Revamping Sunday School

[Sleeping in EQ]

Originally Posted by creekster

What are you talking about? GO back and read his post again. He was lamenting the fact that this doens't happen very often. Talk about touchy.

As to your response to my post, I don't think I am afraid of 'heterodox' opinions at all. I like the idea of having better manuals, or at least materials that could be used for both in depth personal study and an in depth SS class. Even so, it is my opinion (note the word opinion there) that it would be difficult to keep this adequately staffed over the long run adn to keep the class moving in an uplifting direction. Impossible? Not at all, but difficult and, in some places, extremely difficult. For example, we attended Berkeley ward (near UCB) for a couple of years and it would be very easy to have such a class there. In fact, there the difficulty was trying to have an 'orthodox' class (not that I minded). OTOH, we also attend a ward in Murray Utah for a year and it would have been extrememly difficult to staff anything but an orhtodox class there.

Upon reflection, I think the best solution may be to have church sanctioned materials and then to encourage wards to consider the two track approach, but leave it up to them.

I'm open to this. The very existence of the official possibility of a heterodox class would encourage some people in that direction, would ameliorate some of the stigma, and would improve the staffing situation.

I suspect a heterodox class would often be small-ish, but would often be a very good thing for the 8-10 who attended. It would also help the Church dispell the notion that it doesn't encourage thoughtfulness, or that it is trying to keep this or that teaching or incident from the membership.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

I'm open to this. The very existence of the official possibility of a heterodox class would encourage some people in that direction, would ameliorate some of the stigma, and would improve the staffing situation.

I suspect a heterodox class would often be small-ish, but would often be a very good thing for the 8-10 who attended. It would also help the Church dispell the notion that it doesn't encourage thoughtfulness, or that it is trying to keep this or that teaching or incident from the membership.

I also think it would be important to be careful in identifying the classes. I would not want to call it 'orthodox' and 'heterdox', for example, as I think that would have the potential to add to the stigma to whcih you refer and create some suspicions and even animus between groups. Instead, it should be somethign very neutral.

Rtaher than create a heterodox class of members as a subset within the church, I would prefer to see the church come to accept all persons as part of the body of Christ. IOW, rather than risk such a SS class being seen as the wayward people to whom the church caters by letting them be negative on Sunday (which is a real risk if the concept is not promoted correctly), I would prefer to see it adopted by the churhc in such a way that people could attend as a matter of choice and no one wold wonder abotu it at all. In my mind, the manner in wihch this sort of concept is introduced, identified and intiially impolemented would make a big difference in how it is accepted and perceived.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by Sleeping in EQ

I don't appreciate you trying to make this about me being "touchy." The guy dealt with exactly zero of the issues that have been introduced, and did so in a dismissive manner. His whole effort reads like an attempt to misconstrue.

Face it, you're waaaayyyyy too touchy. Lighten up.

[MikeWaters]

The fact is, SEIQ, that hardly anyone in the church cares. Apathy reigns, and I have no desire to combat it.

Sunday School is a crapshoot, and the best thing to do if you don't like it, is not attend.

Eventually if only 10 people are in SS, the Bishopric may get the message.

Don't directly complain or make "helpful" suggestions. You will only be resented.

I admire you for your idealism, but I lost mine a long time ago.

[MikeWaters]

The problem is:

what is correct doctrine?

I have no idea what correct doctrine is.

Probably the best definition is: "general consensus statements from multiple living general authorities."

And that is a pretty small box of doctrine.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by Adam

The distinction between the classes SIEQ has in mind might be this:

Class 1: This class is a wonderful opportunity to apply the scriptures to your life! Come ready to share your personal experiences about how isolated verses or portions of verses pulled out of their context have blessed and shaped your life. In our class we focus on feeling the fruits of the Spirit--love, joy, and happiness. Our goal is that you leave feeling loved and feeling affirmed.

Class 2: This class is about understanding the doctrines taught by the Prophets in the context of which they were taught. Come ready to learn--bring a pad to take notes on and marking pens for your standard works. In our class we focus on learning the Gospel of Jesus Christ, believing that a correct understanding of doctrine will have a greater impact on our lives then will transitory emotion or group-think affirmation sessions. Our goal is that you leave each class with a greater knowledge and understanding of God's dealings with the scriptural actors so that you might know God's dealings with you better as a result.

Subtracting the inferred criticism of class 1, I think this is a pretty good way to look at it.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

The problem is:

what is correct doctrine?

I have no idea what correct doctrine is.

Probably the best definition is: "general consensus statements from multiple living general authorities."

And that is a pretty small box of doctrine.

You sound like SU. Your question could be the first week's lesson.

[MikeWaters]

Correct doctine is a theoretical construct.

How correct doctrine is accessed or divined, is another matter.

Finding correct doctrine among humans is like doing statistics with Excel. You are bound to have some rounding errors.

[creekster]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Correct doctine is a theoretical construct.

How correct doctrine is accessed or divined, is another matter.

Finding correct doctrine among humans is like doing statistics with Excel. You are bound to have some rounding errors.

True, but in class 2 you don't need to have one answer. That's the point.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by creekster

True, but in class 2 you don't need to have one answer. That's the point.

Of course I agree with this. But I think tolerance for this sort of thing is generally pretty low.

Challenging the conventional wisdom is frowned upon in large social bureaucracies.