Handbook Update, Gay Marriage, Apostasy, Resignations... (Merged Thread)

[Tacenda]

Its an overreaction. The fact is most of the worlds religions do not endorse homosexual behavior. Most people in the world do not accept it. There will be people that label the LDS Church as a hate group and that is fine. We will just call those people Bill of Rights haters. The First Amendment protects not only religious belief but practice.

Do they prohibit SSM to join their churches or their children to join?

[Storm Rider]

Interesting thoughts.  There are some wonderful members of the CofC.  Their doctrine changed significantly after their leadership began studying at an Evangelical divinity school  Do you remember which one it was?  I have forgotten the name.

 

The CofC has moved beyond so much of the teachings of early Mormonism that it has little difference between it and any other Evangelical approach to theology.  

 

Whether it is a good place to go is between an individual and God.  I tend to stay of those issues that are not none of my business.  If one seeks an Evangelical theological path it is just as good as any other.  It suffers from the same deficits and has some of the same strengths.  

[Russell C McGregor]

This is a great resource for those looking for a more suitable and spiritually fulfilling home to worship. The LDS church isn't the only nor the best option for all God's children.

From Worlds Without End blog.

 

Umm, isn't this spam?

[Storm Rider]

Here is a blog from someone claiming to be a faithful member who claims that in te near future the being a church member will be a major embarrassment due to the new policy, if at least it becomes solidified as doctrine (I think the opposition to homosexual activity and SSM is already doctrine). And the blogger also argues that it will impede members to hold leadership positions in business and government.

Here Is an excerpt:

If this policy and our anti-gay views (again, calling things what they are) are somehow cemented as doctrine, in time we will be labeled a hate group, and no amount of Mormon bloggers and commenters and online missionaries and ad campaigns will sway that opinion. It will be our brand identity. Within 10 years we’ll be seen as a fringe group. In 20 years we’ll be a bigoted, extremist anachronism.

As that happens, our members will not be able to run major corporations. They will not be welcome in artistic circles. They will not be able to win political office. They will not be able to play in popular rock bands. Think anyone will play BYU in sports? Football contracts get broken all the time, and every school that backs out of playing BYU will win PR points for doing so.

http://bycommonconsent.com/2015/11/12/the-stakes-of-zion/

Now I know some will argue "so what...it is a test...a wheat and rare...it is never easy for God's chosen group to follow...be in the world and not of it and all that..."

And the blogger talks about this some. And that all may or may not be true.

What I want to know is do any of you think the backlash will be this severe?

 

Oh goodie.  When will they do the same thing to the Catholic Church - you know all 1.4 billion of them.  It will be a great day to accuse almost the entirety of Christianity with the same labels this creative blogger has used.  

 

Me thinks, that I would be glad to stand with all those up uphold the name of Christ and preach his word regardless of their church affiliation; who willingly declares our love for all of God's children while denying all unholiness and sin.  

 

Eventually false prophets just learn to shut their mouths because they end up seeing how silly and devoid of the Spirit they have become.  

[Storm Rider]

I read today that several hundred turned in their requests to remove their names from the rolls the Church of Jesus Christ this weekend.  The article quoted a fellow who had not been to church in 17 years who was stridently confident that he did not need old men telling him what to do and that it was time to separate from the Church.

 

You have not gone to church in 17 years and you still care what the prophet and the apostles have to say?  In fact, you care so much that you now want to ignore them!?!  

 

Why am I supposed to think that this is important?  An individual who has ignored the Church for decades now wants to tell me he does not care about his membership?  Okay, thanks for letting me know.  Next. 

[Damien the Leper]

Nope.

[Damien the Leper]

Does this count as proselyting?

Nope. Just saying other options are out there.

[Duncan]

One of my best friends in the mission field was involved in this shindig and is crowing about it on FB. I wanted to respond but I had nothing good to say to him and his friends, so sad he is participating in this kind of thing.

[BCSpace]

It's the only one with legitimate authority, and therefore the only one that can administer God given ordinances.

But yes, if Terrestrial level is all you seek there are many viable options.

 

Telestial the way I read D&C 76 and the official words of the prophets.  Only officially baptized (in this life or the next) members of the LDS Church or ancient equivalent can inherit the Celestial or Terrestrial (cf 'testimony of Jesus').  Adherents of any other church/philosophy, even though they believe in Christ, are relegated to the Telestial (D&C 76:99-101).

[BCSpace]

The Handbook is official doctrine being published by the Church (the Church's own definition of official doctrine).  This fact regarding the doctrinicity of the Handbook is brought up in priesthood leadership meetings on a fairly regular basis.

[Teancum]

The Handbook is official doctrine being published by the Church (the Church's own definition of official doctrine).  This fact regarding the doctrinicity of the Handbook is brought up in priesthood leadership meetings on a fairly regular basis.

CFR please.

[BCSpace]

Here is a blog from someone claiming to be a faithful member who claims that in te near future the being a church member will be a major embarrassment due to the new policy, if at least it becomes solidified as doctrine (I think the opposition to homosexual activity and SSM is already doctrine). And the blogger also argues that it will impede members to hold leadership positions in business and government.

Here Is an excerpt:

If this policy and our anti-gay views (again, calling things what they are) are somehow cemented as doctrine, in time we will be labeled a hate group, and no amount of Mormon bloggers and commenters and online missionaries and ad campaigns will sway that opinion. It will be our brand identity. Within 10 years we’ll be seen as a fringe group. In 20 years we’ll be a bigoted, extremist anachronism.

As that happens, our members will not be able to run major corporations. They will not be welcome in artistic circles. They will not be able to win political office. They will not be able to play in popular rock bands. Think anyone will play BYU in sports? Football contracts get broken all the time, and every school that backs out of playing BYU will win PR points for doing so.

http://bycommonconsent.com/2015/11/12/the-stakes-of-zion/

Now I know some will argue "so what...it is a test...a wheat and rare...it is never easy for God's chosen group to follow...be in the world and not of it and all that..."

And the blogger talks about this some. And that all may or may not be true.

What I want to know is do any of you think the backlash will be this severe?

 

It already is that severe in many circumstances.  I have no idea what the maximum extent will be but I do believe it will get worse.  I often hear rumblings of good and righteous people of various faiths rising up against this labeling of those who take a stand for righteousness against the homosexual and other anti Gospel agendas. I hope it happens, but I'm not holding my breath.

 

Parable of the Sower.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

Telestial the way I read D&C 76 and the official words of the prophets.  Only officially baptized (in this life or the next) members of the LDS Church or ancient equivalent can inherit the Celestial or Terrestrial (cf 'testimony of Jesus').  Adherents of any other church/philosophy, even though they believe in Christ, are relegated to the Telestial (D&C 76:99-101).

Untrue.

[Hamba Tuhan]

I think this prediction more likely - that we will be sanctuaries of civilization in a crumbling world. Not yet perhaps, but eventually.

https://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2015/11/same-sex-marriage-and-the-mormon-benedict-option

 

Thanks for sharing this link. I hadn't heard of 'the Benedict option' before so did a bit of reading/listening during my lunch. For anyone interested in more, here is the original promulgation of the concept, and this is the same man expounding on it.

 

Some helpful quotes:

 

'We should consider what I’ve come to call the “Benedict Option”—that is, pioneering forms of dropping out of a barbaric mainstream culture that has grown hostile to our fundamental values' ... not, I should point out, as a retreat into isolation or disengagement but as a means of safeguarding Christianity, as St Benedict and his followers did, during the encroaching Dark Age.

 

'If we take the Benedict option, we will quit seeing the point of life as good Americans and realise that the survival of the beliefs that sustain us, that we know are true as Christians, requires some form of separation, in community, for the sake of living out Christian truth at a time of chaos and darkness'.

 

'If we continue to go along to get along, allowing the story of postmodern, post-Christian America to become our story, we will cease to exist meaningfully as the church, and we will deserve to cease to exist because we will have betrayed our God'.

 

'A few examples: families as domestic monasteries. Families should see themselves as what St Benedict called "schools for conversion", places/institutions that require fidelity to an order, keeping out things that interfere with the good order of the community'.

 

'We must absolutely practise Benedictine hospitality to strangers, and welcome the stranger in our midst and care for them, but if we don't maintain a clear counter-cultural sense of who we are and how we differ as Christ's people from those around us, we're going to be assimilated by the power of the culture'.

 

'[The Benedictines] lived among the people but also separately in terms of their practices and their common life, so that they would remember the church's story, from generation to generation, and pass on what has been given'.

 

'We may be on the wrong side of history, whatever that is -- St Benedict was on the wrong side of history in his time -- but history is not an irresistible force. It has a funny way of not working out as we predict it will. Whatever happens with history, if we are Christians, we had better only be concerned with whether or not we are on the wrong side of God'.

 

'The Christianity of the future, the Christianity that your children and grandchildren and mine will live by, will either be Benedictine or it will not be at all'.

Edited November 16, 2015 by Hamba Tuhan

[BCSpace]

Untrue.

 

Quite true as far as I can tell.

[rpn]

I am well aware that prior to the  most recent one (the prologue to which seems to require something different) I regularly was given access to the Handbook whenever I wanted to read it.   And yes, I'm not talking about personal documents, but then those aren't published anyway are they?

 

The Handbook 1 however should be completely available to all members.  I don't know how Dehlin got it before SP and bishops did (it was uploaded to their library --- the one they get access to at lds.org because of their callings.  Leaders then just told their underlings to read it.)   But if it was not treated secretly, then he would not have been able to spin it to the media in the way that was widely quoted, but more speculative in a horrible way than accurate.

 

Heck any member can be a church leader with access to the manuals tomorrow.  And leaders don't read any better than other members, so why would we think they are in a better position to  understand the words therein.  True it can be very helpful to sort out any tough things with a leader.  But if a member knows about the Handbook then they also have to know (probably have run into a leader at one time or another that says, Yes, that is what the handbook says, but I've received revelation to do this anyway.  So this we are going to do) that the Handbook says that it does not supercede the revelation they can get in a calling to which they have been set apart.

 

So I consider it really paternalistic to argue that regular members just can't handle it.  (And it is particularly hard to swallow when most of the men of the church have been or will be in some calling in which they have full and unfettered access.)

[rpn]

On the protest facebook page it said that 1.4K had accepted an invite to the event.

 

Several news articles said that 800 resignation letters were put in the mailbox (though I'm not sure it is aa real post office box because tehy talked of getting more).

 

This is the third year for mass resignation.  In the past, many admitted that it was symbolc because they'd already resigned one or more times.   In this case, from the rainbows shown in the videos I suspect there was also a contingent of LGBT.

 

Those who were there first said the crowd was over 500, which is significantly more than last year's 100.

[BlueDreams]

I doubt it will happen. Particularly the parts in bold.

 

If this policy and our anti-gay views (again, calling things what they are) are somehow cemented as doctrine, in time we will be labeled a hate group, and no amount of Mormon bloggers and commenters and online missionaries and ad campaigns will sway that opinion. It will be our brand identity.

 

 

My reasons are pretty simple:

 

1. our "anti-gay" views are pretty nuanced and continue in the general direction of greater nuance. Yes there are very strong messages about SS relationships. But in the same breath there are growing and continuing messages about loving said gay family/friends in or outside of the church. These are coming from top leaders as well as mormon bloggers and lay members. That message is largely increasing. Most groups that get labeled a hate group, do not have that level of nuance in the least. They also are defined as advocating hatred, hostility or violence. Again, not our thang. For half the predictions he gives, we would need to be more than just seen as that opinion-wise, we would need to be on some form of watch list such as the SPLC (fun fact, FLDS is on that list). Being assumed as backwards ain't enough.

 

2. we're not exactly the only church who has some strict expectations or feelings about LGBT concerns....many of these are not likely any day soon to be labeled a hate group nor are they likely to change their doctrine. 

 

3. Seriously? brand identity?...that seems a little dramatic. As it is we're already "branded" in a lot of ways, particular by those more left leaning or very conservative christian. In one boat we're heretical/non-christian. In the other we're already branded as intolerant, sexist, racist, homophobic, or some mix of them. Many of these labels we've had for decades and we're still not following this doomsday prophecy.

 

Any way, the gist is no. I really don't see that happening.

 

With luv,

BD

Edited November 16, 2015 by BlueDreams

[ERayR]

I read today that several hundred turned in their requests to remove their names from the rolls the Church of Jesus Christ this weekend.  The article quoted a fellow who had not been to church in 17 years who was stridently confident that he did not need old men telling him what to do and that it was time to separate from the Church.

 

You have not gone to church in 17 years and you still care what the prophet and the apostles have to say?  In fact, you care so much that you now want to ignore them!?!  

 

Why am I supposed to think that this is important?  An individual who has ignored the Church for decades now wants to tell me he does not care about his membership?  Okay, thanks for letting me know.  Next. 

 

And he thinks he has a valid complaint.

[Kenngo1969]

Throughout our history, we've been a peculiar people, whether by dint of plural marriage, by dint of the priesthood ban, or by dint of our stance on intimacy and marriage in non-heterosexual and non-marital partnerships.

 

President Benson said some things a quarter of a century ago (and longer) that, perhaps, at that time, had Saints scratching their heads and asking, "What, exactly, is he talking about?" when general societal trends and mores between the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the world at large were more widely shared.

 

Now, that is not the case.

 

Anyone with "ears to hear" should, perhaps, be looking at some of the things President Benson said and having a sort of epiphany: "Ooooh!  That's what that's all about!"  And perhaps gay issues (among other things) are a sort of crucible for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Edited November 16, 2015 by Kenngo1969

[ERayR]

On the protest facebook page it said that 1.4K had accepted an invite to the event.

 

Several news articles said that 800 resignation letters were put in the mailbox (though I'm not sure it is aa real post office box because tehy talked of getting more).

 

This is the third year for mass resignation.  In the past, many admitted that it was symbolc because they'd already resigned one or more times.   In this case, from the rainbows shown in the videos I suspect there was also a contingent of LGBT.

 

Those who were there first said the crowd was over 500, which is significantly more than last year's 100.

 

Did they use school buses to bus them in?

[Storm Rider]

In war, truth is the first casualty.  This was said some 2500 years ago and it applies today.  In politics, in protest agendas, etc. truth is the first causality.  Seldom is truth or honesty an objective in politics.  The objective is to win and if honesty needs to be sacrificed, which appears to always be the choice for the participants, so be it.  

 

The LGBTQ agenda is clear and they long ago sacrificed any degree of honesty in their desire to force every citizen in the world to accept their lifestyle.  This political war has been going on for decades and it will continue to go on until all resistance is destroyed by whatever means needed.  It has already become the privileged class, but it not all are willing to bow to their demands so they will continue to shrilly scream the desires to love one another while they bludgeon all who do not comply to their demands.  

 

I don't expect anything to change - certainly not the Church of Jesus Christ.  While the activists continue to defame, twist, and lie about what is reality, the Church will continue in its mission to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ - repent and be baptized.   

[Storm Rider]

Today's Sunday School lesson on Paul's prophesies of the last days - that there would be a falling away.  He described what the attributes of apostasy.  If you have not read lesson 41, I would recommend it.  It is amazing how closely some of these attributes of apostasy fit into today's society.  

 

Scripture can be rather damning of unrighteous and unholy behavior and how that is identified as that which leads to apostasy.  

[Teancum]

Today's Sunday School lesson on Paul's prophesies of the last days - that there would be a falling away.  He described what the attributes of apostasy.  If you have not read lesson 41, I would recommend it.  It is amazing how closely some of these attributes of apostasy fit into today's society.  

 

Scripture can be rather damning of unrighteous and unholy behavior and how that is identified as that which leads to apostasy.

Again I was not looking for wheat vs tare comments but whether people thought this would result in in what the blogger talks about.

We all know that the peculiar people, us vs them mentality, persecution issues and so on are all part of how the church persona. It is interesting that with the two other major issues the church made changes on mentioned in this thread, and both would have possibly created something like the blogger talks about, some see the timing of God. Others see the church giving in to outside pressure and societal demands. Regardless of whether God's hand was in those two major issues or not who knows for sure? But it is clear that the church would not have thrived if they had not been changed. Over time could the homosexual issue be similar? I doubt it because I do think it is different at least now and in the foreseeable future. But the blogger sees it differently.

[Teancum]

In war, truth is the first casualty.  This was said some 2500 years ago and it applies today.  In politics, in protest agendas, etc. truth is the first causality.  Seldom is truth or honesty an objective in politics.  The objective is to win and if honesty needs to be sacrificed, which appears to always be the choice for the participants, so be it.  

 

The LGBTQ agenda is clear and they long ago sacrificed any degree of honesty in their desire to force every citizen in the world to accept their lifestyle.  This political war has been going on for decades and it will continue to go on until all resistance is destroyed by whatever means needed.  It has already become the privileged class, but it not all are willing to bow to their demands so they will continue to shrilly scream the desires to love one another while they bludgeon all who do not comply to their demands.  

 

I don't expect anything to change - certainly not the Church of Jesus Christ.  While the activists continue to defame, twist, and lie about what is reality, the Church will continue in its mission to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ - repent and be baptized.

What is the LGBTQ agenda and how have they sacrificed honesty? Is it to forcevery citizen to accept their lifestyle? Or is it simply to have the same rights of all citizens? Or is the latter item dishonest?