The quiet revolution in LDS curriculum, which started with the Come Follow Me course for LDS youth a few years ago, will accelerate in 2019 with Come Follow Me courses for Primary, Sunday School, and (new!) for Individuals and Families. Doing my very best to put on my “say something nice” hat, I will look at a couple of recent postings at LDS.org which give a hint about what’s coming. No doubt we’ll hear more about this in Conference from (wait for it …) Pres. Uchtdorf, who is still alive and well as the Apostle in Charge of LDS Curriculum Development (not the actual title but much more descriptive).
First, the undated “What You Need to Know” post in the manuals section at LDS.org. Subtitle: “The new Come, Follow Me resources are not just updated manuals; they are part of a new home-centered approach to learning and living the gospel.” Key word here is home-centered. As noted in the post, “each household in the Church will receive a copy of Come, Follow Me—For Individuals and Families.” So you’re getting a new book for New Years. Take it home and study it.
Furthermore, everyone at church is going to be studying the same thing. “[B]eginning January 2019 the scriptures being discussed in Sunday School and Primary classes each week will be aligned so that adults, youth, and children will learn from the same chapters of the scriptures.” The addition of a home study version of Come Follow Me might be coupled with the (rumored) move to a two-hour block. If members actually study the topic and scriptures of the week at home, that might support shorter classes, something like a 50-30-30 schedule with two five-minute breaks. Or how about a 50-20-20 schedule with a twenty minute hot chocolate and donuts break after sacrament meeting?
Second, a Sept. 5, 2018 post at the Church News section of LDS.org, “Get a Sneak Peek at the New Church Curriculum for 2019.” The post quotes a couple of LDS employees who work in LDS curriculum development. The post notes that “much of the learning is to be done at home so that church learning becomes a support—rather than the primary source—to teaching and learning in the gospel.” This is consistent with the earlier quotes.
I found a couple of the quotes a little unsettling. Help me find the positives I’m missing. A curriculum developer is quoted as saying: “Conversion is the end goal, and we know that the Spirit leads to conversion. The previous curriculum model … worked under the assumption that better church experiences lead to more of the Spirit, which leads to deeper conversion” (ellipsis in original). That seems to be saying the focus is not on the content of the lessons or on actually teaching anything, it’s on getting students to feel something (the Spirit, which I’m told manifests itself in a variety of ways) and to experience conversion (best shown by commitment to attending church, zealously following the directives of leaders, and paying tithing, a familiar set of themes regularly emphasized in prior LDS manuals).
Another quote, same guy: “And so we came up with our new curriculum model, which still has conversion as the goal, … and the Spirit is what deepens conversion. We’ve added personal religious behavior as the next ingredient in that equation” (ellipsis in original). Personal religious behavior. I’m not sure how that works in the curriculum, but I’m guessing that means that in addition to reading scriptures and discussing gospel principles, the new lesson guides will tell us what to do or, more likely, invite class discussion in which we can all tell each other what to do. I can just imagine the following directive in the new manual: “After reading the assigned scripture, invite class members to verbally judge each other’s religious behavior for five minutes. Point out that the warm feelings that accompany this activity are the Holy Spirit bearing witness.”
Personally, I want more content, not less, in the manuals. Help these poor teachers out, curriculum guy! Give them something to actually teach! I will note that the new Saints volume has 46 chapters, which suggests it will be the “textbook” of sorts for the Church History sequence in 2020 or 2021 (the New Testament will be covered in 2019). How about a good content-based 46 chapter treatment of the Old Testament or New Testament to match what Saints will likely do for the Church History course? Just my two cents worth while hoping for the best in the new curriculum. If it fails, we can always move to a one-hour block.
Your comments and suggestions are welcome, particularly feedback from adults who have been involved with the youth classes that have already been using the Come Follow Me format for a few years.
Wheat & Tares 
“Personal religious behavior. I’m not sure how that works in the curriculum…” the entire home-based curriculum is dependent on personal religious behavior – scripture study (personal/family) and/or FHE. From the “What you need to know” webpage:
Here you will find helpful ideas to support personal scripture study, family scripture study, and family home evening. If you haven’t studied the scriptures regularly in the past, this resource can help you get started; if you already have a good habit of scripture study, this resource can help you have more meaningful experiences. Use it in any way that helps you and your family draw spiritual power from the scriptures.
——
This is another effort, like the Sabbath Day focus, to counteract the “weak gospel teaching and modeling in the home” that Bednar cited was the stumbling block in building up multi-generational families. From the “Sneak Peek” article:
“[Research has] found that scripture study in the home—personal religious devotion—had a greater impact on conversion than anything else. … Interestingly, the research bore out that family religious devotion was the greatest cause of personal religious devotion. We felt that was a really important idea,” Hansbrow said.
While I applaud the intentions, what concerns me is practical implementation. For families already struggling to do FHE, or in part-member situations, this might not be too effective. Or does it signal the hunkering down pre-apocalypse a la Lachoneus of 3 Nephi 3?
Anitawells, I know the Primary manual tells teachers to take into account the fact that some of the kids won’t be coming from families that work on it, so there is still leeway. The manual can also be used for individual study. From the “Sneak Peek” article:
Although the new resource provides activities to do as a family, the home study is applicable for individuals who live alone or whose family members are not interested in studying with them.
“We’ve got young single adults and individuals who are married and a part-member family and new converts and unsupported youth in the home in a lot of areas,” said Chad Strang, who is a senior product manager in the Priesthood and Family Department of the Church.
The feedback they have received shows that in all of those cases, members of all backgrounds felt they were strengthened at home through study and were then able to contribute in the classroom experience.
Make lessons less structured, and someone will shout that members can’t be trusted to keep the discussion on topic. Make lessons more structured, and someone will complain that the teachers don’t allow for honest discussion and it’s too “correlated”. In terms of satisfying everybody, there’s no way the Church can win with Sunday School curriculum.
The current youth curriculum is total rubbish. It might improve some if it is more scripture based, but that is unlikely if the lessons continue to prooftext insead of asking hard questions, questions with no right or wrong answer.
Like the OP, I want more content, not less, which is why I admit I have started occasionally attending the local Lutheran Church instead of our services. Yesterday the reverend gave an awesome homily based not on some recycled Conference talk, but on… get this… the scriptures. Today, at random times while not paying attention at work (some meetings are boring) I found myself reflecting on the sermon and thinking with real intent, “God, I want to be better”. If people want to feel the Spirit more, they might try other religions now and again.
In my half century of church service (much of it not recently) I have held time and energy demanding ward level callings almost exclusively in 4 areas:
1. eqp- home teaching
2. Sunday school teacher- gospel doctrine
3. Boy scouts
4. Activities committee
They have or are eliminating every one of these areas and rendering useless, almost all of my time and talents with which I was blessed and allowed to give. I think giving and serving in an organization builds personal commitment and social capital in said organization better than anything else. This kind of hunkering down will leave inactive all but the 10 same families with the major calling in the ward.
Mishandling our historical truth problems has lead to about 75-80% of the church going inactive. Shredding the lesser callings upon which much of the social network rests will drive another chunk out the door. If they mean to winnow down the church to less than 10% of only the most hardened core, this just might work.
Why?
Dsc – So with your “you can’t please everybody” are you agreeing with Dave B and “we can always move to a one-hour block”?
I’m currently a Gospel doctrine teacher. I actually like the idea of having the adults and all youth studying the same scriptures in their classes and encouraging them to read during the week. I am aware that Sunday School is about to be transformed. I don’t think it is just this new curriculum. During the past year I have had several family members in different wards testing and giving feedback on very different schedules. I know one schedule involved an abbreviated Sunday School class and a more in depth mid-week class for those who wanted a deeper dive. I was told that It was fairly reminiscent of Protestant Bible study.
I love my calling so much, but I am a lousy facilitator. I’m a much better teacher. I like bringing in history, context and tackling hard things. These are things you can’t do in a 20 or 25 min. class. I know at least one variation of the schedule was indeed a short 20 minute Sunday meeting where the teacher just facilitated a sharing of “What touched you from the reading this week? What did your family learn about _____?” It was a short return and report opportunity. I think it got positive feedback. The changes will be personally hard for me as I love teaching, but I can handle the changes. My family NEEDS 2 hour church.
I read all of these things and it seems as if nobody brings the Lord in to this. Christ is who we believe and who we follow but all of this is just bashing Christ’s church as if people do not think he is the head of it and that the apostles and prophets do not follow him. People are leaving the church because they do not believe in Christ and just assume these apostles and prophets are making all these things up to appease themselves and not following the directives they receive from Christ. Why all this bashing you either believe in revelation or you don’t . I m tired of this and plan on removing myself from it. There is 10 questionings to about one thing that helps my belief. Reading this site would make anyone question there belief.
Thanks for the comments, everyone.
Mary Ann, so it seems that “failure in the home” is the latest explanation for problems elsewhere in the system (declining attendance, disinterest in Sunday School, etc.). I expect we’ll hear a lot in Conference about scripture study and other “churchy” things to be done at home on Sunday instead of watching football, playing games, wasting time online, or just taking a nap. The CFM manual for home use is something new, though.
OftenPerplexed, I think we’re all a little curious how they’re going to redefine the role of the Gospel Doctrine teacher in Sunday School — and in how the actual teachers are going to deal with the new timeframe, the new material, the new approach, and so forth. It will be an interesting year.
Dave B. & MTodd – I also agree that more content would be better, especially for teachers who need that, however, the flexible structure of the current Come, Follow Me course for youth sunday school, I feel, is far better than any church curriculum structure I’ve taught from before and if you have capable teachers you can have some really great lessons. I’ve been teaching youth sunday school for several months now and what I love about the structure of the lessons is that each month has a separate topic to focus on with no specifically assigned lesson to teach each week, meaning that I have an entire month to cover a single topic. I’m able to get really in depth with those topics because I have an entire month to cover each topic and I can teach them the way I want because I’m not encumbered by heavily structured and poorly written lesson outlines. I can cover the content I want, ask the deep thought-provoking questions I want, and present the lessons in a way that I feel is meaningful and appropriate to my young class. However, the quality of the lessons will depend entirely on the person teaching. If you have a fantastic teacher, you’ll have fantastic lessons. If you have a less than fantastic teacher, the class may come away from the class every week bored and wondering what the lesson was about.
Connie Brower, Just in case you haven’t yet removed yourself , consider: “Actually, it is not that simple. In fact, there is not just one reason that applies to the variety of situations [as to why people leave].” (President Uchtdorf Oct 2013) Did you just assume he was making this up? I smiled at the irony. I thought briefly that your comment might be satire, but on reflection it seems an honest, if impulsive, expression of an attitude that is one of the many different reasons some people leave the Church to find better expressions of their faith in Christ elsewhere, Unless you want to promote leaving, you might consider a change of attitude. President Uchtdorf’s Oct 2013 talk might help with the former.
@DB, my teenagers absolutely hate spending an entire month on one subject especially since the same topic was covered in Sunday School and in Priesthood and then repeated yearly. The new Sunday School curriculum may help address this issue if it is scripturally based and rotates annually, but it’s too late for my children who had to suffer through the growing pains that are the current youth curriculum.
Mike, I’m sorry, but I doubt that our activity rates nearly as much to do with our history as it does with people being quickly baptized without any real efforts to ensure they are truly converted. Those-not-really converted people often find themselves on the periphery of the ward and without any close friendships. They stop coming and find that they aren’t really missed. Add to that a non-member spouse and children who perhaps were baptized at age 8 but never integrated into the ward. Now multiply that equation by tens of thousands of eager missionaries who are incentivized to baptize as much as they possibly can, and you have the current activity rates we do. Perhaps Church history really is a driving factor in the Mormon corridor, but having lived my whole life outside it, it’s not a factor out here where activity rates are much lower.
I do hope that the adult Bible study is implemented as I truly enjoy a good Gospel Doctrine class; however, with small kids and a demanding calling, I know that I will only ever be able to attend on an irregular basis which makes me sad. Sacrament meeting can be uplifting at times, but I’ve found priesthood meetings on average to be pretty dull affairs. As others have pointed out, I truly believe the majority of active members will not do regular home study, whether it be personal or as a family. I hope I am wrong.
On a separate note, could the two-hour block be a placeholder for what Church leaders see as the (I’m told) inevitable contraction of the Church in the next 50 years? Why waste millions on new construction and then later having to sell off beloved but often not very valuable church buildings when, if we can just suffer through the short term, the crowding issue will resolve itself (ala Western Europe for example)? Or am I being too cynical?
@MTodd – Like I said, this new curriculum is very teacher dependent. If the teachers are great, the lessons will be great and the class will get more out of spending an entire month on a single topic rather than one short lesson on that topic. It’s an opportunity to have richer, broader discussions on each topic rather than superficially skimming over a different topic each week. Conversely, if the teachers aren’t great, the class could feel like they’re getting the same boring lesson four or five weeks in a row and they’ll hate it.
Re: Connie Brower’s comment that people are leaving the church because they don’t believe in Christ. Well, some people, maybe. However, in my husband’s case, his decision to leave the church is because he DOES believe in Christ, but doesn’t find Christ in enough church programs and policies, as well as in the words and actions of leaders and other members, for him to find enough meaningfulness to stay. And his experience is not unique. For those of us who find our relationship with Christ is fostered through our involvement with the church, we could epxress thankfulness, rather than be snarky or judgemental about those whose experiences do not mirror our own.
@DB, agreed that a good teacher is a requirement for making the material work. That said, my boys had two teachers: one really good and one only meh. When I tried encouraging one son to at least attend on the days with the really good teacher his response, “It’s almost worse to have a good teacher. You’re enjoying yourself, you think you’re learning something, but then you finish and realize you got nothing from the class.”
But yes, I agree wholeheartedly that these lessons need a strong teacher.
I think this is a great idea. Scripture study of the OT and D&C can be difficult without context and background. Giving the manual and talking about it in class is a great aid to study the scriptures.
I’m always hesitant to put everyone on the same schedule and program especially for scripture study but I feel like this sets everyone on a course to get through and finish the scriptures in a 4 year program.
And yes, reading scriptures can lead to personal conversion but that’s not a guarantee. Some read and question, seeing it as impossible or see many other logical conclusions that can be reached. I’m looking at the many people that have gone on to question what they’ve read and left the church.
The plus side is that at least member has educated themselves and know what and why they believe or why the don’t believe.
“Interestingly, the research bore out that family religious devotion was the greatest cause of personal religious devotion.”
Duh. Which has been printed in undergrad childhood psychology textbooks since the middle of the 20th century. Finally catching up? Being critical makes me feel a little hypocritical, because cynicism really isn’t my goal. I’ve been suggesting a 2hr block for a long time. Yet, now hearing it might actually happen (though it’s still just rumor), I find myself underwhelmed and rolling my eyes. I think the reason for that is explained by this cited excerpt from Hansbrow, a full-time salaried employee of the church. What happened to the prophets? They’ve been replaced by researchers, focus groups, opinion polls, curriculum developers, etc. It’s Wal-mart religion. The commodification and commercialization of spirituality.
The basic struggle here seems to be between personal agency and the institution. For a long time I’ve said a 2 hr block would be better for my family. And yet we were never allowed to make that decision for ourselves. If our family had decided to only participate for 2hrs, then leave, we’d have been ostracized. Treated as being unworthy and lacking faith. Likewise the opposite is true. I’ve been in many PEC meetings and Ward Councils where the idea of having an extra meeting was discussed. An extracurricular 100% optional church meeting for a group that was interesting to them. Like a book club. A group that wanted to study the scriptures together, or discuss church history, or whatever. And every time some idea like this would come up, it would have to be run by the stake president for approval, who would always say no. Really? You the stake president, are telling a handful of random members in such and such ward, that they are not allowed to get together on their own and discuss whatever the heck they want? But that’s how it is.
So now the church is making more decisions for me, and my family, without asking me what I think about those changes. I have no say in this curriculum. But it’s been “correlated” to death by the professional church, researched, focus grouped, and they had good results and have decided it’s for me. Family religious devotion was the greatest cause of personal religious devotion? Ya don’t say. Over a decade ago my wife told me about learning the same thing in one of her undergrad classes at a secular university. So in other words, the goal here is to manipulate the family’s devotion, in order to manipulate the devotion of their children? This is precisely what bothers me. The idea of a 2 hr block is really nice. But it sounds like it’s happening for all the wrong reasons. Instead of making at change in a direction that serves to empower people, it’s exactly the opposite. Instead of respecting people, giving them more freedom, more options, etc., it’s the opposite. Why should I care about the church’s latest curriculum? Why should I treat it as being relevant? Or even competent? At what point does the church respect my agency and afford me the opportunity to decide, for myself, how the gospel should or shouldn’t be implemented in my life? Does the church not trust me to raise my children in a good way? It needs to govern what that looks like in terms of my family’s private level of religious devotion?
Not a Cougar.
I haven’t lived in the intermountain west since 1994 and was gone for half of the 1980’s. But if what you say is accurate and I have no experiences or data to refute it, ( and we could both be right- the reasons are not mutually exclusive) then your comment strengthens my complaint. Multi-generational families have more inertia and might need less indoctrination and are more resilient to historical problems. The new converts need a calling, friends and they need to study the gospel. Anyone who goes through the trouble of taking the missionary lessons and of being baptized is a potential life-long member. If we had an ideal (or even decent) church experience every week, we might keep more of them active. A lot more. Other churches are growing.
As for your second comment, our buildings are not really that sellable to other churches. Not secure enough (dedicated children rooms in isolated areas), too plain and boring. Some around here were built in hot, humid climates to specifications for dry, cold climates, etc. They reflect the hollowness (almost like a Soviet-ization) of what has become our religion. My stake doesn’t have a single building that fits the congregations meeting within them because the prior leaders lacked accurate insight into the future growth or contraction and made repeated poor decisions of when and where to divide wards and when and where not to divide them. They are like the old Edsel automobile, Henry Ford liked them but…Plenty of empty, really nice churches are on the market and plenty of money in the growing churches allows them to build what they want. You are right, the use of the buildings we do have is often helping to solve the crowding issue.
To Others:
I always tried to inspire people to do more study on their own at home when I taught..But the sad truth is that people are busy and don’t have time for it. If we cut some of the hampster-wheel busy work in their lives then we might see a spontaneous increase in gospel study. Putting those who ran the fastest on the most hampster wheels in charge is not likely the path up this mountain. I think they are trying to control what we study and that isn’t working.
*****
I think the entire concept of a teacher standing in front of a class is obsolete. It is based on the premise that the teacher possesses or has acquired special knowledge and dispenses it to the attentive class. Or that the collective knowledge of the class is diverse enough to be of value if a skillful teacher can bring various aspects of it out. But the new truth is that we have literally within the palm of our hands many times more information than existed in the entire Library of Congress when I was in college. The new challenge is how to access it, evaluate its usefulness and what to do with it. How to not let it destroy us and waste our lives and corrupt our youth and socially isolate us.
My son who is a theoretical physicist is experimenting with new ways to teach. Instead of telling students to turn off their devices, he wants them to turn on their devices. I just don’t see the big dogs on North Temple in SLC being the ones to lead the way into this brave new world. Even the wise ones at BYU are too submissive and myopic to see this opportunity. But as sure as the printing press changed the world, so will the computer chip change our future.
Thanks for the comments, everyone. Change is in the wind, it seems.
DB, sounds like you are doing a great job as a teacher making the same-topic-all-month approach work for the youth you teach. I wish you were the general rule rather than the rare exception.
Not a Cougar, your idea about saving on new building costs with an eye to the Great Contraction later in the 21st century is very clever. Somehow I don’t think that what the senior leadership is planning for, but still it’s clever.
Peter, I’d agree that sometimes it seems like it takes a few decades for common sense to penetrate the Mormon Bubble and influence the leadership. I wish they would let local units have more flexibility to try out different approaches with Sunday meetings — the schedule, the curriculum, snacks and chat near the kitchen, moving Sunday School to a voluntary weeknight class, bringing in outside speakers for some lessons, and so forth. So many good ideas could come from these sorts of local experimentation.
Mike, I agree that “the entire concept of a teacher standing in front of a class is obsolete.” As noted above, we need some creative exploration of alternative activities in the classroom or in sacrament meeting. My own stake has finally opened up to broadcasting stake conference and some of those “extra” meetings to our building, 45 minutes and one substantial mountain pass away from the stake center. But only in the last five or six years. There is a very strong belief among the leadership, it seems, that having a meeting and getting people to attend with their butts in the pew is a holy and righteous enterprise, regardless of how bland or dull the meeting is. They seem to think the glory of God is a well-attended meeting.
Peter:
Your mistake with trying to have a group of friends study together was asking the Stake President in the first place. The act of asking gave him the control. If you held it without asking he would probably not even have found out about it and probably couldn’t have stopped it once it was going.
When my first child started running (never walked) and sassing us, I realized I did not have the slightest idea how to raise her. I was an incompetent parent and so was my wife. We didn’t agree on that subject, among others. So we set out to read books about it and many seemed idiotic. My social worker/ sister told me about an area called cognitive therapy and an approach to raising children called positive discipline. She gave me several books and numerous lengthy lectures for free. The book we liked best was called Raising Self-Reliant Children in a Self-Indulgent World. It might not be right for you, but it was almost perfect for us.
We invited the parents of the other children in our ward to our house for dinner on Sunday and we studied this book together, chapter by chapter. In a few years this grew into a revolving study group of 3 to 5 families who met on Sundays where we studied together and turned our children loose in our basement with my then about kindergarten-age daughter in charge (and learned later of some pretty rowdy times down there). This systematic group study had a tremendous impact on all of the us. We were building a great network of parents of a peer group who shared values and a similar effective approach to children when the difficult teen years arrived.
Trouble was all of these parents eventually moved away. This left us with very self-reliant and critical -thinking children in a ward with otherwise very submissive and very few peers. My children thrived in the public schools and in every extra-curricular activity but they were a serious problem at church. They became independent and boundary-testing early when the issues were minor. By age 15 they were pretty much behaving like responsible adults (mostly) and we no longer required many if any rules. They were successful in ways beyond my highest expectations and were well prepared to leave for college.
If anyone is still reading me, I would like to challenge you to take Peter’s insight and my experience about determining your own course of home study. If you have small children, consider starting a study group of friends and adopting a book to follow and teach each other how raise them. Aside from general platitudes, the LDS church teaches us squat about raising children. I know people need to go beyond FHE as it is currently constituted and the basic gospel taught in the ward house if they want to do a good job raising their children. Of course, some children raise themselves and others go astray in spite of the best parenting. This approach to having your own study groups in your home would work in other areas.
And Peter, imitation is the highest complement.
I think that making this a home-based program with a Come Follow Me open-ended approach, there is very little correlation, other than that, we will be studying from certain books in the New Testament. If you don’t study at home then you don’t study at home. That is how it is in all of my friends’ Bible study classes. Though their pastor or minister sets the course of study for the year. The teachers will have a lot of latitude and aren’t expected to “teach” anything. What would blow my mind is if they left it up to Wards to pick a schedule for their 2 hours or if some wards could stay 3 hours.
I think that making this a home-based program with a Come Follow Me open-ended approach, there is very little correlation, other than that, we will be studying from certain books in the New Testament. If you don’t study at home then you don’t study at home. That is how it is in all of my friends’ Bible study classes. Though their pastor or minister sets the course of study for the year. The teachers will have a lot of latitude and aren’t expected to “teach” anything. What would blow my mind is if they left it up to Wards to pick a schedule for their 2 hours or if some wards could stay 3 hours.
I second the hot chocolate break. I mean, seriously–casually socializing in a coffee shop atmosphere? It would be too cool.
OftenPerplexed — a great idea to let wards pick, but I could see it turning into a faith competition. “Why certainly we could shorten our meetings, but who else here has enough faith in Jesus Christ to make the hard sacrifice and keep the three hour schedule?”
“Personal religious behavior.”
Back in the 1970’s the Teacher Development Curriculum called for behaviorally stated objectives. In other words, if a lesson could not be shown to produce a change in behavior, however slight, it served no purpose. Pure information transfer *might* induce a change in behavior, but the devils know Jesus Christ better than most living humans, what does that knowledge do for them? Not much.
Be ye therefore doers of the word, and not hearers only.
With many people now playing with smartphones and iPads in church during sacrament meeting, the usefulness of church to inspire and motivate good behavior (ie, faith, hope and charity) is dwindling somewhat. I used to play “connect the dots” game on a particularly boring meeting but the iPad offers Mah-jong so my wife and I will sometimes play a cooperative game; I take a turn, she takes a turn. There is no winning as a goal, merely a bit of mental stimulation waiting for the clock to creep slowly around to okay, done, you can go now and another Sunday attendance ticket punched.
A few lessons on giving talks would brighten the Sabbath experience
Re: Mike and Peter; my wife and I found excellent parenting advice in a book “Positive Parenting”. It was taught as a community class in an elementary school.
Count me seriously underwhelmed by the sample materials my husband brought home last week.
I’m skeptical of the motivations here. Seems that the last few decades of correlated materials have left the church in the position of carrying the can for incorrect teaching, and many are pointing the finger in that direction. Now they want us to proof read passages and then discuss feelings. That’s my take on the limited sample so far anyway. And all within the confines of family, so that in future they can direct any complaints back to delivery in the family or some such. The production of Saints is a the most positive step. But it doesn’t look like we’re going to be getting much in the way of context for scripture, or even pointed towards recent scholarship. Not unless they’re also going to be doing some serious updating to Institute manuals…
The concept of someone standing in front of a class and teaching for 45 minutes is not obsolete. Did you ever hear of the Sermon on the Mount? Did you ever listen to the late Ron Walker, Church Historian, teach a Sunday School class as if he were Brigham Young fielding questions from the class? Did you ever attend an Adult Institute class by Rebecca Holt Stay on the Old Testament? (Good news for the Salt Lake Area, she is back teaching 4 classes at various locations this fall.) The latter is a person who studied the Old Testament and can teach in an authoritative manner, with insight, understanding, and relates it all back to the Savior. Her classes are very well attended because those characteristics are sorely lacking in the Church today. Church statements regarding the new teaching approach not withstanding, when we are encouraged to be “facilitators” we are not following the way Christ taught. He taught as one with authority. Due to a variety of factors, someone facilitating is being pawned off as teaching. I don’t go to a class to hear a bunch of people giving fairly uninformed opinions or relating their life experiences, all so they can go away feeling good about themselves and validated. I go to be taught. So yes, please get rid of Sunday School ASAP. It would be a fantasy to believe that the course of things will change.
I’m old. Very. I come from the time when Primary and RS was in the middle of the week, where “magnify your calling” and “pray about what you speak about” and “take your children out when they cry and/or take them to the bathroom before the meeting” was easily talked about by the bishop. Yes, leaders were not shy then. I’ve been in 20 different wards at least. I’ll just share my experience, but I’m making no statements one way or the other.
–Sac Mtg 1.5 hr length–generally, we had amazing and interesting speakers. I was riveted as a very young child. I sat quietly, sometimes playing the dot game.
–You never saw a child leave Sac mtg. EVER. I checked this with my husband, he concurs it was this way in his ward, 500 miles from my ward.
–I was terrified of Junior Sunday School. No comment.
–Told to always think about our talks and fast and pray about what we should say–this concept important then. No assigned topics. Even if I get assigned something today I revert back to fasting/praying.
–When we changed to the 3 hr block I continued to experience amazing meetings in all orgs each week–I would NEVER miss. I drank deeply of the spirit at Church.
–The teachers really prepared; there were some history-based lessons, what year, what place, etc. Never felt the spirit in the room during this approach. The teachers prepared a great deal and were humble–that I remember.
–Did large events in ward and stake because of many cultures. Took months of planning and there was a big payoff.
–Moved across country and wow, things were different. Few real testimonies on Fast Sunday…but soon I heard the Holy Ghost talking to me in a biofeedback sort of way when people gave talks instead of testimonies. Interesting experience to try if you find yourself baffled.
–A few years ago they put me in YW at an old age. The org. very loosey goosey with very young ladies in charge, loved them but they were never organized. Never knew what was happening next.
–One Sunday I counted 70 children come and go during Sacrament mtg. Mother brought a 15″ truck and ladder so her little boy could play in the aisle.
— Many random children sit by me during Sacrament meeting which I love. I get to know them so they will listen and want to continue sitting with me.
–Taught Primary for years and most older Primary teachers of generations back reparent the children. Most didn’t know the Old testament from the New Testament, had no basic manners, didn’t understand the real reason you come to Church, etc.
— Picking ONE theme from the lesson and you rolling with it–whatever the children need that’s where you go. Worked.
–No one seems to want to spend time planning ward events way ahead of time.
–I see large bags and boxes of food and tons of toys for kids. I never saw this back in the dark ages. I understand having multiple children can be hard.
–“Ministering” today was exactly what my parents did yesteryear. It’s just rephrased now, but then there was concerted heartfelt effort to love and help people as the Lord wants us today. My father is a legend in home teaching. He asked for all inactives and senior single women only. He didn’t want anyone with money.
Obvious differences. My experience of course does not match yours of course.
Yes, we are going to go to a 40/40/40 meeting schedule this Sunday, just wait and see, but somehow my distant memory of times past simply brings a grand smile to my face–except for Junior Sunday School.
Amen Bifdy. Teaching is a skill to be mastered, knowledge is also something to be studied, learned, and earned. The challenge in our culture is that we embrace amateurism, we don’t want trained pastors, teachers, scriptorians, or theologians. We want to be able to opine without doing any work. We want to be able to give talks and have low expectations. I’m not saying anyone is actively or consciously wanting that, but we go on allowing it. I’m a great teacher, and I work hard at my skill while also working hard to have the requisite knowledge to present an engaging and inspiring lesson. I take those same skills and passions into my church callings. So if the church wanted to support a great teacher they could provide more researched content (real biblical studies).
BUT…..the church knows that most of its teachers are skimming the lesson during sacrament meeting. So you don’t ask more of the people, heaven forbid you get actual professionals to train them, you dumb down the material to make the lesson match the ‘presenter/facilitator’. Why not invest in real trainers for teachers?
We had a substitute Sunday school teacher for a month. By the third week attendance quadrupled. These were all people who were supposed to be in the class and came to church each week but didn’t attend. With the right teacher they came pouring in. The last week the teacher (an awesome teacher) had done such a great job the class (actually full) was talking,contributing, and discussing the lesson in impactful ways. The next week the regular teacher came back and attendance immediately dropped back to pre-substitute levels (as did class enthusiasm and participation). I thought for sure the leaders would make a change here, what better way to jump start the spirituality of the ward right? Nope, same teacher.
So instead of aiming for better teachers and content, we’ll get more fluff and mediocrity. Gee, I wonder if attendance and engagement will improve?