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

[JeremyOrbe-Smith]

 

[Calm]

Same principle it seems to me as children in polygamous families.

I think it is wise because it could create situations where grandparents get their grandchildren blessed or baptized and then later on this causes contention plus older children would be placed in positions that they might feel they had to choose between honouring their parents or the Church.

[Damien the Leper]

Children should honor their parents over the church every time.

[Teancum]

By noticing the rather simple and uncontroversial fact that the two concepts are essentially unrelated.To claim or imply that excommunication somehow equates to "shunning" is to blur two quite distinct ideas.

Well while excommunicated members are welcome they are still stripped of all membership rights and it does make things very awkward. When I was a bishop and seeking council about church discipline from my SP about less active members who were cohabitation he suggested I leave them try to get them back to the fold but not apply discipline. He said rarely does and excommunicated member return. Try to reactivate end get them married.

Edited November 6, 2015 by Teancum

[The Nehor]

Seems like a smart decision.

[MiserereNobis]

If excommunicated members were truly shunned then we wouldn't allow them in our chapels, or even in our buildings if we could help it.  We wouldn't send home teachers to them.  We wouldn't speak to them when we meet them walking to church.  Bishops and stake presidents wouldn't spend so much time working with them to help them come back.

 

Are excommunicated members on home teaching rolls?  How are they kept track of since they are not on the membership list?  Is there a difference between excommunicated members and those who ask to be removed from the church?

Edited November 6, 2015 by MiserereNobis

[Calm]

Children should honor their parents over the church every time.

When minors and in their care most definitely.

And they shouldn't be placed in the difficult posotion of feeling they have to choose.

I've seen it happen in families where one parent is a believer and one is not (in one case the nonbeliever used it to blackmail the believer into letting him out of child support) or a grandparent manipulates the situation without parental consent (by lying to the bishop though hopefully these days the bishops are aware of the rules, it is just horrible for the kid.

Edited November 6, 2015 by Calm

[bluebell]

Same principle it seems to me as children in polygamous families.

I think it is wise because it could create situations where grandparents get their grandchildren blessed or baptized and then later on this causes contention plus older children would be placed in positions that they might feel they had to choose between honouring their parents or the Church.

Yeah, it seems like they are trying to keep drama and conflict out of same sex families. It would be really traumatic for a child to live with and love their parents (as they should) while they are taught at church that their family is sinning and their parents are living a sinful life by being married.

That would just be cruel. No child should be put in that situation.

The church can't change doctrine they believe to be from God, but they can try to protect the innocent.

[Teancum]

Seems like a smart decision.

So this essentially tells a child to repudiate their parents in order to be baptized, What a lovely thing.

[rockpond]

Right or wrong. Justified or not. We're about to get trampled by the media.

[The Nehor]

Are excommunicated members on home teaching rolls?

 

No, though the Bishop or Elder's Quorum President may visit them or assign someone to visit them if they find it appropriate.

 

Are excommunicated members on home teaching rolls?  How are they kept track of since they are not on the membership list?  Is there a difference between excommunicated members and those who ask to be removed from the church?

 

Both are severed from their covenants. The only difference in the records would be in regards to disciplinary councils. Both are still recorded in the Church records as people who left. The only difference may be in repenting of any sins that led them to that point. Each case is considered individually if they wish to return.

[rockpond]

"As a church, nobody should be more loving and compassionate. Let us be at the forefront in terms of expressing love, compassion and outreach. Let’s not have families exclude or be disrespectful of those who choose a different lifestyle as a result of their feelings about their own gender." -Elder Cook

#fail

[Avatar4321]

Not at all what the title implies but the policy makes sense.

It's not at all uncommon for children to be required to wait until they are 18 to be baptized

[Teancum]

Yeah, it seems like they are trying to keep drama and conflict out of same sex families. It would be really traumatic for a child to live with and love their parents (as they should) while they are taught at church that their family is sinning and their parents are living a sinful life by being married.

That would just be cruel. No child should be put in that situation.

The church can't change doctrine they believe to be from God, but they can try to protect the innocent.

I wonder if the church may add disavowing a child in a same sex marriage to get a temple recommend. That's what you propose. This essentially says an adult child who wants to be baptized who has same sex cannot be living with them and has to repudiate their marriage.

[Teancum]

Not at all what the title implies but the policy makes sense.

It's not at all uncommon for children to be required to wait until they are 18 to be baptized

It's absolutely what the title implies.

[bluebell]

So this essentially tells a child to repudiate their parents in order to be baptized, What a lovely thing.

It seems harsh, but it matches what Jesus Himself taught (concerning adults of course. Minor children should be loyal to their parents).

[Hamba Tuhan]

Assuming the document is accurate, this is not the only amendment to the Handbook:

 

Policies on Ordinances for Children of a Parent Living in a Same-Gender Relationship

 

The following additions to Handbook 1 have been approved by the Council of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles for immediate implementation.

• A new section in Handbook 1, 16.13 will be added as follows:

Children of a Parent Living in a Same-Gender Relationship

 

A natural or adopted child of a parent living in a same-gender relationship, whether the couple is married or cohabiting, may not receive a name and a blessing.

 

A natural or adopted child of a parent living in a same-gender relationship, whether the couple is married or cohabiting, may be  baptized and confirmed, ordained, or recommended for missionary service only as follows:

 

A mission president or a stake president may request approval from the Office of the First Presidency to baptize and confirm, ordain, or recommend missionary service for a child of a parent who has lived or is living in a same-gender relationship when he is satisfied by personal interviews that both of the following requirements are met: 

1. The child accepts and is committed to live the teachings and doctrine of the Church, and specifically disavows the practice of same-gender cohabitation and marriage.
2. The child is of legal age and does not live with a parent who has lived or currently lives in a same-gender cohabitation relationship or marriage.

 

• Handbook 1, number 6.7.2 is to be updated immediately as follows (addition is highlighted):

When a Disciplinary Council May Be Necessary

 

Serious Transgression

 

. . . It includes (but is not limited to) attempted murder, forcible rape, sexual abuse, spouse abuse, intentional serious physical injury of others, adultery, fornication, homosexual relations (especially sexual cohabitation), deliberate abandonment of family responsibilities, . . .

 

• Handbook 1, number 6.7.3 is also to be updated immediately as follows (addition is highlighted):

When a Disciplinary Council is Mandatory

 

Apostasy

 

As used here, apostasy refers to members who:

1. Repeatedly act in clear, open, and deliberate public opposition to the Church or its leaders.
2. Persist in teaching as Church doctrine information that is not Church doctrine after they have been corrected by their bishop or a higher authority.
3.  Continue to follow the teachings of apostate sects (such as those that advocate plural marriage) after being corrected by their bishop or a higher authority.
4. Are in a same-gender marriage.
5. Formally join another church and advocate its teachings.

Edited November 6, 2015 by Hamba Tuhan

[Calm]

So this essentially tells a child to repudiate their parents in order to be baptized, What a lovely thing.

No, it is the opposite imo. It allows them to not agonize over whether or not to be baptized until they are old enough to handle the family dynamics because they are more independent, emotionally mature, etc.

[The Nehor]

So this essentially tells a child to repudiate their parents in order to be baptized, What a lovely thing.

 

Nope, just repudiate what they are doing and be at the age of adulthood so there is no pressure to try to pressure a child to turn against their parents.

 

"As a church, nobody should be more loving and compassionate. Let us be at the forefront in terms of expressing love, compassion and outreach. Let’s not have families exclude or be disrespectful of those who choose a different lifestyle as a result of their feelings about their own gender." -Elder Cook

#fail

 

So you are arguing that families are now going to exclude homosexual couples only because their children cannot be blessed or baptized? That seems like an oddly specific reason.

 

Right or wrong. Justified or not. We're about to get trampled by the media.

 

[Teancum]

It seems harsh, but it matches what Jesus Himself taught (concerning adults of course. Minor children should be loyal to their parents).

Jesus taught to repudiate a parent if the parent is not living a certain standard?

[Teancum]

No, it is the opposite imo. It allows them to not agonize over whether or not to be baptized until they are old enough to handle the family dynamics because they are more independent, emotionally mature, etc.

And if an adult they still have to repudiate their parents lifestyle.

[Thinking]

So much for the 2nd Article of Faith:

We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression.

[Calm]

46While he yet talked to the people, behold, his mother and his brethren stood without, desiring to speak with him. 46He was still speaking to the crowds when suddenly His mother and brothers were standing outside wanting to speak to Him.

47Someone told him, "Your mother and brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to you." 47 47Someone said to Him, "Behold, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside seeking to speak to You." 47Then one said unto him, Behold, thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to speak with thee. 47Someone told Him, "Look, Your mother and Your brothers are standing outside, wanting to speak to You."

48He replied to him, "Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?" 48But he replied to the man who told him, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers?” 48But Jesus answered the one who was telling Him and said, "Who is My mother and who are My brothers?" 48But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? 48But He replied to the one who told Him, "Who is My mother and who are My brothers?"

49Pointing to his disciples, he said, "Here are my mother and my brothers. 49And stretching out his hand toward his disciples, he said, “Here are my mother and my brothers! 49And stretching out His hand toward His disciples, He said, "Behold My mother and My brothers! 49And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren! 49And stretching out His hand toward His disciples, He said, "Here are My mother and My brothers!

50For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother." 50For whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother.” 50"For whoever does the will of My Father who is in heaven, he is My brother and sister and mother." 50For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.

http://biblehub.com/matthew/12.htm

[Teancum]

Nope, just repudiate what they are doing and be at the age of adulthood so there is no pressure to try to pressure a child to turn against their parents.

So you are arguing that families are now going to exclude homosexual couples only because their children cannot be blessed or baptized? That seems like an oddly specific reason.

From the article:Natural or adopted children living in a same-sex household will only be allowed to be baptized once they are 18, disavow the practice of same-sex cohabitation or marriage, and stop living within the household, according to the policy. Such baptism would still require the approval of the church's governing First Presidency.

Edited November 6, 2015 by Teancum

[The Nehor]

Jesus taught to repudiate a parent if the parent is not living a certain standard?

 

Yeah, or at least their acts.

 

 34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

 

 35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law.

 

 36 And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.

 

 37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.

 

 38 And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.

 

 39 He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.

 

Not my favorite passage but it is in there.

 

And if an adult they still have to repudiate their parents lifestyle.

 

Yep.