My Sunday School Lesson Recaps: Serving Effectively in the Church; or, Focusing on Building Zion

The topic this month is "Building the Kingdom of God on Earth", and we focused last week on "Serving Effectively in the Church". We did so by talking about five things:

1) We talked about the meaning of "effectively".

Effective can mean efficient - meaning doing something with as little wasted energy as possible, but it also can mean "causing an effect" - meaning achieving a desired result. Both are important in the context of serving effectively in the Church, but I pointed out that all actions have effects. One of the critical aspects of leadership is to identify the desired effect and act in such a way that the desired effect occurs. I simply said that the ultimate effect from service in the Church should be a closer relationship with God and each other - or, in other words, the establishment of Zion. Anything that takes people away from that effect is not in harmony with the stated goal of service in the Church.

2) We talked about the importance of callings in the operation of the Church.

I asked the students to rank church callings in order of importance. After a brief discussion about the "natural (wo)man" view of callings, we talked about how the most important calling is the one that they are doing at the time. We talked about living in the present and valuing the contributions and efforts of all members - and I mentioned how much I like the fact that a Bishop can get released and serve next in the Nursery, for example.

3) We talked about the difference between being a leader and being a worker - not relative to importance but merely to emphasize the necessity of each type of calling.

Concerning leaders, we talked openly, with the Bishop in the room, about how some callings are through inspiration, some are through perspiration and some are through desperation. We talked about how callings are important no matter which category applies in each case - and how, as a leader, it is important not to present a calling as being in one category when it really belongs in another one. I told them they should never tell someone a calling was inspired, for example, if there wasn't clear, undeniable inspiration in the selection process.

Concerning workers, we talked openly about how their honest input is important - and how it's okay to say no to callings and/or give qualified acceptance, meaning doing the best they can even if it isn't ideal. One of the students mentioned living in a small ward where his mother had three callings (two of which were leadership callings) while being pregnant. When she was asked to do one more thing, she had to say no for her own health and the well-being of her family. I mentioned a couple of instances where I had said I would accept a calling, but I shared some things about my situation at the time that would not allow me to perform the calling the way they probably wanted.

4) We talked about councils and their centrality to the serving effectively.

We talked about the importance of input from council members - and I stressed that the best councils are those where the participants have differing perspectives and views, since that allows the leader to hear ideas and suggestions (and concerns and objections) that s/he wouldn't consider naturally.

5) We finished by talking about the need to respect others who are doing their best, even if that best isn't what the leader would like.

I told them bluntly that people are more important than numbers and that if they ever lost sight of that and started focusing on numbers over people they would lose effectiveness and, more important, hurt people and lose their support and respect.

The Shaman Exercise: A Secular Example of How Councils Should Function

The idea of councils in the LDS Church reminds me of "The Shaman Exercise".

When someone has a problem, they stand in the middle of the circle and present the problem to the circle. The circle is composed of people from all walks of life and status in the world. Each person in the outer circle gives their analysis of the problem and a proposed solution, while the person in the center listens.

At the end, there is no resolution expected from the person in the center -- but that person walks away with far more information, a broader view of the world, and far more perspectives and angles than they could generate on their own. And ultimately decides on the answer that is right -- for them. And it may be none of the answers given in the circle. But the circle had influence. 

That is precisely how I view the concept of councils.  If I am in the position of the person who presides, I listen, read, talk to others, etc. - and certain things they say "stick". Sometimes the ideas come on my own, but most often it's a synthesis of what I have experienced, what I have read, and what the people around me say.

My Sunday School Lesson Recap: Councils - Men and Women with Equal Voices

The lesson last Sunday was about councils, so I cleared it with my Bishop to do a mock Ward Council with the youth, but to make it as real as possible - including discussing real issues and solutions.

First, we talked for a few minutes about what a council is and how it is supposed to be conducted. We defined a council as a group of people who discuss things and try to reach consensus about what they discuss, generally with the idea of understanding things and coming up with solutions to problems.

I mentioned that in the November 2010 World-Wide Training session, Elder Bednar or Elder Holland (I couldn't remember which one) said that Bishops should NOT share their opinion first and then ask the council members what they thought - since the answer generally would be, "I agree with you." He then paused and said, "Duh!" He said that the person who is presiding should solicit input from everyone first and then make a decision.

I started the mock council by asking each student to think of something they believed would help improve the ward in some way, with one of the students taking notes, so I could share the final suggestions from the class with the Bishop. I gave them about two minutes of silence to think about it and then went around the room and asked each of them for one suggestion. The suggestions were:

1) Have more opportunities for the youth to attend the temple, not just the two or three times each year as a substitute for YW/YM activities that week.

2) Fix the heating and A/C in the building, so it isn't so cold in the winter and hot in the summer in the YW room.

3) Increase the "worship" aspect of Sacrament Meeting.

4) Stop flooding people who have problems with service for a few weeks and then moving on to someone else (a feast or famine approach to service).

5) Start YM/YW activities earlier, since the students sometimes aren't getting home until 9:00 or later - especially during the school year. With Seminary the next morning, this is a real problem.

I told them that we wouldn't talk about the heating and A/C issue in this council meeting, since I would have to talk with someone who understands that issue better to know if it is something that can be changed or fixed. Rather, we would focus on the other issues - and, since #3 above (Sacrament Meeting) was my issue, I put it last on my list (and never got to it).

I then asked for input on each issue, one at a time, and we talked about it until we had something to present to the Bishop as a concrete suggestion:

1) For the temple attendance issue, we will find out from the temple what days and times are available during the summer to bring a group of youth, talk with the youth to see how many could attend on those days at those times and, if necessary, talk with another ward in town to see if they would like to combine with us in order to have enough youth and adults to make it work.

2) For the issue of more even, regular fellowship, we will suggest a more active ward activity schedule - so everyone has a chance to get to know each other better. We also will suggest regular service activities - things focused strictly on unconditional outreach, with no activity or baptism strings attached. The students thought this would give everyone a chance to get to know each other better, so any outreach in a time of crisis would be more natural and seem more genuine than lots of simultaneous attention all at once that ends suddenly after a few weeks.

3) For the issue of the YW/YM activities ending so late, we talked about all of the implications of that situation and exactly what the issue(s) were. After talking extensively about it, we decided that there are two main issues:

a) There is a lot of socializing when opening exercises are supposed to be happening - which means opening exercises often are taking over a half-hour - which means the lessons and activities are starting late and then running late - which is followed by more socializing after the lesson ends.

b) Since the start time is set at 7:00, this means that the regular end time can be as late as 9:00 - and many families have multiple children of varying ages at the building, with each class / group ending at different times (the YW generally going the longest).

We will suggest to the Bishop and the YW & YM Presidents that the arrival time be changed to 6:30 - with 30 minutes designated as time to socialize. Any earlier time would be hard for athletes, musicians, actors, etc. who have extra-curricular activities that keep them from getting home before 6:00-6:30. From 6:30-7:00, the youth could talk, eat food they could bring rather than trying to eat at home, etc - so that their normal schedule could start at 7:00 sharp and end at 8:00. Then, anyone who wanted to stay could do so, but anyone who needed to leave could do so without feeling like they had missed a chance to socialize. Also, we will suggest that all meetings and activities have the same start and end times, so families aren't waiting for children in different settings and can know exactly what time their children will be done. As part of this, the bell will be rung just like in Sunday School, as a reminder of the need to honor the scheduled times.

I ended the lesson by stressing three things:

1) Not all things that are proposed in council meetings like this can be done, especially immediately. I told them that I would pass along the results of our council, but that our Bishop (whom they all love) is the person who has to decide how or whether to proceed with any of them.

2) I explained that PEC used to be the primary council at the ward level but that Ward Council has taken its place in that regard. I explained that one of the main reasons this was done back in November 2010 was that the Church leadership recognized that men had been the only voices in the lead council for too long and that we had sucked at listening to the women and ensuring they had an equal voice in the top council in the ward. I told them as they get older and are involved in Ward Councils (and other leadership meetings) to remember that the women's input is supposed to be part of any decision that impacts the ward as a whole - and to insist that their voices be heard.

3) I talked very briefly about how the Church leadership has been stressing lately a new model of presiding - particularly that I have heard multiple references lately to "co-presiding" in the home and that single mothers are being recognized as the presiders in their homes, even if they have sons who hold the Aaronic or Melchizedek Priesthood. In a home with a single parent, she presides - not a son, not the Bishop, not a Home Teacher, not any man. She presides. Period. I also stressed that, at the class level, the youth presidencies preside in the YM/YW organization, not the adult leaders and advisers. When it comes to the final decisions about what should happen in those organizations, they shouldn't give up that right and responsibility - that they need to take ownership and accountability.

I really enjoyed this lesson, and it illustrated how much our youth can contribute if we let them - especially since most of them had not been in attendance last week and had not had time to think about what they would suggest for our discussion.

Committees vs. Councils: The Difference is Important

There is a big difference between decision that need to be made individually and those that are made best by a committee of some sort.  One of the problems I have seen in every organization in which I've been involved throughout my life is distinguishing between those two situations and acting accordingly. 

With that in mind, I want to share the following generality - understanding it is not a universal constant that applies to all situations:

If the Spirit is telling you to do something, he's likely to share that with others involved.

Often one person will receive the initial inspiration, but if others are going to be impacted to a large degree and in important ways, I believe it is critical to allow for those others to receive confirmation of that inspiration prior to implementation of the decision.  This is one of the reasons I like the council model so much for groups. I don't like committee decision making, necessarily, in many instances (although it is important in some instances) - but I like "counciling". There is an important difference. 

Committee decisions require no decision be made until everyone can reach a mutual decision, which means  that the ultimate decision often is a compromise (or is postponed indefinitely) - OK, but not even close to ideal in many situations.  True council decisions require open discussion and active, sincere consideration of all voices and perspectives - but, ultimately, the decision must be reached by the leader of the council and accepted by the group body. Council decisions can and often should be a compromise from the leader's initial thought, and those decisions can be postponed, but this approach allows decisions to be made that do not require consensus in the traditional way.  They require acceptance, and that is not the same thing as pure consensus. 

The key, in my opinion, is that the leader ask and listen PRIOR to sharing his or her initial opinion - which, in practical terms, means that the group body might not know in the end what that initial opinion was.  I believe the Spirit can share aspects of inspiration with individuals that differ in perspective from that which is shared with others, and combining those aspects into one vision / answer / solution can be powerful. 

In the case of spouses, I believe strongly that one spouse should not dictate to the other. After all, those two are supposed to be one - so, theoretically, one half shouldn't be making major decisions for the whole. Thus, I appreciate the change that has been made in the past few years in the way that the global Church leadership has addressed the concept of presiding in the home - focusing on a couple presiding together as equal partners.  In this instance, the best decision-making process is more of the standard committee model, not the council model. 

It's hard for some members to let go of the former paradigm, but it's important to accept that change.