( NOTE: If you’ve landed initially on this post, please start at the beginning of this essay by reading the introduction first and then continuing. Thanks! )
Individual Charity and Institutional Charity
Will the LDS Church ever change its policy and accept legally wed same-sex couples in full fellowship? I don’t know. Maybe not. With that said I suppose this last post in my essay could be titled, “In the Meantime…”. I’ve broken this last post into two parts because there are things members can do individually that have little or nothing to do with what the Church does institutionally.
Individual Charity
In the introduction to this essay I mentioned my assumption that both LDS Church members and non members may read this. For the most part my thoughts in this section are directed to church members.
Marriage Is Their Right Decision
Over the last year, it’s been interesting for my wife and me to pay closer attention to the concerns and behaviors of LDS parents of LGBTQ children. If I had to paint this picture with very broad brush strokes, I think that there are basically three groups of LDS parents with LGBTQ children.
I realize that I’m pigeonholing people and in reality this is probably far too simplistic; but here I go anyway…
Parent Group #1
These parents (and perhaps other family members including siblings, uncles, aunts, etc.) feel devastated and broken. They feel like their spiritual foundation is crumbling beneath them. The LDS Church has a way of creating picture-perfect images about families in many members’ minds. Horrific folklore is perpetuated through imagined scenarios of families sitting at dinner tables in heaven weeping because there are “empty seats at the table.”
While it’s incomprehensible to me, some parents in group #1 feel so embarrassed and heartbroken that they disown their children.
To its credit the Church has started making some efforts over the last few years to soften the rhetoric and provide an official church-sponsored website for group #1 parents that they’ll trust. Hopefully it’s helping them better cope—or at least stop kicking their LGBTQ family members out of their families. Unfortunately, in my opinion both the overt and underlying messages of this website are conspicuously singular: “We need to love everyone, even LGBTQ people.” That’s about it. To me, the website’s overall message is rudimentary and just a little bit condescending—but it’s a start.
Parent Group #2
Parents in the second group are NOT struggling with the decision of whether or not to kick their LGBTQ children out of their families. I suspect that this group of LDS parents is much larger than group #1. My guess is that the following conversation, in one form or another is common for parents and other family members in group #2. When a concerned friend or sincere ward member asks the following question, the conversation plays out something like this:
Concerned friend or sincere ward member:
“I’ve heard that your LGBTQ child is getting married. So how are you feeling about his (or her) problem (trial, challenge, decision)?”
LGBTQ child’s parent (sibling, uncle, aunt):
“I love my child and will always love my child. But of course I cannot support what he (or she) is doing.”
I think that most parents in group #2 either: A) truly believe in and support the Church’s recently changed position that homosexual attraction is not a sin but acting on it under every circumstance is, or B) in their hearts they don’t feel good about the Church’s policy but in their bewilderment over this matter and to stay aligned with the Church there’s simply no other appropriate way to respond. (I’m probably being too assumptive by lumping these parents into these two categories but that’s been my observation. I’m sure some group #2 parents fall outside those categories.)
I understand why group #2 parents and family members answer this way. Like most religious organizations, the Church has a long history with its LGBTQ members. The Church is certainly not alone in having historically taken these positions. However, even today it feels to me like the Church doesn’t make much of an effort to distance itself from that past. High-ranking Church leaders continue to offer questionable advice to parents of LGBTQ children. Because of the implicit trust placed in these leaders such advice might be considered behavioral standards in these parents’ minds.
For example, when asked what a parent’s response should be if their LGBTQ child asks, “Can I bring my partner to our home to visit? Can we come for holidays?”, Elder Oaks answered, “I can imagine that in most circumstances the parents would say, ‘Please don’t do that… Don’t put us into that position… Don’t expect to be a lengthy house guest. Don’t expect us to take you out and introduce you to our friends, or to deal with you in a public situation that would imply our approval of your ‘partnership’.” That just feels divisive and unchristlike to me. Elder Oaks continued, “We feel great compassion for parents whose love and protective instincts for their challenged children have moved them to some positions that are adversary to the Church. I hope the Lord will be merciful to parents whose love for their children has caused them to get into such traps.”
Parent Group #3
The number of people in the third group of LDS parents with LGBTQ children may be small right now, but I believe it’s growing. This group’s position is quite simple but fraught with complexity in its application. For at least the five reasons listed below I believe that Parker’s decision to marry is the right decision for him even though it puts him at odds with the Church.
Reason 1: Alex is a kind-hearted, hard-working, spiritual person.
I believe he will be a wonderful companion.
Reason 2: The importance of temporal marriage in spiritual development.
I’ve always had a tightly held belief that one of the most important reasons, if not the most important reason we’re here on earth as spiritual beings having a human experience is to start trying to develop the traits of Jesus Christ. The number one proving ground that provides this opportunity is marriage. A loving, committed marriage relationship best serves Parker’s spiritual interests.
Reason 3: The joy, stability and support marriage provides.
Through visits I’ve had with Parker about his experiences over the last few years he has confirmed a stereotypical notion that most straight people my age grew up with. That is, much of the lifestyle that surrounds gay single life is plagued by infidelity and promiscuity. Parker has told me that this kind of lifestyle is simply not for him and doesn’t align with his spirit. My wife and I believe that about him too. As such, marriage offers Parker a safe physical, emotional and spiritual foundation for happiness as would be the case in a heterosexual marriage.
Again, from Tom Christofferson’s recent blog post A Place for Our Fellow Saints: “Even when one feels he or she cannot obey all commandments, they can focus on aligning lives and conduct with eternal principles in every way available in the circumstances. For example, committing to a standard of chastity that includes abstinence before marriage and fidelity afterward while pursuing or creating a same-sex relationship is a far, far better choice than abandoning all the practices that generations have proven create an atmosphere of trust, confidence, health and strength in a home.”
Life is hard. Experiencing the basic human joys of trusted companionship, love and intimacy and just being able to come home after a tough day and vent to someone you love is stabilizing and fulfilling. Studies overwhelmingly conclude that married people are happier, healthier, make more money, live longer and experience fewer psychological problems than singles. I know that a loving marriage anchored by fidelity and trust will best serve both Parker’s and Alex’s physical and spiritual interests.
Several years ago, Dr. John Dehlin and his team provided some powerful research surrounding this topic based on their survey of over 1,600 LGBTQ Mormons. One important insight is that the two most common paths chosen by LGBTQ Mormons who remain active in the Church lead to extremely low quality of life scores. Those two paths are 1) entering into a heterosexual marriage anyway, and 2) living celibate—both of which are directly and/or indirectly endorsed by the Church (e.g., Laurie’s and Ricardo’s stories) even though the divorce rate for such marriages approaches 75%, and quality of life scores are dismal for those who choose celibacy.
Dr. Dehlin’s survey also revealed an impressive insight about quality of life scores for those in same-sex marriages:
(You can view Dr. Dehlin’s entire TED talk on this subject >here.)
Last Saturday I was honored to participate in Alex and Parker’s marriage ceremony. Here is a short 2-minute clip from that ceremony:
(If you have interest in watching the entire 18-minute ceremony you can do so >here.)
Reason 4: Alex and Parker are deeply committed to helping others and to making a difference in the world.
One of things that impressed me during the wedding ceremony last Saturday was something Alex and Parker both talked about in their vows to each other—helping their LGBTQ brothers and sisters who may be struggling on the same roads they’ve traveled the last couple of years. They’re already working on this through their efforts with the non-profit Peculiar where their vision is “to inspire and empower parents and families to unconditionally love and embrace their LGBTQ+ children.” I’m confident Alex and Parker will motivate and inspire each other to provide support and hope to others.
Reason 5: The Church no longer has a place for Parker and Alex—together or separately.
This is the part that I just don’t understand. Both Parker and Alex love the gospel of Jesus Christ. Both are committed to their lifelong faith traditions, their upbringings and their spiritual fabrics. Until recently both had continued to serve in the Church (Parker was serving as an Elder’s Quorum instructor and Alex as his ward’s executive secretary) since returning from honorably served, full-time proselyting missions in Nova Scotia and Fiji.
Organized religion has a long history of creating “false binaries.” False binaries are narratives that a person or organization repeats over and over to erroneously distill a complex set of ideas into two mutually exclusive options. In this case, in my opinion the Church presents LGBTQ people with a stark choice—they can be happy in this life or happy throughout eternity but they’re forbidden to strive for both. The Church teaches that legally married same-sex couples are, and will always be second-class citizens in God’s family. That just feels shortsighted to me. Elder Dallin H. Oaks made that clear in his recent October 2019 General Conference address when he said, speaking specifically about LGBTQ members, “Modern revelation teaches that God has provided a plan for a mortal experience in which all can choose obedience to seek His highest blessings or make choices that lead to one of the less glorious kingdoms. Because of God’s great love for all of His children, those lesser kingdoms are still more wonderful than mortals can comprehend.”
It feels to me like the Church has forced Parker and Alex off the covenant path—at least temporarily. It feels to me like we’ve institutionally forgotten that the covenant path is an eternal path and that it’s alright for all of us to be both contributing members of the Church and be at different points on the path. If the Church were to accept legally-wed, same-sex couples in full fellowship would Parker and Alex return to church activity? I don’t know. I suppose that’s a decision they would need to make.
Things We Can Do Individually
#1: Stop the hurtful rhetoric.
Recently in a church meeting I was attending a member of my ward said, “Gay people who ‘act out’ love themselves more than they love God.” I often hear equally mean-spirited comments from church members. Even if this is your opinion, whether you’re a prominent Church leader speaking in General Conference or just a rank-and-file member please stop saying such hurtful things (and stop implying them through body language and tone). It doesn’t help.
#2: Abandon the false equivalencies.
“False equivalence” is a logical fallacy where one or more shared traits between two subjects is assumed to show equivalence when equivalence is not necessarily the logical result. It’s a common faux pas when anecdotal similarities are pointed out as equal but the claim of equivalence doesn’t make sense because the similarities are based on oversimplification or ignorance of additional factors. It’s like the old standby comparison of apples to oranges. Yes both are fruits, both grow on trees and both taste sweet. But they’re not the same thing. One is an apple and the other is an orange.
Some church members and General Authorities use the logical fallacy of false equivalence to justify condemnation of LGBTQ members’ choices by rehearsing their personalized version of this narrative: “I have a friend who’s handicapped. It isn’t her fault that she was born handicapped. She will never marry in this life. It’s exactly the same thing for LGBTQ members of the Church. They just need to get with the program and understand that they must live the rest of their lives alone. Maybe in the next life they can get married after God fixes them, just like my handicapped friend.” The difference here is that one is based on a person’s reality and the other is based on human decisions. You can’t just lump two things together, call them equivalent and blame God for both of them.
False equivalencies are just as easy to support as they are to contest, and just as easy to contest as they are to support. They’re not only not useful, but they also distract from the real issue.
#3: Don’t just “be kind”, but wholeheartedly love.
Just because the Church as an institution stops short of unconditional love that doesn’t mean you have to as well. In her post entitled, “7 Ways We Can Better Love and Welcome God’s LGBTQ Children”, Christy Kane, Ph.D. writes: “In this process of learning, I have come to realize that at the end of the day, regardless of identified sexuality, what people seek most of all is love and for others to take time to get to know them as individuals, instead of judging them or trying to fix them.”
In addition, love can save lives as Dr. Dehlin suggests:
#4: Understand with your heart.
Elder Bruce C. Hafen wrote, “Those whose faith is not blind ‘see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and . . . understand with their heart’.” As Church members we have an opportunity to embrace the ambiguity that surrounds this complex issue and then become better because of it. Joseph Smith once said, “by proving contraries, truth is made manifest.”
Elder Hafen continues, “Bumping into conflicts anywhere in our lives, but especially in the gospel, can make us want to dodge the ambiguity so we don’t have to deal with the tension it creates … The Lord has a way of helping us resolve our ambiguities in ways that both stretch and strengthen us. If we can resolve ambiguities with a believing attitude, our faithful choices will lead ultimately to our sanctification. And that complete use of our faith senses will one day bring us to the feet of Him who said, ‘and I should heal them’ (Matthew 13:15).”
Institutional Charity
There are things we would need to do as a church if we were to ever accept legally married same-sex couples in full fellowship. There are also things we could do as a church in the meantime. Here are some thoughts on both:
No Deletions, Only Additions to the Family Proclamation
I’m in complete harmony with the spirit of the Family Proclamation. I believe it’s a divinely inspired document. 25 years ago, when it was released my wife and I were right in the middle of raising our five children and the Family Proclamation provided appreciated assurance that we were trying our best to do the right things in our home. I believe the document is sound advice for families.
During the Church’s history there have only been two canonized documents officially added to LDS scripture. They are known as “Official Declarations.” The first, issued by President Wilford Woodruff was accepted by the Church as authoritative and binding in 1890. It ended the practice of polygamy in the Church. The second one, accepted in 1978 removed all restrictions with regard to race that once applied to the Church’s Priesthood. Although not yet canonized I’m guessing that eventually “The Family: A Proclamation to the World” may be. However, since that hasn’t happened yet perhaps there’s a reason. Perhaps it’s evolving.
Mormons know that there have been many times in the Church’s history when, as Elder Bruce R. McConkie said, “new light and knowledge” has erased previously “limited understanding.” If the Church were to ever accept legally married same-sex couples in full fellowship I believe additions to the Family Proclamation would not only be understood, but enthusiastically embraced by the vast majority of Church members who accept what a recent official Church press release said about policy changes: “Prophets have taught that there will be no end to such adjustments as directed by the Lord to his servants.”
This is a good thing. It supports the idea that having living prophets on Earth is important and essential in navigating today’s complex issues.
Here’s my view of how the Church could make viable, defendable additions to the Proclamation (with no deletions) based on “new light and knowledge” without compromising Church doctrines or the proclamation’s sanctity: [my additions are bracketed, in green]:
paragraph 1 of 9:
“WE, THE FIRST PRESIDENCY and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children. [While marriage between a man and a woman is central to God’s eternal plan, we know that many faithful Latter-Day Saints, through no fault of their own, come to earth with same-sex attraction. Although we do not solemnize same-sex marriages in our temples, we 1) recognize and respect legally, lawfully wed same-sex couples, 2) we accept those couples in full fellowship, and 3) we extend to them every other sacred ordinance and covenant-making opportunity available to worthy church members.]”
paragraph 2 of 9:
(no additions to this paragraph):
“ALL HUMAN BEINGS—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.”
paragraph 3 of 9:
(no additions to this paragraph):
“IN THE PREMORTAL REALM, spirit sons and daughters knew and worshipped God as their Eternal Father and accepted His plan by which His children could obtain a physical body and gain earthly experience to progress toward perfection and ultimately realize their divine destiny as heirs of eternal life. The divine plan of happiness enables family relationships to be perpetuated beyond the grave. Sacred ordinances and covenants available in holy temples make it possible for individuals to return to the presence of God and for families to be united eternally.”
paragraph 4 of 9:
“THE FIRST COMMANDMENT that God gave to Adam and Eve pertained to their potential for parenthood as husband and wife. We declare that God’s commandment for His children to multiply and replenish the earth remains in force [and is supported and encouraged in those marriages where appropriate.] We further declare that God has commanded that the sacred powers of procreation are to be employed only between man and woman, lawfully wedded as husband and wife. [In addition to those ‘sacred powers of procreation’ employed between a man and woman as referenced above, physical intimacy’s second purpose—that is, the expression of love within marriage—is to be employed only between those who are legally and lawfully wed.]”
paragraph 5 of 9:
(no additions to this paragraph):
“WE DECLARE the means by which mortal life is created to be divinely appointed. We affirm the sanctity of life and of its importance in God’s eternal plan.”
paragraph 6 of 9:
“HUSBAND AND WIFE [, as well as all married couples] have a solemn responsibility to love and care for each other and for their children. “Children are an heritage of the Lord” (Psalm 127:3). Parents have a sacred duty to rear their children in love and righteousness, to provide for their physical and spiritual needs, and to teach them to love and serve one another, observe the commandments of God, and be law-abiding citizens wherever they live. Husbands and wives, mothers and fathers, [and all parents] will be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations.”
paragraph 7 of 9:
“THE FAMILY is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother [, or parents] who honor marital vows with complete fidelity. Happiness in family life is most likely to be achieved when founded upon the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ. Successful marriages and families are established and maintained on principles of faith, prayer, repentance, forgiveness, respect, love, compassion, work, and wholesome recreational activities. By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children. In these sacred responsibilities, fathers and mothers [, and all parents] are obligated to help one another as equal partners. Disability, death, or other circumstances may necessitate individual adaptation. Extended families should lend support when needed.”
paragraph 8 of 9:
(no additions to this paragraph):
“WE WARN that individuals who violate covenants of chastity, who abuse spouse or offspring, or who fail to fulfill family responsibilities will one day stand accountable before God. Further, we warn that the disintegration of the family will bring upon individuals, communities, and nations the calamities foretold by ancient and modern prophets.”
paragraph 9 of 9:
(no additions to this paragraph):
“WE CALL UPON responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.”
A Simple Decision Tree
We’ve Done It Before. We Can Do It Again.
In my opinion, one of the best things the Church has done in recent history is when it came clean (so to speak) on the issue of race by releasing a statement in December of 2013 entitled “Race and the Priesthood.”
The carefully crafted document explains that the Church’s now-abandoned ban on black males holding the priesthood was rooted more in racism than revelation. It traces the policy’s beginnings more closely to the Church’s second president, Brigham Young. It also renounces and attempts to distance the Church from theories developed through the years to justify the prohibition.
When this landmark statement was released people both inside and outside the Church rejoiced. “How else could you feel but great?” said Don Harwell, president of the Church’s Genesis Group for black Latter-day Saints in Salt Lake City. “They’ve renounced the silliness that blacks were fence-sitters and less valiant (in the premortal existence), all the things some members had used to justify the racism.”
If someday the Church were to accept legally wed same-sex couples in full fellowship, and if I were king of the world and could appoint myself as the Church’s public relations director for a day I would use the exact template and tone that the Church used for the “Race and the Priesthood” statement to craft a new statement titled, “LGBTQ Members and the Church.”
I took the liberty below of using the exact paragraphs from the 2013 statement to create a new statement by simply replacing some words.
The original words are shown in red and the replaced words are shown in green:
From the Church’s Original Statement, “Race and the Priesthood”:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: In theology and practice, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints embraces the universal human family. Latter-day Saint scripture and teachings affirm that God loves all of His children and makes salvation available to all. God created the many diverse races and ethnicities and esteems them all equally. As the Book of Mormon puts it, “all are alike unto God.”
The Template for a Future Statement, “LGBTQ Members and the Church”:
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: In theology and practice, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints embraces the universal human family. Latter-day Saint scripture and teachings affirm that God loves all of His children and makes salvation available to all. God created the many diverse people in the world. In ways we don’t fully understand, His plan and infinite wisdom allowed for diverse biological and psychological variations associated with sexual orientation when His spirit children received physical bodies, and He esteems them all equally. As the Book of Mormon puts it, “all are alike unto God.”
Original Statement:
The structure and organization of the Church encourage racial integration. Latter-day Saints attend Church services according to the geographical boundaries of their local ward, or congregation. By definition, this means that the racial, economic, and demographic composition of Mormon congregations generally mirrors that of the wider local community.
Template for Future Statement:
The structure and organization of the Church encourage straight and LGBTQ integration. Latter-day Saints attend Church services according to the geographical boundaries of their local ward, or congregation. By definition, this means that the straight and LGBTQ, economic, and demographic composition of Mormon congregations generally mirrors that of the wider local community.
Original Statement:
The Church’s lay ministry also tends to facilitate integration: a black bishop may preside over a mostly white congregation; a Hispanic woman may be paired with an Asian woman to visit the homes of a racially diverse membership. Church members of different races and ethnicities regularly minister in one another’s homes and serve alongside one another as teachers, as youth leaders, and in myriad other assignments in their local congregations. Such practices make The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints a thoroughly integrated faith.
Template for Future Statement:
The Church’s lay ministry also tends to facilitate integration: a straight bishop may preside over a mostly LGBTQ congregation; a lesbian woman may be paired with an straight woman to visit the homes of a diverse membership. Church members of different sexual orientations regularly minister in one another’s homes and serve alongside one another as teachers, as youth leaders, and in myriad other assignments in their local congregations. Such practices make The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints a thoroughly integrated faith.
Original Statement:
Despite this modern reality, for much of its history, from the mid-1800s until 1978, the Church did not ordain men of black African descent to its priesthood or allow black men or women to participate in temple endowment or sealing ordinances.
Template for Future Statement:
Despite this modern reality, for much of its history, and particularly from the time same-sex marriages were legalized in the United States until now, the Church refused to baptize lawfully wed same-sex couples, or accept them in full fellowship in the Church.
Original Statement:
The Church was established in 1830, during an era of great racial division in the United States. At the time, many people of African descent lived in slavery, and racial distinctions and prejudice were not just common but customary among white Americans. Those realities, though unfamiliar and disturbing today, influenced all aspects of people’s lives, including their religion. Many Christian churches of that era, for instance, were segregated along racial lines.
Template for Future Statement:
The Church was established in 1830, and has grown during an era of great prejudice toward our LQBT brothers and sisters in the United States. During that time, many same-sex couples lived in fear and shame, and prejudice was not just common but customary among straight Americans. Those realities, though unfamiliar and disturbing today, influenced all aspects of people’s lives, including their religion. Many Christian churches of that era, for instance, were segregated along gay/straight lines.
Original Statement:
Over time, Church leaders and members advanced many theories to explain the priesthood and temple restrictions. None of these explanations is accepted today as the official doctrine of the Church.
Template for Future Statement:
Over time, Church leaders and members advanced many theories to explain the prejudice against our LGBTQ brothers and sisters including a recent general conference talk by LDS Apostle Boyd K. Packer who said, “Some suppose that they were pre-set and cannot overcome what they feel are inborn tendencies toward the impure and unnatural. Not so! Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone? Remember he is our father…”, and from other prominent Church leaders including Elder Hartman Rector who said, “If children have a happy family experience, they will not want to be homosexuals, which I am sure is an acquired addiction, just as drugs, alcohol, and pornography are.” None of these explanations is accepted today as the official doctrine of the Church, and we both formally and unequivocally distance ourselves from ALL such destructive rhetoric, recognizing that previous leaders, though well intentioned, have spoken with both human prejudice and limited understanding.
Original Statement:
Given the long history of withholding the priesthood from men of black African descent, Church leaders believed that a revelation from God was needed to alter the policy, and they made ongoing efforts to understand what should be done. After praying for guidance, President McKay did not feel impressed to lift the ban. As the Church grew worldwide, its overarching mission to “go ye therefore, and teach all nations” seemed increasingly incompatible with the priesthood and temple restrictions.
Template for Future Statement:
Given the long history, Church leaders believed that a revelation from God was needed to alter the policy, and to accept lawfully wed same-sex couples into full fellowship in the Church. They made ongoing efforts to understand what should be done. After praying for guidance, President Monson—who was the Prophet at the time same-sex marriages were legalized in the United States, did not feel impressed to lift the ban. As the Church grew worldwide, its overarching mission to “go ye therefore, and teach all nations” seemed increasingly incompatible with its stand on refusing to baptize lawfully wed same-sex couples, and refusing to accept them in full fellowship in the Church.
Original Statement:
In June 1978, after “spending many hours in the Upper Room of the [Salt Lake] Temple supplicating the Lord for divine guidance,” Church President Spencer W. Kimball, his counselors in the First Presidency, and members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles received a revelation. “He has heard our prayers, and by revelation has confirmed that the long-promised day has come,” the First Presidency announced on June 8.
Template for Future Statement:
In (__month?, year?__), after “spending many hours in the Upper Room of the [Salt Lake] Temple supplicating the Lord for divine guidance,” Church President ___(?)___, his counselors in the First Presidency, and members of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles made the change, in part upon confirmation from the Lord that it was, in fact, His will. “He has heard our prayers, and by revelation has confirmed that the long-promised day has come,” the First Presidency announced on (__day? month?__).
Original Statement:
Reaction worldwide was overwhelmingly positive among Church members of all races. Many Latter-day Saints wept for joy at the news. Some reported feeling a collective weight lifted from their shoulders. Soon after the revelation, Elder Bruce R. McConkie, an apostle, spoke of new “light and knowledge” that had erased previously “limited understanding.”
Template for Future Statement:
Reaction worldwide was overwhelmingly positive among Church members of all sexual orientations. Many Latter-day Saints wept for joy at the news. Some reported feeling a collective weight lifted from their shoulders. Soon after the revelation, Elder ____(?)____, an apostle, spoke of new “light and knowledge” that had erased previously “limited understanding, cultural traditions, and individual prejudice.”
Original Statement:
Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects unrighteous actions in a premortal life; that mixed-race marriages are a sin; or that blacks or people of any other race or ethnicity are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all racism, past and present, in any form.
Template for Future Statement:
Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that being gay is a learned behavior; that legal, monogamous, faithfully honored same-sex marriages are a sin; or that our LGBTQ brothers and sisters are inferior in any way to anyone else. Church leaders today unequivocally condemn all prejudice, past and present, in any form.
Original Statement:
Since that day in 1978, the Church has looked to the future, as membership among Africans, African Americans and others of African descent has continued to grow rapidly. While Church records for individual members do not indicate an individual’s race or ethnicity, the number of Church members of African descent is now in the hundreds of thousands.
Template for Future Statement:
Since that day in (year?), the Church has looked to the future, and has given our faithful, legally and lawfully wed LGBTQ member couples an option for 1) staying active in the Church, 2) not being constantly subject to formal Church discipline, 3) enjoying many of life’s greatest blessings including the love and support of a trusted companion, 4) serving God and fellow Latter-Day Saints inside the Church, and 5) being fully integrated as important members of the body of Christ. Membership among our LGBTQ brothers and sisters has continued to grow rapidly. While Church records for individual members do not indicate an individual’s sexual orientation, the number of Church members of various sexual orientations is now in the hundreds of thousands.
Original Statement:
The Church proclaims that redemption through Jesus Christ is available to the entire human family on the conditions God has prescribed. It affirms that God is “no respecter of persons” and emphatically declares that anyone who is righteous—regardless of race—is favored of Him. The teachings of the Church in relation to God’s children are epitomized by a verse in the second book of Nephi: “[The Lord] denieth none that cometh unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female; … all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile.”
Template for Future Statement:
The Church proclaims that redemption through Jesus Christ is available to the entire human family on the conditions God has prescribed. It affirms that God is “no respecter of persons” and emphatically declares that anyone who is righteous—regardless of sexual orientation—is favored of Him. The teachings of the Church in relation to God’s children are epitomized by a verse in the second book of Nephi: “[The Lord] denieth none that cometh unto him, black and white, bond and free, male and female,”gay and straight;“… all are alike unto God, both Jew and Gentile.” (important side note… to be clear, i’m not advocating changing any scriptures)
In the Meantime, Things We Could Do Institutionally
If it’s “just not time yet” for the Church to take major steps with our LGBTQ brothers and sisters what are some things to do in the meantime that would demonstrate greater faith, hope and charity as an institution?
#1: Be more transparent.
Greater transparency in the Church’s corporate voice will strengthen member testimonies, not weaken them.
#2: Don’t alienate the people we love and need.
Come up with creative and effective ways to better practice what we preach. If we really believe what Elder Dieter F. Uchtdorf says in the clip below, then let’s make it happen—from the top down:
I really like Elder Uchtdorf’s message but we can do more. The Church has access to brilliant, creative, spiritual minds both inside and outside of corporate headquarters including people on the edge of inside who can help with these challenges. When it comes to supporting members who are struggling with this issue and/or other issues, let’s not just try to get people back. Let’s also do a better job of helping people stay.
#3: Proactively distance the Church from past statements.
Over the years LDS prophets and apostles have said some bad things about our LGBTQ brothers and sisters. I realize that they were not alone in doing so and I’m not blaming them. However, the Church today could be more assertive in distancing itself from those teachings. And a good marketer would know that it can’t just be once or twice in a couple of obscure press releases. It must become part of the brand and the message to the world. It must be repeated over and over at every level in the organization. It takes a long time to shake off bad stuff! In my opinion, unless the Church starts being more aggressive about it the rank-and-file members will continue to believe and perpetuate mean-spirited ideas from past prophets and apostles.
Also, retract the recent public statement Elder Oaks made about policy changes when he said, “immoral conduct in heterosexual and homosexual relationship[s] will [now] be treated in the same way…”. It seems to me that isn’t accurate.
#4: Stop the aggressive rhetoric.
This really isn’t that difficult. Start by stopping the mean-spirited General Conference talks. As recently as last October Elder Oaks reiterated what feels to me like the standard homophobic animosity points. And to make matters worse, he delivered his address during the “women’s session” to female members ages eight and older. I’m thankful I didn’t have an 8-year-old daughter sitting in that meeting. Please… no more aggressive rhetoric.
#5: Change one temple recommend interview question (again).
Although it recently changed I think adjusting this question once more will make it better align with what the Church’s leadership is actually saying today. The question is, “Do you support or promote any teachings, practices, or doctrine contrary to those of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?” Instead, how about something like, “Are you actively involved in promoting an anti-LDS agenda that’s designed to lead our members away from the Church?” Or something along that line that captures what I think is the intent of the question. When the Church’s leadership asks whether or not someone “…support[s] any teaching or practice…” it contradicts what the Church has been saying lately about honest doubts. Let’s help faithful church members stop agonizing over this question.
#6: Stop telling our young LGBTQ members to “overcome” it.
Just a few days ago the Church sent an email to its members that had at least one variation in the message depending on who it was sent to. The first email shown below was sent to members my age and talks about overcoming “the hardships of life” including “experienc[ing] the loss of a loved one, aging, fear…”. The second one appears to have been sent to younger members and talks about overcoming the hardships of life including “experienc[ing] the loss of a loved one, same-sex attraction, fear…”.
Because the Church seems like it has officially recognized now that being gay is not a choice, then it seems to me like we should stop implying that it’s something that needs to be “overcome.”
The Church’s current position is that celibacy or entering into a heterosexual marriage anyway are the only two options for LGBTQ members. I understand that. But that expectation is different than continuing to imply that same-sex attraction is something that needs to overcome. Again, as Dr. Gregory Prince said, it seems that the leadership’s body language, words (and emails?) “…suggest that they still think it is a choice, and that people should make the opposite choice and get back in the fold.”
I think this mixed message continues to hurt our young members.
#7: Stop disparaging people’s realities.
It seems to me that the Church’s leadership continues to disparage people’s sincere feelings by refusing to acknowledge their realities, saying, “We should note that the words homosexual, lesbian, and gay are adjectives to describe particular thoughts, feelings, or behaviors. We should refrain from using these words as nouns to identify particular conditions or specific persons. Our religious doctrine dictates this usage. It is wrong to use these words to denote a condition, because this implies that a person is consigned by birth to a circumstance in which he or she has no choice in respect to the critically important matter of sexual behavior.”
Maybe we could just stop talking this way. Maybe we could stop talking about our LGBTQ brothers and sisters as if they’re not in the room. Maybe we could stop saying “…those who identify as LGBTQ…” and just call them LGBTQ. Minimizing or discrediting people’s experiences to support a position doesn’t help anyone—including the Church. To me, it just doesn’t feel like the Savior’s way.
As a Church, Why Are We So Afraid?
I’ve heard the Church’s leadership say that we must “protect the sanctity of traditional marriage.” I guess I just don’t understand how supporting same-sex marriage takes something away from traditional marriage. It’s an opportunity for us to develop greater Christlike love. It’s an opportunity for parents to own the conversation and teach their families about tolerance and patience.
Everybody is better off (including Parker, Alex, the Church as a body and church members individually) with our LGBTQ brothers and sisters inside the fold rather than outside the fold, faithfully using their gifts and talents to serve others and to strengthen both themselves and the body of Christ. I’ve heard some church members say, “Even if the policy were to change, same-sex couples may not want to come back to the Church.” Of course that will be their choice and that may be true in some (or in many) cases. I don’t know. But it doesn’t matter what they do or don’t do. This is about us, not them.
As a Church have we forgotten Paul’s message to the Corinthians … that Christ’s church is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body … that the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you … that those members of the body which we think to be less honourable are in fact honourable … that there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another … and that whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it?
During General Conference in April, 2019 Sharon Eubank taught, “Christ tenderly told the Nephites, ‘I have commanded that none of you should go away.’ Peter had that powerful epiphany in Acts 10 when he declared, ‘God hath shewed me that I should not call any [person] common or unclean.’ It is an unwavering requirement of Christian disciples and Latter-day Saints to show true love to one another.”
Let’s wholeheartedly reinforce through policy and practice that our LGBTQ brothers and sisters not only have a place in God’s plan of happiness and salvation but that we also want them and need them with us now. Then, let’s simply leave the rest in God’s hands. There may only be one time in history when there’s only One variable in decision making. That’s when He returns to personally reign upon the Earth. Until then, my view is that there’s just too much we don’t know or understand.
If we truly believe and embrace our Covenant Path narrative let’s do all we can to help people stay on that eternal path, regardless of where they are on that path during this life.
