Yes, he is saying that those called to leadership positions in the Church and members at large should be ready to respond to the questions of apostates (as we would with a total stranger) rather than be insecure about doing so merely because they are “apostate”. I see nothing wrong with this thinking and I am sure the Church leadership would not either. I still fail to see whatever point it is you are trying to draw from this article. I think you are reaching for something that isn’t there. Typical.
I will repeat my comment in reply no. 1 at the beginning of this article: "This seems to refute the oft-repeated message that all those who leave the LDS church have done so because they are, in the words of President Monson, "the less active, the offended, the critical, the transgressor".
We have discussed many of these points here, and also these: “Since the social relationships between them and other ward (or stake) members suffer (avoidance, silence, even mobbing) because of their status as heretics, which is usually known via gossip, and since the extent of active involvement and range of possible callings are reduced because of their nonconformity in various areas, there is a risk that they end up leaving the church after all, because they are simply ignored by the majority of the other members.”
Perhaps readers here on FR who have been bombarded by accusations that those posting here in opposition to mormon proselytizing are "liars and bigots", will learn differently from this article.
apastate - another slam