When researching the Church’s humanitarian service website (see comment #32 above for the link), I saw that the Church has some excellent options and suggestions for wards and stakes that want to do humanitarian service. They can gather and create packets of humanitarian goods that can be dropped off at the nearest Bishop’s Storehouse for distribution. Sounds like a great option for any stakes and wards interested in humanitarian service projects.

1. The mission president who researched and developed the concept at Church HQ (Cyril I.A. Figuerres) went home and his successor just didn’t have as much expertise in the program.

2. The missionaries became rather undisciplined and started to take too many liberties with the flexibilities and increased leeway the program allowed them.

3. When the Ammon Project was implemented, our mission president was reporting directly to Neal A. Maxwell. Asia Area President Sorenson was pretty-much cut out of the loop. As a result, he never really got on board. It was common knowledge in our mission that he intensely disliked the Ammon Project and wanted the whole program deep-sixed. Once Figuerres went home, my second MP had a very difficult time selling his ideas and projects with the Asia Area Presidency. We got almost zero support from Tokyo for what we were doing.

So when is the first Mormon Matters service Saturday? Or we could make it a Bloggernacle project…

We could all show up with T-Shirts and that…

Great points. I have to think God’s #1 priority is that the hungry be fed, the naked be clothed, the homeless be sheltered, etc., and that his concern over whether our motives are 100% pure is a secondary consideration at best. I feel sure he doesn’t want concerns over absolute purity of motive to hold us back from helping the less fortunate.

So when Mormons respond negatively to the idea of getting out and serving in our communities to show that we love our neighbors, arguing that it’s an impure motive to want others to recognize our good works, I wonder whether that’s really just another excuse for inaction hiding behind a thin veil of “righteousness.”

Now that is an “odd” comment for this topic.

I think that self-selecting converts will allow the church to feel more latitude owning up to the controversial aspects of their religion – and save people like me the heart ache of feeling misled. People don’t mind ‘odd’, as long as they know that you are ‘good’.

There is a difference between identifying yourself and bragging about what you do. Any good done from that recognition is icing on the cake. It should not be sought out, but it is ok form folks to know if Mormons are helping them.

I think the example sited above from “The Mormons” is the ideal outcome. Potential converts are self-selecting, not necessarily by any act of ours.

I think making it clear that you are actually from the church and that you are organized together, and that you don’t mind working along side anyone else that is there, then you make inroads. It becomes clear that the gospel is doing something right. That’s what I think.

“While visiting Church headquarters in Salt Lake City a few months ago, a group of journalists from Haiti offered an interesting suggestion: They asked the Church to do a better job of publicizing its humanitarian efforts. . . .

Two New Testament scriptures seem to be somewhat in conflict regarding the issue. In the Beatitudes, Jesus taught that we should do our “alms … in secret.” Yet in another Bible scripture, Jesus tells his followers to “let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven.”

Faced with the dilemma between publicizing the good works and results of its worldwide humanitarian efforts on the one hand and appearing self-promotional on the other, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints attempts to find a balance and walk that fine line.”

Based on that quote, Chris W., I’d say we were both on the right track.

You folks might also be interested in a Church Humanitarian Service website I just found as well, located at http://www.lds.org/ldsfoundation/welfare/0,7133,1325-1,00.html

Sounds like you have a great Stake President. It makes you wonder how much empowerment exists below the surface for grassroots-type movements to happen in the church.

I’m not aware of any conversions due to the stake’s community service, but who knows where they seeds blow? Conversion never seems to come up. Mostly it’s about living the religion and the pleasure we get to serve. I know it sounds hokey, but that’s pretty much it. Also making friends of our neighbors. Personally, I like the camaraderie.

Beautifully said.

I call it the PR approach because many in the thread (including you in comment 19) advocate either increasing service or increasing exposure of existing service in order to improve the church’s image.

I agree with your interpretation of Matthew 5 – it’s hard to interpret it as anything else, I think. I think that delineating things into “giving alms” or “doing good works” is far too fine a line for completely opposing prescriptions. For me, I’m going to have to say that the scriptures are contradictory on this one (especially since the correct translation from Matthew 6:1 appears to be righteousness instead of almsgiving).

You could make the argument that the difference is the intent: if you’re trying to glorify God, it’s cool. If you’re trying to glorify yourself, not so much. But I don’t think this fits with the PR approach, either (I know, you object to the term).

That being said, I think it would be fantastic for our church if we started receiving more callings that had to do with participating in the community (especially service oriented participation). I think this is something that Claudia Bushman talked about in the Mormon Stories podcast that John Dehlin did with her.

I think if we did service just to do service, without looking for the, “would you like to hear more. . .” moment, we would be better situated to understand those around us, something we aren’t always the best at.

Other service ideas I would love to see the church implement:

Service-only missions for trained doctors/nurses/paramedics to places where they are needed. Think of how much good we could do for the world if all our doctors took out a year and did this!

Service-only missions for a larger percentage of young people. Whether it’s building houses, digging wells, assisting those aforementioned medical experts, I echo some of the earlier comments about learning charity, love, and what it is to serve through this kind of service much more fully than I ever would knocking doors in France.

Callings as representatives of the church in various civic areas, whether it’s to volunteer at soup kitchens, habitat for humanity, clothing drives, etc. These jobs are left to the auxilary leaders, when there should be a willing, capable person coordinating our efforts in order to maximize them.

I guess I’m saying, the idea of us being a service oriented church doesn’t need to equate to more baptisms for it to be a great thing. I think we as members would be better believers in Christ for it, even if our numbers continued to decline.

1. Absolutely. Rather than “drawing away” from precious resources, I think focusing on service is a smart way to reallocate those resources to where they could be better used. Too often poor beleagured ward missionaries are left trying to force themselves into the homes of the same inactive & part-members families month after month. It can be a demoralizing process for all involved. Serving, however, provides psychic satisfaction and allows us to actually extend ourselves in a more meaningful fashion.

2. Since its not currently happening with any discernable frequency (at least as far as I can tell), I say the answer is yes, the Church should prompt ward members come up with their own ideas for community service. That nudge would likely be enough to get the ball rolling. Despite the best of intentions, we often get so caught up in our Church jobs that we lose sight of other, equally valuable service opportunities.

3. No. While feeding our own sheep should definitely remain a priority, that doesn’t mean it should be done to the exclusion of helping others outside our faith. We are already involved in this effort to some degree — RS members prepare humanitarian kits for delivery in foriegn lands, etc. We need to see more of this focused on our own local friends and neighbors. My PBS station just rebroadcast “The Mormons.” Once again, I was nearly brought to tears by the words of a Hurrican Katrina survivor who spoke of the willingness of Mormons, all of whom were strangers to him, to get their hands dirty to help him out. He said, “they got into my heart. No Mormon will ever come to my door without being invited in.” Missionaries had been to his house plenty of times, and been rejected out of hand. It was not until they quit worrying about doing “Missionary Work,” and focused on performing Christlike service that he stopped to listen to their message.

4. It certainly could. I remember being an EQP — the idea of leading or participating in an additional service effort would not have been a welcome idea. It’s all about a smart reallocation of resources. Find and qualified people outside the big leadership positions to organize and spearhead the effort. I truly believe that, even if there murmuring in some quarters at the outset, members would jump at the chance to get involved in such work. That’s where the richest blessings can be found. When’s the last time you heard someone get up and bear their testimony about the spirit they felt in a monthly PEC meeting?

5. Your guess is as good as mine, but I think it’s worth a shot.