- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
No one mentioned this one in the changes thread. An unexpected, pleasant surprise. https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900063943/church-lgbt-gay-lesbian-policy-mormon-baptisms-blessings-apostasy.html ” class=”bbcode_url”> https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900063943/church-lgbt-gay-lesbian-policy-mormon-baptisms-blessings-apostasy.html Quote:Children of parents who identify themselves as lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender may now be blessed as infants and later baptized as members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, according to updates announced Thursday to November 2015 church policies intended at the time to maintain family harmony but perceived as painful among some supporters of the LGBT community.
The church also will update its handbook of instructions for leaders to remove the label of apostasy for homosexual behavior that also was applied in November 2015, said President Dallin H. Oaks, first counselor in the First Presidency, who announced the changes on behalf of the First Presidency on Thursday morning during the leadership session of the church’s 189th Annual General Conference.
I just saw this too and you beat me to posting Nibbler. I gotta say while I did expect this to happen eventually, I did not expect it now or in the near future. :clap: :clap: :clap: Just two other notes surrounding this that I think are interesting:
1. This was announced by Oaks, perceived by many as one of the chief anti-LBGTQ+ in the Q15.
2.
Deseret Newspoints out that Nelson once said the policy was revelation. Not the Trib, DN. I love it because it reinforces the idea that the Church can tweak policies. More reinforcement of the change-is-OK concept. Also, I love it because it walks back a really bad, heartless, hardliner policy. I’m a bit surprised that THIS group of leaders where willing to do that, because they are basically the same people that put it in.
I am stunned it happened so quickly. I am grateful it happened so quickly.
Today, I am happy.
Quote:Local church leaders should instruct the parent or parents that the blessing, an ordinance that places the child’s name on formal church records and triggers a lifelong series of church contact, would mean congregation members will contact them periodically and propose baptism when the child turns 8.
This is the “problem” see with baby blessings, and probably why the Nov 2015 policy was put into place in the first place. It was practical, it “made sense”, but it offended a lot of people. I feel it is, in effect, making babies “members” without their consent, and to be frank, we need to either get rid of baby blessings, or directly separate the blessing from making the infant a “child of record”.
That being said, Kudos.
Quote:While same-gender marriage by a church member still is considered a serious transgression, President Oaks said, it no longer will be treated as apostasy for purposes of church discipline. The clarification aligns the church’s response to violations of the church’s doctrine of the law of chastity — sexual relations are proper only between a man and a woman who are legally and lawfully wedded as husband and wife — whether they occur in heterosexual or homosexual relationships.
:thumbup: Quote:Throughout the church’s history, Latter-day Saint leaders have instructed church members that current revelation overtakes past teachings. For example, after the 1978 revelation that extended the priesthood to members of African descent, the late apostle Elder Bruce R. McConkie said faithful people would get in line with a modern, living prophet and forget everything Elder McConkie and other leaders had said about blacks and the priesthood “with limited understanding and without the light and knowledge that now has come into the world.”
Lol.
One more thing in the announcement that is getting lost: Homosexual activity within a same-sex marriage is no longer considered apostasy. Also, homosexual activity outside of marriage will be treated the exact same way heterosexual activity is treated – as a serious transgression. In other words, “fornication” will be treated the same way for everyone. Local leaders no longer can justify punishing LGBTQ+ members differently for their sexual activity.
That is HUGE.
I am stunned. Elder Oaks has done a good job clarifying the changes and in a sense, asking for “forgiveness” for the pain that has been caused. I am very excited and hopefull, as he said… last year I think, that the church was “not familiar enough” with the transgender side of the community and this change could be a stepping stone into seeing how the church handles situations in the future. I am so excited! Old Timer wrote:
One more thing in the announcement that is getting lost:Homosexual activity within a same-sex marriage is no longer considered apostasy. Also, homosexual activity outside of marriage will be treated the exact same way heterosexual activity is treated – as a serious transgression. In other words, “fornication” will be treated the same way for everyone. Local leaders no longer can justify punishing LGBTQ+ members differently for their sexual activity.
That is HUGE.
Agreed, Curt. My main objection to the policy was that it was unfair compared to how heterosexuals were treated for the same sin. I have had that conversation with my SP (partly in his effort to try to understand why people are troubled by it). It is indeed HUGE. It’s more than just a reversal of one policy.
I am honestly at least as happy right now as I was when I found out missionaries can call home.
Question — is homosexuality within a same-sex marriage considered a breach of the law of chastity, but not apostasy? That is a question nothing more… Anyway, I take all this to mean the November policy has been reversed. Very happy about that. It never was very fair to the children who had no say in what family they ended up in. Not sure who implemented the policy (instigated, formulated it) but I’m glad its reversed. Too bad RMN had said previously it was revelation. That statement paints leaders into a corner. Very glad RMN didn’t let it paint him into that corner.
Now, if they will reverse the policy on the one year waiting period for the sake of family unity that will be balm to my soul. Let us hope.
We are fast transitioning from being a backward, stilted, egocentric church to one that is “trying” to be inclusive and kind. Let us hope this continues.
God bless the Internet and how it gives church leaders lots of information about the mind of its membership, without having to ask.
Very happy about the announcement as well. It’s been interesting to see that it really highlighted some cognitive dissonance for very orthodox members of my family. I wonder if it will highlight prophetic fallibility for a lot of people who had not considered it before. The implications for this are huge. Say there is a married gay couple in the ward. They could now participate on some level and have their kids involved. They could hold some kind of minor calling and be part of the ward. It seems like the main goal of the 2015 policy was to cut off this kind of involvement. It will be interesting to see if some gay members find a way to participate in wards.
I got emotional texting my wife about this announcement. I wanted her to contact her openly gay cousin to tell him the good news. She reminded me that her cousin has long since left the church and is not consumed by LDS issues anymore. This news would likely bring to him a mixture of emotions and should be handled delicately. We cannot burst into the scene like people at a surprise party, “Happy SSM is no longer automatic apostacy Day!” That would be insensitive of us.
Roy wrote:
I got emotional texting my wife about this announcement. I wanted her to contact her openly gay cousin to tell him the good news.She reminded me that her cousin has long since left the church and is not consumed by LDS issues anymore. This news would likely bring to him a mixture of emotions and should be handled delicately. We cannot burst into the scene like people at a surprise party, “Happy SSM is no longer automatic apostacy Day!” That would be insensitive of us.
Which has me ponder to what extent any previous excommunication and other damages will be reversed or given the opportunity for such reversal? Will people who were kicked out of the church desire to come back? Is it too late?
Roy wrote:
I got emotional texting my wife about this announcement. I wanted her to contact her openly gay cousin to tell him the good news.She reminded me that her cousin has long since left the church and is not consumed by LDS issues anymore. This news would likely bring to him a mixture of emotions and should be handled delicately. We cannot burst into the scene like people at a surprise party, “Happy SSM is no longer automatic apostacy Day!” That would be insensitive of us.
True point. This hasn’t solved all issues. It has taken some edge off, but not all. I look forward to a future day when SSM is considered part of the Church program, but that day isn’t yet, and probably won’t be for awhile.Your story also reminded me of a few-years-ago occurrence at work. On the day that Pope Benedict announced that he would be the first-ever Pope to step down due to age/health issues, I went over to talk to an active Catholic friend and said, “Wow, that was some surprising news about the Pope, huh?” to which he replied, “why, what do you mean?”… “Oh… uh… you might want to check CNN” and I walked away wishing I had just let him discover it on his own.
SilentDawning wrote:
Question — is homosexuality within a same-sex marriage considered a breach of the law of chastity, but not apostasy?
The Church doesn’t recognize SSM as legitimate, and so consider sexual activity within SSM the exact same as outside.
grobert93 wrote:
Which has me ponder to what extent any previous excommunication and other damages will be reversed or given the opportunity for such reversal?
Probably not. There are many reasons why a person can get exed, related to sexual transgressions. They’re just not labeling it as “apostasy”. I think advocacy and open participation in a “serious transgression” would still qualify as apostasy, regardless of what that serious transgression is. Adultery, for example, can still be punished through excommunication, without being considered “apostasy”. Same with embezzlement, child abuse, etc, etc. “Apostasy” is definitely the worst thing someone can be charged with in the Church, and the Church took homosexual activity out of that subset, and into the subset of “serious transgressions”.
I am interested to see, now, how they handle same-sex relations that aren’t “sexual”. For example, can they go on “dates”? Hold hands? What would happen if they were caught? I have a hard time believing it’ll be treated the same as if it were heterosexual.
Quote:Happy SSM is no longer automatic apostacy Day!” That would be insensitive of us.
There will be some significant pain. We need to pour on the love to both sides of the aisle. Meet people where they are at and let time heal the valid wounds.
On another note – The Methodist General Conference went the opposite of ours, mostly. Isn’t life strange?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.