BYU comm speech "disconnect from those who have lost their faith"

[Atheist Mormon]

I don't get this philosophy, perhaps some of you faithful can clue me in how to accomplish this.                                                                       From my point, this request is neither realistic nor achievable, in this age of information.                                                                                 Elder L. Whitney Clayton should know the impossibility of this request.                                                                                                       Even in early1980's when I was in SLC this was not possible, I wanted to know about the church and immediately found                               Tanner's book, little later, I read "No Man knows my History", "Nightfall at Navuoo".                                                                                          Church hierarchy should know this type of advice will not bear any fruit.

I'd like to know what you think or if you would have a better alternative.                                                                                                                 

[ksfisher]

Perhaps if you provided a link or the quote in context we could all understand it better.

[Bobbieaware]

5 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

Perhaps if you provided a link or the quote in context we could all understand it better.

Here is the pertinent quote from Elder Clayton's BYU commencement address:

"The faithless often promote themselves as the wise who can rescue the rest of us from our naiveté. 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."

Notice Elder Clayton didn't say to totally disconnect in every way from those who have lost their faith. What he actually said was that the faithful should "disconnect immediately and completely from listening to the proselytizing efforts of those who have lost their faith" I've been able to have friendly visits with some of those who have lost their faith, as long as intense religious discussions aren't the focus of our interactions.

[ERMD]

Your interpretation of what he said and what he actually said are two different things.

 

[stemelbow]

33 minutes ago, Bobbieaware said:

Here is the pertinent quote from Elder Clayton's BYU commencement address:

"The faithless often promote themselves as the wise who can rescue the rest of us from our naiveté. 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."

Notice Elder Clayton didn't say to totally disconnect in every way from those who have lost their faith. What he actually said was that the faithful should "disconnect immediately and completely from listening to the proselytizing efforts of those who have lost their faith" I've been able to have friendly visits with some of those who have lost their faith, as long as intense religious discussions aren't the focus of our interactions.

His view makes me feel like the caricaturized description of the Pharisees, long condemned, should be a noble path for us to follow. 

If we aren't willing to engage people with different views we'll lose.  If we aren't willing to treat those in our family, or our close friends with love and a listening ear, we'll be defeated, int he long run.

[bluebell]

You shouldn't put words in quotes if they aren't actually a quote. 

It doesn't appear that Elder Clayton said to disconnect from people who lose faith. He said not to listen to their proselytizing efforts. 

Those are two very different things. 

[Storm Rider]

I read a post by an atheist on Patheos that was criticizing this talk and the quote that Bobbie presented specifically.  They were appalled that this Mormon yokel would counsel the saints to exclude people from their lives.  

What amazed me is that the language used so clearly states, "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,"  How does stop listening to the proselytizing efforts become rejecting people?  

Simple, if you are the type of person that yammers on constantly about how stupid or silly or wrong the Church is then some LDS are going to say, "Look, I love you, but I don't want to hear this anymore.  If we are going to hang out together leave your negative comments at the door for your other friends.  Deal?"

Why would any individual want to be around a negative person all the time?  

[Meadowchik]

16 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

His view makes me feel like the caricaturized description of the Pharisees, long condemned, should be a noble path for us to follow. 

If we aren't willing to engage people with different views we'll lose.  If we aren't willing to treat those in our family, or our close friends with love and a listening ear, we'll be defeated, int he long run.

How many evangelical arguments (of all belief systems) are you familiar with?

I take it this way: an evangelical jab, manipulation, or subversion is one thing....discussing a point of truth or doctrine is another.

Edited April 25, 2016 by Meadowchik

[stemelbow]

9 minutes ago, bluebell said:

You shouldn't put words in quotes if they aren't actually a quote. 

It doesn't appear that Elder Clayton said to disconnect from people who lose faith. He said not to listen to their proselytizing efforts. 

Those are two very different things. 

Was the quoted version from Bobbie not a quote? 

I don't see them as two different things.  If I am unwilling to listen to him/her whom I love about some particular thing he/she needs to tell me, then I am disconnecting from that person, at least to some level. It only gets worse as time goes by and many more attempts to converse are rebuffed.  I'd maintain we are in for a BIG loss if we all follow that advice.  Now I will say on an individual basis one needs to learn to set limits to protect oneself with some people.  But, those limits might need to be set with some active LDS just as much as with some ex-LDS. 

Categorizing people and saying shut them down, instead of promoting the teaching we're all in this together, is only going to hurt us in the long run.  I'd hope someone above Elder Clayton corrects this. 

[stemelbow]

Oh I needed to add:  "The faithless often promote themselves as the wise who can rescue the rest of us from our naiveté"

How disappointing it is that he does not realize the projecting.  Replace faithless, whatever that means, with faithful and it rings true, at least to me and probably to every person ever approached by a member of the Church in Church related discussion.

[Tacenda]

I would hope leaders like this would be able to rise above this attitude, very disappointing that it comes from a leader of the one true church from God.

There's no trying to convert over...just to shut your ears, as if the information is going to hurt something like the church being true, if it's true, nothing should be able to harm it.  Missionaries hear it all the time.  And they aren't told this.  Or maybe I'm wrong.   

At one time, before the essays etc.  The church leaders, some or many, were oblivious to many things in history that was held back.  But now that's not the case, and it seems they still can't accept anything is wrong.  And those that think it is, are bad people, in my eyes the quote appears to make people that find it disturbing, bad.

Edited April 25, 2016 by Tacenda

[stemelbow]

12 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

How many evangelical arguments (of all belief systems) are you familiar with?

I take it this way: an evangelical jab, manipulation, or subversion is one thing....discussing a point of truth or doctrine is another.

20 Years ago I went on a mission surrounded by evangelical arguments.  Since that time I've spent a great deal of my free time engaging evangelical arguments.  In college I befriended a stout evangelical, the two of us forming a book club of sorts, sharing different books from each other's perspectives.  I've read a ton of evangelical works thanks to her direction and suggestion, and many more since then. 

 

But his point has nothing to do with the evangelical crew of Christians.  His point is talking about those who have walked away from the LDS Church, which granted, may include some evangelicals but by and large would not.   

[bluebell]

17 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Was the quoted version from Bobbie not a quote? 

I don't see them as two different things.  If I am unwilling to listen to him/her whom I love about some particular thing he/she needs to tell me, then I am disconnecting from that person, at least to some level. It only gets worse as time goes by and many more attempts to converse are rebuffed.  I'd maintain we are in for a BIG loss if we all follow that advice.  Now I will say on an individual basis one needs to learn to set limits to protect oneself with some people.  But, those limits might need to be set with some active LDS just as much as with some ex-LDS. 

Categorizing people and saying shut them down, instead of promoting the teaching we're all in this together, is only going to hurt us in the long run.  I'd hope someone above Elder Clayton corrects this. 

I have a friend who is way into Mary Kay.  I can very easily disconnect from her proselytizing Mary Kay (which i have!) and yet still be her friend.  I have another friend who wants very little to do with mormonism.  We are still good friends even though she doesn't want to hear about my religion or my beliefs.

This isn't about categorizing people.  

And yes, the quoted version from Bobbie is a quote.  The quoted words in the OP title don't appear to be a quote at all though, which is what i was talking about.  The appear to be AM's interpretation of what Elder Clayton said, put into quotes.

[Bobbieaware]

17 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

His view makes me feel like the caricaturized description of the Pharisees, long condemned, should be a noble path for us to follow. 

If we aren't willing to engage people with different views we'll lose.  If we aren't willing to treat those in our family, or our close friends with love and a listening ear, we'll be defeated, int he long run.

I'm willing to converse with those who have lost their faith, as long as I'm able to spiritually discern they still have some capacity to keep an open mind. But if I discern they're arrogant, and their anti-Mormon ideas are set in stone, I will not engage.

Also, please note Elder Clayton is specifically speaking of not engaging with former members of the Church who have become anti-LDS zealots who are actively proselytizing against the Church. Humble folks who have lost their faith but who have not become anti-Mormom propagandists are in a wholly different category from the modern-day Korihors against whom Elder Clayton warned.

[bluebell]

15 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I would hope leaders like this would be able to rise above this attitude, very disappointing that it comes from a leader of the one true church from God.

There's no trying to convert over...just to shut your ears, as if the information is going to hurt something like the church being true, if it's true, nothing should be able to harm it.  Missionaries hear it all the time.  And they aren't told this.  Or maybe I'm wrong.   

At one time, before the essays etc.  The church leaders, some or many, were oblivious to many things in history that was held back.  But now that's not the case, and it seems they still can't accept anything is wrong.  And those that think it is, are bad people, in my eyes the quote appears to make people that find it disturbing, bad.

It won't hurt the church, but that doesn't mean that it won't hurt someone personally.  If the church is true, for example, then everyone who has left the church because of the CES letter has been  greatly damaged (and their families and in some cases future posterity) by listening to the proselytizing of someone who has left the faith.

Just like we are taught to protect our marriages and we would not feel it to be appropriate to listen to someone who was trying to talk us into committing adultery, we have to safeguard our testimonies as well.  There's nothing evil or underhanded about such a teaching.  

[Scott Lloyd]

I agree it is irresponsible, careless and misleading at best, outright dishonest at worst, to put those words in quotes, as though Elder Clayton really had said them. 

People, if you're not directly quoting someone or something, don't use quotation marks. A paraphrase does not belong in quotation marks. 

Edited April 25, 2016 by Scott Lloyd

[stemelbow]

4 minutes ago, bluebell said:

I have a friend who is way into Mary Kay.  I can very easily disconnect from her proselytizing Mary Kay (which i have!) and yet still be her friend.  I have another friend who wants very little to do with mormonism.  We are still good friends even though she doesn't want to hear about my religion or my beliefs.

This isn't about categorizing people.  

And yes, the quoted version from Bobbie is a quote.  The quoted words in the OP title don't appear to be a quote at all though, which is what i was talking about.  The appear to be AM's interpretation of what Elder Clayton said, put into quotes.

In speaking with people about religious feelings and belief, you are engaging in personal heart-felt deeply seeded feelings.  In engaging with people about selling products, well, that's business and has no comparison.  You set limits in conversation with people and you disengage to some extent.  there's no way around that.  Sure, there are people you should set limits with.  But that's a person by person individual assessment we should make.  We should not generalize and say, these types we can't go there with.  I think it's a big mistake that encourages far more disconnection than connection. 

Some of my most meaningful personal interactions occur with those who have left the faith.  I treat them as we are in this together rather than as enemies needing to be disconnected with. 

[stemelbow]

8 minutes ago, Bobbieaware said:

I'm willing to converse with those who have lost their faith, as long as I'm able to spiritually discern they still have some capacity to keep an open mind. But if I discern they're arrogant, and their anti-Mormon ideas are set in stone, I will not engage.

Also, please note Elder Clayton is specifically speaking of not engaging with former members of the Church who have become anti-LDS zealots who are actively proselytizing against the Church. Humble folks who have lost their faith but who have not become anti-Mormom propagandists are in a wholly different category from the modern-day Korihors against whom Elder Clayton warned.

SOunds like you're reading tons into his words.  He merely said the "faithless", not those who have left the Church and are "anti-LDS zealots who are actively proselytizing against the Church".  But I do appreciate your more nuanced view. 

So in other words he is comparing anyone who he considers faithless to the worst of characters he can imagine.  I think treating people who have left the faith as such is a huge ol' problem.  It does feel like you disagree with him on that, at least to some extent, as you are willing to actually engage with some of them. 

[Storm Rider]

14 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I would hope leaders like this would be able to rise above this attitude, very disappointing that it comes from a leader of the one true church from God.

There's no trying to convert over...just to shut your ears, as if the information is going to hurt something like the church being true, if it's true, nothing should be able to harm it.  Missionaries hear it all the time.  And they aren't told this.  Or maybe I'm wrong.   

At one time, before the essays etc.  The church leaders, some or many, were oblivious to many things in history that was held back.  But now that's not the case, and it seems they still can't accept anything is wrong.  And those that think it is, are bad people, in my eyes the quote appears to make people that find it disturbing, bad.

So if you have faith you can listen to the same attacks on faith all your life without any impact on your own faith.  Why, well because what you believe is true and therefore all negative attacks will have no impact because it is true.  

You seem to have a far different understanding of faith than I do.  More importantly, you have a different understanding of what faith would typically cause us to do.  

Faith is something that we build and care for and feed.  It is not something to neglect and expect that it will remain strong.  Does that make sense or sound familiar?  

My mother always said, "you cannot go down a chimney without getting any soot on you."  If we want to pay daily attention to falsehood, lies, negativity, and destructive influences how do we expect our faith to remain strong?  Judas sat at the feet of the Savior and yet he listened to a negative influence and he denied the Christ.  Do you think that God desires us to build our faith or destroy our faith?  What are his counsels to build our faith?

[Bobbieaware]

9 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

In speaking with people about religious feelings and belief, you are engaging in personal heart-felt deeply seeded feelings.  In engaging with people about selling products, well, that's business and has no comparison.  You set limits in conversation with people and you disengage to some extent.  there's no way around that.  Sure, there are people you should set limits with.  But that's a person by person individual assessment we should make.  We should not generalize and say, these types we can't go there with.  I think it's a big mistake that encourages far more disconnection than connection. 

Some of my most meaningful personal interactions occur with those who have left the faith.  I treat them as we are in this together rather than as enemies needing to be disconnected with. 

I'm wondering why you as yet haven't seemed to grasp the difference between a proselytizing Korihor and a sincere former believer who hasn't yet crossed over the spiritual Rubicon into the netherworld of anti-Mormon zealotry?

Edited April 25, 2016 by Bobbieaware

[Tacenda]

7 minutes ago, bluebell said:

It won't hurt the church, but that doesn't mean that it won't hurt someone personally.  If the church is true, for example, then everyone who has left the church because of the CES letter has been  greatly damaged (and their families and in some cases future posterity) by listening to the proselytizing of someone who has left the faith.

Just like we are taught to protect our marriages and we would not feel it to be appropriate to listen to someone who was trying to talk us into committing adultery, we have to safeguard our testimonies as well.  There's nothing evil or underhanded about such a teaching.  

If the information were false then I agree with you.  IME or IMO, just as many can leave the church over the church essays or FAIRMormon and have.  Are we to completely run from the sources sanctioned by the church also?  No one has an answer for this it seems, yes it's a faithful approach, but it's still the same information.  

I heard today that Jeremy Runnells' wife would have left him had it not been for the church essays coming out just in time.  In that respect, thank heavens for the essays, but in other cases the essays cause harm just as much as the anti's.  And maybe even more so, because it's going to be the truth coming from the church wherein if it comes from anti's than it's taken with a grain of salt.  

I think the church needs to show a softer side, more understanding and loving of the situation.  Elder Clayton doesn't seem to really know what's going on IMO.  

[bluebell]

7 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

In speaking with people about religious feelings and belief, you are engaging in personal heart-felt deeply seeded feelings.  In engaging with people about selling products, well, that's business and has no comparison.  You set limits in conversation with people and you disengage to some extent.  there's no way around that.  Sure, there are people you should set limits with.  But that's a person by person individual assessment we should make.  We should not generalize and say, these types we can't go there with.  I think it's a big mistake that encourages far more disconnection than connection. 

Some of my most meaningful personal interactions occur with those who have left the faith.  I treat them as we are in this together rather than as enemies needing to be disconnected with. 

I'm guessing that Elder Clayton assumes that those who are listening to him are capable of common sense.  He's giving general advice about those people who actively try to harm the faith of others, not telling people they should never talk about beliefs with anyone who believes differently than they do.  

[stemelbow]

12 minutes ago, bluebell said:

It won't hurt the church, but that doesn't mean that it won't hurt someone personally.  If the church is true, for example, then everyone who has left the church because of the CES letter has been  greatly damaged (and their families and in some cases future posterity) by listening to the proselytizing of someone who has left the faith.

Just like we are taught to protect our marriages and we would not feel it to be appropriate to listen to someone who was trying to talk us into committing adultery, we have to safeguard our testimonies as well.  There's nothing evil or underhanded about such a teaching.  

Bluebell,  I fell like you are misunderstanding the complaint here.  There is no doubt that some individuals need to make the tough choice with certain other individuals to disengage to some level, to protect oneself, quite often.  Sure.  There are no doubt many people who have left the Church that I would say it wise to set limits on in terms of interactions.  But I would also argue the same is true for many individuals whether they are in the Church or not.  The problem comes in when those who have left the faith are marked as faithless, treated as BoM villains (which are really just caricatures of the real people named), grouped as those who we need to disconnect from to some level.  But as Bobbie points out, there are plenty of people that have left who are good to engage.  It's really damaging to treat all faithless as people to disconnect from.

[flameburns623]

Like almost everyone else, I agree that the full quote, in context, says something dramatically different from what was attributed in both the title of the thread and in the opening post.

Honest dialogue with a doubter or questioner is very different from giving a place to one whose predisposition and intention is to damage and destroy the faith of others.

You need to indicate, OP, by use of brackets and/or ellipses when a particular attributed quote is paraphrased or is a fragment.

[stemelbow]

5 minutes ago, Bobbieaware said:

I'm wondering why you as yet haven't seemed to grasp the difference between a proselytizing Korihor and a sincere former believer who hasn't yet crossed over the spiritual Rubicon into the netherworld of anti-Mormon zealotry?

He didn't mention any faithless as sincere former believers who haven't crossed over the spiritual Rubicon to anti-Mormon zealotry.  He didn't treat the world as nuanced as you.  That's the problem.  He said disconnect from any faithless who dares to proselytize his/her own feelings and message.  He didn't say there are sincere people who have left the faith.  That again, is you addition.  Which I can appreciate, actually.  But, not everyone will be as wise as you to disagree on his overall point and stick to your own judgment.  Many will say, disconnect from the faithless when they talk religion, because that's what he said to do. 

This attempt to neatly catergorizing is perhaps one of the larger problems in all of this.  As it turns out, many faithful LDS have many of the same concerns and complaints as many of those who have left.  This is a fearful attitude as if truth won't prevail.