DiscussMormonism.com

Something very strange happened to me last Wednesday evening, and I would like to get input from the board about it.

There are many details which I will not share in this opening post because it would make it too long, but will gladly do so as we go along should there be interest.

I am the secretary in the high priest group leadership. We meet each Wednesday.

The first counselor took me aside last Wednesday and asked me if I wanted to teach the lesson in a couple of weeks. This is a first.

I said sure.

He said it will be fast Sunday, and he then emphasized that I was not to teach from any outside source, but only from approved church publications and the scriptures. He said this directive was coming from some place up the food chain, though he said he didn't know precisely whom it was coming from.

I said that, as long as the scriptures were allowable, we could still have some fun.

I asked what the subject was.

He shook his head slightly as if I weren't understanding and explained that the lesson itself was on how we should not use any outside materials in church lessons or classes but only approved church publications and the scriptures.

I was floored. I said I would think about it.

We had to set up chairs and tables for a ward activity, and all the time I was doing that, I kept thinking about this.

When we were done, I called the counselor over and asked, "You do know who I am, don't you?" He said yes.

I explained that although I understand where this directive about teaching materials is coming from, I believe it to be misguided and I disagree with it 100%. I told him I couldn't teach anything that I thought was wrong, and so if I taught a lesson on the subject, I would be teaching the exact opposite of what he wanted me to teach on.

I said I wouldn't want him to be mad at me to ask me to teach about one thing, and then to have me get up and teach the opposite; that I wouldn't want him to buy a pig in a poke without the pig saying something first.

I ended up talking to him for about half an hour, explaining why I felt the way I do, and at the end he seemed to be in agreement with me.

I told him I could make it a discussion where we talked about the pros and cons of this position, but he needed to know I was totally on the con side and would express myself accordingly.

I then asked him if he still wanted me to teach the lesson.

Amazingly, he said he did. I told him he could call it off should he come to his senses. He laughed and said he didn't think that would happen.

(I am still waiting for the other shoe to fall, but he saw me Sunday and said nothing about it, except to make sure I knew what Sunday the lesson would be.)


As I say, there are many other details that I can flesh out later, but right now I am soliciting people's thoughts--not only about this strange turn of events, but what I should talk about and what things might be a good idea to bring up during the lesson--should he really not come to his senses before then--or should somebody not slap him about until he regains his senses.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

I would pay to attend this class.

consiglieri wrote:He shook his head slightly as if I weren't understanding and explained that the lesson itself was on how we should not use any outside materials in church lessons or classes but only approved church publications and the scriptures.

I taught that lesson a few years ago to the Elders Quorum. I stuck to the lesson in the priesthood manual, which was about the importance of sticking to the lesson in the priesthood manual. I cannot explain how I managed to get through the entire lesson without going into a coma or suffering a grand mal seizure. I think that supernatural forces may have been involved. I know that I could not do it again.

Good luck consig. I would LOVE to be there to see what happens.

He said it will be fast Sunday, and he then emphasized that I was not to teach from any outside source, but only from approved church publications and the scriptures. He said this directive was coming from some place up the food chain, though he said he didn't know precisely whom it was coming from.

This has always been the directive as long as I've been cognizant of doctrine. You might want to refer to Teaching, No Greater Call or the Cirriculum for the year. I personally don't think there is a problem with using outside sources to illustrate certain points so long as they don't make up the bulk of the lesson and as long as your teaching points don't originate with them.

I explained that although I understand where this directive about teaching materials is coming from, I believe it to be misguided and I disagree with it 100%. I told him I couldn't teach anything that I thought was wrong, and so if I taught a lesson on the subject, I would be teaching the exact opposite of what he wanted me to teach on.

I said I wouldn't want him to be mad at me to ask me to teach about one thing, and then to have me get up and teach the opposite; that I wouldn't want him to buy a pig in a poke without the pig saying something first.

I ended up talking to him for about half an hour, explaining why I felt the way I do, and at the end he seemed to be in agreement with me.

LOL! Could it be that you are in my Stake? Frankly, I don't believe there is anyone active in your ward who agrees with you on this matter, but if they do, you are both apostates ;)

I would pay to attend this class.

Looks like I might actually be in attendance.

He shook his head slightly as if I weren't understanding and explained that the lesson itself was on how we should not use any outside materials in church lessons or classes but only approved church publications and the scriptures.

What? We're not supposed to use any outside materials at all? I didn't realize that was the case. I teach often and nearly as often as i teach I at least refer to something that is outside the church publications and scriptures. 'course I don't strictly use those things, but usually throw them in as a side note, or supportive material.

I would love it if we were able to fly a little more by the seat of our pants in lessons, but in lessons that this has happened, I'm usually left wondering "what was he/she even talking about?" I guess this is the easiest way to make lessons useful, and also non-controversial.

Until they ban the scriptures I don't need outside sources to weird up my lessons. :)

I imagine you standing in front of the class and telling an awkward joke about how ironic it was that you of all people were asked to talk about this. Then you turn serious, and bear testimony about how humble you feel and how you know you were asked to talk about this because this is exactly what the Lord wanted you to work on. You hold back the tears, say that in preparing for this you learned more than the class ever could, and then you fall into line, and begin reading out of the manual.

So according to this lesson, what sources are allowed?

Analytics wrote:I imagine you standing in front of the class and telling an awkward joke about how ironic it was that you of all people were asked to talk about this. Then you turn serious, and bear testimony about how humble you feel and how you know you were asked to talk about this because this is exactly what the Lord wanted you to work on. You hold back the tears, say that in preparing for this you learned more than the class ever could, and then you fall into line, and begin reading out of the manual.

It just may be that some unnamed somebody "up the food chain" has that exact scenario in mind.










As if!


All the Best!

--Consiglieri

Why is this lesson being given to everyone and not being done as a teacher inservice or leadership training instead?