Age Change Announcement

[dahlia]

So - let me make sure I understand this - beginning in January, 12 yr olds will come to Sunday School? I'm not a fan. I like being around adults. Even in Sunday School (and certainly in RS) topics come up that are for adults. I think having kids around waters down the environment. I have a hard enough time with the Women's meeting during Conference for the same reasons; you can't forget that there are children in the audience.  Obviously, this isn't for every topic, but geez, sometimes I want to learn from adults who have something to say or some life knowledge to impart. 

It looks like the Church is trying to consolidate all these different classes/groups, and I dig that, but  maybe this is too much.  Am I missing something? I don't look to children for inspiration or guidance on adult life problems or adult level education on the Scriptures. Bah humbug.

[Just_A_Guy]

I read it as there still being age-specific Sunday School classes.  “Sunday School” technically encompasses *all* post-Primary instruction (other than quorums/Relief Society/Young Women, of course), not just the grownups.  

Edited December 14, 2018 by Just_A_Guy

[Jane_Doe]

Great minds think alike: we all started 4 threads on this.  Perhaps we should pick one and close the others? 

 

[Jane_Doe]

9 minutes ago, dahlia said:

So - let me make sure I understand this - beginning in January, 12 yr olds will come to Sunday School? I'm not a fan. I like being around adults. Even in Sunday School (and certainly in RS) topics come up that are for adults. I think having kids around waters down the environment. I have a hard enough time with the Women's meeting during Conference for the same reasons; you can't forget that there are children in the audience.  Obviously, this isn't for every topic, but geez, sometimes I want to learn from adults who have something to say or some life knowledge to impart. 

It looks like the Church is trying to consolidate all these different classes/groups, and I dig that, but  maybe this is too much.  Am I missing something? I don't look to children for inspiration or guidance on adult life problems or adult level education on the Scriptures. Bah humbug.

They'd attend youth specific Sunday School, as they do when they turn 12 now.  The change is simply instead of individuals kids moving up to youth classes as the turn 12, the entire class moves up together in January.  

There will be no kids coming up to adult classes.  

[dahlia]

1 minute ago, Jane_Doe said:

They'd attend youth specific Sunday School, as they do when they turn 12 now.  The change is simply instead of individuals kids moving up to youth classes as the turn 12, the entire class moves up together in January.  

There will be no kids coming up to adult classes.  

Thanks for that clarification. Whew!

[mirkwood]

https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/multimedia/file/age-group-announcement-january-2019.pdf

[carlimac]

Ok it's still not perfect. Here's one situation in our ward:   We have one girl with a fall birthday in one of the MIA Maid classes. This week I was driving her somewhere in my car with my daughter who is in her school age class ( freshmen in high school) and she was bemoaning the fact that she has to move up to Laurels a whole six months before her friends (there are 7 others) from school and that she hates her SS class because no one she's friends with is in it. So with these changes, she will have to become a laurel a whole year before her friends instead of just 6 months. She is going to be furious.

I still think organizing by school year the way they used to was the best. 

 

And for some reason, receiving the priesthood at 11 just doesn't feel right to me. what if their birthday is Dec. 31st and they are immature. that's like a 10 yr old holding the priesthood. 😟

Edited December 14, 2018 by carlimac

[Vort]

4 minutes ago, carlimac said:

And for some reason, receiving the priesthood at 11 just doesn't feel right to me. what if their birthday is Dec. 31st and they are immature. that's like a 10 yr old holding the priesthood. 😟

An 11-year-old holding the Priesthood is like a 10-year-old holding the Priesthood? We can extend that logic to affirm that a 12-year-old holding the Priesthood is like an 11-year-old holding the Priesthood—which means that the announced change is no change at all. Voilá! Problem solved.

[Jane_Doe]

7 minutes ago, carlimac said:

Ok it's still not perfect. Here's one situation in our ward:   We have one girl with a fall birthday in one of the MIA Maid classes. This week I was driving her somewhere in my car with my daughter who is in her school age class ( freshmen in high school) and she was bemoaning the fact that she has to move up to Laurels a whole six months before her friends (there are 7 others) from school and that she hates her SS class because no one she's friends with is in it. So with these changes, she will have to become a laurel a whole year before her friends instead of just 6 months. She is going to be furious.

I still think organizing by school year the way they used to was the best. 

There's always going to be situations where it's not a perfect fit, hence the instructions specifically allows for exceptions as needed.  

7 minutes ago, carlimac said:

And for some reason, receiving the priesthood at 11 just doesn't feel right to me. what if their birthday is Dec. 31st and they are immature. that's like a 10 yr old holding the priesthood. 😟

I find that people rise to the challenge they are given.  And the priesthood ordination ages have varied a lot through time.  

History of Age for Ordinations

• Before 1877: No age specified; mostly adult men and some boys, ages 8 and up
• 1877: No age specified; mostly youth, ages 9–19
• 1908: Deacons: 12–14; Teachers: 15–17; Priests: 18–21
• 1934: Deacons: 12–14; Teachers: 15–16; Priests: 17–18
• 1954: Deacons: 12–13; Teachers: 14–15; Priests: 16–19
• 2012: Deacons: 12–13; Teachers: 14–15; Priests: 16–18

[carlimac]

5 minutes ago, Vort said:

An 11-year-old holding the Priesthood is like a 10-year-old holding the Priesthood? We can extend that logic to affirm that a 12-year-old holding the Priesthood is like an 11-year-old holding the Priesthood—which means that the announced change is no change at all. Voilá! Problem solved.

You missed the point.

[Vort]

8 minutes ago, carlimac said:

You missed the point.

No, actually, I'm pretty sure I didn't miss the point.

[anatess2]

So... a Priest graduates into YSA in January too?  Or is that still has to be 18?

Edited December 14, 2018 by anatess2

[Jane_Doe]

13 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

So... a Priest graduates into YSA in January too?  Or is that still has to be 18?

Nothing about 18 year olds moving up faster.  

In my areas, the culture is to have the HS graduating boys to move up to YSA/adult classes when they graduate HS, regardless of age.

Edited December 14, 2018 by Jane_Doe

[anatess2]

5 minutes ago, Jane_Doe said:

Nothing about 18 year olds moving up faster.  

In my areas, the culture is to have the HS graduating boys to move up to YSA/adult classes when they graduate HS, regardless of age.

Hah.  They haven't had a Ben Shapiro in that area then. 

 

[MrShorty]

1 hour ago, carlimac said:

I still think organizing by school year the way they used to was the best. 

FAQ #7 in the full document says that, where desirable, something other than calendar year can be considered. I am not sure if "area" in this FAQ refers to a generic area or if it specifically refers to the Area bureaucratic subunit of the Church, so I don't know who decides (probably decided by Area Presidency). While I agree with you that school year makes a lot of sense, Bureaucratic inertia will make it difficult to change in areas that have been advancing on calendar year for a long time. I will note that I do not recall ever advancing by school year. It has always been by calendar year (or birthday) as long as I can remember (which doesn't mean much, other than to say that I think there will be a lot of inertia to remain on calendar year basis in the US anyway).

Edited December 14, 2018 by MrShorty

[carlimac]

2 hours ago, Vort said:

No, actually, I'm pretty sure I didn't miss the point.

NO actually you thought you were so crafty and in true Vort form wanted to make someone feel like an idiot. does that make you feel so much better about yourself?  So you twisted it to make me look like a fool and  you didn't address my concern at all.  

[Vort]

57 minutes ago, carlimac said:

NO actually you thought you were so crafty and in true Vort form wanted to make someone feel like an idiot. does that make you feel so much better about yourself?  So you twisted it to make me look like a fool and  you didn't address my concern at all.  

The point was not to make you "feel like an idiot". The point was that saying that one age is "like" another is denying any variance in age. Which is silly. Which you know.

You discount the changes made by those whose duty it is to make changes, and you discount those changes by using a specious argument. I think you would do much better to find reasons to sustain the prophets rather than searching for reasons to disparage their decisions.

[Vort]

3 hours ago, Jane_Doe said:

There's always going to be situations where it's not a perfect fit, hence the instructions specifically allows for exceptions as needed.  

I find that people rise to the challenge they are given.  And the priesthood ordination ages have varied a lot through time.  

History of Age for Ordinations

• Before 1877: No age specified; mostly adult men and some boys, ages 8 and up
• 1877: No age specified; mostly youth, ages 9–19
• 1908: Deacons: 12–14; Teachers: 15–17; Priests: 18–21
• 1934: Deacons: 12–14; Teachers: 15–16; Priests: 17–18
• 1954: Deacons: 12–13; Teachers: 14–15; Priests: 16–19
• 2012: Deacons: 12–13; Teachers: 14–15; Priests: 16–18

• 2019: Deacons: 12th year in January; Teachers: 14th year in January; Priests: 16th year in January

[Grunt]

Are we forgetting that priesthood holders also have to be worthy of it?  One of my children, who just turned 8, has what I believe to be a better grasp of the priesthood than many teens.

[Lost Boy]

This was a bit unexpected.  My youngest is 17 so it doesn't affect me at all.  I don't see any real concern. And considering it is of divine origin it should be an improvement.

[JohnsonJones]

Okay...I'll have to read it more, but as defined by our Stake Presidency this is how we are doing it...

11 year olds attend primary classes.  WHEN THEY TURN 12, they start going to priesthood and no longer attend Primary classes or Primary.  Thus, they will go to the 12 year old classes.  This occurs when they turn 12.  I have not been notified of ANY 11 year olds getting the priesthood.

When they turn 18 they go into the Adult classes.

Of course, this was up until this past week.  This letter seems to indicate that this idea has changed (as of today).  This means that yes...it could be interpreted that a nigh 10 year old will get the priesthood.  We have a kid that just turned 11.  On January he will be 11 years and a few weeks old.  THIS seems a tad extreme.  I suppose we may start ordaining them when they are 8 years and just baptized next?

Ah well...we aren't asked for our thoughts, but are to follow church policy. 

I do wonder if we will have clarification on this from the Stake or higher.  That seems extreme, but it probably seemed extreme to many when the age someone could be a Deacon was officially defined at the age of 12 as well.

[Vort]

3 hours ago, JohnsonJones said:

11 year olds attend primary classes.  WHEN THEY TURN 12, they start going to priesthood and no longer attend Primary classes or Primary.  Thus, they will go to the 12 year old classes.  This occurs when they turn 12.  I have not been notified of ANY 11 year olds getting the priesthood.

That's because it was only just announced. You will be getting notification probably this week.

[Colirio]

What a great new policy! 

 

This potentially allows several new deacons to enter the program at the same time. They will also transition to the next Priesthood office at the same time in two years. Stronger bonds can be formed by quorums who are together for the full two years and then transition into the next quorum together. 

[Colirio]

9 hours ago, carlimac said:

I still think organizing by school year the way they used to was the best. 

 

President Henry B. Eyring

April 2017 General Conference

"Walk With Me"

"The second lesson is that the Lord’s work is not just to solve problems; it is to build people. So as you walk with Him in priesthood service, you may find that sometimes what seems like the most efficient solution is not the Lord’s preferred solution because it does not allow people to grow. If you listen, He will teach you His ways. Remember that God’s work and glory is not simply to run an effective organization; it is “to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man” (Moses 1:39). This is, after all, why He gives His priesthood authority to flawed mortals like you and me and invites us to participate in His work. Our progress is His work!" 

[Guest]

On 12/14/2018 at 2:23 PM, carlimac said:

NO actually you thought you were so crafty and in true Vort form wanted to make someone feel like an idiot. does that make you feel so much better about yourself?  So you twisted it to make me look like a fool and  you didn't address my concern at all.  

You didn't need any help from him for that.