- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
A few more weeks have flown by since my previous update here on the site. Life’s been treating me fairly and I’ve been getting along nicely. I am now finishing up my last few weeks of work before I make the move back to college and jump back into the education loop. Just wanted to take a minute to let everyone know how things are going. Today I met with both my SP and Bishop(in separate interviews). The meetings were very different and contrasted against one another very vividly to me. After Sacrament meeting, I met with my Stake President in his office. Like previous meetings, the atmosphere was warm and welcoming and we had a very positive discussion. He provided me with support and council as well as took the time to hear me out on my concerns. I left our meeting on a personal high, and things were well. After this meeting, I opted out of Sunday school & Priesthood meetings and went for a drive. I drove out past the farms and fields until I found myself some peaceful solitude. I went for a walk and just spent time outside, enjoying the sunny Sunday morning. This has always been a great way for me to clear my thoughts and draw closer to God personally.
:thumbup: After the scheduled church block ended, I made my way back to the meeting house for my appointment with my bishop. I took my seat, and then my bishop proceeded on with his familiar gospel monologue. About five minutes into our meeting, he took an incoming phone call on his cell phone. I patiently waited for him to conclude his business over the phone, and then he proceeded with his speech. It felt very impersonal when he had to ask, “Now, where was I?” I reminded him and he picked right up where he’d left off. Unlike my meeting with the SP, I had very little time to discuss things with him and was left more to lend my ear to the typical things I’ve heard him chew out a thousand times. It was a very frustrating meeting to say the least. Not only was I frustrated with the lack of two-way communication, but also with the way he approached the entire situation.
Today I realized that my SP and Bishop are on completely different pages and are trying to implement different solutions to help. My Stake President has sided with the general voice of the Brethren in admitting that same gender attraction is a very real thing, while my Bishop is still stuck in the narrow-headed mindset that it is something that can be cured with proper discipline.
:think: The view my Bishop tends to have is really frustrating, and frankly offensive. Same gender attraction is not simply a decision, rather it is a very complex and personal struggle for each person coping with it. My bishop loves comparing it to addictions such as alcohol, tobacco, or pornography. This really upsets me because same gender attraction isn’t like that at all. It’s not a result of any action on my part, but instead it is something that’s a part of me. It’s really frustrating when someone treats it like a condition that can be cured through proper discipline. Sure, it might be able to be managed, but I’m not even sure suppression would be the right solution. It’s a growing issue that won’t get any better if members continue to turn a blind eye and sweep the matter under the rug. It’s a serious issue that needs to be brought into the light and seen for what it really is. There are so many struggling members out there drowning in the depths of depression and despair because they don’t know how to navigate this storm. As one voice among the countless others, I know that they need the love and support that we all can offer. I’m doing my best to let my voice be heard, but I can’t do it alone.Anyways, if anything productive came from these meetings today, it would be that my bishop and I finally set a date for my disciplinary council. I actually just received the formal letter a few minutes ago by two members of the bishop brick to make it official. That will be happening later this week, so I will keep you posted on the aftermath. Thanks again for your concern everyone, I appreciate your comments!
Thanks for the update, candlelight. This experience is a great example of why it’s hard and problematic to talk about “The Church” as if it’s a monolithic entity. For all practical purposes, it really is a reflection of us – and the messiness we bring as a group.
I’m really happy you have a SP who seems to understand, intellectually at the very least and emotionally it appears, your situation. I hope that support and understanding helps mitigate whatever might have happened without it. I also appreciate your patience and attempts for charity in the face of frustration and ignorance. It sounds glib to say this, but sometimes we grow the most when faced with choosing how to react to such ignorance and in the midst of such frustration.
Good luck — my thoughts are with you. I just want to comment on how incredibly well-worded and clear your opening post was. It was engaging to read top to bottom, and I feel for your situation. Will keep you in our prayers. Candle, good luck with things — I do hope that the bishop does not get it into his mind that as part of your ‘repentance’ you go through some kind of therapy to repair what he thinks is your ‘addiction’. Above all else, love yourself in all this — they cannot take that away from you.
cheers,
The council will be happening tonight, in a few hours. I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t nervous… almost to the point of nausea. :thumbdown: CandleLight, I hope for the best for you and will be thinking of you this evening.
Candlelight, our prayers are with you. Please stay with us and let us know how you are doing. I am praying specifically that the Holy Ghost will blanket you with our love, concern and wishes for your well being. Candlelight, I echo the good wishes of everyone on this site. I’m convinced that your life is going to get better.
Keep us informed.
Mike from Milton.
wow ! thanks for sharing. i look forward to your update for what happened lastnight. i hope it went well for you. Well, I finally have a verdict. It’s good to finally have some resolution to this whole situation… it’s been up in the air for so long. After a lengthy, drawn out, 3 hour process, it was decided that I should be disfellowshiped. I was surprised that the news didn’t have much of an effect on me. It kinda troubles me actually. I’m not sure why it doesn’t bother me much, but I’ve come up with some possible reasons. It may be just because in a way, I’ve already checked out of being an orthodox member. Or maybe it was just because I had already come to terms with the possibility of being disfellowshipped. This whole process has been dragged out over the span of a few months, so I feel like I’ve had ample time to come to terms with the idea. It’s not really that much of a shock for me. My heart aches more for the way this is hurting my parents. The council in itself wasn’t very productive in my opinion. Before going into the council, I had several people tell me that these meetings could be a very spiritual and uplifting thing. Frankly, I didn’t really feel that way at all. It was very frustrating to me. I was less than thrilled with bringing more people up to speed with the situation. After explaining myself to the Bishop’s counselors and secretary, I was drilled with several questions. What really bothered me was the fact that everyone decided to hon in on my struggle with the LDS church rather than the actual reason why the council was being held. They bogged me down with several commitments to help me develop a testimony of the “truthfulness of the restored church.” Despite my best efforts to keep the field even, I soon found myself feeling cornered with my arm twisted behind my back. When they did focus on my issues with same-gender attraction, it was no more productive. I tried explaining to them the frustrations I had with the double standard within the church concerning it’s members with same-gender attractions. I could sense how uncomfortable the discussion was for all of them. One of the coucelors went as far as to ask me if I had faith that Christ could “heal” me…
Anyways, I’m not really sure what will happen from this point forward. I’m still letting everything sink in.
((((candle)))) so, since you are an MP holder, the bishop’s council of love gave you the maximum penalty they could do: they cannot excommunicate you — that requires the high council.
I really feel for you going through 3 hours with profoundly unenlightened people who think they have some sort of authority over you. I wish it were different. really i do.
Now it’s time to move on, and find your own joy and peace.
we’re here for you.
CandleLight, this is going to sound naive. I have a good idea what the answers are. I want to understand what they mean to you.
What does it mean to be “disfellowshiped”?
I think I know the administrative definition is.
What does it mean to you?
Do you feel that the Bishop & his Counsellors had any real (Christ-like) feelings for you or your family?
What do they expect will happen over time to bring you back into full fellowship? (Is this like “probation”?)
If it’s too personal, then don’t answer them.
I’m just curious about how this works.
I give you alot of credit going through with this process.
I don’t think I would have the strength to do it.
I wish you all the best.
Mike from Milton.
I can only imagine how difficult this has been for you. Here is a bit of the history of the churches take on homosexuality over time: A 1974 church pamphlet excoriated homosexuality as evil and castigated parents of gays for having raised their children poorly. By 1992, a new teaching suggested that biological factors could be at work.
New church publication, “God Loveth His Children,” says gay feelings are neither learned nor chosen, and it counsels against rejecting a gay child. It repeatedly warns against feelings of guilt: “Attractions alone do not make you unworthy.
It has also abandoned its history of encouraging gay members to enter heterosexual marriages. The new document says “the perfect plan of our Father in Heaven makes provision for individuals who seek to keep His commandments but who, through no fault of their own, do not have an eternal marriage in mortal life.”
Spencer W. Kimball’s book, The Miracle of Forgiveness. It had a chapter in it called I think, “Crime Against Nature”, and it described in very certain terms the evilness and sinfulness this condition. He used awful words to describe homosexuals and their feelings. He stated that these desires were pugnant, evil, disgusting, vial, malicious, and pernicious. I remember reading his book and cried as I read what was said about my son.
Later in Prophet Kimball’s life he regretted saying things like that and felt he was too harsh according to his nephew.
It is interesting because I was recently talking to one of my old
missionary companions who lives in Washington D.C. Before her mission she
had waited for a missionary that she was very much in love with. When he got
home he was struggling with SGA and went to his bishop about it. He was
told to go ahead and marry his fiancé and his SGA would go away. He still did
not feel right about it and told my old companion he could not go through with
the marriage. She was devastated and went to talk to her dad, who was a stake
President at the time in California. This stake president was good friends
with Spencer W. Kimball and he arranged for his daughter to go talk to him. She
said it was a very interesting meeting and Prophet Kimball was very kind to her.
He told her that this bishop was wrong to advise this young man to marry because
these feelings don’t just go away. Then he told her he did not understand why
some people have this trial but he believed that it was like the story of the
blind man in the Bible. That took me back because this is exactly what the
Lord told me about my son.
I had also listened to a tape my sister in law had sent me about the life of Spencer W. Kimball. I was surprised to hear
that he had worked with many gay people and wrote many of them daily to help
them come back to the church. The tape said that he had brought about 200 gay
people back to the church. Here is what my sister in law wrote me:
The tapes were made by Truman G. Madsen. He did a series on all the
presidents (through Hinckley). It is called “The Presidents of the Church”.
It is probably out in CD form now. Check with Deseret Book.
Here is a link:
http://deseretbook.com/search/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&query=Truman+G.+M You can get it in a CD
however well-meaning the “court of love” thinks it intends to be, disfellowshipping is public shunning and shaming, and as such is institutional bigotry when it punishes innate, natural tendency. it is little different than getting out a pink triangle and pinning it on the “sinner”. i am sorry if my words offend here. it just hits too close to home for me, and i feel that these words need to be expressed.
I don’t disagree with your main point, wayfarer, about punishing someone for natural tendencies – and I think this decision is especially egregious ( and against the actual Church guidelines) IF it is focused on tendencies only and not actions(and this isn’t the place to ask about that issue, so let’s not go there), but I have a hard time calling disfellowshipment “shunning” – even as I do believe it is a form of “shaming”. They aren’t the same thing; the consequences aren’t supposed to include any shunning (they aren’t even supposed to be known by others); the vast majority of cases of which I’m aware involved no shunning whatsoever from the general membership – whether or not they knew about the decision.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.