What is the LGBT policy goal for the Church

[california boy]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

I wouldn’t say “toe to toe” is what I’m looking for. Rather, just a reasonably close comparison of compelling reasons in terms of saving mortal life and spiritual motivation. Whether it or your reply is serious or banter is up to you.

Why?  What are you trying to understand?

[CV75]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

Why?  What are you trying to understand?

You are countering peoples' experiences, shared at your request, with examples of your own that are not comparative. To be able to refute others' experiences as you seem to be attempting to do, you need to provide equivalent experiences. To do that most efficiently and effectively, my recommendation is that you focus on the most compelling reason in terms of "eternal benefits" (your term) for someone to make such a sacrifice, specifically, to stay in the Church. If you've lost track of your questions to others, then this is just banter and don't worry about it.

[california boy]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

You are countering peoples' experiences, shared at your request, with examples of your own that are not comparative. To be able to refute others' experiences as you seem to be attempting to do, you need to provide equivalent experiences. To do that most efficiently and effectively, my recommendation is that you focus on the most compelling reason in terms of "eternal benefits" (your term) for someone to make such a sacrifice, specifically, to stay in the Church. If you've lost track of your questions to others, then this is just banter and don't worry about it.

I am not countering peoples experiences at all. Nor am I trying to refute other's experiences.  Not sure where you even got this idea.  But clearly you are reading things into my post that I certainly did not post.  

I am only saying that I too have similar promptings by the Spirit. It is a blessing one can have either inside or outside the Church.  You don't have to be a member of the Church to get promptings of the Spirit.  If Church members believe that, it is a myth.

 

I was interested in hearing what others felt like the benefits are for someone to leave the person he loves the most, break up that family, be celibate for the rest of their lives with no intimate relationships at all.  Surely you can see how being with the person you love is a MAJOR blessing in life.  So finding out what others think is the benefit of giving up that blessing was of interest to me.  

[CV75]

11 hours ago, california boy said:

I am not countering peoples experiences at all. Nor am I trying to refute other's experiences.  Not sure where you even got this idea.  But clearly you are reading things into my post that I certainly did not post.  

I am only saying that I too have similar promptings by the Spirit. It is a blessing one can have either inside or outside the Church.  You don't have to be a member of the Church to get promptings of the Spirit.  If Church members believe that, it is a myth.

I was interested in hearing what others felt like the benefits are for someone to leave the person he loves the most, break up that family, be celibate for the rest of their lives with no intimate relationships at all.  Surely you can see how being with the person you love is a MAJOR blessing in life.  So finding out what others think is the benefit of giving up that blessing was of interest to me.  

I got the idea of your countering others' experiences by the tone and content of your replies to them. For example, miraculously saving a life is not a prompting of the Spirit, which indeed is available to all. I don't think you can understand why someone would make such a sacrifice without making good comparisons.

[gopher]

On 10/3/2021 at 9:33 PM, MustardSeed said:

Ok. 

Apology accepted!  Sorry there was a misunderstanding.

[gopher]

On 10/3/2021 at 9:50 PM, california boy said:

I have never heard Icky gay sex used as a common term in the gay community that I am involved in.  But the LGBT community is diverse.  So I can't speak for everyone.  I just though you were being demeaning.

Glad you cleared up your intention of using that phrase.

I had no problem finding many examples of the expression in a simple internet search so it's not uncommon, but since it's meant to be used sarcastically towards mostly religious people (which includes me), I won't use it again.

Back to your comment that sex is the least important part of your relationship - isn't that the part that results in excommunication (or the new, kinder name for it)?  I haven't heard of action taken towards gays in the church until that line is crossed.  At least not recently.  Possibly exceptions are made if a man is married and carries on a non-sexual, but otherwise intimate relationship (maybe there's a better word out there) with another man.  I know a man who was excommunicated for carrying on a non-sexual relationship with a woman that wasn't his wife.

My understanding is that sex isn't the only reason homosexuality is considered wrong in the eyes of God, even though the church has begun to use "homosexual behavior" which leaves open many differing interpretations.  But would it make a difference if the church did clarify that holding hands, maybe even kissing, between same sex couples wouldn't be grounds for discipline? 

Here's what prompted the thought.  I attended a baptism of a man who was living with his member girlfriend in the same house, but different bedrooms.  They were in their 40's and had no plans to marry or have children.  They claimed they kept the law of chastity.  But they held hands at church and even kissed in public.  It wasn't a rogue missionary that performed the baptism, it was the mission president. 

I know you aren't interested in being a member of the church, but I'm curious if you think it would be enough for believing gays to feel welcome if they didn't have to worry that any action would be taken if they were in a similar situation as the couple I described.  Or does it have to be all or nothing?

[pogi]

1 hour ago, gopher said:

I had no problem finding many examples of the expression in a simple internet search

You actually googled the phrase? 

You are a brave? soul. 

[The Nehor]

On 10/3/2021 at 10:54 AM, Maestrophil said:

1. Knowing God is pleased with you. 
2.  Knowing you are headed towards exaltation. 
3.  Knowing that you qualify for blessings that are predicated upon obedience you would otherwise miss out on.  
4. receiving those blessings. 
5.  Knowing that if the loved ones you ‘leave’ (and you don’t have to leave their lives) will receive similar blessings if they also choose to follow Gods commandments. 
6. Knowing you are an example to others to lead them to Exaltation as well. 
7. Having the constant companionship of the Holy Ghost. 
8.  Being able to attend the temple for personal succor and revelation. 

As someone who has gotten 1 out of 8 on this checklist I can say with confidence……

 

 

 

I must be doing this very wrong.

[gopher]

18 minutes ago, pogi said:

You actually googled the phrase? 

You are a brave? soul. 

It was much safer than when I didn't realize CB mistyped LGBT when he typed LPSG in an earlier post so I googled it.  Now I know there's such a thing as the Large P* Support Group and I've been trying to to get that out of my search history since.

 

 

[Maestrophil]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

As someone who has gotten 1 out of 8 on this checklist I can say with confidence……

 

 

 

I must be doing this very wrong.

You say you only have received 1 out of these 8 benefits?  I hope you have received more than that, brother!

Even if you have not - I wasn't necessarily saying that all members experience all these things all the time, I was simply providing the '5 reasons' that were asked for that would be worth leaving your homosexual marriage/partner...  the hope of those reasons being possible.  I believe they are all available to saints striving to live righteously.

[california boy]

3 hours ago, gopher said:

I had no problem finding many examples of the expression in a simple internet search so it's not uncommon, but since it's meant to be used sarcastically towards mostly religious people (which includes me), I won't use it again.

Back to your comment that sex is the least important part of your relationship - isn't that the part that results in excommunication (or the new, kinder name for it)?  I haven't heard of action taken towards gays in the church until that line is crossed.  At least not recently.  Possibly exceptions are made if a man is married and carries on a non-sexual, but otherwise intimate relationship (maybe there's a better word out there) with another man.  I know a man who was excommunicated for carrying on a non-sexual relationship with a woman that wasn't his wife.

My understanding is that sex isn't the only reason homosexuality is considered wrong in the eyes of God, even though the church has begun to use "homosexual behavior" which leaves open many differing interpretations.  But would it make a difference if the church did clarify that holding hands, maybe even kissing, between same sex couples wouldn't be grounds for discipline? 

Here's what prompted the thought.  I attended a baptism of a man who was living with his member girlfriend in the same house, but different bedrooms.  They were in their 40's and had no plans to marry or have children.  They claimed they kept the law of chastity.  But they held hands at church and even kissed in public.  It wasn't a rogue missionary that performed the baptism, it was the mission president. 

I know you aren't interested in being a member of the church, but I'm curious if you think it would be enough for believing gays to feel welcome if they didn't have to worry that any action would be taken if they were in a similar situation as the couple I described.  Or does it have to be all or nothing?

I am going to tell you the full answer since I think you and maybe some others reading this thread really want to know.  It might have been enough for me to live in a non sexual relationship with someone I love.  Lots of married people don't have sex.  When I came out to my wife, I thought a real possibility would be for us to stay together, but just have separate bedrooms and live our lives a little more independent from each other.  We talked about it, but she felt like we both needed to move on.  I thought she was much braver than I was for coming to that realization.  I think she made the right decision.

I also had long talks with the stake president and  my bishop.  I actually asked them this very question.  Could I live with another gay man as just roommates.  They both told me that wouldn't be acceptable.  They used the very example you brought up, but they said that it would be improper for a boyfriend and a girlfriend to live together.  The same would be true with a boyfriend and me.  I asked them how they felt about me living with a woman.  They said that also would be inappropriate.  I think a large part of this had to do with the fact that I have always had pretty high profile church assignments.  At the time I was on the high counsel after having served in a bishopric.  I was well known in my stake.  Living with another person that I was not married to didn't work for them. I was released from my calling and disfellowshipped.  In all fairness to them, I think this was such a new issue for both of them that they really were trying to figure this all out for themselves.  Maybe things would have been different now.  But eventually, I probably would have still made the same decision.  It is the right decision for me.

At that point, I really couldn't see the upside for staying in the Church.  Even if I did as they asked and lived my whole life alone, where would this all go?  They told me I would be fixed and be able to marry a woman in the next life.  That had NO appeal to me whatsoever.   So I made the decision to break ties with the Church.  I started living my own life and let God decide what should be my judgement.  And I am at complete peace with that decision, now, more than ever. Eventually I was excommunicated.

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, Maestrophil said:

You say you only have received 1 out of these 8 benefits?  I hope you have received more than that, brother!

Even if you have not - I wasn't necessarily saying that all members experience all these things all the time, I was simply providing the '5 reasons' that were asked for that would be worth leaving your homosexual marriage/partner...  the hope of those reasons being possible.  I believe they are all available to saints striving to live righteously.

Currently I am at 0 with the temples closed to most visits.

[CV75]

1 hour ago, california boy said:

I am going to tell you the full answer since I think you and maybe some others reading this thread really want to know.  It might have been enough for me to live in a non sexual relationship with someone I love.  Lots of married people don't have sex.  When I came out to my wife, I thought a real possibility would be for us to stay together, but just have separate bedrooms and live our lives a little more independent from each other.  We talked about it, but she felt like we both needed to move on.  I thought she was much braver than I was for coming to that realization.  I think she made the right decision.

I also had long talks with the stake president and  my bishop.  I actually asked them this very question.  Could I live with another gay man as just roommates.  They both told me that wouldn't be acceptable.  They used the very example you brought up, but they said that it would be improper for a boyfriend and a girlfriend to live together.  The same would be true with a boyfriend and me.  I asked them how they felt about me living with a woman.  They said that also would be inappropriate.  I think a large part of this had to do with the fact that I have always had pretty high profile church assignments.  At the time I was on the high counsel after having served in a bishopric.  I was well known in my stake.  Living with another person that I was not married to didn't work for them. I was released from my calling and disfellowshipped.  In all fairness to them, I think this was such a new issue for both of them that they really were trying to figure this all out for themselves.  Maybe things would have been different now.  But eventually, I probably would have still made the same decision.  It is the right decision for me.

At that point, I really couldn't see the upside for staying in the Church.  Even if I did as they asked and lived my whole life alone, where would this all go?  They told me I would be fixed and be able to marry a woman in the next life.  That had NO appeal to me whatsoever.   So I made the decision to break ties with the Church.  I started living my own life and let God decide what should be my judgement.  And I am at complete peace with that decision, now, more than ever. Eventually I was excommunicated.

Thank you for sharing this. It illustrates that the decision to stay or leave is a matter of competing convictions given life’s pressures. We may attribute, correctly or not, that the strength of conviction comes from the Spirit, which anyone can claim but no one can prove unless they are on the same wavelength.

The question I see in many of these discussions is whether the Church is responsible for making members’ convictions easier to manage by compromising her expectations (or to blame for not). I think that is solely an individual responsibility, otherwise there would be no need for the gifts of agency, grace or the companionship of the Holy Ghost.

When the Church does make changes to policy and practice, they seem designed to facilitate bringing people closer to Christ, and the conviction to remain so comes later as we choose between that and other strong convictions (both pre-existing and any that develop along the way).

[Maestrophil]

On 10/5/2021 at 10:52 AM, california boy said:

I am going to tell you the full answer since I think you and maybe some others reading this thread really want to know.  It might have been enough for me to live in a non sexual relationship with someone I love.  Lots of married people don't have sex.  When I came out to my wife, I thought a real possibility would be for us to stay together, but just have separate bedrooms and live our lives a little more independent from each other.  We talked about it, but she felt like we both needed to move on.  I thought she was much braver than I was for coming to that realization.  I think she made the right decision.

I also had long talks with the stake president and  my bishop.  I actually asked them this very question.  Could I live with another gay man as just roommates.  They both told me that wouldn't be acceptable.  They used the very example you brought up, but they said that it would be improper for a boyfriend and a girlfriend to live together.  The same would be true with a boyfriend and me.  I asked them how they felt about me living with a woman.  They said that also would be inappropriate.  I think a large part of this had to do with the fact that I have always had pretty high profile church assignments.  At the time I was on the high counsel after having served in a bishopric.  I was well known in my stake.  Living with another person that I was not married to didn't work for them. I was released from my calling and disfellowshipped.  In all fairness to them, I think this was such a new issue for both of them that they really were trying to figure this all out for themselves.  Maybe things would have been different now.  But eventually, I probably would have still made the same decision.  It is the right decision for me.

At that point, I really couldn't see the upside for staying in the Church.  Even if I did as they asked and lived my whole life alone, where would this all go?  They told me I would be fixed and be able to marry a woman in the next life.  That had NO appeal to me whatsoever.   So I made the decision to break ties with the Church.  I started living my own life and let God decide what should be my judgement.  And I am at complete peace with that decision, now, more than ever. Eventually I was excommunicated.

I think one of the biggest things I needed to learn (and am trying to do better at) and I believe the church culture as a whole also needs to learn this - is how to accept that sometimes the healthiest thing for someone to do at a certain moment in their lives IS to leave the church.  Or at least respect that person for making what they feel is an authentic choice and respect and love them for it rather than condemn or vilify them.  

I can't begin to imagine the struggle and pain that came with the decisions you have made and I have no reason to believe you did not make them lightly and without a lot of sincere struggle and contemplation.

And I wish you all the best and am glad you are finding peace in your journey.

[MrShorty]

1 hour ago, Maestrophil said:

accept that sometimes the healthiest thing for someone to do at a certain moment in their lives IS to leave the church.

I can agree with this, but I think it brings up the slippery slope of wondering just how strait and narrow is the path to salvation and exaltation. If there are paths that lead to salvation and exaltation that do not pass through the Church (or only pass temporarily through the Church), then is it possible that we are not the only true and living Church on the Earth?

Or, perhaps to put it this way, as it might apply to the topic at hand: If there is a path to salvation and exaltation that passes through a committed, monogamous same sex marriage (or gender transitioning or whatever), why would we as a Church not embrace that path? Why would we send LGBT people and couples off to find and follow their path to salvation and exaltation outside of the Church?

[Vanguard]

28 minutes ago, MrShorty said:

I can agree with this, but I think it brings up the slippery slope of wondering just how strait and narrow is the path to salvation and exaltation. If there are paths that lead to salvation and exaltation that do not pass through the Church (or only pass temporarily through the Church), then is it possible that we are not the only true and living Church on the Earth?

Or, perhaps to put it this way, as it might apply to the topic at hand: If there is a path to salvation and exaltation that passes through a committed, monogamous same sex marriage (or gender transitioning or whatever), why would we as a Church not embrace that path? Why would we send LGBT people and couples off to find and follow their path to salvation and exaltation outside of the Church?

But the belief is that all paths will eventually lead 'though the church' by way of ordinances that need to be completed for everyone - this regardless of whether the individual even knew of the church in this mortality. I would include those who did have knowledge (or even believed at one point) of the church. The path is still the same though the journey can look quite different.

[MustardSeed]

27 minutes ago, Vanguard said:

But the belief is that all paths will eventually lead 'though the church' by way of ordinances that need to be completed for everyone - this regardless of whether the individual even knew of the church in this mortality. I would include those who did have knowledge (or even believed at one point) of the church. The path is still the same though the journey can look quite different.

I think "all paths will eventually lead through" Christ.  I don't believe that "the church" has caught up yet, in several areas.  The church is constantly changing based on what the people can and will handle.  We have several examples of this. This is why I choose to remain flexible and admit I know nothing.  

[Vanguard]

12 minutes ago, MustardSeed said:

I think "all paths will eventually lead through" Christ.  I don't believe that "the church" has caught up yet, in several areas.  The church is constantly changing based on what the people can and will handle.  We have several examples of this. This is why I choose to remain flexible and admit I know nothing.  

I actually like that better. : ) The ordinances must still be done though it flows more meaningfully to refer to Christ in this way.

[MrShorty]

I agree that the necessary ordinances must be performed by the Church, whether by ourselves or by someone standing in as proxy. Interestingly, the turn of the conversation reminded me of a quip from J. Golden Kimball. Allegedly (because I don't have the inclination right now to verify that it is not apocryphal), when he was a bit frustrated with Southerners, he quipped that it would be easier to give up proselyting and just baptize for the dead. Is this how we really feel about LGBT people -- that it will be easier to let them find their own path through life, then perform any missed ordinances by proxy, and then God sorts everything out from there? I guess that I wonder -- if this is our thinking, would it be better to be more inclusive of LGBT people, let them receive the ordinances and encourage full fellowship (even if they decide to marry or transition), and let God sort it out in the end.

[CV75]

1 hour ago, MrShorty said:

I agree that the necessary ordinances must be performed by the Church, whether by ourselves or by someone standing in as proxy. Interestingly, the turn of the conversation reminded me of a quip from J. Golden Kimball. Allegedly (because I don't have the inclination right now to verify that it is not apocryphal), when he was a bit frustrated with Southerners, he quipped that it would be easier to give up proselyting and just baptize for the dead. Is this how we really feel about LGBT people -- that it will be easier to let them find their own path through life, then perform any missed ordinances by proxy, and then God sorts everything out from there? I guess that I wonder -- if this is our thinking, would it be better to be more inclusive of LGBT people, let them receive the ordinances and encourage full fellowship (even if they decide to marry or transition), and let God sort it out in the end.

My take is that God sorts us all out in the end, but in the meantime, we have 3 Nephi 12:1 where He sorts us out – in a probationary way, thank goodness – in this life, our time to prepare. I think this helps, at least it does my perspective, in choosing love and unity over disagreement on matters of doctrine, policy and practice. This means we stick together despite our disagreements for the greater good, and act as we would in a Church or family council. The spirit of contention involved with blame and accusation is prohibited in the previous chapter.

Given this instruction in 3 Nephi 12:1, I sometimes think when people leave the Church, there may be something missing in those who might have helped them stay but did not for any given reason, and both sets need God’s mercy, grace and forgiveness. Perhaps this gets delayed until the hereafter, which is fine with me because it motivates me to seek and access these blessings in this life (why wait?).

Where the terms of membership are determined by doctrine, policy and practice, and unity is determined by love, it is possible to lovingly unite on some other point with those who disagree with or reject membership requirements.

[CV75]

18 hours ago, MustardSeed said:

I think "all paths will eventually lead through" Christ.  I don't believe that "the church" has caught up yet, in several areas.  The church is constantly changing based on what the people can and will handle.  We have several examples of this. This is why I choose to remain flexible and admit I know nothing.  

I would say that Christ will reach out and sort through (and sort out) all paths, but we will also choose which path to follow. I think it is great to be flexible, but we do know what we know, otherwise we would not stay on the path we have chosen.

[Maestrophil]

21 hours ago, MrShorty said:

I can agree with this, but I think it brings up the slippery slope of wondering just how strait and narrow is the path to salvation and exaltation. If there are paths that lead to salvation and exaltation that do not pass through the Church (or only pass temporarily through the Church), then is it possible that we are not the only true and living Church on the Earth?

Or, perhaps to put it this way, as it might apply to the topic at hand: If there is a path to salvation and exaltation that passes through a committed, monogamous same sex marriage (or gender transitioning or whatever), why would we as a Church not embrace that path? Why would we send LGBT people and couples off to find and follow their path to salvation and exaltation outside of the Church?

I agree it is a potentially a tricky stance to take - but I feel better admitting that 1. I am not the one who decides what a person needs, or what is right for them. 2. Similarly, I won't be their judge, 3. I believe the funnel will narrow as time/eternity goes on and eventually all will fall in with what God requires of them, or choose not to.  I think what I am saying is that for a season, in this life, I am trying to be more patient and less 'panicky' about people who choose to leave in order to relieve pain and/or dissonance they feel.  

[california boy]

Quote

This thread has been one of the best discussions on LGBT issues.  I think there can be common ground and certainly better understanding   I for one, have enjoyed hearing your viewpoints

 

[Calm]

4 hours ago, Maestrophil said:

I agree it is a potentially a tricky stance to take - but I feel better admitting that 1. I am not the one who decides what a person needs, or what is right for them. 2. Similarly, I won't be their judge, 3. I believe the funnel will narrow as time/eternity goes on and eventually all will fall in with what God requires of them, or choose not to.  I think what I am saying is that for a season, in this life, I am trying to be more patient and less 'panicky' about people who choose to leave in order to relieve pain and/or dissonance they feel.  

Well stated.

[BlueDreams]

On 10/4/2021 at 5:42 PM, california boy said:

I am not countering peoples experiences at all. Nor am I trying to refute other's experiences.  Not sure where you even got this idea.  But clearly you are reading things into my post that I certainly did not post.  

I am only saying that I too have similar promptings by the Spirit. It is a blessing one can have either inside or outside the Church.  You don't have to be a member of the Church to get promptings of the Spirit.  If Church members believe that, it is a myth.

 

I was interested in hearing what others felt like the benefits are for someone to leave the person he loves the most, break up that family, be celibate for the rest of their lives with no intimate relationships at all.  Surely you can see how being with the person you love is a MAJOR blessing in life.  So finding out what others think is the benefit of giving up that blessing was of interest to me.  

I've followed the thread only here and there, so this may be repetitious, but wanted to respond to the part in bold. First I agree with others who note it's sometimes better for individuals to leave the church in order to find greater healing. I've seen it for varying reasons and honor that choice. I've only met a handful of people who fit into the category you describe. All of these were not close and were what they stated in semi-public forums (albeit usually small groups). All of them mentioned something close to what gillebre mentioned: a profound relationship with God and deciding to follow no matter what. The one that stuck with me the most was Tom Christofferson, who both noted the pain of losing his partner of 20 years, but had one of the most powerful testimonies of Christ I'd experienced at that point in my life. 

Later on I like to believe I experienced something (more mildly) similar to that...though in a very different manner. I was prompted over and over again to stay in a relationship that I knew was unhealthy. (this ironically was happening when I hear Tom Christofferson's testimony). It wasn't a short period either...it continued on and off again for years and I knew at some point in it that what kept me there were strong promptings by God to stay. It was miserable. But it also turned out to be a necessary fire to forge and change me for the better. Who I became after was so different than who I'd been and my relationship with God was cemented in a way I didn't know it could have been. I remember distinctly after it was all done that I was alone, but I wasn't lonely...I had been filled by God in a way I couldn't have without a painful journey. And It opened doors and capacities for me to continue to grow and become better now.

Having a very healthy relationship now with a man I love, I very much realize just how big of a blessing that is in so many ways. But the experiences I had before meeting him taught me that what mattered most was my relationship with God. That said, I am no judge of another's promptings and I am not about to insist others do likewise. That is not a sacrifice I can ask or insist someone else make...doing so IMHO usually leads to a more inauthentic relationship towards God that can be more damaging than good. 

 

With luv,

BD