Comments on: Mormon Catechisms?

By: Hunter

Hunter — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 16:12:25 +0000

I’ve been wanting to come back and say that I think Ardis said it best above when she argued for a distinction between memorizing (yes, memorizing) principal matters versus tedious, secondary stuff:

“[W]hile names and dates need to be memorized, and key texts should be memorized, it isn’t necessary — may be harmful — to insist on the memorization and verbatim recitation of secondary material. It should be enough for a child to be able to retell in coherent fashion and sufficient detail the story of Noah and the Ark or the events of the Resurrection, for instance, and not repeat word-for-word the modern English version of the story that appears in a lesson manual or The Friend or any other source.”

Amen, sistah!

By: Eric Boysen

Eric Boysen — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 15:48:19 +0000

That reminds me of the talking dog story: “Rough,” “Roof,” “Ruth” … “I should have said DiMaggio.” Now what were the questions?

By: Clark

Clark — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 00:34:33 +0000

Don’t forget the catechism style Q-and-A that appears at the end of every chapter in Lectures on Faith.

I think to a certain extent, catechism is still widely used in Primary and Sunday school. Only today,it’s much easier because regardless of the question asked, the answer is always the same “pray, read your scriptures, go to church…”

By: Eric Boysen

Eric Boysen — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 15:34:01 +0000

As I recall the trouble I had memorizing the 12 sentences of the Scout Law (“A Scout is trustworthy. A Scout is …”) which differ only in one word, I marvel at my 10 year-old’s ability to memorize the Articles of Faith. She has them down cold. In other cultures such memorization is is taken to an amazing level, with some Moslems having memorized the entire Quran, a hold over from pre-literate days, I suppose. I wish I had a similar level of ability, but that will never be.

By: Bookslinger

Bookslinger — Sun, 07 Mar 2010 03:54:22 +0000

Seminary students and missionaries-to-be are still encouraged to memorize 100 scriptures. 25 each from You can buy the Scripture Mastery card sets at ldscatalog.com

By: Maurine

Maurine — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 06:28:25 +0000

The method of teaching young children the songs in Primary is basically memorizing catechism to music. The song leader may explain what the song means, but learning it requires the song leader to break it down into small units and sing and repeat until the song is memorized.

By: kevinf

kevinf — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 20:06:01 +0000

I actually was impressed by the Jacques catechism, at least as far as I read. Doctrines explained in reasonably simple terms, and with scripture references. Memorization of all that, though, would be a non-trivial task.

I didn’t memorize a lot of scriptures when young, but I still remember several of the old Mutual themes from the mid to late 60′s that were direct scriptural quotations. I did memorize the AoF, which along with the scripture mastery scriptures in seminary, seem to be the extent that we push memorization these days, which seems about right.

I compare this with my wife teaching math to junior high school kids. They need to memorize their multiplication tables in elementary, but the emphasis on algebra and geometry is in real world application and context, not just “skill & drill”. As she puts it, she hates just seeing kids sit down and factor pages of polynomials (I hope I am saying that right), but loves to see them work together and solve contextual problems (ie, the dreaded story problems of our youth). Being able to apply doctrinal concepts is better than just memorizing names and dates.

Last thought, though, about scripture memorization (seems to be the day for longer comments). I am pretty good at remembering where particular scriptures are, and my own eclectic marking system helps me find them, but I dread losing my 1979 copy of the Old & New Testaments, and all the work I have invested in it. I have a newer Triple, but it is similarly marked and filled with notes. I’d hardly be as scripturally literate without those copies, even though I also have the scriptures on my smartphone.

By: Anne (U.K)

Anne (U.K) — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 19:23:03 +0000

Maybe children’s minds- or attention spans- have changed over the years. About 12 years ago I was called to teach the 10-11 year olds in Primary, and quickly realised none of them had ever been challenged to learn their Articles of Faith, which were required for an award (?was it Gospel In Action? They were awarded a tie pin or a pendant). Memorising was utterly beyond them. In the end we learned to sing the Articles of Faith and they all passed, me too

A little bit of memorisation is a useful habit, I think. Is it true seminary students don’t need to memorise the seminary scriptures anymore? One of my friends in seminary managed to recite the entire First Vision during a scripture chase final once. I was so deeply impressed.

By: Steve C.

Steve C. — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 18:43:49 +0000

What a fun and thought-provoking post. I remember years ago at a conference a newly returned missionary got up to speak. He stood there and recited the PofGP account of the First Vision and then sat down. It was, I guess, a feat that he was able to memorize it, but he didn’t teach any doctrine or bear any testimony. Isn’t the issues of rote memorization the reason they got rid of the old “Rainbow” missionary discussions?

I agree that memorization of the basic ideas, principles and tenents of the Church is vital, but not for memorization’s sake. Understanding the concepts is what is necessary.

By: queuno

queuno — Fri, 05 Mar 2010 17:41:44 +0000

Great post! Those kids were certainly more educated on Church history than today!

Well, they had less to have to know than our kids do now…