Free Byu?

[mormonnewb]

Hyperbole alert.  Nobody is calling or suggesting they are enemies.  They are saying that when the rules are breached that previously explained consequences be applied.

What "rules" are being breached? Is it the rule that regardless of what information one acquires he/she may never change their conclusion? Is that what BYU students promise to the institution -- intellectual retardation? Because that's what it sounds like to me. "Come to our beautiful campus and soak up all of the knowledge we have to offer, but don't you dare let it change any of the fundamental premises that you had when you came here. If so, you are wicked and a rule breaker and we will cast you into outer darkness (ie, U of U)."

Once again, BYU has every right to treat its students in this manner. What it does not have the right to do is call itself an institution of HIGHER learning. It's an indoctrination center with sports teams, in the mold of West Point and the Naval Academy. These are wonderful schools for their intended purposes but they don't claim to be "universities." Maybe Brigham Young Academy should do the same.

 

Update: Okay, the above may be SLIGHT hyperbole, but the idea that an 18 yo is "breaking their covenants" because they no longer blindly accept the "truths" that have been pushed upon them during their childhood puts the onus where it doesn't belong. If we have the truth, then the onus is on us to CONVINCE rational thinking ADULTS of our truth instead of insisting that a decision made at 8 years old must be binding 'til graduation due us part.  And if our truth is so fragile that we must insulate our young people in a bubble of believers, then we're just forestalling the inevitable.

Edited November 19, 2014 by mormonnewb

[voiceafx]

A couple of notes to consider.  First, in spite of the fact that BYU is a private institution, it is a publicly accredited institution.  As such, it does not have license to do whatever it wants without the possibility of losing accreditation - something which none of us would like to see, I should think.

The NWCCU, which is the organization that accredits BYU, has the following to say about religious and intellectual freedom at accredited universities:

 

Within the context of its mission, core themes, and values, the institution defines and actively promotes an environment that supports independent thought in the pursuit and dissemination of knowledge. It affirms the freedom of faculty, staff, administrators, and students to share their scholarship and reasoned conclusions with others. While the institution and individuals within the institution may hold to a particular personal, social, or religious philosophy, its constituencies are intellectually free to examine thought, reason, and perspectives of truth. Moreover, they allow others the freedom to do the same.   http://www.nwccu.org/Standards%20and%20Policies/Standard%202/Standard%20Two.htm

 

Read that carefully.  It seriously calls into question the practice of expelling students who change their faith.  Can it be said that students are "intellectually free to examine thought, reason, and perspectives of truth" if coming to the wrong conclusions means being expelled?  Are students free to "share their scholarship and reasoned conclusions with others"?

 

Second, one possible unintentional side-effect of the Honor Code is that students who change their faith are not only expelled, but they are also evicted from BYU Approved Housing.  All undergrads are required to live in BYU Approved Housing, unless specific exceptions are granted (say, to live with family members or whatever).  Private landlords who want to stay in business in Provo must conform to BYU's requests.

 

The problem is that, according to Utah and Federal housing laws, it is illegal to evict someone for changing personal faith.  So not only is BYU expelling students in probable violation of its accreditation terms, it is also forcing the unlawful eviction of students for changing their faith.  All other concerns aside, this should be a red-flag for anyone who thinks that the Articles of Faith apply to BYU, and who believes that BYU should honor its own commitments.

BYU hosts an annual symposium to discuss the importance of religious freedom.  Leaders from countries all around the globe attend.  Regardless of how "right" it might seem for BYU to expel students for changing their faith, imagine how it looks to the rest of the world.  BYU hosts a global symposium on religious freedom, but it expels LDS students for changing their faith.  It could be very damaging for both the LDS Church and BYU if knowledge of this practice became more widespread.

Many people don't seem to care how damaging this policy can be to BYU students.  That's fine.  I can understand that perspective.  But consider the possibility of BYU losing its accreditation, or at least being put on probation until it is changed.  Consider how forced unlawful eviction looks for a church that believes in "obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law."  Consider how the Church's aggressive, public campaign for religious freedom might be undermined if this policy becomes more commonly known.  Think of how it could hurt missionary work in countries that are wary of the Church's presence there.

Changing the policy is a win-win-win.  It is better for the Church, it is better for BYU, and it is better for BYU students.

[CV75]

I think this particular issue has very little to do with personal integrity and more about who BYU and the Church will all to be enroleld at their university.  And it's only about the honor code because BYU has defined the honor code as including the need for an ecclesiastical endorsement, which for LDS students asks that the ecclesiastical leader consider active attendance and whether the student is in full fellowship, whatever that means.  But it's not about "honor" as typicall understaood.

 

But again, as I've repeatedly mentioned, doubts or even the loss of faith don't seem to be grounds for dismissal or withdrawal of an ecclesiastical endorsement.  Rather, the student seems to need to take the additional step of resigning his or her membership, getting excommunicated or disfellowshiped, or joining another religion.  It seems that the Church is asking those students that have doubts, a faith crisis, or who have lost their faith, to continue their church attendance and remain open minded while still enrolled.  Given BYU's mission, which seems distinct from most other educational institutions, that seems fair.

Yes, BYU and the Church will allow people who demonstrate personal integrity (by accepting on the honor code) to enroll in the school. The honor code includes adhering to the qualifications for and taking the steps to obtain an ecclesiastical endorsement—both steps are indicators of integrity.

 

“Honor code” as generally understood: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_honor_code : “…a set of rules or ethical principles governing an academic community based on ideals that define what constitutes honorable behaviour within that community. The use of an honour code depends on the notion that people (at least within the community) can be trusted to act honorably. Those who are in violation of the honour code can be subject to various sanctions, including expulsion from the institution. Honour codes are used to deter academic dishonesty.” I see lots about integrity there.

 

I agree that a perception that “the Church is asking those students that have doubts… to continue their church attendance and remain open minded while still enrolled… seems fair,” and may even be an accurate description of part of BYU’s motive for the honor code, but church attendance also “constitutes honorable behaviour within that community.”

[CV75]

Read that carefully.

“While the institution and individuals within the institution may hold to a particular personal, social, or religious philosophy, its constituencies are intellectually free to examine thought, reason, and perspectives of truth.”

 

This sentence speaks to intellectual freedom within the context of the institution’s and students’ predominating religious philosophy, and allows for individual religious philosophies. It does not speak at all to religious affiliation. The honor code sustains intellectual freedom, the institution’s religious philosophy, and religious freedom. Let’s not conflate the terms.

 

A school can dismiss a student for breaking its honor code, which includes eviction from its housing arrangements.

 

Students are not expelled for changing their religion from Mormonism, but for breaking the honor code, which allows for appeal and consideration of extenuating circumstances.

[HappyJackWagon]

 

Not unreasonable but then do they have to repay all the subsidies they have already received un false pretenses?

 

Of course not. Besides, you're assuming they gained advantage in their pricing because of pretense. You are assigning a sinister motivation to their change in beliefs whereas most people I've known who have undergone a faith transition found it to be one of the most difficult things they've ever experienced. They did not choose it. There was no pretense to their previous faithfulness.

 

 

Do they lose their credits when they transfer?

Does BYU consider allowing them to continue on campus tantamount to allowing a contagion free rein?

 

Many credits do not transfer but it will be dependent on the receiving school. Some estimates for undergrad transfer of credits show 50-60% of credits transfer. Grad students would not be so fortunate. So for an undergrad in his senior year, forced transfer would be a tremendous hardship of additional funds and time to retake 40% of their credit hours a second time.

 

I hope BYU doesn't view them as a contagion. That kind of language is similar to the "enemy" language used earlier in the thread. If these people commit to keep the honor code after a faith transition they should be treated like every other student, not as some plague or invading army that must be defeated.

[ERayR]

What "rules" are being breached? Is it the rule that regardless of what information one acquires he/she may never change their conclusion? Is that what BYU students promise to the institution -- intellectual retardation? Because that's what it sounds like to me. "Come to our beautiful campus and soak up all of the knowledge we have to offer, but don't you dare let it change any of the fundamental premises that you had when you came here. If so, you are wicked and a rule breaker and we will cast you into outer darkness (ie, U of U)."

Once again, BYU has every right to treat its students in this manner. What it does not have the right to do is call itself an institution of HIGHER learning. It's an indoctrination center with sports teams, in the mold of West Point and the Naval Academy. These are wonderful schools for their intended purposes but they don't claim to be "universities." Maybe Brigham Young Academy should do the same.

 

Update: Okay, the above may be SLIGHT hyperbole, but the idea that an 18 yo is "breaking their covenants" because they no longer blindly accept the "truths" that have been pushed upon them during their childhood puts the onus where it doesn't belong. If we have the truth, then the onus is on us to CONVINCE rational thinking ADULTS of our truth instead of insisting that a decision made at 8 years old must be binding 'til graduation due us part.  And if our truth is so fragile that we must insulate our young people in a bubble of believers, then we're just forestalling the inevitable.

 

See post # 178

[ERayR]

Of course not. Besides, you're assuming they gained advantage in their pricing because of pretense. You are assigning a sinister motivation to their change in beliefs whereas most people I've known who have undergone a faith transition found it to be one of the most difficult things they've ever experienced. They did not choose it. There was no pretense to their previous faithfulness.

 

It may have been a difficult choice but it is/was a choice.

 

Many credits do not transfer but it will be dependent on the receiving school. Some estimates for undergrad transfer of credits show 50-60% of credits transfer. Grad students would not be so fortunate. So for an undergrad in his senior year, forced transfer would be a tremendous hardship of additional funds and time to retake 40% of their credit hours a second time.

 

Choices have consequences.  One should weigh the consequences before acting.

 

I hope BYU doesn't view them as a contagion. That kind of language is similar to the "enemy" language used earlier in the thread. If these people commit to keep the honor code after a faith transition they should be treated like every other student, not as some plague or invading army that must be defeated.

 

If one breaks an honor code without consequence then soon no one feels obliged to keep the honor code and with good reason. Yes contagion might describe it.

[HappyJackWagon]

 

Of course not. Besides, you're assuming they gained advantage in their pricing because of pretense. You are assigning a sinister motivation to their change in beliefs whereas most people I've known who have undergone a faith transition found it to be one of the most difficult things they've ever experienced. They did not choose it. There was no pretense to their previous faithfulness.

 

 

It may have been a difficult choice but it is/was a choice.

 

I cannot trick myself into believing things I find unbelievable. Belief does not seem to be a choice but I think faith is in that we can choose to act with the hope that something may be true. But I don't think belief is a choice.

 

 

Many credits do not transfer but it will be dependent on the receiving school. Some estimates for undergrad transfer of credits show 50-60% of credits transfer. Grad students would not be so fortunate. So for an undergrad in his senior year, forced transfer would be a tremendous hardship of additional funds and time to retake 40% of their credit hours a second time.

 

 

Choices have consequences.  One should weigh the consequences before acting.

 

Yes, we could require people to act contrary to their belief and go through the motions of worshipping in a way that holds no meaning for them instead of following their own conscience and worshipping according to their conscience. The point is, this is an artificial consequence that does not need to exist.

 

 

I hope BYU doesn't view them as a contagion. That kind of language is similar to the "enemy" language used earlier in the thread. If these people commit to keep the honor code after a faith transition they should be treated like every other student, not as some plague or invading army that must be defeated.

 

 

If one breaks an honor code without consequence then soon no one feels obliged to keep the honor code and with good reason. Yes contagion might describe it.

 

Viewing people as a contagion is sad. But to each his own.

 

 

Uchtdorf- 4 Titles (April 2013)-“But while the Atonement is meant to help us all become more like Christ, it is not meant to make us all the same. Sometimes we confuse differences in personality with sin. We can even make the mistake of thinking that because someone is different from us, it must mean they are not pleasing to God. This line of thinking leads us to believe that the Church wants to create every member from a single mold–that each one should look, feel, think, and behave like every other. This would contradict the genius of God.”

 

 

I view God as a loving father who is not trying to fit each of his children into one mold. I doubt he would refer to his children as a contagion.

 

It could be argued that 1/3 of the hosts of heaven were a contagion that HF felt he needed to eradicate so maybe there is some point there. But I think it would be a massive stretch to consdier LDS members who have gone through a faith transition to be similar to sons of perdition.

[toon]

Yes, BYU and the Church will allow people who demonstrate personal integrity (by accepting on the honor code) to enroll in the school. The honor code includes adhering to the qualifications for and taking the steps to obtain an ecclesiastical endorsement—both steps are indicators of integrity.

 

“Honor code” as generally understood: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_honor_code : “…a set of rules or ethical principles governing an academic community based on ideals that define what constitutes honorable behaviour within that community. The use of an honour code depends on the notion that people (at least within the community) can be trusted to act honorably. Those who are in violation of the honour code can be subject to various sanctions, including expulsion from the institution. Honour codes are used to deter academic dishonesty.” I see lots about integrity there.

 

I agree that a perception that “the Church is asking those students that have doubts… to continue their church attendance and remain open minded while still enrolled… seems fair,” and may even be an accurate description of part of BYU’s motive for the honor code, but church attendance also “constitutes honorable behaviour within that community.”

 

I think people in this thread are talking about a number of different things: faith crisis/loss of faith, resignation or excommunication (for whatever reason), and joining another church.  Of those, I see a faith crisis/loss of faith as qualitatively different.  I suspect it is not somehting that will impact an LDS student's ability to continue attending BYU.  I suspect students are not being kicked out or denied an ecclesiastical endorsement for this. Rather, it seems like the issue really is with those that have formally severed their ties with the Church.

 

That said, my point was that a faith crisis or even the loss of faith does not seem to be a matter of personal integrity.  Nothing in the BYU honor code or the ecclesiastical endorsement process requires that a student have a testimony.  Nothing requires that an LDS student believe in any of the Church's core precepts.  It is possible to be actively involved in church and in good standing without having a testimony.  Lack of a testimony, in itself, is not grounds for disfellowship or excommunication.

 

But even if it were a requirement of the honor code and the ecclesiastical endorsement process, I still have a hard time seeing it as a matter of personal integrity.  Personal integrity seems to require an element of conscious choice, and in most cases lack of a testimony is not a conscious choice.  If anything, someone falsefly proclaiming a testimony would seem more of a lack of personal integrity.

[HappyJackWagon]

 

Church Educational System Honor Code Statement

We believe in being honest, true, chaste, benevolent, virtuous, and in doing good to all men. . . . If there is anything virtuous, lovely, or of good report or praiseworthy, we seek after these things (Thirteenth Article of Faith).

As a matter of personal commitment, faculty, administration, staff, and students of Brigham Young University, Brigham Young University-Hawaii, Brigham Young University-Idaho, and LDS Business College seek to demonstrate in daily living on and off campus those moral virtues encompassed in the gospel of Jesus Christ, and will

• Be honest
• Live a chaste and virtuous life
• Obey the law and all campus policies
• Use clean language
• Respect others
• Abstain from alcoholic beverages, tobacco, tea, coffee, and substance abuse
• Participate regularly in church services
• Observe the Dress and Grooming Standards
• Encourage others in their commitment to comply with the Honor Code

This is part of the interview for ecclesiastical endorsement at any church school. There is no mention of belief, only church participation.

 

This next piece is from the honor code

 

 

Withdrawn Ecclesiastical Endorsement

A student's endorsement may be withdrawn at any time if the ecclesiastical leader determines that the student is no longer eligible for the endorsement. If an endorsement is withdrawn, no confessional information is exchanged without authorization from the student. Students without a current endorsement are not in good Honor Code standing and must discontinue enrollment. Students who are not in good Honor Code standing are not eligible for graduation, even if they have otherwise completed all necessary coursework.

 

Excommunication, disfellowshipment, or disaffiliation from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints automatically results in the withdrawal of the student's ecclesiastical endorsement and the loss of good Honor Code standing. Disaffiliation is defined for purposes of this policy as removal of an individual's name from the official records of the Church.

...

Former LDS students are not eligible to receive an ecclesiastical endorsement (See Withdrawn Ecclesiastical Endorsement below).

 

I'm sharing this as source material.

 

I'm curious how closely they adhere to the policy of not revealing any information to the honor code office that is learned during confession. If I went to my bishop and confessed anything that would be in violation of the honor code I wonder if they would still be able to rescind endorsement while not sharing details or if even the removal of the endorsement would be a lack of confidentiality.

[HappyJackWagon]

 

Requirements

Whether on or off campus or between semesters, all students are expected to abide by the Honor Code, which includes (1) the Academic Honesty Policy, (2) the Dress and Grooming Standards, and (3) the applicable Residential Living Standards. Students are required to be in good Honor Code standing to graduate.

 

LDS students must fulfill their duty in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, attend Church meetings, and abide by the rules and standards of the Church on and off campus.

 

Students who are not members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are also expected to maintain the same standards of conduct. They are encouraged to participate in services of their preferred religion. All students must be in good Honor Code standing to graduate, to receive a diploma, and to have the degree posted.

I wonder if bishops could have different views about what it means for students to "fulfill their duty in the church".

 

Non-members are allowed to freely engage in the religion of their choice.

 

Non-members who were once members are not free to engage in the religion of their choice.

[thesometimesaint]

What "rules" are being breached? Is it the rule that regardless of what information one acquires he/she may never change their conclusion? Is that what BYU students promise to the institution -- intellectual retardation? Because that's what it sounds like to me. "Come to our beautiful campus and soak up all of the knowledge we have to offer, but don't you dare let it change any of the fundamental premises that you had when you came here. If so, you are wicked and a rule breaker and we will cast you into outer darkness (ie, U of U)."

Once again, BYU has every right to treat its students in this manner. What it does not have the right to do is call itself an institution of HIGHER learning. It's an indoctrination center with sports teams, in the mold of West Point and the Naval Academy. These are wonderful schools for their intended purposes but they don't claim to be "universities." Maybe Brigham Young Academy should do the same.

 

Update: Okay, the above may be SLIGHT hyperbole, but the idea that an 18 yo is "breaking their covenants" because they no longer blindly accept the "truths" that have been pushed upon them during their childhood puts the onus where it doesn't belong. If we have the truth, then the onus is on us to CONVINCE rational thinking ADULTS of our truth instead of insisting that a decision made at 8 years old must be binding 'til graduation due us part.  And if our truth is so fragile that we must insulate our young people in a bubble of believers, then we're just forestalling the inevitable.

 

That's just not slight hyperbole it is major hyperbole, and baiting to boot.

 

There are any number of fine universities to go to. All that is needed is to choose one that is not BYU. Any adult(18 years old is an adult) should be able and willing to support themselves while continuing their education at the university of their choice. Get grants, loans, a part/full time job, use the GI Bill, go to school for a while then work until you can afford the time and money constraints. IOW GROW UP

Edited November 19, 2014 by thesometimesaint

[CV75]

I think people in this thread are talking about a number of different things: faith crisis/loss of faith, resignation or excommunication (for whatever reason), and joining another church.  Of those, I see a faith crisis/loss of faith as qualitatively different.  I suspect it is not somehting that will impact an LDS student's ability to continue attending BYU.  I suspect students are not being kicked out or denied an ecclesiastical endorsement for this. Rather, it seems like the issue really is with those that have formally severed their ties with the Church.

 

That said, my point was that a faith crisis or even the loss of faith does not seem to be a matter of personal integrity.  Nothing in the BYU honor code or the ecclesiastical endorsement process requires that a student have a testimony.  Nothing requires that an LDS student believe in any of the Church's core precepts.  It is possible to be actively involved in church and in good standing without having a testimony.  Lack of a testimony, in itself, is not grounds for disfellowship or excommunication.

 

But even if it were a requirement of the honor code and the ecclesiastical endorsement process, I still have a hard time seeing it as a matter of personal integrity.  Personal integrity seems to require an element of conscious choice, and in most cases lack of a testimony is not a conscious choice.  If anything, someone falsefly proclaiming a testimony would seem more of a lack of personal integrity.

I agree that the honor code does not require a student to not have a faith crisis. But a student with a faith crisis is bound by his word to keep the honor code as long as he wishes to remain enrolled. That is where the integrity comes in.

 

“All who represent BYU, BYU—Hawaii, BYU—Idaho, and LDSBC are to maintain the highest standards of honor, integrity, morality, and consideration of others in personal behavior. By accepting …enrollment, individuals evidence their commitment to observe the Honor Code standards approved by the Board of Trustees "at all times and . . . in all places" (Mosiah 18:9).”

 

While the honor code is about personal integrity in relation to institutional requirements, it is not the only thing in the universe that is about personal integrity, it is not the only means by which personal integrity is expressed, and there are other virtues entailed in its keeping (honor, morality and consideration of others).

[CV75]

What it does not have the right to do is call itself an institution of HIGHER learning.

CFR--unless it's retracted with the ADMISSION (LOL) of hyperbole.

 

Update: Okay, the above may be SLIGHT hyperbole, but the idea that an 18 yo is "breaking their covenants" because they no longer blindly accept the "truths" that have been pushed upon them during their childhood puts the onus where it doesn't belong. If we have the truth, then the onus is on us to CONVINCE rational thinking ADULTS of our truth instead of insisting that a decision made at 8 years old must be binding 'til graduation due us part.  And if our truth is so fragile that we must insulate our young people in a bubble of believers, then we're just forestalling the inevitable.

I think there's still a LOT of HYPERBOLE here... The only BINDING decision in this regard is the one made when observing the honor code in accepting ADMISSION.

[Bernard Gui]

 

I'm curious how closely they adhere to the policy of not revealing any information to the honor code office that is learned during confession. If I went to my bishop and confessed anything that would be in violation of the honor code I wonder if they would still be able to rescind endorsement while not sharing details or if even the removal of the endorsement would be a lack of confidentiality.

There is a solution..... How much better it would be if the applicant was not in a position to get a denial! If there is something in the applicant's conduct or loss of faith that would result in denial of admission, the student can work with the bishop to resolve the issue before applying to BYU or continuing studies there. Take a semester off or delay applying if necessary. Then the bishop can give an honest and favorable endorsement and the student can be free from impediments - much like applying for a mission call. It's far better to resolve those problems before commitment is made than to go forward on false pretenses that another bishop or mission president will have to deal with. Sneaking through the process is bad for everyone involved, especially the student who will also be embarrassed by the discovery. A missionary who refuses to comply with the rules applying to missionaries should not be sent on a mission. A student who will not abide by the Honor Code should not be admitted to BYU. Part of the Code is to be an active participant in the church, which is 

-in full fellowship

-not voluntarily disaffiliated from the Church

-appropriate and consistent Church activity

-doing his/her duty in the Church

-abiding by the rules and standards of the Church

 

In my experience, I have learned that policies are usually made to deal with past situations

that caused harm or embarrassment to the institution, its employees, and to the individuals involved.

 

 

Here are the instructions for leaders who give the ecclesiastical endorsement:

 

https://it.byu.edu/byu/help.do/sc_help.do?sysparm_document_key=kb_knowledge,f6b1a65f2b1e70007ed590a069da1507

Edited November 19, 2014 by Bernard Gui

[sethpayne]

 

 

“But unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required,” for starters.

 

 

So we are free to create hardship for those who lose faith as opposed to those who retain or gain it?

 

 

I think ex-members and in some cases ex-convicts that retain membership give up consideration for a number of Church callings even when fellowshipped or re-baptized, so the ecclesiastical endorsement is not inconsistent with that principle or practice. In this case, a student can be viewed as a kind of calling or assignment (in the case on non-members).

 

That's an interesting perspective.  Acceptance to BYU is like a calling to a Catholic seminary.  

 

But if this is the case, shouldn't BYU limit itself to members-only?

[CV75]

That's an interesting perspective.  Acceptance to BYU is like a calling to a Catholic seminary.  

 

But if this is the case, shouldn't BYU limit itself to members-only?

That’s not the perspective I’m trying to convey. Members can receive callings and assignments and non-members can receive assignments, but ex-members, members not in fellowship or re-baptized members are barred from certain callings and/or assignments. In similar fashion or consistent in principle, ex- or disfellowshipped members are barred from BYU enrollment.

Edited November 19, 2014 by CV75

[ERayR]

So we are free to create hardship for those who lose faith as opposed to those who retain or gain it?

 

 

As opposed to those who live up to their contract.

[Sleeper Cell]

So we are free to create hardship for those who lose faith as opposed to those who retain or gain it?

 

 

I was responding to your statement: that you saw “no reasonable justification for treating a former Church member differently than someone who never joined.”  

 

Even if one disagree with the concept “But unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required” (and I am not saying that you do), it is a reasonable justification. One can disagree with a policy and still believe it has a reasonable justification.  

[Kenngo1969]

I don't believe LDS students at BYU who have lost their faith face any such dilemma.  A student who no longer believes can still attend, so long as he or she continues to attend and actively participates in church and otherwise remains in good standing.  There's no need to transfer.  Nothing wrong with a student who says, "I no longer believe, but for the near future, I'm still going to make some effort at obtaining a testimony, even if that means going through the motions.  The problem appears to only be when that person takes some action to formally disaffiliate with the Church.

Your point is well-taken.  I was speaking more to the case of someone who has lost faith to such an extent that he no longer would feel comfortable in the faith-promoting setting BYU tries to provide its students.  (None of us have any way of knowing, but personally, I doubt Hardy was the type of student you mention, for reasons I explain in another reply, below.)

Edited November 21, 2014 by Kenngo1969

[Kenngo1969]

\I'm not that sympathetic to Hardy.  But precisely what did he lie about to obtain the ecclesiastical endorsement?  There are no "DO you have faith in . . " questions in the endorsement process like there are in a temple recommend interview.  Rather, the endorsement process asks the ecclesiastical leader to consider whether the student activily participates in chuch meetings and is in full fellowship.  Even then, those issues are not determinative -- the leader is only asked to consider them when making his decision.

 

If Hardy was no longer active, in that he didn't attend meetings, then that might be an issues, But I'd also suspect an ecclesiastical leader would know about church attendance -- that fact would be pretty difficult to lie about.

 

I think we sometimes tend to be cavalier about accusing others of dishonesty.

I wasn't intending to be cavalier, or unfair to Hardy. (Whaddo I know?    I only went to three apostate schools!  ) His loss of faith is one thing, and I'll take your word for it that such a loss, standing alone, is not enough to raise Honor Code issues.  And I don't want to be unfair to someone who loses faith. Still, based on what little has been revealed publicly, I strongly suspect that Hardy wasn't someone who lost his faith but who simply kept his head down and his nose to the grindstone in an effort to get his degree and then get out.  Based on what little I know, Hardy did other things (and likely persisted in a course of action) that put him crossways with the administration.

Edited November 21, 2014 by Kenngo1969

[HappyJackWagon]

 

toon, on 18 Nov 2014 - 5:22 PM, said:

I don't believe LDS students at BYU who have lost their faith face any such dilemma.  A student who no longer believes can still attend, so long as he or she continues to attend and actively participates in church and otherwise remains in good standing.  There's no need to transfer.  Nothing wrong with a student who says, "I no longer believe, but for the near future, I'm still going to make some effort at obtaining a testimony, even if that means going through the motions.  The problem appears to only be when that person takes some action to formally disaffiliate with the Church.

Kenngo:

Your point is well-taken.  I was speaking more to the case of someone who has lost faith to such an extent that he no longer would feel comfortable in the faith-promoting setting BYU tries to provide its students.  (None of us have any way of knowing, but personally, I doubt Hardy was the type of student you mention, for reasons I explain in another reply, below.)

 

 

We claim the privilege of worshiping 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.

 

I don't see that requiring people to be active in a faith they don't believe in is helpful to anyone. So the distinction of, they can stay even as non-believers as long as they act like they are, is no real solution.

[ERayR]

I don't see that requiring people to be active in a faith they don't believe in is helpful to anyone. So the distinction of, they can stay even as non-believers as long as they act like they are, is no real solution.

 

It seems it is helpful for some who want to circumvent their contract and still receive their subsidies.

[HappyJackWagon]

It seems it is helpful for some who want to circumvent their contract and still receive their subsidies.

Fine, then give them a way to remain at the school without subsidies. I'm not arguing against that.

[Buzzard]

Really? A covenant only counts if entered into by God's authority (through the power of the priesthood)? So if my wife makes a promise to HF to, say, go to the temple once a week, she should feel free to blow it off because it doesn't really count, right?

Second, holding an 8 yo accountable a decade later for a promise they made at a time when they still believed in Santa Claus is absurd. In law, we don't enforce a contract entered into by an 8 yo over a pack of chewing gum. Because we have enough compassion and good sense to understand that children that age don't have the ability to understand long-term consequences. Yet, you believe that HF is less just Judge Judy and says, "A deal is a deal, Missy. Now, get back in thst sacrament meeting. You owe me another 80 years of devotion for that promise you made when you were 8!"

As always, we see HF so much differently. On the plus side, we do share a common desire for "considerate and respectful discourse", so I eagerly anticipate your gentle response (ducking for cover).

 

 

Children at 8 may not have that comprehension, but remember, we renew our baptismal covenants every week when we take the sacrament. So BYU is not holding it's students to a promise they made a decade or more ago, it's holding them to a covenant they just renewed in the recent past. 

One other thing I note. This "Free BYU" group doesn't seem to have any current students on it's roster.  Every person I have seen was a former student who had subsequently left the church. I'd postulate that this circumstance doesn't happen very often.  Most students quietly transfer to a school that doesn't care what their religion is. And they DID have the Honor Code available to them to review upon admission, so no one can claim to be blindsided.