BYU athlete kicked out for not attending church enough ....

Post by **_Rollo Tomasi** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:15 pm

See link below for article in today's Trib. Seems incredibly heavy-handed. Just another example of FUBAR at BYU.

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_8149321

Post by **_the road to hana** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 2:17 pm

If it's really the case that his dismissal is entirely for reasons of not attending church often enough to get a renewed ecclesiastical endorsement from the bishop of his BYU ward, that's very sad.

Many BYU students go home on the weekends or attend other wards, for various reasons, and it sounds like this was the case with him, too.

In retrospect he probably should have left his church membership in his home ward, rather than transferring it to a BYU ward.

I imagine there will be other things that surface in this story, real or manufactured, because otherwise the university is probably staring down a lawsuit.

Post by **_charity** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 4:20 pm

As usual, those who want to speak against the Church or BYU can do so, and BYU can't answer back because of confidentiality issues.

Post by **_the road to hana** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 4:41 pm

charity wrote:As usual, those who want to speak against the Church or BYU can do so, and BYU can't answer back because of confidentiality issues.

Sometimes it's isn't the church, Charity. It's an individual.

It wouldn't be any different if the athlete had been kicked out of any other university; people would be looking at it to see if it was with or without merit.

You need to put that knee back under your dress.

Post by **_The Nehor** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 5:22 pm

He knew the rules when he came in. They're not a secret.

Post by **_harmony** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:09 pm

"This is a soul, not a nobody."

What does this mean?

Obviously my sympathies go with the student. In order to be considered active in a non-BYU ward, a member only has to attend a meeting or activity once a month. At least, that's how it was explained to me. Maybe someone with a bit more experience in a bishopric would expound on that. What is the expectation at BYU? That a person will attend all meetings? Half? 90%? What?

Post by **_Tori** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:20 pm

The Nehor wrote:He knew the rules when he came in. They're not a secret.

Oh, so what are the rules? That he can't be sick? That he can't attend another ward? That he must attend 100% of the time no matter what?

I know Vance Law and I bet this is just driving him crazy. I'm a huge BYU fan, but I can't imagine how tough it would be to coach there with the expectations that is placed on them. It sounds like this young man is exactly the kind of athlete they are wanting and then they dismiss him? (insert rolling eyes smilie, here)

Good luck BYU. You will never really be a contender. Not anymore. This isn't raising the bar or having high standards. It's shoving students out the door if they aren't completely perfect.

Post by **_harmony** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:38 pm

Tori wrote:
The Nehor wrote:He knew the rules when he came in. They're not a secret.

Oh, so what are the rules? That he can't be sick? That he can't attend another ward? That he must attend 100% of the time no matter what?

I know Vance Law and I bet this is just driving him crazy. I'm a huge BYU fan, but I can't imagine how tough it would be to coach there with the expectations that is placed on them. It sounds like this young man is exactly the kind of athlete they are wanting and then they dismiss him? (insert rolling eyes smilie, here)

Good luck BYU. You will never really be a contender. Not anymore. This isn't raising the bar or having high standards. It's shoving students out the door if they aren't completely perfect.

Why would the guy want to go back? I mean really. Isn't that taking masochistic behavior a bit too far?

Post by **_bcspace** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 7:13 pm

He knew the rules when he came in. They're not a secret.

Indeed.

However, what happened to "Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it. "? A college student is old enough to sink or swim and all the Honor Code does is show distrust rather than affirming faith. BYU, the Church, and all the students would be better served by the elimination of the Honor Code and Student Life. Sure, you'll have much more scandalous behavior (perhaps not more, just out in the open); but the faithful can govern themselves.

It's really the some principle that shows Mormons living as a minority outside Utah to be stronger in their faith (imho and experience). It's Satan's plan to watch over our shoulders and check us every time we're about to do something wrong. The Church shows a real disbelief in it's own doctrine with policies such as this.

Post by **_skippy the dead** » Sat Feb 02, 2008 7:29 pm

The annual ecclesiastical endorsement is ridiculous, particularly when it comes to the nebulous "do his or her duty in the Church." That is so broadly open to individual interpretation. For instance, I never liked attending Sunday meetings, particularly by the time I hit law school; I would hit sacrament meeting sporadically. I especially hated Relief Society, and never went. I was able to talk to one bishop openly about my disdain for Relief Society; he was empathetic to my reasons and signed my endorsement. Another year, the bishop required a "pledge" that I attend Relief Society before he'd sign. Same form - different results. I would imagine that if this baseball player indeed had his endorsement withdrawn by his bishop because of poor attendance and lack of a calling, the result could very well have been different with another bishop.

If BYU is going to micromanage a student's activities in the church, it should at least be consistent in what that means.