- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Introduction and OutlookMy intention for this thread is to consider what we can and should do so that our kids are prepared to at least a basic degree when they run into some of the historical and doctrinal issues that have derailed so many young adults and older members who felt they were blindsided and deceived because they didn’t have a clue about the problems.
There are two places that we will be primarily discussing this issue: the first will be at Church, in Sunday School (note that I don’t think there is much need for such sensitization in Primary, I could be wrong let me know what you think) and at home. If you have kids at home you have both the formal opportunity provided by Family Home Evening lessons and the much broader field of the “teachable moments” all thoughout the day.
There is no need to force our own concerns and worries onto our kids. By and large they don’t have to deal with or understand Joseph Smith’s polyandry until they are firmly adults but by the same token they do need to understand that the Church practiced plural marriage for a significant amount of time and that it had many benefits and some negatives.
Issue by IssueI think I will work in the thread to bring up specific issues and look at how we can approach them with kids and within what contexts. Please feel free to add in your own issues that you would like to see discussed and considered. I expect we will be at this for a little while and in some ways we may well be bringing up topics that are parts of very long already exisiting threads here at the site. This is NOT the place to work through our issues, those threads are the place for our own musing, here we want to try and stay focused on how and when to introduce kids to some of the issues. In a practical sense I expect to be heading back to John Dehlin’s “Why people leave the Church” presentation to bring on over another issue to discuss whenever we seem to have beaten one idea or another to death
😆 .AttitudeThe overall attitude I think is one where we don’t want to immerse kids in the gritty history in a detailed way but rather that we want them to have from a fairly young age a sense that the history and the doctrine have some fairly complicated areas but that they already know the basics and that people that they love and trust know that and have shared some insights with them. Another way of putting it is to make sure that they don’t think that the history of the Church in particular is a Disney movie where all the Church members are wonderful, perfect, never faltering, always right and the pirates are very, very evil.
Ground RulesSo, if you can restrain yourself, let’s just consider our “ground rules” for the discussion in the thread before we start bringing up specific issues and ideas. Of course you are free to respond however you want but it would help if we thought about the purposes before we get into the specifics. So for example do we want everything in this thread, potentially extending to many pages (which is OK) or do we want to use this thread to “announce” a new topic and then start a new thread maybe with each of them have “Preparing: ” or “Innoculating: ” as the first word in the title? Perhaps that is all a bit too organized so let’s talk.
Bill- No matter how organized you want it to be, it’s going to become what it becomes.
😆 I guess you’re fishing for topics. A tough one for me right now is the priesthood. Since it was a new school year, I did the annual father’s blessing (which everyone enjoys). Of course, as most here know, I resigned as a member of the church so, in the church’s eyes, I no longer hold the priesthood. My DW and I have decided that as the patriarch of the home, I can at least call on the name of Jesus Christ to bless her and my children.
My ten-year-old, however, caught on to this. “How can you give us a blessing if you don’t have the priesthood anymore?” Now, we never told him that this was a consequence of my resigning, either he figured it out (probably) or someone told him (possibly).
Obviously, my situation is unique but my question is more general. What is priesthood power at stage 2, stage 3, stage 4? And, I know every kid is different but, at what age, generally, would you expose them to those thoughts, understandings in each of those stages in the process?
I’m guessing in stage 2, “the force” from star wars is probably a reasonable explanation. (my kids love star wars)
The best inoculation method, imo, is simply creating an open environment where children feel comfortable asking anything – and teaching them what you consider to be correct principles – and being willing to entertain unique perspectives from them. When your children ask a question, do you give them an answer – or do you ask them what they think. When they tell you what they think, do you try to build on their understanding and help them see multiple perspectives – or do you “correct” them or merely validate their still immature understanding? Do you encourage them to think – or merely to memorize?
When you read the scriptures with them, do you just read as much as you can cover – or do you discuss every verse and/or passage to make sure they have a chance to understand what it says (and, in some cases, differing opinions on what it says)?
I could go on, but the key is pretty simple. I just wish, sometimes, it was easy.
I think that Ray has outlined the key attitude and strategy for dealing with children and teenagers, being open and developing understanding from where they are right now in their life. His description and options for dealing with kids is a model for both parenting and teaching in the Church, thanks Ray. Priesthood
The “power to act in the name of God” is generally a fairly stable concept for kids and there is little need to prepare them for any issues. The problem comes in adulthood when a person loses faith in just about everything that the Church represents, often including faith in God, but still wants to remain within the social structure of the Church often for family reasons. In this situation you get the classic dilemma of a father without faith though still holding the priesthood faced with blessing a new baby, baptizing childen at 8 years old, and ordaining teenage sons as they move through the priesthood offices. This is a moral and family issue for the adult and can greatly affect the children but it is not an inevitable result of moving from a Stage 3 faith though Stage 4 and into Stage 5. In terms of kids and teenagers I think the major need is simply to provide an open, caring, compasionate approach to all aspects of life.
For the father or husband in this situation it can be a major crisis. Your bishop is going to be the key player in these situations and will in fact have the power of decision making if you have discussed your ongoing faith crisis with him or been in for a temple interview and have been honest about your belief in the Church. As long as a man is still virtuously holding the priesthood and is willing to have a mustard seed of faith (even if that is just in the possibility there might be a God) I think the ordinances can be performed by the father and will still be valid because of the faith of the child and the seed of faith still in the father. It is complex and different Bishops will deal with it in different ways hopefully compassionately and with an understanding that a crisis in faith can be worked through to a successful conclusion if the people around the situation are truly Christlike.
swimordie, your situation is painful and I really appreciate your courage in sharing it. Personally I think that you are completely correct, you can certainly give father’s blessings in the name of Jesus Christ and I suspect that Jesus is completely satisfied with them and supports you in doing so.
Quote:We believe the Bible to be the word of God as far as it is translated correctly; we also believe the Book of Mormon to be the word of God.
as a Church we still tend to present both the Bible and especially the Book of Mormon as inerrant documents. This is especially true for the Book of Mormon which is continually trumpeted as “the most perfect book in the world” by both speakers and people bearing testimonies. If that is all a person hears in Church then they are wide open and very vulnerable to a successful attack on their faith when someone or some web site reveals to them that for the Book of Mormon there has been well over 3000 corrections made.
It is very easy to let Sunday School youth know that there have been many corrections to both the Book of Mormon and the Doctrine and Covenants most of them made under the direction of Joseph Smith in the 1830s as the Church prepared to print the second editions of both books. In teaching the D&C this year to my class I have gone through the complete “publishing history” of the D&C several times, emphasizing and discussing the changes made by Joseph between the non-published Book of Commandments and the 1835 Doctrine & Covenants.
Youth have no trouble with this issue when presented in a faithful context especially when they understand that with the Book of Mormon, for example, the manuscript itself had little or no punctuation, therefore a lot of difficutly with where the sentences were, and no paragraphs. With the Doctrine & Covenants it is very important for students to understand that to Joseph and by extension to the Church, though we tend to forget it easily, on-going revelation is more important than received scripture and that with the D&C particularly and mostly with the 1835 revision Joseph was still continually receiving more light, more revelation as he was editing.
I think I will do a separate post on how important it is to have students understand the nature of revelation and how Joseph was continually prompted by experiences to seek further truth continually.
Next No Brainer”>
Far too many members seem to feel that God reaches down into the prophet’s being (Joseph in our case mostly) and uses him as a modified word processing machine in order to get HIS word’s down on paper. Whatever comes out many members assume that the exact wording, the spelling, the punctuation, all of it is exactly what God dictated and it is SACRED, HOLY and UNCHANGEABLE.
It isn’t like that as Oliver Cowdery found out early in Church history (D&C 9) and which gives this advice on revelation:
(D&C 9:8-9)
8 But, behold, I say unto you, that you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right, and if it is right I will cause that your bosom shall burn within you; therefore, you shall feel that it is right.
9 But if it be not right you shall have no such feelings, but you shall have a stupor of thought that shall cause you to forget the thing which is wrong; therefore, you cannot write that which is sacred save it be given you from me.
There are three things happening here as revelation comes and each of them is full of messyness and potential difficulty and it is clearly apparent that Heavenly Father is quite willing for us to get a close approximation and run with it and not correct us even if we are a bit off.
I think it boils down to a few childish ideas that we get and often don’t let go of:
1 – Followership
2 – Perfectionism
3 – Literalism
Those are just a few thoughts on this important topic. But kids don’t necessarily begin to see things with more nuance from childhood. Often this comes as we grow up.
I have tried to do as Ray suggested, keep things open, but have found they don’t know what to ask, and I am not sure where to start. I want to be careful not to teach “all things are relative, so nothing really matters” or “it is what you make it” … since I don’t think that benefits my kids in trying to live their lives while gaining maturity and perspective. But I have shared with them I am still searching and learning for answers, and they seem to respect that and come to me quickly right after a question arises (sometimes even call me at work).
And so I have felt it important to first instill the idea of self-confidence…faith is trust in God and trust in yourself. Similar to Hawk’s perfectionism, I believe they need to have faith in God and at the same time accept the leaders (and their parents) aren’t perfect, and so they are allowed to think for themselves. Most of my discussions with my kids come from a lesson with something they don’t think sounds right, or a leader that says something they wonder about, and I stress to them they need to understand respect for those leaders, but not blind faith.
So far, that groundwork has led to discussions on: polygamy, chastity, priesthood, revelation, and temples.
Hawkgirl
It think you have nailed the “psychological profile” of the Stage 3 believer: follows the prophet and their culture, everything about the “true church” is perfect, and looks at scriptures and General Authority messages as literal truth from Heaven. Great post. Now this is a fine place for early teenagers to be in but even here we have to start letting them know that the scientific stuff they are being exposed to every day at school is a very good approximation of the truth and that the Devil and his minions didn’t spend a few thousand years setting up all the fossils in the ground just to mess with human minds.
It is not that we have to hit them over the head with information just that they need to know it is alright to seek for scientific truth and eventually it will all get sorted out satisfactorily AND that on most scientific issues the Church has no official policy and probably more important that the ramblings of numerous General Authorities are just that, ramblings not scipture.
Heber13
I think you are doing fine.
And so I have felt it important to first instill the idea of self-confidence…faith is trust in God and trust in yourself. Similar to Hawk’s perfectionism, I believe they need to have faith in God and at the same time accept the leaders (and their parents) aren’t perfect, and so they are allowed to think for themselves. Most of my discussions with my kids come from a lesson with something they don’t think sounds right, or a leader that says something they wonder about, and I stress to them they need to understand respect for those leaders, but not blind faith.
Your approach is low key, you let them bring it forward, you help them to understand that faith in the gospel isn’t a contradition to all this stuff. I think your kids will be able to handle the issues when they come up, they will know that the Church has some messy stuff but so do all religions.
Next No Brainer: Prophets and Apostles are people
Most of the time
And Seers and Revelators only once in awhile
One of the major hunting grounds for anti-Mormons and a mine field for faithful Mormons has always been the Journal of Discourses. There we find Brigham Young explaining numerous times his Adam is God theory which does NOT make it Mormon doctrine, it was just one of Brigham’s hobby horses, something like my obsession with the prophet Zenos (I keep searching in the scriptures for stuff I think was first written by Zenos — I know a bit of a wild goose chase but a good illustration).
Kids need to understand that even current articles in the Ensign and Conference talks are by an large just that “talks”, with the same sort of doctrinal status as the talks they hear each week in Sacrament meeting. At some future date I have no doubt that we will begin to “canonize” (make officially a scripture) some of the talks, sermons and even books that some of our General Authorities have written since the move to Utah BUT until that happens everything is just opinion.
I find the Mark Hoffman affair a good example of how we know the General Authorities are just people like you and me. I greatly regret that two people were killed by Mark Hoffman as his scam to sell fraudulent Mormon documents came apart but the larger issue for me is that many General Authorities were fooled by Mark Hoffman, they were impressed at the documents he had “found in Texas” (Texas was a good place to have the documents come from for two reasons: 1) Lyman Wight had let a factional group into Texas as part of the succession crisis when Joseph died, and though most of them rejoined the Reorganized Church eventually it was plausible that some documents could have gone that way; and 2) not that many researchers had looked into that possibility. So anti-Mormons use this event to show that the General Authorities aren’t chosen of God, or holders of any special Priesthood power because they should have been able to tell that Mark was a fraud. However my take on the affair is : “Wonderful, see, our General Authorities are just like most people you see every day who can be conned by a master (Hoffman was a master at his trade) con artist, they are JUST PEOPLE, most of the time”.
The “moral” of the story is, most of what any General Authority says is NOT to be automatically considered Church doctrine, just as most of the talks and discourses of past General Authorities are mostly not Church doctrine. Sure they have some better access to inspiration and their talks are wonderful and fabulous and help to lead us through the mine field of modern life but if one of them , like Joseph Fielding Smith, insists that evolution is absolutely untrue and that the world is 6000 years old you are not required to accept that as doctrinal truth.
It is easy enough to gradually point this stuff out to kids as they grow up and to help them understand some of the tougher issues. I am beginning to think that prospective missionaries should be given some special help from people in their home ward that they love and trust and for example if they haven’t been exposed to some of the most troubling issues out of the Journal of Discourses they should be brought up to speed.
I don’t know if it is possible to prepare your children to be prepared for what they, personally, will find challenging.
Your concerns may simply be transference. You are trying to anticipate for your children, something that is
actually bothering you. Something has shaken your ground, and so therefore how can you help children with their grounding, right?
At the same time that you are trying to hold your ground, you realize that it will ultimately prove difficult for them.
They may look at you and say, “Hey, Dad or Grandpa, you’ve been standing on shaky ground, ever since you put me down- here.”
By the way, I think that you may have produced a Freudian slip. On August 28th you said this in a post:
the ramblings of numerous General Authorities are just that, ramblings not scipture.
Sounds like “skip ture.”
One of the problems that I have is noticing how General Authorities do skip scripture that used to be prevalent in years past, as if it has no relevance today, e.g., Lamanite vs Nephite, “pure and delightsome, as opposed to “white and delightsome, to be just one example, etc..
If they are not worried, should we be?
Yet, we are, aren’t we.
It may well have been a Freudian slip but poor typing is the more likely explanation
I think you are correct that we can’t prepare our kids for exactly what their crisis of faith might be but I think we can give them a background level of knowledge that allows them to be in control of the conversation when one of the problems is foisted upon them by a concerned evangenical or a web site. Something like: “What’s is this that the Book of Mormon is the most perfect book. Did you know that it had thousands of changes?”, to which a prepared kid / likely 20something by the time the conversation takes place says something like: “yeah, we talked about that in Sunday School and my Dad talked about it at Family Home Evenings, something like 3000 or so changes, most of them spelling or grammar I think.” No matter how the conversation continues from that point the evangelical has not managed to become “the expert” on the topic so our kids have a better chance to survive the discussion.
So as a whole culture we move on and I think that is OK, I think the newer emphasis on Christ may allow us to tone down the stridency and irritation factor in our declaration of “the one true church”. As I have said elsewhere I think the priesthood power represented in the Church is real and that as the saying goes “the scandal of the particular” fact that every human must take advantage of it if even only a vanishingly small number of people have ever held it on the earth. However I DON’T think that the other churches or religious traditions are dead end streets on the road to the Celestial Kingdom, lots of them will get there, many of them through means of the Millenium I suspect. You don’t have to be a member of the “one true church” in this life in order to make it.
I also remember talking to my oldest two children about lessons and leaders at Church. They were very very relieved when I told frankly that whatever they hear in Church is just that person’s view and opinion, no matter if they are an adult or a even leader. That started a great discussion with my oldest son about something that had really bothered him years ago (a CogDis thing where people’s actions and leader’s words didn’t match). It was like a light went on in his eyes when he realized sometimes things that were said didn’t seem right … because the people talking were probably not right 
BTW, my kids are way more conservative than I am. It’s funny how kids rebel against whatever their parents are
It seems that we are having a conversation of our own between last night and this morning!
I love your post and how your kids responded. I think you are spot on, it shouldn’t be a big production just an attitude of questioning and searching and having fun and not being too worried about what leaders are up to, they are people too.
Thanks.
Difficult but possible issue”>
Bringing up the Book of Mormon so called “anachronisms” (stuff that is out of historical place) is a standard of anti-Mormon literature and web sites. I think kids do need to have some awareness of the issue and some idea that at least important adults in their life have looked at the issue and come away still with a committment to the Book of Mormon (in some form).
The FAIR site ( here:
1. Look at exactly what the Book of Mormon itself has to say
2. The Book of Mormon needs to be seen as taking place within a restricted geography
3. Testimony:
4. Efficacy:
In summary I think it is a disservice to our kids to simply ignore the “anachronisms” and hope they don’t run into them. They will. So at appropriate times over a few years in family home evenings and discussions and Sunday School I feel that they should have an idea of what the issues are and a sense that “yeah there might be problems but we’ll get them sorted out eventually and more important people that I love and trust know about those problems and can live with them too.”
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.