- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
During a presentation at BYU yesterday, Sister Sharon Eubank asked a friend to speak about her experiences being a Queer Mormon. To say it was moving would be an understatement.
Here is a link to the Salt Lake Tribune’s article about it:
https://www.sltrib.com/religion/2021/04/29/help-all-women-including/ Some excerpts from the article:
RS Pres. Jean Bingham said:
Quote:“
Studies have shown that the number one reason people leave religion is that they feel judged or unwelcome. That is cited more often than doctrinal disagreement or lack of belief.” Quote:To that end, Eubank, who heads the church’s humanitarian arm, Latter-day Saint Charities, invited her friend Jessica Livier Mendoza de la Vega — “Liv” — to talk about her experience as a self-identified queer Latter-day Saint.
She has never been hurt by the “gospel,” Liv said, but by what members have said to her.
She also described positive experiences.
When she told the bishop (a lay leader of a congregation) of her young single adult ward about her queer identity, he replied, “I don’t know anything about this. What can I read? How can I help people know this is a safe place?”
For nearly 20 years, she thought she was “broken” because of her attractions, but now she knows she is loved by God and Jesus Christ just as she is, Liv said. “My eternal identity is not something anyone can take away from me.”
Quote:Eubank praised her friend and told in-person attendees and those watching online to “recognize the courage it took to stand on this BYU stage to talk about this.”
Wow! that is groundbreaking. Liv and Sis. Eubank are true trailblazers! This was wonderful and BYU Women’s Conference is a pretty big stage relatively speaking. Something like this would have been very nice to have in General Conference. But giving credit where credit is due,it was acknowledged by two apostles in GC that the majority of the membership is single. It was also nice that Sr. Eubank made note that church leaders are aware of studies like The Next Mormons which objectively look at why people leave. Just to provide some balance: I have heard from a couple of friends who are queer that they are upset that the friend who spoke is in a mixed-orientation marriage – because that gives the impression to many queer members that the only “acceptable” queer member is one who is not “too queer” but rather lives a life that is fully in line with the orthodox view of human sexuality. These friends also understand the issue of anything they say that hints they see the queer member not being “queer enough”. Ironically, this highlights their concern, since it works as almost another muzzle on their concerns.
I understand that concern, although not in the same way as my friends who are impacted by it, but I tend to celebrate even small, non-perfect steps. Of course, I have the luxury of doing that as someone who is not queer.
I also have heard from some friends (queer and cis) who have left the Church, and, understandably, they tend to see this as nothing but a cynical move and as completely insincere. (I know enough about the two leaders involved to not believe that, but I have not been hurt like these friends have been hurt, so I understand their reaction, as well.)
Note: I do not want this post to become a discussion of sexuality or turn political in nature.
I share this simply for balance and to illustrate how complex it is to be outside the cultural norm but still want to be faithful.I think people here will understand that, even if not in the area of sexual and gender orientation. Old-Timer wrote:
She has never been hurt by the “gospel,” Liv said, but by what members have said to her.
My wife and I had a discussion this morning about some hurtful facebook posts an otherwise good woman that we know posted. We discussed that from her perspective she is defending what she sees as her group or tribe from what she perceives as outsiders that are dangerous and want change that will threaten her (the facebook poster’s) way of life. What she cannot yet see is that many people that she assumes to be in the “in-group” that she believes to be “defending” are actually in the out group that she is attacking (or at least sympathetic with those in the out group).
Roy wrote:
Old-Timer wrote:
She has never been hurt by the “gospel,” Liv said, but by what members have said to her.
My wife and I had a discussion this morning about some hurtful facebook posts an otherwise good woman that we know posted. We discussed that from her perspective she is defending what she sees as her group or tribe from what she perceives as outsiders that are dangerous and want change that will threaten her (the facebook poster’s) way of life. What she cannot yet see is that many people that she assumes to be in the “in-group” that she believes to be “defending” are actually in the out group that she is attacking (or at least sympathetic with those in the out group).
I think that’s not uncommon among the membership, especially what I call the “old guard.”* I think the run on the assumption we’re all the same, like little gingerbread people when the truth is we’re all very different even in our beliefs. In one way it’s nice to believe we’re all alike and share exactly the same beliefs because that’s part of the tribe mentality. But in another way it can be very exclusive of those who aren’t all in or are different in some way. That’s partly why I liked that two apostles pointed out the majority of members are not married and that there are a variety of reasons for that. Nevertheless, it’s harder to see all those single people in an insular “family ward” in Utah where all the singles are sent to YSA or singles wards (where it’s more than implied you’re there to get married). But even in a ward like mine where there are quite a few singles (especially older widowed or divorced women) it can escape notice. Of late the bishopric has gotten into the habit of asking husbands and wives to say the opening and closing prayers. In one sense there’s nothing wrong with that and I’m sure they don’t see any other message it’s sending – but it does send a message to those who are not married.
*Yes, I do recognize this is also labeling.
I wonder (maybe it’s been answered already) how the church deals with transfolx in relation to the priesthood among other things. Would a FTM be eligible for the priesthood but not a MTF or vice versa? And how long before we see our first transfolx Prophet! 🙂 Limhah wrote:
I wonder (maybe it’s been answered already) how the church deals with transfolx in relation to the priesthood among other things. Would a FTM be eligible for the priesthood but not a MTF or vice versa? And how long before we see our first transfolx Prophet!🙂
It’s a pretty easy find in the handbook (38.6.23):
Quote:Transgender Individuals
Transgender individuals face complex challenges. Members and nonmembers who identify as transgender—and their family and friends—should be treated with sensitivity, kindness, compassion, and an abundance of Christlike love. All are welcome to attend sacrament meeting, other Sunday meetings, and social events of the Church (see 38.1.1).
Gender is an essential characteristic of Heavenly Father’s plan of happiness. The intended meaning of gender in the family proclamation is biological sex at birth. Some people experience feelings of incongruence between their biological sex and their gender identity. As a result, they may identify as transgender. The Church does not take a position on the causes of people identifying themselves as transgender.
Most Church participation and some priesthood ordinances are gender neutral. Transgender persons may be baptized and confirmed as outlined in 38.2.3.14. They may also partake of the sacrament and receive priesthood blessings. However, priesthood ordination and temple ordinances are received according to biological sex at birth.
Church leaders counsel against elective medical or surgical intervention for the purpose of attempting to transition to the opposite gender of a person’s biological sex at birth (“sex reassignment”). Leaders advise that taking these actions will be cause for Church membership restrictions.
Leaders also counsel against social transitioning. A social transition includes changing dress or grooming, or changing a name or pronouns, to present oneself as other than his or her biological sex at birth. Leaders advise that those who socially transition will experience some Church membership restrictions for the duration of this transition.
Restrictions include receiving or exercising the priesthood, receiving or using a temple recommend, and receiving some Church callings. Although some privileges of Church membership are restricted, other Church participation is welcomed.
Transgender individuals who do not pursue medical, surgical, or social transition to the opposite gender and are worthy may receive Church callings, temple recommends, and temple ordinances.
Some children, youth, and adults are prescribed hormone therapy by a licensed medical professional to ease gender dysphoria or reduce suicidal thoughts. Before a person begins such therapy, it is important that he or she (and the parents of a minor) understands the potential risks and benefits. If these members are not attempting to transition to the opposite gender and are worthy, they may receive Church callings, temple recommends, and temple ordinances.
If a member decides to change his or her preferred name or pronouns of address, the name preference may be noted in the preferred name field on the membership record. The person may be addressed by the preferred name in the ward.
Circumstances vary greatly from unit to unit and person to person. Members and leaders counsel together and with the Lord. Area Presidencies will help local leaders sensitively address individual situations. Bishops counsel with the stake president. Stake presidents and mission presidents must seek counsel from the Area Presidency (see 32.6.3 and 32.6.3.1).
For further information on understanding and supporting transgender individuals, see “Transgender” on ChurchofJesusChrist.org.
Trans prophet? Not in the sense of ordained and recognized as president of the church any time soon.
Thanks it seems that clears it up pretty well. Seems they base it on your parts. Makes about as much sense as anything I suppose. I suspect it’s not an issue that comes up much. I think it comes up more than most people realize, and it should be noted the above is much “softer” than the previous version of the handbook. I also believe most trans people, like the majority of LGBTQ+, leave the church. I have a friend who is a trans female who has not had surgery yet, due almost entirely to cost. She served a mission about 20 years ago as a male while feeling female and felt guilty the entire time – continuing to this day. One of the religious reasons she wants the surgery is to have her Priesthood revoked and remove the guilt. There are so many ways we make it much harder than it needs to be for people who don’t fit the generalized ideal. The presentation had elements that I see as wonderful – but it was a step/gesture that cannot fix decades of harm. I hope it is another step in the right direction – and I hope the pace of the steps continues to accelerate.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.