I was responding to her statement because being humiliated is part and parcel of accepting LDS charity.

You can try and put some kind of feel good sayings to it, but if you accept LDS charity, you will be humiliated.

I doubt Christian Food Banks treat people as badly as LDS “Welfare” does.

Regarding “Humiliation is having to bear all your financial information in order to feed your children”: It isn’t intended to humiliate, but it is a necessary thing and may have that side-effect. I don’t think it is unreasonable to ask for financial information when someone is asking for help due to financial hardship. Documenting that hardship helps insure that the system isn’t abused, and it is a common (and appropriate) practice at many places to get help when you’re in need, including many government, religious, or other charitable organizations. If I’m telling the Church I need money, I should be willing to show them why, and be willing to agree to make reasonable changes to help prevent that necessity in the future.

Regarding the selection of cereal at the storehouse: did anyone ever tell you that beggars can’t be choosers? The storehouse stocks things that are designed to efficiently sustain life. And they have a much better selection than you imply. In terms of quality, from what I’ve seen, everything they offer is at least as good as the generic or store brand items I get at the supermarket.

If your Church leaders treat you in a way that makes you feel humiliated, at any time before, during, or after a Welfare need, then either they’re doing something wrong (possibly an innocent mistake, or misdirected action) or you’re overly sensitive. I’ve seen both kinds of situations.

SO true!

So true it is or is not?

Humiliation is having to go to the Bishop Store House on certain day and your ward or ex-ward is on duty that day.

Humiliation is having a person follow you around the Store House making sure you only get what is on the order form.

Humiliation is having the person following you around (helping is the term) and asking personal questions about your situtation and telling you why you should not be there. I know it is not correct but it happens all to often.

Humiliation is having to bear all your financial information in order to feed your children.

Humiliation is telling your children all you have to feed them is the same crappy cold cereal week after week because that is all the Bishops Store House will stock.

Humiliation is the way Church Leaders treat you after you work your way off Church Welfare.

Bishop Store House Missionaries are the nicest and most caring people. How interesting that those who serve the poor care the most for them.

Is this possible? lol

SO true!

Sounds like HP material.

The negative reinforcement methods you preach may be practical in some ways, but they are not uplifting in any kind of spiritual way. And as you ask, I will further describe more powerful motivational tools that are uplifting.

When someone is “motivated by the Spirit”, the motivation comes from a feeling inside, in a positive way, through the influence of the Holy Ghost. They feel motivated to do good, for good reasons, and feel the love of our Heavenly Father and those that are trying to help them. They are always left with their agency, and never coerced. Coercion is not God’s way of getting things done, that was the “other plan”, remember? The person being motivated is free to choose to follow the prompting or not, just like the Bishop is free to judge if and how he can use the resources available to him to help the person. If they choose not to be motivated to make positive changes in their life, then the Bishop can’t accomplish his goal of helping them become self-sufficient until they have a change of heart, and at his discretion, he may or may not continue giving them food or financial assistance.

The principle of being motivated by the Spirit can best be described by Doctrine and Covenants 121:33-46. The Bishop, like everyone else, should work with people by the principles outlined here.

http://scriptures.lds.org/en/dc/121/33-46#33

We are instructed not “to cover our sins, or to gratify our pride, our vain ambition, or to exercise control or dominion or compulsion upon the souls of the children of men”. (v.37)

“(39) We have learned by sad experience that it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.”

“(41) No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long-suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned;

(42) By kindness, and pure knowledge, which shall greatly enlarge the soul without hypocrisy, and without guile—

(43) Reproving betimes with sharpness, when moved upon by the Holy Ghost; and then showing forth afterwards an increase of love toward him whom thou hast reproved, lest he esteem thee to be his enemy;

(44) That he may know that thy faithfulness is stronger than the cords of death.

(45) Let thy bowels also be full of charity towards all men, and to the household of faith, and let bvirtue garnish thy thoughts unceasingly;”

That right there is the short version of the Priesthood Handbook, or The Good Ways to Motivate People. The welfare system (any system) doesn’t work well if people are forced into things. It works best when you help people want to do it.

Really this shouldn’t be a principle that is mysterious or unknown to members of the Church. It is (or should be) used throughout everything that gets done in the Church, at every level, from Church-wide to Stakes to Wards to Quorums, Organizations, Classes, and the Family itself. It embodies the principles of Christlike living in my opinion. It’s a more verbose way of teaching the principle of Charity.

And therein lies the root of the problem…

When you say,”There are much better ways to motivate people.” you imply that the other ways are ‘better’ because they are somehow more noble of moral. The fact of the matter is that there are very few ways of influencing behaviour that are more practical than those I mentioned.

When you use the words “motivated by the Spirit” I don’t understand you. Is there another way you can categorize this behaviour?

Yes, they can motivate, but like you said, it practically amounts to coercion. There are much better ways to motivate people. The difference between being motivated by guilt/shame and being motivated by the Spirit is similar I think to the difference between being moved to repentance by “sorrow you got caught” rather than by “sorrow you did wrong.”

You bring up a great point about other people being able to help. The Bishop involves the Welfare Committee/Council (I forget which is the official name) and other trusted resources as appropriate, and usually with the consent of the family receiving aid. It really is a team effort, when the system is operating correctly. But it is at the Bishop’s discretion if, when, who, and how, other people are involved in the circle of confidence.