Thank you Anne Squire for a well written article. Your reporting boosted the
idea that spiritual learning and secular learning are compatible in today's
divisive world. Christ is the Key to all learning. He will never give
conflicting information, nor cause confusion, or even dilute His own work and
glory. His learning is out of the best books, coupled with prayer, and
discovered by the power of the Holy Ghost. Excellent article.
As you pursue this education, you will find things to which you disagree that
will challenge things that you felt in the past. Guard against new ideas that
(will) lead you down the path to accepting that which goes against the teachings
of the Lord.This right here is probably the worst piece of
educational advice I have ever heard given. What is education if not to
challenge ones previous notions about life? Is Holland really telling students
to remain ignorant? to guard against notions that go against church doctrine,
and ignore what professors and experts have to say? I understand balancing faith
and morality with education, but to let ones religion blockade your mind and
prohibit new possible discoveries is arrogant and regressive. Think
of this, what if Joseph Smith had "guarded against new ideas" which
led him down different paths?
Was this BYU's graduation, or UVU?
The leader of a secular institution giving a religious speech at that same
institution. While the message may be good and appropriate, I wonder if the
messenger was appropriate. It is, frankly, insensitive to non-LDS students who
attend this state school. I guess it shows there is no separation of church and
state in Utah.
The event was hosted by the LDSSA, a recognized campus student organization. In
fact, many public colleges and universities have LDSSA chapters, especially
those that have an Institute of Religion adjacent to the campus. All LDSSA
chapters are approved and recognized by the leadership of the associated
students of the respective college or university. The UVU students who are not
members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints would have known that
the LDSSA was hosting this event and that the university president and his wife
would have been speaking from the perspective of their religious affiliation.
Consequently, they had the freedom to opt out of the event, or walk out if they
had attended and found the president's and his wife's comments offensive. I
don't see how this would have been insensitive to anyone given the circumstances
I have just outlined.
I agree with Montana Mormon.
Given the venue and event, I see no problem with him participating. I also
didn't see anything in his "talk" that was either enlightening or
controversial.The posts about the event is a different story.
Suggesting that there is no conflict between faith and reason is a stretch and a
clear sign that a person hasn't done a lot of study.A simple study
of ancient texts, teachings and beliefs is enough to call into question many of
the so-called beliefs that are held today. For those who believe the bible is
literally true, then an education can be a illuminating event. Geology, biology,
sociology can all be disturbing to those who have never venture outside the cave
of evangelical-styled religion.That is not to say that religion and
science can't co-exist. They can...provided you don't spend much time reading
the text upon which religions are based.
Perhaps the Prez should not be so polorized with his mormonism. He has a
university to run and plenty of them are not LDS. With all do respect would he
ever attend a GLBT event to lift the spirits of others? Better choices need to
be made but after all this is Utah.....
I don't know why the fretters must fret so. This was an event for LDS students
and anyone else who wished to attend, and was not an event for anyone else.
There are a fair number of LDS students at UVU, and an event for them seems
reasonable. Hearing from the institution's president seems reasonable from the
student point of view. Speaking at such an event seems reasonable for the
president. However, he must have had a difficult decision: Do I turn down the
invitation because people will comment negatively? Do I accept at the risk of
alienating groups who didn't ask me to speak? Can I participate in an event with
students when my role in that event is not to act as university president
indoctrinating subordinates? What can I do to cause no controversy? Well, I
suppose I could be dead 10 or 15 years and no longer upset these fine Deseret
News readers. . . .