- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Also, I don’t know if I’ve ever seen a roll used in a Melchizedek Priesthood meeting (maybe, but I can’t remember, given my advanced age 
I’ve seen a roll passed in SS a few times but not in a long long time. I’ve seen rolls being passed in priesthood meetings all the time. You wouldn’t even have to show up on strategic Sundays to fly under the radar, they passed a 3 month roll around, you could show up once and do a lot of checking next to dates.
The funny thing is that during the time I was teaching in EQ I never got the roll. I was in front of the group giving the lesson. I suppose I was inactive during that period.
:think: No one was checking my name off each Sunday. I’d occasionally see the roll and there I was… inactive.
I was always under the impression that it wasn’t so much the who but the purpose of the roll was the how many. Like a stake or ward that is a slave to the numbers for a short duration because they are trying to make the case to split into a new stake/ward. That said I think they only report SM numbers for that sort of thing. Active priesthood holders may also come into play somewhere there as well.
Back to some of the experiences shared. I’m not going to mince words… a lot of that sounds like elementary school. Seriously doesn’t seem to be any way to treat adults.
What I’m finding really curious is the idea that I held many leadership positions before the new handbook. I’m comfortable things have changed but I wonder now if the strict policies I encountered weren’t a reflection of an extremely conservative stake that was holding tightly to antiquated structure. Autocorrect is Skynets way of saying, Hello!
I think that’s the case. Lots of people, inside and outside the Church, have a hard time letting go of the way they learned how to do things when changes are made. This is one thing that drives me crazy with the church. Are we not adults? Do we somehow not know where the classroom is? I suspect not. Then clearly we are choosing not to be there. I had this exact discussion with my DW on Sunday. I was waiting to go in and listen to my son give a talk in Primary when the Bishop walked by and asked why I wasn’t in class. I told him why. He response was along the lines of, ” oh, that’s a valid reason.” But I could tell from his body language that he was not happy that I wasn’t in priesthood.
The way I figure it is I’m 40, hold 3 university degrees, been a member for about 21 years, and by all accounts I am functioning as a competent husband and father. I’m more that capable of making choices for myself. I am not a child. If I want to, or feel the need to, go to class, I will.
I told my DW, that if the pressure to go to class increases then I will start going home after SM (since we are currently taking 2 vehicles). I simply don’t need to be treated as a subordinate and with what I consider to be disrespect.
In my case, starting priesthood role is new. It’s not done publicly. But rather I suppose to take it silently without drawing attention that I am doing it. It’s not passed around. I print out a MLS sheet look at everyone and mark them down. Head to the church computer mark them in the system as having attended what weeks every month in EQ. Then send a email or print to the bishop. No one in EQ is even aware the role is being taken until you don’t show and the EQ, bishop has a talk with you. That’s why I feel weird about it. It makes me feel uncomfortable that I am doing it secretly, but it was defind as my job. Also my stayed job to tell on people leaving after sacrament or SS per instructions of SP. Can anyone tell me what I can do to better the situation? Positive feedback? I would like to feel better about my job and still help them without feeling dirty about treating people like little kids. It being asked to act like one. Any positive advice would be appreciated. Forgotten_Charity wrote:In my case, starting priesthood role is new. It’s not done publicly. But rather I suppose to take it silently without drawing attention that I am doing…Can anyone tell me what I can do to better the situation? Positive feedback? I would like to feel better about my job and still help them without feeling dirty about treating people like little kids. It being asked to act like one. Any positive advice would be appreciated.
If you don’t do it you’ll probably get landed on–well, more likely your EQP will get the hassle. Every secretary I’ve had simply passed the roll around with a pen and you marked yourself. This makes it an open behavior and folks can be responsible for themselves.
VikingCompass wrote:Forgotten_Charity wrote:In my case, starting priesthood role is new. It’s not done publicly. But rather I suppose to take it silently without drawing attention that I am doing…Can anyone tell me what I can do to better the situation? Positive feedback? I would like to feel better about my job and still help them without feeling dirty about treating people like little kids. It being asked to act like one. Any positive advice would be appreciated.
If you don’t do it you’ll probably get landed on–well, more likely your EQP will get the hassle. Every secretary I’ve had simply passed the roll around with a pen and you marked yourself. This makes it an open behavior and folks can be responsible for themselves.
And, people can “mark attendance” for those weeks that are blank….I don’t go to priesthood, I find the class useless for the most part. So my “attendance” is blank, all the way across the board.
Hey, no worries. The bandwidth of experience on this amazes me. I wonder how many “clandestine” rolls are out there. Again, my experience mirrors Forgotten_Charlie’s complete with the interview issues. I hate to say this, but it is what it is. I really dislike anything like this that is done without people knowing about it. It just rubs me the wrong way. Also, do they count everyone who is serving in Primary as attending, because they should. Does the Bishopric get marked as absent from Sunday School if they hold interviews or other meetings during that time, because they should – if they are that serious about trying to passive-aggressively force attendance. Suggestions? None except to express your uneasiness about doing it and letting the chips fall where they may, if you are comfortable doing that. If not, it isn’t a harmful thing, in and of itself (taking role), so you might want to chalk this one up to stuff that has to be done for now regardless of how you feel about it – and use it as a learning experience if you ever find yourself in a situation to influence another similar discussion.
VikingCompass wrote:Not taking roll isn’t an option.
Yes it is for SS. In my current calling as ward clerk, I fill out the quarterly report. There is nothing on that report about SS attendance. There is sacrament meeting attendance, Priesthood/RS attendance, and primary. Some wards do take SS attendance, but it is only used internally, and not in any reports.
I’ll agree that is now the case–but given regionalization and individual leadership style–what would you do if the stake asked for one? Or the STK SSP asked for them? By this I mean there appears to be a pretty wide interpretation of how to handle taking roll and monitoring attendance.
VikingCompass wrote:I’ll agree that is now the case–but given regionalization and individual leadership style–what would you do if the stake asked for one? Or the STK SSP asked for them?
Take my comment as my opinion …..
I would ask to be released. I wouldn’t be able to do it.
Not looking to go down the rabbit hole but the STK SSP could currently be compiling reports from the Ward SST and you wouldn’t know it. That line of authority doesn’t require passing through you… Jazernorth wrote:VikingCompass wrote:I’ll agree that is now the case–but given regionalization and individual leadership style–what would you do if the stake asked for one? Or the STK SSP asked for them?
Take my comment as my opinion …..
I would ask to be released. I wouldn’t be able to do it.
Ditto. I’m really not comfortable with the clandestine nature you describe.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.