- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Obviously happy for our LGBTQ brothers and sisters. But can we rage a bit about how we got here? President Nelson came out in January 2016 and emphatically proclaimed that this policy was revelation! Direct from God. He described the process of how President Monson received the revelation from God, and all of the 15 knew it and supported it. Elder Christofferson was trotted out and told us that this was doctrine. How can this be revelation if it is completely rescinded in three years? Those of us who stood up against this policy were persecuted for it, all under the mantra of follow the prophet and these men were inspired from God. How could these men think that the 2015 revelation was a good thing and inspired and now not? It did so much harm. Bridget – The following is from a woman who shares your pain. I hope it helps. https://bycommonconsent.com/2019/04/04/from-the-archives-bound-hand-and-foot-with-graveclothes/ ” class=”bbcode_url”> https://bycommonconsent.com/2019/04/04/from-the-archives-bound-hand-and-foot-with-graveclothes/ For good measure I am cyber hugging you as tight as I can. Your family wasn’t the first family to experience this. Our brothers and sister of color had decades of it. I grieve with you as much as I am able.
Quote:
While we still consider such a marriage to be a serious transgression, it will not be treated as apostasy for purposes of church discipline. Instead, the immoral conduct in heterosexual or homosexual relationships will be treated in the same way.
A heterosexual couple can hold hands, cuddle, kiss, even make out a little and none of these actions are considered immoral. Will the same allowances now be made for a homosexual couple? As long as they don’t cross certain lines, can a gay couple hold hands and sit together in church and still be considered in good standing and hold temple recommends?
I’m unclear on the full implications of this announcement, but I’m hopeful that those words can be taken at face value but I also doubt that’s the case.
The wording of the actual announcement stated that heterosexual and homosexual activity would be treated in exactly the same way now. I know actual implementation of that standard will depend on the water getting to the end of the local rows, so I will make sure it gets to the end of mine. I will do so gently and meekly and humbly, but I will do so.
bridget_night wrote:
Obviously happy for our LGBTQ brothers and sisters. But can we rage a bit about how we got here? President Nelson came out in January 2016 and emphatically proclaimed that this policy was revelation! Direct from God. He described the process of how President Monson received the revelation from God, and all of the 15 knew it and supported it. Elder Christofferson was trotted out and told us that this was doctrine. How can this be revelation if it is completely rescinded in three years? Those of us who stood up against this policy were persecuted for it, all under the mantra of follow the prophet and these men were inspired from God. How could these men think that the 2015 revelation was a good thing and inspired and now not? It did so much harm.
I know, talk about your cognitive dissonance, right? If ever there was cognitive dissonance, here it is. But if you read the DN article, we’re not the only ones being hit with it. The article points out the old policy was revelation according to Nelson, but also points out this one is revelation too. So, shoe on the other foot – you’re a totally in orthodox believer who wholeheartedly believed the old policy really was revelation – and now so is this?
:wtf: How can this evil suddenly be less evil and both making it more evil be a revelation and making it less evil both be revelation? They’re in the same boat we are. I’m actually looking forward to having some discussion with some of the Old Guard – and frankly it is quite possible we may lose some of them.Here are my own thoughts on the subject. I did not believe the old policy to be anything more than that – a policy. I did not (and do not) believe that was revelation. Period. I’m also not sure this is revelation, but I am sure it is policy. We are in the midst of a major – MAJOR – cultural shift in the church. The church is NOT a perfect (whole, complete) organization run by imperfect people. Like us, it may become perfect in time – this is a big step in that direction for
usand the church. As for my own cognitive dissonance, yes I do believe the leadership could have believed the old policy was revelation and the new policy is revelation. They both could be, neither could be or one or the other could be. Either way, we’re closer to the right place now with or without revelation. If the leadership needs to tell the Old Guard it’s revelation to help them accept it, it’s fine with me. My truth does not change. Old Timer wrote:
The wording of the actual announcement stated that heterosexual and homosexual activity would be treated in exactly the same way now.I know actual implementation of that standard will depend on the water getting to the end of the local rows, so I will make sure it gets to the end of mine. I will do so gently and meekly and humbly, but I will do so.
Amen, Brother, and me too.
Old Timer wrote:
The wording of the actual announcement stated that heterosexual and homosexual activity would be treated in exactly the same way now.I know actual implementation of that standard will depend on the water getting to the end of the local rows, so I will make sure it gets to the end of mine. I will do so gently and meekly and humbly, but I will do so.
bridget_night wrote:
Those of us who stood up against this policy were persecuted for it, all under the mantra of follow the prophet and these men were inspired from God.
I suppose it is some good news that those that would wish to take the hardest stand against all forms of same gender affection are guilty of not following the prophet. This announcement does not go as far as I personally would have liked but I can still celebrate a positive change when I see one.Call me skeptical, but as good as this is, and it is very good, I think people are reading a little more meaning into it than it deserves. I don’t mean here, but from others I’ve heard. This doesn’t fundamentally change anything. I view the Nov 15 Policy as the low point in a bad direction, and that the Church has now turned to face a more positive direction, which is great. And kudos for reversing (or revising?) the policy. It’s just that I think all this accomplishes at the moment is to put us back onto the same ground we stood on back in Oct, 2015, which I don’t think of as very LGBTQ friendly. If the Church had meant to say that they would now recognize SSM, they would have said so.
I’ll reserve my complete celebration for GC pronouncements that actually change our accepted view.
DarkJedi wrote:
I’m actually looking forward to having some discussion with some of the Old Guard …
More power to you.
“Old guard” story:
Granted this was just one person but I remember a talk during sacrament meeting where the speaker told a story about their gay friend. To simplify all the pronouns that would otherwise pepper the retelling, lets call the person giving the talk during SM Gary and their gay friend Bob. Bob told Gary that he had received personal revelation that the policy was wrong and that there was nothing wrong with gay marriage. Gary told Bob that his revelation came from Satan.
I walked out of SM.
That’s the challenge. People put all their faith eggs in “the prophet said so” basket. It’s what brings them comfort. It’s what calms their fears. It’s what gives them order. It’s understandable why people would make such statements and hold such beliefs.
But being frank (gloves coming off, sorry)… I’m not eager to hear how an arrogant faith finds a way to turn this reversal into yet another weapon.
bridget_night wrote:
Obviously happy for our LGBTQ brothers and sisters. But can we rage a bit about how we got here? President Nelson came out in January 2016 and emphatically proclaimed that this policy was revelation! Direct from God. He described the process of how President Monson received the revelation from God, and all of the 15 knew it and supported it. Elder Christofferson was trotted out and told us that this was doctrine. How can this be revelation if it is completely rescinded in three years? Those of us who stood up against this policy were persecuted for it, all under the mantra of follow the prophet and these men were inspired from God. How could these men think that the 2015 revelation was a good thing and inspired and now not? It did so much harm.
Bridget, I feel the same way about the claims of revelation, and then reversing them.
But you know, I’m happy about it. It justifies the path that I’m on. If so many things believed to be prophetic revelation, doctrine and “engraved in stone by the finger of the Lord” can be reversed, it throws into question the revelatory nature of these items in the first place. It shores up my tendency to see the church as a temporal organization with some great doctrines, but like most other organizations — concerned with finances, growth, avoiding lawsuits and legal entanglements, and not all it claims to be.
This isn’t without some regret that, if certain revelations were actually a mistake, or unnecessary, or just someone’s idea, so many people suffered for it in the past. My heart goes out to them But on the other hand, what it says about the extent to which I should cut off my right arm for the church in the future is a bit of a relief to me…
And this justifies the current path upon which I am traveling now. It feels even righter being a near Agnostic Mormon with the remnants of testimony from days gone by, navigating between full activity and less activity…and feeling happy about it.
I have heard that in spite of having the women go into the missionary field, and increasing missionary numbers substantially, baptisms haven’t increased accordingly. This has led to potentially decreasing the missionary age for women to the same as for the men….
Growth is a problem — I think these changes, very positive in my view, and effort to help us grow membership.
It wouldn’t be surprising if we start hearing about local ward presidency meetings held at Starbucks over a cup of java some time in my own lifetime.
nibbler wrote:
[… I’m not eager to hear how an arrogant faith finds a way to turn this reversal into yet another weapon.
I want to give credit for the powers leading our church now for reversing so many ineffective policies. It takes a certain amount of humility to do this. The Gospel Essays were a step in the right direction, but they were buried in LDS.org and to me, they were a kind of facing-saving approach, consistent with an arrogant faith that knew it was wrong, but wouldn’t admit it publicly.
These later changes have been a kind of open admission that things haven’t been right, and they are open about it. It will be interesting to see how these changes are shared, whether with some kind of hiddent arrogance, or simply with reason or even implicit admission of a mistake — like Uchdorft did. Although Uchdorft didn’t point to any one policy.
I have to confess, I see the church acting more like the divine institution I once believed wholeheartedly it was. Christlike people admit mistakes, and are not arrogant. They don’t hang on to old policies simply to save face while people suffer. And I see our church ‘repenting’ so to speak. All things I would expect of an organization led people imperfect people.
If we want to claim the old “the church is perfect but the people aren’t” then reversal of bad policy and righting wrongs should be a regular part of our organizational habits! And I can believe in a church that claims a divine commission when it openly admits its mistakes, rights wrongs and shows that it cares about its membership. Cares enough to get rid of destructive policies that hurt its membership, and replace them with caring ones.
I am not sure if this is the motive, or if we are simply in a period of social integration due to backlash from so many policies and sluggish growth, but I plan to give the benefit of the doubt until I’m given further evidence otherwise.
Old Timer wrote:
I am stunned it happened so quickly.I am grateful it happened so quickly.
Today, I am happy.
Yes! Yes! Yes! My sentiments exactly!
SilentDawning wrote:
nibbler wrote:
[… I’m not eager to hear how an arrogant faith finds a way to turn this reversal into yet another weapon.
I want to give credit for the powers leading our church now for reversing so many ineffective policies. It takes a certain amount of humility to do this. The Gospel Essays were a step in the right direction, but they were buried in LDS.org and to me, they were a kind of facing-saving approach, consistent with an arrogant faith that knew it was wrong, but wouldn’t admit it publicly.
I was referring to your friendly neighborhood old guard. Leaders of the church? I’ll never meet them or interact with them. Your friendly neighborhood old guard is front and center every Sunday.
Maybe a well placed, “We realize this policy has divided family and friends. Let’s use the opportunity to come back together.” would would work wonders.
This article on CNN summarizes what these changes look like to outsiders. Can’t say I disagree. https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/04/05/us/mormon-policy-reversal/index.html My nephew is gay and is in an openly gay relationship. My brother is gay and is married to a woman and they have a child together. Each are happy, in their way. I can’t really understand either lifestyle, except to say where there is love, let love be. I haven’t spoken to my brother yet, so I don’t know his thoughts. I can say that all this announcement did for my nephew is to force emotions to the surface that are not yet resolved. He is not in a place of peace, and this reversal does nothing for him other than to refresh his feelings of exclusion and thoughts about “what could have been.”
As for me, I’m going to be extremely grateful for the reversal and leave it at that for now.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.