I've seen a lot of posts talking about the LDS church's position and how emotionally devastating it is - and that is the big takeaway from this shocking policy change, but I thought I would do a little bit different post exploring exactly how hollow the argument is even from the perspective of their own dogma.
First let's look at the actual policy changes from their manual.
1 - The addition of a new heading under the term "Apostasy" (defined in the Oxford Dictionary as "the abandonment or renunciation of a religious or political belief") of
"Are in a same-gender marriage."
That is pretty severe considering the only other definitions of apostasy are
- "Repeatedly act in clear, open, and deliberate public opposition to the Church or its leaders."
- "Persist in teaching as Church doctrine information that is not Church doctrine after they have been corrected by their bishop or a higher authority."
- "Continue to follow the teachings of apostate sects (such as those that advocate plural marriage) after being corrected by their bishop or higher authority." (We'll come back to this one later.)
- "Formally join another church and advocate its teachings."
Notice how none of those are "murder" "rape" "molestation" etc. (All of which can result in excommunication, but are not considered crimes against the church as an organization.) Neither is "homosexual sex" on the list - only "same-gender marriage." So the church is not considering the sin of homosexuality here - they are considering gay marriage as an attack on the church in a technical organizational sense. As if gays who are getting married have some sort of agenda against the church. The "gay agenda" perhaps?
In the video response from the church (which you can watch here) a church leader (an apostle!) says, "We regard same-sex marriage as a particularly grievous or significant, serious kind of sin that requires Church discipline. It means the discipline is mandatory — doesn’t dictate outcomes but it dictates that discipline is needed in those cases."
Apostasy is pretty much the highest level of sin you can commit against a religion (to the church itself, not necessarily god) so when Mr. Christofferson says that punishment isn't dictated, he doesn't just mean that it doesn't HAVE to be excommunication, but this also means that it can pretty much be as severe as they would like it to be up to, and including, excommunication.
2 - This is the doozie: A whole section was added specifically about children of gay families (this one applies to gay people LIVING in a relationship - not just to married gay couples):
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.
Oh boy.
Okay, here we go: This new policy basically treats children of gay parents as children who are being raised in and being indoctrinated by a religious sect which is in open opposition to the Mormon church - such as those sects who advocate plural marriage (as in one of the other definitions of apostasy from before).
You can see the similarity in the section about children of parents in plural marriages from the 1998 Church Handbook of Instructions - Handbook 1:
Children Whose Parents Have Been Excommunicated for Practicing Plural Marriage
Children of parents who have been excommunicated for practicing plural marriage must receive approval from the First Presidency to be baptized. The bishop may request this approval through the stake president when he is satisfied that the children
1. accept the teachings and doctrines of the Church and
2. repudiate the teachings that caused their parents' excommunication.
Mr Christiensen makes it clear that this was their inspiration for the new policy when he states, "The situation with polygamist families, for example, and same-sex marriage couples and families really has a parallel. For generations we've had these same kinds of policies that relate to children in polygamist families that we wouldn't go forward with these ordinances while they're in that circumstance and before they reach their majority[sic]. That's the same sort of situation we're dealing with here, so it's something we have had a history with. It's a practice that really is analogous that's been the case over many generations."
"...Anyone coming out of a polygamous setting who wants to serve a mission, it has to be clear that they understand that is wrong and is sin and cannot be followed. They disavow the practice of plural marriage. And that would be the same case here. They would disavow, or assent I guess would be a better way to say it, to the doctrines and practices of the Church with regards to same-sex marriage. So they would be saying, as you said, not disavowing their parents, but disavowing the practice."
You can kind of see the church's position on this. They are feeling attacked by the "organization" of gay marriage and so they decide to deal with it on the same level that they have dealt with plural marriage.
There are many reasons why it is a false analogy for the church to compare children living in polygamist households with children living with gay parents but here are some of the major ones:
1 - Polygamy in the western U.S. has primarily been related to splinter religious groups who have doctrinal differences with the main branch of the Mormon church.
These sects literally ARE teaching their children that not only is the main Mormon church wrong, but are setting up an alternative theology often with their own "prophet" and general authorities.
Despite what the church leadership may think, there is no "gay agenda" that is trying specifically to go against the Mormon church. Yes, the gay members of the church are "living in sin" by being in a homosexual relationship, but not anymore in sin than members who are co-habitating and/or committing fornication.
I'm sure many straight couples are having anal sex without the church considering those couples to be some sort of organized group with a specific agenda against the church for anal sex and blow jobs to be an accepted sexual practice.
In other words, this policy sets up people in gay marriage as part of some organization with specific anti-Mormon policies when this couldn't be any farther from the case. If you want to consider gay sex as a sin, then they is your own business but to elevate gay marriage to some sort of organized group who give two cents about what old white dude is considered a "prophet of the lord" then they are seriously mistaken.
2 - Polygamy is illegal - gay marriage is not.
In a way it makes sense that they Mormon church would want to distance themselves from polygamous sects who are illegally practicing something for which the Mormon church has gotten into a lot of legal trouble over in the 19th century and something they would rather put behind them. Ask any Mormon if they have multiple spouses and you will receive a groan and a roll of the eyes that is reflected in the attitude of "please forget about that polygamy stuff" that the church as an organization desperately wants.
On the other hand nobody is confused about the Mormon church conducting gay marriages. There have not been multiple Mormon leaders thrown in jail for practicing gay marriage. No body asks their Mormon friends how many gay marriages they have performed. There is no precedent for the Mormon church to take this sort of legal hard nosed stance against children with parents who are gay. No body needs to get special permission from the upper church management to baptize the child of parents who are not married but live together. There is no special need for a child to disavow adultery if on of their parents committed adultery.
3 - Polygamy happens in compounds in the mountains or deserts - gay couples and their families are part of the community.
It makes sense that the church wouldn't want to have anything to do with children of polygamist sects because that may involve them going out to the home and sending church members to give lessons in the homes of people who actively dislike the Mormon church. It could even be dangerous to send some over zealous home teacher to a child's house if they are on some polygamous compound in the middle of the desert.
The only reason for the church not wanting to send home teachers to the homes of gay parents is that they might realize how silly the church is about the whole thing. They might get to know gay couples and see how much they love their children despite being rejected by their own religion. This way the suffering of gay families can be completely swept under the rug and no church member with any authority is under any obligation to deal with them at all.
Overall the response of the church to the legalization of gay marriage is overblown and looks threatens to burn the entire religion to the ground. To be a church who claims to be all about family and then issue a policy that exploits and harms children smacks of hypocrisy and illustrates clearly that the leadership of the Mormon church is completely out of touch not only with modern society but with human decency. In it's blind flailing to re-establish the power dynamic against homosexual couples it has over-extended it's reach and not only hurt gay couples and their children but every member who believed
At the end of the video response from the church Mr Christofferson made what is quite possibly the most insulting statement of all. When asked if children of gay couples could still be blessed if they are sick he said, "When we are talking about blessings, priesthood blessings, given to those who are ill or want a blessing of comfort or guidance, that's open to all."
Mormons give blessings to anyone who wants one. Every person, every animal, every building, every tree. So basically Mr Christofferson is saying that at least the church still considers children of gay parents to be as worthy of a blessing as LITERALLY everything. I'm sure that is very comforting to everyone in emotional anguish over your recent policy decision.
References:
Changes to LDS Policy Regarding Same-Gender Relationships and Children
http://mormonstories.org/same-gender-relationships-and-children/
Church video response to outcry over new policy
http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/handbook-changes-same-sex-marriages-elder-christofferson
1999 Church Handbook 1
http://www.provocation.net/chi/chi99.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment