|
Post by jondough on May 28, 2013 14:31:16 GMT -5
Don't you think those '2x2 women' have a problem though? Like, what's the big deal about a worker visit. I always did enjoy them, but I more thought of it as doing our bit, and we were quite happy to do our bit. But I know there were years when we got a rush visit to "fit us in at the end". Okay, no problem. (However, towards the end our home was skipped which I read as a signal we were on the outs, but that's another story, entirely.) I don't want to be insensitive to those who attach number of days of worker visit into their personal sense of self-worth. But that's a sad state of affairs if it matters that much. I think you missed the gist of this post by a mile or so. Of course these women have problems, that's the point of the post. They have problems, the workers visited, and indicated they "couldn't care less about their troubles". Clearly they expected (appropriately) that their worker guests would at least show they cared even if they weren't capable of helping, and they got none of it. So yes, in those cases, no visit would have been a blessing but the actual visit was nightmare. It could only have gotten worse had the workers listened, then blabbed about it to others in the local meetings.....that has happened far too often. Wouldn't you love to be able to post up measurable statistics of: 1. How many people were helped, and became spiritually stronger by a "Worker reprimand". This would include just pointing out to someone their opinion of how they were wrong in any way - clothing, how they pray/speak, how they are raising their children, etc... 2. How many people were helped and became spiritually stronger simply by not saying anything, but by a worker simply showing them love and encouraging them. No pointing out blemishes...Having faith that the Spirit would do this part. I'm wondering if there are any on this board that think that more were helped by item #1?
|
|
|
Post by findingtruth on May 28, 2013 16:25:18 GMT -5
One thing I know about worker visits: Workers used to come as a matter of course; there are some now who do not visit unless they are invited. I have noticed that workers do not expect the friends to have a 100% open door at their homes but they do call to see if a visit or overnight stay would be OK. I suspect they know most of the friends will say "yes". I've never seen the workers wait for an invitation - chances are that they wouldn't get many invites. Are there ever situations where they have no place to stay and if so, what is their backup plan?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2013 16:48:07 GMT -5
Workers backup plan is go somewhere else --- I was in the work 16 years -- never slept on the street once. We were turned away a few times for different reasons -- but always had somewhere else to go. In foreign countries there can be less choices but if they can't find a home to sleep in they will rent a hotel just like anyone else or have rented an apartment .. just like other people do.
The uniqueness of their homelessness is a 100% farce.
|
|
|
Post by sacerdotal on May 28, 2013 18:57:21 GMT -5
I think you missed the gist of this post by a mile or so. Of course these women have problems, that's the point of the post. They have problems, the workers visited, and indicated they "couldn't care less about their troubles". Clearly they expected (appropriately) that their worker guests would at least show they cared even if they weren't capable of helping, and they got none of it. So yes, in those cases, no visit would have been a blessing but the actual visit was nightmare. It could only have gotten worse had the workers listened, then blabbed about it to others in the local meetings.....that has happened far too often. Wouldn't you love to be able to post up measurable statistics of: 1. How many people were helped, and became spiritually stronger by a "Worker reprimand". This would include just pointing out to someone their opinion of how they were wrong in any way - clothing, how they pray/speak, how they are raising their children, etc... 2. How many people were helped and became spiritually stronger simply by not saying anything, but by a worker simply showing them love and encouraging them. No pointing out blemishes...Having faith that the Spirit would do this part. I'm wondering if there are any on this board that think that more were helped by item #1? Item #1, the worker feels like he/she has done something. Item #2 doesn't require a worker and could be anyone- any neighbor- which is what Jesus taught. In some cases, other friends complain to the workers about so and so, and the workers will resort to Item #1 to satisfy those friends- friends that are usually prominent in the fellowship- and so those friends and the worker can then feel like they have taken care of "a problem". Most of the time, "those problems" then go away- knowing when they aren't wanted.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2013 21:22:38 GMT -5
I think you missed the gist of this post by a mile or so. Of course these women have problems, that's the point of the post. They have problems, the workers visited, and indicated they "couldn't care less about their troubles". Clearly they expected (appropriately) that their worker guests would at least show they cared even if they weren't capable of helping, and they got none of it. So yes, in those cases, no visit would have been a blessing but the actual visit was nightmare. It could only have gotten worse had the workers listened, then blabbed about it to others in the local meetings.....that has happened far too often. Wouldn't you love to be able to post up measurable statistics of: 1. How many people were helped, and became spiritually stronger by a "Worker reprimand". This would include just pointing out to someone their opinion of how they were wrong in any way - clothing, how they pray/speak, how they are raising their children, etc... 2. How many people were helped and became spiritually stronger simply by not saying anything, but by a worker simply showing them love and encouraging them. No pointing out blemishes...Having faith that the Spirit would do this part. I'm wondering if there are any on this board that think that more were helped by item #1? No doubt. While workers are far less prone to "reprimand" these days, they have been unable to replace that with something else of better value to help people. It seems that the system is designed to serve them, not the people who need help. Workers don't need to be expected to have all the answers to fix up people's lives, but they can be good empathetic listeners, and they could learn to help people clarify their problems, which is a big first step in helping people find solutions. A good example of that was Edgar's cousin Marg Magowan when she was still in the work. When some things were going wonky around here, she phoned (out of her territory again!!) and spoke with my wife at length. What she displayed was to be a good empathetic, non-judgmental listener and she asked intelligent, thoughtful questions which helped clarify the problems in my wife's mind. She didn't offer a roadmap of action, but was very helpful, and probably the only worker during that time who was helpful. While this is a skillset, it is a skillset which can be learned by most workers who want to be helpful. For those who want to play ruler, there would be no hope of teaching them how to do this.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on May 28, 2013 21:25:11 GMT -5
Don't you think those '2x2 women' have a problem though? Like, what's the big deal about a worker visit. I always did enjoy them, but I more thought of it as doing our bit, and we were quite happy to do our bit. But I know there were years when we got a rush visit to "fit us in at the end". Okay, no problem. (However, towards the end our home was skipped which I read as a signal we were on the outs, but that's another story, entirely.) I don't want to be insensitive to those who attach number of days of worker visit into their personal sense of self-worth. But that's a sad state of affairs if it matters that much. I think you missed the gist of this post by a mile or so. Of course these women have problems, that's the point of the post. They have problems, the workers visited, and indicated they "couldn't care less about their troubles". Clearly they expected (appropriately) that their worker guests would at least show they cared even if they weren't capable of helping, and they got none of it. So yes, in those cases, no visit would have been a blessing but the actual visit was nightmare. It could only have gotten worse had the workers listened, then blabbed about it to others in the local meetings.....that has happened far too often. Whoops ... I read quizzer's post as they were upset because they didn't get a visit. Sorry about that quizzer. Scratch my response. Thanks for pointing out my mistake, Clearday.
|
|
|
Post by snow on May 28, 2013 21:25:58 GMT -5
CD and yet they are getting rid of those workers that do have that skillset. One of the things they need the most for the group they are tossing away.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 28, 2013 21:35:02 GMT -5
CD and yet they are getting rid of those workers that do have that skillset. One of the things they need the most for the group they are tossing away. Absolutely. I have seen that "coincidence" over and over. It seems as soon as I encounter an excellent worker with real empathy and the ability to make people's lives better......they're gone. I haven't given it a lot of thought about a possible cause and effect there, but there is definitely a connection.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on May 28, 2013 21:49:15 GMT -5
It strikes me that the solution to this kind of problem is to order your affairs according to your own internal clock and priorities. Now, for us, doing this ultimately led us out of the fellowship, so that is a possible outcome. But you are simply not going to be able to change the mindset as it exists. There are definitely people within the fellowship, workers and friends, who operate largely outside of that mindset. But someone like the single mother mentioned by jondough almost doesn't have a chance among the friends. She is going to do much better in another church, and there are lots of churches around that would give her the support she needs. I'm sure there are places within the friends that would support her as well, but why put up with what she is putting up with. It's just one church among many, after all. Unfortunately, exclusivity can hold some people captive un-necessarily. The kind of social pecking order we're describing does exist in many other denominations, but there are two key differences that I see. (1) Some churches have a greater capacity to evaluate themselves critically, make corrections and try and do better. Some don't, they think they're fine, or worse, they think their church is perfect. (2) People do frequently change churches when they don't get along in one church. I see that as a good thing, actually. I mean, sure, it's better to stay in the same church, but not if you're unhappy. So at least in other churches people who are unhappy can empower themselves by moving to another church where things may work better. And perhaps there is a level of Darwinism at work in that process, so that good churches grow spiritually and survive, and bad churches shrivel up. (I'm not thinking here of numbers but spiritual health.) Many friends who are on the margins, such as this single mother, seem to feel trapped and that is very sad.
|
|
|
Post by What Hat on May 28, 2013 21:53:50 GMT -5
Perhaps another way out of this for some of the friends is just to resist the entire social pecking order. Look for those on the margins, and try to help them on a personal level.
You know when I think of our history with the friends in our part of Canada, we were quite blessed in this respect. I can mentally divide the friends into two camps: 'status seekers' and 'led by the Spirit'. Now, we all function in both camps. But there are status seekers who seem to have no redeeming qualities that I can see. Others are just socially insecure so it's really a bit of a trap for them and I feel sorry for them because it's spiritually limiting to be in social want. (Think Maslow's hierarchy with spiritual progress at the top, and social needs somewhere in the middle.) But who really cares about any of this as long as you are fortunate to have just a few friends who are 'led by the Spirit'. What do I mean by that? They go where there is true need, they are inclusive in their relationships, they don't worry overly much about what others think, they are comfortable in their own skin. Two years later and we still socialize with our 'true friends' within the fellowship. (I don't mean to make them out to be better that others in any absolute sense ... but we do know what they're made of and what makes them tick .. warts and faults like ourselves but still true blue friends every one.) Understandably the visits are not as frequent because we don't see them at church functions, but we know we will see these folks again as life continues.
|
|
|
Post by jondough on May 28, 2013 23:35:25 GMT -5
It strikes me that the solution to this kind of problem is to order your affairs according to your own internal clock and priorities. Now, for us, doing this ultimately led us out of the fellowship, so that is a possible outcome. But you are simply not going to be able to change the mindset as it exists. There are definitely people within the fellowship, workers and friends, who operate largely outside of that mindset. But someone like the single mother mentioned by jondough almost doesn't have a chance among the friends. She is going to do much better in another church, and there are lots of churches around that would give her the support she needs. I'm sure there are places within the friends that would support her as well, but why put up with what she is putting up with. It's just one church among many, after all. Unfortunately, exclusivity can hold some people captive un-necessarily. The kind of social pecking order we're describing does exist in many other denominations, but there are two key differences that I see. (1) Some churches have a greater capacity to evaluate themselves critically, make corrections and try and do better. Some don't, they think they're fine, or worse, they think their church is perfect. (2) People do frequently change churches when they don't get along in one church. I see that as a good thing, actually. I mean, sure, it's better to stay in the same church, but not if you're unhappy. So at least in other churches people who are unhappy can empower themselves by moving to another church where things may work better. And perhaps there is a level of Darwinism at work in that process, so that good churches grow spiritually and survive, and bad churches shrivel up. (I'm not thinking here of numbers but spiritual health.) Many friends who are on the margins, such as this single mother, seem to feel trapped and that is very sad. You are correct in that it is a trap. She was B&R, and of course has always been told that this is one true way. Most of us that were B&R can truly understand what if feels like to be in that little box. Basically, there ARE no other options. So if you suffer shunning and abuse, you simply take it. You hang on. Poor lady never gets invited anywhere since her divorce. Most of it is un-intensional. People tend to do things with people like themselves. If you have kids, you do things with other people that have kids. Most don't even think of it twice, but what they don't realize is how much hurt is taking place. She once was invited to all the social things going on, then all of a sudden she is alone. Goes home alone with her daughter. Then this...the workers don't even come over to her house for the entire year while she sees them time and again staying at her ex-husbands relatives. Its really sad. I really like what you said about reaching out to those people on the fringes. This is my New Years resolution, and its not even New Years. I am going to make an effort to LOOK for those people.
|
|
|
Post by quizzer on May 29, 2013 11:26:39 GMT -5
I think you missed the gist of this post by a mile or so. Of course these women have problems, that's the point of the post. They have problems, the workers visited, and indicated they "couldn't care less about their troubles". Clearly they expected (appropriately) that their worker guests would at least show they cared even if they weren't capable of helping, and they got none of it. So yes, in those cases, no visit would have been a blessing but the actual visit was nightmare. It could only have gotten worse had the workers listened, then blabbed about it to others in the local meetings.....that has happened far too often. Whoops ... I read quizzer's post as they were upset because they didn't get a visit. Sorry about that quizzer. Scratch my response. Thanks for pointing out my mistake, Clearday. 'Sokay. These women didn't really care if the workers visited or not. However, they did get a visit, and they did mention what was troubling them. The workers couldn't have cared less (or were downright hostile). Not a great way for clergy to react, but it's happened a variety of times.
|
|