The Death of "Free Agency"

[pogi]

22 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Tell your landlord you don't feel like paying the rent/mortgage this month because you have free agency.

Yep.  He’ll likely respond, “yes, you do.  Then I will have the free agency and the ability to kick your butt out on the street…”

I do still indeed have the "option" and "choice" to do whatever I want, and not pay.  Then he will have the option of kicking me out on the street, etc.  it is about choices and consequences.

Quote

‘free to choose liberty and eternal life, through the great Mediator of all men, or to choose captivity and death, according to the captivity and power of the devil’ (2 Nephi 2:27)” (True to the Faith p. 12).

We do have the option and choice to choose whichever we want.  That is our choice.  The way he said it sounds contrary to this scripture.  I don't think he really meant it the way he said it though.

Elder Bednar (from the video):

Quote

 If, after entering into the covenant, we don't abide by the conditions of the covenant - For example, if you or I don't pay our tithing, do we have the option not to pay our tithing?  Nope.   It's breaking a covenant.  It is not the exercise of agency anymore.  Because what happened to our individual agency?  It was enlarged.  Now, it's more important to represent Him.  Is this making sense?

Me:

No.  Not really. 

Edited August 18, 2022 by pogi

[mfbukowski]

13 minutes ago, pogi said:

Yep.  I'll face the consequences fur sure.  But I do still indeed have the "option" and "choice" to do whatever I want, and not pay.  Then he will have the option of kicking me out on the street, etc. 

We do have the option and choice to choose whichever we want.  That is our choice.  The way he said it sounds contrary to this scripture.  I don't think he really meant it the way he said it though.

Elder Bednar (from the video):

Me:

No.  Not really. 

Isaiah Berlin "Positive Liberty" in "Two Concepts of Liberty "

Laws actually create freedom.

If everyone drove on whatever side of the street they wanted it would be chaos.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Concepts_of_Liberty#:~:text=Positive liberty,-"is involved in&text=than that%3F'-,",any free and civilised society

Self Mastery is the key.

You're on a diet so you don't eat cake and you lose weight.  One freedom to choose another 

The gospel is about self Mastery.

 

Edited August 18, 2022 by mfbukowski

[pogi]

14 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

Isaiah Berlin "Positive Liberty" in "Two Concepts of Liberty "

Laws actually create freedom.

If everyone drove on whatever side of the street they wanted it would be chaos.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Concepts_of_Liberty#:~:text=Positive liberty,-"is involved in&text=than that%3F'-,",any free and civilised society

I agree with that completely.  But that is not to say that we don’t have the “option” or “choice” (using his language) to choose or do otherwise.

Edited August 18, 2022 by pogi

[pogi]

1 hour ago, bluebell said:

It seems obvious that he meant it like that, because he knows there are thousands (probably millions) of members who are choosing not to pay tithing.  I agree though that it wasn't a great way to say it.  

 

Yes, in context he hints at our option to break our covenants and not pay tithing, but then says that we don’t have the option not to pay.  It is really confusing and contradictory.  I blame it on being off-the-cuff remarks.  Had he prepared a written talk I am confident that it would have made more sense.  The concern is that it appears some leaders are parroting poorly prepared remarks and unfortunate comments as if it was doctrine - unless there is something here that is just going completely over my head.

Edited August 18, 2022 by pogi

[mfbukowski]

7 minutes ago, pogi said:

I agree with that completely.  But that is not to say that we don’t have the “option” or “choice” (using his language) to choose or do otherwise.

Yep, of course!

As I said earlier the whole concept of "free agency" was based on erroneous logic and linguistic confusion 

Ever had, say a real estate agent?

Can she be YOUR "agent" and be free to do what she wants? Get the highest commission she can in her interest, not yours?

[mfbukowski]

2 minutes ago, pogi said:

Yes, in context he hints at our option to break our covenants and not pay tithing, but then says that we don’t have the option not to pay.  It is really confusing and contradictory.  I blame it on being off-the-cuff remarks.  Had he prepared a written talk I am confident that it would have made more sense.  The concern is that it appears some leaders are parroting poorly prepared remarks and unfortunate comments as if it was doctrine.   Unless there is something here that is just going completely over my head.

No I think you're right.

Surprise! Leaders are human!

 

[pogi]

8 minutes ago, mfbukowski said:

No I think you're right.

Surprise! Leaders are human!

If we have to defend every comment of every leader…we are in a world of hurt.   I just really hope this idea that we don’t have a choice or option to not serve missions etc, is squashed quickly.  
 

Mistakes happen and have consequences, I think we are seeing those consequences.  It is really kind of sad how careful GAs have to be with every word in every talk.  They just cary so much weight that a simple misunderstanding can quickly go viral and turn into new false doctrines.

Edited August 18, 2022 by pogi

[Stargazer]

5 hours ago, The Unclean Deacon said:

In this new rhetoric the doctrine being taught is that when you are 8 years old (and still may believe Santa Claus at that time) a child being baptized into the LDS Church gives up their "free Agency" and takes on "moral agency" or "representative agency" which means you now have to choose to do what the Church tells you to do. 

Good grief, what a hokey pile of baloney.

All baptism does is make it possible for one to repent and be forgiven of one's sins through the atonement of Christ.

All accountable human beings born upon the earth have moral agency, regardless of baptismal status. They may choose for themselves in all the choices available to them.

There's no such thing as "free agency". Just because we've been habitually using the wrong term for decades does not mean we're not allowed to correct ourselves.

Free agency is something that exists in professional sports. Once you've been released from your contract you become a free agent, and you may freely contract with another sports club.

But in terms of morality, there is no free agency, because in order to act without committing sin, you must obey God's law. You are free to violate God's law, of course, but then you are no longer a free agent because the law will come for you in the end. Unless you are baptized and repent.

If there were no God, only then would there be free agency, because then there would be no law to break, and you would truly be free to do everything that entered into your heart. Except there still would be no true free agency, because there are consequences for every act, good or evil. So "free agency" is really just a non-thing.

Unless you want to define "free agency" in the same terms as "moral agency". Then it's OK.

[Tacenda]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

Isaiah Berlin "Positive Liberty" in "Two Concepts of Liberty "

Laws actually create freedom.

If everyone drove on whatever side of the street they wanted it would be chaos.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two_Concepts_of_Liberty#:~:text=Positive liberty,-"is involved in&text=than that%3F'-,",any free and civilised society

Self Mastery is the key.

You're on a diet so you don't eat cake and you lose weight.  One freedom to choose another 

The gospel is about self Mastery.

 

You are acting far too superior to us minions!

[Calm]

6 hours ago, bluebell said:

If I'm remembering right, this quote was by a counselor in a stake presidency (?) and was in a talk that he gave at a stake conference.  People weren't very appreciate of his take on the issue and it ended up online.  I think @Calm has the reference.

Probably got the transcript from an anti site if there is no reference.  I saw a clip on Twitter of it, but didn’t catch it (haven’t made friends with Twitter yet and don’t know if you can link to a specific tweet).  My guess is you can find it pretty easily on a couple of anti sites I am not advertising.  I will look for it again if absolutely needed, but am busy and dizzy at the moment so you may have to message me to remind me if anyone wants it. (The transcript of the stake leader isn’t here, but everything else relevant is in the links in the OP).

Edited August 19, 2022 by Calm

[Calm]

I am reading backwards and haven’t caught up.  I believe the stake counselor took an idea of Elder Bednar’s and went further, beyond the mark with it and used the term “mandatory”, which iirc was never used by Elder Bednar.  Elder Bednar speaks of moral agency, which means we at baptism become agents for the Lord.  To fulfill that accepted role, we need to obey commandments.  I may try and find the clip where he goes into that.  The clip I saw didn’t refer to missions as an example, iirc. Added:  I see the clip is the third in Unclean’s list.

I don’t believe the type of mission was specified when Elder Bednar talks about missions elsewhere either and there are a number of variations available that can be adapted for most needs, imo, including being able to stay at home.

 He does not address in the short clip I saw (the second clip in the list) the possibility of exceptions or time of seasons that are spoken of at other times by leaders, but I don’t think one should assume that suddenly those qualifications don’t apply anymore.  I don’t believe our apostles, even Elder Bednar, are demanding we run before we walk or ignore our special callings (perhaps a young man or woman helps support and care for disabled family members, has a very special time limited opportunity that will give them skills that will greatly benefit others, has prior commitments where people are depending on them and it will take time to find replacements if even possible) in favor of general commandments as long as our intent is not to ignore what we don’t like, but to follow the Spirit’s guidance.  Thus they have taught in the past that while family history and missionary work are commandments, they don’t expect young parents who are fulfilling the commandment to raise up children to the Lord to fulfill those commandments if it means neglecting their families.  Same with food storage and college kids, college is not the time to start getting in a year supply (though a 72 hour kit in a backpack ready to go for emergencies would be smart imo).
 

Nothing has really changed imo.  Maybe more emphatic language from Elder Bednar, but we have had the same from other apostles in the past.

Edited August 19, 2022 by Calm

[Calm]

@The Unclean Deacon, did you copy/paste this from someone else or write it yourself?  The formatting makes it look like the former.

added:  I see others think the same.  FYI, this is against the board rules without credit to the original compiler/author since it is plagiarism.

Edited August 19, 2022 by Calm

[Calm]

6 hours ago, The Unclean Deacon said:

then the recent push to have local leaders impose missions

CFR please.

[Calm]

6 hours ago, ksfisher said:

If that's true then I'm sure the OP will be able to provide it.

It was provided in the clips he gave.

 

5 hours ago, The Unclean Deacon said:

It is happening in more than one place all at the same time

CFR please.  I have seen to one clip you provided.  An anonymous post on an anonymous site is not a decent reference. 

Edited August 19, 2022 by Calm

[Calm]

4 hours ago, pogi said:

now we see other leaders parroting his terrible delivery. 

Where? Added:  I now understand you meant Elder Bednar phrased it badly and now we have a stake leader at least taking what he said and making it rigid as if there were actually no options to choose differently.

Edited August 19, 2022 by Calm

[Islander]

6 hours ago, ksfisher said:

CFR on this please.

That sounds, rather, like a veiled attempt to normalize a "new" concept or redefinition of what free agency just to be. In simple terms; free agency means (at least in the old LDS parlance) the ability to decide for oneself what course of action to take, having use of all cognitive faculties and aware of the choices and consequences that lay before us. Anything other than that is a "novel" interpretation of an old precept. 

[T-Shirt]

2 hours ago, pogi said:

Yes, in context he hints at our option to break our covenants and not pay tithing, but then says that we don’t have the option not to pay.

If we enter into an agreement (covenant) the terms of the agreement do not give us the option to do something contrary to the agreement. If you want to do something contrary to the terms of the agreement, but you want to stay compliant, you do not have that option.  Certainly you may choose to break the agreement, but you will lose all the benefits of the agreement and you have surrendered the agency you exercised to enter the agreement.  The agreement grants you freedom to do and receive things that those outside of the agreement do not have.  By acting contrary to the agreement, you lose that freedom.

[InCognitus]

27 minutes ago, Calm said:

@The Unclean Deacon, did you copy/paste this from someone else or write it yourself?  The formatting makes it look like the former.

added:  I see others think the same.  FYI, this is against the board rules without credit to the original compiler/author since it is plagiarism.

It was copied and pasted from a post by Bill Reel on reddit.  I'm not going to post the link, but it's titled:  "Mormon Discussion: 369: The Death of Free Agency in Mormonism"

[T-Shirt]

7 minutes ago, Islander said:

That sounds, rather, like a veiled attempt to normalize a "new" concept or redefinition of what free agency just to be. In simple terms; free agency means (at least in the old LDS parlance) the ability to decide for oneself what course of action to take, having use of all cognitive faculties and aware of the choices and consequences that lay before us. Anything other than that is a "novel" interpretation of an old precept. 

Before entering a covenant, you have agency to choose which path to take. Once you exercise that agency and enter into a covenant, the terms of the covenant do not grant you the right or the option to do something contrary to the covenant and remain in the covenant. You may choose to break the covenant but that is not exercising agency it is relinquishing the agency you used to enter the covenant.

Edited August 19, 2022 by T-Shirt

[ksfisher]

24 minutes ago, Calm said:

It was provided in the clips he gave.

I missed that.  There were a lot of them.

[mfbukowski]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

You are acting far too superior to us minions!

Years of studying what sensible folks won't even look at! 

[Islander]

8 minutes ago, T-Shirt said:

Before entering a covenant, you have agency to choose which path to take. Once you exercise that agency and enter into a covenant, the terms of the covenant do not grant you the right or the option to do something contrary to the covenant and remain in the covenant. You may choose to break the covenant but that is not exercising agency it is relinquishing the agency you used to enter the covenant.

That is an erroneous interpretation of the situation. Without agency there no true love or faith. You HAVE to allow for the possibility that love or faith would not become a reality. Otherwise it would be Satan's plan; a benign dictatorship or a plan that implies "coercive enticement". 

It is like faith. It is not blind. it rests on the evidence of what God has done, on the reliability of the witnesses and on the revelation of the Spirit. But to be real, it must endure ALL the trials of mortality and thus the pitfalls that could demonstrate that it was NOT real. Thus I must be free to embrace it or reject the claims before me. 

Every day people that had entered into the covenant walk away from it, reject and rescind everything to which they held before. They are free to do so. It may not be desirable, wise or safe but they do it. They are exercising their agency. God will not bring you into His kingdom kicking and screaming if you do not desire fellowship with Him. 

[Calm]

30 minutes ago, Islander said:

That sounds, rather, like a veiled attempt to normalize a "new" concept or redefinition of what free agency just to be. In simple terms; free agency means (at least in the old LDS parlance) the ability to decide for oneself what course of action to take, having use of all cognitive faculties and aware of the choices and consequences that lay before us. Anything other than that is a "novel" interpretation of an old precept. 

The only addition I see is that by accepting baptism, we accept the role to be an agent of the Lord (which isn’t really new, but isn’t used often that I remember in talks on agency while it has been used in talks and lessons on baptism (taking on Christ’s name).

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1985/04/taking-upon-us-the-name-of-jesus-christ?lang=eng

[T-Shirt]

16 minutes ago, Islander said:

Every day people that had entered into the covenant walk away from it, reject and rescind everything to which they held before. They are free to do so. It may not be desirable, wise or safe but they do it.

Yes, you can choose to walk away from a covenant. However, if you want the benefits of that covenant, the covenant does not give you that option.  True agency is a blessing.  It is not a blessing to those who choose to act contrary to the will of God.

[Calm]

In case it wasn’t posted, the fifth Sunday lesson on missionary work:

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/share/fifthSundayDiscussion?lang=eng

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/bc/content/ldsorg/content/pdf/share/PD80003288_000_5thSunday_SharingTheGospel-WEB.pdf

Quote

The bishopric should consider inviting the Relief Society presidency, elders quorum presidency, ward mission leader, and youth leaders to participate in facilitating the discussion. The bishopric should also determine whether youth and adults should meet separately or together.

Overview 

The purpose of this meeting is to recognize and discuss together the joy and blessings that come from sharing the gospel of Jesus Christ. Focus the meeting on the following two objectives:

Help each young man prepare for and serve a mission, and help each young woman who desires to prepare for and serve a mission.

Help each member share the gospel of Jesus Christ in normal and natural ways by acting upon the principles of love, share, and invite.

Follow the guidance of the Spirit as you prepare. Teach in a way that encourages your ward or branch members to participate in the discussion, especially the youth. The following outline has been provided for your use in preparing. Download PDF

 

Edited August 19, 2022 by Calm