Comments on: Individual Aaronic Priesthood Award, 1963

By: Marjorie Conder

Marjorie Conder — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 18:53:35 +0000

Ziff–worse than that. Not only were there 4 stake conferences a year, but each conference had 2 general meetings on Sunday of two hours each. In addition the auxillaries rotated with a “special” meeting on Sunday night. My memory says that at least in some years there was also a Saturday meeting for the adults.

Another point of interest about these meeting was that we felt “gyped” if we didn’t get a GA visitor and sometimes it was two! How times and the Church have changed–and grown.

By: Ziff

Ziff — Wed, 15 Jul 2009 07:20:27 +0000

I love the detail in what counts as attendance–attending a meeting at another ward doesn’t count unless a similar meeting was held at your ward. So no getting extra credit by going to other wards’ sacrament meetings and such while your ward is having stake conference!

Also, quarterly stake conference–wow! Was it ever more frequent than that? I’ve only ever known twice a year, and with half of those now being broadcasts, it feels like we only have one “real” stake conference a year. Not that I’m complaining; I actually prefer regular Sunday meetings.

By: Ardis E. Parshall

Ardis E. Parshall — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 23:41:31 +0000

That would make a nice illustration, kevinf, I hope you can find it. I know that these certificates (and similar ones for the girls) were held very closely. They didn’t send a stack of blanks out to the wards — your ward leaders had to submit a list, and the certificates were made out with the names of the awardees in the auxiliary general offices and sent to the bishops for countersignature. Another mark of the much smaller church then, eh?

By: kevinf

kevinf — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 23:13:06 +0000

Ardis, I may actually have my “beautifully engraved award” for 1964, my first year as a deacon, somewhere in stuff my mother saved for me. Part of the difficulty in getting four years worth to earn your Duty to God award was that in my ward, it was interpreted that all the records be marked contemporaneously. In other words, I couldn’t go back in 1966 and get my bishop to sign off for 1964 on the Duty to God achievement record, so even though I had four annual awards, I didn’t get my Duty to God award.

If I can find it tonight, I’ll try to scan a copy for you. It was 11×14 landscape mode, in today’s vocabulary, of heavy cream card stock, prepunched to fit in the old genealogy/personal history binders. Each year had a different color embossed foil seal of red, blue, or gold according to your priesthood office, and had some nice engraved lettering across the top. It was very impressive for a young man.

By: Hunter

Hunter — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 22:21:31 +0000

Clark, I see nothing wrong with having high expectations. To the contrary, I really think it’s a good thing.

The only thing I wondered about as to the 1963 program was the granting of an award based, in part, upon the keeping of certain commandments (namely tithing and the Word of Wisdom). For some reason, that strikes me as wrong. To me, the current Duty to God, I think, avoids those types of requirements; perhaps the focus is a bit more on personal spiritual progression and experiential learning.

By: Clark

Clark — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 21:19:07 +0000

Re#1, as a scoutmaster and deacon’s quorum advisor, I would be thrilled to have a boy’s parents actively working with him on the Duty to God Award. I would talk to the decon’s quorum advisor and ask him which requirements were going to be done as a quorum and which ones needed to be done at home. The program certainly is challenging.

But I believe that’s the point. (And was back in 1963, as well) If everyone receives the award, it ceases to be special. The award, then and now, is for those young men who do their very best to magnify their calling and priesthood office. Allowances for repentance and slip-ups are made, but the young men were held to high expectations. I see nothing wrong with that.

By: Ardis E. Parshall

Ardis E. Parshall — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 16:03:11 +0000

I just ran across the requirements for the Duty to God program in 1967-68. The requirements then were to achieve the following for FOUR (not necessarily consecutive) years:

1. Receive the Aaronic priesthood certificate of achievement (the requirements of which changed from time to time).

2. Attend Sunday School at least 75% of the time.

3. Attend YMMIA weekly meetings at least 75% of the time.

4. Be an officially registered Boy Scout or Explorer in the US; or if outside the US, enroll in the MIA age group appropriate to the country in which he lives.

That sounds like a handful for a parent.

By: Hunter

Hunter — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 16:00:08 +0000

I was intrigued at all the strict comments (“THERE ARE NO AUTHORIZED EXCUSES FOR ABSENCE FROM EITHER OF THESE MEETINGS”). Wow – they were pretty serious!

What intrigued me more, though, was the inclusion of the tithing and the Word of Wisdom requirements for earning the award. To be frank, I kind of found that distasteful.

But then, I had to ask myself, “What’s the difference between those requirements and any of the current behavioral/achievement/moral requirements of the Duty to God award?”

By: Researcher

Researcher — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 14:26:13 +0000

That sounds similar to the Duty to God program currently in use. It's a lot of work, and in addition to all the scouting requirements and with our small ward, I've been wondering where my husband and I will find the time and energy to get our new deacon through both programs simultaneously. So I just googled Duty to God and found this site which has some really helpful worksheets which include information on the requirements that also fulfill scouting requirements and I guess we will get right to work over the summer vacation. Thanks for this post, Ardis!