Elder Holland at BYU


Grunt
 Share

Recommended Posts

Is the Church looking a little closer at BYU?

This quote meant so much to me.

Quote

“But it will assist everyone in providing such help if things can be kept in some proportion and balance in the process. For example, we have to be careful that love and empathy do not get interpreted as condoning and advocacy, or that orthodoxy and loyalty to principle not be interpreted as unkindness or disloyalty to people. As near as I can tell, Christ never once withheld His love from anyone, but He also never once said to anyone, ‘Because I love you, you are exempt from keeping my commandments.’ We are tasked with trying to strike that same sensitive, demanding balance in our lives.”

https://www.thechurchnews.com/leaders-and-ministry/2021-08-23/elder-holland-byu-university-conference-love-lgbtq-223095?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=cn-social&utm_campaign=facebookpage-en&utm_content=general conference&fbclid=IwAR12i6wIiksmOdnRAOXXwE6vsohHlIJdMZZT1OHwGGL-tkzc3EHGn5uj3rw

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Grunt said:

Is the Church looking a little closer at BYU?

I never realized there was a disconnect between what BYU and Church leadership did.  But obviously there is.

Elder Holland says Matt Easton commandeered the graduation podium, but Matt states that he was given prior approval by the BYU dean for everything he said in his speech.

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2021/08/23/byu-teachers-are-expected/

Elder Holland

"Holland brought up the time a student 'commandeer[ed] a graduation podium intended to represent everyone getting diplomas to announce his personal sexual orientation."

“What might commencement come to mean or not mean if we push individual license over institutional dignity for very long?”

Matt Easton

Matt Easton, the gay valedictorian, was surprised and disappointed by Holland’s mention of his action.

“I am proud of what I did two years ago,” he responded Monday, “and I stand by what I said.”

His speech, including the mention of his sexual orientation, was approved by his dean two weeks in advance, Easton said from his home in Berkeley, Calif, where he is about to begin graduate school. “I wasn’t trying to grandstand or ‘commandeer’ the event. I drew on my personal experiences because they shaped my time at BYU — authenticity is not the same as ‘agenda pushing.’”

Questions

1.) Does anyone have any context to this situation as to why Elder Holland didn't focus on solely reproving the BYU dean and staff for allowing Matt Easton to state his sexual orientation in his valedictorian speech?

2.) Are BYU valedictorians supposed to just speak generically and not draw upon any personal accounts or life experience for future commencement speeches?

Edited by clbent04
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Grunt said:

I don't get it.

Sorry, I’m riffing off the old saw that “hit birds, flutter”—Elder Holland’s remarks are causing umbrage amongst people who know themselves to be guilty of the behavior he speaks of.

21 minutes ago, clbent04 said:

I never realized there was a disconnect between what BYU and Church leadership did.  But obviously there is.

Elder Holland says Matt Easton commandeered the graduation podium, but Matt states that he was given prior approval by the BYU dean for everything he said in his speech.

https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2021/08/23/byu-teachers-are-expected/

Elder Holland

"Holland brought up the time a student 'commandeer[ed] a graduation podium intended to represent everyone getting diplomas to announce his personal sexual orientation."

“What might commencement come to mean or not mean if we push individual license over institutional dignity for very long?”

Matt Easton

Matt Easton, the gay valedictorian, was surprised and disappointed by Holland’s mention of his action.

“I am proud of what I did two years ago,” he responded Monday, “and I stand by what I said.”

His speech, including the mention of his sexual orientation, was approved by his dean two weeks in advance, Easton said from his home in Berkeley, Calif, where he is about to begin graduate school. “I wasn’t trying to grandstand or ‘commandeer’ the event. I drew on my personal experiences because they shaped my time at BYU — authenticity is not the same as ‘agenda pushing.’”

Questions

1.) Does anyone have any context to this situation as to why Elder Holland didn't focus on solely reproving the BYU dean and staff for allowing Matt Easton to state his sexual orientation in his valedictorian speech?

2.) Are BYU valedictorians supposed to just speak generically and not draw upon any personal accounts or life experience for future commencement speeches?

As to 2)—it doesn’t take a particularly smart person to understand that at a church school, a speech about “I am proud to be be a pedophilic son of God” or “I am proud to be a kleptomaniac son of God” or “I am proud to be sociopathic son of God” isn’t going to go over well—even if it is indeed rooted in personal accounts drawn from the speaker’s life experiences, and even if the speaker feels he is being “authentic”.

As to 1)—I have no idea if Easton is telling the truth as to who authorized what; but I think the point Holland was trying to make was that that event belonged to the students, and Easton made it about himself by highlighting his affinity for a divisive (and let’s be blunt—sinful) practice at a university that strives for unity and righteousness.  In that sense, the student body’s event was “commandeered” even if the administration was fully complicit in the commandeering.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

As to 2)—it doesn’t take a particularly smart person to understand that at a church school, a speech about “I am proud to be be a pedophilic son of God” or “I am proud to be a kleptomaniac son of God” or “I am proud to be sociopathic son of God” isn’t going to go over well—even if it is indeed rooted in personal accounts drawn from the speaker’s life experiences, and even if the speaker feels he is being “authentic”.

I guess it depends on how you dissect it.  Matt could be saying "I am proud to be a gay son of God" in the sense that he's proud to be a son of God despite his imperfections, or, it could be he's proud of being gay, which would be something entirely inappropriate to admit at BYU. 

When I initially read the story I gave the guy the benefit of the doubt, but I don't have much context to the story other than the few articles I've read.

Edited by clbent04
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Grunt said:

Is the Church looking a little closer at BYU?

There was a point in his talk where he talked about the sacred tithing funds that the church puts toward the school and how they are very deliberate about where to put that money and how they don’t want to waste it, then went on to talk about the failings of the professors and student body at the school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, clbent04 said:

Matt Easton

“I wasn’t trying to grandstand or ‘commandeer’ the event. I drew on my personal experiences because they shaped my time at BYU — authenticity is not the same as ‘agenda pushing.’”

Heh.  Well, as a graduating college kid, I can understand why he's wrong without knowing it.  Give him a few years, and he'll learn that authenticity, especially in a prepared speech, is basically the dictionary definition of 'agenda pushing'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, clbent04 said:

I guess it depends on how you dissect it.  Matt could be saying "I am proud to be a gay son of God" in the sense that he's proud to be a son of God despite his imperfections, or, it could be he's proud of being gay, which would be something entirely inappropriate to admit at BYU. 

When I initially read the story I gave the guy the benefit of the doubt, but I don't have much context to the story other than the few articles I've read.

Sure, it depends on how you dissect it; same as it would for a kid who had publicly “come out” as experiencing any of the other conditions/predilections I enumerated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have 2 brothers (well...one a brother-in-law) who teach/work at BYU. I also have several nephews and nieces attending there. By all reports, the place is a mess. Not as much of a mess as other colleges. But still....

Of course the whole world is a mess. So....   But as it stands, I would actively discourage people from attending BYU. Why? Because at least when you go into the wolves' den (other colleges) they aren't dressed in sheep's clothing.

I hope things change at BYU. But I also despair for education in general.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Folk Prophet said:

I have 2 brothers (well...one a brother-in-law) who teach/work at BYU. I also have several nephews and nieces attending there. By all reports, the place is a mess. Not as much of a mess as other colleges. But still....

Of course the whole world is a mess. So....   But as it stands, I would actively discourage people from attending BYU. Why? Because at least when you go into the wolves' den (other colleges) they aren't dressed in sheep's clothing.

I hope things change at BYU. But I also despair for education in general.

Having attended BYU, this surprises me. Granted, I graduated in 2010, but I don’t see how it could have gone downhill much.

Have your brothers indicated what kind of split they’re seeing among BYU faculty who follow Church guidance verse question it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

Heh.  Well, as a graduating college kid, I can understand why he's wrong without knowing it.  Give him a few years, and he'll learn that authenticity, especially in a prepared speech, is basically the dictionary definition of 'agenda pushing'.

I get how authenticity and agenda pushing can overlap, but can’t authenticity in a case like Matt’s not have an agenda other than the guy just sharing a part of who he is? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, clbent04 said:

I get how authenticity and agenda pushing can overlap, but can’t authenticity in a case like Matt’s not have an agenda other than the guy just sharing a part of who he is? 

I remember the BYU woman’s conference, they brought out a lesbian to share her experience. What she said was not all that different from what Matt said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fether said:

I remember the BYU woman’s conference, they brought out a lesbian to share her experience. What she said was not all that different from what Matt said.

Can't really argue with that.  And "they", in this case, was the entire General Relief Society presidency, who smilingly brought her into the spotlight and supportively participated in the interview.

(Oh, and she wasn't "a lesbian", she was "queer".  Asking people the difference between the two almost gets you as many answers as there are answerers.)

Edited by NeuroTypical
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hallelujah!

Please can we use the musket!

The following statement made me cheer.

“If at a future time that mission means foregoing some professional affiliations and certifications, then so be it. There may come a day when the price we are asked to pay for such association is simply too high, too inconsistent with who we are.”

I have a BS and the wife has a JD from BYU.  We have also sent 4 of our children there.  

We continue to be dismayed and shocked at the changes and direction that the University is moving.

It will need more than hope and prayers to regulate.

Every now and then the stalls need mucking.  It’s way overdue in my opinion.

We have always warned our children that we recommend BYU but with reservations.  Frankly I'm at the point where I can no longer recommend the institution.

Edited by mikbone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, clbent04 said:

Questions

1.) Does anyone have any context to this situation as to why Elder Holland didn't focus on solely reproving the BYU dean and staff for allowing Matt Easton to state his sexual orientation in his valedictorian speech?

2.) Are BYU valedictorians supposed to just speak generically and not draw upon any personal accounts or life experience for future commencement speeches?

1. Only Elder Holland knows why Elder Holland said what he said. My guess is that he, and/or other church leaders, did reprove the dean of the Family, Home, and Social Sciences College for allowing him to give this speech...they simply reproved in private. We don't need to know all the juicy details. To me, Elder Holland's words indicate that something was said.

2. Not necessarily. However, if one speaks about personal growth stories and/or their trials, yet fail to explain how they overcame such trials, it gives the impression that either the trial was never overcome, or that the trial was in fact, not a trial at all, but something acceptable. This kid never once said that he overcame his temptations (he didn't even use that word). He did not explain that through the Atonement he has been able to become a better person, or the person that the Lord ultimately wants Him to be. Instead, he simply said he was a proud gay man. Sins are personal, and should be treated as such. It takes a very difficult balance to make mentioning something so personal in a public speech appropriate, and he botched it by making a meeting about everyone in attendance all about himself, while at the same time implying that those who suffer from the same trial have no need to change. He also implied that BYU helped him come to this conclusion, which is disturbing.

The favorite oft quoted lie of the lbgtxyz crowd is "God loves me just the way I am." It is a wicked lie because it is only half truth that also implies sin is acceptable in God's eyes. Yes, God loves you, but He does not love the way you are. He does not love the way any of us are really, and the hope is that we can better ourselves so that we can become the people He ultimately wants us to be...like Him. Participating in homosexuality is nothing short of a damning wall for individuals and families.

Lastly, this kid was the valedictorian of the Family, Home, and Social Sciences College. What a slap in the face. When it comes to families, homosexuality is directly against what God has intended for His children. It does not paint a true picture of what BYU should be trying to stand for. Methinks that church leaders will, unfortunately, need to start being more involved in the school, and having more direct say in the day to day goings on. They should be able to trust their hired staff and appointed committees, but this has proven to not be the case multiple times. The school has been too lax when it comes to hiring staff whose beliefs align with church doctrine, because many of them do not. Instead, they have their own personal agenda, and prove Paul's words to be true...

"For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

Can't really argue with that.  And "they", in this case, was the entire General Relief Society presidency, who smilingly brought her into the spotlight and supportively participated in the interview.

(Oh, and she wasn't "a lesbian", she was "queer".  Asking people the difference between the two almost gets you as many answers as there are answerers.)

She was also, let us note, married to a man.  I still think it unhealthy for her to emphasize her “identity” as a LGBTQ woman; but to her credit she has at least indicated a commitment to the law of chastity.  Easton hasn’t, and his public squealing last year when the CES announced that, yes, gay PDA is a violation of the Honor Code; suggests that chastity is not a burden he thinks ought to be borne.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

She was also, let us note, married to a man.  I still think it unhealthy for her to emphasize her “identity” as a LGBTQ woman; but to her credit she has at least indicated a commitment to the law of chastity.  Easton hasn’t, and his public squealing last year when the CES announced that, yes, gay PDA is a violation of the Honor Code; suggests that chastity is not a burden he thinks ought to be borne.  

Valid points, all which speak to the church being ok with her, and not ok with mr. valedictorian.

Quote

As near as I can tell, Christ never once withheld His love from anyone, but He also never once said to anyone, ‘Because I love you, you are exempt from keeping my commandments.’ We are tasked with trying to strike that same sensitive, demanding balance in our lives.”

 

Edited by NeuroTypical
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were a lot of things said in his talk that showed a deep desire to find a doctrinal middle ground, yet no one is talking about it.

“I and many of my brethren have spent more time and shed more tears on this subject than we could ever adequately convey to you this morning, or any morning. We have spent hours discussing what the doctrine of the church can and cannot provide the individuals and families struggling over this difficult issue. So, it is with scar tissue of our own that we are trying to avoid — and hope all will try to avoid — language, symbols, and situations that are more divisive than unifying at the very time we want to show love for all of God’s children.”

- ELDER HOLLAND

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Fether said:

There were a lot of things said in his talk that showed a deep desire to find a doctrinal middle ground, yet no one is talking about it.

“I and many of my brethren have spent more time and shed more tears on this subject than we could ever adequately convey to you this morning, or any morning. We have spent hours discussing what the doctrine of the church can and cannot provide the individuals and families struggling over this difficult issue. So, it is with scar tissue of our own that we are trying to avoid — and hope all will try to avoid — language, symbols, and situations that are more divisive than unifying at the very time we want to show love for all of God’s children.”

- ELDER HOLLAND

He wasn’t supposed to find middle ground.  He was supposed to kiss the ring.

Hence the weeping, wailing, and gnashing of teeth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

12 hours ago, Fether said:

There were a lot of things said in his talk that showed a deep desire to find a doctrinal middle ground, yet no one is talking about it.

“I and many of my brethren have spent more time and shed more tears on this subject than we could ever adequately convey to you this morning, or any morning. We have spent hours discussing what the doctrine of the church can and cannot provide the individuals and families struggling over this difficult issue. So, it is with scar tissue of our own that we are trying to avoid — and hope all will try to avoid — language, symbols, and situations that are more divisive than unifying at the very time we want to show love for all of God’s children.”

- ELDER HOLLAND

 

Could you explain what you mean by "middle ground"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Grunt said:

 

 

Could you explain what you mean by "middle ground"?

There are things we do because of doctrine and things we do because no one has had a problem with and he haven’t had a reason to stop. Middle ground would be found in situations that fall in that second category.

for example:

- in the US, we have a cultural hall that normally has a basketball hoop. If basketball went out of fashion and everyone like tennis, we could replace those basketball courts with tennis courts.

- Making same sex marriage not apostasy, but just a serious transgression when it came to church discipline.

- allowing pre-18-year-old children of LGBTQ or polygamists get baptized without first presidency approval

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Fether said:

There are things we do because of doctrine and things we do because no one has had a problem with and he haven’t had a reason to stop. Middle ground would be found in situations that fall in that second category.

for example:

- in the US, we have a cultural hall that normally has a basketball hoop. If basketball went out of fashion and everyone like tennis, we could replace those basketball courts with tennis courts.

- Making same sex marriage not apostasy, but just a serious transgression when it came to church discipline.

- allowing pre-18-year-old children of LGBTQ or polygamists get baptized without first presidency approval

Thanks.   It was the "middle ground" that hung me up, since middle ground to me implies compromise.  Compromise generally involves giving something up in the interest of amity or agreement.   I'm not disagreeing with your statement, but personally probably would have instead said something about prayerfully and carefully examining the doctrine to ensure the "line" is drawn in the right place.   

I suppose I only take notice and split hairs because this is a very serious issue for me personally.   I don't want to compromise on God's will.   However, we should make very certain we haven't accidentally excluded our brothers and sisters from all of Christ's earthly light due to cultural or misdrawn lines.

I'm not sure I made sense, so I'll try again if I haven't done well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share