NOM

Then Elder Oaks said challengingly, “I would like to hear a little more musket fire from this temple of learning.” He said this in a way that could have applied to a host of topics in various departments, but the one he specifically mentioned was the doctrine of the family and defending marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Little did he know that while many would hear his appeal, especially the School of Family Life who moved quickly and visibly to assist, some others fired their muskets all right, but unfortunately didn’t always aim at those hostile to the church. A couple of stray rounds even went north of the point of the mountain!

My beloved brothers and sisters, “a house divided against itself . . . cannot stand,” and I will go to my grave pleading that this institution not only stands but stands unquestionably committed to its unique academic mission and to the church that sponsors it. 22:55 We hope it isn’t a surprise to you that your trustees are not deaf or blind to the feelings that swirl around marriage and the whole same-sex topic on campus. 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.

If a student commandeers a graduation podium intended to represent everyone getting diplomas in order to announce his personal sexual orientation, what might another speaker feel free to announce the next year until eventually anything goes? What might commencement come to mean — or not mean — if we push individual license over institutional dignity for very long? Do we simply end up with more divisiveness in our culture than we already have? And we already have too much everywhere.

In that spirit, let me go no farther before declaring unequivocally my love and that of my brethren for those who live with this same-sex challenge and so much complexity that goes with it. Too often the world has been unkind, in many instances crushingly cruel, to these our brothers and sisters. Like many of you, we have spent hours with them, and wept and prayed and wept again in an effort to offer love and hope while keeping the gospel strong and the obedience to commandments evident in every individual life.

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.

Musket fire? Yes, we will always need defenders of the faith, but “friendly fire” is a tragedy — and from time to time the church, its leaders and some of our colleagues within the university community have taken such fire on this campus. And sometimes it isn’t friendly — wounding students and the parents of students who are confused about what so much recent flag-waving and parade-holding on this issue means. Beloved friends, this kind of confusion and conflict ought not to be.

My brethren have made the case for the metaphor of musket fire, which I have endorsed yet again today. There will continue to be those who oppose our teachings and with that will continue the need to define, document, and defend the faith. But we do all look forward to the day when we can “beat our swords into plowshares, and [our] spears into pruning hooks,” and at least on this subject, “learn war [no] more.” And while I have focused on this same-sex topic this morning more than I would have liked, I pray you will see it as emblematic of a lot of issues our students and community face in this complex, contemporary world of ours.

Someone once told me that the young speak of the future because they have no past, while the elderly speak of the past because they have no future. Although it damages that little aphorism, I come to you as the veritable Ancient of Days to speak of the future of BYU, but a future anchored in our distinctive past. If I have worded that right, it means I can talk... out of my ass...about anything I want.

I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do to their fellows because it always coincides with their own desires.
— Susan B. Anthony

Advocate wrote: ↑Tue Aug 24, 2021 5:26 am What they fail to see is that there are no good arguments [against homosexuality/same-sex marriage], so church leaders receive "friendly fire" from BYU professors who have some intellectual honesty.

One generation o f homosexual "marriages" would depopulate a nation, and , if sufficiently widespread, would extinguish its people. Our marriage laws should not abet national suicide.
Memo: Principles to Govern Possible Public Statement on Legislation Affecting Rights of Homosexuals.

Red Ryder wrote: ↑Mon Aug 23, 2021 11:16 pm Holland is kissing Oaks’ ass by quoting him and his musket fire speech. He’s brought up a concern that the youth are going to BYU only to lose their faith and is blaming this loss on “progressive issues” of the day. ie. Homosexuality.

Holland must be aligning with Oaks to get in the FP. How much do you want to believe Oaks probably called Jeff up and ordered him to speak as a test of loyalty?

blazerb wrote: ↑Wed Aug 25, 2021 8:52 am I was listening to a commentary. It hit me that Holland declares himself at the beginning of the talk the "Ancient of Days." He may not be aware that this is a title for God in most of the Christian world, but I doubt it. He is setting up his authority equal to God. It is similar to the way he started his talk at the Maxwell Institute by saying he was coming in his "true identity as an apostle of Jesus Christ." There he was referencing the temple, of course.

Is it always Holland who calls BYU employees to repentance?

But we do all look forward to the day when we can “beat our swords into plowshares, and [our] spears into pruning hooks,”

Hagoth wrote: ↑Wed Aug 25, 2021 11:48 am

But we do all look forward to the day when we can “beat our swords into plowshares, and [our] spears into pruning hooks,”

Well, then just f**king do it! Apparently your understanding of this verse is that we make the plowshares only after we have killed our enemies with the sword. Jesus said, "suffer the little children to come unto me. Except the queer ones. Muskets and pitchforks for them."

My son read me some responses from members gushing about how much love and acceptance this talk shows to the LGBTQ community. I guess they interpret it the same way they interpret the BoM's example of love and acceptance for people with dark skin.

Fifi de la Vergne wrote: ↑Fri Aug 27, 2021 2:55 am My nephew's response to Holland's talk was to come out on Facebook. Thing is, he's recently married -- to a woman -- and she also made a long post.

Hagoth wrote: ↑Fri Aug 27, 2021 11:05 amThey have an ongoing project in which they donate a rainbow or transgender color umbrella to an LGBTQ-friendly campus (BYU and other campuses) organization for every one they sell online. I bought one of each. If you are interested, the order page is here:

https://lattergaystories.org/umbrella/? ... G0bKHNiB8U