- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Last Sunday in gospel doctrine class, the instructor came very close to saying that mass shooting in Orlando happened because God was punishing gay people. I want to be very clear that the instructor didn’t directly come out and say this, but when church was over, and my wife and I talked about it, and we both agreed she was trying to hint at this without actually saying it. Between my wife and I, I have more interest in attending church. I am pretty sure this lesson is going to keep my wife away from SS for the next couple of months at least. Her brother is gay, and this is NOT the message she needed to hear. As the lesson was going on, the instructor kept framing chapters 8 – 10 in Alma as us vs. the world. “The church is righteous and the world is evil”. “God will punish the evil”. When we were driving home from church I asked all the kids what they learned in church. I got a few answers, then my wife blurted out, “I learned that if we aren’t perfectly obedient that God will kill us”. That statement pretty much sums up the theme of the lesson from the other day.
Throughout this lesson, I kept trying to find a way to make a comment that would soften the tone of the lesson, but nothing was coming to mind. I am curious how some of you might attempt to handle this? I am not a very confrontational person and generally like to be constructive, so this makes it even more challenging. Our bishop came in half way through the lesson. At this point, the SS teacher apologized for making the lesson so political, while looking at the bishop. The bishop did interject a comment to attempt to temper the hard core lesson, but the instructor shrugged it off an kept going. By this point the lesson was almost over
I look for opportunities to add a balanced viewpoint without being controversial. But even suggesting or hinting or poorly wording something that could be construed as “god punishing gays” would be absolutely unchristlike and unacceptable to me sitting in a lesson. Of course, I would probably also be quietly assessing if that is what is really being said, or if I was interpreting things through my filter and hearing it wrong. I hesitate to open my mouth when I’m the one hearing it wrong.
Even still…I would probably share with the lightest touch possible that we should never insinuate what happened in Orlando is anything but a complete tragedy.
Tough lesson to sit through. A few months ago in EQ, we were having a lesson talking about God chastening us. The idea was basically that God intervenes in our lives by punishing us when we aren’t doing the right thing and how it’s ’cause he loves us, etc, etc. I raised my hand and said something like this: “Well, I probably have a bit of a non-standard view on this one. I don’t really think God reaches down to punish anyone. Good and bad things happen to everyone, and as far as I can tell, it seems evenly split among good and bad people. But I think the idea of the Gospel is that it can help people find a light in dark times, so that they can get through the difficulties they experience.”
In your particular case, I might have added: “Based on TSM’s talk last October to be a light to the world, It’s probably our responsibility to reach out to people most effected by this, and I’m not talking about people who were there, but homosexual people in general, and make sure that they know we stand with them against this kind of bigotry and hate, in spite of our doctrine on marriage. This is a good time to mourn with those who mourn.”
OON, thanks for your response. I do think there are opportunities like this that allow us to show our faith and how we stand up for correct principles. That is what class should be for. I like both your answers. The trouble I was having was that the statements were so veiled that I am not completely confident that this was what she was really getting at. So, at the same time, I was trying to decide what she was actually trying to say, and trying to think of something halfway intelligent to comment. azguy wrote:I like both your answers. The trouble I was having was that the statements were so veiled that I am not completely confident that this was what she was really getting at. So, at the same time, I was trying to decide what she was actually trying to say, and trying to think of something halfway intelligent to comment.
Similar experience in HPG this week. The guy prepared the wrong lesson to begin with so we got a second round of the tithing lesson. From my point of view and interpretation of what he was saying, and I know the guy pretty well and think he would say it, he was more than strongly hinting at tithing on gross being the only acceptable way. But, like your teacher, he never came out and directly said that – it was just that everything he said pointed in that direction. I would have had a hard time in your lesson as well because I don’t believe the Orlando shootings were anything else but evil committed by an evil person. From the church’s statement, I don’t think the leadership sees it as anything but a tragedy as well (it uses the words “tragedy” “senseless shooting” and “shocking crime”).
I deal with things like this in a few ways. Sometimes I just tune out and use my tablet or phone as a distraction. Sometimes I do as Heber suggests but that often requires a great deal of thought on my part so I get the wording and tone right and sometimes the moment has passed before I get it out. In those cases it’s similar to OON’s example. If I’m in a particular mood I am sometimes a bit more confrontational, but that is rare.
I do not often attend SS. It is hard for me because there is an opportunity for feedback. I by nature am one that likes to participate in the discussion. Because my comments are non-traditional and not always appreciated this sets up a situation where my answers might be publicly criticized, downplayed, or diminished. I simply am not open to having public disagreements. I sometimes put on my anthropologist hat and look at the lesson in a detached way. I ask myself why it is important for the person teaching to espouse such a view. They probably feel very literally that the world is an increasingly scary place and that God will step in any day now, wipe out the wicked, and vindicate their choices. This is actually a very common view of marginalized, scared, and persecuted groups.
When Richard Bushman was asked about genocide in the bible he responded that he tries to be charitable to the people of the OT that wrote the bible. What must of their life have been like that their vision of God included the disposition to come down and wipe out their enemies wholesale?
I also love OON’s responses.
Great question. I used to hate SS for this same reason. You can hear a lot of kooky stuff thrown out by teachers and other members. In the midst of my FC, I stopped going to Gospel Doctrine and started going to Gospel Essentials to avoid a lot of the deep theories that people would throw around. It was easier for me to connect with the Gospel Essential lessons that were much simpler. I just started attending Gospel Doctrine again within the past couple of months, and I’ve found it to be more entertaining than I did a year or two ago. I think it’s important to remember that the teachers are volunteers. Some of them stick to exactly what’s in the book, and don’t drift far from that. Others take a lot of liberty and love trying to dissect the characters and stories in the scriptures as if they have an intimate knowledge of what these people were like. My SS teacher two weeks ago pulled a chair up to the front of the room and invited Alma to join our class. He left the chair there during the entire lesson, and then at the end he said, with a completely straight face, “Apparently, Alma wasn’t able to make it today, and I testify that he could have been here if he truly had time to be here. But Alma is so dedicated to missionary work, that it would be like torture for him to stop his labors in the spirit world, even for a few minutes. Otherwise, I know he would have been here.” Then he ended the lesson. It hasn’t taken me long to figure out that this guy is one of those super-intense members. There’s one or two in every ward. He makes a lot of comments that really would have offended me a year ago. However, it’s more entertaining for me now than offensive. When a lesson begins to take an ugly turn, I’ve found it can be helpful just to share the 11th article of faith. We claim the privilege to worship how we may, and we allow others the same privilege. And, if I want people to accept that my beliefs are a bit unorthodox, then I also have to respect their right to hold beliefs that are ultra-orthodox. That is their right. However, when they share those beliefs in a SS environment, I no longer feel like they are speaking for what the church teaches; they are sharing what they personally believe. I don’t have to agree with them, because I have the right to form my own beliefs. Sometimes, I have to roll my eyes so hard that I can see my brain, but I can still allow those people the same right to their beliefs that I want others to extend to me. I no longer leave the church after a SS lesson saying, “The church teaches (fill in the blank), because that’s what Brother/Sister Doe taught us in Sunday school.” I now leave saying, “Brother/Sister Doe believes that this scripture means (fill in the blank). I believe that it means (fill in the blank).” A sunday school teacher speaks for themselves, not for the entire church. azguy wrote:Last Sunday in gospel doctrine class, the instructor came very close to saying that mass shooting in Orlando happened because God was punish gay people.
Then you should ask if the First Presidency carefully and prayerfully rechecks every word of doctrine every time a temple is damaged by weather.
Holy Cow wrote:My SS teacher two weeks ago pulled a chair up to the front of the room and invited Alma to join our class. He left the chair there during the entire lesson, and then at the end he said, with a completely straight face, “Apparently, Alma wasn’t able to make it today, and I testify that he could have been here if he truly had time to be here. But Alma is so dedicated to missionary work, that it would be like torture for him to stop his labors in the spirit world, even for a few minutes. Otherwise, I know he would have been here.” Then he ended the lesson.
:wtf: Uh, ok.I guess people like to try things to get effect. It doesn’t always work, does it?
Quote:I now leave saying, “Brother/Sister Doe believes that this scripture means (fill in the blank). I believe that it means (fill in the blank).” A sunday school teacher speaks for themselves, not for the entire church.
This makes the most sense to me too. It really is what church is about. There isn’t one “church” voice. It is people asked to volunteer their best efforts to serve in callings…and what they do is about them…not the church in total. Joseph smith restored the church, and the Lord has been correcting imperfect people in the church ever since.
I would have a difficult time sitting silent in a SS class like that. I would try to be diplomatic. It that’s possible.
You could ask the question,
Quote:using your logic (the teacher) Haun’s Mill & the deaths of JS & HS was God’s judgement?
My conclusion would be: it’s dangerous for anyone to pass judgement in a situation like this. We do not speak for God & His judgement.If the teacher says something that I believe is so far out of bounds that it can’t go unaddressed, I say something – even if I have to say that I disagree. As often as possible, I say it with a smile, slowly, and gently – but I say something. I also mention it to the Bishop privately. If I think a teacher might be hinting at something with which I disagree strongly, I don’t challenge it directly – but I make a comment that contradicts what I think I am hearing.
I also try very hard not to put words into people’s mouths they don’t say. I hate it when others do it to me, so I try not to do it to them.
Ray, thanks so much for your comments. What made it so challenging was that it was so ambiguous. I AM putting words in her mouth here on this board, but I don’t feel too bad because no one knows here and this is (psuedo) anonymous. In reality she was tiptoeing around it, and didn’t come out and say anything directly, but the fact that my wife and I both came to the same conclusion means that others were likely thinking the same thing. It sounds like the teacher might have known lots of people (or a few vocal ones) would have objected, so being ambiguous might have been a way to circumvent opposition. If you feel strongly that you and your wife heard the unspoken message, and if you have a Bishop who will understand and listen to you, talk with him about it. Stress that you are talking about it privately and confidentially, since it never was said directly and explicitly, but tell him you are concerned about that message and think it might be good to have someone address the general concept in a way that teaches love toward others and not judging those who are different. Pres. Uchtdorf has given some talks that could be used for source material.
I like to present the range of perspectives when people make comments like that. Here is a stab at it: Quote:I’m saddened by what happened in Orlando. Those people all had many talents, many positive contributions to society. One was a graduate from my North American university, who apparently had just walked across the stage after graduating with a Master’s Degree in Human Resources that week. And then, there is the grieving of families, even LDS families who have gay children and relatives. It must be so hard for them to see that incredible loss of life. I like to consider the perspectives of the many people affected by this — the people themselves, their friends and victims in the club of all sexual orientations, the families — Mormon and Non-Mormon — who loved them. And Mormon and non-Mormons who accept people with same sex attraction as they are. It is such a tragic time for all of these people, and a time when we need to reach out in compassion. I believe a loving God is grieving their loss just as we are.
With this soft statement of regret, I have reminded the discompassionte teacher that Mormons have gay relatives, that he is being hard hearted and cold, and that God loves all of his children. Also that it’s pretty gauche to refer to a terrorist attack the way he did. Without being confrontive.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.