Utah Ward Invites LGBT Speakers for 2nd and 3rd Hour

[Scott Lloyd]

3 hours ago, JulieM said:

I guess we will just have to wait and see what happens with this from here.  I try to reserve judgement of others when we know so little about what was actually said.  

I hope this can be a step towards showing more love for LBGT members  (as expressed by President Nelson in the press conference towards gay members of the church) and an actual indication that many want to hear what they have to say and listen.  They do have a voice here.  As long as they’re not openly preaching against the church, I think it’s great to see this.

If they did say anything in open rebellion, I’ll agree with you.  

But I’m going to wait to pass judgement on them.

The optics alone of having them preach at the meeting implies excusing or tolerating the sin they are engaged in, not just the sinner. As I said, I wouldn't accept any obligation to attend such a meeting, Sunday meeting block or not.

Edited January 30, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[pogi]

1 hour ago, Danzo said:

Well, It would be helpful for those in these discussions that they are making arguments based on faith or speculation and not actual data.

I personally believe that exercising faith, repenting of ones sins, entering in to and keeping covenants like baptism and having access to the Holy Ghost promote peace of mind and provide the hope that would reduce suicides and improve mental health.

Many hear seem to be arguing the opposite.  exercising faith, repenting of ones sins, entering in to and keeping covenants like baptism and having access to the Holy Ghost, degrade mental health and promote suicide.

I admit my believes are based on faith, but it would be refreshing for the others in this discussion to admit likewise.

 

Until there is anything close to reliable data on the subject we will just have to go by what we believe

(I don't think Utah is  a proxy for active, practicing LDS)

Faith, repentance, covenants, etc. are all important for peace of mind etc.  So are all the tools that lead to faith and repentance...  Are you going to assist a person back to faith and peace, or are you going to judge them to death?  If a suicidal person comes into a bishp’s office and that bishop tells them that they simply need to pray more, repent, and have more faith and provide no other means of intervention, then that bishop is negligent.  

Edited January 30, 2018 by pogi

[JulieM]

13 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

The optics alone of having them preach at the meeting implies excusing or tolerating the sin they are engaged in, not just the sinner. 

You're making a judgement even using the word “preach” rather than how they were possibly just sharing personal experiences as requested.

You don’t know they were “preaching”, but you continue to use such judgmental and negative words on this.  I’m just going to wait for more information to be fair to those involved.

Edited January 30, 2018 by JulieM

[pogi]

50 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I think it quite possible to understand said experiences and perspective in ways that avoid the spectacle of having unrepentant individuals preach to Church members and appear to be advocating acceptance of the sin, not just the sinner. As was pointed out here, we don't do that with unrepentant adulterers or those involved in other forms of sin.

As has been stated here, this is being addressed in ways other than turning over the pulpit at our worship services to unrepentant sinners. And, as has been stated, there is no reliable information that justifies the conclusion that the Church's doctrines and standards on homosexuality lead to higher than average rates of suicide. It is overwrought hyperbole to imply that maintaining those standards and values amounts to tolerance of suicide.

This is not about changing church doctrine and standards.  It is about practicing them. 

[pogi]

53 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

If we are all sinners then why highlight one specific group's sin?  

It is not about highlighting their sin, it is about highlighting their burden.  LGBT youth are at heightened risk, they therefore need heightened attention. 

[Scott Lloyd]

10 minutes ago, JulieM said:

You're making a judgement even using the word “preach” rather than how they were possibly just sharing personal experiences as requested.

You don’t know they were “preaching”, but you continue to use such judgmental and negative words on this.  I’m just going to wait for more information to be fair to those involved.

That's just quibbling over semantics. Formally engaging the congregation at church can reasonably be regarded as preaching.

Edited January 30, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[provoman]

22 minutes ago, pogi said:

I don't have numbers specific to our church, but we do have reliable data that shows increased suicidality among religious LGBT youth in general who face internal faith conflicts, self-acceptance issues, and "internalized homophobia".  In other words, they hate the gay part of themselves.  They shame themselves to death.  Where did they learn that?  Who taught them shame?  We NEED to fix that message that these youth are receiving.  That is our burden!  Unfortunately, too many wards understand this too late.  When I was secretary of the young men's, one of our boys that I loved dearly killed himself.    

We shouldn't resist doing good because we don't have any reliable way of measuring results.  Anti-shame messages are good. Period. 

What do you propose as the message? 

Is there a message that encompasses the Gospel that would not “trigger” self-shame?

[Scott Lloyd]

14 minutes ago, pogi said:

This is not about changing church doctrine and standards.  It is about practicing them. 

And one of the standards, as I understand it, is to embrace the sinner without tolerating the sin. In my view, inviting unrepentant individuals to preach from the pulpit or lectern at Church seems to imply excusing or tolerating the behavior.

Edited January 30, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[kllindley]

2 hours ago, pogi said:

Therefore they are unworthy of our love?  That seems to be the point of this meeting...to teach Christ like love, yes, even for the sinner. This was not some pro-gay marriage propaganda program. 

Do you understand how many members are engaged in violations of the law of chastity?  How many porn addicts speak in church every Sunday?  As a pornography addict, I felt terrible shame. The taboo nature of the subject is a tool of toxic shaming.  We don't need to approve of their lifestyle, but we do need to understand and accept people who violate the law of chastity, in love.  

There is a reason that suicide rates are so high among LGBT youth in our church...it is NOT because of meetings like this one!  That is all I know.  I see this meeting as a very powerful example of loving the sinner and not the sin.  That seems to be the point of this meeting to me.  This meeting is suicide prevention at its finest!   

Pogi! I wish I knew you in real life. Than you so much for you kindness and support. I appreciate the courage it takes to stand up for what you believe even to people who are supposed to be on your side. Thank you. 

I honestly believe a lot of members simply do not understand the reality of shame and it's insidious impact on so many members. That doesn't really excuse the lack of compassion, but it does help me have more compassion for them. 

[kllindley]

1 hour ago, Danzo said:

Do we have an idea of what the suicide rate is among LGBT youth in our church?

I am unaware of any reliable data.

If we don't then there is no way of knowing whether anything we do has any affect positively or negatively.

Best research shows that LGBT youth commit suicide at a rate of the times the standard population. 80% of LGBT youth were social in the last year. And 10-20% of youth fall in the LGBT category. 

There is no data that LDS LGBT youth are more likely than non-LDS LGBT youth. 

But the stats for ALL LGBT youth are sufficiently alarming to me. 

[cinepro]

Update:

The Bishop and his wife have posted their remarks from the meeting on their Facebook page:

Quote

The video of the Sunday meeting about loving and supporting our LGBTQ 🏳️‍🌈 brothers and sisters is still under works. Here is the outline for now that Bishop Augenstein followed for the meeting and the exact words he delivered. Please feel free to read and share with your loved ones and wards and stakes as a template of a discussion or a meeting that would promote more love and support for our amazing lgbtq friends.

January 28th, 2017
Intro
I would like to thank everyone for being at this very special meeting today. As many of you know, Susie and I have been very involved this last year in serving and getting to know many of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters. We have spent hours at a place in Provo called The Encircle House which serves members of this community in helping to prevent teen suicide and homelessness. Believe it or not, these difficult circumstances not only exist but are currently skyrocketing. While tragic on one hand, it has brought so much love and joy into our lives as we have sat and really listened to our new friends about what it means to be gay. I am humbled and quite frankly in awe of some of the people you are about to meet today and their stories. In this meeting, we are going to hear from three different perspectives all of which need our love and support.
We are going to hear from people in the LGBTQ community who are active in the LDS church and need you all to understand what it feels like to be in a church where people still view them at times like they don’t belong and explain what they need from us.
We are going to hear from some who have stepped away from the church but still have beautiful ties and families in the faith and still desire to be loved and valued even though their viewpoints don’t coincide with LDS doctrine.
Lastly, we will hear from families in the church with LGBTQ children who desire love and support from their ward families and a great desire for their children and grandchildren to be loved and accepted by their ward members whether their kids choose to stay apart of the mainstream church or not.

The people within the LGBTQ community need us, and today I am giving you a chance to hear their stories and to ask yourself at the end of this meeting “what would my savior have me do? How would He have me talk about and treat people who are not exactly like me? What is it that Heavenly Father would have me learn? I pray that the spirit will be with all of us during this meeting and that we can not only listen with our ears, but really listen with our minds and hearts to gain a better understanding about those within the LGBTQ community. And from that, create an increased level of pure love for God and ALL of his children.

 

The agenda for the meeting will proceed as follows:
Kent Carollo – Graphic Designer and presenter at the annual “Affirmation” symposium which is an outreach program for Mormon LGBTQ families and friends
Ben Schilaty – Spanish Professor at BYU, also a presenter at Affirmation.
George and Alyson Deussen – Proud parents of their son Stockton who recently lost his life to suicide.
Musical Number “Nearer My God to Thee” by Cole Rasmussen and Max Eddington
Jordan Sgro – Chief Program Officer at Encircle House
Our concluding speaker will be Sister Debi Day and her daughter Morgan Burdi

 

Conclusion
Thank those who participated today in our program.
I pray it was as informative, edifying, and faith promoting.

Matthew 12
46 ¶ While (Jesus) yet talked to the people, behold, ... his brethren (and sisters) stood without, desiring to speak with him.
47 Then one said unto him, Behold, …. thy brethren and sisters stand without, desiring to speak with thee.
48 But he answered and said unto him that told him, who are my brethren and sisters?

(I’d like to ask those who are with us today who are part of the LGBTQ community and their families to stand if they feel comfortable to do so –

49 And he (The Savior) stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold …… my brethren and sisters!
50 For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother and sister, …

(thank you – you may sit down)

My Brothers and sisters – Friends - the will of Our Father in Heaven – what our Heavenly Father really wants for all of us - first and foremost -- is that we “love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first “and great” commandment.
31 And the second is like unto it, namely this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.”

But Like Nephi in the Book of Mormon, “I do not know the meaning of all things. But I know that He loveth His Children.”
Continuing the Dialogue in the B of M, the angel speaking with Nephi in this exchange goes on to ask him, “do you know the meaning of the tree that your father saw? Nephi answered,” Yea, it is the love of God, which sheddeth itself abroad in the hearts of the children of men; wherefore, it is the most desirable above all things. 23 And he spake unto me, saying: Yea, and the most joyous to the soul. “
However, Brothers and sisters - that joy is fleeting and difficult to come by for many; specifically, our LGBTQ friends.
Elder M. Russell Ballard said the following in a speech given at BYU on November 14th, 2017:
“Every member has a place in God’s kingdom. It may be difficult sometimes for gay Latter-day Saints to see “where you fit in the Lord’s church but you do.” Mormon leaders, along with the rank and file, need to “listen to and understand what LGBT members are feeling and experiencing. We must do better than we have in the past until all feel they have a spiritual home … a place to worship and serve the Lord.”

I too believe, with Elder Ballard that we must do better in assisting our LGBTQ brothers and sisters in helping them find a spiritual home so the joy of the restored Gospel can be efficacious in all who enter here. Someday, the sign outside our churches might say “ALL are welcome” not just “visitors.”
In conclusion, I have tasted of this fruit of which the Angel spoke, and it is truly desirable above all things. The love, understanding and compassion I have for my friends within the LGBTQ community has grown immensely and caused me to reflect deeply on “who my brethren and sisters are” and what my role is in their lives. Our role- Our purpose - is to love…love unconditionally without judgement or condemnation.
I hope that this afternoon, you have in the Prophet Alma’s words, “felt to sing the song of his redeeming love” as we all apply the power of Christ’s Infinite atonement in allowing it to transform US into the charitable sons and daughters he intends for us to be, and I say these things in the name of Jesus Christ, our Savior, Amen.

Bishop Paul Augenstein, Parkway Ward, Riverton Utah Summerhill Stake

https://www.facebook.com/susie.augenstein

[kllindley]

7 minutes ago, provoman said:

What do you propose as the message? 

Is there a message that encompasses the Gospel that would not “trigger” self-shame?

Absolutely there are ways to teach the Gospel without creating shame. This is not some secret code for excusing sin. 

Shame is about one identity. Guilt is about behavior. Teach sin and guilt all day long! Seriously. Guilt is good! 

Shame is Satan's counterfeit to guilt that tells a person because he has made mistakes it has weaknesses, he is bad. Shame destroys the part of us that believes we can change. It isolates us and brings despair. 

 

[kllindley]

2 minutes ago, cinepro said:

Update:

The Bishop and his wife have posted their remarks from the meeting on their Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/susie.augenstein

Thanks for posting the update. It confirms that this was done appropriately. I'm so happy to see this sort of thing, even if it does make some members uncomfortable. I know my grandpa was very uncomfortable with being next to black people in the temple for a while. He refused to attend sessions when a black person was present. Eventually he came around. 

 

To any active members on here, please support these efforts in your wards and stakes. It will save lives. 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, JulieM said:

You're making a judgement even using the word “preach” rather than how they were possibly just sharing personal experiences as requested.

You don’t know they were “preaching”, but you continue to use such judgmental and negative words on this.  I’m just going to wait for more information to be fair to those involved.

Sunday 3 block is set aside for teaching.  There were apparently assigned speakers and not audience members pulled up to share a few comments.

I think it qualifies as preaching/teaching according to the Handbook.

It seems they held a fireside during Sunday School.  It was publicized for one thing at least enough to bring in 150 visitors including many from the LGBT community.  It was filmed as a program.  You don't even film Primary Programs,

  What might be appropriate in one is not always appropriate in the other.

Edited January 30, 2018 by Calm

[JulieM]

18 minutes ago, cinepro said:

Update:

The Bishop and his wife have posted their remarks from the meeting on their Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/susie.augenstein

Amazing to read (quotes of some of what was actually shared at this meeting).

Thanks for posting this.  It’ll be interesting to see what happens from here and if more wards and stakes do similar meetings or even firesides.

I can’t inagine anyone reading what was said, and not feeling love and hope.

Edited January 30, 2018 by JulieM

[pogi]

3 minutes ago, provoman said:

What do you propose as the message? 

Is there a message that encompasses the Gospel that would not “trigger” self-shame?

Absolutely.  Thanks for asking.

First of all, let me explain to you what toxic shame is.  It is the core belief that if people knew who the real me really is, they wouldn't accept me.  Guilt = I have made a mistake.  Toxic shame = I am a mistake. 

The amount of toxic shame that I felt as a porn addict probably pales in comparison to the shame that someone might feel who suffers with gay identity crisis in the church.  IF anyone feels the toxic shame of "if they really knew the real me, they wouldn't accept me." it is gay youth!  That message they receive NEEDS to change!

I don't know if you have noticed, but the messages on pornography and their delivery has changed significantly over the years.  The leaders have learned, and are continuing to learn and understand the role of toxic shame in addiction.  Instead of messages like this: "Brothers, how could you do this to your poor wives who love you? How could you let them down like this by partaking in such smut, such gross sin?  You are bearers of the holy priesthood, so act like it.  Don't look at such filth.  When temptations come, simply walk away.  It is that simple.  Stop disappointing your loved ones."

They now give messages like this: "Brothers, we understand the burden of addiction, and we are here to help you through this burden and trial.  We will not let you bear it alone.  In many ways you may be a victim of this terrible disease, but that should not diminish the accountability you have to find healing.  Let us find healing together."

Do you see the difference?  Slowly but surely, the message is changing.  It still needs work, but the work has started at least.   

 

[JulieM]

17 minutes ago, Calm said:

Sunday 3 block is set aside for teaching.  There were apparently assigned speakers and not audience members pulled up to share a few comments.

It might be a better venue to have these people share or speak at a fireside rather than during the block.  I can see that.  I just don’t get the impression, they were trying to preach though.  More of a sharing of experiences feeling is what I get (but I could be wrong). Preaching can have a negative connotation, but I understand what you’re saying too.

I don’t know the current rules on video taping.  They held it in the cultural hall and maybe that’s so they could film it?  They used the word “cameramen”, so it seems they were open about it at least.

Edited January 30, 2018 by JulieM

[Calm]

19 minutes ago, JulieM said:

It might be a better venue to have these people share or speak at a fireside rather than during the block.  I can see that.  I just don’t get the impression, they were trying to preach though.  More of a sharing of experiences feeling is what I get (but I could be wrong). Preaching can have a negative connotation, but I understand what you’re saying too.

I don’t know the current rules on video taping.  They held it in the cultural hall and maybe that’s so they could film it?  They used the word “cameramen”, so it seems they were open about it at least.

Yes, it looks like the bishop arranged it.  It just wasn't done by a Church production crew.

Personally I might have left for that reason.  Maybe not if they had announced the cameras would not scan over the crowd, but stay focused on the speaker.  Church and cameras just don't mix well in the list of things I am comfortable with.

If I ever see a camera heading my way, I duck out, except at family stuff where I just try to shift to where they have already been after the one obligatory shot.  Been this way since at least 8 years of age.

Edited January 30, 2018 by Calm

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, cinepro said:

Update:

The Bishop and his wife have posted their remarks from the meeting on their Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/susie.augenstein

Thanks for posting this.

While it helps me understand the bishop's laudable intent in organizing the program, I'm disturbed about his including in the speaker line-up for a formal, Sabbath day worship service "some who have stepped away from the Church." I wonder if it would have been possible for the bishop to achieve his goals for the meeting without resorting to this highly irregular and, in my view, troubling precedent.

I also wonder what his specific reason was for inviting "some who have stepped away from the Church." Through a lifetime of Church membership, I don't recall that it has ever been appropriate or acceptable for any reason to give a forum at a Sabbath day worship service to anyone who has forsaken or renounced his or her faith or membership in the Church of Jesus Christ. As I've said before, I view the Sunday Church meetings as a sanctuary for strengthening one's faith in and commitment to the restored gospel, not to entertain ideas that are counter to it.

 

Edited January 30, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[phaedrus ut]

When I saw news of this meeting on Reddit and Facebook all I could think is how much of a positive step this could be for the church.  I'm also so happy to see many here who see this as positive.  Like other changes in the church, this will be one that comes from the ground up not the top down. 

The justifications for the priesthood ban, much like the rhetoric describing the LGBT community has been very negative. It will take a generation or more to remove the prejudices from the hearts of some people.  

Phaedrus

[smac97]

3 hours ago, pogi said:

Therefore they are unworthy of our love? 

They are absolutely worthy of our love.  Nobody is suggesting otherwise.

Quote

That seems to be the point of this meeting...to teach Christ like love, yes, even for the sinner. This was not some pro-gay marriage propaganda program. 

I hope so.  But it sure seems like an awfully significant incremental step toward having such things presented during the Church's meetings.  

From the synopsis in the OP:

Quote

 

Next speaker, a gay woman married to a woman. Her wife was also there and she made 3 or 4 references to her wife. Talked about her amazing mother who rejects her wife and their marriage. Read several letters to her mother (some of them not sent) seeking to re-establish their previously close relationship. (ItNoJC,A).

...

Next speaker: A lesbian woman married to a woman. Told of her upbringing and her struggles with prescription drugs and her self loathing because -- she is gay. Now clean, happily married to a woman and has a child. (ItNoJC,A).

 

"Now clean, happily married to a woman and has a child."

I am glad these people are doing what they think is right.  I do not begrudge them that. 

But consider what she is saying here.  "Now clean, happily married to a woman..."  That sounds an awful lot like advocacy/justification for conduct that is prohibited by the Church, that is grounds for excommunication.  And she is saying such things in a meeting held in an LDS building, during the Church's formal Sunday services, and presided over by local priesthood holders.

My concern pertains to A) whether this meeting was conducted with proper approval and in accordance with the Church's guidelines, and B) whether meetings like this might create a challenging precedent.

For example, are we going to allow polygamists to come into Church meetings and present their opinions about the merits of their social and marital circumstances?  If not, why not?

What about unmarried parents?  Are we going to allow them to come into Church meetings and present their views as to their social and marital circumstances?  If not, why not?

What about Denver Snuffer?  Are we going to allow him to come into Church meetings and explain and advocate for his views about matters of church doctrine and governance?  If not, why not?

What about Kate Kelly?  Are we going to allow her to come into Church meetings and explain and advocate for her views about women in the church, female ordination, etc.?  If not, why not?

What is the limiting principle here?  Is there one?

Quote

Do you understand how many members are engaged in violations of the law of chastity? 

None of them, however, are invited to use the Church's formal Sunday services to present to the Saints an explanation and justification for violations of the Law of Chastity.

Quote

How many porn addicts speak in church every Sunday?  As a pornography addict, I felt terrible shame. The taboo nature of the subject is a tool of toxic shaming.  We don't need to approve of their lifestyle, but we do need to understand and accept people who violate the law of chastity, in love.  

Agreed.  But I here's the thing: Porn addicts are not being invited to use the Church's formal Sunday services to rationalize and justify their use of pornography.

My concern is that the meeting described in the OP was used, to some extent, to rationalize / justify / excuse / advocate for same-sex marriage.  And even if that was not the case, I am also concerned that this sort of meeting, if replicated elsewhere, could easily and quickly devolve into attempts to rationalize / justify / excuse / advocate for same-sex marriage.

Quote

There is a reason that suicide rates are so high among LGBT youth in our church...it is NOT because of meetings like this one! 

I would like to see your data for suicides rates "among LGBT youth in our church."  CFR, please.

Quote

That is all I know.  I see this meeting as a very powerful example of loving the sinner and not the sin. 

I fully support the concept of loving the sinner and not the sin.  That is not the basis for my concern.

Thanks,

-Smac

Edited January 30, 2018 by smac97

[pogi]

1 hour ago, Scott Lloyd said:

And one of the standards, as I understand it, is to embrace the sinner without tolerating the sin. In my view, inviting unrepentant individuals to preach from the pulpit or lectern at Church seems to imply excusing or tolerating the behavior.

I wouldn't expect you to do anything you didn't feel comfortable with. 

[cinepro]

32 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

While it helps me understand the bishop's laudable intent in organizing the program, I'm disturbed about his including in the speaker line-up for a formal, Sabbath day worship service "some who have stepped away from the Church." I wonder if it would have been possible for the bishop to achieve his goals for the meeting without resorting to this highly irregular and, in my view, troubling precedent.

I also wonder what his specific reason was for inviting "some who have stepped away from the Church." Through a lifetime of Church membership, I don't recall that it has ever been appropriate or acceptable for any reason to give a forum at a Sabbath day worship service to anyone who has forsaken or renounced his or her faith or membership in the Church of Jesus Christ. As I've said before, I view the Sunday Church meetings as a sanctuary for strengthening one's faith in and commitment to the restored gospel, not to entertain ideas that are counter to it.

 

 

The Bishop did explain why he included those who had left the Church (emphasis added):

Quote

We are going to hear from some who have stepped away from the church but still have beautiful ties and families in the faith and still desire to be loved and valued even though their viewpoints don’t coincide with LDS doctrine.

I guess he wanted the ward members to know that even if someone leaves the Church over the issue, the church members aren't off the hook for loving and valuing the aspects of their existence that aren't related to homosexual sex.

It's certainly unusual, but if the Bishop's goal was to get ward members to understand these people and to "love and value them", then having them come and speak to them in that time and place is probably the most effective way to do it.  Stuff that is done in "other meetings" like Firesides or Saturday morning workshops is usually viewed as supplementary and optional ("Come learn about the Dead Sea Scrolls" or "How to Can Peaches So They Last Forever").  Having the ward gather together during the three-hour block emphasizes the important and necessary nature of what they're going to hear.

But I doubt this is the last thing the Bishop is going to do on the subject.  If the pictures on his Facebook page are any indication, he takes love and inclusivity very seriously and this isn't something he's going to give up on.

Edited January 30, 2018 by cinepro

[USU78]

38 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Thanks for posting this.

While it helps me understand the bishop's laudable intent in organizing the program, I'm disturbed about his including in the speaker line-up for a formal, Sabbath day worship service "some who have stepped away from the Church." I wonder if it would have been possible for the bishop to achieve his goals for the meeting without resorting to this highly irregular and, in my view, troubling precedent.

I also wonder what his specific reason was for inviting "some who have stepped away from the Church." Through a lifetime of Church membership, I don't recall that it has ever been appropriate or acceptable for any reason to give a forum at a Sabbath day worship service to anyone who has forsaken or renounced his or her faith or membership in the Church of Jesus Christ. As I've said before, I view the Sunday Church meetings as a sanctuary for strengthening one's faith in and commitment to the restored gospel, not to entertain ideas that are counter to it.

I likewise am more troubled now than before, notwithstanding I'm wholly unsurprised.  I guess I had a scintilla of hope that something else was going on.

It was a Mormon-shaming meeting.

[Scott Lloyd]

7 minutes ago, cinepro said:

 

The Bishop did explain why he included those who had left the Church (emphasis added):

I guess he wanted the ward members to know that even if someone leaves the Church over the issue, the church members aren't off the hook for loving and valuing the aspects of their existence that aren't related to homosexual sex.

It's certainly unusual, but if the Bishop's goal was to get ward members to understand these people and to "love and value them", then having them come and speak to them in that time and place is probably the most effective way to do it.  Stuff that is done in "other meetings" like Firesides or Saturday morning workshops is usually viewed as supplementary and optional ("Come learn about the Dead Sea Scrolls" or "How to Can Peaches So They Last Forever").  Having the ward gather together during the three-hour block emphasizes the important and necessary nature of what they're going to hear.

But I doubt this is the last thing the Bishop is going to do on the subject.  If the pictures on his Facebook page are any indication, he takes love and inclusivity very seriously and this isn't something he's going to give up on.

(Portion bolded for reference)

And I suppose it's the mandatory (if you will) nature of Sabbath meetings as opposed to an optional fireside or workshop that would make me resent being a part of a captive audience, as it were, for something I don't approve of, i.e. including people in the program who have left the Church or who are involved in relationships that are in clear violation of Church teachings.