmThere are reasons for asking us to do things in a certain way, if the call comes from the Bishop, then you will feel more that it is a call from the Lord and it is inspired. If it's presented as 'how would you feel about doing such and such?', then it doesn't feel that's it much different than being asked to fill a secular organization assignment.
At any rate, I really am happy to do it - it's a calling I've had before and I enjoyed it - plan to this time around, as well!I asked my wife to go once, and I've taken a daughter twice. Other times, it's with a companion.EmmaLee wrote: ↑February 23rd, 2018, 12:35 pm Thank you all for your replies - I appreciate it. Wholeheartedly agree that a man should not go visit a single woman by himself. In the case of the two wards in our town, the men are not assigned companions (other than the few who have teenage sons, in which case, they are assigned as their father's HT companion), and it just seems to be assumed that their wives will go with them - in fact, they are expected to, even though not formally called to do so (in other words, their wives names are not on the print-out they get of their routes, etc).
What this means then, is that the active women in our ward carry double-duty - they are formally assigned to visit 4-5 women on their visiting teaching routes, AND they are "expected" to go with their husbands to visit another 4-5 families on their husbands home teaching routes. So the active women in our ward make 10+/- visits to other ward families every month. That's a lot. I always thought home teaching was a priesthood responsibility.