Bishop Dismisses Sunday School Teacher For Using Essay.

[canard78]

It sounds like he went to the media, which people react to more than they probably would otherwise because now everyone knows what happened

 

 

Well someone definitely did, and then he didn't refuse an interview (which he probably should have).

 

 

I don't agree with how the local leaders handled it, but the glaring question is how did the newspaper find out about it?

 

If I have a disagreement with my local leaders, I certainly am NOT going to talk to a newspaper about it - or any other media outlet.

 

 

I would bet that this teacher and the Bishop had had discussions before.

 

 

I have my doubts about this being the whole story. It is amazing how one side is the hero and the other behaving scandalously when the story is told by the "hero".

 

 

The fact that this hit the media means that there is a lot more to the story than is represented. 

 

So just to check... rather than discuss the actual topic at hand, you'd prefer to discuss the people in the story and draw your own conclusions about the people involved with a limited supply of facts? Seems par for the course from many of you.

 

Are the essays appropriate lesson material for teenagers or not? Is the church the right venue for discussing the essays?

[Calm]

Are the essays appropriate lesson material for teenagers or not? Is the church the right venue for discussing the essays?

The Gospel Topics link is included in the main menu for the lds.org youth page:

https://www.lds.org/youth?lang=eng

It is also the top suggestion aid under Prepare A Talk.

Edited May 6, 2015 by calmoriah

[canard78]

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.

 

Out of interest Teddy, under what circumstances should a teenagers concern about Mormon history or doctrine be addressed directly? Should it always be simply answered with the overbearing and implied dismissiveness that your response suggests?

 

I often think of Alma teaching his three sons. He gets to Corianton and, in chapter 40, says:

 

...here is somewhat more I would say unto thee; for I perceive that thy mind is worried...

 

 

And again at the start of 41, he says:

 

And I perceive that thy mind has been worried also concerning this thing. But behold, I will explain it unto thee.

 

 

What he doesn't do is bare a curt and dismissive testimony. Instead he shows a willingness to fully engage in the topic. He expounds, teaches and even speculates with a level of uncertainty.

 

When I knew Jeff Lindsay he would often reference this conversation in lessons when the topic of doubts or concerns came up. He felt that it was far better to encourage questions and discussions than to squash or ignore the questions.

[mormonnewb]

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. 

 

So how should he have handled it?  Just sit down, shut up and let the race problem keep festering in the Church?

[canard78]

The Gospel Topics link is included in the main menu for the lds.org youth page:

https://www.lds.org/youth?lang=eng

It is also the top suggestion aid under Prepare A Talk.

 

Thanks

[mormonnewb]

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.

 

And what if that is not the case?  What if, like some people on this board, had the Church not gotten the memo back in 1978, his wife would have told the missionaries to take a hike?

 

Should he had lied for the sake of being a "testimony-bearing member of the LDS Church?"

[JLHPROF]

So just to check... rather than discuss the actual topic at hand, you'd prefer to discuss the people in the story and draw your own conclusions about the people involved with a limited supply of facts? Seems par for the course from many of you.

 

Are the essays appropriate lesson material for teenagers or not? Is the church the right venue for discussing the essays?

 

Personally I was just responding to a comment on the topic.

And this might surprise you, but I agree with you.  I didn't post this so we could debate the teacher, but I was more interested in the use of the essays in a lesson and the Bishop's objection to it.

[Thinking]

When you can't articulate a sound rebuttal, speciously jump to a sensationalistic buzz phrase.

 

It's a tired-and-true tactic, I suppose.

 

Sometimes the buzz phrase so perfectly fits that anything else just wouldn't cut it.

[teddyaware]

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 

 

While there isn't enough information provided to know what might have gone on in the class that may have prompted the "Mormon youth" to entertain and then ask his two VERY UNUSUAL questions, I'm still somewhat suspicious it might have been the teacher's own discussion points that caused the questions to enter into the youth's mind in the first place. I'm doubtful there is a specific lesson in any of the LDS Sunday school manuals for the youth that would contain the kind of information that would spur the sort of thinking that prompted this youth to ask his two extraordinary questions.

 

Could it be that the teacher was "hot to trot" about wanting to delve into controversial material with the young people under his charge, and for that reason it was he who brought up the subject in the first place? I don't know. But I wouldn't at all be surprised if it did turn out the teacher was the one who started the ball rolling because this otherwise obscure incident somehow wound up in the pages of the Salt Lake City Tribune -- media resource numero uno for apostates and the disaffected.

 

At any rate, if I was the teacher it would never even enter into my mind to attempt to broach such a sensitive subject with the youth under my sacred charge, when to my way of thinking it's the child's own parents and/or the bishop who should address such a controversial subjects. I wouldn't even try such a stunt with adults, let alone with the delicate and impressionable minds of our youth. For this reason I think it's possible we're dealing with another overwrought ark-steadier. 

 

Edited to add: newby, Alma was the boy's father, not his sunday school teacher.

Edited May 6, 2015 by teddyaware

[rongo]

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.

Correction. He's "telling people what [he claims] transpired." It's interesting how people sort themselves in reacting to this. The other side is just as knee-jerk in assuming and assigning motives as yours/mine. You (and predictably, others) automatically assume that his account is 100% how it happened. I (and predictably, others) automatically assume that there is more to the story and that involving the media in levying criticism is a big red flag.

 

 

 

Oriented towards the Church? The Bishop isn't the Church. If the bishop was wrong, he was wrong.

 

Which is your (and others') default assumption, that everything in the article (which, again, only has one side) is true and accurate and that the bishop is wrong.

 

As far as orientation towards the Church, anyone want to guess how stemelbow, Jeanne, Tacenda, JulieM, etc. have reacted to this? Or, rongo, Russell McGregor, etc.? It is predictable, on both sides. My side is just pointing out why we see red flags with the article's representation.

 

 

 

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.

Edited May 6, 2015 by rongo

[Coreyb]

Whatever the rest of the story may or may not be, church published material aught to be allowed to answer questions in church sponsored classes. Sorry, not all youth are innocent precious and fragile little minds that must be protected. I asked those types of questions and at a much younger age than fourteen

[The Nehor]

So just to check... rather than discuss the actual topic at hand, you'd prefer to discuss the people in the story and draw your own conclusions about the people involved with a limited supply of facts? Seems par for the course from many of you.

 

Are the essays appropriate lesson material for teenagers or not? Is the church the right venue for discussing the essays?

 

Can we discuss Canard78's wife-beating. I know he will try to derail it with trying to cast doubt on the people making the accusations but can we please accept that we do not have all the facts about whether he beats his wife and just assume the story is true and discuss his wife-beating please?

[mormonnewb]

Can we discuss Canard78's wife-beating. I know he will try to derail it with trying to cast doubt on the people making the accusations but can we please accept that we do not have all the facts about whether he beats his wife and just assume the story is true and discuss his wife-beating please?

 

But no one is making such accusations against Canard.  Or are you just now making such an accusation?  Otherwise, your analogy fails.

[CA Steve]

While there isn't enough information provided to know what might have gone on in the class that may have prompted the "Mormon youth" to entertain and then ask his two VERY UNUSUAL questions, I'm still somewhat suspicious it might have been the teacher's own discussion points that caused the questions to enter into the youth's mind in the first place. I'm doubtful there is a specific lesson in any of the LDS Sunday school manuals for the youth that would contain the kind of information that would spur the sort of thinking that prompted this youth to ask his two extraordinary questions.

 

Could it be that the teacher was "hot to trot" about wanting to delve into controversial material with the young people under his charge, and for that reason it was he who brought up the subject in the first place? I don't know. But I wouldn't at all be surprised if it did turn out the teacher was the one who started the ball rolling because this otherwise obscure incident somehow wound up in the pages of the Salt Lake City Tribune -- media resource numero uno for apostates and the disaffected.

 

At any rate, if I was the teacher it would never even enter into my mind to attempt to broach such a sensitive subject with the youth under my sacred charge, when to my way of thinking it's the child's own parents and/or the bishop who should address such a controversial subjects. I wouldn't even try such a stunt with adults, let alone with the delicate and impressionable minds of our youth. For this reason I think it's possible we're dealing with another overwrought ark-steadier. 

 

Edited to add: newby, Alma was the boy's father, not his sunday school teacher.

Young men who are old enough to hold the priesthood are also old enough to be taught why young men the same age but of different skin color were denied the same right. And based on how the bishop and at least one parent reacted, it is quite clear leaving it up to either of them would be the wrong decision.

[Robert F. Smith]

............................................

The Bishop is not King. He is a servant of each member of the ward.

I thought Jesus taught us that he who would be king must be servant of all.  King Benjamin said the same thing.  A local bishop is both boss and servant.  That's the way it works.

[ttribe]

I thought Jesus taught us that he who would be king must be servant of all.  King Benjamin said the same thing.  A local bishop is both boss and servant.  That's the way it works.

 

Pretty sure HJW was recently Bishop of his ward.

[Robert F. Smith]

Young men who are old enough to hold the priesthood are also old enough to be taught why young men the same age but of different skin color were denied the same right. And based on how the bishop and at least one parent reacted, it is quite clear leaving it up to either of them would be the wrong decision.

So, who ya gonna call?  Ghostbusters?

 

Whatever the rest of the story may or may not be, church published material aught to be allowed to answer questions in church sponsored classes. Sorry, not all youth are innocent precious and fragile little minds that must be protected. I asked those types of questions and at a much younger age than fourteen

Yeah, how old was Joseph Smith when he first started asking the hard questions?

[deli_llama]

While there isn't enough information provided to know what might have gone on in the class that may have prompted the "Mormon youth" to entertain and then ask his two VERY UNUSUAL questions, I'm still somewhat suspicious it might have been the teacher's own discussion points that caused the questions to enter into the youth's mind in the first place. I'm doubtful there is a specific lesson in any of the LDS Sunday school manuals for the youth that would contain the kind of information that would spur the sort of thinking that prompted this youth to ask his two extraordinary questions.

Really? There isn't enough information? This occurred in Honolulu, a racially diverse region. Having lived there for over a decade, it has been my observation that youth of this age openly talk about, and have questions about, race and the church/priesthood. It is not unusual for these types of questions and conversations to occur in a church setting. I don't know for sure of course, but this is something that could have easily been prompted by the class and not the teacher.

Conversations about race are not unusual in Hawaii, inside and outside of the church.

[Kenngo1969]

I would bet that this teacher and the Bishop had had discussions before.

Hmmm ... is there an essay on ... [Dun-dun-dun!] gambling?  (Sorry; couldn't resist!  Carry on!)

[JulieM]

Hmmm ... is there an essay on ... [Dun-dun-dun!] gambling?  (Sorry; couldn't resist!  Carry on!)

Now, that's funny

I love your posts and they add some comic relief here! (And, they're also pretty insightful too. I enjoy reading them.)

[The Nehor]

But no one is making such accusations against Canard.  Or are you just now making such an accusation?  Otherwise, your analogy fails.

 

One of the major difficulties Nehor experienced in his relationship with mormonnewb was learning to distinguish between him pretending to be stupid just to get people off their guard, pretending to be stupid because he couldn't be bothered to think and wanted someone else to do it for him, pretending to be outrageously stupid to hide the fact that he actually didn’t understand what was going on, and really being genuinely stupid. He was renowned for being amazingly clever and quite clearly was so—but not all the time, which obviously worried him, hence, the act. He preferred people to be puzzled rather than contemptuous.

 

Edit: A cookie for the person who knows where this quote was pulled from before I mangled it.

Edited May 6, 2015 by The Nehor

[CA Steve]

So, who ya gonna call?  Ghostbusters?

 

 

Actually I think it takes a community. In the case in question the bishop failed to allow material specifically created for that exact purpose into the classroom and even removed the teacher from his position for doing so. Additionally there was at least one parent upset that the Church approved material was being used in the classroom and complained about it. As we have seen throughout this thread, there are numerous examples of people who either do not accept the essays or somehow believe that 12 year old children, some of which actually are given the priesthood at that age, are at the same time,  incapable of understanding such discussions, an age at which these very discussion should be taking place and in public, not hidden away as if it were some sensitive secret that the Church denied black people the priesthood for over a century.

So instead of relying on a single source or even two, it should be from a variety of sources, like conference talks, sacrament meeting talks, Sunday school lessons, seminary classes and so on. There are lots of opportunities to educate ourselves. We should take advantage of them all.

[teddyaware]

Young men who are old enough to hold the priesthood are also old enough to be taught why young men the same age but of different skin color were denied the same right. And based on how the bishop and at least one parent reacted, it is quite clear leaving it up to either of them would be the wrong decision.

 

The one-sided Tribune article doesn't provide enough perspective and information from the bishop's point of view for anyone to be able to rightly conclude that facts of this case are "quite clear." For all any of us know, this particular incident could have been the straw that broke the proverbial camel's back as a long-suffering bishop finally got to the point where he could no longer ignore rebellious and insubordinate behavior. I don't know. But one thing is for sure, it's almost always a bad idea to prematurely draw hard and fast conclusions after hearing only one side of a story.  

[deli_llama]

Edit: A cookie for the person who knows where this quote was pulled from before I mangled it.

The answer is 42, but I don't think that is what you are looking for, so... Douglas Adams. My towel is packed, and I will take that cookie now.

[JulieM]

The one-sided Tribune article doesn't provide enough perspective and information from the bishop's point of view for anyone to be able to rightly conclude that facts of this case are "quite clear." For all any of us know, this particular incident could have been the straw that broke the proverbial camel's back as a long-suffering bishop finally got to the point where he could no longer ignore rebellious and insubordinate behavior. I don't know. But one thing is for sure, it's almost always a bad idea to prematurely draw hard and fast conclusions after hearing only one side of a story.

I actually agree with you. We don't have the Bishop's side of the story and I imagine his leaders have asked him not to speak out about it. We really don't even know for sure how familiar the Bishop was with the essay on the blacks and the Priesthood until now. We also don't know who went to the press, but we do know that whoever it was had to have known that it wouldn't be a positive for the church. But, the ward and stake leaders need to be familiar with the essays and their purpose, that it's ok to use them to answer questions they're asked and to teach ward members about them. If anything good comes out of this, that will be it.