Can a Family Really be Happy?

                Some years ago I was out at our mailbox when my neighbor and friend came to see what was in his box. We struck up a conversation and it turned to family. He asked me for some advice on families and the raising of children. It was a general question and I always think that behind a general question lies a more specific question, so I just answered him in generalities, hoping to get to the real point. He finally came to it. He wanted some specific answers on why (in his perception) my children had turned out so well.

                I think they have turned out well but I’ll leave that judgement to others. My wife and I have eight children, seven living. We saw our second daughter die at 4 months old, so we have raised seven. All are now adults and are fully functioning people in society and are happy. My neighbor has a smaller and younger family. His desire was that he would like his children to turn out like ours, if possible, and wanted to know what he should do. 

                “You’ve got to have a plan. These kids don’t raise themselves, although many of them think they can and far too many parents leave them alone to do just that. No, you have to plan to be an intentional parent. You have to be a parent with a purpose.”

                It really is a two-part plan that you need. I think every parent of a newborn looks at their infant and feels like they have a plan: “I will love them and provide for them and guide them and all will be well.” That is a good start, but just as the old military maxim “No battle plan survives contact with the enemy” is true, so initial plans of parents rarely survive contact with a cranky, screaming 2 year old or a 12 year old with a defiant attitude or a teenager determined to make every wrong choice possible. In those 3 cases the kids are bare likeable, let alone loveable. Surface plans are a beginning, but they have to be supported by a deeper more fundamental strategy.

                “What’s yours?” he asked.

                “Ours is and has been to raise our children in the light of the restored gospel of Jesus Christ.”

                He was curious and invited me to expound. I told him that the gospel provided the principles, the teachings, and the context that was applicable in all situations and at all times. For example, I paraphrased to him from the 13^th chapter of the book of Proverbs, the passage that essentially says if you spare the rod, then you are not loving your children. But the rod is not a stick for beating your children. It is, as prophets in the Book of Mormon have taught, the “word of God” which is found in scripture. So we as a family studied scriptures on as regular a basis as we could work out. We prayed as a family to thank God and petition His blessings on us. We worshipped together in church and associated with good people who strengthen us. We tried to have good, wholesome family activities which were sometimes work (not always appreciated by everyone) and sometimes play. We supported one another.

                “But what did you do when things went wrong?”

                They often did, and still on occasion do but there is more help available. Another Book of Mormon prophet had a son that went seriously astray. His response? Assume that he needed re-teaching. Assume that this is a child of God who has failed to understand. So he was re-taught and as a result he self-corrected. Now that doesn’t work all the time, and it doesn’t always work quickly, but it is a starting place, a part of an overall plan. I have had to teach and re-teach my children many times which initially was frustrating until I remembered how many times I have had to be taught and retaught. We are all susceptible to it.

                We carried on our conversation for a bit longer. He was most grateful for the help. I have been most grateful for the constant help I have received in raising my family and the source of it has been the restored gospel as found in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Repetition - I Repeat - Repetition is Critical

            Part of our missionary assignment in Brockton has us teaching English classes 2-3 times a week. We have about 10 students, some coming every time and others just coming as they are able. Some are very serious about learning and others just come for the social aspect of the gathering. We have tried a lot of different ways to teach a foreign language (English) to this wonderful immigrant population. We have used a program supported by the church called Daily Dose. We have done a lot of reading and vocabulary building. All of it works to a certain extent but we are just not seeing real, lasting progress.

            Last week we decided to do something different. We brought a box of everyday things: silverware, plates, cups, staplers, a ruler, etc. As the class began I said that we would only be speaking English tonight. I would not say anything or answer anything in Portuguese, only English. They were all puzzled by it but we began. We only worked on four sentences. I would hold up something and ask “What is this?” They would be required to answer “That is a spoon.” We were trying to teach them the difference between “this” and “that” so I had to move around the room, showing them distances and the difference between something close and something farther away, and which words to use in each case. We were also trying to teach them how to construct a sentence. When I ask "What is this" the tendency is to simply answer "Spoon". We continually required that they respond in a full sentence and this took a lot of effort on their part.

            We did this over and over. We made them pronounce correctly, repeating constantly. We made them say “this” and “that”. We must have used the question “What is this” a hundred times that night and they consequently had to answer “That is…..” an equal number of times. We made steady corrections. By the end of the night they were asking and answering each other correctly. It felt tedious. But by the time class ended, they all had it. They all understood and could ask and answer that basic question. And they all said it was the best class ever. They loved it and want to do it again. As a follow up, last night was our class and we started with a review. I held up a knife and asked "What is this" and they all answered with a full sentence: "That is a knife."

            Whenever I read about any kind of learning that says “…and no tedious memorization” I wonder what it is they are going to do in place of repetition and memorization. There are just certain things we have to commit to memory and the best way to do that is through constant repetition. I have been working since January trying to recapture the use and fluency of the Portuguese language since it is required for the work I do here. Obviously the best thing to do is to speak it and I do speak it a lot. But I spend a good chunk of time each day memorizing verb conjugations, vocabulary lists, reading aloud, and peppering the Brazilian missionaries with language questions. And the only way I can keep a new concept in my head is by repetition. I have to say and use it over and over again. I have to write it down, refer to it, say it, use it, and make it a part of what I do and say each day. It is the dull tedium of repetition that makes learning come alive. 

            If you’re ever tempted to say “I just don’t want to memorize this or have to repeat this again”, what you might be saying is “I just don’t want to learn this.”

The Leaf Hackers

"For every thousand hacking at the leaves of a problem, there is one striking at the root"

            That quote is attributed to Henry David Thoreau and I’ve seen it rendered in a few different ways but the model above is the most common and expresses well the idea. Every evil has a root that allows it to grow and then be expressed in a variety of ways. The expression of evil is the leaves. It is useful to trim the leaves to curtail the expression of evil but evil will always exist until we can identify the root and take action against it.

            The evil of slaughtering innocent people is growing in our nation and in the world. There is a large segment of our society – politicians, educators, entertainment types, religious leaders – who have seen the evil and misidentified (either purposefully or ignorantly) its root as the proliferation of guns. Obviously the use of guns can kill people, but they really are not the root of the problem. Guns in the hands of those who guard our political leaders and their families are seen as a blessing. Guns in the hands of law enforcement and military personnel are good not evil. A gun in the hands of a father or mother protecting family during a home invasion could be seen as a good thing.

            Since guns can be used for both good and evil purposes, what is the deciding factor?  You have to add in the other element of the equation which is the person using the gun. If the person using the gun is evil then the gun (or knife, or lead pipe, or poison) is used for evil purposes. Logically, (and the amount of logic required to reach this conclusion is minimal) the gun – the inanimate object - cannot be good or evil. It is the person using it that determines the nature of the usage. To assign evil to an inanimate object is pure nonsense and a diversion from the real problem.

            We live in a time and place where standards have largely been thrown away. It becomes increasingly difficult to tell right from wrong. I wonder if those concepts can even be taught anymore in schools. To teach right and wrong is to hold up something as better or worse than something else and that will inevitably offend someone or hurt someone’s feelings and is therefore not allowed. We live in a time and place where religious teachings have been thrown aside, where they are rarely allowed to be expressed or considered in a public place. And yet, what is the basis for morality if not religious teachings? How do we in the Western world know that it is not right to kill someone if not for the Ten Commandments and a clear understanding of them?

            The root of the problem of slaughtering innocent people is not an excess of guns. It is the vacuum created by not allowing moral truth to be taught in society. That vacuum will then be filled by whatever feels right to an individual even if what they feel is completely and fully wrong. Murder is wrong – completely – but without the teachings of religion you would not naturally know that.

            So if these teachings are not allowed openly in the public square then one key part of the solution – the striking at the root – has to be that we teach them more clearly in the home. We need more homes with parents that understand their duty to teach children to understand truth and to act on it. We need more homes and more parents who teach right versus wrong, truth versus error, and good versus evil, and who teach their families to act for right and against wrong. Only then will we begin to see this evil of slaughter (and similar evils) fade away. The longer we keep misidentifying the root and offering solutions that allow us to feel good about trimming the leaves, the larger the problem grows. Feeling good about your solution doesn’t solve any problem, it’s only a diversion. Often a real solution is painful and takes serious courage. 

            We all see the same things. How we interpret the data has long term ramifications. We are in the midst of watching national leaders and opinion makers continually misinterpret the data and thus try to correct a massive problem in a way that will never fix it. We are being led by a stunning array of self-congratulatory leaf hackers who feel good but solve no problems.

            A return to morality, to the teachings of the Savior of the world, is the only real and lasting way to make the correction. 

The Real, Genuine Teacher

            As a classroom teacher I always wanted to control the teaching/learning atmosphere as much as possible. I would arrange the room, use the media well, and ensure that the walls had appropriate things hung on them. I worked under the belief that if the physical atmosphere was well managed then both the teaching and the learning would be elevated.

            Teaching as a missionary brings a whole new dimension to the teaching atmosphere because a missionary can rarely control the physical aspect of it. You are invited into someone's home and you just go with what is there. Here are 3 experiences I had last week. The first was in the evening. A mother and her teen-age son are studying with us. We went for a lesson and she was trying to get dinner ready, keep her other 3 younger daughters under control, keep the television off or at least keep the volume down, answer the phone, and be engaged in the lesson. Not an ideal situation.

            That was followed by a lesson with a single man who lives in a hotel. We taught him in the lobby of the hotel. There were 2 chairs in the whole lobby. He sat in one, I in the other, and the two young missionaries stood. People were coming in and out, the desk clerk was right by us and there was the usual commotion associated with a public place. Again, not ideal.

            Two days later we went at 10 a.m. to a home to teach a single woman. She lives in a 3-story, 6-unit building, the type that are so common in these parts. She couldn’t invite us in because one of her roommates had started drinking earlier in the morning and was well into his first six pack of the day and not in a good mood. So we stood on the porch and taught – we in our white shirts and ties, she in her bathrobe. We competed with her phone, the trash trucks, a fire engine, lots of neighbors flowing in and out of the building, and the general noise of the street. Far, far from the ideal.

            All three of these situations would never be considered excellent teaching venues, but here is what happened. The first woman and her son were on their fourth discussion and it went well. She shared with us some experiences from her life where she felt the Spirit but didn’t know what it was that kept guiding her towards better things. We helped her see what it was and she was filled with the Spirit again. The second man had already committed to baptism and this was a little tune up lesson for him. He accepted it very well. He was edified as we all were. The third woman was very agreeable to the message, accepted a Book of Mormon, committed to read it each night, and invited us back.

            What made these lessons come alive and overcome very poor ‘classroom’ set ups? Of course, it was the presence of the Holy Ghost. Nothing makes teaching too difficult for Him. When we pray and invite His presence, real teaching and learning occurs no matter what the setting and situation. Now, what will happen with these people and their relationship to the church only time and experience will tell. But I do know that on each of those particular occasions they were given the best opportunity to hear and accept the message because of the presence and active involvement of the Spirit in the teaching process 

Find a Way to Reach Them All

            Teaching is a very simple thing to do, when it appears in the hands of an accomplished teacher

            Teaching is more complex along the path to becoming an accomplished teacher. Part of the complexity is who are the students in the class and what baggage have they brought with them.

            I’ve been teaching a seminary class 1-2 days a week in our ward here in Brockton. There are 7-8 students. For convenience and proximity we meet in the basement of the home of a member of the ward. The class meets from 5:45-6:30am, and then the students catch a bus one block away to get to the high school. These are good and bright kids whose faithfulness is witnessed by their willingness to be in this class at such an early hour.

            However, my first 4-5 times teaching I could not engage them. They were distant and nothing I did could bring them closer. We are studying the Old Testament, the second half, and it is a real challenge. I would go home each morning thinking I had failed them because I hadn’t reached them. They had just endured the class. I was reminded of a scene from the 1995 movie, “Mr. Holland’s Opus” where the coach is begging Mr. Holland, the music teacher, to find a way to teach Lou Russ, his star wrestler, to play the drums so he could pass his band class and stay eligible to wrestle. Mr. Holland is explaining that Lou simply can’t find the beat. The coach then says, “You’re a teacher and you have a willing student and you can’t find a way to teach him? Then you’re a lousy teacher.” (If you want to see that scene, go on Youtube and search Mr. Holland’s Opus and find the scene Lou Finds the Beat.)

            Those words kept ringing in my ears - "You're a lousy teacher" - so I spent one morning just thinking of ways to teach them. It came after some time pondering. The challenge was the physical Bible. It is big and I think to them impenetrable. I don’t blame them because among many adults in the church the last half of the Old Testament is difficult to grasp. Add to that challenge is this fact: English is a second language for all of these kids. They grew up speaking Portuguese Creole as their first language. They are fluent in spoken English but the written word is tough.

            So I did a few things different the next class. I removed all of the copies of the scriptures from the tables. In their place I had prepared a one page sheet with 6 verses we were going to focus on. I modified the words slightly so as to make them more easily understood. I rearranged the tables in a new configuration to signal to them as they walked in that something was different about this class. And then instead of standing to teach I just sat at the tables with them. When the class began I told them that our goal was to simply understand what was written here and learn one gospel principle from this page. It took some gentle leaning on them but at the end of class they got it. I was elated.

            The next class I did essentially the same thing and the results were even better. It was a real class with talking and exchanges and challenges and laughter. It was a great seminary class even though it lacked a class presidency, a devotional, scripture mastery, and 50 minutes of instruction. It was just a class stripped down to its essence – students, scriptures, teacher, and especially the Spirit. Two of the chronically tardy students even came on time.

            This whole experience reinforced the idea that some students and classes are easier to reach and others take more time and effort, but all can be reached, and all are worth reaching. 

Simple and Clear

I sat in on a missionary discussion the other night. It was with a woman and her son who both had recently joined the church. They were being taught a follow up lesson on the Plan of Salvation. I was with two really good missionaries. They teach well and they teach well together, almost seamless in their transitions from one teaching to the other. After the lesson we three talked about it and they both agreed that it wasn’t their strongest teaching effort. I offered, as I always do, to give them some feedback and they readily accepted, as they always do.

The feedback was this: they taught the Plan of Salvation in an unnecessarily complicated way. They taught it in the standard way that we all seem to use, with circles and lines representing different spheres of existence and transitions to and from those spheres. But it took over 30 minutes to get all of that on paper. And the reason it took so long is that there were dozens of digressions.

The Plan is vast and it touches at the very heart of what we believe. It helps us understand where we came from, why we are here, and where we are going. As we begin to talk about it and teach its truths, we are easily distracted by another example, another appendage to it, another story we’ve heard about one of the facets of the plan, by any number of things that keep us from communicating simply and clearly what that Plan of Salvation really is.  We, the teachers, are not bothered by the digressions because we understand the basics, but those trying to learn them get confused by what is really important and what is less so. And when the lesson is over they are not really sure which points are critical. If we can’t teach the Plan in a straightforward way, we lose people who can’t hack their way through the dense forest of facts we have built for them in order to see the truth at the center.

The lesson of the feedback was this: the best teaching is clear and simple. It is always clear and simple. The circle and line drawing can be put on paper in 10 minutes. It can be clearly explained in not much more time than that. If we teach it in that manner and the Spirit is present, the student/learner will have questions. She will begin to ask questions about the parts and pieces she is interested in and that she doesn’t understand. We can then address those. It will be a much more useful learning experience.

I’m not short-changing the beauty of the plan in suggesting that we can teach it very well in a much shorter time. What I am saying is that this particular subject is so filled with details that we could talk about it for hours, explaining more and filling in more with scriptural backing. That is not only unnecessary but confusing to a beginning learning of these things.

If we lay it out simply and clearly it will be easier understood and will create in the learner an increased desire to understand more.

One of the marks of an effective teacher is this: can he teach simply and clearly.

Help Them Understand

I have mentioned before in this blog that the style and quality of teaching is not really important if no learning is taking place. The whole purpose of teaching is so that people can learn. If that is not happening then we need to readjust our teaching so that the outcome is achieved.

Yesterday I went on a teaching appointment with 2 of our elders. We went to the home of a woman who is committed to being baptized in a week and a half. She was a delight and is so full of faith and hope that I was more edified when I left her home than when I entered. During the course of the lesson, which was on commandments, she asked a question about tithing. One of the elders opened to Malachi 3 and read to her verses 8-10, which as you know is the classic biblical reference on the subject. She listened as he read and when he finished she said “I don’t understand a word of it.” It wasn’t said in a mean way, just a factual way.

He then handed her the book and invited her to read the passage, thinking that her own voice might help in understanding. She did read and when she finished one of the elders immediately said “So what do you think it means?” She hesitated, then stumbled a bit in her explanation. Eventually, with the help of these excellent missionaries she came to understand the passage.

As we drove away the Elders asked me how I thought the lesson went. I told them that I would give them a tip about scripture reading. “You could go to any strong, well-established ward and read that same passage and there would be many adults and youth who would tell you that they don’t understand it. Scripture language is in some sense a foreign language until we pay the price in time and effort to understand the language. Not everyone has yet paid the price, even people with strong testimonies. So my tip is this: don’t assume that people automatically understand the scriptures, just because they were read aloud." I shared with them the reference in D&C 68:25, the one that says that parents in Zion need to teach their children the basics of the gospel. But the sweet spot in that verse for me is the line that says “...and teach them not to understand…” It is not just the teaching that is key – it is teaching to understand. That takes more time and more effort.

When I teach, my first question after reading a passage of scripture would not be “So what do you think that means?” because my steady assumption is that they didn’t fully understand what was read. That is not a comment on a person's intelligence. It is rather a feeling I have about what it takes to learn to understand things of the Spirit. And if they truly didn’t understand then we put them on the spot and they mumble something and hang their head and learning stops. We don't want to embarrass people. 

My first response after reading is to comment on it myself and pose a few simple questions to aid them in understanding. After reading “Will a man rob God…” I might say, “Did you catch how God talks about us robbing Him? Can you see in that third (or fourth) line what He says is robbery in His eyes?” I want to summarize and point them back into the passage so that they grasp the meaning of it for themselves. They will begin to understand. They want to understand, they just need help and we, as teachers of the gospel, are in a prime position to help.

It takes listening and sensitivity and a great desire to see people learn in order to help them get the most they can from a lesson. Think of every student as the Ethiopian described in Acts chapter 8. He was reading the scriptures and wanted to understand. When Phillip approached him, he asked "Understandest thou what thou readest?" The response is a classic: "How can I, except some man should guide me (verses 30-31)." Here was a student who wanted to learn and just needed a little help. We can be that help.