There is often a comment that LDS leadership, being a lay leadership (even the full-time “professionals” with stipends are lay leaders in terms of pastoral or theological training) really needs to be better trained for the ministry. “If only they were properly trained” is something I hear a lot.
I’m not discounting training. President Monson’s initiative to provide true leadership and management training to general authorities is a great thing. I believe in the training that gets offered (and not used enough). I keep wondering what a good pastoral training regimine for Bishops would look like.
But.
I’ve dealt with chaplains who had doctorates. When my oldest daughter was in the hospital, they assigned a chaplain in the graduate program who had a bachelors degree and a doctorate and experience as a pastor. He brought up that my daughter was expected to die by asking me if he could observe how I took the news when the doctor delivered it as I seemed to be dealing with issues better than anyone else had. He also discussed his bitterness over the lack of a good theological understanding of the problem of suffering and how lame the theodicy training he had gone through was.
I was unable to provide him with the help he needed.
Then, when Robin was in the hospital (our first child who died and our third child who died were both at the same hospital) I got assigned a senior chaplain instead. She was busy with preparing for some holiday services and really let me know she didn’t have time to deal with me. Makes sense, since Robin later died at home, not at the hospital and from the chaplain’s perspective had a 60% chance of surviving the surgery that day, so why would I need any of her time when she had something important to deal with.
I’ve also done legal work for people with pastoral training and congregations and doctorates. Some desperately reached out to me for more than legal advice, because the pastoral training they had experienced did not give them a feeling of confidence in what help they could receive (you are in desperate straits if you reach out to a lawyer over a minister).
Not to mention Dallas was one of the epicenters of the sexual abuse by clergy scandals (including a major Catholic one).
I guess what I am saying is that I’m not sure that classical “training for the ministry” offers that much in what I’ve seen in the real world.
Of course:
- Every bishop should know the abuse hotline number and use it immediately.
- Every bishop should be trained that any abuser who does not confess to the police and make full amends, including those required by the criminal justice system is one who has not repented. Thereafter they should vigorously avoid temptation or infringing on their victims peace of mind.
- I don’t doubt that the training offered by the Church should (a) be used and (b) be expanded.
- I enjoy the way our theology develops
What do you think?
- What training essentials that bishops are provided do you think they need to have refreshed and emphasised (perhaps on a 4×8 or 3×5 summary card)?
- What training do you think they need that they aren’t getting?
- What things do you like about having a lay ministry?
- What do you see as the downsides in having a lay ministry?
- What have I missed?
I look forward to your thoughts.
Images are courtesy of the Wikimedia Commons Project.
“Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license is included in the section entitled GNU Free Documentation License.”
Wheat & Tares 
Is training for Bishops available overseas. Not having been on a Bishopric for 20 years I do not know. Certainly there was very little then.
There are substantial on-line resources.
I’m with you, Stephen, and have also had experiences that that seem to show that professional ministers are not necessarily superior to our bumbling amateurs. :). In all seriousness, I think the informal on the job training we get as Mormons usually seems to work pretty well for many things.
Advice to bishops:
1. Listen far more than you speak.
2. Don’t express shock or disappointment during counseling.
3. As much as possible, help the one being counseled come up with their solutions.
CJ, great comments!!!!!! Brother Marsh, great insights. Thank you.
I love so much about the lay ministry, especially the opportunities for trying assignment way outside one’s comfort zone.
At the same time, this can be a disaster. My primary concern is bishops, SP, and GAs as therapists and life coaches. It seems like in your situation (and correct me if I am wrong), but the chaplains were theologically trained, but not social services trained and the social services element was what was missing. Same with church leadership. They have a basic grounding in LDS doctrine and know how to look things up in the handbook. But very few know anything about therapy, etc. For me, the personal counseling should stop with more referrals to LDS social services (although I hear that in Utah LDS SS is overrun at the moment with huge waiting lists) or other professional counselors. Bishops are trained to be administrators. It takes a master’s degree, if not a Phd to be a counselor – and there are good reasons for that. There are some wonderful, life-changing behavioral therapies out there, how many Bishops even know they exist? How many Bishops are giving advice that may dramatically affect an individuals life choices without any understanding of how the brain or human behavior work?
Bishops need some training and direction in pastoral and therapeutic interviewing. “The system” needs to be changed so bishops are pastors rather than “Judges in Israel.” I know they think they can separate those roles but they generally can’t and don’t. Anything above gentle informal measures (don’t take the sacrament for a month), anything that is an actual church court, ought to be referred to the high council or some other LDS official.
Bishops (really, the entire LDS leadership structure, from top to bottom) need some training in human sexuality. Since most of their sin-related counseling and judging is sex-related, it would be nice if they were informed rather then merely opinionated on the topic.
A little humility about the degree of inspiration would help. Most bishops and most members seem to think every thought that pops into a bishop’s head is straight from God’s mouth. This reassures a lot of members, who seem to think, “He has no training and he doesn’t know much about this or that, but at least he is inspired so we can trust his counsel and his decisions.” Even in the Church we acknowledge that prayer and inspiration is a garbage-in garbage-out process — that’s the import of the directive to study it out in your mind. The corollary is that an untrained, uninformed bishop won’t get inspiration to make up for willful ignorance. Again, leadership up and down the chain needs to acknowledge this problem.
Maybe they should take some of the millions of dollars they are investing in Florida real estate and instead invest in training our volunteer lay clergy. I’ll bet if you polled 100 bishops, 99 out of 100 would be in favor of some serious, substantive training on these topics.
Chaplains are supposed to do pastoral care first and foremost.
Most of the Church-wide leadership training programs I’ve seen are a mile wide and and an inch deep. No focus on real-world problems or scenarios. These trainings usually conclude with the admonition to “just follow the spirit” or “ultimately, trust in the Lord’s guidance” or something to that effect; that isn’t necessarily bad advice, except that I’ve had a few bishops in my life who believed that the calling alone was a suitable substitute for specialized graduate education, clinical experience and professional licenses in counseling, and in the process gave some pretty bad advice. My current bishop is a dentist. He’s a good man, but I don’t think he’s qualified to mediate marriage disputes or discuss sexuality with the youth. Fortunately, he’s relatively young (late 30s) and he seems to know his own limitations.
Like you Stephen I have had some experience with the so called professional ministry. I even have a friend who is one and we have talked extensively about the training he received among other things.
For many, if not most of them, it is a job like any other. They may talk about being “called to the ministry” and all that, but it is not really that different then be being “called” to the field of engineering. At the end of the day it is just a job for most of them; it pays the bills and is an interesting job. They get more training in how to negotiate higher salaries and how to balance church books than on how to council people.
The thing that makes a good minister and a good bishop is the same, compassion and experience. Neither can be really learned in a divinity school. They do have an advantage in a better understanding of Greek and Hebrew than your average bishop, but your average bishop has a better overall understanding of true gospel principles (and more scripture). Your average bishop has more real world experience, holding a regular job, married with kids etc, than your average minister, who may never have been married or had kids or even had a normal job in their life. Your average bishop may have been in seminary or institute programs, they most likely have been in leadership positions of one form or other, prior to being a bishop. Plus the average bishop is not alone, but has counselors to talk too and work with on all but a handful of personal issues. Your average minister may have no one close to work with, or learn from, being a one man or woman show, they may have their church elders to work with but they are his boss in most respect and not always much help.
At the end of the day they are an employee of the congregation that hired them; they teach what the congregation wants to hear. If they, the congregation or elders of the church, don’t like it they fire them, they lose their job and money support. They are generally a “go along to get along” mentality.
If you are going to the bishop for free ‘life-changing behavioral therapy” then you gets what you pay for. Most bishops I know were very good at directing people to outside counselors (LDS social services being one) pretty quickly.
As for pastoral care, most bishops I have worked with, and it is a good number, have done a good overall job, they tend to care more than the average paid minister I have known or heard about. For every bad bishop story I can find an equally bad paid minister story. Your mileage may vary.
There are pro’s and con’s of paid and well trained clergy. I like our system and think it works fine for the most part. An area of opportunity would be in eliminating so many of the things we hear related to “leadership roulette. You hear stories of bishops interpreting the temple questions and worthiness standards in a very harsh way. Some training in that area would definitely help.
“You hear stories of bishops interpreting the temple questions and worthiness standards in a very harsh way. Some training in that area would definitely help.”
Trouble is the leaders who have been trained but disregard it. An ombud (ombudsman? onbudswoman?) would be better, a second route to appeal, rather than just the SP. but that’s another post (there’s been good ones, look em up!) 🙂
Frank—that is an excellent point. The big problem is training that is ignored and it would be good to have a method to alert when it is not followed.
The same questions actually apply to therapists and counselors, though probably less so today than 30 years ago. The impression I’ve gotten is that many psychologists went into the field to figure themselves out… and didn’t succeed. Fortunately, I think there’s a lot more real science involved these days and I think it’s gotten a lot better.
I should say that I’ve met chaplains I liked. Well. One. (Maxine Hanks).
Bishops who were also trained chaplains were not better than the others I met.
Martin, I think your impression of therapist and counselors is truer than most people want to think about. But I don’t think it has gotten any better, at least in the last 15 years that I have been observing and talking to people doing therapy and counseling. Real science and therapy should never be used in the same sentence. Therapist roulette is more common that leadership roulette.
Dave B: “Bishops (really, the entire LDS leadership structure, from top to bottom) need some training in human sexuality. Since most of their sin-related counseling and judging is sex-related, it would be nice if they were informed rather then merely opinionated on the topic.” I think the real problem here is that we’ve got a huge problem in the GOP in this country right now developing an anti-science, anti-news streak, and anti-sex ed streak. We’re as likely to see church leaders embracing pseudo-scientific studies on sexuality that reinforce their existing worldview as we are to see them reading seriously on these topics. IOW, I don’t see the leadership walking the walk here, and the talk they are talking is scary as all get out in some cases (reparation therapy for homosexuality? abstinence-only education?). We seem to be able to avoid some of the most egregious weird sex idea stuff that is found in the GOP (it’s physically impossible for a woman to become pregnant from rape??), but just barely.
“A little humility about the degree of inspiration would help. Most bishops and most members seem to think every thought that pops into a bishop’s head is straight from God’s mouth.” This was my first thought. With no professional training (or even interest in learning) about human relationships or human sexuality or basic psychology, bishops who are car salesmen or small business owners or who sell pharmaceuticals immediately assume that every idea that pops into their head is pure gold once they are set apart. The reality is that those are pretty much the same ideas they had before the calling. After all, you can only really tell if something is “inspired” if it’s NOT what you normally would think. But most members and bishops instead put the cart before the horse and see the calling as God’s tacit approval of whatever random thoughts and ideas the bishop brings to the table. That’s a recipe for bad results.
“He brought up that my daughter was expected to die by asking me if he could observe how I took the news when the doctor delivered it as I seemed to be dealing with issues better than anyone else had.”
This level of cluelessness is difficult to comprehend. Had noone told him, this isn’t about you. The people you are supporting are not lab specimens for you to study. It’s about the real people, with real problems, it’s about supporting them. A message equally important for lay leaders in our own church, not least, on a much more mundane level, the home teacher my husband and I were assigned 20 years ago who insisted it was our duty to be home taught regardless how inconvenient that might be at any given time,,,
Only an observation but a bishop is meant in the original sense to be an “overseer or manager” of his ward with some preaching and teaching thrown in. The real pastoral work is done by the RS president. My only other thought was to relieve the bishop of his role as “judge in Israel” so if he did need to act as a minister the judging part wouldn’t get in the way.
Stephen,
Your asked, “What have I missed?”
I think when should the training happen is a miss? The first Sunday of the Month in the 3rd hour would be a great time do some in-depth to training. In the third hour in my ward we have two released bishops, two high councilors, a handful of bishop councilors and in the Relief Society there are four previous Presidents not to mention all of the councilors and previous Primary and Young Women leaders at both a Stake and Ward level who attend. It would be great to use the time to go over the information already available on the Church’s website as well as using the talents of those who attend. I remember one lesson where the instructor was sick and the CPA in attendance stepped in and went over how you actually develop a family budget and saving program.
I enjoyed this. There is no silver bullet.
I’ve been a Bishop and know how difficult it can be. I was just turned 31 and my wife just had our fourth child, a girl two weeks before the call. She was Primary President of 98 active children!
I had no real training other than my educational degree and watching some good leaders and some very very bad ones in the Church. I have to say most all the bad ones were in senior leadership…..my time as Bishop was not without mistakes either….unfortunately!!
My current Bishop is a very kind and sweet person and I am loath to be critical of him at all. He is just 30,like me, with a young family. He does however show some very poor judgment at times that have created some very serious problems and in my last count something like 10 or so people have gone ‘inactive’ .
Many of his decisions have just been poor execution of church policy ( but not all) eg allow new members to stay in the Gospels Essentials class for 1 year. Suddenly the young women who had found the church by herself on the internet who wanted to know if their was religious ‘truth’ ….a divorcee with two beautiful kids ..was called as a councillor in Primary within a month….socially isolated then bullied by the Primary President….and left the church …..
Perhaps there should be a clear list of basic instructions from the Stake President on policy matters.( I know there is a Church Handbook). I know Bishops have ‘training’ with Stake Presidents as I vaguely remember mine it was on reporting as my Stake President was an accountant and ‘ ambitious ‘ . Perhaps some vital training on how to handle behavioural issues from the church social workers or in countries where they are not available or some material on line or hard copy…..
I have observed that cultural issues in both western and non western cultures have very different views on some basic issues , views on ownership, money, sex management and leadership..this too must be managed and not left to just freewheel…..with the church having ‘problem s’ it is an import area that needs attention.
The leadership training I received in a bishopric sucked. It was usually from the stake presidency who were over worked and would read from the manual to us. One advantage of a professional clergy is they could devote full time to the ministry. I would hope this would involve real service.I think our lay leaders are pulled from family to much.
I feel very strongly that all of this could be resolved if we changed our expectations of the role of Bishops. A Bishop’s role should be that of an adminstrator rather than a pastor or counselor. The “business” of the ward is handled by the Bishop and any issues that require pastoral care or counseling are immediately referred to a qualified, trained professional. Training as an administrator would be accomplished very quickly and efficiently online and through regular “leadership” training meetings. We simply ask too much of our Bishops when we expect them to be an administrator, a theologian and a counselor. Let’s ease the burden and improve our leadership by setting realistic expectations.
I’ve enjoyed the comments.
Mark — you raise a good point about using the available resources and people to train each other.
I also was given this:
“I think that one of the strongest checks on bishops deciding to just wing it and do things that the handbook tells them not to do is articles in the Ensign Magazine telling members that bishops are not supposed to do certain things and are supposed to do other things.”
I think a regular Ensign column on the duties, boundaries and policies for leaders would be a great thing to have.
For example, everyone is probably familiar with the instruction that Bishops are not to get into probing questions or detail on sex in interviews. Yet, the biggest movement in the news right now is someone trying to “save the children” from interviews that are too probing (and, of course, prevent any child from exposing that they are being abused by a parent. I’m sure that isn’t their intent, but it is surely one of the the things that is sure to follow from their movement if it succeeds). There would be no such movement if (a) bishops were reminded of the official policy in a way that (b) also reminded/educated ward members so that when the policy was violated everyone would be aware of it (at least everyone who reads the Ensign).
Hedgehog — I assure you, it surely struck me. It was as bad as the LDS Chaplain in the military at Ramstein who expected Enlisted men to receiving counseling by standing at attention and answering “Yes Sir!” and “No Sir!” (since he was an officer and by God, they would treat him with proper respect). Except the guys at Ramstein could always go to their local stake (if they were LDS, the non-LDS guys just gained a real hatred for the LDS Church).
Angela — you make an excellent point.
Kangaroo — that sounds terrible. Miguel. I don’t know, but I hope that the expanded 70s quorums are able to do more in outreach and training.
Eliza — excellent points.
But Mark — that is a great point — it would be good if just like there are teacher training lessons, if one Sunday a month there were leadership lessons.
Scott. You made excellent comments that deserve an essay in return.
GBS, Miguel and Martin —good points.
Cody—thanks.
The best complement I received while Bishop was from a sister that came in for some counseling. After if was over she thanked me and said I was the first priesthood leader she had talked to that had not looked at his watch midway through the interview. And that included her mission president and bishop when she was a YW. She was in her mid 40’s when this happened.
I know this thread is pretty much played out, but I’ll respond to the sentiments expressed that the bishop should just be an administrator, not a pastoral counselor, or that the bishop should drop the “judge in Israel” role and stick strictly to a pastoral one: I think the “judge in Israel”, administrative, and pastoral roles overlap in such a way that the bishop would be far less effective at any one if he wasn’t simultaneously performing the others. In fact, I think the majority of complaints about bad bishops come because the “bad bishop” is doing just that — emphasizing one role over the others. The callings that are issued are heavily affected by pastoral concerns, penitents need pastoral care, and only the judge can know if a person should be serving in a given capacity. All of this involves confidential information that people don’t want widely shared. Ideally, and it’s really a stretch considering we’re all natural men, but ideally, the bishop should be filling a Christlike role, because Christ fills all those roles perfectly and simultaneously.
Obviously, bishops screw up and some are screwups, but having faulty people fill immensely important roles seems to be part of the plan (or else, they’d be a test before people could be allowed to have children). I don’t mean this to excuse bad bishops. That’s on them and the SPs who call them. I just mean that given what God has to work with, I’m not convinced the systems is broken.
I think Frank makes a good point. There is no real “check” on bishops that are not following the procedures and direction they have been given.
I like what Dave B said. I just realized that I don’t think I have ever thought of my bishop as my “pastor”. I have only seen him as the person I confess as a part of repentance. I have never once asked my bishop’s opinion on something. Part of that is on me, but I would suggest that is in part the emphais of the bishop being a judge.
I do wish they had more practical training. When in a bishopric as a counselor I was asked to attend the bishop’s welfare council in place of the bishop. The bishop in charge had collected a great set of details about local resources for the homeless / those in need. The other bishops just spewed forth praise for the bishop that collected this information.
I would like for them to get more training as to their limitations. An example would be basic understanding of scrupulosity and how this is ODC playing out via the religous parts of a person. Of course more training on not assuming every sexual encounter is the same. It just sickens me the number of times I have heard reports of women that get into a situation and instead of fighting or flighting, they have the one other response – freezing. And not fighting is assumed “they wanted it.”
I have had 4 bishops in a row that I am close to and they are some wonderful men that gave a lot to those that were in their wards. I can see some faults, but I really appreciate how much they cared about others.
Training is often helpful, but it does not guarantee success. I’ve been to several professional counselors and some bishops have been better than trained counselors. I think it is important for every person to realize that not all counselors (and bishops) are created equal. I had a bishop who sent me and my wife to LDS Social Services. She was probably the worst counselor I ever had, and he did mention that some had remarked he did a better job. (FYI, he was an agriculture teacher.)
I would love to have LDS Clergy take theological training, but to be honest, I don’t expect any of my bishops to be a good counselor. Many trained counselors with a Ph.D. flatly suck, and I’ve fired more than 1 before I found a counselor that I connected with. Even trained counselors can do damage. I went to one seeking to save my marriage. After I got done with him, I wanted a divorce. He was horrribbblee. Lucky for me, a good counselor had an opening and helped smooth things out.