- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Roy wrote:
I find it interesting that in teaching these things the church was only doing the same as almost every other christian church. Somewhat reminds me of the priesthood ban being a product of the racism prevalent at the time. I know that there are some unique doctrinal challenges with gays but is it possible that in some 50 or 100 years we will be saying that our teachings about gays were a product of the prevailing environment of the time?
I do think that in 100 years they may look back and be able to see the whole thing that way, but if you zoom in just a bit you will find that while some churches have been accepted gays and performing gay marriages for 10-15 years before the church as told people not to disown your gay kids and being gay isn’t a sin. I can see some leeway of a few years, but when you start talking about decades and in the mean time kids are committing suicide over an issue, it should be a top priority and rather than spending all your time at the bully pulpit pushing against allowing others to even call same sex unions “marriage” that you instead put your efforts into helping people and families better deal with it.
Roy wrote:I know that there are some unique doctrinal challenges with gays but is it possible that in some 50 or 100 years we will be saying that our teachings about gays were a product of the prevailing environment of the time?
I don’t think it will take that long. At least I hope it doesn’t.
Also, just to say it, I don’t think anyone has a responsibility or right to apologize for me, so I am very hesitant to apologize for others. Old-Timer wrote:Also, just to say it, I don’t think anyone has a responsibility or right to apologize for me, so I am very hesitant to apologize for others.
You make a good point, Ray, and I did think about that during my prior post. Frankly if someone (FP or Q12) apologized today specifically for Brigham Young’s actions there would be an amount of “poo” in my attitude for that very reason – Pres. Monson can’t (and maybe shouldn’t) apologize for Brigham Young. He could perhaps give some sort of general apology for what happened to those of African descent as a result of Young’s actions and the actions of others in authority in the century + that followed.
To put this in perspective, a former SP once apologized to me for something a bishop had done. That bishop was perfectly capable of apologizing himself but never did. While I respect the SP for trying to right a wrong, in that particular respect he was unsuccessful. I have other examples, but I’ll leave it at the unwritten order of things in the church that forbids a leader from directly apologizing is wrong.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.