This past weekend, there were two protest testimonies posted on Youtube. Both testimonies were filmed, and both people claimed to be visitors. In the first, a man proclaims admiration for Sam Young. Sam is the guy who went on a hunger strike protesting sexually explicitly Bishop’s interviews with minors. He has a church court next week, and will likely be excommunicated. (He wrote his last testimony on his blog, but didn’t film it–at least that we are aware of.) Anyway, both videos are pretty short.
In the second video, McKenna Denson bore her testimony in Joseph Bishop’s ward, proclaiming that a sexual predator lived among them. McKenna has a lawsuit that was dismissed claiming Bishop sexually molested/raped her in the Missionary Training Center in the 1980s while he was serving as MTC president. (Her lawsuit against the LDS Church is pending.) She didn’t leave the stand willingly, and some have speculated she had her own microphone for the video.
Do you think such protests are appropriate in Fast & Testimony meeting? Do you support Sam and McKenna? What would you do in their shoes? Share your thoughts with us!
Wheat & Tares 
I don’t know that the second question is the kind of question you can get good answers for in a multiple-choice poll. I support steps to help ensure the safety of ward members, and think that Sam Young may have played a roll in getting some really great policy changes implemented. That said, I think his demand that bishops cease youth interviews that even mention the law of chastity goes way too far. Bishop/youth interviews can be extraordinarily valuable in the development of a youth.
As for Ms. Denson, so much depends on the truth of her account, which I can’t make any judgments on. There are plenty of reasons to believe her, and plenty of reasons to question her credibility.
No matter the cause, though, fast and testimony meeting is not an appropriate time to protest, make political statements, bring up personal gripes, or anything that isn’t the sharing of one’s personal convictions in an uplifting manner. Time and place, and all that.
Hard for me to fault McKenna Denson. She levels a sexual assault accusation that turns out to have credibility but nothing happens to her accuser. Instead, the church gaslights her and shares unfavorable information with the accused. You give me an open mike in a similar situation and I’ll probably take you up on it.
I agree with Dsc that the second question requires a lot more nuance.
I can understand feeling like you’re supposed to go up and say something, even if it’s controversial. When you have video (and in these cases, video from multiple angles), it looks staged and tasteless. It’s very effective at making yourself look like a martyr to people outside the Church, but I feel like it’s more likely to sour feelings of people inside the Church.
(Granted, there are not very many avenues of protest in this church, so I can see why some people use this to get their voices heard.)
When people have little to no venue for voicing their concerns (and having them acknowledged and acted upon) they WILL FIND A WAY, either passively or agressively to be heard. I have a really hard time laying much blame on either one of these folks; it sure beats having 20 children being paraded up front, month after month, to declare “that they know the church is twoo” – month after month.
If one doesn’t agree with my statement re: the desire of human beings (even church members) to be heard…..how do we explain the growth of r/ex mormon by approximately 1000 people a week? Now, approaching 90,000.00 members. “The Church” may continue to demand silence…..but I think they lost control of that narrative long ago and “the genie isn’t going back into the bottle”.
I’m totally in favor of two-person youth interviews (ideally one man, one woman) and have zero tolerance for sexual predators. But fast and testimony meeting is neither the time nor place to grandstand on social, political, or church policy issues, whether I agree with them or not. If such publicity-seeking measures continue, it will make the meetings unmanageable without significant changes (e.g., pre-approval of speakers). Whatever their motives, these protesters are peeing in the pool in which the rest of us will be left paddling.
“Time and place” is all well and good for those who haven’t been raped by the serving bishop. Looking “staged and tasteless” is also all well and good for those who haven’t been raped by the serving bishop.
If F&T isn’t the time and place, then where is? If that “sours” the feelings of people in the church, then people in the church are complicit in continuing the abuse. I’m sorry that telling people that their bishop is a rapist hurts their delicate feelings and makes them annoyed that F&T is being interrupted with actual truth.
No time and place is so special and sacred that evil can’t be challenged and brought to light there.
While I’m sympathetic to their causes, and acknowledge that there are few avenues for having one’s concerns legitimately heard in the LDS Church, to do this seems disrespectful. It also doesn’t help their credibility and is more akin to tabloid stunts, especially the pre-testimony portion of Ms. Denson’s video.
Testimony meeting is for bearing testimony that Jesus is the Christ and that He has restored His church in these latter days. It is for sharing one’s faith and strengthening faith in others.
Choppers, she was not accusing the “serving bishop”. The man’s last name is Bishop. I do not agree with her choice of time and place, but rather than physically removing her from the pulpit, it would probably have been preferable to simply cut the mike and close the meeting. Of course, hindsight is always 20/20, and with a lay clergy, most of us do not serve in leadership positions long enough to gain experience in handling dicey issues like this.
Chompers, criminal and civil courts are the right place. In a situation where the statute of limitations has passed–as in the case of Joseph Bishop (who is not, contrary to your suggestion, the “serving bishop” of any ward)–there are plenty of media options. McKenna Denson is, in fact, having her claims heard in both court and in the media.
If F&T isn’t the time and place, then where is?
If you have been raped by the serving bishop (and I am assuming you meant exactly what you wrote, given the lack of capitalization), then “the police station ASAP” is the time and place.
I’ve heard travelogues, sermons, paranoid rants, and political diatribes in Sacrament Meetings. If someone who has been injured by another chooses to speak, perhaps we can show him or her the same respect we would want to be shown if we were injured. Although they may make McKenna appear troubled, perhaps her remarks show how wounding her injuries really were to her soul.
I support McKenna’s cause (I was very disturbed by the transcript of her interview with Bishop).
I’m not sure if I know enough to say whether I support Sam, but I have had the impression at times that he is seeking attention for himself as much as trying to change anything in the church. I could be wrong.
That said, I almost feel no spirit at all in fast and testimony meetings where at least 15 – 20 people stand up to speak, and maybe one of them mentions Jesus Christ. It often ends up feeling like a waste of time. Fast and Testimony meeting should be for the sharing of testimonies. Testimonies primarily of Jesus Christ and His gospel. But all too often, the bearers of testimonies are seeking glory for themselves rather than glory for God.
I’m sure there were a lot of uncomfortable people in that meeting. I’m sure there are a lot of people who have seen the video or read or heard about it since Sunday who are also uncomfortable. Likewise I suspect there are people who are uncomfortable about another embarrassing public excommunication. But how do we think that compares with having your life knocked off the rails by being abused by a trusted authority who you believe got that authority from Heavenly Father via his church? How would it compare to 20 or 30 years of carrying that scar and self-doubt? How do we suspect it compares to the 700 stories a former bishop has collected from people who believe they were emotionally abused by their bishops with inappropriate questioning?
I don’t wish to conflate bishops in the performance of their duties with the disgusting behavior of Joseph Bishop. But the fact remains that untrained bishops may have had the best of intentions and may not to this day recognize the damage they’ve done but serious harm could have been done nonetheless. Seven hundred people who are now adults want their stories addressed and they want it not to happen to anyone else. The husband of one of those women addressed a ward calmly and respectfully in warning. I don’t have any problem with that at all.
I think Jesus’ people should stop worrying about protecting the church and their own feelings and start protecting Jesus’ people!
A friend of mine complains that “liberals” fight for a rights to “not be offended”. I think he says this with respect to legalizing gay marriage, using preferred pronouns for trans people, things like that. He thinks that society at large need not accommodate the feelings of the LGBT community by sanctioning gay marriage, for example.
It occurs to me that the videos and questions above show a reversal (or perhaps a twist) of this argument. Many members of the congregation are certainly made uncomfortable by these protest-imonies. But people do not necessarily have a right to sit comfortably in the pew, anymore than a protester has a right to do whatever they want on private property.
I’m fine with the protest-imonies. I’m also fine with the leaders exerting reasonable and lawful control of their meeting. Unfortunately, local leaders may not know how to best respond in the moment. And protestors should be prepared for consequences to their actions, such as being asked to leave, charged with trespassing, or banned from church property.
It’s worth noting that I am sympathetic to these protestors’ causes. I’d like to think I would say the same for people with whom I disagree.
A protest that seems appropriate to everyone is rarely effective. Protests that break social norms offend some people, but energize others. Obviously from the perspective of the congregation in general, protest-imonies are completely out of line. But when a person feels a calling to raise attention to an issue they will often take steps that seem shocking or offensive in order to be heard.
I think that the pulpit is the exact place for this, actually. If the congregation is uncomfortable for a few minutes, that’s nothing compared to the discomfort of the offended party in one of these cases. And if testimony meeting is really about sharing our beliefs with each other, then it ought to really be about that. If I believe the Book of Mormon is inspired fiction rather than historical fact and I want to share that with my fellow believers, I ought to be able to. It’s astonishing to me that we come up with a testimony meeting as a way for people to share their sincere beliefs and then prohibit them from doing exactly that. Wouldn’t it create a stronger community if we all got up and shared what we actually thought/believed/suffered through instead of a bunch of canned rhetoric that’s anything but inspirational? The whole way we run testimony meeting is absurd. I, for one, am a fan of truth and of people having the courage to get up and tell their truth.
And BTW, this is also about the church trying to insulate itself against real world consequences. Lots of folks don’t like political gestures at sporting events like football games or the Olympics because they’re supposed to “just be about sports/entertainment”. Well, Pandora’s box is open, folks and people are suffering from a lot of things in this world and they want to express it in ways that make them feel heard, so that may spoil the “purity” of the sports event (or the testimony meeting), but it also makes real and tangible the struggles of many.
I’m not sure that the word “inappropriate” covers my feelings about these incidents (disclaimer – I didn’t see the video of the Sam supporter, and it won’t play in my workplace). I think they’re likely to be counter-productive, politically. To the extent that the purpose is to raise awareness among general membership, they’re not likely to be seen sympathetically by many people watching who may have been unaware of the issues. The people in favor of this kind of demonstration will probably be mostly the already -supportive.
To the extent that the purpose was (in Denson’s case) to draw a public silencing and an obvious assault by Church officials on video, why, they managed it – but I don’t think it’s going to help much where it really counts.
I say this as someone who believes her, and who supports Sam Young. I doubt that either video will help, and may well hurt, if the goal is change in the Church.
I think this kind of behavior is ineffective and at least in the case of Denison, makes her look like a troubled person and decreases her credibility. And I believe her story. My heart goes out to her. It’s not her ward, her story is already out there and I’m sure everyone in Mr. Bishop’s ward is aware of it, she’s not bearing testimony of the gospel, she’s with others who are filming. I don’t think anything good is accomplished by this.
I look at it as when people are repeatedly shut down they will lash out. It certainly seems within the realm of possibility that Denson’s pain has been shut down by the church for most of her life.
If you ask me if it is “appropriate” I would lean towards, “No” given I don’t want to disrupt what many find as a spiritually rewarding meeting.
If you ask me if it is “effective” I would say, “No”. I think for the vast majority of members this will just provoke the backfire effect and they will be offended and not consider the issue in a logical manner.
If you ask me if it is predictable I would say, “of course”.
I think it would be good for LDS members to think of how they might look at the sex abuse scandal within the Jehovah’s Witnesses. The little bit that I have looked into this, I do feel there are similarities. I think a ton of folks look at the JW’s and Mormons as being quite similar. Both groups pester people at their homes all the time. Both groups seem to be way too defensive about abuse within their church to the point where they would rather ignore it than really buckle down and fix the issues to minimize the risk of it occurring. Both groups too often look at supporting victims as an admittance of guilt and lessens their authority and stature.
These protests are not for the members. They are for the public and making the church look bad for those OUTSIDE the church (I will give them the benefit of the doubt if they want the church to improve or burn). Why else would you have multiple cameras and audio recordings? LDS.Org certainly won’t be posting them.
Do I think Ms. Denson’s approach here is inappropriate? Sure. But it pales in comparison to the horrific official church response to her “testimony.” The official church response to her has been stunningly bad from the start, and it’s not getting any better. Bullying and victim-blaming. The church would save itself a lot of grief if it would stop its attacks on her.
We get travelogs, what I have been up to updates and what I have been thinking about for the last month, we get mini sermons that someone wants to preach and has a platform, we get love everyones — we have given a platform to people on the first Sunday, Maybe we should have talks!
Our Bishopric encourages testimonies that are “Christ-Centered”; not so much to get the usual “I know the Church is true” etc. but to hopefully limit the monthly medical reports that come from certain members.
A person bears their testimony to enrich and edify not only themselves but those assembled. A scripted testimony would be viewed as dis-ingenious, especially with “Lights-Camera-Action”.
These individuals could still speak of the struggles and pain they’re experiencing and ask for prayers and support without details. As visitors, they may not have known the ground rules, but I highly doubt it.
Today, conscientious objection is replaced by disruption; and disruption replaced by violence. When will it reach our F&T services?
Ms. Benson has hurt her cause by teaming up with Mike Norton aka NewNameNoah, the man best known for sneaking hidden cameras into the temple and placing all the videos on Youtube.
This is not the most bizarre thing I’ve seen happen in F & T meeting. Not even in the top 10. And I’m sure we all have stories of witnessing cringe-worthy or embarrassing testimonies over the years. But I’ve never seen someone forcefully removed from the pulpit–that, I believe, was the only inappropriate thing that happened here.
I don’t really have a problem with a “protestimony”. Jesus was all about giving voice to the voiceless, especially the marginalized and the victims. Let them speak their truth, and if that makes you uncomfortable, then that probably says a lot more about you than it does about them. Don’t silence them.
An alternative solution would be for the Church to do away with F & T meetings altogether, which I am also not opposed to.
On the topic of testimony meetings in general, they can be a source of strength and support for members. But that is not true for all. There is a down side for those who struggle with doubts or unresolved problems.
Some don’t find solace listening to accounts of spiritual experiences, including stories of miraculous healings, which somehow seem out of reach for them or loved ones. Instead they ask “Why does God treat me differently?” They become frustrated.
Testimony meetings are sort of confirmation bias sessions. Generally, only positive experiences are shared; not many relate experiences with negative outcomes. This gives a distorted view of how Heavenly Father interacts with his children.
In response to a few things:
“I doubt that either video will help, and may well hurt, if the goal is change in the Church.”
I think there’s a considerable body of evidence that the change that’s occurring is the exodus of people who are not willing to be passive receptors of pre-packaged civic thinking along with their worship. That is to say that change may not be evident in what remains of the body of the Saints but folks who are more concerned with the truth than the COB public relations department — that BTW uses church publications and other organs to sweep the repulsive under the rug and vilify people who have already been damaged by the abuses of some of leaders of the church — are leaving in increasingly large waves at this point.
What was the size of the church in 2008 before Prop 8 and then the excommunications of Kate Kelly, John Dehlin, Jeremy Runnells and a number of others? What was the direction of church growth? Will we hear numbers at the upcoming GC? I doubt it! And I’d point out that temple, ward and branch numbers are much more easily manipulated than actual population!
I can only agree with you that the church won’ t change by assuming that an institution that is withering in members and public influence and trust is holding steady.
“I think this kind of behavior is ineffective and at least in the case of Denison, makes her look like a troubled person and decreases her credibility.”
Are you assuming that a young woman whose psyche from previous abuse who is then targeted and further abused by an esteemed “spiritual leader” is unlikely to be a “troubled person”? Did you think she would just slough off rape and go on to be a person with healthy self-esteem and regard for the church? Or maybe you think 10 years (or 10 attempts, I can’t remember) of reports/ing what happened to her to various church and civil authorities without being responded to is a mere inconvenience? Just ask yourself how that would define a young person’s identity and place in the world! Ask yourself what it would do to your central core!
So she is lashing out. Isn’t that part of the problem that Joseph Bishop’s actions and the response of the institutional church have created? They are equally responsible for the embarrassment and pain that the members of the church are feeling now. And if they don’t change — or are changed– it will happen again. Mark my words because I don’t think that McKenna Dennson and Sam Young or the wife of that other man are even the only people who have been abused in the past or who are being abused today. And they’re not the only ones it will happen to in the future so long as the perpetrators are protected and the victims are scapegoated. They are merely the fearless ones who are speaking out. Others may have been more effectively destroyed inside by what’s happened to them.
So Jack, you’re okay with “protestimony”. Then a second person gets behind the pulpit to counter the 1st protestimony, then another gets up to object to the 2nd protestimony. I witnessed a testimony meeting (not LDS) where a couple were in the midst of a divorce. The assembly were getting up in support of one spouse or the other. Nothing spiritual about that gathering at all.
On the subject of Ms. Denson’s testimony possibly being an attempt to get church leaders to throw her out and get it on camera, what does it say about the current state of our church that it worked so easily? It took less than 2 minutes for the ward members to resort to physical force even though she told them they were on video.
To me, a video of Ms. Denson speaking until the mic gets cut and the meeting haphazardly adjourned carries much less impact than a video of a survivor of sexual violence being physically removed for nothing more egregious than violating a social norm. Whether one supports her or not, the way church leaders handled the situation needs to be a topic of conversation.
Are we a church that helps people heal (regardless of how uncomfortable the discussions may be) or are we only concerned about how things “look”? Through my eyes, “The Church” spends way too much time and energy on it’s appearance, it’s public display of perfect morality and sameness. It’s almost like going to Disneyland where everything APPEARS to be perfect, clean, tidy, well mannered and orderly; which of course is not the real world. So, I think we members who remain need to ask ourselves – do we continue to create Disneyland every Sunday, pretending that all is well in Zion, or do we attempt to heal ourselves and others by dealing with the real messiness of which life is made of.
Elizabeth: Beautiful said, my friend. Long, slow, steady clapping!!
If you are planning to get members converted to your point of view, then doing something that so abrasively infringes on their sacred spaces (especially as a visitor to the congregation, NOT a member of that congregation) is the wrong tactic. At F&T meeting, you get plenty of crazy happenings, but to have an outsider come in deliberately with a prepared speech feels like an attack and is a great way to get persecution-complex Mormons to circle the wagons. People shut down and they STOP LISTENING to the prepared message.
Your point is well taken, Mary Ann. I acknowledge that there’s a big difference between someone giving a “prepared statement” and another person bearing their soul – and sharing (even tragic) events in their lives; all while trying to hold to a belief in God. Thank you!
“People shut down and they STOP LISTENING to the prepared message.”
Do you really think they’ve shut down and stopped listening, Mary Ann?
I’d bet you a quarter of Social Security checks that they’re talking about it with everyone they know. They will say it doesn’t change their opinion of the church. Maybe they will dig in and be even more devout. …or try as hard as they can to.
I can hear the inner voices now:
“My son has started doubting. Is that how he’ll be treated if I can’t get him to pray harder or at least play the game?”
“OMG! _____ is always so angry these days. What if he/she speak out like that? Will they be strong-armed? Will I be humiliated?”
Those “prepared statements” AND the church’s callous and even inappropriate responses to it will be eating at people until the church faces these things, admits its culpability, and sincerely repents. Isn’t that what the church counsels and expects from us? Why wouldn’t Heavenly Father expect the same from the leadership when this stuff is out of hand and leading people away from the church?
As I understand it, testimony meeting is not for you to “share your beliefs.” Its for you to testify of Jesus Christ. I agree with both McKenna Denson and Sam Young, but believers need a safe place to worship as well. Mary Ann hit the nail on the head.
Testimony meeting is for bearing testimony of Jesus Christ. While there is flexibility for bearing testimony of gospel principles, it is not an open mic to air grievances.
CB radio in the early 1970’s was a terrific way for motorists to obtain information and emergency assistance. Then it became a cesspool of anything goes and people abandoned CB radio including the protestors that caused the departure in the first place once they had nobody listening to their speeches.
If bishops allow disruption then people will vote with their feet and simply not attend testimony meetings; which is probably what disruptors seek but regardless of their motivations that will be the outcome (or maybe no longer have testimony meetings).
Therefore bishops must make a choice whether to allow that which drives people away, or that which encourages people to attend.
That is also true of blogs.
As to the specific topics at hand its probably irrelevant. If the holy ghost inspires you to speak, then you should speak. If the source of your inspiration is something else, then probably not.
“If bishops allow disruption then people will vote with their feet and simply not attend testimony meetings; which is probably what disruptors seek but regardless of their motivations that will be the outcome (or maybe no longer have testimony meetings). ”
Why is this such a bad thing? Like CB radio, F&T meeting is largely a relic of a different century. We might be better off without it nowadays. Either everyone gets to speak freely or no one does.
Alice, “Do you really think they’ve shut down and stopped listening, Mary Ann?” Yes, I do. Back when the tape was first leaked and the BYU police report came out, people actually talked about how in the world sexual predators could be placed in leadership positions. Even FairMormon wrote up apologetics to help counter the concerns. I had conversations with members who were rightfully bothered and struggled with it. But with stuff like this, it’s her method of protest getting the attention, not the idea itself of Church leaders allowing sexual predators into the ranks of leadership. And with the time between when the tape was first leaked and now, a certain newspaper has been working hard to make her look aggressive and that she’s an enemy to the Church. A stunt like this just provides confirmation.
Jack Hughes writes “Why is this such a bad thing?”
It is bad only for those for whom it is bad. Testimony meeting is THE meeting for me; it is where I hope to find out what you believe and why you believe it. An important part of that will be the things others have criticized; the mini-sermons and what-I-did-for-summer-vacation. This reveals to me who might have interests similar to mine and maybe I can be friends with that person. Obviously if the exact same people have been telling the same stories for 40 years the value of getting to know people you already know is probably reduced.
“F&T meeting is largely a relic of a different century.”
So it is. Christianity itself is a relic of a different millenium.
“We might be better off without it nowadays.”
There is no we. I have freedom to attend or not attend. Perhaps you were hoping they would cease to exist so that I do not have a choice.
“Either everyone gets to speak freely or no one does.”
Unfortunately that statement makes no sense and appears to be untrue. The truth exists somewhere between those extremes with some people speaking almost without inhibition (free) but few speak without consequence.
For the love of Heaven, please just give me a Sacrament Meeting with some beautiful, uplifting music – a message focused on Jesus Christ and his life rom the New Testament – leave the nuttiness of Mormonism out of it….and I’ll be a happy man.
I was fascinated today as these comments came in, while at the same time on the TV/radio protesters were interrupting the Senate Judiciary committee hearing on Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination every few minutes, getting arrested one by one.
Civil disobedience is by it’s very definition innappropriate to somebody.
Whether it’s effective or not largely depends on the purpose. If Denson’s purpose was to embarrass the church in the national media following the announcement of back disciplinary council for Sam Young, then I think she succeeded.
C’mon people, only three downvotes for me? I’m sure that some votes are just because you saw my name so here’s another chance to vote!
OK, Mary Ann, I take your point in that regard. But I don’t view this thing as an “A ha!” affair but one of the termites taking nibble after nibble in the quiet of people’s souls.
There is something very rotten going on here and I don’t think the victims are the ones who can correct it.
Lefthandloafer: the Episcopal Church welcomes you. 😉
Mary Ann
The time for being a “Good German” is over. I’ve stopped careing about Mormon’s persecution complex. Ever since Joseph Smith, the Church cries that someone’s out to get them, meanwhile they seem to forget that they are the ones with a gun in their hand. Christ wouldn’t recognize the church that bares his name today.
Worth considering: this isn’t going away. McKenna Denson’s suit won’t go to trial until 2020, I believe, so we’ll be thinking and hearing about this issue at least periodically until then.
The church could do a lot in that time to show that it’s gotten the point, taken it seriously, found some humility, undertaken steps to provide restitution and ensure that it can never happen again. The way I see it, this is not a case of Denson v the church but the church v The Restoration unless and until the leadership embrace The Restoration and become Christ’s church again in fact rather than by temper tantrum.
Hey Cody: Ha!…well played, my friend. Well played. That actually entered my mind as well. I’m just so fatigued by the “sameness” of Mormonism; week after week, month after month and year after year. I’ve heard these things so many times over the years – my mind is just numb!
What Elizabeth St. Dunstan said. I tried to take a similar stance in the comments section at the Deseret News, and multiple people responded: “Don’t you see? This women *was* about to harm the innocent children and families in the congregation by making them hear things they didn’t want to hear! Of course leadership was justified in physically restraining and removing her!” [sigh]
When I see bishops physically drag away people who use testimony meeting to 1) give political commentary 2) bear testimony of other people and not of the Savior (e.g. “I love my cheer squad so much!”) 3) bear weaponized testimonies to complain about family problems 4) state outright false doctrine, then fine, I’ll support the response to Ms. Denson. I don’t support her use of F&T meeting in this way, but the optics are terrible for the church and nigh on indefensible.
Thank you for the downvotes on a nothing-there comment.
The significance is this: The most votes, 34, establish the upper limit on vote-casting readership; thus -4 represents the tribal component of the readership. I am a bit surprised at the small magnitude of it.
What does that mean for Mormonism? A portion of membership attends church purely out of this cultural affiliation, feels compelled to attend church and will signal disaffection as opportunities arise.
D&C 88 speaks to grudging membership. “33 For what doth it profit a man if a gift is bestowed upon him, and he receive not the gift? Behold, he rejoices not in that which is given unto him, neither rejoices in him who is the giver of the gift.”
This was an interesting discussion.
Has anyone contacted the people involved for their thoughts? Those would be interesting.