Bishop Dismisses Sunday School Teacher For Using Essay.

[stemelbow]

Even if the teacher wasn't the primary mover behind the article, he willingly participated in what was criticizing his bishop in the newspaper. To me, that makes whether or not he was the primary mover a distinction without a difference.

Criticizing the bishop and telling people what happened are two different things. You seem to think telling people what transpired to be criticizing his bishop. I don't.

[stemelbow]

Again, this is all according to him. The degree to which people here take him at face value or question the backstory/his motives lines up with how people here are oriented towards the Church generally (supportive of the Church/the Brethren, or critical/skeptical).

Oriented towards the Church? The Bishop isn't the Church. If the bishop was wrong, he was wrong. The Church wasn't, necessarily. I tend to believe people's perspectives until there is some reason to disbelieve. If the Bishop was quoted as saying, in the article, "taht's not what happened". Then I'd have more reason to question the story. But, as of now, I see nothing to refute it. I don't hold the guy in contempt, like some seem to. I think it's likely a bishop got carried away. it happens.

The point I've been making is that the very fact that he involved the media tells us a lot about what isn't being said (and again, all that is being said is 100% one-sided ---- from the member who went to the media).

That's as speculative as one can get. We don't really know his motivations. I see no reason to assign negative motivations to him.

 

That's the $64,000 question, isn't it? The fact that he involved the media indicates to me that there is more to this and more under the surface than he admits to.

Well there's always more to people's stories. But that doesn't mean the stories are not true.

 

 

It indicates other things as well.

 

 

 

 

I've discussed it (I did a stake/community fireside on the priesthood ban and polygamy a few years ago), and I have never shied away at church and in public from difficult parts of our history and church. 

That's cool, and is how it should be. It'd a terrible thing to see you disciplined for discussing reality.

[Jeanne]

Criticizing the bishop and telling people what happened are two different things. You seem to think telling people what transpired to be criticizing his bishop. I don't.

The Bishop owes him a huge apology!

[Calm]

"Anything regarding black history before 1978 is irrelevant," Dawson recalls his bishop saying, "and a moot point."

 

Can you imagine what the reaction would be generally if any bishop or stake president has said anything regarding pioneer history in Utah before the 1990s is irrelevant and a moot point now that we are a global church and it doesn't need be taught in Sunday School class?  Or any reference to US history is irrelevant now that the Church has more members outside of the US than inside so there is no need to mention such?

 

Our Primary has a section every week where the kids talk about a bit of family history.  This family was being told (or at least the message they got...the bishop may not have intended it that way) their family history wasn't wanted by their bishop to be discussed at church, their family's history wasn't important because they were black while likely discussion about other families joining the church, the obstacles they overcame etc. would have been welcomed.  

 

Now that very well may not have been anything close to what the bishop actually said or wanted to convey, but it is apparently the message the husband and wife got.  If it is not what the bishop meant, he now has a chance to clarify and straighten things out with the family.  Hopefully whatever happens on that side of things work out and the article doesn't just make things worse.

 

And I would hope that more specifics about how the essays and topics are included in the curriculum are mentioned so that members can know when to expect the material to be covered and hopefully prepare themselves to discuss it with their children in more detail and not overreact because they have educated themselves.

 

It is sad to see the resistance to the essays that occurs, I have heard a lot more positive than negative reactions since they were posted, but that there are a significant amount of members who are dismissing their value is very unfortunate and shows how ingrained some ideas are and how they are likely only going to be removed by a slow, longterm process of exposure.  And starting slow by posting them on the website (and announcing them in DeseretNews several times in the process) and then adding them to the curriculum in more and more places is probably a good way to ease in those who are most stubborn to change, even if it is frustrating for those of us who were comfortable with the material beforehand.

[CA Steve]

Can you imagine what the reaction would be generally if any bishop or stake president has said anything regarding pioneer history in Utah before the 1990s is irrelevant and a moot point now that we are a global church and it doesn't need be taught in Sunday School class?  Or any reference to US history is irrelevant now that the Church has more members outside of the US than inside so there is no need to mention such?

 

Our Primary has a section every week where the kids talk about a bit of family history.  This family was being told (or at least the message they got...the bishop may not have intended it that way) their family history wasn't wanted by their bishop to be discussed at church, their family's history wasn't important because they were black while likely discussion about other families joining the church, the obstacles they overcame etc. would have been welcomed.  

 

Now that very well may not have been anything close to what the bishop actually said or wanted to convey, but it is apparently the message the husband and wife got.  If it is not what the bishop meant, he now has a chance to clarify and straighten things out with the family.  Hopefully whatever happens on that side of things work out and the article doesn't just make things worse.

 

And I would hope that more specifics about how the essays and topics are included in the curriculum are mentioned so that members can know when to expect the material to be covered and hopefully prepare themselves to discuss it with their children in more detail and not overreact because they have educated themselves.

 

It is sad to see the resistance to the essays that occurs, I have heard a lot more positive than negative reactions since they were posted, but that there are a significant amount of members who are dismissing their value is very unfortunate and shows how ingrained some ideas are and how they are likely only going to be removed by a slow, longterm process of exposure.  And starting slow by posting them on the website (and announcing them in DeseretNews several times in the process) and then adding them to the curriculum in more and more places is probably a good way to ease in those who are most stubborn to change, even if it is frustrating for those of us who were comfortable with the material beforehand.

Doubt your doubts before you doubt the essays!

[rockpond]

Can you imagine what the reaction would be generally if any bishop or stake president has said anything regarding pioneer history in Utah before the 1990s is irrelevant and a moot point now that we are a global church and it doesn't need be taught in Sunday School class?  Or any reference to US history is irrelevant now that the Church has more members outside of the US than inside so there is no need to mention such?

 

Our Primary has a section every week where the kids talk about a bit of family history.  This family was being told (or at least the message they got...the bishop may not have intended it that way) their family history wasn't wanted by their bishop to be discussed at church, their family's history wasn't important because they were black while likely discussion about other families joining the church, the obstacles they overcame etc. would have been welcomed.  

 

Now that very well may not have been anything close to what the bishop actually said or wanted to convey, but it is apparently the message the husband and wife got.  If it is not what the bishop meant, he now has a chance to clarify and straighten things out with the family.  Hopefully whatever happens on that side of things work out and the article doesn't just make things worse.

 

And I would hope that more specifics about how the essays and topics are included in the curriculum are mentioned so that members can know when to expect the material to be covered and hopefully prepare themselves to discuss it with their children in more detail and not overreact because they have educated themselves.

 

It is sad to see the resistance to the essays that occurs, I have heard a lot more positive than negative reactions since they were posted, but that there are a significant amount of members who are dismissing their value is very unfortunate and shows how ingrained some ideas are and how they are likely only going to be removed by a slow, longterm process of exposure.  And starting slow by posting them on the website (and announcing them in DeseretNews several times in the process) and then adding them to the curriculum in more and more places is probably a good way to ease in those who are most stubborn to change, even if it is frustrating for those of us who were comfortable with the material beforehand.

 

Great summary and response, Cal.  As usual.

[Duncan]

I would love to know why it didn't "please" his local leaders. I think this is Greg Prince's point, we all want revelation but how many want change? we want the Church to comment on items but when they do we are apathetic to it or unpleased or we may not even know about it!

[DJBrown]

 

 

The direct correspondence they are referring to was a letter that was placed into the communications library. Bishops have the opportunity to go into the library and see what is new out there. It wasn't a physical letter mailed to Bishops and they didn't even receive a notice that there was something they needed to review. It all depended on whether or not the Bishop proactively went to this online communications library, scrolled through dozens of notifications, found the essays message, and then read it.

Poor communication channel.

 

 

All bishops in our stake have been asked to read all the essays and report when they are done.

[Calm]

Doubt your doubts before you doubt the essays!

it is not about taking the essays as final word on any subject, I consider them works in progress that will get updated if new info comes out.

I would just hope the essays would push people to explore history rather than reject or dismiss them outright. It is sad for me to see exposure to them result in the opposite of their intent, which is to be an aid in gospel study.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

Many people who want the Church to change things don't overtly belong to the protest organizations. I know some in this boat, and some of them post here. 

 

 

 

He knew full well that pulling in the 'Trib would "stir up trouble," and complaining about a release to the media is "antagonistic."   C'mon!

I might buy that, except for the fact that whole reason we are having this discussion is because he did NOT covertly express his views. Seems he has demonstrated that he is not afraid to take it on the chin.

[Calm]

If this is true, then I don't know where he has been for the past year. One of the S&I priorities for 2014–15 is "Seek Truth," which is code for helping students with questions and doubts. One of the resources teachers are encouraged to use are the Gospel Topics essays.

 

On the S&I website, on the "Seek Truth" page, under the section, "Help Students Find Answers," one sees this:

 

Gospel Topics

The ongoing enhancement of the gospel topics section on LDS.org can provide readers with accurate information as they seek answers to questions about the Church’s doctrine and history as well as other subjects. As students use this material as part of their effort to “seek learning, even by study and also by faith” (D&C 88:118), they can learn to discern between truth and error and be prepared to explain their beliefs to others.

 

Below it is a link to the Gospel Topics introduction page, which says, among other things:

 

We urge all to read the essays as written rather than relying on the characterization of their content by others.

The Church places great emphasis on knowledge and on the importance of being well informed about Church history, doctrine and practices. Ongoing historical research, revisions of the Church’s curriculum, and the use of new technologies allowing a more systematic and thorough study of scriptures have all been pursued by the Church to that end. We again encourage members to study the Gospel Topics essays cited in the links to the right as they “seek learning, even by study and also by faith.”

Is there any particular time of the year where a specific essay would likely be referenced?  I can see some teachers not being aware of specific essays because they haven't covered relevant topics yet, but it seems odd not to be aware of them at all.

[BlueDreams]

After the class, students told their families about the conversation. One parent complained to Dawson's bishop.

"Anything regarding black history before 1978 is irrelevant," Dawson recalls his bishop saying, "and a moot point."

Then, the former teacher says, his bishop insisted that Dawson agree never again to bring up the essay or discuss "black Mormon history" in the class.

Dawson declined — even after believing he would be "released" from teaching the class for disobedience.

 

 

My first thought was he should have taught this in February and everything would have been OK. 

 

My more serious thought is that this is irritating and disheartening. And this is not black mormon history...it's just mormon history, plain and simple.

 

What do you think?  Does the average member know about or even believe the explanations in the essays, whether this one or any other essay?

 

 

I don't know, i don't have a normal demo of friends and acquaintances....ie. young, college educated (a good number of those working on a masters or PhD), and a disproportionate amount who are people of color of some sort (compared to UT overall, at least). So with that in mind, then yes....my average is aware of it. I've heard people refer to it's existance even in church (I don't think I've seen it read in church yet). But I don't know how that translates to other demographics.

 

With luv,

BD

[ttribe]

Is there any particular time of the year where a specific essay would likely be referenced?  I can see some teachers not being aware of specific essays because they haven't covered relevant topics yet, but it seems odd not to be aware of them at all.

Totally anecdotal, but I've not been in a single Ward or Stake meeting where the mere existence of these essays was mentioned. No idea why that is the case in my little corner of the world, but there you have it.

[ALarson]

I just posted this on the other thread (about teaching the essays on the 5th Sunday), but I believe that getting the word out about the essays depends a lot on the Stake President.  If he has read them, sees value in them and wants the members to discuss the topics, he will instruct the ward leaders to make that happen (even if it's not a formal class, but just to incorporate them into their lessons).  If the Stake President doesn't feel this way (or is not familiar with the essays), I doubt Bishops are going to move ahead with any 5th Sunday discussions, lessons, etc., without approval.

 

It would be interesting to see what is going on with the other Bishops in the stake (in this story) and if the Stake President had given this Bishop any direction regarding the essays.

Edited May 5, 2015 by ALarson

[Calm]

 

It wasn't a physical letter mailed to Bishops and they didn't even receive a notice that there was something they needed to review. 

 

I am getting feedback that bishops are notified every time they log on if there is anything new added as well as one pretty sure that paper copies are sent out.

[Tacenda]

Totally anecdotal, but I've not been in a single Ward or Stake meeting where the mere existence of these essays was mentioned. No idea why that is the case in my little corner of the world, but there you have it.

Until it's in the curriculum it will be a rare occurrence, as we can see with this bishop's dismissal. Edited May 5, 2015 by Tacenda

[SmileyMcGee]

Which ancient prophet do you propose we follow?

Doesn't really matter, the "speaking as a man" position destroys the credibility of all prophets. Just go with your gut.

[Calm]

Until it's in correlation, it will be a rare occurrence, as we can see with this bishop's dismissal.

What do you mean by correlation?

[ttribe]

What do you mean by correlation?

I'm guessing she means the manuals and similar materials.

[teddyaware]

I know this was just published an hour ago but surprised it hadn't made it here yet...

 

http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/2475803-155/mormon-bishop-dismisses-teacher-for-using

 

 

I found this comment particularly interesting:

 

"It's "great" that the essay is on the church website, Smith says, "but people don't believe it."

It was neither signed nor penned by the governing First Presidency, nor has it been mentioned, alluded to, or footnoted in speeches by LDS authorities at the faith's semiannual General Conferences."

 

What do you think?  Does the average member know about or even believe the explanations in the essays, whether this one or any other essay?

 

And the the source of the problem maybe:

 

All of this upset and negative publicity could have easily been avoided if the Sunday school teacher had simply demonstrated some wisdom by answering the "Mormon youth's" question in a manner becoming a testimony-bearing member of the LDS Church. When the teacher was asked why his Nigerian wife and family joined a church that once barred black men from holding its priesthood, all he had to say in response is that his wife and family know by the power of the Holy Ghost that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Lord's one true Church, and because his wife and family know the Church is true they have full confidence when the time is right God will provide perfectly logical and reasonable answers as to why in His mysterious economy black men were temporarily barred from holding the priesthood.

Edited May 5, 2015 by teddyaware

[Calm]

It has been a few years since I have been ward librarian, but even then they were including videos and other stuff that were not in hardcopy but only accessible through lds.org in lesson plans iirc.

[Tacenda]

I'm guessing she means the manuals and similar materials.

Yeah, thanks for making sense of my post.

[Calm]

All of this upset and negative publicity could have easily been avoided if the Sunday school teacher had simply demonstrated some wisdom by answering the "Mormon youth's" question in a manner becoming a testimony-bearing member of the LDS Church. When the teacher was asked why his Nigerian wife and family joined a church that once barred black men from holding its priesthood, all he had to say in response is that his wife and family know by the power of the Holy Ghost that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Lord's one true Church, and because his wife and family know the Church is true they have full confidence when the time is right God will provide perfectly logical and reasonable answers as to why in His mysterious economy black men were temporarily barred from holding the priesthood.

But why not also use the information provided by the Church to provide background to the second question asked ("Why, the student wanted to know, was the ban instituted in the first place?") especially given the leadership has said it is appropriate to use them in teaching?

Edited May 5, 2015 by calmoriah

[CA Steve]

All of this upset and negative publicity could have easily been avoided if the Sunday school teacher had simply demonstrated some wisdom by answering the "Mormon youth's" question in a manner becoming a testimony-bearing member of the LDS Church. When the teacher was asked why his Nigerian wife and family joined a church that once barred black men from holding its priesthood, all he had to say in response is that his wife and family know by the power of the Holy Ghost that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Lord's one true Church, and because his wife and family know the Church is true they have full confidence when the time is right God will provide perfectly logical and reasonable answers as to why in His mysterious economy black men were temporarily barred from holding the priesthood.

At about the same age as the members of this class, I sat with my family in a tithing settlement meeting with the bishop. During the meeting the well meaning bishop turned to me and asked me if I knew how lucky I was to have been chosen to be sent to my family. Without missing a beat I responded: "How do you know I didn't argue and lose?"

 

Youth tend to ask questions that don't allow for simple testimony bearing, nor should they be all answered that way.

 

The reality is you don't know what the situation was in the classroom and, like a lot of other people here, are condemning a member with limited information. He may very well have answered at first as you describe and then in response to further questioning went exactly where he should have gone, to a Church approved source designed for exactly this type of situation, and provided the appropriate materials.

 

If we were to follow your approach we could just eliminate all Sunday School classes and hold testimony meetings all day.

Edited May 5, 2015 by CA Steve

[BlueDreams]

All of this upset and negative publicity could have easily been avoided if the Sunday school teacher had simply demonstrated some wisdom by answering the "Mormon youth's" question in a manner becoming a testimony-bearing member of the LDS Church. When the teacher was asked why his Nigerian wife and family joined a church that once barred black men from holding its priesthood, all he had to say in response is that his wife and family know by the power of the Holy Ghost that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is the Lord's one true Church, and because his wife and family know the Church is true they have full confidence when the time is right God will provide perfectly logical and reasonable answers as to why in His mysterious economy black men were temporarily barred from holding the priesthood.

 

Who said he didn't bare testimony....in 1-2 hrs of lessons (it sounded as if the questions was answered the next week or something) I'm assuming he probably bore testimony that they were converted to the gospel. But that's not really answering the entirety of the question. It's a question that suggest minimal knowledge about our history from the questioner. I don't see the point of giving an answer pointing to the mysteries and whimsy and then leaving them, probably unsatisfied and still oblivious, when there can be answers that were approved by the presidency found on LDS.org....meant specifically to answer said questions. To me that's not solving a problem. I'm more concerned about having youth that are more aware of finding channels and learn to wrestling productively with difficult topics than have youth that get broadsided later or are left assuming there is nothing beyond testimony to make sense of a spotty past...particularly if their testimony still needs improvement.

 

With luv,

BD