Stake Pres. Ditches Ethics to Smear Tal B.

[_Who Knows]

Can someone paste the letter here? I haven't been to MAD for a couple months now, don't want to break my streak.

[_skippy the dead]

Wow Shades. How does it feel to be 'infamous'??

To quote Ned Nederlander: In-famous is when you're MORE than famous. This man [Shades], he's not just famous, he's IN-famous.

[_Mister Scratch]

Can someone paste the letter here? I haven't been to MAD for a couple months now, don't want to break my streak.

Sure, WK. Here is the Stake Pres.'s letter:

April 27, 2008

Tal Bachman:

It’s me, President Randy Keyes. Someone brought to my attention that you have been purporting to quote me on the web. I read your comments about the talk we had five years ago on a message board post you made on April 17, 2008. I was surprised at how you reported things I never said, as if I had said them. I now want to speak for myself on what you chose to write.

First, you stated that my term as stake president is over. I’m not sure how you would have gotten such incorrect information, but I am still stake president of the Victoria British Columbia Stake. You also reported that I said that Joseph Smith “hadn’t told the truth” and that he “invented stories” and that he “deliberately took advantage of girls.” I never said these things, nor do I believe these statements. These are your statements, not mine. You have invented things I did not say.

When we spoke, I tried to listen to and acknowledge your thinking, but you obviously did not listen to me. Here is my reality: For as long as I can remember, I have had a knowledge that Joseph Smith is a Prophet of God. In my childhood I visited Palmyra often. At age 14 I felt a spiritual witness of the reality of the First Vision while in the Sacred Grove. At age 16 I experienced a spiritual confirmation of Joseph Smith as a prophet while I stood in Carthage Jail. At age 18 I had a life-changing spiritual witness of Christ as my Lord and King. At age 19, while reading the Book of Mormon, I found myself in the presence of prophets (I did not, as you said, communicate with them). There have been many other spiritual events, including at the present time as I serve in the Victoria Stake.

I know God the Father and Jesus Christ personally visited Joseph Smith. I know that Moroni visited Joseph Smith and I felt a strong confirmation of this when I recently stood in the upstairs bedroom of the rebuilt Smith log cabin where Moroni stood. I know he led Joseph to the gold plates, that they were translated by the gift and power of God into the Book of Mormon.

I believe that John the Baptist and Peter, James, and John restored Priesthood authority to the earth because I have seen the Priesthood in action. I regularly feel its power as it moves the Stake along and as it influences the individuals I get to work with and talk to. As I said to you and your wife, I do believe that Joseph Smith is a prophet.

How is it that our memories of our interview are so different? In our talk I felt your questions and struggles were genuine.; I wanted to help. In my profession as a therapist (as in our discussion) I try to follow the principle of “seek first to understand, then to be understood.” In that initial visit it was your turn to talk. I accepted that you could not find peace on your interpretation of historical items you read concerning Joseph Smith. I listened and reflected what I heard, and when I would nod and say, “sure,” it was an indication that I was listening and that what you were saying was comprehendible.

Because I was listening for understanding, I carefully, mildly challenged some of your views by stating my beliefs and witnesses, and as to “scrutiny,” I am convinced that the Church will continue to stand up well. Over time, truth will prevail and the Church and Brother Joseph will be further exonerated and praised. Misinformation, misrepresentation, and misunderstandings will be diminished.

In your message board post you reported that I said my mission president made up motivational stories to get missionaries to follow him. You also indicated that I said Joseph Smith did the same thing. Let me be clear: I never said my mission president made up stories or that Joseph Smith did. My mission comments regarding motivation centered on the president observing that some people are motivated by external supports (like newsletters that announce top baptismal numbers) while others have quiet, inner motivation. I did not talk about “making up stories.”

Understanding each other—especially in spiritual things—is not a single event but an ongoing process. It was my hope that we would have ongoing discussions so you would get to eventually understand my views and testimony. In the first interview, I provided what I viewed as acknowledgement that I understood what you were saying, not an acknowledgment that what you were saying was true. In future discussions, had they occurred, we would have talked more about those matters, continuing with hope and faith until more information settled your questions. I felt that when I spoke of my spiritual confirmations your response was, “Yeah, but what about…” This was a dismissing of my views, and it is obvious from your message board post that you neither understood those views nor have you reported them correctly.

I decided to choose to listen to you. My hope was that I would be heard on some other day. Regarding your comments about my thoughts of being personally comfortable as a member of the Church, but it not necessarily being for everyone, I meant that not all people are ready for it. Not all people are ready for the commitment, rules and obligations that accompany Church membership. However, as they continue to investigate the gospel and the Church, this engagement will hopefully expand with time, involvement, and repeated episodes of being touched by the Holy Ghost. An LDS lifestyle offers such opportunities on many occasions. I would have loved to have you stay involved and I believe that with more time you would have received answers to many of your questions.

The personal improvement I get from living the gospel is only one aspect of my testimony. There are many layers and dimensions to what I know and am a witness to and I continue to learn spiritual truths with time. The knowledge that matters is the first-hand knowledge we receive from God. The constant invitation in the Church is to ask God and get your own witness. There is no compartmentalization in my gospel understanding. There are things I know and things I believe, things I hope for, and some things I don’t have answers for yet; it is a connected continuum. We worship with both knowledge and faith.

I hope in the past that I expressed understanding and compassion for your struggles. I perhaps did not do the back half of “…then [seek] to be understood” very well. I trust that these comments settle any guessing that you or others have about why I am an active member of the Church. I do know the gospel is what it claims to be. I cannot comprehend the idea that anyone would believe that a stake president would keep serving if he did not believe the gospel to be true. There is no reason anyone would give this service if he didn’t believe this is, literally, the Church of Jesus Christ. This gospel gives me a fuller life, my involvement in it feeds my soul, and it provides the way for me to worship God the Father and his Son Jesus Christ.

This, Tal, is my position and reality. I trust that you will now afford me the courtesy that I afforded you—to be understood.

Your brother,

Randy Keyes

Here is Mrs. Keyes's letter:

April 27, 2008

Tal,

I feel very frustrated that you have misquoted my husband so grossly. I know that you have misquoted him because I know my husband intimately and I know he would not make the statements you attribute to him. In your message board post you insinuated that Randy may not have been truthful with me about his feelings about Joseph Smith. You couldn’t be farther from the truth. The most important thing we have learned in our 28 years together is to be honest with each other. His only thoughts and feelings about Joseph Smith have been admiration and respect and a belief that Joseph Smith was honest and forthright with great integrity and courage.

Repeatedly, over the years, I have turned to Randy for clarification of doctrine and understanding of the scriptures and the deeper things of the gospel. He has always given me amazingly clear, insightful feedback. His understanding of the restored gospel is incredibly sound. He has shared with me several very sacred witnesses that he has received. I believe him because I know he is an honest man. We have been through too much together not to know this. We have cried together, laughed together, struggled and triumphed together. Through it all he has repeatedly, unceasingly, unflinchingly expressed his awe, respect, and reverence for the gospel of Jesus Christ, for Joseph Smith, and for the restoration. He has expressed these things in quiet ways; he does not grandstand.

As a convert to the Church at age 21 (I joined the Church a year before I met Randy) I am an independent thinker and have had some very powerful witnesses myself. I have the perspective of living my first 20 years without the gospel. The difference is quite profound. When I compare the difference between my life before joining the Church and after, it is like night and day. The restored gospel of Jesus Christ fosters deeper thinking; a broader perspective; a richer, more satisfying life; and ongoing, multiple spiritual events and experiences.

Unfortunately, in our attempts to be understood, semantics will never be enough; human language is too limited. Knowing Randy, he was just trying to empathize with your feelings. I am disappointed in you for misrepresenting my husband. You misunderstood him. I believe you have assumed too much and taken liberties with what my husband said.

Your sister,

Julie Keyes

[_Mister Scratch]

by the way: here are some of the choice comments which were posted to the blog:

I’m sorry, but I tend to give more credence to a serving stake president than an apostate musician on logic alone.

Being a stake president isn’t an easy job, as any of you out there that have served in that capacity can attest. I submit that it would be extremely difficult- if not downright impossible- to have the doubts that Bachman says Keyes admitted and still fake it as a stake president.

Now maybe Bachman thought he heard Keyes say these things. Kind of a stretch, but I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. If he misinterpreted church history the same way he interpreted his stake president, what a waste. Even if he realizes his mistakes, it will be all the harder to return to the church now that he’s- how do I put it- “living it up.”

As yet another person who has been a victim of Tal Bachman’s selective attention and public misrepresentations for a number of years — Paul Simon’s line (”still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest”) has come repeatedly to mind when I’ve reflected on his abuses — I’m delighted that we now have the other side of this particular story.

Bravo to FAIR for posting it, and many thanks to President and Sister Keyes for their compassionate, lucid, and even moving responses to this unfortunate situation.

Does this mean there is going to be a move in favor of making public the proceedings of Church disciplinary councils?

[_skippy the dead]

Having just read what Keyes had to say I am failing to see any combative spirit or ridicule or harassment by Keyes.

It seems clear that both Keyes and his wife (and Allen Wyatt, for that matter; and, while we're at it, the dogpile at MAD) are all very anxious to "stick it" to Tal, and to accuse him of being dishonest.

While on the one hand I could see how someone might be interested in what is said about him, it's pretty odd for Wyatt to track down the man and point the post out to him to get the response.

[_Scottie]

I didn't necessarily see anything confidential in that letter. What are you guys seeing that you feel is a breach of trust?

[_Bond...James Bond]

1) Somebody is apparently keeping a close tab on this site, no doubt in the hopes of culling information to later use against Church critics. (Note Wyatt's use of the derisive "infamous 'Dr. Shades'".)

I want to know how Dr. Shades ranks "infamous". I want to be infamous...instead I rank as cuddy or lovable most of the time. I should have signed up for that class on evil behavior taught at the learning annex.

[_Mister Scratch]

I didn't necessarily see anything confidential in that letter. What are you guys seeing that you feel is a breach of trust?

The conversation in and of itself ought to have been seen as confidential, no? What seems objectionable, in my opinion, is that Pres. Keyes is selecting items which are presumably meant to paint Tal in a negative light, e.g.:

I felt that when I spoke of my spiritual confirmations your response was, “Yeah, but what about…” This was a dismissing of my views, and it is obvious from your message board post that you neither understood those views nor have you reported them correctly.

Here, he is portraying Tal as a rude interrupter who blithely treads over others' points, and, who lies about them to boot.

Regarding your comments about my thoughts of being personally comfortable as a member of the Church, but it not necessarily being for everyone, I meant that not all people are ready for it. Not all people are ready for the commitment, rules and obligations that accompany Church membership.

Here, Tal is being portrayed as the stereotypical apostate who was "too weak" to meet the demands of Mormonism.

This, Tal, is my position and reality. I trust that you will now afford me the courtesy that I afforded you—to be understood.

This seems the very height of disingenuousness. Obviously, "to be understood" is now completely impossible since Keyes has essentially fingered Tal as a liar and a misrepresenter of the truth.

I have to wonder: Did Pres. Keyes make an effort to first personally contact Tal? I mean, doesn't that seem like a far more reasonable tactic for a professional therapist to pursue? Why dive right into this Allen Wyatt-operated mud-slinging operation? Do they not know anything of Wyatt's history?

I don't know. I know that others on this MB work in the field of counseling. I'd be interested in hearing their opinions.

[Guest]

Keyes strikes me as a man who is covering his ass. It may be that Tal read a little more into his SP's attempts at empathy than he should have, but I have no doubt that Keyes, on his part, expressed enough substantive doubt to confirm Tal's mounting suspicions. I think Keyes tried to look for common ground by sharing his own doubts, and then it backfired on him. Now, he has been made to look like a closet doubter, because Tal made the session public, and so he has to "set the record straight" by minimizing what he did in fact say. His reportage is actually quite vague. He never provides a detailed account of what happened, whereas Tal's story is pretty specific. The addition of the wife's story does nothing to support the credibility of the husband's.

I really don't see the damning refutation of Tal's credibility that others see in this.

[_Who Knows]

meh. i don't see the big deal. there's always 2 views to how a conversation went. We now know how tal thought it went, and how this other dude thought it went. there's probably some truth, and some embellishments, to both their statements.