Again I must ask therefore, with what objective in mind?
I notice that although you did not respond to my email of 3 rd October last year, in which I set out my thoughts, you are now repeating your original request. Has anything changed in your understanding of the various issues since we last met? If, (hypothetically speaking), we were to meet again, what do you consider would be a mutually helpful agenda, and to whom would you afterwards report the outcomes?
I understand that you feel little has changed since my communication in concerned as the Stake President about your continued private and public concerns about the Church, its teachings and beliefs and wish to discuss your views and Church membership with you in the near future.
I am away later in the week until next Wednesday, but if you are available, could meet with you during the day on Thursday and Friday next week at the Yeovil Chapel at a time that is convenient for you
Firstly, please accept my apologies for the delay in responding to your last email of 19 th ily members before doing so.
You have answered my first question about your objective in us meeting again, citing your concern about my concerns, and your wish to discuss my views and my membership. That is fair enough, although I must remind you of the brief discussion we had last 15 th May at East Stour when I explained that as long as the dialogue would be honest and open it would be potentially worthwhile, adding that I didn’t want 
to put you in a difficult position by discussing subjects you didn’t wish to explore, and nor would I be prepared to meet just in order to tick boxes.
My second question, asking whether anything had changed in your understanding since we last met in 2012, we can probably treat as rhetorical at this point, as long as you are able to embrace my request for honesty and openness
Personally, I have only ever been interested in identifying truth, and in following wherever that leads, even though the resulting faith journey might prove uncomfortable. Reality is all that matters to me. If we are to proceed, I would welcome your prior assurance that you are of a like mind. Anything less, frankly, would render the exercise a waste of time for us both.
I notice that you didn’t answer the final question of my previous email, in which I asked to whom you would be reporting the outcomes of a meeting. I would still welcome an answer to that please. I think it is reasonable to ask for example whether you anticipate reporting “up the line” as well as to various officers of the Poole Stake and Yeovil Ward. I have been transparent with you in previously informing you that the content of any “official” meeting we have, (i.e. in which you as Stake President interview me as a member), will at some point be made public.
I also asked what would be a helpful agenda for such a meeting. I would be content to refer back, (in the hope that you could now offer some answers), to the shortlist of troublesome items I mentioned in my email last 3 rd October, viz:
- DNA evidence which counters the fundamental claim of the Book of Mormon that native Americans originated from the Palestine region within the last three millennia;
- Joseph’s Smith completely incorrect “translation” of a 1st Century Egyptian pagan funerary text into the compilation now known as The Book of Abraham, which of course was subsequently canonized as scripture;