Dear Editor,
Thank you for running that article about Religious Freedom at BYU. I am a student in this exact situation. It may not be the popular thing to do here in Provo, but I no longer really do the whole Mormon thing anymore. I grew up in the church and even served a mission, but as I’ve grown these past few years I’ve become more of an agnostic and don’t subscribe to any religion. I have nothing against the LDS church, but I’ve chosen a different way, and I am true to myself. Unfortunately, BYU doesn’t seem to accept this type of spiritual progression. To be enrolled, I needed an endorsement. I’ve visited with many school counselors, but since i’m officially “mormon” on their books, only my bishop could do that. So I went back to church for the first time in over a year. Thebishop would only give it to me if I participated in the ward. I explained my situation, and he understood, but it was made clear to me that if I changed my declared religion, I would be forfeiting all the years of schooling I had invested at BYU (over 5 years). It wasn’t just a simple matter of having to pay non-LDS tuition, its like the school had a grip on my soul and they weren’t interested in letting me have control of it. I weighed theoptions, and in the end the smartest and easiest thing for me was to just go through themotions while I’m here at BYU until I graduate. Its not worth the risk. I’ve loved my schooling here, its a great university, and while other faiths seem welcome here, I don’t. Everyday I am living a lie, just to appease this honor code. I smile and show my face at church once in a while so I can keep my endorsement. I bow my head with other in class when a prayer is offered, but I’m not praying. I’m getting by just by lying toeveryone and on top of that getting my tuition subsidized by good church members. At church I feel alienated and alone, but I’m forced to be there, or I can’t graduate. If therationale behind the policy is to get me back into church, they got it wrong. I’m being blackmailed into church. If anything, this annoyance has driven me further away. Living in provo, its hard enough to make friends and date when you’re not mormon. I wish BYU would respect and appreciate what I believe, not force me to live this lie. After all, isn’t this what religious freedom is all about?
Samuel
18 comments
Joshua says:
Jan 27, 2012
“Unfortunately, BYU doesn’t seem to accept this type of spiritual progression.”
That’s because BYU sees it as a spiritual regression.
“I would be forfeiting all the years of schooling I had invested at BYU (over 5 years).”
Actually BYU’s a highly respected institution and most of their credits are accepted by other major universities. (I say most, not all. The instances in which all of 5 years’ worth of credits will transfer between any 2 universities aren’t common, whether one’s religious or not.) The credits you’d be most likely to forfeit are from religion classes and if you chose to leave the church you’re practically saying they were worthless anyway so why should a university you might transfer to disagree with your conclusion?
“… its like the school had a grip on my soul and they weren’t interested in letting me have control of it.”
You claim agnosticism yet you argue not only that you have a soul but that BYU exercises power over it against your will? Either you have agency or you don’t. If you do, the only power that others exercise over your soul is that which you grant to them. If you don’t, none of it really matters anyway does it?
If you live a lie it’s because you chose to. No one’s responsible for your decisions but you. If you really feel that guilty about getting your tuition subsidized then leave or pay the difference. (BYU will gladly accept your donation of any amount.) Really, you’re the one deciding what you do. No one else is to blame for your actions or lack thereof.
“At church I feel alienated and alone, but I’m forced to be there, or I can’t graduate.” If you spent your time at church trying to make sure no one else felt alienated and alone. You’d no longer feel alienated and alone, promise. Also, no one’s forcing you to do anything. You have your choices. They have consequences. Such is life.
“I wish BYU would respect and appreciate what I believe, not force me to live this lie.”
They do. You know that. You’re just refused services. Do they not have the right to act in accordance with their beliefs? Again, you chose how to live. Live as you will and don’t blame others for the decisions you make. Life’s better when we take responsibility for our own actions.
Orwell says:
Jan 28, 2012
Joshua, with that picture and your unceasing, self-righteous preaching, I would swear you were satire if I hadn’t met people like you myself.
Joshua says:
Jan 28, 2012
Orwell,
It’s funny that you should think me self-righteous as those who actually know me would laugh at such an accusation. Beside that, six paragraphs is a far cry from unceasing. I would swear your whole comment was in jest had I not met people who would sincerely make such exaggerated and inaccurate statements.
Brian says:
Jan 30, 2012
Joshua,
It’s always easy to feel on the defensive when someone leaves the church and has grievances to bear, but I don’t think that Samuel is attacking the church or even the school, but rather a policy that does not seem in line with doctrine or even BYU’s other policies.
I think what Samuel is saying is that an agnostic would be welcome to BYU and admitted on his merits but would also pay a non-subsidized tuition due to not being a tithe-payer, but only on condition that that very agnostic not have been a mormon before, or at least not by the time he/she applied to BYU. An agnostic could theoretically lose their faith in the church before applying to BYU, but then be allowed to enter and study and graduate without problems as long as they payed the raised tuition. But if an Mormon loses faith while studying at BYU, they cannot simply pay higher tuition and be counted with the rest of the agnostics on campus. They would then have to transfer to another school or pretend not to believe what they really believe. If our goal is to bring them back into the fold, forcing them to transfer in order to be honest about their beliefs doesn’t accomplish that goal, and asking them to play the part even though they don’t believe it hardly comes in line with the principle of being “honest in your dealings with your fellow man.”
I’m all for encouraging faith and helping people see the truth of the gospel, but this policy does not accomplish that goal, and I can see his point. Giving students who falter in their faith this kind of experience will not facilitate their eventual return to the church, but only hinder it. We need to hear honest opinions like this one.
Dave says:
Feb 7, 2012
This is somewhat beside the point of the article, but I think it’s valuable to remember that even students paying the non-LDS tuition are still having their education subsidized 50-70% by tithing money. If one of us wanted to have a lighter conscious knowing that we weren’t using tithing funds (donated by LDS in faith that the money would further God’s kingdom) to subsidize our education that we personally knew wasn’t complimentary to that purpose, we would each need to make a $12,000 or so donation each year on top of tuition.
Here’s to recognizing tithing members and other donors more often in class prayers. Spiritual or not, we really are blessed to be attending here.
Joshua says:
Jan 31, 2012
Brian,
I understand your perception of defensiveness on my part. When people say things like BYU blackmailing them to go to church and it being like BYU has a grip on their soul with no interest in letting them have control of it, I tend toward the defensive. Samuel’s intent may or may not have been an attack but he certainly used some aggressive and accusatory language.
The problem in this issue lies in people’s misunderstanding of what religious freedom is. If you study about it, including the many talks given by church leaders, you understand that private institutions have no power over an individual’s religious freedom. Only governments do. BYU has control over the religious plurality on campus but no power over an individual’s religious freedom.
I may be wrong but I’m pretty sure that no one who has disaffiliated themselves from the church is allowed to attend BYU (unless they’ve been re-baptized), regardless of when the disaffiliation occurred. That would be something the author of the original author could have researched. The wording in the honor code would suggest such a case. That would be important to know. BYU is on firmer ground if they refuse services to anyone who disaffiliated themselves from the church, which I’m pretty sure is the case. Granted, someone can always try to hide the fact that they were once a member but the church keeps records of those who disaffiliated themselves and why.
The concept of BYU forcing anyone to do anything is ridiculous. If someone decides to “just go through the motions” to stay at BYU it’s because they decided to. We all have our agency and make our own decisions.
I don’t know if the intent of the policy is to bring people back to the church. I’d be more likely to believe that the intent is to prevent those individuals from leading other students away from the church. But who am I to say? You’d have to talk to those who made the policy. I do know that the policy is not in conflict with the church’s teachings on freedom of religion. If someone studies those teachings, and maybe a bit of law and/or politics as well, that would be clear to them.
Robert says:
Jan 31, 2012
I think the larger issue at hand is what happens when people like Samuel start to question, or feel disillusioned with BYU’s version of Mormonism (if you believe that the culture and beliefs of every LDS congregation is the same worldwide, then you need to travel more). Unfortunately, I feel that a large group of people react similarly to how Joshua has in his comments. They pick apart the honest expression of personal feelings just as Samuel has shared as if their own beliefs or feelings of faith were under attack. What our LDS culture will have to do to bring others to Christ, is to try to understand our brothers more, and to be slow to pass judgement. Striving for dialogue, not debate, is always the best policy.
Ali says:
Apr 17, 2012
^This. I don’t have any problems with the church at home, but it’s difficult for me at BYU with its “version of Mormonism” that has quite honestly hurt my testimony. I applaud Samuel for his honesty.
Locke says:
Feb 1, 2012
As a student in a similar situation to Samuel’s, I can say that the opinion of people like Joshua is something I have found to be very common. It has come to the point that I carefully (emphasis placed here) vet anyone before I open up to them, and to the rest I “go through the motions.” Joshua has a valid point in that BYU is not making anyone stay here and students are free to transfer, but what if the student genuinely wants to stay and graduate from school here? I have enjoyed my classes here and the few friends I’ve made, and at this point, it is worth it to me to “put up” with all the Mormon hijinks that go on at BYU, than leave and essentially have to start all over in my program of study.
Agreeing with Robert above, dialogue is what we should strive for. Not the heated picking apart of each other’s statements on the nets.
Chris Wiren says:
Feb 1, 2012
If you want religious freedom don’t attend a religious school…?!
Joshua says:
Feb 1, 2012
I think Robert is confusing issues. I think if Samuel were looking for a dialogue regarding the church’s doctrines then we wouldn’t have even approached the honor code at BYU. I may be mistaken, but the content of Samuel’s letter seems more like part of a debate regarding the policy in the honor code than part of a dialogue about doctrine. That’s assuming that by dialogue you mean a conversation with the goal of mutual understanding and by debate you mean a conversation with the goal of one side proving itself over the other. If anyone wants to have a dialogue about doctrines I’d love that. It seems, however, that the issue in this letter, as well as the article that inspired it, is whether this policy is right or wrong not whether its understood or not. Dialogue is best when possible but it can be difficult to engage in dialogue when it begins as a debate. When I hear things like: “I don’t understand _______.” or “Please explain ___________.” That signals a dialogue to me. Accusations of blackmail and forced control over someone’s soul sound more like a debate to me.
Locke’s comment is more in dialogue language than Samuel’s letter. To Locke I reply that there are the two options we are all aware of. If a student wants to stay, then they maintain their membership status in the church and “go though the motions” if necessary. I’m sure there are students at BYU who don’t subscribe to the word of wisdom or law of chastity yet still “go through the motions” of keeping those parts of the honor code to stay at BYU. If a student doesn’t want to stay then they can transfer, and BYU will send their transcripts to wherever said student pleases.
We don’t accuse certain employers of forcing us into college by only employing those with college degrees. We go through what we have to in order to meet the qualifications they set for employment because we want that job. BYU has set their requirements for studying here. We all knew them when we came. If someone wants to study here they must meet those requirements. Honestly I don’t agree with certain parts of the honor code but I do what I need to in order to enjoy the benefits of school here.
If dialogue is sought I’ll gladly participate. The same goes for debate. I’ll dialogue about why the board of trustees has made that policy or debate about whether it’s right or not. (Or I’ll switch those, but it seems that that’s how all these articles and comments have been going.)
rebecca says:
Feb 1, 2012
Samuel would feel better about himself if he stood by his beliefs/ convictions and transferred to another school that would not “force” him to be religious in any way. He would not have to complain to others and write letters to the Editor of the Student Review. And there would then be more room at BYU for someone who really wanted to be there. Follow your heart, Samuel — transfer.
Julie says:
Feb 2, 2012
If I were a mother, (and I am) and all of you were my children and I walked in on this argument/dialogue/debate, here’s what I’d probably do: First I would digress and tell a short story–Once I had 2 of my children by the hand and in the distance we all saw a dog at about the same time. One child tried to pull away as if to run to the dog, and the other tensed up and hid behind me. I quickly pulled back on one and said, “Hey, you don’t just go running up to strange dogs like that!” I then turned to the other and said, “Let’s go see that doggie–it’s okay, don’t be scared.” If they had been teenagers they would have busted me and said I was contradictory. But I believe I acted appropriately.
I think of it like an ‘S’ with all of us standing in the middle where it has not yet started to curve. My goal is to keep us centered. One child will loop one way and another will loop the other way and by my easing up and pulling back and holding on to each of them during the process neither is lost to me. At one point in the cycle I’ll be stretched and they’ll be far away, but if we keep at it, the curves will bring us back around again–thereby saving them from spinning off into nothingness–turning a potentially dangerous ‘S’ curve into the symbol for the number 8 or better yet, infinity or eternity.
Maybe that’s the way truth is circumscribed… [The dictionary definitions dovetail nicely here. Circumscribed: 1. Restrict (something) within limits: "their movements were strictly monitored and circumscribed". 2. Draw (a figure) around another, touching it at points but not cutting it.]
So Joshua, if I were your mother, what might I say to you? Orwell? Locke? Brian? I’m sure you’ve found yourselves in this situation before (you all seem quite comfortable) so take a minute and walk in the mediator’s shoes. Hint: Joshua, you have a tone. Orwell, you’re just throwing bombs. Locke, you’ve got some condescension going on and maybe a bit of selfishness too–the widow’s mite that’s subsidizing you should perhaps grate on you a bit more than it appears. Rebecca, your comment came in while I was writing this and I’ll simply say that the reverse psychology you administer, while clever, will make some smile and others bristle—the ‘S’ curve problem without the sense that you are trying to keep all parties from being spun away from each other.
And to you Samuel, as far as the agency question is concerned, the link below is great. It contains two poems, two schools of thought. One is Invictus by W. Henley and the other is the Answer to Invictus by Orson F. Whitney. I wish you well in your quest for truth and hope that you’ll find a way to be authentic.
http://emp.byui.edu/marrottr/INVICTUS.pdf
Jen says:
Feb 11, 2012
I personally really appreciated this article. I went through a similar experience while I was at BYU- halfway through my junior year I came to the conclusion that the Church isn’t true. I too felt that I was stuck. It was either go through the motions and graduate, or be true to myself, transfer, and probably have to go to college for an extra year or two. It was a very difficult experience, and one that I know many BYU students go through. An important point to remember is that many of us went to BYU with the best of intentions and strong testimonies; however, we increased in our learning and understanding of the Church in a way that was against the status quo. I am grateful for the education I received there and the friends I made, but I’m even more grateful that I’m out of there.
Samuel says:
Feb 14, 2012
Interesting comments guys.
But Brian seems to understand what my intent was, Thanks for understanding me. It was a response to a published article and I was thanking them for writing, not just me complaining about life. People seem pretty defensive, without understanding the context. I tried not to have a discussion about my spirituality, but a discussion about a confusing policy. I am not a great writer or english major or anything, so in picking apart little statements of mine, you could really run with it, but I was just trying to be honest and express my frustrations with this policy, like Robert said. However, I don’t think I made clear that I really enjoy being at BYU. I don’t want to leave. I love my classes and program of study, and I don’t want to transfer. Especially since that process could take a year just in applications. I just wish I could keep doing my thing without having to navigate around this policy, which involves my own personal beliefs. Its not like every day I am living in misery and just dying to get out of here but I am forced to stay. I like it here. I understand I have my own agency and I am happy with my choices. I weighed my options. I’ve done my due diligence and met with lots of people with the school and with church. They were very frank and direct with what I was to do if I wanted to stay enrolled here. I still have morals, and I was just trying to do the right things by the right channels, but found the options a little extreme. Since the only options the university had for me is to lie or leave, I chose to stay. I want to stay. If they had the option for me to change my religious status, I would have done that. I just think the policy is ridiculous, and I explained some of those opinions in my letter. I don’t think its right to be expelled because of a change in my beliefs. Its not like I am going against the church. I have nothing against the church, the people are nice, I don’t feel alienated socially, just by my beliefs. I just wish I had the same freedoms that other religions had here at byu. I hope that makes sense.
-Samuel
PS: Thank you Robert, Brian, Locke, Julie, and Jen for your great comments.
Angela says:
Feb 14, 2012
Joshua hit the nail on the head with his comment. Why are you all being so mean to him? As a religious school run by the prophets of the Church, BYU has the right to kick you out if you leave the LDS faith. If you willfully leave what you know is right, that’s not OK. If you leave because you don’t know, I’m sorry that you didn’t try hard enough to find out.
Brian says:
Mar 27, 2012
I’m appalled by this comment, Angela. I understand if you feel threatened when somebody else says that their experience has led them to believe that the things you believe are untrue, but there are a lot of things that can contribute to that experience other than denial or laziness.
If there were a non-member who said their experience led them to doubt your beliefs, you would never accuse them like this. Now you might say, “well, a non-member has never had a testimony or known what I know.” You’re right, they’re experience is different than yours so maybe they have a harder time believing than you do, but just because someone was baptized doesn’t mean that they have had your same experience. Who knows what Samuel’s experience has been to lead him to these conclusions? I don’t. And neither do you.
Maya says:
Apr 19, 2012
I totally know where Samuel is coming from, I felt the exact same way while at BYU. I would have gladly taken a tuition hike if I could still stay. And I unfortunately came across comments like Angela’s all the time. As if my leaving the church was due to laziness or sin, as if I didn’t deserve the same treatment as other non-LDS students because I was willfully leaving the one and only true church. The underlying message of the policy is a little arrogant for a school that boasts religious diversity. But I suppose I get why they have it, apostates are threatening. And Angela, I’m not denying that BYU has the right to have this policy. But having the right to do something doesn’t mean it is in fact right. Just means no one can sue them. And if you read the honor code, they don’t explicitly say “leaving the church even if you still follow the honor code results in expulsion”. They imply it, but many of my BYU true-blue-mormon friends deny that this policy even exists because they thought “disaffiliation” meant just publicly going against church policies like murder. They think that peacefully joining another church is okay as long as you follow the honor code. So when people say that we signed up for this and knew this was coming, that’s only partially true. In general I think people are pretty thorough when they first read the honor code before signing so that they don’t accidentally break a rule, but many BYU students (TBM and otherwise) are still unaware of this policy. I guess we didn’t read the fine print well enough, plus knowing that there were non-LDS people at BYU led us to assume that BYU would be reasonable when it came to former mormons. That just shows that you should never assume an institution will be consistent in its policies. I know what your response will probably be, that YOU understood the policy just fine and I was just too stupid to understand the honor code, but the fact that many of my hardcore mormon friends were unaware of this policy as well leads me to think that BYU should maybe consider more obvious word choice so there can’t be any confusion. Not that it would REALLY help, who goes to BYU and expects to lose their faith midway through? But it may dissuade some of us who find the policy a bit repugnant to go to BYU in the first place. Which would be a win for all!