- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Since I talked to a member of the stake presidency and our bishop about why I thought the announcement was a mistake I’ve had both councilors in the stake presidency and the bishop, who never comes to SS, come to GD to hear me teach. My wife thinks I’m paranoid, but… I know most of you are way ahead of me on this & other topics. I’ve gone back to: mormonsandgays.org (church) web site & looked at the few scriptural references about this topic.
Including Ensign articles, books & conference talks.
The feelings I come back to is: the leadership of our church is really struggling with this. Much like the membership.
Sometimes their actions are well meaning & other times they are not. (Like this policy)
Mistakes can & will be made.
My conclusion is: if asked a direct question, I will give a direct answer.
Without anger or emotion. If I stand alone, I will stand alone.
If there are consequences, I will live with them.
From what I can tell I’m not alone. Including in my own ward.
Minyan Man wrote:I know most of you are way ahead of me on this & other topics.
I’ve gone back to: mormonsandgays.org (church) web site & looked at the few scriptural references about this topic.
Including Ensign articles, books & conference talks.
The feelings I come back to is: the leadership of our church is really struggling with this. Much like the membership.
Sometimes their actions are well meaning & other times they are not. (Like this policy)
Mistakes can & will be made.
My conclusion is: if asked a direct question, I will give a direct answer.
Without anger or emotion. If I stand alone, I will stand alone.
If there are consequences, I will live with them.
From what I can tell I’m not alone. Including in my own ward.
This is what shocked my so much about the policy MM. I do believe the top leadership is conflicted on the issue – and I thought two of the strongest of the old guard just gave up the ghost. That has been part of the discussion here, of course, but it still hurts that those on the other side let this happen or agreed to it or whatever. From a political point of view though (and yes I do believe the church is very political at the top) I have ended up hoping that this was something they gave in anticipation of a big win on another front.
Among my FB friends, the only ones who are adamantly supporting the Church stance on the children of SSM are also the same ones spouting off about the need to close all mosques in the US and stop all international travel of Muslims. My hand keeps twitching in an attempt to hit the BLOCK and UN-FRIEND buttons. I make myself stop. I dont want to live in an echo chamber. It is healthy for me to hear their arguments .. But their logic doesn’t make sense to me, and my heart gives me far different answers.
There appears to be a very quiet civil war being waged within the church.
AP Quote:
There appears to be a very quiet civil war being waged within the church.I agree, and it breaks my heart.
DarkJedi wrote:
This is what shocked my so much about the policy MM. I do believe the top leadership is conflicted on the issue – and I thought two of the strongest of the old guard just gave up the ghost. That has been part of the discussion here, of course, but it still hurts that those on the other side let this happen or agreed to it or whatever. From a political point of view though (and yes I do believe the church is very political at the top) I have ended up hoping that this was something they gave in anticipation of a big win on another front.
DJ, What kind of win are you thinking? If you don’t have anything specific, it’s okay; I try to follow up on anything that could make sense of what’s happened.GBSmith wrote:Since I talked to a member of the stake presidency and our bishop about why I thought the announcement was a mistake I’ve had both councilors in the stake presidency and the bishop, who never comes to SS, come to GD to hear me teach. My wife thinks I’m paranoid, but…
My radar would be going off, but time will tell. I hope things go well.I think there is an understanding that missionary work would become much more difficult in Africa, some Latin American countries, much of Asia, etc. if we became known as a liberal church – and strong support of same-sex marriage could lead to that. Those are countries where solid growth is possible, so there might be a sense of trying to do the right thing in relation to support of newly existing civil law (and support of previously existing civil law) without compromising a LONG, scriptural view of immorality. I really believe this is generational. In the youth Sunday School class I taught on Sunday, it was enlightening to see that the kids (many from conservative families) didn’t think of homosexuals when I asked which people might be considered outcast sinners today if Jesus ministered today. I mentioned that group and the generational divide between people their age and people my age in how we view them, and pretty much everyone nodded their heads.
amateurparent wrote:I dont want to live in an echo chamber. It is healthy for me to hear their arguments .. But their logic doesn’t make sense to me, and my heart gives me far different answers.
I was just thinking about this today. I fear I am in too much of an echo chamber and even where I can hear some different opinions I can tend to ignore them a bit too easy. I don’t know what exactly to do about it as I can get rather upset if I just try and go read the Ensign all the time.
amateurparent wrote:There appears to be a very quiet civil war being waged within the church.
I would agree. I don’t quite see how this is going to play out either. Part of me wants to be a conscientious objector and just try and love those that are injured in the battle.Ann wrote:DarkJedi wrote:
This is what shocked my so much about the policy MM. I do believe the top leadership is conflicted on the issue – and I thought two of the strongest of the old guard just gave up the ghost. That has been part of the discussion here, of course, but it still hurts that those on the other side let this happen or agreed to it or whatever. From a political point of view though (and yes I do believe the church is very political at the top) I have ended up hoping that this was something they gave in anticipation of a big win on another front.
DJ, What kind of win are you thinking? If you don’t have anything specific, it’s okay; I try to follow up on anything that could make sense of what’s happened.
I don’t know Ann, and that’s part of the problem. It could be something that has nothing to do with gay marriage like doing away with the temple marriage after civil marriage wait time. Just speculation.LookingHard wrote:When I keep reading this thread title I keep thinking about that Saturday’s Warrior song of this same name. [emoji3] “I would stay by you jimmy”
For some reason I have had that song stuck in my head since I read your post… perhaps that is a form of ponderizing
:lolno: .Jimmy asks, “What would you do if there comes a day when I loose my way? What would you do?” As I was driving to work I wondered, “What if it isn’t gay people that have lost their way? What if it is my LDS brothers and sisters that have lost their way with well meaning but uncharitable attitudes and policies?” It gave me something to think about as the song continues, “I would stay by you Jimmy…Pray for you Jimmy…If it would help I would even die for you Jimmy.”
If this is a civil war then we need more than ever individuals that can reach across the isle.
Quote:Come on, dear brother, since the war is past, For friends at first, are friends again at last!
That is an excellent point. I believe it to be true. Slightly ironic to Roy, Heber and Miniyan Man’s last comments. The original Jimmy Flinders, the voice on the records and recordings is actually gay. I don’t imagine at the time of writing the play, that the idea had crossed anyone’s mind, but strange to consider now that 30+ years have passed. Roy – way to take my silly post and make a good serious statement out of it. I too agree that we shouldn’t be out to “force” others to see the error of their ways (no matter how much we see it as that), but to be examples of love and understanding to help de-escalate the war.
Interesting fact Mom!
Today, I had the chance to bring up aspects of my view about the policy without mentioning the policy. First, I simply mentioned that I have gay friends who have helped me understand how poorly we understand homosexuality as a culture.
Second, I mentioned how odd it seems that we can excommunicate someone for cheating on a spouse or marrying someone of the same sex but also can choose not to excommuncate someone who is found guilty of a serious felony.
I am glad that our disciplinary decisions are not black-and-white and dictated to us, especially given some experiences in my life where I have seen what I believe to be the Spirit inspiring more merciful results than even I would have chosen naturally, but I was able to address the irony of the new policy without attacking it directly.
Sometimes, open disagreement is important. More often, I believe steady education through simple, little, non-confrontational, gentle statements are just as important – and, sometimes, those statements are far more effective, even if they only are seeds germinating for a time.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.