L. Whitney Clayton Warns BYU grads to Disconnect from proselyting efforts of those who have lost their faith.

[CMZ]

Might be talking about different things. We can listen to and engage with others, but quite often people parrot arguments that there are already answers for and their intent in doing so is not to build up. Engaging with people whose intent is to tear down is not productive. Discussion with others who really do just want to talk about things is a different matter. I actually met with Sandra Tanner in person on one occasion and in that particular conversation she was not attempting to tear down my faith, so it was just... a conversation. No biggie. I have had other people approach me and say, "Since you're still in the Church clearly you've never examined the foundations of your faith. Why don't you let me tell you about some things that your bishop is hiding from you? For instance: did you know Joseph Smith looked into a hat? Bet you didn't know that." Or, "Did you know the Bible says we are saved by grace and not by works? I bet your stake president never told you that. He probably only tells you to read your Book of Norman." Or, "Did you know Brigham Young said you must live the law of plural marriage in order to be exalted? Now that's not something you ever hear President Monson say over the pulpit." So, yes, I'm entirely open to speaking with anyone on anything, but every time one of these types of situations arises again it's hard for me to see them as legitimate opportunities for intellectual integrity.

Edited May 1, 2017 by CMZ

[Rain]

6 hours ago, Pete Ahlstrom said:

How do you square this with "every member a missionary" or the duty to seek after the lost sheep?  This has always bothered me because friendships can definitely be ruined by proselytizing or in trying to rescue someone who seemingly goes astray.  Also, as Elder Clayton alludes to in his speech, there is a danger that the "missionary" or "faithful member" will be the one who gets converted or loses "faith" when connections are formed.

A big part of missionary work is finding those who are ready. If Bluebell's friend is not ready then proselytizing her is going to do no good and will send her further from being ready. If they have a good relationship, filled with love, if and when the friend is ready then she will know she can approach Bluebell with questions. 

Edited April 30, 2017 by Rain

[CV75]

14 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Elder L. Whitney Clayton, a senior president of the LDS Church's Quorums of the Seventy, was the school's featured commencement speaker. 

In his commencement address he offered the following council 

"The faithless often promote themselves as the wise, who can rescue the rest of us from our naivete," Clayton said. "We should disconnect, immediately and completely, from listening to the proselytizing efforts of those who have lost their faith, and instead reconnect promptly with the holy spirit."

All I can say is Wow...unbelievable...I am so disappointed in his message...was he who President Uchtdorf had in mind when he counciled members of the church to avoid messages of fear in the last GC?

The poster Freedom challenged me to find messages of fear.  Despite having been given at BYU graduation 2016, it is a message of fear of "others" and a lack of confidence in the strength of the LDS message to prevail in the market place of ideas.

Fear? I think it's more an exhortation to not waste your time with drivel.

[Tacenda]

19 minutes ago, CMZ said:

Might be talking about different things. We can listen to and engage with others, but quite often people parrot arguments that there are already answers for and their intent in doing so is not to build up. Engaging with people whose intent is to tear down is not productive. Discussion with others who really do just want to talk about things is a different matter. I actually met with Sandra Tanner in person on one occasion and in that particular conversation she was not attempting to tear down my faith, so it was just... a conversation. No biggie. I have had other people approach me and say, "Since you're still in the Church clearly you've never examined the foundations of your faith. Why don't you let me tell you about some things that your bishop is hiding from you? For instance: did you know Joseph Smith looked into a hat? Bet you didn't know that." Or, "Did you know the Bible says we are saved by grace and not by works? I bet your stake president never told you that. He probably only tells you to read your Book of Norman." Or, "Did you know Brigham Young said you must live the law of plural marriage in order to be exalted? Now that's not something you ever hear President Monson say over the pulpit." So, yes, I'm entirely open to speaking with anyone on anything, but every time one of these types of situations arises again it's hard for me to see them as opportunities for intellectual integrity.

Was this person a former LDS or an Evangelical? Or it could be both maybe.

[CMZ]

Just now, Tacenda said:

Was this person a former LDS or an Evangelical? Or it could be both maybe.

Referring to different people I have met over the years, some coming from a Fundamentalist perspective, or a born again perspective, or an ex-Mormon perspective.

[Johnnie Cake]

I think this advice is applicable here in this thread:

 

http://www.sltrib.com/news/5225922-155/kirby-dont-let-your-mormon-children

[Rain]

4 hours ago, Tacenda said:

He is my stake president now, this interchange happened in 2012. And I was raw and didn't want to go sit in his office. That was 5 years ago and he hasn't said a word about it in all those years. 

 

Then it would only be fair to go talk with him and let him know you are ready to talk. 

Perhaps, he has been waiting at the door for you to open it. Knock and it shall be opened unto you. 

[Calm]

2 hours ago, Pete Ahlstrom said:

Yes, example is the best missionary work.  But if you don't open your mouth, do the converts simply appear?  If you don't try, does the disaffected have a better chance of returning?  Anyway, I agree with you that the best medicine for harmony among member and former is to avoid the subject.

One can certainly open one's mouth until one is asked not to as long as one does so appropriately.

Edited April 30, 2017 by Calm

[mfbukowski]

4 hours ago, Pete Ahlstrom said:

How do you square this with "every member a missionary" or the duty to seek after the lost sheep?  This has always bothered me because friendships can definitely be ruined by proselytizing or in trying to rescue someone who seemingly goes astray.  Also, as Elder Clayton alludes to in his speech, there is a danger that the "missionary" or "faithful member" will be the one who gets converted or loses "faith" when connections are formed.

Dialogue never hurts anyone.  It can change minds, yes, but that is what it's for.  There is nothing to fear from changing your mind or your faith- it is what is called "growth"

[Rain]

2 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

I made this post late last night...I've corrected my title clearly he was referring to anyone both member or former member, who has lost their faith.

I wasn't talking about former members or members etc.

I was saying there is a difference in disconnecting with others and not connecting to proselytizing efforts. It is a people verses actions idea. 

 

Edited April 30, 2017 by Rain

[mfbukowski]

4 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

I live in a mixed faith marriage, fortunately through love and mutual respect my marriage has survived.  Messages like the one offered by Elder Whitney are destabilizing and create unnecessary wedges in families like mine.  Unsurprisingly he seems more interested in driving wedges and dividing family, friends and associates than in bringing people of differing beliefs together. 

Surely if he felt LDS truth claims could survive being challenged he wouldn't instruct these graduates to disengage but to engage those who have lost faith.  This board exists in conflict with Whitneys advise.   It's a message of fear, divisiveness and a call to driving unessessary wedges between families.

I found the message to be based in fear and a disappointing message to pass on to the next generation who more than any other will face an ever increasing population of members who have lost belief in Mormonism.  Shunning and disengaging is a message of fear not only in the "othering" of those who do not share a common set of beliefs but lack in confidence in the strength of his own beliefs.

I speak remembering the numerous families that have ended in divorce when one spouse has lost belief in Mormonism ...this is not the kind of message a leader in the LDS church should be sending. Shame on him

So you disagree with him- so what??  I disagree with the Pope but I don't go on Catholic boards to rant about it.  Heck I disagree with this talk too, so what?  Water off a duck's back.  Such is life- surprise!  There's someone wrong on the internet!!

It's like road rage.  Get over it and move on- it's not healthy for you or anyone else.  The bottom line is no one here really cares- you have not converted anyone and essentially your hobby is putting out negative energy, and I see that as a waste.  Go find something positive to do with your life

- Your Therapist.

 

Edited April 30, 2017 by mfbukowski

[mfbukowski]

4 hours ago, CA Steve said:

The criticism about this thread being old news is right on because obviously no one has new has signed up for this board in the last year, all current members have read the old thread, everyone has already said all there was to be said in the other thread and every lurker has already read the previous thread about this subject.

 

I mean really, Johnny should know better.

I guess this board is only for newbies then because it is ALL old news.  So why are you here?

[bluebell]

5 hours ago, Pete Ahlstrom said:

How do you square this with "every member a missionary" or the duty to seek after the lost sheep?  This has always bothered me because friendships can definitely be ruined by proselytizing or in trying to rescue someone who seemingly goes astray.  Also, as Elder Clayton alludes to in his speech, there is a danger that the "missionary" or "faithful member" will be the one who gets converted or loses "faith" when connections are formed.

There are lots of ways to seek after lost sheep without actively trying to proselyte someone, and in regards to people who are openly hostile to the message, the best way is just to be 'an example of the believer.'

Could you provide the part of the talk where you believe that Elder Clayton is alluding to possible danger if people are friends with those who reject mormonism?  I'm not sure what you are referring to.

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

I'm a big believer in building bridges of mutual respect and understanding.

[Duncan]

I used to get emailed from this former member and to me he was just annoying and when you answered his questions, he dredge something else up. He also had atrocious spelling, like how many "Angle Moroni's" can you take? sometimes people member or nonmember are just harassing you and you finally to tell them to take off. If they want to have a nice civil conversation and take me out to supper then we can work out a deal but if not then go elsewhere

Edited April 30, 2017 by Duncan

[Pete Ahlstrom]

3 hours ago, bluebell said:

There are lots of ways to seek after lost sheep without actively trying to proselyte someone, and in regards to people who are openly hostile to the message, the best way is just to be 'an example of the believer.'

Could you provide the part of the talk where you believe that Elder Clayton is alluding to possible danger if people are friends with those who reject mormonism?  I'm not sure what you are referring to.

He says to disconnect from assertive apostates. Assertive means confident. An apostate is someone who renounces a religion. So, I guess it's a question of degree. Should you disconnect from everyone who leaves the mormon church and happens to be confident about their decision? Or is it just the overbearing person who is in your face about how you should leave too? The later is obvious but the former is more problematic. There are some nice confident in their decision former mormons that I have no problem with but I think Elder Clayton would want disengagement from these.

[bluebell]

1 hour ago, Pete Ahlstrom said:

He says to disconnect from assertive apostates. Assertive means confident. An apostate is someone who renounces a religion. So, I guess it's a question of degree. Should you disconnect from everyone who leaves the mormon church and happens to be confident about their decision? Or is it just the overbearing person who is in your face about how you should leave too? The later is obvious but the former is more problematic. There are some nice confident in their decision former mormons that I have no problem with but I think Elder Clayton would want disengagement from these.

Assertive also means forceful though, and i think if we use that definition it better supports the context of Elder Whitney's talk.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Pete Ahlstrom said:

He says to disconnect from assertive apostates. Assertive means confident. An apostate is someone who renounces a religion. So, I guess it's a question of degree. Should you disconnect from everyone who leaves the mormon church and happens to be confident about their decision? Or is it just the overbearing person who is in your face about how you should leave too? The later is obvious but the former is more problematic. There are some nice confident in their decision former mormons that I have no problem with but I think Elder Clayton would want disengagement from these.

I think it is important to read his comments in the total context of what he is saying to understanding what he is suggesting.  Ignoring what is said elsewhere in his paragraph isn't going to yield an accurate understanding of his position.

Edited May 1, 2017 by Calm

[Calm]

8 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

I don't see any organized effort by "those who have lost faith" to proselytize anyone.  however the internet has given rise to tools that do level the playing field some. An influential blogger or podcaster can now have access to an audience that only a newspaper or broadcaster had access before...

Doesn't have to be organized to be proselytizing.  Any movement always starts with the individual after all.

A spouse pressuring their partner read a certain set of books, whether it is scriptures or critical texts is proselytizing.  A family member constantly bringing up their religious position, critical or supportive, is proselytizing.  Friends printing up online material and dropping it on one's desk same thing.

Quote

I'm guessing Elder Whitney doesn't like that this playing field has become more accommodating to alternative points of view.

I have heard plenty of exmormons express dissatisfaction that the Mormon message is out there intruding everywhere in their lives.  It is human to desire a favored position for one's own beliefs even if one is realistic enough to recognize it is not happening.

Quote

all must still place their ideas into the same market place where their respective ideas are scrutinized, tested, challenged and either rise or fall on their own merits.

Except this doesn't match reality much imo given there are tons of different 'marketplaces' and some ideas never make it to the 'global market' because they first appear in an environment that withers them even though they might have thrived in a different one.  Many ideas flourish or die based on who promotes them and how as opposed to actual content as well. It is an overly idealized view of human discussion imo.

Edited May 1, 2017 by Calm

[Mars]

if i had a dollar for every 15 minutes of time wasted on /r/exmormon, i'd have enough for a nice steak dinner.  but i prefer my sanity.

i appreciate that they're angry, frustrated, feel lied to, manipulated, or just venting.  it's just not really worth my time to listen.  so elder clayton's advice is on point.

[Bernard Gui]

12 hours ago, Johnnie Cake said:

I speak remembering the numerous families that have ended in divorce when one spouse has lost belief in Mormonism ...this is not the kind of message a leader in the LDS church should be sending. Shame on him

So, when someone you know leaves the Church, actively and aggressively seeks out friends and family members to drag out with him, tells people in conversations, "I despise you and every thing you stand for," the shame is on the one who doesn't want to participate?

Edited May 1, 2017 by Bernard Gui

[Johnnie Cake]

6 hours ago, CV75 said:

Fear? I think it's more an exhortation to not waste your time with drivel.

With all due respect...this post is offensive, that it also received rep votes by fellow posters is also offensive. I need to seriously reconsider why I even participate on this board I think.  

[Johnnie Cake]

9 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

So, when someone you know leaves the Church, actively and aggressively seeks out friends and family members to drag out with him, tells people in conversations, "I despise you and every thing you stand for," the shame ison the one who doesn't want to participate?

I am unfamiliar with anyone who has done this...plus surely the church truth claims can withstand this kind of examination right?

Edited May 1, 2017 by Johnnie Cake

[Calm]

Context being important, I am again quoting the section dealing with 'those who are lost' (I and others have done partial quotes, iirc at least Tacenda has done a full quote of this section of his talk and I am using her link above, this is not an official transcript so it may not be accurate, I probably should check it...add-on:  I would debate some punctuation choices, spelling of names is wrong, but the text is accurate from what I heard; the time was 2 1/2 minutes out of a 20 minute talk):

Quote

 

A few of you may have run into some who cease to hold fast to the iron rod wandered off the straight and narrow path, and have become lost. They started sometimes with online tours of the territory of the faithless. This indiscretion is often accompanied by failing to earnestly study The Book of Mormon everyday, and by the companion problem of gradually becoming lax in keeping other commandments. This sometimes leads to listening and then harkening to those who mock the church, its leaders, or its history. The faithless often promote themselves as the wise who can rescue the rest of us from our naievity. One does not need to listen to assertive apostates for long to see the parallels between them and the Corihors and Nehors and Sharoms of The Book of Mormon. We should disconnect immediately and completely from listening to the proselytizing efforts of those who have lost their faith, and instead reconnect promptly with the holy spirit. The adversary sees spiritual apathy and half-hearted obedience as opportunities to encircle us with his chains and bind us, and he hopes to destroy us. We escape his chains as we voluntarily chose to bind ourselves instead to God. In what at first may seem ironic, our choosing to bind or connect with Heaven frees and empowers us to become all that we possibly can in this life and the next through the atonement of Jesus Christ.

 

He has plenty of identifying description in this section so we don't have to guess who he means when he says "assertive apostates".

He first starts out identifying a group of individuals that we may have connections to as:

"some who cease to hold fast to the iron rod wandered off the straight and narrow path, and have become lost"

He then explains how they may have become that way with

1) "started sometimes with online tours of the territory of the faithless",

2) "failing to earnestly study" BoM, 

3) "lax in keeping other commandments",

4) "listening and then harkening to those who mock the church, its leaders, or its history".

These are not automatically the "faithless" in my view, but are those who have taken tours into the "territory of the faithless" and lost their way, which may or may not mean they have lost all their faith and thus are faithless.  It is possible that he sees this group as including those who are experiencing significant doubt, who have given into temptation, but are still searching to get back on the path because they have some faith remaining.  It is also possible that he sees them as the "faithless", disbelievers that have set their foot on another path and are no longer wandering directionless, I can see that interpretation as a valid possibility, but I do not believe he includes all of the above lost due to letting go of the iron rod in the behavior of the group he now moves on to talk about.

He focuses next on the subset group of "faithless" who now:

1) "[O]ften promote themselves as the wise who can rescue the rest of us from our naivety", 

2) Are "assertive apostates" who parallel "the Corihors [sic] and Nehors and Sharoms [sic] of The Book of Mormon" (this isn't just about confidence, Korihor, Nehor, and Sherem were much more than just confident exbelievers),

3) Are engaged in "proselytizing efforts".  This is the defining characteristic shared by Korihor, Nehor, and Sherem, they were missionaries for their own causes.  They placed themselves as teachers and leaders.

And then he states what we should do:

"We should disconnect immediately and completely from listening to the proselytizing efforts"

And "voluntarily chose to bind ourselves instead to God"

Then he sums up the result as "our choosing to bind or connect with Heaven frees and empowers us to become all that we possibly can in this life and the next through the atonement of Jesus Christ."

Nothing in the above (the only section in the talk that deals with this issue) suggests we should disconnect in every which way with assertive apostates who proselytize their disbelief, only that we should avoid listening to proselytizing of false beliefs.

To ignore his precise descriptions and claim he is talking about any confident exbeliever is a misrepresentation of his words.

For those who view his words as too negative an impression to leave, he goes on for the next several minutes to discuss positive connections.  The final paragraph summarizes the purpose of the talk and the overall emphasis on loving God and loving one's neighbour:

Quote

A lawyer once asked the savior, “Master, what is the great commandment in the law?”, Jesus said unto him, “Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the great and first commandment. And the second is like unto it. Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.” When we love God, we become truly connected to him. When we love our neighbor, we become truly connected to him or to her. As we keep the commandments of God, we show our love for God. As we serve one another, we show our love for our neighbor. The lasting value of your education at Brigham Young University is that it enhanced your capacity to do both. May you and we all make it our purpose to be worthily connected to God and to each other I pray, in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

 

Edited May 1, 2017 by Calm

[Calm]

23 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

I am unfamiliar with anyone who has done this...plus surely the church truth claims can withstand this kind of examination right?

Truth claims sure, their loved ones maybe not so much.

Or do you believe that pressure tactics never work?