What IS the Lord’s plan for gay people?

[Anonymous]

I know we’ve been talking a lot on this board about SSM and related issues, but I don’t think this specific aspect has been addressed. We had Stake Conference yesterday and SLC actually flew a Seventy out to address us; apparently I wasn’t the only person in the stake who complained to my bishop about the horrible SSM policy because this Seventy brought up SSM. He made the same argument against it that has been made from the start: that SSM is wrong because marriage between a man + woman is central to God’s plan. What’s never been addressed, though, is what God’s plan is for people who are actually homosexual. I think there are three possible outcomes:

1) The gay person will be ‘cured’ of his gayness at the Resurrection, in much the same way that my husband’s hearing impairment will be fixed and he will finally hear every word I am saying.

2) The gay person will remain gay, but will enter into a mixed-orientation marriage (perhaps with someone who never had the opportunity to be married during mortal life) and is therefore eligible for the highest level of exaltation.

3) The gay person remains gay, does NOT enter into a MOM and is alone forever. He can go to the Celestial Kingdom, but is ineligible for the highest degree of exaltation within the CK.

I think you can see that none of these are particularly good choices. The problem with (1) is that the Church no longer teaches that homosexuality can be cured (as they once did), and the problem with (2) is that the Church also no onger encourages mixed-orientation marriages. And the problem with (3) is that doesn’t it sound awfully similar to what the Church used to teach about black people, pre-1978? That black people could go to the Celestial Kingdom, but they’d be ineligible for the highest degree of glory within the CK?

The Church no longer teaches that same-sex attraction is a choice, and they no longer teach that it’s a sin. So on some level, even if we aren’t willing to say that God specifically created a gay person to be gay, we are at least saying that it’s innate, in much the same way that being black or being female is innate. So, God is willing to say to a HUGE number of his children, hey, because of what you are, you’re ineligible for the highest degree of glory, and you can never become like God, even if you make and keep the exact same temple covenants as a straight person. Basically, the only people who get to become like God are straight people (because male/female marriage is required for exaltation). Does it really seem fair that a loving God would stack the deck against a HUGE number of His children like that?

[Anonymous]

Joni wrote:

doesn’t it sound awfully similar to what the Church used to teach about black people, pre-1978? That black people could go to the Celestial Kingdom, but they’d be ineligible for the highest degree of glory within the CK?

YES! The more I study issues of the ban on blacks and the priesthood and the temple, the more I think – “this sounds exactly the same!”

Joni wrote:

Does it really seem fair that a loving God would stack the deck against a HUGE number of His children like that?

I do think therein lies the real sticking point and maybe why the church is digging it’s heals in a bit. They may have started doing some whiteboard (theo) logical flowcharts and realized where this was headed and kept coming to a point where they would say, “Wait – that won’t work – or there would have to be some dramatic changes to our theology – the kind that would actually create new sections in the D&C (and not those that just say, “we are not doing THAT [polygamy or discriminating] any more). Some actual groundbreaking revelation – the biggest since Joseph Smith passed away.

[Anonymous]

The afterlife is one big speculation. We define it by imagining our dream existence.

I think many people love their spouse enough to where they can’t imagine heaven being heaven without them. This sentiment probably extends to family as well (though not always ) hence eternal families. We want it so badly that we convince ourselves that it must be the lord’s plan, and therefore that is what the lord wants for everyone.

What does the lord plan for gay people? What do gay people plan for themselves? Is it any different? Be with (or find) the partner of their choosing. Be with family. Sounds good to me.

Sometimes I view this whole business of eternal marriage as an extension of our culture’s problem of having ulterior motives. Sure, you can be together forever… but with the expectation that you produce a few billion babies, if you’re not willing to sign up for that then what’s the point? You might as well not be together forever. It’s like a church activity, you can’t have an activity/relationship without a (narrowly defined) gospel purpose. C’mon, we can do better, can’t we? What if there were no ulterior motives associated with the afterlife? Sometimes I feel like our concept of eternal life is limited by the worldly concept of “but what does it produce?” “What’s my ROI?” Very corporate. What if the “product” was the relationship? The afterlife is probably more about strengthening relationships than finding reasons to tear them down.

Joni wrote:

1) The gay person will be ‘cured’ of his gayness at the Resurrection, in much the same way that my husband’s hearing impairment will be fixed and he will finally hear every word I am saying.

That one makes me bristle. I no longer feel as though homosexuality is some sort of illness; there is nothing to fix because it’s already right. Will people be “cured” of having brown hair? Will people be cured of not being 5′ 10″ tall? Anyone taller than the standard is adjusted down, anyone shorter adjusted up. Maybe some would have us cured of everything that makes us who we are. Is our destiny to be white haired, interchangeable, soulless cogs in the eternal machine? Well we need the gays to be there with us to make sure that doesn’t happen.

[Anonymous]

Joni wrote:

1) The gay person will be ‘cured’ of his gayness at the Resurrection, in much the same way that my husband’s hearing impairment will be fixed and he will finally hear every word I am saying.

This is the one I hear the most from church members. The atonement will “fix” anything.

On a related note, a friend sent me this link about what we used to teach about blacks and the CK. Not trying to be inflammatory or threadjack, but another option seems to be that gay people will not get to the highest degree of the CK.

http://rationalfaiths.com/weve-heard-these-arguments-before/?utm_campaign=shareaholic&utm_medium=facebook&utm_source=socialnetwork

[Anonymous]

Joni wrote:

I know we’ve been talking a lot on this board about SSM and related issues, but I don’t think this specific aspect has been addressed. We had Stake Conference yesterday and SLC actually flew a Seventy out to address us; apparently I wasn’t the only person in the stake who complained to my bishop about the horrible SSM policy because this Seventy brought up SSM. He made the same argument against it that has been made from the start: that SSM is wrong because marriage between a man + woman is central to God’s plan. What’s never been addressed, though, is what God’s plan is for people who are actually homosexual.

Man + Woman = God’s Plan

I’m feeling very adrift right now. I’ve heard this a hundred times this month and I believe it less with every repeat. There is something foreign to me now in the church’s approach, emphasis, and I’d go so far as to call it unhealthy, unloving obsession.

I’m aware of plans in our stake to have a youth conference focusing on this issue, because the kids are “having a lot of trouble,” and are “confused.” I imagine they’ll get a whole weekend of Man + Woman = God’s Plan. If I hear what they say God’s plan for gay people is, I’ll report back. I hope kids ask.

The event is being planned by some very good friends. I respect them and love our friendship. I’m sad that I feel so at odds with them, sad for what would probably come of a frank discussion.

It’s so true that this is a journey and we can’t predict its course. If you’d told me a year ago that this would be the breaking point, I’d have bet money against it.

And maybe I’m the one who’s wrong. I don’t know, so I’m just drifting.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

What IS the Lord’s plan for gay people?

The same as for all His other children. His plan is big enough for us all.

[Anonymous]

Husband and I actually had a really productive talk on the drive home from Stake Conference – basically about the fact that we have no idea what we’re signing up for. We’re paying tithing/attending boring meetings/wearing special underwear/having only 1 pair of earrings based on the idea that the CK is something we actually want, but who knows? We don’t know if Husband will be married to only me, or 8,000 other women. I don’t know if I will be allowed to communicate with my spirit children once they go to earth, or if only my husband gets to do that. We don’t know if our bodies will actually be allowed to experience physical pleasure via eating and sex, or if our spirit children will be created by spawning. We don’t know if we’ll be equal partners as God and Goddess, or if I’ll be hearkening to him. I don’t know if I’ll be allowed to communicate directly with God or if my husband has to serve as go-between. And so on and so forth. Basically, God is asking us to sign the contract, and if we sign it, He lets us read the contract to find out what we’re agreeing to.

So when it comes to gay people, there’s an even greater degree of uncertainty. Will God ‘fix’ them at the Resurrection? (Like nibbler, I wonder to what degree God is going to social-engineer our supposedly perfected bodies. Will my high-functioning autistic son come back as a neurotypical person? But how can God do that without fundamentally changing who my son is as a person?) Or will God require mixed-orientation marriages even though those marriages have dismal success rates? It seems odd that we are perfectly content to say we don’t KNOW what causes people to be gay (previous statements that homosexuality is a choice have been scrubbed from LDS rhetoric), we don’t KNOW what God plans to do with them, but we are ABSOLUTELY SURE that the one thing God DOESN’T want is gay people in committed, monogamous, same-sex marriages. That’s a bit of a problem for me because it takes me back to what I learned in all my math and science courses about significant figures. It didn’t make sense to me then, but it makes sense to me now: you can’t have any more certainty in an equation or system than the most uncertain thing.

[Anonymous]

Several years ago I read a book, very pro-LDS book from 2007, titled “What Happened to the Cross? Distinctive LDS Teachings” by Robert L. Millet professor of ancient scripture and former dean of Religious Education at BYU. There is one passage that I feel has direct bearing on this thread.

Author Robert L. Millet wrote:

Quote:

“While serving as a priesthood leader many years ago, I had occasion to work with a young man who was struggling with same sex attraction. He had violated his temple covenants but sincerely wanted to change. Church disciplinary measures were taken, and he and I began to work together toward change. He spoke often of how difficult it was for him to be active in the Church, to attend all the activities, and in general to be a typical Latter-day Saint when he felt so very atypical. He committed himself to avoid inappropriate sexual activity but wrestled with his same-sex attraction. One day he asked me, “If I do the things you have asked me to do- go to Church, read the scriptures, fast and pray, plead for divine help, receive priesthood blessings when necessary, and be chaste- can you assure me that the Lord will take away these desires, these attractions? Can you promise me they will go away?” It was a tough question.

As I recall, I said something like this; “I know the Lord can indeed change you, change your heart, change your orientation. I know that he can do that instantaneously if he chooses to do so. I know that the power of change is in Jesus Christ and that dramatic and rapid change can take place. I do not know, however, whether the Lord will change you right away. I do know this, however: If you do what you have been asked to do, and you do it regularly and consistently from now on, God will change you, either here or hereafter. You may be required to deal with these feelings until the day you die. But I can promise you two things- first, these feelings will eventually be transformed; and second, if God does not choose to bring about a major change in your nature in this life, he will strengthen and empower you to deal with the temptations you will face. You don’t need to face this on your own.”

He then shared some scriptures about those who “overcome by faith” D & C 76:53 and “withstand every temptation of the devil, with their faith on the Lord Jesus Christ” Alma 37:33.

How then can gay people fit into the eternal plan?

Elder Packer seems to conclude that a loving Father God would not make a person gay. Bro. Millet seems to conclude that faithful gay people will be made heterosexual in the resurrection (if not before).

I believe that different people will honestly come to different conclusions until we are given some definitive direction.

[Anonymous]

Exactly what it is for the rest of God’s children.

I am not confident about any of the details.

[Anonymous]

Joni wrote:

What IS the Lord’s plan for gay people?

Joni,

Are you asking this from our perspective or the Church’s? In other words are you asking people to tell you their thoughts on God and what he has in store or are you asking what the teachings of the Church are?

[Anonymous]

Joni,

Great topic to discuss. I personally think that option 1 is what most (if not all) of the brethren believe is the Lord’s plan for gay people:

Joni wrote:

1) The gay person will be ‘cured’ of his gayness at the Resurrection, in much the same way that my husband’s hearing impairment will be fixed and he will finally hear every word I am saying.

I believe the brethren feel that SSA is a trial that some people face — a trial that many will not be able to overcome in this life. Because the Lord’s only authorized plan for families is a marriage between a man and a woman, any sexual relations outside of those bounds are sin. That is the doctrine that was reiterated by “The Family: A Proclamation to the World”, given by our prophets, seers, and revelators some 20 years ago. The proclamation on the family clearly establishes the boundaries for appropriate sexual expression, as well as the covenants we make as part of the temple endowment.

To have SSA is not a sin by itself, but acting on it is. This is no different than heterosexual people: being attracted to someone other than the person you are legally and lawfully wedded to (if married) is not a sin, but acting on that attraction is. Having impure thoughts is not a sin, but dwelling on them leads to acting on those thoughts can lead to inappropriate sexual behavior, which is sin.

The doctrine of the Church is that sexual relations are only appropriate between a man and a woman who are legally and lawfully married. That is the hard and fast line that has been set and any sexual relations that fall outside those bounds are sin. I think the brethren see homosexuality as an earthly trial much like the trial of a faithful single person, who longs to be married in the temple to a worthy partner of the opposite gender, but never has the opportunity in this life. In the Church, we believe that these faithful single people will have the opportunity to be married in the hereafter. I guess that’s a good argument for option 2:

Quote:

2) The gay person will remain gay, but will enter into a mixed-orientation marriage (perhaps with someone who never had the opportunity to be married during mortal life) and is therefore eligible for the highest level of exaltation.

I think the other option for gay people (from a faithful perspective) is that we simply don’t know what God’s plan is for them in the afterlife, but we trust that a loving God will make everything work out for the best.

I’m with LookingHard in my thinking that our doctrine in the Church about sexual orientation is much like our doctrine (pre-1978) about race and the priesthood. I’m hoping that further light and knowledge will be coming, but I think it will take time because it will have to change some other core doctrines of our faith.

[Anonymous]

It says in the Book of Mormon that in the resurrection, our bodies will be perfect. I take this to mean that IF it’s abnormal for someone to have SSA, then the biology responsible for it will be corrected, and they will have heterosexual attraction in the next life. They will be able to marry members of the opposite sex and enjoy what they did not enjoy in this life — assuming there is sex in the afterlife. And James E Talmage said that everything we suffer in this life has a compensating blessing in the next, provided the trial is met with patience. Therefore, not only will they be able to enjoy heterosexual relationships, they will be compensated for what they suffered in this life as a result of SSA.

Now, that is assuming that it’s ABNORMAL to have SSA and that the assertions of past leaders regarding the “just world theory” is true. Whether that is true is not something I wish to debate as I don’t know.

I also believe we honestly don’t know what is going to happen, how injustice will be “righted” in the next life, etcetera. I have become more and more agnostic about church claims, church doctrine etcetera. We simply don’t know anything we can’t see and verify. The reversal of the priesthood ban, and subsequent disavowal of “all racism” in the articles is testament of that.

I think that if I had SSA, i would probably do what someone in Utah did. He got into a relationship with another person with SSA, told his Bishop, was excommunciated, and then participated as an excommunicated member. She sang in the choir, attended lessons, cleaned the chapel, did service projects, and helped out where he could. He enjoyed his relationship with his husband, and found other ways to fill the gaps in his life due to the penalty of excommunication.

In a way, that is what I have done with my dissaffection. I let the church into my life as much as I can, and fill the void with other activities that are fulfilling. I have a very FULL LIFE, althgough I still have my full membership. I venture to say that I am more engaged in service and life than I was in for years and years as a TBM acting out of a sense of duty.

So, one has to stop thinking everything revolves around the church — it doesn’t have to be about the church all the time. It’s about your personal happiness, and the church is merely an instrument in helping you toward that goal. If the instrument is blunt, ineffective, incapable of being fixed, then you might keep it out of memories, culture, respect, or hopes something will change in the future, while at the same time, find new vehicles that will help you achieve personal happiness.

[Anonymous]

I think if you were to ask the top church leadership if we believe that the highest exaltation is only for heterosexual people, they would say no, of course not. After all, we aren’t that far removed from a time when church leaders taught that the highest exaltation was reserved for whites, and I don’t think they are keen to repeat those mistakes. But, as I pointed out in the first post, we can’t conceive of a way in which gay people can have the same level of glory as straight people. They either have to become straight, remain gay but in a mixed orientation eternal marriage, or remain gay and celibate, but be ineligible for the top tier of the Celestial Kingdom.

I can no longer ascribe to the idea that God will “cure” homosexuality at the Resurrection. That just feels wrong to me. At the best, such talk is speculation (and statements to that effect have never come from an official, correlated source).

The Law of Chastity isn’t exactly the same as gay people as it is for straight people: straight married people are OK in God’s eyes to have sex, gay married people are not. (Or rather, gay people married to other gay people – since mixed-orientation marriage has been the loophole for so long. Unfortunately, we’ve seen that those marriages have an abysmal success rate.) Furthermore, a straight, unmarried man holding hands with his girlfriend is not breaking the Law of Chastity; a gay, unmarried man holding hands with his boyfriend is. I’m really wondering what is our source of knowledge on these technicalities since it doesn’t come up at all in any of our canon of revealed scripture. Even the idea that ‘it’s not a sin to have SSA but acting on it is’ may not accurately represent God’s will – there is no revelatory source for this statement. Frankly, the idea that ‘SSA is not sinful in and of itself’ is a fairly new idea in Mormon theology (you have to ask yourself, did we change our tune on SSA to be more in step with ‘the world’? Is that a thing that God’s true church should be doing?) So our only source of God’s opinion on SSA is what we hear from the apostles – and their statements may be subject to editing. And as we have learned, statements made over the pulpit at GC, even if they are delivered passionately and eloquently, may be flat-out wrong and subject to disavowal in later Gospel Topics essays.

I wish we could shift the rhetoric on homosexuality from “We don’t know what God’s plan is for gay people, but we know with 100% certainty that X, Y and Z are wrong” to “We don’t know what God’s plan is for gay people,” full stop.

[Anonymous]

Joni wrote:

I think if you were to ask the top church leadership if we believe that the highest exaltation is only for heterosexual people, they would say no, of course not. After all, we aren’t that far removed from a time when church leaders taught that the highest exaltation was reserved for whites, and I don’t think they are keen to repeat those mistakes. But, as I pointed out in the first post, we can’t conceive of a way in which gay people can have the same level of glory as straight people. They either have to become straight, remain gay but in a mixed orientation eternal marriage, or remain gay and celibate, but be ineligible for the top tier of the Celestial Kingdom.

Are there different races in the CK? One supposes that we are all spirit children of the same heavenly parents. The differences in the races all spring from the different earthly bloodlines where we are born. Are these differences eternal or temporal? Will everyone be made “White and delightsome” (2 Ne 5:21) in the CK? Do we have any doctrine on this?

(I promise I am not trying to be offensive – I am just wondering what the current church position is)

[Anonymous]

Good question. I guess you are asking if the celestial kingdom has a “little Italy”, “little China”, and a ‘hood? That seems so earthly and petty, but it has been said – we really know so very little.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Author]

Posts