How much stock do we put in the statements of our seminary/institute teachers?

[Backroads]

The head honcho at my office sent out an email this morning that was rather quite LDS focused where he had to spell out the duties of seminary and institute teachers because of rumors of a certain church pulling out of a certain organization if certain things happen that was being spread as fact by a bunch of local seminary teachers.

Kind of sad the man had to do this in a technically non-LDS office, but it seems lots of people will believe anything seminary and institute teachers say.

So, how do we judge the statements of these teachers? I hate to send kids and young adults to classes and say something along the lines of "don't believe anything they say until you find other evidence" but we've all heard stories of trouble caused by foolish opinions and statements. What is the right attitude?

[MarginOfError]

I've long believed that seminary and institute teachers are responsible for the circulation of more false doctrine and general nonsense than any other group of people in the church.

I don't necessarily fault them for this. They have a tough job; they are exposed to their students more; and they are required to fill more time with content than anyone else in the church (you could claim parents, but I think the concentration of content per hour parented is probably lower). When you combine that with a general lack of critical thinking skills (especially in teenagers--again, not their fault, but the developmental process is incomplete), it's a recipe for trouble.

Having said all that, I wouldn't trade this system for anything else. It works too many miracles and establishes too many testimonies to give up. But we ought to work harder on teaching the teachers to have proper documentation for their claims available.

[Backroads]

I also wonder how much of what they say is correct but gets completely twisted by students...

[Vort]

I've long believed that seminary and institute teachers are responsible for the circulation of more false doctrine and general nonsense than any other group of people in the church.

I don't necessarily fault them for this. They have a tough job; they are exposed to their students more; and they are required to fill more time with content than anyone else in the church (you could claim parents, but I think the concentration of content per hour parented is probably lower). When you combine that with a general lack of critical thinking skills (especially in teenagers--again, not their fault, but the developmental process is incomplete), it's a recipe for trouble.

Having said all that, I wouldn't trade this system for anything else. It works too many miracles and establishes too many testimonies to give up. But we ought to work harder on teaching the teachers to have proper documentation for their claims available.

Huh. Another case where MoE and I are in agreement.

[Backroads]

Huh. Another case where MoE and I are in agreement.

Disturbing.

[NeuroTypical]

So, how do we judge the statements of these teachers? What is the right attitude?

Here's someone who is doing the best they can, to do something for you. (Unless they're not, and seem to be there for other reasons which may seem obvious, but you probably don't know for sure.)

They're not perfect, they're human. If something sounds wrong, come tell me or your mother, and we'll look it up. Who knows - maybe they're right.

[Guest]

Seminary was tremendously helpful for me. I heard a lot of hooey though. Thankfully I recognized it as such. I guess this is a good reminder that we need to keep communication open with our children and make sure we're teaching them from the scriptures at home.

[Anddenex]

This is more a matter of who actually speaks for the Church, or any local organization within the Church.

Thus, if nothing has been spoken by the mouth of our prophets, seers, and revelators then we can see that these seminary teachers are acting according to their own thoughts, which may or may not resemble our leaders.

We judge them by stewardship. What stewards do they have? If they say their children will not be involved in scouts because of certain decisions then that is their right and choice.

If they say the Church will withdraw, without our leaders saying anything, then we can politely regard their words as their opinion and they are being over zealous, unless our leaders then speak out which verify their words -- then we can either consider them lucky, or spiritually guided.

My personal thoughts.

[Guest gopecon]

There's no reason to think that they are less reliable than anyone else in the Church, and the primary material that they should teach from is Church approved. Are there some who think too highly of their own intellect? Sure there are, but you could find people who fit that in almost any group out there.

[Wingnut]

There's no reason to think that they are less reliable than anyone else in the Church, and the primary material that they should teach from is Church approved.

Yes, it is.

[NeuroTypical]

Maybe it's just my being a homeschooling parent, but we're not really too big on the whole "respect and obey and believe all your elders all the time" thing. That notion seems to be real good for making a classroom full of kids manageable, but it comes with a lot of drawbacks we prefer to avoid.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

I hate to send kids and young adults to classes and say something along the lines of "don't believe anything they say until you find other evidence" but we've all heard stories of trouble caused by foolish opinions and statements. What is the right attitude?

Actually, IMO that is the right attitude. I try to teachmy children to think for themselves...whether the information comes from a teacher, the media, a doctor etc. I don't mean you have to doubt everything you hear, but trust yourself, if something doesn't seem right. . .

At home we invite the kids to talk about how they feel and what they think. We have long family discussions. I encourage all my kids to take a debate class.

[Dravin]

So, how do we judge the statements of these teachers? I hate to send kids and young adults to classes and say something along the lines of "don't believe anything they say until you find other evidence" but we've all heard stories of trouble caused by foolish opinions and statements. What is the right attitude?

Being able to evaluate sources and claims is an important life skill. I'm not sure I'd classify it as "Don't believe without a citation." but more "when deciding how much credence to give a claim you need to take your own experience, the experience and authority of the person stating it, and any ancillary sources/citations into considerations."

[Backroads]

Being able to evaluate sources and claims is an important life skill. I'm not sure I'd classify it as "Don't believe without a citation." but more "when deciding how much credence to give a claim you need to take your own experience, the experience and authority of the person stating it, and any ancillary sources/citations into considerations."

Your wording would be best to give to the youngsters. I do think a seminary/institute teacher should be considered in general circumstances a fairly decent gospel resource--but not as the gospel itself.

Granted, my OP situation is definitely policy rather than gospel, but in this case they weren't even good sources of policy.

[Dravin]

Your wording would be best to give to the youngsters. I do think a seminary/institute teacher should be considered in general circumstances a fairly decent gospel resource--but not as the gospel itself.

Why? What makes a seminary/institute teacher a more decent gospel resource than any other teacher in the Church?

[derblitzenator]

I had one institute teacher that tried to pass off his personal opinions on a variety of topics as church doctrine. He would say one thing every other class or so that clearly wasn't doctrine. Since I was in law school at the time, I was never hesitant to correct him and argue the point. Unfortunately, it detracted from his lesson and I could sense from his body language that he wasn't too comfortable with me questioning him, so I stopped going. I don't recall everything he said, but here's few items that I disagreed with him about:

1) All gays come from an abusive background

2) You should start each date with a prayer

3) You can marry any other righteous person and it will work

The bottom line is that you should take what you learn from institute/seminary teachers and compare it with the scriptures and what other church leaders have said on the topic. All teachers are human and have certain biased, so it's practically impossible to be spoon fed 100% doctrine every class.

[NeuroTypical]

I was somewhere around 11 yrs old when I was taught that the 'third part' that sided with Lucifer in heaven, came to earth and got bodies. So one out of every three people you meet on any given day, is a demon in disguise.

I also had a primary teacher who pulled up shop and moved to Missouri, so he could be there before everyone else got called by the prophet to go move there. But I don't really remember anything about his lessons, so they were probably ok and out of the manual.

[Backroads]

Why? What makes a seminary/institute teacher a more decent gospel resource than any other teacher in the Church?

Never said a better resource, probably just as much as anyone. I don't like the idea of full-out considering seminary teachers as lesser sources.

[Backroads]

But I don't really remember anything about his lessons, so they were probably ok and out of the manual.

So the lesson is... if it ain't memorable, it was probably true?

[pam]

Huh. Another case where MoE and I are in agreement.

You know how people say they are going to mark that day on their calendar. Well I put it on the site calendar.

http://www.lds.net/forums/calendar.php?do=getinfo&e=34&day=2013-1-31&c=1

[Vort]

You know how people say they are going to mark that day on their calendar. Well I put it on the site calendar.

http://www.lds.net/forums/calendar.php?do=getinfo&e=34&day=2013-1-31&c=1

Needing the LOL.

[Guest gopecon]

Why? What makes a seminary/institute teacher a more decent gospel resource than any other teacher in the Church?

The fact that full time teachers are vetted a lot more carefully than your average Sunday School teacher. Institute teachers in particular generally have graduate degrees in religion. Does this make them perfect? No, but probably a better source than the Sunday School teacher who just returned to activity a year ago, or a convert, etc.

[Dravin]

Never said a better resource, probably just as much as anyone. I don't like the idea of full-out considering seminary teachers as lesser sources.

Lesser sources compared to what?

The fact that full time teachers are vetted a lot more carefully than your average Sunday School teacher.

Okay, that covers one type of seminary teacher, what about those who aren't full time?

Institute teachers in particular generally have graduate degrees in religion.

Statistics? If you want to claim, "Institute teachers with graduate degrees in religion (relevant to LDS doctrines) are a better source than your average Sunday school teacher." I'll agree with that.

Edited February 1, 2013 by Dravin

[Vort]

Statistics? If you want to claim, "Institute teachers with graduate degrees in religion (relevant to LDS doctrines) are a better source than your average Gospel Doctrine teacher." I'll agree with that.

Not sure I would. The most knowledgeable people about gospel principles that I personally have known have not been CES employees, but those who, day by day for decades, studied the scriptures and prayed. I'm not even convinced that they outdo the average gospel doctrine teacher, though I admit that in some cases that's a pretty low bar. Furthermore, CES employees tend to have some unrelenting views that they attribute to LDS doctrine which in fact are no such thing (e.g. organic evolution being false).

[Dravin]

Not sure I would. The most knowledgeable people about gospel principles that I personally have known have not been CES employees, but those who, day by day for decades, studied the scriptures and prayed. I'm not even convinced that they outdo the average gospel doctrine teacher, though I admit that in some cases that's a pretty low bar. Furthermore, CES employees tend to have some unrelenting views that they attribute to LDS doctrine which in fact are no such thing (e.g. organic evolution being false).

Well, it really comes down to what you are considering average. I understand where you are getting at, I'm just inclined to figure someone with a graduate degree will at least be able to give citations that can be checked up on. I have to admit that I'm speaking in a personal knowledge vacuum, I've never been taught by a CES employed religious studies graduate degree holding Institute teacher.

For the record I'm ambivalent on the supposed superiority or inferiority of seminary and institute teachers. I'm inclined to think that the individual is the overwhelming factor, not the title.

Edited February 1, 2013 by Dravin