Sometimes it's interesting to take scriptures a little out of context and look at what they say. These scriptures were generally written for a straight audience, and when we add the gay context, based on what the church teaches, it changes.
Wednesday, December 2, 2020
Scriptures Out of Context
Sunday, November 1, 2020
Mixed Messages
One of the goals I hope the church has is that they don't make second class citizens of any of their members. Somehow there needs to be consistency in the way that everyone is treated. But messages in For the Strength of Youth and also in the way the CES Honor Code is enforced tend to make second class citizens of their non-straight youth and members.
Let me explain. The message to the straight youth is basically that things like holding hands, hugging, and things like that among boyfriend/girlfriend pairs and even occasional kissing is fine as long as it is kept chaste. Save the heavier stuff for when you are married and you're great. But if you're gay, well, any affection expressed at all is against the law of chastity. The message, even if it's not meant that way, is basically that if you show affection toward those who you are attracted to, you've already broken the law of chastity. The logical continuation is that since the law has already been broken, there's not really any incentive to avoid continuing on to the hot and heavy stuff.
So the Law of Chastity doesn't mean the same thing to straight vs. gay members. Second class citizens.
Or worse, when the doctrinal mastery scripture is invoked -- the natural man is an enemy to God. Gay kids need to choose to reject their nature. People's misuse of that scripture can imply that straight members aren't enemies to God like gay members are. See? Second class citizens.
The question that church leaders need to ask is how the church can comply with God's insistence that He is no respecter of persons. Because the current policies of the church tend (intentionally or not) to lead to different standards for different citizens of the kingdom.
Wednesday, February 26, 2020
Avoid the Appearance of Sin
There is a strong emphasis given by church leaders to avoid even the appearance of sin, and members take this very much to heart, sometimes to the exclusion of showing Christlike love. I mentioned that in my last post, and it was brought to my attention that people may not understand what I mean. So let me provide an example.
Suppose a member of the church admits to a second member that their orientation is gay. The first question the second member asks is "but you surely don't act on it, do you?". The church has a policy that a gay orientation is not a sin, only acting on it is. So that second member is deciding how to interact with the first based on whether or not they are sinning. That second member wants to make it abundantly clear that they don't approve of sin. It can seem so important to them to make sure nobody thinks they approve of sinning that they make sure that anyone who knows they befriended the first member also knows that the first member was not acting on their orientation.
Do we do this with other sins? When we interact with other members, do we make sure to let them know that our member friends do actually obey the word of wisdom? If a friend introduces their spouse and children, do we ask whether the children were born in wedlock so we can properly make it known that we disapprove of having children out of wedlock?
Avoiding the appearance of sin is important. We should not be skirting the line, pretending for social reasons that we are happy to share a drink with friends even if we slyly avoid actually drinking. Taking a bold stand is good. But that's dealing with our own choices. When we take it to the extreme of shunning others to appear to disapprove of sin, then we are out of line with the teachings of the Savior.
Suppose a member of the church admits to a second member that their orientation is gay. The first question the second member asks is "but you surely don't act on it, do you?". The church has a policy that a gay orientation is not a sin, only acting on it is. So that second member is deciding how to interact with the first based on whether or not they are sinning. That second member wants to make it abundantly clear that they don't approve of sin. It can seem so important to them to make sure nobody thinks they approve of sinning that they make sure that anyone who knows they befriended the first member also knows that the first member was not acting on their orientation.
Do we do this with other sins? When we interact with other members, do we make sure to let them know that our member friends do actually obey the word of wisdom? If a friend introduces their spouse and children, do we ask whether the children were born in wedlock so we can properly make it known that we disapprove of having children out of wedlock?
Avoiding the appearance of sin is important. We should not be skirting the line, pretending for social reasons that we are happy to share a drink with friends even if we slyly avoid actually drinking. Taking a bold stand is good. But that's dealing with our own choices. When we take it to the extreme of shunning others to appear to disapprove of sin, then we are out of line with the teachings of the Savior.
Sunday, February 23, 2020
Raw Honesty
Before I begin, let me make one thing clear. I love my wife and my family and I do not want to do anything to lose them. That being said, life can be very difficult. I feel the desire for the romantic love of another man every single day. It's something that remains painfully unfulfilled in my psyche and I have no hope of ever being able to fill that void.
Why, you may ask, would I choose to go the route that I did? I had male friends my age who left the church to satisfy their desire to develop relationships with other men. I have friends and family recently who, despite not being gay themselves, have left the church because of its stand against gay marriage. Believe me, I get it. I feel it every...single...day. It doesn't go away.
I choose to stay in the church because I have had powerful spiritual experiences from a very young age. I'm not talking about some burning in the bosom. It's not something that was prompted by a church lesson or a leader. It was just me pleading with the Lord. And my prayers were answered in a powerful way. I know the church is Christ's. But it's still so hard.
The church doesn't minister to me. How can it? I can't tell them about my struggles because I fear the judgments of the members. My ministering brothers occasionally might ask how I'm doing and I tell them I'm fine. What else could I say? But I feel extremely lonely. Who else living in this sphere can I confide in? I can talk about it with my wife, but not really with anyone else. And as much as I feel loved and supported by her, it's hard to feel truly understood.
And there's nobody else.
Am I the only one? I can't imagine that I'm this rare special flower and there's almost nobody like me. But those who are like me are probably just as secretive. So the church can't minister to them, either. As long as there is such a powerful stigma against gay oriented people in the church, it will fail at its mandate to minister to the members who need it. As long as the rhetoric is so much on avoiding the appearance of evil at the expense of lifting the hands that hang down, the church will fail its gay oriented members.
We are here, but nobody wants to know. We have testimonies of the divinity of the work. We want to help build the church. But we can't let anyone know about our struggles.
Why, you may ask, would I choose to go the route that I did? I had male friends my age who left the church to satisfy their desire to develop relationships with other men. I have friends and family recently who, despite not being gay themselves, have left the church because of its stand against gay marriage. Believe me, I get it. I feel it every...single...day. It doesn't go away.
I choose to stay in the church because I have had powerful spiritual experiences from a very young age. I'm not talking about some burning in the bosom. It's not something that was prompted by a church lesson or a leader. It was just me pleading with the Lord. And my prayers were answered in a powerful way. I know the church is Christ's. But it's still so hard.
The church doesn't minister to me. How can it? I can't tell them about my struggles because I fear the judgments of the members. My ministering brothers occasionally might ask how I'm doing and I tell them I'm fine. What else could I say? But I feel extremely lonely. Who else living in this sphere can I confide in? I can talk about it with my wife, but not really with anyone else. And as much as I feel loved and supported by her, it's hard to feel truly understood.
And there's nobody else.
Am I the only one? I can't imagine that I'm this rare special flower and there's almost nobody like me. But those who are like me are probably just as secretive. So the church can't minister to them, either. As long as there is such a powerful stigma against gay oriented people in the church, it will fail at its mandate to minister to the members who need it. As long as the rhetoric is so much on avoiding the appearance of evil at the expense of lifting the hands that hang down, the church will fail its gay oriented members.
We are here, but nobody wants to know. We have testimonies of the divinity of the work. We want to help build the church. But we can't let anyone know about our struggles.
Monday, January 20, 2020
The Family Proclamation
I'd like to carefully read the proclamation on the family one paragraph at a time. My aim is not some authoritative interpretation but an attempt to examine my current thoughts about it.
1. We, the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children.
This seems fairly obvious. This is a main point of church doctrine that refutes some ideas in many Christian traditions that marriage is lesser than celibacy. Families are more important.
2. All human beings—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.
This one is interesting. It's about gender identity. Gender extends to the spirit world. We know that this world is imperfect and flawed. There are definitely cases of physiological gender ambiguity, and that means that spiritual gender does not always translate perfectly to birth gender. So it seems to me that it's possible that there could be mismatches between birth gender and physical gender. Maybe this could be one cause of gender dysphoria.
3. In the premortal realm, spirit sons and daughters knew and worshipped God as their Eternal Father and accepted His plan by which His children could obtain a physical body and gain earthly experience to progress toward perfection and ultimately realize their divine destiny as heirs of eternal life. The divine plan of happiness enables family relationships to be perpetuated beyond the grave. Sacred ordinances and covenants available in holy temples make it possible for individuals to return to the presence of God and for families to be united eternally.
This is pretty straightforward explanation of doctrine. It's unfortunate that many people have been denied the blessings of temple ordinances for a variety of reasons. Life's unfair that way. But if life were always fair, we wouldn't have to learn patience and longsuffering, and thus wouldn't be able to become like our Father in Heaven. And in the end, everyone will have ample opportunities, even if they are denied in the short term.
4. The first commandment that God gave to Adam and Eve pertained to their potential for parenthood as husband and wife. We declare that God’s commandment for His children to multiply and replenish the earth remains in force. We further declare that God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife.
This is the first paragraph that deals directly with the Law of Chastity. I noticed that it is worded to make sure plural marriage is not disallowed. There is ample evidence in the scriptures that chastity is extremely important to Christ, and those that feel the church should "stay out of the bedroom" haven't carefully studied Christ's teachings. However, the "only between man and woman" part is modern doctrine, or at least newly explained policy. The references to homosexuality in the Bible are all in places where cultural context makes their modern applicability questionable. And there are no references to homosexuality at all in the other standard works. Either homosexuality is a new problem that didn't exist back then or the Lord didn't feel it was important enough to comment on it in the past, which is possible. It could be a misinterpretation, or possibly it's just a doctrine for today. The word of wisdom is such a doctrine, as there is nothing inherently immoral about drinking alcohol. Christ himself drank wine. The word of wisdom is a commandment for our day, given "In consequence of evils and designs which do and will exist in the hearts of conspiring men in the last days." In all honesty, the commandment against homosexuality feels more like the ban on those of African heritage from holding the Priesthood than an eternal doctrine. Maybe it could be lifted. I don't know. Even if it is lifted, the Law of Chastity would still be in force and proscribe sex outside of marriage.
5. We declare the means by which mortal life is created to be divinely appointed. We affirm the sanctity of life and of its importance in God’s eternal plan.
This is an important distinction of doctrine, because it flies in the face of much of traditional Christianity where sexual intercourse is vilified and marriage is a punishment for those who don't practice celibacy. The phrase "born in sin" is usually a reference to this tradition.
6. Husband and wife have a solemn responsibility to love and care for each other and for their children. “Children are an heritage of the Lord” (Psalm 127:3). Parents have a sacred duty to rear their children in love and righteousness, to provide for their physical and spiritual needs, and to teach them to love and serve one another, observe the commandments of God, and be law-abiding citizens wherever they live. Husbands and wives—mothers and fathers—will be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations.
If parents bring children into the world, they have an obligation to provide for them, not just physically but also emotionally, socially, intellectually, and spiritually. The neglect of these obligations is morally reprehensible. Parents of LGBTQ+ children are not excepted from this duty.
7. The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity. Happiness in family life is most likely to be achieved when founded upon the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ. Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of faith, prayer, repentance, forgiveness, respect, love, compassion, work, and wholesome recreational activities. By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners. Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation. Extended families should lend support when needed.
I mean, if children are important and chastity is important, marriages between men and women are rather essential. However, there are many couples who are incapable of having children. Their marriages shouldn't be relegated to side-note status. Ideally, children will be born to parents who are faithful to each other and care for their needs. But in this fallen world, there are broken marriages, orphans, neglected children, etc. Single parents, adoptive parents, and other alternate care-giving situations deserve strong support from members of the church if the well-being of children is truly valued.
8. We warn that individuals who violate covenants of chastity, who abuse spouse or offspring, or who fail to fulfill family responsibilities will one day stand accountable before God. Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.
Again, parents of LGBTQ+ children who fail in their obligation to care for those children will stand accountable before God. The breakdown of the family is of definite concern to members of the church, but I think it's easy to be distracted by the "gay marriage movement." That movement does little to contribute to the breakdown of the family as compared to things like children being born outside of marriage, spousal abuse, spousal infidelity, and other such problems. Yet the first thing I often hear about in Elder's Quorum when the breakdown of the family is mentioned is gay marriage.
9. We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.
I am wholly behind strengthening families, as they are the fundamental unit of society.
In general, the family proclamation is very reasonable and a succinct statement on the value placed on families by the church. I question the focus put on fighting gay marriage, but I see where it is coming from. In many eyes, couples living together having children outside of marriage is remediable simply by encouraging them to get married, so it's seen as not as bad as gay marriage; but I think that's misguided because of the propensity for children to be harmed in the former rather than the latter.
Members who use the proclamation as their reason for opposing gay marriage need to read the whole document and take a look at where their efforts would be best used. Activism against "abuse [of] spouse or offspring" gets short shrift compared to the efforts of members decrying homosexuality, and that's too bad.
1. We, the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children.
This seems fairly obvious. This is a main point of church doctrine that refutes some ideas in many Christian traditions that marriage is lesser than celibacy. Families are more important.
2. All human beings—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.
This one is interesting. It's about gender identity. Gender extends to the spirit world. We know that this world is imperfect and flawed. There are definitely cases of physiological gender ambiguity, and that means that spiritual gender does not always translate perfectly to birth gender. So it seems to me that it's possible that there could be mismatches between birth gender and physical gender. Maybe this could be one cause of gender dysphoria.
3. In the premortal realm, spirit sons and daughters knew and worshipped God as their Eternal Father and accepted His plan by which His children could obtain a physical body and gain earthly experience to progress toward perfection and ultimately realize their divine destiny as heirs of eternal life. The divine plan of happiness enables family relationships to be perpetuated beyond the grave. Sacred ordinances and covenants available in holy temples make it possible for individuals to return to the presence of God and for families to be united eternally.
This is pretty straightforward explanation of doctrine. It's unfortunate that many people have been denied the blessings of temple ordinances for a variety of reasons. Life's unfair that way. But if life were always fair, we wouldn't have to learn patience and longsuffering, and thus wouldn't be able to become like our Father in Heaven. And in the end, everyone will have ample opportunities, even if they are denied in the short term.
4. The first commandment that God gave to Adam and Eve pertained to their potential for parenthood as husband and wife. We declare that God’s commandment for His children to multiply and replenish the earth remains in force. We further declare that God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife.
This is the first paragraph that deals directly with the Law of Chastity. I noticed that it is worded to make sure plural marriage is not disallowed. There is ample evidence in the scriptures that chastity is extremely important to Christ, and those that feel the church should "stay out of the bedroom" haven't carefully studied Christ's teachings. However, the "only between man and woman" part is modern doctrine, or at least newly explained policy. The references to homosexuality in the Bible are all in places where cultural context makes their modern applicability questionable. And there are no references to homosexuality at all in the other standard works. Either homosexuality is a new problem that didn't exist back then or the Lord didn't feel it was important enough to comment on it in the past, which is possible. It could be a misinterpretation, or possibly it's just a doctrine for today. The word of wisdom is such a doctrine, as there is nothing inherently immoral about drinking alcohol. Christ himself drank wine. The word of wisdom is a commandment for our day, given "In consequence of evils and designs which do and will exist in the hearts of conspiring men in the last days." In all honesty, the commandment against homosexuality feels more like the ban on those of African heritage from holding the Priesthood than an eternal doctrine. Maybe it could be lifted. I don't know. Even if it is lifted, the Law of Chastity would still be in force and proscribe sex outside of marriage.
5. We declare the means by which mortal life is created to be divinely appointed. We affirm the sanctity of life and of its importance in God’s eternal plan.
This is an important distinction of doctrine, because it flies in the face of much of traditional Christianity where sexual intercourse is vilified and marriage is a punishment for those who don't practice celibacy. The phrase "born in sin" is usually a reference to this tradition.
6. Husband and wife have a solemn responsibility to love and care for each other and for their children. “Children are an heritage of the Lord” (Psalm 127:3). Parents have a sacred duty to rear their children in love and righteousness, to provide for their physical and spiritual needs, and to teach them to love and serve one another, observe the commandments of God, and be law-abiding citizens wherever they live. Husbands and wives—mothers and fathers—will be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations.
If parents bring children into the world, they have an obligation to provide for them, not just physically but also emotionally, socially, intellectually, and spiritually. The neglect of these obligations is morally reprehensible. Parents of LGBTQ+ children are not excepted from this duty.
7. The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity. Happiness in family life is most likely to be achieved when founded upon the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ. Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of faith, prayer, repentance, forgiveness, respect, love, compassion, work, and wholesome recreational activities. By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers are obligated to help one another as equal partners. Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation. Extended families should lend support when needed.
I mean, if children are important and chastity is important, marriages between men and women are rather essential. However, there are many couples who are incapable of having children. Their marriages shouldn't be relegated to side-note status. Ideally, children will be born to parents who are faithful to each other and care for their needs. But in this fallen world, there are broken marriages, orphans, neglected children, etc. Single parents, adoptive parents, and other alternate care-giving situations deserve strong support from members of the church if the well-being of children is truly valued.
8. We warn that individuals who violate covenants of chastity, who abuse spouse or offspring, or who fail to fulfill family responsibilities will one day stand accountable before God. Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.
Again, parents of LGBTQ+ children who fail in their obligation to care for those children will stand accountable before God. The breakdown of the family is of definite concern to members of the church, but I think it's easy to be distracted by the "gay marriage movement." That movement does little to contribute to the breakdown of the family as compared to things like children being born outside of marriage, spousal abuse, spousal infidelity, and other such problems. Yet the first thing I often hear about in Elder's Quorum when the breakdown of the family is mentioned is gay marriage.
9. We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.
I am wholly behind strengthening families, as they are the fundamental unit of society.
In general, the family proclamation is very reasonable and a succinct statement on the value placed on families by the church. I question the focus put on fighting gay marriage, but I see where it is coming from. In many eyes, couples living together having children outside of marriage is remediable simply by encouraging them to get married, so it's seen as not as bad as gay marriage; but I think that's misguided because of the propensity for children to be harmed in the former rather than the latter.
Members who use the proclamation as their reason for opposing gay marriage need to read the whole document and take a look at where their efforts would be best used. Activism against "abuse [of] spouse or offspring" gets short shrift compared to the efforts of members decrying homosexuality, and that's too bad.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)