In the conference just held it was announced that the Home Teaching program was being retired and a program of “ministering” would take its place. I have had for a while an unresolved love/dislike relationship with the Home Teaching program. I absolutely see how it can really help those on the margins, help lower the reluctance to ask for assistance when needed, and can even help build friendships among members. But I have also had issues with the guilt that has surrounded Home Teaching and how it often was a checklist item. Even Elder Holland joked about it in a priesthood session of conference recently. I have also had home teachers that came regularly (at least twice in a year) that I really would rather they had not come as they would repeatedly made offensive remarks. It certainly is a program that has some truly heartwarming wonderful stories, but admittedly was not perfect in every case.
This change made me curious a bit about the history of Home Teaching including the “Ward Teachers” program that preceded it. Elder Holland joked in this conference talk about Home Teaching, “Entire forests have been sacrificed providing the paper to organize it and then reorganize it.” But it would have been worse if the if the Ward Teachers program had continued. I ran across where Ardis E. Parshall dug up a 1952 manual for Ward Teachers. Wow! Talk about paperwork! I wouldn’t be surprised if some of those that created this program went on to help setup the Strengthening Church Members Committee. But seriously, as documentation intensive the ward teaching program was it did seem to have a bit of a focus on employment which is good to see. I have to admit I have home taught a family a few times before I would find out exactly what jobs the parents in the family held, but I am in a location that doesn’t have much of an unemployment problem. But the ward teachers were to note if there were problems such marital issues. It is just interesting to look back on this history. I can tell you I don’t want to be reporting my state of marital bliss or discord two a random peer from Elder’s quorum and a 14 year old junior companion.
In 1963 the Home Teaching program was discussed during the April 1963 General Conference. It was then implemented in 1964, replacing the ward teaching program. On page 86 of the April 1963 conference report Elder Harold B. Lee introduces the Home Teaching program replacing Ward Teaching as part of the overall correlation program that was being rolled out. Some of the details sound a bit odd today in that the High Priests were the preferred “senior companions” for visiting the families of 70’s, High Priests, and widows while the “Aaronic Priesthood over 21″ would be senior companions for Aaronic Priesthood over 21 and the unordained.” Today it seems any male member over 21 that does not hold the Melchizedek priesthood is on a list that is being reviewed in ward council from time to time. It seems like it must have been more common in 1963.
There are many positives that I see with the new Ministering program. The inclusion of the Young Women is one of the parts I really like. But probably the biggest positive is that it tends to make the entire home teaching a bit less of a checklist.
No longer will LDS filmmakers be able to show scenes of a home teacher on the evening of the last day of the month pushing cookies through the mailslot in the front door and counting that as, “mission accomplished.” I think the filmmakers will still have other parts of Mormon culture to poke fun at.
I feel in some ways the new program places more of the emphasis on the original focus of Home Teaching. I think the checklist scaffolding was there to suggest how to accomplish the main objective of developing a friendship, but many focused on the task too much instead. On the other hand, as was mentioned in the latest Mormon Matters podcast, many home teachers (and visiting teachers – in fact probably a higher % of visiting teachers) already had moved beyond the checklist and were focusing on the relationship already. There will probably be no transition issues for these individuals.
How do you feel this new structure will change for both those that are ministering?
How do you feel this new structure will change for both those that are ministered to?
Wheat & Tares 
I think the change is great. It gives local leaders more flexibility in how to contact and support members in the ward. It brings young women into the system. It will remove much of the guilt-mongering that inevitably came with any discussion of home teaching. Seems like a winner.
The ministering brothers (or sisters) get to decide how to fulfill the ministering assignment. That is good. I hope we don’t forget this, and let bishops and others start dictating how the ministering must occur.
The elders quorum (or Relief Society) will do quarterly interviews to inquire how the ministering brothers (or sisters) are doing in their ministering. The reports will be the number of ministering brother (or sister) companionships that were contacted. That’s good. I hope we don’t forget this, and turn quarterly interviews into accountability interviews.
The elders quorum (or Relief Society) presidency only makes recommendations for ministering assignments — the bishop has to approve all assignments. That is bad. We should allow the presidency to be a presidency and accomplish their duty. I would prefer that in a case where a bishop feels an adjustment is needed for whatever reason, he can quietly recommend that adjustment to the elders quorum (Relief Society) president.
The best, if we are able to remember it: Ministering brothers (or sisters) are responsible for ministering, not for re-activations or other progress or other outcomes of other members — those members must retain responsibility for these things, and the ministering brothers (or sisters) only need to minister without responsibility for results.
I agree very much with Ji and Dave B. In answering how it will affect those being ministered to, I will cordially meet with the ministers assigned to me and inform them that I do not want visited in my home. I got a phone call from the 1st councilor in the Stake Presidency because I had told a few people that home teaching was going away and he wanted to know where I saw the leak. I really like the guy, but he told me that it was just a change in the name and that nothing really was going to change. I just hope that stake leadership and bishops don’t micromanage the program. Give people assignments, put priorities on people that need and WANT more attention, and allow each of us determine how it is that we want to minister.
On a side note, my favorite part of the whole conference, beyond canceling home teaching, was how often the speakers talked about how they receive inspiration. A few of them could not help but drop the revelation card, but most went out of their way to explain the preparation, education, prayer and spiritual confirmation that went into making decisions at the top level. I know people hear what they want to hear, but I thought they were going out of their way to drop some knowledge on the process. It was as close to admitting that Jesus does not visit them on a regular basis as I have heard in a long time.
From what I have read and what has been my experience, it seems more of the same under a different name. I could be wrong but on the other hand, what does this say about revelation from the prophets from 1963 to this last conference?
Can’t remember if I said this here or somewhere else in the Bloggernacle, but I believe it will energize those who didn’t want to be home taught to say, “Thanks, but we don’t need visits.” As a former EQ president, I simply never gave any thought as to whether to ask people if they wanted home teachers to begin with (we did have two families who firmly said no but it wasn’t in response to a question). Would have saved us quite a bit of manpower, I’m sure.
I get and support the spirit of the new concept, but I haven’t figured out how it will look different in practice. Do I now coordinate with my partner who is sending the text message, having the casual chat, etc.? Ministering sounds more like what someone does for a friend, but how does that work when you barely know your partner let alone those you minister too? Visits at least afforded some time to get to know others better.
I should add in my ward my partners and who I visit has changed 3 times in the last year, so making connections has been hard.
This new program just shows I was years ahead of the “brethren” with respect to Home Teaching. I’ve been “ministering” to my families for over 30 years. One inactive man owned a gas station. So I bought gas there, asked how he was doing, and counted it as HT visit. That was in 1986!
A lot of members have built support structures for themselves in the church independently of the HT/VT system. Wise EQ and RS presidencies will identify these pre-existing support structures and exploit them. Talk to people about what they are already doing and recognize that as ministering. In the unlikely event that I am called as the new EQ president (I am the outgoing HP group leader and the current EQ president has been in for only a month), I would assign as ministering brethren the two brethren who have the strongest existing connections with each family. That would mean companionships would be situational. Some people would be assigned to a lot of families and may have a different companion for each of them. But it would not be a burden on them because they would be doing what they already do without having to squeeze a bunch of visits in at the end of each month. Companions could operate largely independently of one another. They should communicate occasionally to make sure all needs are covered and they should visit together when necessary, but the difficulty of coordinating three schedules should no longer be an excuse. I would conduct the quarterly interviews with each brother separately instead of trying to meet with all combinations of companions. That would give me a wider perspective on things anyway.
The trick comes with people who have truly relied on HT/VTs up to now because they have no independent support structure. I would certainly assign them ministering brethren, but I fear that they are more likely to fall between the cracks now. I have been in wards in which such people are in the majority. That would be an opportunity for the stake HP quorum to step in and help.
The equalization of YW (including them where YM have been included all along) is good. The rest is just giving people permission to do what most people have already been doing, but sometimes felt guilty about. The interviews might be new for the women, but are just a new version of PPIs.
What really strikes me as different is the set of online resources for ward council members regarding the program. These articles discuss abuse, pornography, masturbation, homosexuality (under the name same sex attraction, of course), etc. If any (home or visiting teachers / ministering brothers or sisters) have ever had both the repoire and knowledge to discuss these topics appropriately with their assigned people, I’m not aware of it.
Here’s an idea that will occur to about 90% of new and improved EQPs within the next 30 days: instead of sitting around holding hands on that first “council Sunday,” just do PPI visits one-on-one with everone who shows up. A three-minute PPI and you can go home.
Dave B that’s a great idea! Whoever thumbs downed you is a straight hater! That’s such a great use of time. One of the presidency members could lead the council discussion while the president and the other counselor conduct PPI’s. Great use of time!
I agree with brother Lastlemming in the strategies for success and avoid the dreams of home teaching continuation, because when the Prophet and church president introduce change we as a member we have to sustain it, because it’s for us Heavenly Father inspiring all general authorities to prepare to way for all, in another hand, the key held by bishop and Elders quorum president silently causing some issue, sometimes EQ recommendations are not taken or there are some callings, set apart or releases in EQ that EQ or RS president never been interested. As JI said ” We should allow the presidency to be a presidency to accomplish their duty and Bishop quietly in consultation meeting suggest adjustment if needed” not for accountability but in Savior’s way.