My DS just got rejected to attend a co-op Christian academy

[NanceXToo]

I'm sure Jesus would have totally approved of that <eyeroll>.

 

Sorry that happened to your son. Makes me really glad for my inclusive, non-religion-oriented homeschool group where we really can all get along and live and let live no matter what our religious beliefs (or lack thereof) are.

[DawnM]

I haven't really gotten involved in the discussion re: SOF with co-ops and such, but I do think everyone has the right to have an exclusive group should they so choose. I choose to join or not join based on how exclusive I think it is and whether I agree or not with it.

 

It sounds like you aren't a good match for each other and you might be upset even more should he go and be taught something you aren't comfortable with.

 

It is Spanish class....he might be learning scripture in Spanish that is not KJV. He might learn the apostles creed in Spanish.....of course I am speculating here....but just thinking that maybe it wouldn't end up being positive for him or you.

 

Dawn

 

 

 

This was the email that I received from them. They tried to be nice but my Dh's first response was "Thats Discrimination!" They do not have anything on their website about not allowing certain denomonations into the classes but we had to fill out a questionaire about how he would continue to allow Jesus into his life etc. Just so you know, WE are Christians hence the name of our Church- Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

 

 

* Christian Academy is a tutorial school that endeavors to provide homeschooling support to Christian families of like mindedness. It is our belief that children should have a safe place to learn and not have to defend their beliefs, which is why we make every attempt possible to preserve this atmosphere for the students.

 

After seeking information on the Church of Latter Day Saints, we realize that we have some doctrinal differences with your faith. We do not mean to offend in ANY way, but do feel as if we are not the best environment for your son to take classes. Each of our teachers is of the same faith and they are encouraged to share their beliefs with students while teaching. Whereas we both believe in God, we do think that there will be times when the doctrinal differences will become apparent and that is not an issue we want the students to have to face in this environment.

 

We are returning your check that accompanied your registration. We sincerely hope you are able to find a place for Tanner to take classes and thank you for your interest in.

[LidiyaDawn]

If they're presenting themselves as a Christian coop and then not accepting other Christians, well, they can seem as respectful as they want but it still stinks.

 

Again, if they serve only a specific denomination then they should have that reflected in their name.

 

:iagree:

 

As it stands right now, they're misrepresenting themselves.

 

[and i don't see 'respect' in that letter, as some have said…i see a very clear kick out the door.]

[twoforjoy]

I don't think anybody has indicated that this group shouldn't have the right to exclude anybody they want. But just because we have the right to do something doesn't mean it's the right thing to do.

[Orthodox6]

because we are LDS. They say we have differing doctrinal beliefs. So he is not allowed to take Spanish II there. I seriously believe it is crap. If he was taking a religon class I could understand it but Spanish II? I am seriously ticked!

 

I am so sorry you were hit with this. I am Eastern Orthodox which makes me, in the minds of some faith groups, not a Christian.

 

The letter you post includes that the co-op staff teach their beliefs (I'm approximating, not quoting) embedded into the subject matter. Perhaps -- (?) -- the Spanish course material this co-op uses is designed less as general Spanish language instruction, but more with a slant toward mission work in their faith group. I have seen homeschooling foreign language materials crafted with missionary purposes as the focus.

 

Maybe the rejection is not so benign as what I sketched in the previous paragraph, but very long-shot "maybe", . . . just trying to offer a slightly less painful explanation, if it be possible.

[Halcyon]

I don't think anybody has indicated that this group shouldn't have the right to exclude anybody they want.

 

 

I did.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

While it seems unfair to you, the other 'patrons' might find it unfair if they allowed you in (assuming that they were aware that the co-op is of a certain persuasion). It's their party, they get to do what they like. And they get the reputation (good and/or bad) for their actions as well.

 

Yes , it is their co-op but honestly, IMO, I think it is very unChristian of them:glare: Why not have a statements of expectations/rules. I have no problem with a religious co-op or even a SOF as an FYI. I also teach ds to be respectful of differing beliefs. Instead why not a rule that states that those of differing beliefs shall respect the specific religious viewpoint being taught at co-op and no debates regarding the same:) Better yet why not a co-op that mostly focuses on math, langauge arts, science (where even evolution can be excluded:tongue_smilie:) :)

[Orthodox6]

Yes , it is their co-op but honestly, IMO, I think it is very unChristian of them:glare: Why not have a statements of expectations/rules. I have no problem with a religious co-op or even a SOF as an FYI. I also teach ds to be respectful of differing beliefs. Instead why not a rule that states that those of differing beliefs shall respect the specific religious viewpoint being taught at co-op and no debates regarding the same:) Better yet why not a co-op that mostly focuses on math, langauge arts, science (where even evolution can be excluded:tongue_smilie:) :)

 

Keying into the bolded text: That sounds good on the surface; however, I once was hit with a variation on that theme. I would be permitted to join the homeschooling group; however, I was flatly forbidden ever to utter a syllable that would betray my religious beliefs, no matter what the context, no matter how informal the personal conversation. In other words, I would be like a dog with a choke collar and a muzzle because I was so dangerous. No thanks.

[YLVD]

I think that all coops should welcome all people. I don't think discrimination based on gender, sexual orientation, race or religion should be permitted, ever. And that's what this is. I get that it's a "private" group, but that's the same argument that gentleman's clubs and golf clubs have used to exclude women and Jews.

 

:iagree:

 

I like you, lol

 

It saddens me that I really can't join co-ops because I'm an atheist. Even though I live in an area with one of the largest populations of atheists, there still isn't much.

 

I probably won't have much choice anyways as my DD is a teen. It seems like most co-ops are geared towards younger kids.

 

Anyways, it's a bummer to be excluded.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Where I live, it's not uncommon for the Catholic schools to have most of their students not be Catholic. As long as the parents understand that Catholic views will be presented, it's fine.

 

Exactly. Ds attended a Lutheran School last year even though we are not Lutheran and more inclined to Unitarian Universalist/Episcoplaian/Buddhist ideas:D He was respectful and did not debate religious ideas at school as I taught him. We did not have to sign a SOF. It was only presented as an FYI.

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Keying into the bolded text: That sounds good on the surface; however, I once was hit with a variation on that theme. I would be permitted to join the homeschooling group; however, I was flatly forbidden ever to utter a syllable that would betray my religious beliefs, no matter what the context, no matter how informal the personal conversation. In other words, I would be like a dog with a choke collar and a muzzle because I was so dangerous. No thanks.

 

:eek:That would be awful. I was only referring to not debating a teacher in class or other students about religion which I think would be ok.

[Orthodox6]

Where I live, it's not uncommon for the Catholic schools to have most of their students not be Catholic. As long as the parents understand that Catholic views will be presented, it's fine.

 

This seems to be true in many places. Some years ago, however, we were going to enroll our eldest in a private, Catholic school. He scored very high on the placement test, and the school was anxious for him to enroll. We had no objection to ds attending there, but we had to draw the line because the school would have required him to participate in their religious services. We had permission from our archbishop for ds to sit quietly in the back of their chapel, but not to participate. The school administration could not understand our inability to enroll ds. It was awkward for everyone involved but, fortunately, everybody remained cordial throughout.

[Impish]

OP I'm sorry you are feeling hurt and rejected but I have to agree with the above. A private group has the right to limit their membership for any reason and it sounds like they handled it politely. It shouldn't come as a complete shock to LDS followers that their version of Christianity is different from some. When I was growing up, they didn't even call themselves Christians. The label seems to have changed, but not the underlying beliefs. I have the utmost respect for LDS members but I can't understand the outrage at this group for limiting their membership.

:iagree:

If I had to guess, I'd bet that it has to do with the issue of this group viewing the Bible as the only Word of God. That's a pretty basic and big difference.

[EthiopianFood]

OP I'm sorry you are feeling hurt and rejected but I have to agree with the above. A private group has the right to limit their membership for any reason and it sounds like they handled it politely. It shouldn't come as a complete shock to LDS followers that their version of Christianity is different from some. When I was growing up, they didn't even call themselves Christians. The label seems to have changed, but not the underlying beliefs. I have the utmost respect for LDS members but I can't understand the outrage at this group for limiting their membership.

 

:iagree:

[missmoe]

LDS have always considered themselves Christians. One of the first tenants of our faith is the statement: We believe in God the Father, in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost. I think it has been recently we have needed to stress the fact we are Christians to others.

[DawnM]

I don't think that is true at all.

 

I watched a very long documentary on mormon history in the US and their trek to find a place they could call home because they were being chased out of areas. One woman's diary was read. In it she said, "We are Christian, but others in this nation who consider themselves Christian think we are not Christian."

 

My understanding is that this has been an issue for a very long time.

 

Dawn

 

LDS have always considered themselves Christians. One of the first tenants of our faith is the statement: We believe in God the Father, in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost. I think it has been recently we have needed to stress the fact we are Christians to others.

[Xuzi]

I don't think that is true at all.

 

I watched a very long documentary on mormon history in the US and their trek to find a place they could call home because they were being chased out of areas. One woman's diary was read. In it she said, "We are Christian, but others in this nation who consider themselves Christian think we are not Christian."

 

My understanding is that this has been an issue for a very long time.

 

Dawn

Yes it has. :) One thing that has changed (slightly) though, is putting more emphasis on our church's actual name (The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints) and identifying ourselves by that name, as opposed to only refering to ourselves by our nickname, "Mormons". There are many people (from my experience) who don't realize that Mormon = LDS. I even had a friend who told me that she tried to visit a "Mormon Church" once, but couldn't find them in the phone book to get directions. :tongue_smilie:

[Denisemomof4]

I can understand being upset but I have been to many co-ops that have you sign a statement of faith, and they only allow other like-minded believers to join. While the class may not touch on the subject, perhaps the children will.

 

Sorry, I do understand and I'm not saying I agree, but the people who lead the groups do get to call the shots. I hope you find another group!

[dakarimom5]

I'm sorry you had this happen. I was once told that I was not a christian because I am Catholic. It doesn't matter if it was done nicely, it still hurts.:grouphug:

[MamaSheep]

because we are LDS. They say we have differing doctrinal beliefs. So he is not allowed to take Spanish II there. I seriously believe it is crap. If he was taking a religon class I could understand it but Spanish II? I am seriously ticked!

 

I'm sorry this happened to you. I know from experience that it's never fun to be told that you aren't Christian no matter what you think. :grouphug:

 

And I'm sure it was not fun to think you had your school plans all squared away, only to have this fall through just when you thought it was a done deal and have to start all over again figuring out what to do for this class. How frustrating!

 

I can see, though, that the religious nature of the group could certainly be carried through into Spanish as a subject. When dh was a visiting professor at BYU for a year he was strongly encouraged to incorporate LDS beliefs and standards into his teaching, even though the subject he taught was not a religious topic. And he gladly did so. I would imagine other faith-based educational institutions and groups would want to do the same.

 

I'm sorry that you're hurt. I think that in some ways this falls under AOF 11: "We claim the privilege of worshipping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may." We may not LIKE how they choose to define terms like "Christian", but as Latter-day Saints I think we need to be able to acknowledge that they have the right to define their own religion for themselves, even if part of it is drawing narrower definitions than we would agree with and then excluding people who don't fit their definitions. They don't define what Christian means to US, of course, but they have a right to define what it means for THEIR group.

 

One wonders what kind of research they did that they didn't even get the name of the church right in their email--they left out the name of Jesus Christ, but we don't! But it's their group, and it is their decision to make. I do hope, as a fellow Latter-day Saint that once you get over the shock any response you make will be gracious and loving and demonstrate through your words actions that you are, indeed, a disciple of our Savior Jesus Christ. A soft answer turneth away wrath and all that. But I know it still hurts. :grouphug:

[MamaSheep]

:iagree:

 

As it stands right now, they're misrepresenting themselves.

 

[and i don't see 'respect' in that letter, as some have said…i see a very clear kick out the door.]

 

This makes me giggle. Perhaps because having been on the receiving end of a number of very clear kicks out the door on the basis of my religious affiliation I can definitely testify that this one, while definitely a kick out the door, was actually delivered with an unusual level of tact and courtesy. Yes, it's still what it is, but believe me, it could have been much, much worse.

[Guest momk2000]

because we are LDS. They say we have differing doctrinal beliefs. So he is not allowed to take Spanish II there. I seriously believe it is crap. If he was taking a religon class I could understand it but Spanish II? I am seriously ticked!

 

I'm so sorry. :grouphug::grouphug: I never could understand how so many "Christian" homeschool groups could justify such unChristian behavior. We have to think about what Jesus would do, and maybe more homeschool groups would be all inclusive.

[LittleIzumi]

I haven't really gotten involved in the discussion re: SOF with co-ops and such, but I do think everyone has the right to have an exclusive group should they so choose. I choose to join or not join based on how exclusive I think it is and whether I agree or not with it.

 

It sounds like you aren't a good match for each other and you might be upset even more should he go and be taught something you aren't comfortable with.

 

It is Spanish class....he might be learning scripture in Spanish that is not KJV. He might learn the apostles creed in Spanish.....of course I am speculating here....but just thinking that maybe it wouldn't end up being positive for him or you.

 

Dawn

 

That wouldn't bother me at all, personally. I know the Apostolic Creed (well, there are multiple versions) and the Nicene Creed. We prefer the KJV but we don't disparage other versions. We know none of the modern translations are the original and each has different strengths and weaknesses. I have no problem with hearing verses from the NIV or similar. (Is that the one VeggieTales uses? :lol:)

[cseitter]

I do believe they have the right to choose who they want in their group. I did read all the information that they have on their website regarding their beliefs and all they stress is faith in Jesus Christ and we have that in spades. I also checked out the book that they would be using for the class and it didn't have a christian leaning at all (not that that was what I was looking for just checking out what they use).

 

I didn't post this to get into a debate on my religion. I completely understand that others don't believe what we do and I respect that wholeheartedly. I also agree that their letter back was respectful and they tried to let me down easy but now I am back to square one in finding my DS a spanish class since they have held my check for 2.5 months and I am past the deadlines on any other co-ops in the area.

 

I can't say I am really hurt per se, just annoyed that their is still bias out there but I guess I shouldn't be surprised. It IS only 2011 and I guess no one expected much when this country was founded for freedom of religion. (ok don't blast me for this, just getting my feelings out before bed.):tongue_smilie:

[MamaSheep]

OP I'm sorry you are feeling hurt and rejected but I have to agree with the above. A private group has the right to limit their membership for any reason and it sounds like they handled it politely. It shouldn't come as a complete shock to LDS followers that their version of Christianity is different from some. When I was growing up, they didn't even call themselves Christians. The label seems to have changed, but not the underlying beliefs. I have the utmost respect for LDS members but I can't understand the outrage at this group for limiting their membership.

 

LDS have always considered themselves Christians. One of the first tenants of our faith is the statement: We believe in God the Father, in His Son, Jesus Christ, and in the Holy Ghost. I think it has been recently we have needed to stress the fact we are Christians to others.

 

I don't think that is true at all.

 

I watched a very long documentary on mormon history in the US and their trek to find a place they could call home because they were being chased out of areas. One woman's diary was read. In it she said, "We are Christian, but others in this nation who consider themselves Christian think we are not Christian."

 

My understanding is that this has been an issue for a very long time.

 

Dawn

 

We've definitely always considered ourselves to be Christians and referred to ourselves that way. The whole premise when the church was first established was that it was a restoration of Christianity in its original form. That's definitely not a new development. Certainly when I go back and read original sources from that time period church leaders frequently referred to the church as Christian, and to its members as Christians. They are also careful, however, to delineate the things that distinguish us from other Christian faiths, and I can see where some of the things they said could definitely be misunderstood, particularly if taken out of context. I think Dawn is right, though, that this "issue" has been around from the beginning.

 

I think part of the problem is that different people mean different things by "Christian" (as is demonstrated in this thread). Sometimes when people ask me, "Are you Christian?" what they clearly mean is, do you believe in Jesus Christ as the Only Begotten Son of God, and your personal Savior? (Yes.) And other times what they mean is, "Do you consider yourself, as a Mormon, to be a branch of traditional "mainstream" Christianity as it has been transmitted down through the centuries since Christ?" (No.) And I think an LDS person's response to questions along this line can depend on how the question is asked. Or how the responder perceives it as being asked. And I think both sides sometimes talk "past" each other because they each assume the other guy is using the same definitions, and that adds to the confusion.

 

We absolutely and without equivocation consider ourselves to be Christian. To us, this means that Christ is at the center of our faith and that He literally stands as the head of the church and leads it through revelation. It means that Christ has given authority to the apostles and other church leaders, and that they can legitimately act in Christ's name, with power and authority deligated to them directly from Christ. We consider ourselves to be Christian in exactly the same sense as the first Christians in the early days of Christianity when Christ and His original apostles ministered.

 

But we don't consider ourselves as just another denomination that branched off of the Christian traditions that have been passed down through the centuries. We believe that whole "tree" and all its branches have undergone various forms of alteration away from Christianity in its original form, and that is why God started over again by re-establishing His church, sending Peter, James, and John as resurrected beings to ordain new apostles to send out into the world. As we see it, it's a "new" Christian tradition that links directly to the original roots of Christianity, and indeed directly to Christ himself in the present, not part of the "historic" Christianity that developed down through the ages.

 

I think another factor might also be that more people are coming into direct contact with LDS church members in recent times than was the case in years past. There are more of us, and we are more broadly distributed. Because of that, people have more access to first-hand information about what the LDS church is, and what it teaches, instead of having to rely on third-hand accounts from other sources (which are often hostile to the LDS church and unfortunately often misrepresent our beliefs). I also think that individual LDS church members these days benefit from a better quality of religious education, something the church has put more emphasis on in recent years. They're better informed about church teachings and therefore better able to express those teachings to others.

Edited July 15, 2011 by MamaSheep

[wapiti]

I do believe they have the right to choose who they want in their group. I did read all the information that they have on their website regarding their beliefs and all they stress is faith in Jesus Christ and we have that in spades. I also checked out the book that they would be using for the class and it didn't have a christian leaning at all (not that that was what I was looking for just checking out what they use).

 

I didn't post this to get into a debate on my religion. I completely understand that others don't believe what we do and I respect that wholeheartedly. I also agree that their letter back was respectful and they tried to let me down easy but now I am back to square one in finding my DS a spanish class since they have held my check for 2.5 months and I am past the deadlines on any other co-ops in the area.

 

Whoa. That's rude and inconsiderate, to say the least.

 

Why don't they just say upfront that they only allow denominations X, Y and Z.

[MamaSheep]

I do believe they have the right to choose who they want in their group. I did read all the information that they have on their website regarding their beliefs and all they stress is faith in Jesus Christ and we have that in spades. I also checked out the book that they would be using for the class and it didn't have a christian leaning at all (not that that was what I was looking for just checking out what they use).

 

I didn't post this to get into a debate on my religion. I completely understand that others don't believe what we do and I respect that wholeheartedly. I also agree that their letter back was respectful and they tried to let me down easy but now I am back to square one in finding my DS a spanish class since they have held my check for 2.5 months and I am past the deadlines on any other co-ops in the area.

 

I can't say I am really hurt per se, just annoyed that their is still bias out there but I guess I shouldn't be surprised. It IS only 2011 and I guess no one expected much when this country was founded for freedom of religion. (ok don't blast me for this, just getting my feelings out before bed.):tongue_smilie:

I can definitely understand that frustration. I was pretty ticked when an online charter school in our area waited until AFTER I had filled out a bunch of information and gotten on all their annoying mail and phone lists before telling me that they don't allow people to sign up for just one or two classes, you have to be in for all or nothing. I only wanted one class from them, and if it was in their charter (as they said) they could have just SAID so in the first place and saved me all sorts of time. And that had nothing to do with religion. You definitely have my sympathies. :grouphug:

 

And...well...I guess since it's only 2011 we should just be glad they can't legally shoot us anymore...lol.

[simka2]

I do believe they have the right to choose who they want in their group. I did read all the information that they have on their website regarding their beliefs and all they stress is faith in Jesus Christ and we have that in spades. I also checked out the book that they would be using for the class and it didn't have a christian leaning at all (not that that was what I was looking for just checking out what they use).

 

I didn't post this to get into a debate on my religion. I completely understand that others don't believe what we do and I respect that wholeheartedly. I also agree that their letter back was respectful and they tried to let me down easy but now I am back to square one in finding my DS a spanish class since they have held my check for 2.5 months and I am past the deadlines on any other co-ops in the area.

 

I can't say I am really hurt per se, just annoyed that their is still bias out there but I guess I shouldn't be surprised. It IS only 2011 and I guess no one expected much when this country was founded for freedom of religion. (ok don't blast me for this, just getting my feelings out before bed.):tongue_smilie:

 

What they did was wrong on many levels. I am sorry for you and your son.

 

As to their response: No amount of fluffy sweet frosting will make a pile of crap anything... but a pile of crap!

 

As a friend in a difficult spot reminded me today. "Good things fall apart, so better things can fall together." (Although, I hesitate to refer to this group as "good.")

 

You are better of in the long run. :grouphug:

[naturalmom]

but I don't understand the anger people have that while Christian is in the co-op name, they don't include LDS.

 

I really don't know how to say this gently, but ...I think it's clear LDS DOES mean something else by the term Christian....otherwise the LDS missionaries who come to my door, upon hearing that I am a Christian, would move on, wouldn't they? But they want to engage me in conversation, and introduce me to something different.

 

Move on sounds bad...that's not what I mean. More that their time and energies would be focused somewhere else.

 

Having said all that, I think the co-op should have had a SOF up front so that this didn't happen.

[6packofun]

You all do realize that being a Christian is a little deeper than just saying, "Hey, we all believe in Jesus!" right? LOL

 

You can look at what the LDS church believes--I'm sure you have and aren't jumping on this topic uninformed--and honestly say yep, that's the same religion as the protestant Christian denominations I know? Hm.

 

I'm not saying the actions of this group are right or wrong, but I'm surprised at all of the sarcastic comments about intolerance based on a simplistic belief that Christianity can have such a wide variety of sometimes incongruent/opposing doctrines and still be all lumped together. ??

[jewellsmommy]

I think it is unreasonable to say that the group should list the denominations accepted or adjust their name. Not knowing how wide or narrow their SOF is, but the title might have to be "The Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian, some Catholic, some Non-Denominational, Group". And even then there could be a Baptist that might not be able to tow the line while a Lutheran came along and has no issue with their SOF.

[JudyJudyJudy]

I love our secular homeschool group. I have to drive to another county for us to attend it, but it's worth it. We accept anyone regardless of religion; and we have members from a number of religions and a number of Christian denominations as well as others (like my family) with no religion. Even some evangelical Christians have joined our group because we offer so much more in terms of classes and activities than the other homeschool groups in the area and surrounding areas. The only thing we don't allow is proselytizing from any group. We haven't had any problems.

[amey311]

 

I really don't know how to say this gently, but ...I think it's clear LDS DOES mean something else by the term Christian....otherwise the LDS missionaries who come to my door, upon hearing that I am a Christian, would move on, wouldn't they? But they want to engage me in conversation, and introduce me to something different.

 

 

 

I think this can be said of other groups. It may be that other churches aren't as active in recruiting new members, but I've known loads of people from different denominations try to explain why their particular flavor is better than another. They just don't do it door to door. Maybe LDS is MORE christian because they're out there trying to make disciples of all nations. Or something.

[JudyJudyJudy]

but I don't understand the anger people have that while Christian is in the co-op name, they don't include LDS.

 

I really don't know how to say this gently, but ...I think it's clear LDS DOES mean something else by the term Christian....otherwise the LDS missionaries who come to my door, upon hearing that I am a Christian, would move on, wouldn't they? But they want to engage me in conversation, and introduce me to something different.

 

Move on sounds bad...that's not what I mean. More that their time and energies would be focused somewhere else.

 

Having said all that, I think the co-op should have had a SOF up front so that this didn't happen.

This could be said of all denominations. If all Christian denominations believed the same, then all Christians could attend church under the same name (the original Christian church maybe?) and live happily ever after. Unfortunately, things aren't so pretty, even within a single church.

 

I've witnessed numerous churches split up and form new churches. If all the people within the same denomination believed the same way, then this wouldn't happen. However, the reason we have different Southern Baptist churches on every corner in the South is often because one group couldn't get along with others within the same church. They argued over practices even though they were supposed to be following the same doctrine.

[LidiyaDawn]

 

I really don't know how to say this gently, but ...I think it's clear LDS DOES mean something else by the term Christian....otherwise the LDS missionaries who come to my door, upon hearing that I am a Christian, would move on, wouldn't they? But they want to engage me in conversation, and introduce me to something different.

 

…so does that mean that the Baptist church in my town - the one that sends people out "soul winning" (door to door) - also means something else when they say they're Christians? They don't move on… they try to convince you to attend their church.

[LidiyaDawn]

You all do realize that being a Christian is a little deeper than just saying, "Hey, we all believe in Jesus!" right? LOL

 

You can look at what the LDS church believes--I'm sure you have and aren't jumping on this topic uninformed--and honestly say yep, that's the same religion as the protestant Christian denominations I know? Hm.

 

I'm not saying the actions of this group are right or wrong, but I'm surprised at all of the sarcastic comments about intolerance based on a simplistic belief that Christianity can have such a wide variety of sometimes incongruent/opposing doctrines and still be all lumped together. ??

 

You jumped from "being a Christian" to specifically Protestant… :confused:

 

"Protestants" aren't the only Christians.

[JennifersLost]

Seriously. Any group that can't see the ridiculousness of that policy is too ridiculous to join.

 

Their ridiculousness might rub off on your son and then where would you be?

 

I'm sorry you've had to deal with that. We ran into a lot of stupid-ness in our homeschooling journey, too. Persevere and don't let the blockheads get you down.

[keptwoman]

I'm sorry OP. That's a horrible situation.

The co-op should be much clearer upfront about who they will and will not accept. It's just ridiculous to wait until people apply to tell them they aren't the right brand of Christian.

And holding your money, and not letting you know you weren't "acceptable" for 2 1/2 months so you've missed out on all the other co-ops is inexcusable.

 

I tend to agree with others that you probably dodged an unpleasant experience by not going, but the whole 2.5 month thing would send me over the edge too!!

[MamaSheep]

...I really don't know how to say this gently, but ...I think it's clear LDS DOES mean something else by the term Christian....otherwise the LDS missionaries who come to my door, upon hearing that I am a Christian, would move on, wouldn't they? But they want to engage me in conversation, and introduce me to something different...

 

We do have a pretty broad definition, generally including anyone who claims faith in Jesus Christ--which is why it sometimes catches us off guard when we run into people or groups who use a more narrow definition.

 

Looking at your comments here, I'm guessing there might be slight differences in our understanding of the purposes of missionary work as well.

 

We tend to see coming to Christ more as a new beginning than as the ultimate destination. Even after we believe, we constantly strive for a deeper understanding of Christ's teachings and a more profound personal relationship with the Savior, and we love to talk about Christ and our beliefs about Him amongst ourselves and with other people. And I think we sometimes assume that other people feel the same way.

 

So when we meet up with another person who says they're a Christian we don't go, "Oh, ok. You've already 'arrived' as far as you can go down this road, and offering additional information about Jesus could have no possible benefit, so we'll move on."

 

We kind of think, "Oh yay! Someone else who loves Jesus. Maybe they would like to talk about Jesus. Maybe we can learn something from each other." I know I've learned a lot by talking with Christians of other faiths. I have not served as a full-time missionary, but I like to think that I've been able to share some things with friends of other faiths that in some way benefitted their walk with Christ. I love to talk to other people who believe in Christ, even if we don't agree on all the details. There's so much we CAN agree on! And sometimes talking (politely) about the things we don't agree about has helped me see my own beliefs through different eyes and has given me a new perspective that has deepened my faith. I certainly don't see another person's belief in Jesus as a reason to end an interaction and ignore them. Christ reached out to everybody. He didn't check them off his list and stop teaching them the moment they said, "I believe!" And our missionaries reach out to everyone. And besides that, can you look out over your congregation at church and tell by looking at them which ones are sincerely believers, which ones are just going through the motions to please family members, which ones may be struggling with doubts? Neither can we. We'd rather minister to someone who doesn't need it than not minister to someone who does, and it's hard to tell by looking which is which. If they do believe in Christ already, maybe we can offer something that will deepen their faith or understanding. If not, maybe we can learn something from each other that will help us better understand and love our neighbors.

 

I do understand that some other Christian faiths view missionary work ONLY as a method to locate unbelievers and bring them to Christ. That's not how we see it though, so please understand that a missionary wanting to continue the conversation even after discovering that you already believe in Christ is NOT any sort of judgment about the state of your soul. It's just a conversation.

[asta]

OP I'm sorry you are feeling hurt and rejected but I have to agree with the above. A private group has the right to limit their membership for any reason and it sounds like they handled it politely. It shouldn't come as a complete shock to LDS followers that their version of Christianity is different from some. When I was growing up, they didn't even call themselves Christians. The label seems to have changed, but not the underlying beliefs. I have the utmost respect for LDS members but I can't understand the outrage at this group for limiting their membership.

 

Because they're full of crap and they haven't read their homework:

 

 

 

"I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in me, and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from me you can do nothing.

 

If a man does not abide in me, he is cast forth as a branch and withers; and the branches are gathered, thrown into the fire and burned. If you abide in me, and my words abide in you, ask whatever you will, and it shall be done for you.

 

By this my Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit, and so prove to be my disciples.

 

As the Father has loved me so have I loved you; abide in my love.

 

If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father's commandments and abide in his love.

 

These things I have spoken to you, that my joy may be in you, and that your joy may be full.

 

This is my commandment, that you love one another as I have loved you."

 

John, Chapter 15

 

 

If you're going to say you're a Christian, then you have to BEHAVE as one. Other religions don't seem to have a problem with this concept; why do Christians?

 

 

asta

[Mrs Mungo]

I am sorry, Cindy. For what it is worth, I think they are jerks. I think they have the right to be jerks, but I think they are jerks, nonetheless.

[Lily_Grace]

I am sorry, Cindy. For what it is worth, I think they are jerks. I think they have the right to be jerks, but I think they are jerks, nonetheless.

 

QFT.

 

I think it's a sad state of christianity when it is used to discriminate and exclude others. I highly doubt Jesus said love others if you must, but do it from a distance.

[Miss Marple]

Better yet why not a co-op that mostly focuses on math, langauge arts, science (where even evolution can be excluded)

 

A perfectly good idea! The original poster should try to start one. As the start up person of a co-op I find it very frustrating that someone would like me to do all the work organizing it and then complain that it doesn't work for them. Because in essence she wants a co-op that is non-religious (or will accept her version of Christianity) because it's just "Spanish". But the original intent of the co-op was religious and exclusive of her version of Christianity. So...I say again, "it's my party and I can do whatever I want". If you want something different make your own. This is not an organization that gets any funding from a governmental source thereby making it very private. And they prefer to be exclusive. Whether you agree with the spiritual premise of exclusion isn't the argument.

 

FWIW, in my co-op we simply asked that the participants agree to respect our SOF - they need not agree with it.

[keptwoman]

A perfectly good idea! The original poster should try to start one. As the start up person of a co-op I find it very frustrating that someone would like me to do all the work organizing it and then complain that it doesn't work for them. Because in essence she wants a co-op that is non-religious (or will accept her version of Christianity) because it's just "Spanish". But the original intent of the co-op was religious and exclusive of her version of Christianity. So...I say again, "it's my party and I can do whatever I want". If you want something different make your own. This is not an organization that gets any funding from a governmental source thereby making it very private. And they prefer to be exclusive. Whether you agree with the spiritual premise of exclusion isn't the argument.

 

FWIW, in my co-op we simply asked that the participants agree to respect our SOF - they need not agree with it.

I think that the issue is that the co-op was not upfront with their restrictions. And then took 2 1/2 months to tell the OP that her DS wasn't eligible.

[Pam Wilhelm]

I am sorry, Cindy. For what it is worth, I think they are jerks. I think they have the right to be jerks, but I think they are jerks, nonetheless.

 

QFT.

 

I think it's a sad state of christianity when it is used to discriminate and exclude others. I highly doubt Jesus said love others if you must, but do it from a distance.

 

 

Bravo!

[cseitter]

A perfectly good idea! The original poster should try to start one. As the start up person of a co-op I find it very frustrating that someone would like me to do all the work organizing it and then complain that it doesn't work for them. Because in essence she wants a co-op that is non-religious (or will accept her version of Christianity) because it's just "Spanish". But the original intent of the co-op was religious and exclusive of her version of Christianity. So...I say again, "it's my party and I can do whatever I want". If you want something different make your own. This is not an organization that gets any funding from a governmental source thereby making it very private. And they prefer to be exclusive. Whether you agree with the spiritual premise of exclusion isn't the argument.

 

FWIW, in my co-op we simply asked that the participants agree to respect our SOF - they need not agree with it.

 

No I was not looking for a non-religious co-op if I was I certainly wouldn't be applying to a Christian Academy. I have NO problem with my son being around, with, introduced to other religions and their beliefs. If I was I would start an exclusive LDS co-op. Yes they CAN do whatever they want to but to hold my check and then only tell me after I emailed them twice about status?? You as a leader of a co-op would YOU do that? And when I said just "Spanish" I meant that it wasn't all incompassing but I know that Christian beliefs would be discussed. How could they not?

Oh and they seem to pick and choose. I have a friend that is Catholic and her 2 children attend but I have another friend that is also Catholic and they refused her children. But again "Its their party and they can do what they want to"

Edited July 15, 2011 by cseitter

[Murphy101]

I agree with Cynthia.

 

As for why it took a couple emails and months, that actually makes sense to me for the time of year. Many coops do not start sending info and Finalizing things until end of June or early July. End of May is full of finishing up the previous year and at least some of June is a much needed vacation. Add in a popular coop with high requests and yeah, I can easily see it taking them some time to wade through it.

 

The big heads up here is that they require an application to join. Applications come with an implied possible denial. At least to me they do.

 

Bottom line is they have an application/screening process bc they want their coop to be a group that has more in common than they would have with you. Really, this is a classic case of it isn't you, it's them. Btdt from both sides. :grouphug:

[beccad777]

I may the lone duck here, but the e-mail they sent you sounds very respectful and makes it clear that they are looking for members who share the very same beliefs. LDS don't hold the same beliefs as say a Baptist church, or Bible church, or most other protestant denominations. And, they're trying to make sure that what you're teaching your ds at home isn't undermined by what the teachers teach in class. And yes, even in a Spanish class, there can be room for Bible teaching, particularly depending on the curriculum used.

If I were applying to a Catholic co-op and was turned away b/c I'm protestant, I'd understand.

 

Surely there are other co-ops out there that will meet you needs?

 

:iagree:

[Murphy101]

If it helps to know, I understand your frustration.

 

It took me two years to find an affordable Spanish coop class for my son and these situations were a contributing factor to that. I hope it is as good as some have told me it will be.

 

But you are just looking for Spanish and the group you applied to is looking to develop a like-minded community where they can feel extra comfortable. (Which I don't think is unchristian of them either, everyone feels a need for that at times.)

 

Different goals mean the class probably wouldn't have worked out for you anyways.

[twoforjoy]

It is our belief that children should have a safe place to learn and not have to defend their beliefs, which is why we make every attempt possible to preserve this atmosphere for the students.

 

...Each of our teachers is of the same faith and they are encouraged to share their beliefs with students while teaching. Whereas we both believe in God, we do think that there will be times when the doctrinal differences will become apparent and that is not an issue we want the students to have to face in this environment.

 

 

I don't consider this respectful, but condescending and silly. I mean, if they are talking about this child somehow creating an "unsafe" environment, that makes no sense. For one, I doubt he's any more likely to be disrespectful of anybody's beliefs than any of the other kids there (because, while their parents might affirm the SOF, who knows what the kids actually believe?). And, if any child does put another child in a position to defend their beliefs, give them a warning or boot them from the class/co-op. But, the idea seems to be that simply having an LDS child present would somehow create an "unsafe" space for the other students.

 

Or, if they are talking about not wanting the LDS child to be put in a position where his beliefs are challenged, that's really patronizing. Shouldn't that be up to the parent to decide?