Need help with Seminary lesson!!

I also think there is a general misunderstanding of the new and everlasting covenant in the church. We so often attach “of marriage” to the end of new and everlasting covenant either consciously or subconsciously. Marriage is a part of the new and everlasting covenant, but the new and everlasting covenant is the fullness of the gospel. Here are some quotes I used in a talk about covenants I gave last year:

Joseph Fielding Smith: The new and everlasting covenant is the fullness of the gospel. It is composed of ‘All covenants, contracts, bonds, obligations, oaths, vows, performances, connections, associations, or expectations’ that are sealed upon members of the Church by the Holy Spirit of promise, or the Holy Ghost, by the authority of the President of the Church who holds the keys. The President of the Church holds the keys of the Melchizedek Priesthood. He delegates authority to others and authorizes them to perform the sacred ordinances of the priesthood.

Marriage for eternity is a new and everlasting covenant. Baptism is also a new and everlasting covenant, and likewise ordination to the priesthood and every other covenant is everlasting and a part of the new and everlasting covenant which embraces all things. (Answers to Gospel Questions, 1:65.)

Elder Christofferson: The scriptures speak of the new and everlasting covenant. The new and everlasting covenant is the gospel of Jesus Christ. In other words, the doctrines and commandments of the gospel constitute the substance of an everlasting covenant between God and man that is newly restored in each dispensation. If we were to state the new and everlasting covenant in one sentence it would be this: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” (GC April 2009)

D&C 66:2: Verily I say unto you, blessed are you for receiving mine everlasting covenant, even the fullness of my gospel, sent forth unto the children of men, that they might have life and be made partakers of the glories which are to be revealed in the last days, as it was written by the prophets and apostles in days of old.

Wow… this is a really tough one. I would be tempted to do one of the following:

– ask someone else to teach it

– declare a picnic day and skip that lesson

In other words, I would be tempted to avoid. But I don’t think you should… and ultimately, I don’t think I would. The reason is simple. If you don’t talk to them about it, they are either going to hear nothing (damaging) or hear it from a polygamy-friendly source (more damaging). I believe polygamy is an affront against all women because it says, right there in Section 132, that women have as their crowning achievement, being added glory for an exalted man. I think we all need to stand up when we can and refute that. But it has to be done in a way that is respectful of the trust the Church has placed in you by making you a seminary teacher, or you will lose effectiveness.

I like Ray’s approach, but let me add some other thoughts.

– Eternal Marriage and Polygamy are closely related. IMO the former led to the latter. In the 1840’s, the reality was that people often remarried after the death of a spouse. That significantly complicated the concept of Eternal Marriage. My own view is that Eternal Marriage is one of the very best doctrines of the Church, but that it could only answer the obvious questions by polygamy; the single worst doctrine. I’m not saying that you teach that, but just background for you to consider.

– Because of the above, I would talk about the wonder of Eternal Marriage. Focus heavily on that. Then I think I would say about polygamy: “We don’t know what was going on there, polygamy caused the death of JS and the expulsion of his followers, and yet was later abandoned. I’m glad we don’t practice it now, and I think we should all live our lives as if there is no polygamy either here and now or later on. In the past, women were often relegated to second-class-ness. But now, in the 21st Century, how can we learn from those experiences and build a better concept of God, Church, Men, Women, Salvation? I think I could get the question out there, and the follow-on discussion without either supporting or rejecting polygamy out-right. I would love to reject polygamy, and I might do so if I were in someone else’s lesson, but as the seminary teacher, you have to be able to bridge the gap.

– I would avoid any speculation about the future of polygamy.

– I would prepare by reading the two essays that the Church has published about polygamy https://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-in-kirtland-and-nauvoo and https://www.lds.org/topics/plural-marriage-in-the-church-of-jesus-christ-of-latter-day-saints … I still think they are not strong enough, but they set boundaries about what you can freely say without riling up parents or Church leaders.

– I would wrap up by getting back to the part of 132 that we do still follow: Eternal Marriage, and how it is such a uniquely LDS doctrine, and how glad we are for that.

– I would continually focus on the here and now, not trying to analyze either what was going on then, or what will happen in the next life. The Gospel belongs to the living.

This may not fit. My husband and I team taught seminary nearly a decade ago and much has changed, but when I did I completely skipped anything about polygamy or marriage. To me 132 leaves so many people out. What about single people who never get sealed, or inter-faith couples, or the single child who joined our church when his family didn’t.

For me I took the lesson and basically shared my personal likes about temple work. I talked about things like doing baptism for the dead, for doing proxy work, for binding families and individuals. I choose to do it that way, because weeks earlier I had been introduced to Joseph’s polygamy after calling the Church History Department and I couldn’t wrap my head around 132 or early church to save my life. It was the best way around I had at the time.

I am struggling with how to teach some lessons coming up, but wondering why some of this stuff is in the manual? Have they always taught this?

The lesson on polygamy, D&C 132, is coming up in a few weeks. They have the kids read D&C 132 vs 3-6 and this is what they say: The new and everlasting covenant” in these verses refers to eternal marriage between a man and one woman and not to plural marriage. The individual who has entered into the covenant of eternal marriage has the obligation to live up to that covenant or be damned. “For of him unto whom much is given, much is required; and he who sins against the greater light shall receive the greater condemnation” (D&C 82:3).

So why would it be interpreted this way now, if the whole section is on the revelation on polygamy? I am so confused and am scared the kids will ask me this. Although, they dont usually pick up on these things and I am sure I never did either. I was a teenager and didnt care too much to delve into anything. How would you guys teach this?

Hi, slowly… Good luck with this. My daughter’s class is getting close, too. Teaching the history is one thing. The question is, what are those quiet girls who aren’t saying anything thinking? What has the lesson told them about God and themselves?

I have read so many examples of women that this issue really is painful. Something that most of us guys get creeped out about polygamy, but it does not make us feel “less than”. The more I have heard these the more I realize how different it can feel for a man vs a woman.

This may not fit. My husband and I team taught seminary nearly a decade ago and much has changed, but when I did I completely skipped anything about polygamy or marriage. To me 132 leaves so many people out. What about single people who never get sealed, or inter-faith couples, or the single child who joined our church when his family didn’t.

For me I took the lesson and basically shared my personal likes about temple work. I talked about things like doing baptism for the dead, for doing proxy work, for binding families and individuals. I choose to do it that way, because weeks earlier I had been introduced to Joseph’s polygamy after calling the Church History Department and I couldn’t wrap my head around 132 or early church to save my life. It was the best way around I had at the time.

mom3, I do appreciate this! I think there are times that I just have to find a way to get around a topic rather than run through it. I just dont want my kids to think I am avoiding a topic, especially when they see these topics online and know what we will talk about in class. I usually am a “tell it like it is” kind of person, but being so confused, I am just trying to finish off this seminary year without ruffling feathers with parents or causing my kids to wonder whats wrong with their teacher. I never anticipated my life changing, I never anticipated my faith flipping on me, and I never would have guessed that it would happen all during my time teaching church history. A bit of a mess. So any advice is so welcome since my brain is mush and my ideas are failing!

The nice thing in my area right now is that I am teaching only one night a week and the rest is done online. So my kids feel much more comfortable sharing their feelings and questions because it is done through the computer. They open up so much more online than they do in class!! Its been great. I am constantly telling them that I am not afraid of honesty or questions, so they definitely ask. I got some good ones this year and one that caught me a bit off guard (because only a week earlier my FC had begun) was about the witnesses and how could they possibly have left the church if they saw all of those things. It was a great opener for a discussion on having a FC and what that means for different people. I hope that if the girls have any worries, they would message me, but you just never know with teens sometimes. The boys tend to be more forth coming with these questions though. Luckily they have such an open teacher???

Very cool! Fingers crossed for you.

One of the hardest things for me when I learned about the extent of Joseph Smith’s polygamy and polyandry is that I’m over 40 years old, and have gone to church every week my whole life, and attended seminary, institute and BYU religion classes, and I Never Knew This Stuff! I felt like I’d been lied to and deliberately deceived. That was the hard part for me. It was the shock to the system, not that Joseph had 33 wives and married women that were already married. They will find out about it eventually anyway. In this internet age it is no longer possible to keep information under wraps. Who would you rather they hear it from? You, or a bitter apostate who can prove it’s true? So I think that it is in the best interest of the church to inoculate the youth with this information while they are young and flexible. At least cover the information as it is presented in the new church essays, which is as faith-promoting as possible.