Recommended Posts

Did anyone else read about Spirit-Led Teaching? It sounds great; I wonder why it hasn't been used more - especially the discussion/interaction aspect.

 

I can't imagine being a born Mormon and hearing the same lessons year after year. Even being new, some of the RS lessons are getting old fast. I don't get a lot out of them.

 

When I give my lessons, the sisters always come up saying they hadn't thought about the topic the way I presented it or that there was a more lively discussion then they've had before. It may help that I'm used to teaching, but I can tell from the other presenters that they don't spend much time on prep. When you don't prep, you end up reading straight from the manual and asking the questions at the end of the chapter. Not exciting, not interesting, and not particularity spirit-led if you ask me.

 

I'm not saying I'm special (tho I am), I'm just saying that maybe we will see some more interesting lessons in which people will want to participate, not just sit back and listen to the teacher. We have had some great discussions in Sunday School with a good teacher, whose prep is also evident. I know it can be done; I just wish more would do it. Maybe this initiative re the Mission Leaders will filter down to the rest of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I guess I'll put this here, but the admins can move if necessary.

 

Did anyone else read about Spirit-Led Teaching? It sounds great; I wonder why it hasn't been used more - especially the discussion/interaction aspect.

 

I can't imagine being a born Mormon and hearing the same lessons year after year. Even being new, some of the RS lessons are getting old fast. I don't get a lot out of them.

 

When I give my lessons, the sisters always come up saying they hadn't thought about the topic the way I presented it or that there was a more lively discussion then they've had before. It may help that I'm used to teaching, but I can tell from the other presenters that they don't spend much time on prep. When you don't prep, you end up reading straight from the manual and asking the questions at the end of the chapter. Not exciting, not interesting, and not particularity spirit-led if you ask me.

 

I'm not saying I'm special (tho I am), I'm just saying that maybe we will see some more interesting lessons in which people will want to participate, not just sit back and listen to the teacher. We have had some great discussions in Sunday School with a good teacher, whose prep is also evident. I know it can be done; I just wish more would do it. Maybe this initiative re the Mission Leaders will filter down to the rest of us.

 

 

 

well to answer the first question is because people both individually and as a group get into ruts, and it's sometimes easier to do something that's cookie cutter than going out on limb. That and procrastinating is so addicting.

Sounds like you're doing a great job too, a good teacher also helps set an example to others later on life when it is their turn to teach :)

I agree the grand majority of it is taking enough time to prepare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dahlia, one thing to remember is that people are called to callings that often scare the picnic basket out of them.  The majority of people (not just church, but people in general) are scared to speak in front of an audience.  So aside from teaching at church, people are truly frightened of speaking in front of RS, or Sunday School, or in sacrament, etc.

 

There are actual skills to teaching (as you know).  But, oftentimes, those are neglected for just the will and courage to get up and talk about gospel subjects.  And often, we feel inadequate to talk about a gospel subject because we don't understand it or think we don't know enough, or don't have a testimony of it, and so forth.

 

I don't get much for people just reading out of the manual (hello! I can read it myself!). But, I have to remember that we are all along the path to God, but some are sprinters, others are marathon and some are just turtles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dahlia, thanks for sharing that link

 

The new 2013 youth curriculum "come follow me" was the pilot program to this new style of teaching. So yes, the youth teachers were trained and have been trying to teach this way since 2013. It will now be rolled out into the rest of our ward classes in 2016.

 

As a Sunday school president in my ward I am excited to see and hear of this type of progress we are making in regards to teaching to our members and investigators. Im super excited to have this spirit-led teaching as the new standard for learning in our church.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know all the answers. I've read the Book of Mormon about 1.5 times. I listen to more LDS music and read more about Church history and Joseph Smith than I do the BOM. I can't cite chapter and verse of the Bible the way some people at church can.

 

What I do during many of my lessons is turn it around to the class - 'You tell me about ...' 'I think this means X, but are there other interpretations I'm not aware of?'  'Tell me about some people from the BOM who embody this characteristic.'  That way, there is discussion, and they have to think about what they know and how to tell it to someone who doesn't know a lot (tell it to me like I'm a 10 yr old). 

 

We have a number of recent and not so recent converts, so while I phrase my questions in terms of 'tell me,' info is also getting out to the other converts in RS. I also bring in quotes from other religions if relevant (I'm often  surprised at how little many of the sisters know about other religions) and have talked about civil rights/ethics/religion issues. I didn't mean to go there, but, for example, how do you talk about forgiveness without talking about MLK's Letter from Birmingham Jail and discussing how long you 'turn the other check' and when is it appropriate to move on and take action? I'm pretty sure they didn't expect that, but we wound up having a good discussion of women and abuse and 'taking it.' I can tell you now that the lessons from the born Mormons don't get anywhere near topics like this.

 

Some of the lessons 'write themselves,' some make me sit and think and ask you guys stuff and scour the internet to help me understand. It isn't always easy, but I think it's worth the struggle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People talk about what they feel familiar with. It may be the case that most Mormons simply are not familiar with abusive households, drug addiction, and other such social issues. That is not to say such problems don't exist among Mormons; I'm sure they do. But the incident rate might be drastically lower.

 

I have never been part of a physically abusive household, so why would that even come to my mind when we're talking about domestic issues? I would never think of that when contemplating my own household -- though I might if I thought others were facing that challenge. But unless I had special inside info on someone, it would probably not occur to me that So-and-so's household might be physically or sexually abusive.

 

So the moral of my story is: Maybe it's not just cowardly Mormons refusing to talk about The Tough Things of Life®. Maybe those Tough Things simpy do not form a part of the reality of most Mormons, and that's why they don't discuss them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know what the point is here.  What we are trying to get going.

With my limited experience, I see good teachers, very good teachers.  And the best.  The old guys.  Going to southern Utah, these old men have been going over these lessons for years, longer than many have been alive.  And they teach from the heart, the memory, but they also have someone read parts of the lesson.

It was really the same in both college and law school.  My favorites were the old guys.  The older the better. 

In the church, it's all review for almost everyone except the newest.  But review from a year or two or three ago.

So it's always taking a new look at old ideas.

Last Sunday the missionaries, young guys got stuck teaching gospel principles.  They were excellent.  In depth knowledge and all fresh in their minds.  And professionally presented. 

It may be all different for RS.  I have no idea what goes on over there.  I had heard we are not SUPPOSED to know what goes on over there.

dc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People talk about what they feel familiar with. It may be the case that most Mormons simply are not familiar with abusive households, drug addiction, and other such social issues. That is not to say such problems don't exist among Mormons; I'm sure they do. But the incident rate might be drastically lower.

 

So the moral of my story is: Maybe it's not just cowardly Mormons refusing to talk about The Tough Things of Life®. Maybe those Tough Things simpy do not form a part of the reality of most Mormons, and that's why they don't discuss them.

 

1. There are tons of mormons familiar with the darker things in life but they are all inactive or have left the church.

 

The good thing about our church is that it encourages good men to be better, the sinner to stop sinning.

 

The sad thing about our church is that although we admit that no one is perfect and church is for sinners, the sinners dont feel its a place for them unless they are actively trying to stop sinning and some dont want to stop their sins so they stop coming to church.

Edited by priesthoodpower
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know all the answers. I've read the Book of Mormon about 1.5 times. I listen to more LDS music and read more about Church history and Joseph Smith than I do the BOM. I can't cite chapter and verse of the Bible the way some people at church can.

 

What I do during many of my lessons is turn it around to the class - 'You tell me about ...' 'I think this means X, but are there other interpretations I'm not aware of?'  'Tell me about some people from the BOM who embody this characteristic.'  That way, there is discussion, and they have to think about what they know and how to tell it to someone who doesn't know a lot (tell it to me like I'm a 10 yr old). 

 

We have a number of recent and not so recent converts, so while I phrase my questions in terms of 'tell me,' info is also getting out to the other converts in RS. I also bring in quotes from other religions if relevant (I'm often  surprised at how little many of the sisters know about other religions) and have talked about civil rights/ethics/religion issues. I didn't mean to go there, but, for example, how do you talk about forgiveness without talking about MLK's Letter from Birmingham Jail and discussing how long you 'turn the other check' and when is it appropriate to move on and take action? I'm pretty sure they didn't expect that, but we wound up having a good discussion of women and abuse and 'taking it.' I can tell you now that the lessons from the born Mormons don't get anywhere near topics like this.

 

Some of the lessons 'write themselves,' some make me sit and think and ask you guys stuff and scour the internet to help me understand. It isn't always easy, but I think it's worth the struggle.

 

You are awesome, this is exactly how I feel our church will explode in growth. Spirit-led discussions that encourages  participation from diverse students will cause for self criticism to dwindle in our classrooms and be replaced with self-motivation, self-reflection and self-conversion.

 

There are so many gospel truths outside of mormonism that we dont talk about in church that its not even funny. For example the simple creation of the automobile, but we don't have discussion about how Henry Ford was an inspired man of God. I love our prophets and our leaders but no longer will we be forced to only stick to the lessons which only acknowledges the prophets and leaders as examples of inspired men/women.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The idea of Spirit-Led Teaching is not a new idea. There is a new emphasis being put on this principle, but it has always been taught that we must teach by the Spirit or not teach at all. The spirit matters most, has been taught since the beginning.

 

I teach Gospel Principles. I love teaching the gospel. I feel comfortable talking about it and teaching it. This next part will come across as boasting but it is not intended to be that, but rather it is just factual. The reason why I feel comfortable talking and teaching about the gospel is because I have spent a lot of time learning the gospel. I have spent a lot of time reading the scriptures, in particular in reading the Book of Mormon. I have spent a lot of time reading Church manuals, materials, etc. I have also spent a lot of time learning about other religions, history, and culture. Because I have filled my head with these things, when I am without sin and the Spirit is with me, the Spirit will draw upon whatever it needs to from my brain so that I can teach and speak that words that the Spirit wants. Sometimes I'm aware of this, other times I am simply saying what I am saying.

 

I take the time to read over the lesson. I make sure that I take the time to listen to how I am feeling that day. Sometimes what I am feeling is not what is in the lesson manual. I ask people in my class at the beginning of each class if they have anything that has been on their mind. I let my class know that I am not just going to talk but that I expect engagement. I tell them that I don't have all of the answers and that I don't know everything there is to know and so I will be asking for input and ideas. I am not afraid of silence. I don't let myself feel awkward. I try to be genuine and real with people. All of these things help me to keep my perspective right so that I don't get distracted from the spirit and start relying on my own strength.

 

-Finrock

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know all the answers. I've read the Book of Mormon about 1.5 times. I listen to more LDS music and read more about Church history and Joseph Smith than I do the BOM. I can't cite chapter and verse of the Bible the way some people at church can.

 

What I do during many of my lessons is turn it around to the class - 'You tell me about ...' 'I think this means X, but are there other interpretations I'm not aware of?'  'Tell me about some people from the BOM who embody this characteristic.'  That way, there is discussion, and they have to think about what they know and how to tell it to someone who doesn't know a lot (tell it to me like I'm a 10 yr old). 

 

We have a number of recent and not so recent converts, so while I phrase my questions in terms of 'tell me,' info is also getting out to the other converts in RS. I also bring in quotes from other religions if relevant (I'm often  surprised at how little many of the sisters know about other religions) and have talked about civil rights/ethics/religion issues. I didn't mean to go there, but, for example, how do you talk about forgiveness without talking about MLK's Letter from Birmingham Jail and discussing how long you 'turn the other check' and when is it appropriate to move on and take action? I'm pretty sure they didn't expect that, but we wound up having a good discussion of women and abuse and 'taking it.' I can tell you now that the lessons from the born Mormons don't get anywhere near topics like this.

 

Some of the lessons 'write themselves,' some make me sit and think and ask you guys stuff and scour the internet to help me understand. It isn't always easy, but I think it's worth the struggle.

 

Dahilia, can you come teach my ward?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vort - Alas, many of the women in my RS are too familiar with abuse in its many forms. Some grew up in abusive families, some have sisters in abusive relationships. I hope that none of the women in my RS have that issue (I certainly wouldn't expect them to reveal it to the whole RS), but they certainly have stories to share and have frequently tried to help people in abusive situations.  So, they are no strangers to situations in which they might find it difficult to forgive.

 

I have heard some sad stories in RS on a variety of life experiences. This may be a terrible thing to say, but hearing these stories helped me, as a convert, realize that LDS women and families were not perfect, nor were they spared life's sadness. You have to admit, the Church has some pretty good PR.  I thought y'all were perfect. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually i'd say there would be a great many in the church that are in the church because they have experience with the darker things in life. Sooner or later we all have to walk through the valley of death and experience the refiner's fire, whether inflicted upon us by others or by the result of our own actions.

Christ said he came to heal the broken in body and spirit, and it's been interesting to see how many individuals that have been strengthened in the church because they had to go through either (or both) trials, and finally had to totally rely on the Lord for strength to go on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to say it.  Your post bothered me.

 

It came across as - I'm a far superior teacher than anyone else and if you all would be like me, classes wouldn't be so danged useless and boring.

 

We get it.  You're a college prof.  You bring that experience to your calling. But you aren't teaching a college class on Sundays.  Scholarship and an impressive CV aren't the most important qualifications.  They aren't even on the list.  Humility is. Being in tune with the Spirit is.  The desire to magnify one's calling is.  And knowledge of the scriptures that you seem to find irrelevant and boring is.

 

Do you think "Spirit led teaching" is really something only you know about and you do? I see it all the time in my ward.  People have been led by the Spirit in their callings for longer than you or I have been alive.  It's not some new-fangled teaching method.

 

Our current Gospel Doctrine teacher is not a natural-born teacher.  And he will be the first to tell you that.  But it is obvious that he is led by the Spirit as he teaches.  And people tune into that and are in tune with the Spirit themselves.  That is what makes the class great. It's not about turning it into some scholarly college class experience.

 

Yes, we do study the same scriptures and history over and over again.  Why is that a bad thing, worthy of your disdain?  I was an Orthodox Jew.  We studied the Torah our entire lives, and there's a whole lot less scripture there!  But you can study the Torah or any scriptures for your entire life, and still not plumb the depths of it.  There is ALWAYS more to learn.  Always. But it requires an open heart and mind and humility.

 

I admire - and am jealous of - those who grew up in the church and have had the opportunity to learn these lessons over and over again.  I am awe of teachers who can - just off the top of their head - reference scripture time and time again when discussing a subject.  Any subject.  I am awe of the bishop and my home teachers and just plain old friends in the church who have all that scripture and history right there in their brains and in the middle of any discussion about anything - can talk about a relevant passage or story in the scriptures.

 

We have those lessons over and over again because it is important. 

 

Just the other week in Gospel Doctrine class, we all were marveling over the fact that you can read the same bit of scripture dozens of times....hundreds of times....and still have that moment when something new jumps out at you.

 

Back to our Gospel Doctrine teacher.  Shortly after he was called, he was diagnosed with cancer.  He has spent the last year undergoing chemo and radiation and fighting hard to beat this disease. You can see the ravages in his physical appearance.  The cancer affected his voice, so he can be very hard to hear in class sometimes.  And, as I stated previously, he is not a natural-born teacher.

 

But we were all incredibly moved when he bore his testimony last week and shared the fact that he is now cancer-free.  He talked of how having cancer has not caused him to waiver in his faith, it has only served to strengthen his testimony.

 

He spoke of the joy his calling brought him and how much he has learned from it.  He had shared with us previously how he prepared diligently for his lesson each week, even the weeks he knew the effects of the cancer treatment would make him too sick to teach.

 

His preparation might not meet your scholarly standards.  He might not address the political and social issues you deem necessary to address in class.  But he brings to class what the Spirit prompts HIM to bring to class.

 

One of his promptings was to change the configuration of the class.  Instead of the usual rows of chairs, he rearranged the chairs into a circle.  He talked about how he wasn't there to give a lecture.  That we were all there to learn together and he was simply helping to facilitate that.  He felt that all of us being part of the same circle was more conducive/reflective of that, rather than his standing behind a lectern in front of anyone.

 

Perhaps not a scholarly experience, but definitely sprit-led.

 

One of our favorite teachers in RS is a young woman.  Married.  A nurse by profession.  Two boys under the age of five.

 

The Spirit she brings with her every time she teaches is obvious.  I know that some people think she's the "perfect Mormon woman" with the "perfect Mormon life".  But sit in on her lessons and you will learn of the trials she has been through.  Searching for the truth on her own as a teenager.  Battling cancer at a young age. Being told children would probably never happen because of it.  A divorce.

 

She teaches of out of the strength of her testimony.  She prepares her lessons while juggling all of the demands mentioned previously.  She recently was asked to give a talk in Sacrament meeting on the same day she was scheduled to teach in RS.

 

She doesn't have impressive (to some) credentials that "qualify" her for teaching.  That wasn't important.  That wasn't what led the Spirit to make the promptings that led to her being called as a teacher.

 

Whenever she teaches a lesson or gives a talk, there are always people that approach her afterward to share with her the impact that her talk or her lesson made on them.  And it's not usually because they learned some new scholarly or historical fact (although that happens as well).  It is because they were touched by the Spirit and learned something that Heavenly Father knew they needed to learn.

 

I am sure you are a fabulous teacher.  I am sure you are the kind of teacher that I loved to have in school at whatever level - those who are gifted such that it is easy to learn from them.

 

But I would hate to teach a class that you were in, knowing that no matter what, I am going to fall short in your eyes because I don't have the same CV, because I don't teach in the way you think is the only way to teach, because I will be teaching a lesson you've heard before and we never, ever need to repeat lessons, do we?  Yeah, it would be hard to teach someone who has pre-determined there is nothing to learn from this inferior teacher, that there is nothing new for the Spirit to whisper to them from a lesson they've heard before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The sad thing about our church is that although we admit that no one is perfect and church is for sinners, the sinners dont feel its a place for them unless they are actively trying to stop sinning and some dont want to stop their sins so they stop coming to church.

 

It is a sad thing...but why is it a sad thing "about our church"? Seems like you're blaming the church for the fact that sinners don't want to stop sinning? Are you implying that preaching against sin should be abandoned?

Edited by The Folk Prophet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is a sad thing...but why is it a sad thing "about our church"? Seems like you're blaming the church for the fact that sinners don't want to stop sinning? Are you implying that preaching against sin should be abandoned?

 

Hi The Folk Prophet! I hope you've been well. :)

 

I understand priesthoodpower to be saying that our church meetings in general should be more accepting of those who are sinners or those who are actively sinning should feel welcomed, loved, wanted, and desired at church. I believe he is saying that there should be less judgement and more empathy.

 

I was speaking with a member who grew up in Utah. She made an observation that growing up in Utah there was great energy put in to appearing as if you were rigtheous and people were not open about their weaknesses at all. She was surprised when she moved to the Metro Detroit area and found that people were more open about their weaknesses and that there wasn't a hypocritical front or an attempt to hide the fact that one is a sinner.

 

-Finrock

Edited by Finrock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand priesthoodpower to be saying that our church meetings in general should be more accepting of those who are sinners or those who are actively sinning should feel welcomed, loved, wanted, and desired at church. I believe he is saying that there should be less judgement and more empathy.

 

Sure. But are they to feel welcomed because their "sinning" is acceptable? Or should we welcome them, love them,etc., while also declaring, plainly, that active sinning is unacceptable and that change needs to occur?

 

There is, in my opinion, a disconnect between what is "judging" and what is the declaration of truth, a call to repentance, and the preaching of righteousness. The members understanding, and teaching, for example, that smoking is a sin, is not "judgmental". It is truth.

 

The declaration of sin as sin is, and should be, appropriate in church. And those engaged in such sin should, in fact, be uncomfortable with these declarations, should they not? Or is the implication that feeling comfortable in sin is a better way, and that we should be striving to make others comfortable in their sinning?

 

I know that there have been times in my past where I have been decidedly uncomfortable at church or listening to General Conference or the like because of the truths spoken there. There is, imo, a new trend to respond to such discomfort by throwing the blame at "the church" by way of "judgement", whether that means the organization or the individuals therein.

 

I think this response invalid. I also think that the problem of sinners going inactive does not ultimately stem from the unkindness, judgmental-ism, or lack of love coming from their fellow members. I accept that this occurs, of course. But I don't believe it to be the primarily reason that sinners leave activity.

 

So whereas I agree that we should always strive to be less judgmental and show more empathy, I do not believe that doing so will affect the issue at hand or that it is appropriate to be blaming the church for this.

 

We need to all continually work to improve our ability to succor. Yes. But that does not mean we are at fault for sinners' guilt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You misunderstood completely.  I asked about Spirit-led teaching because I read the article and wondered what others thought about this approach. I mistakenly thought this was a place to talk about LDS news. Silly me.

 

I said that many lessons were repetitive or only hitting the surface, or it appeared that no prep had been done. Sorry, you can tell it a mile off. It's especially apparent when the person comes right out and says, "I just looked at the lesson this morning."

 

I mentioned a good Sunday School teacher that I have, who is 'good' because it appears that he actually preps for class. We had another teacher who was even better, but who moved from the area. My Gospel Principles teacher was fantastic and kept me coming to church as an investigator on Sundays when I really didn't want to, because I didn't want to miss one of his lessons. We have had Sacrament speakers, regular people from the ward, who were fantastic and who were obviously influenced by the Spirit.

 

I learned from answers here that spirit-led teaching isn't entirely new, good to know. How would I know that as a somewhat new convert who is still learning? Plus, I would hope all teaching would be led by the Spirit.

 

I have found in life that some people can't stand that you have more education or experience than they do. They look for opportunities to say 'just because you have X, doesn't make you whatever.'  Yes, I have a PhD and a law degree. I see the world a certain way. My approach teaching and the human experience as we discuss it in RS is influenced by my education and life experience.  Don't like it? Tough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet

We have a number of recent and not so recent converts, so while I phrase my questions in terms of 'tell me,' info is also getting out to the other converts in RS. I also bring in quotes from other religions if relevant (I'm often  surprised at how little many of the sisters know about other religions) and have talked about civil rights/ethics/religion issues. I didn't mean to go there, but, for example, how do you talk about forgiveness without talking about MLK's Letter from Birmingham Jail and discussing how long you 'turn the other check' and when is it appropriate to move on and take action? I'm pretty sure they didn't expect that, but we wound up having a good discussion of women and abuse and 'taking it.' I can tell you now that the lessons from the born Mormons don't get anywhere near topics like this.

 

 

Sounds like a wonderful lesson.  I want to be in your class!  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet

I said that many lessons were repetitive or only hitting the surface, or it appeared that no prep had been done. Sorry, you can tell it a mile off. It's especially apparent when the person comes right out and says, "I just looked at the lesson this morning."

 

FWIW, I'm with you on all of this Dahlia.  

 

I've always tried to use Spirit-led teaching when I teach or give a talk.  It really does make a difference.  But to have the Spirit guide you does require prep on the part of the teacher.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet

1. There are tons of mormons familiar with the darker things in life but they are all inactive or have left the church.

 

 

I agree there are tons who have experienced this and many who are inactive or have left the church...but not all!  I also know many who have suffered from abuse that stay active and faithful.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FP we both seem to understand it the same way, except I like to emphasize one side of the argument while you emphasise another side.
 

Sure. But are they to feel welcomed because their "sinning" is acceptable? Or should we welcome them, love them,etc., while also declaring, plainly, that active sinning is unacceptable and that change needs to occur?

 
I think where we differ on this matter is when you use the word "WE".
Prophets, Bishops and other leaders should declare sin as evil, the rest of us "WE" members should support and accept each other in our active sinning.
 
 

There is, in my opinion, a disconnect between what is "judging" and what is the declaration of truth, a call to repentance, and the preaching of righteousness. The members understanding, and teaching, for example, that smoking is a sin, is not "judgmental". It is truth.

The declaration of sin as sin is, and should be, appropriate in church. And those engaged in such sin should, in fact, be uncomfortable with these declarations, should they not? Or is the implication that feeling comfortable in sin is a better way, and that we should be striving to make others comfortable in their sinning?

 
Once again, the leaders should make the sinner feel uncomfortable, not the rest of the members in the ward.
 
 

I think this response invalid. I also think that the problem of sinners going inactive does not ultimately stem from the unkindness, judgmental-ism, or lack of love coming from their fellow members. I accept that this occurs, of course. But I don't believe it to be the primarily reason that sinners leave activity.

So whereas I agree that we should always strive to be less judgmental and show more empathy, I do not believe that doing so will affect the issue at hand or that it is appropriate to be blaming the church for this.

We need to all continually work to improve our ability to succor. Yes. But that does not mean we are at fault for sinners' guilt.


I agree

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, I'm with you on all of this Dahlia.  

 

I've always tried to use Spirit-led teaching when I teach or give a talk.  It really does make a difference.  But to have the Spirit guide you does require prep on the part of the teacher.  

 

I've been called to substitute teach on a Sunday morning right when I walk into Church - quite a number of times.  I've done it many times in Primary, Gospel Principles, and even RS.  Those were always great lessons from my perspective... it is when I just surrender and completely rely on the Spirit to guide me.

 

The thing is - preparation is not just for teachers.  Every single one of us are supposed to be studying the gospel every single day of our lives and striving to live righteous lives.  If we do this, we are always ready to teach through the Spirit.  Sunday School is not the only time that the opportunity to teach is present.  Every single day is a teaching opportunity - may it be an argument breaking out in the backseat of the car on your way to drop kids off at school prompting an impromptu lesson... or some guy at the check-out counter of the grocery asking what you're doing with a cartful of canned peas, or the Jehovah's Witnesses knocking on your door, etc.

 

And about the MLK speech used in Sunday lessons - that's great to use secular things to enhance a lesson... but it's not necessary.  A vast repertoire of secular knowledge or secular research to use in preparation for lessons is not a requirement to be called to teach - including the nitty-gritty of Church history (modern and ancient).  A lot of times, one's spiritual experiences and testimony is loads better than somebody else's - including the great MLK.  A lot of times, we think it is a great lesson because we learned how long it took to build the Kirtland Temple and what materials it was built out of and how the room dividers were designed, and how they abandoned the temple.... things that we never heard of before in Sunday School.  But then that was the meat of the lesson and nothing at all to do with God's purpose and revelation that brought Joseph Smith to the building of the temple - which is supposed to be the lesson.  We have to always keep in mind that we are not teaching secular things in Sunday School... we are teaching Spiritual and Eternal gospel principles... how many wives Joseph Smith has and the history of each wife is not the Sunday School lesson - Eternal Marriage and Eternal Families is the Sunday School lesson and this is where I expect the Spirit to lead me.  You wanna know the secular things surrounding the Church - go read up on it outside of Church and talk to your Mormon friends... or hop on to lds.net and join the forum.

 

Just my 2 cents.

Edited by anatess
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share