I LOVE it when low-level ecclesiastical leaders are overruled (for the right reasons). And here’s the coverage from the SLTrib.
From the Salt Lake Tribune:
“We may never know the full story since the bishop does not wish to comment and the school is citing privacy to keep things quiet. Regardless, the entire episode may have some stereotypical ramifications on the national level. But at least it has been resolved in a manner that seems more reasonable for every party involved to minimize the damage. “
From the Deseret News:
“Brigham Young University baseball star Kent Walton, who had been dismissed from school after his ecclesiastical endorsement was withdrawn by his bishop, is enrolled at BYU again and has returned to the Cougars’ baseball team, coach Vance Law told the Deseret Morning News Thursday night. “
Overruled by whom? Will we know more details?
The original story made it sound like he had exhausted his appeals.
If BYU administration overruled the ecclesiastical leaders, that sets an interesting precedent. I suppose having a member of the Seventy as BYU president means BYU administration can overrule local ecclesiastical leaders more credibly, since Samuelson can act in his office as General Authority to initiate change. Can we tie this story into Mitt Romney dropping out of the presidential race somehow? 😉
I LOVE it when low-level ecclesiastical leaders are overruled. Actually you don’t John, at least not as a general rule. There have been several cases where all indications were that low level church leaders were content to just leave Mormon intellectuals alone, but were given motivation from higher ups to pursue disciplinary action. On this analysis it makes it even worse since if you play sports for BYU then you get a favorable reversal, but not if you are an intellectual.
Analyzing this based purely on the decision reached, it seems like the right decision.
FANTASTIC!!! I am glad for Kent. That must be really difficult. And I prefer seeing Bishops work with their congregation. Our church, similar to other churches, has had a history heavy handedness in terms of disciplining members.
People will leave once hey realize they dont need to put up with it. Makin people welcome on their own terms is great.
Well done in your struggle against unjust authority Kent.
ok. I added (for the right reasons).
Then what are the right reasons, and how do we know that they apply in this case? If this was truly an injustice and the kid was legitimately absent from church, that is one thing. But if he was basically inactive, and was reinstated just to make the story go away, it hardly qualifies as “the right reason” in my book. But I’m a Ute, so what do I know.
“ok. I added (for the right reasons).” Please now add, “we hope.” 🙂
I thought the whole expulsion thing was the ridiculous from the start. But it is nice to see the BYU is just like every other university regarding the lower standards it sets for their intercollegiate athletes, especially when those athletes are very very talented. Not nice to see because I agree with how universities treat athletes, but as a thumb in the eye to those who think BYU is some really special place.
AHLDuke, you know, BYU really is a pretty neat place, all in all.
I agree. It was ridiculous that he lost his endorsement in the first place. I’m glad cooler heads are prevailing in this case.
To the extent a policy is involved (e.g., how many times must a student attend to be considered “active” for endorsement purposes or how may one appeal an endorsement withdrawal), hopefully adjustments have been or will be made across the board so that, in application, the “least among” the students will be treated as fairly as this prominent one.
“The original story made it sound like he had exhausted his appeals”
He did exhaust all the appeals.
But then the press got wind of it…and the rest is history.
It kind of makes me wonder what happens to the kids who don’t go to the press? Who stands up for them. And how many abusvie casas are there involving dictatorial bishops?
I really wonder.
Isn’t it funny that the church uses the “attend once a quarter” as its definition when reporting activity rates, and then missing 3 or 4 Sundays might make someone, for lack of a better word, unworthy to attend “the Lord’s” university?
But, I wonder if there is anything else behind the scenes as John suggested in his original post on this story.
It’s too bad tscc is so stubborn to ‘ever’ admit-confess it made a mistake…
Question: Can (or DO) gals wear pants to church at BYU