Quote:
Originally Posted by BigFatMeanie
The quality of visiting teaching? Hah! A VT only needs to make "contact" with their assigned person in order to count it. How much of those great VT numbers are composed of simple phone calls or simple "hi, how are you doing" in church? An HT is supposed to actually go to the home and deliver a message in order to count it. Granted, many HT count the phone call or the "hi" but they're technically not supposed to.
When I home teach we are in the door, brief chat, message, find out if there are concerns, and out the door in a half hour or less. Multi-hour bull sessions among the sisters do not, in my opinion, equate to quality.
Also, I would venture to guess that in most wards the HP HT numbers are very near to the RS VT numbers. It's the EQ numbers that are horrible. Of course, the EQ gets the crappiest inactives in the ward to HT - you know, the 40 year old deacons. The 30 year old unbaptised members of record, etc. The HPs generally get assigned other HPs which are relatively easy to visit. How many inactive HPs do you know?
Are there lazy-ass brothers in the church? Of course there are. There are also lazy-ass sisters that don't do jack crap and are selfish, irresponsible, stupid, and frigid to their husbands. Individuals of both genders come with a wide variety of both talent and weakness. I have no problem calling a spade a spade when referring to various individuals but the talk about a ""larger point" is nonsense in my book.
The larger point is that the RS sisters have the largest or sometimes the second largest budget in the ward and it is mainly spent on entertaining themselves. The larger point is that sisters are continually built up and told how wonderful they are and that they are treasured daughters of Heavenly Father, etc. while the men are continually chastized and called to repentence. The larger point is that sisters don't have to make the tough decisions like, say, whether whether or not to excommunicate brother Jones. They don't get the calls in the middle of the night to bail brother Smith out of jail. They don't have brother Anderson coming in and confessing to them how he is watching porn and can't stop and it is destroying his life. They don't get called to hospital to bless a dying child and hoping they're living their life worthy enough to feel the Spirit and be able to determine which words to impart.
The sisters don't have these duties and yet a certain segment of the population clamors for women to hold the priesthood? Heck, let the women have it. If one thinks that half the population of the church has a subtle undertone of laziness or tendency to shirk duties and that the other half works their collective asses off then let the halves switch roles for a while. They'll soon find out that the grass is NOT always greener.
|
You're killing me. This isn't about 1. you; 2. budget size; 3. priesthood blessings given by worthy males; or, 4. claiming women work too hard. Btw, how many men have to decide whether to excommunicate someone? In general, I find Bishops shoulder their share and are capable of being the spiritual leader they should be.
I am talking about the cultural tendency to exalt the social and spiritual competence of women as an excuse to avoid cultivating those same traits in men. If you haven't' seen this, then either you have never been in leadership or you have a very different ward than mine. I have never said women work too hard or are too spiritual. to the contrary, they are doing fine. I find fault with men (and women that encourage this view) who lay off their role to women because women are better at it or more prepared or more spiritual etc. This is a lame excuse and should not be encouraged or allowed. I see this happen ALL THE TIME at the ward and stake level when planning activities, firesides, lessons, etc. It is embedded in our culture and almost presents a barrier to the progress of many men, IMO.
Finally, I want to make clear that, contrary to the premise of several of your arguments, I am not talking about ALL men or ALL women as to do so on this or any topic would be folly.