Editor's note: an earlier version of this appeared here on February 13, 2016.
(Revised and
Enlarged)
President Gordon B. Hinckley knew exactly
what he was talking about when, in a 1997 general conference, he
cautioned members of the Church, saying: “I hope you will never look to the public press [or bloggers/social
media] as the authority on the doctrines of the Church.” His point was
that most commentary from such sources fails to one degree or another to
accurately represent or communicate Church doctrine, practice, and policy. The
result is that many readers are given a false impression of the Church’s
position and judge it falsely thereby. Of course, such a result—misunderstanding
and confusion—is usually what the reporter or blogger—often a gay
activist—seeks. They know there is nothing easier to sway than an outraged but misinformed
audience.
The Position of the Church
The Proclamation
on the Family, issued by the
First Presidency, teaches that “All human beings—male and
female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or
daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and
destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal,
and eternal identity and purpose.”[1] The First Presidency has further
stated:
We of The Church
of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints reach out with understanding and respect
for individuals who are attracted to those of the same gender. We realize there
may be great loneliness in their lives but there must also be recognition of
what is right before the Lord. As a doctrinal principle, based on sacred
scripture, we affirm that marriage between a man and a woman is essential to
the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children. The powers of
procreation are to be exercised only between a man and a woman lawfully wedded
as husband and wife. Any other sexual relations, including those between
persons of the same gender, undermine the divinely created institution of the
family.[2]
During an occasion when activists
and media were agitating, President Hinckley stated the following, which is the
same thing he would say today if he still lived:
People inquire
about our position on those who consider themselves so-called gays and
lesbians. My response is that we love them as sons and daughters of God. They
may have certain inclinations which are powerful and which may be difficult to
control. Most people have inclinations of one kind or another at various times.
If they do not act upon these inclinations, then they can go forward as do all
other members of the Church. If they violate the law of chastity and the moral
standards of the Church, then they are subject to the discipline of the Church,
just as others are.
We want to help
these people, to strengthen them, to assist them with their problems and to
help them with their difficulties. But we cannot stand idle if they indulge in
immoral activity, if they try to uphold and defend and live in a so-called same-sex
marriage situation. To permit such would be to make light of the very serious
and sacred foundation of God-sanctioned marriage and its very purpose, the
rearing of families.[3]
In one of his last major addresses,
Elder L. Tom Perry stated: “We want our voice to be heard against all of the
counterfeit and alternative lifestyles that try to replace the family
organization that God Himself established.”[4] This message follows a
decades earlier declaration from him: “I want to publicly profess my opposition
to those who are so caught up in their own learning they believe with their
enlightened minds they can change the laws of God. A consensus of mankind is
not and never will be empowered to change these divine laws.” Elder Perry
continued:
These seemingly
enlightened minds are trying to destroy the sacred institution of marriage with
their erroneous doctrines and teachings. . . .
The
union between husband and wife is sacred to the Lord, something not to be
trifled with. . . .
In
all periods of time, he has declared his divine law is to safeguard and protect
this holy union between husband and wife. . . .
I
leave you my witness that there is a consistency in the laws of God that will
not change. When we conform our lives to his laws we will find a rewarding joy,
a fulfillment, and a peace as we live here on earth. When we would pervert or
change his laws or disregard them, we must stand the judgments of God, and as
surely as that occurs, misery, sorrow, and heartache will be the result.[5]
While much more has been
said and written
by the Church or its Public
Affairs spokespeople, these quotations convey the Church’s position well. None
of this should surprise anyone who pays attention to modern prophets and reads
material on its newsroom website.[6] Sin is still wrong and
serious sin still results in serious spiritual consequences. Gay
activism can’t change that fact. Those who refrain from or sincerely repent
of serious sin of any kind have a far smoother time progressing spiritually
than those who do not. God blesses those who keep His commandments, serve Him and
have faith in Him.
And for those
trying to wrest the scriptures to include gay relationships in the spirit
world and the resurrection, we quote Elder Bruce C. Hafen referencing Elder
Oaks: “If you are faithful, on resurrection morning—and maybe even before
then—you will rise with normal attractions for the opposite sex. Some of you
may wonder if that doctrine is too good to be true. But Elder Dallin H. Oaks
has said it MUST be true, because ‘there is no fullness of joy in the next life
without a family unit, including a husband and wife, and posterity.’ And ‘men (and
women) are that they might have joy.’”[7] Alma further taught: “Behold,
the scriptures are before you; if ye will wrest them it shall be to your own
destruction” (Alma 13:20). That’s the plain long-established doctrine of the
Church and it will never change.
What or Whose Standards ought we live by?
It becomes increasingly clear that
many voices around us call for a growing variety of standards or norms of human
behavior. They often desire others to follow them; to think like they do, to
espouse their particular cause of social justice.
Some call for an end to all
religion and eagerly litigate if a religious meeting is held in a public
building. Others call for animals to be given the same rights as human beings.
Some say that if we don’t join their religion they will kill us. Many begrudgingly
concede that religion has some minor uses as long as adherents stay out of
public policy and opinion. So what is the point?—ideas once considered extreme
are now the norm. Whether or not a majority in the United States or on planet
earth actually do think there is nothing wrong with same-sex marriage or not, if
activists become loud enough they can often bully people into believing that they
do constitute a majority. Words like “homophobic” are invented and given connotations
similar to “racist” and “bigot” and are used to silence or shame anyone unconvinced
by their great lie. The gay activist’s logic is so flawed that if God has given
laws and commandments against homosexual acts, then they say God himself must be
homophobic; or they disbelieve in him.
Good and evil inverted today
The great Old Testament prophet Isaiah
warned: “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness
for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for
bitter!” (Isaiah 5:20; see also 21, 23-25; and 2 Nephi 15:20-25.) The prophet Mormon
echoed this same caution, warning those living in the latter days to “take heed
. . . that ye do not judge that which is evil to be of God, or that which is
good and of God to be of the devil” (Moroni 7:14; see also 7:15-19). One would
think that such a thought as to charge God foolishly might be found in an atheists’
mind, but would never enter the heart of anyone claiming to be a latter-day saint—yet
here we are: “I sit here heartbroken that the Church is not only standing by
this regrettable policy but enshrining homophobia as God’s will.”[8] We would be hard-pressed
to come up with a better example of sophistry and disloyalty.
The pertinent question becomes—what
standard should Latter-day Saints or any people of faith and morality hold to?
Whose beckoning voices should we follow, if any? Do we find spiritual safety
with the popular trends of modern secular society, following their descent into
a river of filthy water? Or do we hold to a higher, iron-clad standard?
Is there a penetrating and familiar
warning voice to be heard amid the activist’s noisy clamor? It seems that a General
Conference cannot pass without God’s prophets and apostles employing strong language
that warns of how modern society continues its unrelenting downward spiral
toward immorality, amorality, secularism, atheism, moral relativism and the
spirit of anti-Christ. A few examples suffice:
“In a confusing world of
conflicting ideas, shifting values, and selfish desire for power. . . .”[9]
“People are looking for a solid
anchor in a world of shifting values. They want something they can hold to as
the world about them increasingly appears to be in disarray.”[10]
“One of the consequences of shifting
from moral absolutes to moral relativism in public policy is that this produces
a corresponding shift of emphasis from responsibilities to rights.
Responsibilities originate in moral absolutes. In contrast, rights find their
origin in legal principles, which are easily manipulated by moral relativism.”[11]
“I need not remind you that the
world we are in is a world of turmoil, of shifting values. Shrill voices call
out for one thing or another in betrayal of time-tested standards of behavior.
The moral moorings of our society have been badly shaken.”[12]
“Look at the world around us. There
has been a decline. The world has been slipping for as long as we know. Since
World War II, the plane dipped and it gets ever steeper. The world is slipping
into mischief and wickedness and depravity at a rate faster than we have known
or that we can find in the annals of history.”
These are warnings from church
leaders that the truly faithful hear and recognize and heed, and that others ignore
or rail against. Prophets and apostles not only know how things are in the
world now, but they also know much of what lies ahead; of course, that is
nonsense and gibberish to unbelievers and activists who desire to keep an iron grip
on their position of being the blind leading the blind.
Over two decades ago, a great Seer prophesied
of our time and of the decades to come. He declared: “As we continue on our
course, these things will follow as night the day: The distance between the
Church and a world set on a course which we cannot follow will steadily
increase. Some will fall away into apostasy, break their covenants, and replace
the plan of redemption with their own rules.”[13] “Their own rules”; their
own shifted and corrupted standards; evil is pronounced good and anyone
disagreeing is swiftly denounced as a homophobe. This same Seer further noted
that “President Harold B. Lee told me once of a conversation he had with Elder
Charles A. Callis of the Quorum of the Twelve. Brother Callis had remarked that
the gift of discernment was an awesome burden to carry. To see clearly what is
ahead and yet find members slow to respond or resistant to counsel or even
rejecting the witness of the apostles and prophets brings deep sorrow.”[14]
Could Isaiah and Mormon have described
our society’s present condition with any greater clarity? How many fringe, progressive
(liberal), dissident, and misled Mormons now proclaim evil is good and good is
evil on this issue and others? Who can doubt that the growing distance between
the Church and the world will continue to get wider as courts continue to
legalize other forms of sin and immorality.
In our current sex-saturated
society, it is easy to forget that commission of sexual sin is very serious;
next to murder in gravity in the eyes of the Lord (see Alma 39:5). Gay
activists don’t want homosexual relations to be considered sinful and so if they
are latter-day saints, they either need to apostatize or they need to wrest the
scriptures. Elder Boyd K. Packer noted: “Some challenge us to show where the
scriptures specifically forbid . . . . a gay-lesbian . . . life-style. ‘If they
are so wrong,’ they ask, ‘why don’t the scriptures tell us so in “letter of the
law” plainness?’ These issues are not ignored in the revelations. The
scriptures are generally positive rather than negative in their themes, and it
is a mistake to assume that anything not specifically prohibited in the ‘letter
of the law’ is somehow approved of the Lord. All the Lord approves is not
detailed in the scriptures, neither is all that is forbidden.” Then Brother
Packer quoted D&C 59:6, which says this: “Thou shalt not steal; neither
commit adultery, nor kill, nor do anything like unto it.” To illustrate his
point, he read it this way: “The scriptures tell us: ‘Thou shalt not … kill,
nor do anything like unto it’” (D&C 59:6). The “anything like unto it”
expands each category of sin—stealing, adultery and killing—so that every
conceivable wrong does not need enumeration. It is also correct read this way:
“Thou shalt not . . . commit adultery . . . nor do anything like unto it.” What
is like unto adultery?—any major sexual sin. As King Benjamin in the Book of
Mormon explained, “I cannot tell you all the things whereby ye may commit sin;
for there are divers ways and means, even so many that I cannot number them”
(Mosiah 4:29). Both the scriptures and today’s prophets and apostles have
clearly and forcefully declared the truth of this matter.
Media/blogger sophistry
One online piece on gay marriage
stated: “The Mormon Church has long opposed gay marriage. But until now, its
bishops were given discretion over whether to discipline Mormons in same-sex
relationships. Some Mormon congregations have quietly welcomed gay couples and
their children.”[15]
This is another example of clever sophistry. The variables are glossed over and
ignored. Anyone (that is not being disruptive) can indeed attend a sacrament
meeting and will be welcomed. However, if the couple is/was breaking the law of
chastity, which is the assumption here, whether married by the law of the land
or not the couple simply was not actively participating as members in good
standing.
Before the policy adjustments were
made, members breaking the law of chastity were just as subject to church
discipline then as they are now, and if their local leaders were not following
through with such measures they either needed further training or to be
released.
The stories that find their way
into the media or blogs about gay couples attending church are often misleading
because the implication for many readers is that they are fully participating. However,
only those not committing serious sin can participate fully as members in good
standing. Most media and blog stories neglect to mention that the gay people
are either living the law of chastity, are lying to their bishop, or are
attending without the privileges of membership. One article in the
liberal-extremist Huffington
Post gay activist section used this strategy by intimating that a gay
couple was fully participating in their local congregation after having come
back to church after a very long absence. Whether on purpose or on accident the
piece neglected to mention the strictly limited level of participation the
couple could have. They had been married by the civil law of the land and this
implies that they were breaking the moral law of chastity. Again, such sinful conduct
meant that they could not participate in the Church as members in good standing
(hold service callings, offer public prayers, take the sacrament, pay tithing,
give talks, teach lessons).
One gay activist compared the First
Presidency to a wife-beater, having equated their desire to keep the inner vessel
clean with spousal abuse.[16] Such thinking
demonstrates ignorance of fundamental doctrine. In the same article the
activist also said: “We may have alienated a portion of what could be really
amazing Latter-day Saints.” If they are defiantly practicing the gay lifestyle,
they cannot be active latter-day saints; if they are keeping the law of
chastity than they are entitled to all the blessings of the gospel and may
indeed be amazing latter-day saints. But the media often fails to make such
distinctions, leaving readers confused about the true position of the Church.
Again, confusion among readers helps the gay activist cause.
There is no such thing as a practicing gay Mormon
In point of fact, the oft-used term
“gay Mormon” is really a misnomer as the world or modern society views it. It
is more accurate and correct to say “same-sex-attracted Mormon,” (which is
entirely possible) since if the person is sexually active with someone of the
same sex, that person by definition cannot be an active, faithful, spiritual Mormon.
Another phrase that is being widely used and abused and inaccurately applied is
some combination of “faithful gay Mormon,” as in this sentence from a feminist
blogger evidently ignorant of Church doctrine and practice: “The Lord,
apparently, thinks it is the right thing to do . . . to declare gay church
members who are living in faithful and monogamous marriages to be apostates,
subject to possible excommunication.”[17] She came to this
conclusion after listening to a talk with parts related to the subject given
January 10, 2016, by President Russell M. Nelson. She should have known what
the position of the Lord and His Church was on gay marriage years before hearing
that talk. (She probably did but wants to challenge or dispute it; that’s what
disloyal gay activists do.)
There is no such thing as a gay
church member living in a faithful and monogamous marriage to someone of the
same sex. Further, attaching the word “faithful” to people—married or not—that
are having same-sex sexual relations is another impossibility. Being “faithful”
implies spiritual and physical worthiness and commitment to serving the Lord
and keeping His commandments and repenting of sins. Living in a same-sex
relationship evidences a blatant disregard for the commandment to live the law
of chastity. This was true before the handbook changes were made and is after.
It’s simply stated more clearly now.
The blogger continued her line of backwards
reasoning, betraying her lack of knowledge of the doctrine of the Church she
claims membership in:
So what does this mean for the
many, many Latter-day Saints who have indeed prayed about this, fasted about
this, and similarly “wrestled at length” to get the Lord’s guidance—only to
receive a totally different answer than the prophet’s? . . .
And an answer that recognizes the
inherent sacred worth of LGBT persons — and their marriages?
I am in that camp. I sit here
heartbroken that the Church is not only standing by this regrettable policy but
enshrining homophobia as God’s will.[18]
Latter-day saints who pray and
receive an answer “totally different” from or in opposition or contradiction to
the voice of the First Presidency and Twelve are deceived and wrong and should
repent or suffer the consequences. From Hiram Page and his phony seer stone
(see D&C 28) to gay activists and sympathizers getting false impressions
today, such counterfeit personal revelation has long been a serious problem
that has led many people astray.
Regarding the status of children in
this matter, I would much rather rely on the interpretation of scripture and
doctrine from the First Presidency and Twelve than that of a gay activist or doctrinal
dissident. If the Holy Spirit directs them to implement a policy for children
of polygamists and same-sex couples that is different than for others, that is
fine with me. I do not know their reasoning or the inspiration they received
beyond what they have said, but I can venture a guess for what it is worth.
If a child is raised in an
environment where something very wrong is portrayed as normal or good; where
example, discussions, teachings and lessons, on a daily basis, convey such a lifestyle
as good, those teachings become ingrained and powerfully influential in a
child’s understanding and experience. Whether they themselves develop same-sex
attractions or not, they are likely going to view such relationships as good
and right. Then, when these impressionable children go to Church, they will be
taught that the lifestyle of their “parents” is sinful and wrong, and will also
be taught why. They will see that the scriptures and the teachings of the
prophets and apostles and the stake president and bishop and primary teacher
oppose what they receive at home. These kinds of contradictions could be very
difficult for children to deal with, especially when the Holy Spirit whispers
to their souls that the way their parents live is sinful. The policies in the
handbook help mitigate such concerns. And of course, without court approved
adoptions or scientific intervention, gay people cannot normally (biologically)
have any children to worry about in the first place.
Another consideration that comes to
mind is that of lawsuits. Since the days of Joseph Smith, anti-Mormons have filed
suite as a way to harass and vex the Church; it is standard operating procedure
among them. This is why the Church has an Office of General Counsel and a respected
law firm on continuous retainer. It could well be that a hateful or angry gay
“parent” could decide to sue the Church over religious matters; the policy
avoids such possibilities.
But just what is the inherent worth
of LGBT marriages? Is an arrangement or lifestyle that continuously breaks the
commandments of God “sacred” as the blogger states? This blogger claims to hold
a temple recommend. Is she justified or in open public rebellion? Is she moving
from being a wolf in sheep’s clothing to being a wolf in wolf’s clothing? How
much humility and contrition will such a person have in their lives and prayers
as they find prophetic counsel and established doctrine contradicting their personal
views? She seems to have answered this question by rhetorically asking another:
“By rejecting this policy, are . . . members like me, people who hold a calling
and a temple recommend, now to be regarded as ‘servants of Satan?’” As the
First Presidency put it: “Those who persist in such behavior or who influence others to do so are
subject to Church discipline.” In this same vein, newspaper reporters who
persist in fanning the flames of the gay activist cause in opposition to the
teachings and policies of the Church are also subject to Church discipline;
further, if for some reason they are not excommunicated or disfellowshipped,
one wonders if they could not find honorable employment elsewhere, doing
something helpful; using their influence for good instead of evil.
This blogger and others, as well as
various
media outlets, have taken notice of President Nelson’s January 10, 2016, talk,
“Becoming
True Millennials.” The reason is because, in something of an unusual gesture,
as part of his remarks, President Nelson shared some of the behind-the-scenes deliberations
and procedures of the First Presidency and the Twelve in relation to the
handbook revisions. He declared the substance of the changes to have been a
result of revelation to President Thomas S. Monson. Such declarations of the
will of the Lord by the Prophet of the Lord are simply not acceptable to an
unbelieving world responding to moral relativism as dictated by social media
and activism. To them such prophetic pronouncements need to be qualified or
altered or mocked. One
blogger did his best to rationalize President Nelson’s language to mean
policy, not revelation, for the Church, and therefore something he hoped to be
changed later. Many commenters seemed to hope he was right. Parsing such terms
in a search for loopholes does not demonstrate either understanding or loyalty.
Of course, church policy is rooted in revelation and therefore usually becomes
enduring, with little or no adjustment.
President Nelson speaks of the handbook changes
In his unusually powerful talk,
even for him, President Russel M. Nelson said:
This prophetic process was followed
in 2012 with the change in minimum age for missionaries and again with the
recent additions to the Church’s handbook, consequent to the legalization of
same-sex marriage in some countries. Filled with compassion for all, and
especially for the children, we wrestled at length to understand the Lord’s
will in this matter. Ever mindful of God’s plan of salvation and of His hope
for eternal life for each of His children, we considered countless permutations
and combinations of possible scenarios that could arise. We met repeatedly in
the temple in fasting and prayer and sought further direction and inspiration. And
then, when the Lord inspired His prophet, President Thomas S. Monson, to
declare the mind of the Lord and the will of the Lord, each of us during that
sacred moment felt a spiritual confirmation. It was our privilege as Apostles
to sustain what had been revealed to President Monson. Revelation from the Lord
to His servants is a sacred process, and so is your privilege of receiving
personal revelation.
Only ignorance of what revelation
is and how prophets and apostles receive it allow people to twist President
Nelson’s wording into “policy” instead of “revelation,” a word used three times
in two sentences. Words like direction, inspiration, and spiritual confirmation
are also used and by a speaker who chooses his words carefully. One can
disbelieve that it is genuine revelation from God to His prophet, but one
cannot change the meaning of the words.
President Nelson also took occasion
to give members a warning we should all take as seriously as we value our hope
of eternal life:
Prophets see
ahead. They see the harrowing dangers the adversary has placed or will yet
place in our path. Prophets also foresee the grand possibilities and privileges
awaiting those who listen with the intent to obey. I know this is true! I have
experienced it for myself over and over again. The Lord has promised us that He
will never allow the prophet to lead us astray.
Around 41 B.C.,
many Nephites joined the Church, and the Church prospered. But secret
combinations also began to grow, and many of their cunning leaders hid among
the people and were difficult to detect. As the people became more and more
prideful, many of the Nephites made “a mock of that which was sacred, denying
the spirit of prophecy and of revelation.”
Those same threats
are among us today. The somber reality is that there are “servants of Satan”
embedded throughout society. So be very careful about whose counsel you follow.[19]
This is what we see on social media
and in newspapers today, people in and out of the Church, including those who
should know better, denying the spirit of prophecy and of revelation: “Deny not
the spirit of revelation, nor the spirit of prophecy, for wo unto him that denieth
these things” (D&C 11:25). We can follow the unbelieving and faithless activists’
counsel or that of President Nelson and his apostolic associates. Elder M.
Russell Ballard has given this warning:
Too often we hear,
“why do the Brethren…”, or, “why does the Church…” instead of, “why do the
scriptures teach…” or “why does the Lord say…”. We need to remember that when
the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve speak with a united voice it
is the voice of the Lord for that time. . . . So I am saying to you, when you
step out into the noisy world, keep your eyes on us. We will not and cannot
lead you astray. Do not ever follow those who believe they know more than
Heavenly Father and the Lord Jesus Christ about the administration of the
affairs of Their Church here upon the earth. . . .
In every
generation there are those who have partaken of the fruit, but later became
ashamed of the gospel. Today is no different. To them and to us, Paul boldly
declared, “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of
God unto salvation to everyone that believeth.” The Lord needs an army of
faithful, dedicated, and loyal disciples who are not ashamed of the gospel of
Christ and who are willing to speak and stand up for the doctrine of Christ,
including all principles and practices that flow from us as announced by The
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints—even when the principles and
practices are not popular with some who may say they are not currently
politically correct. . . .
Please remember
that public opinion is not God. We must be faithful to Him. Additionally,
public opinion is not our judge; God is our judge and He will stand by us. . .
.
You will be going
out into a noisy world. This noisy world will have some things to say that are
nice about the Church and they will have some things not so nice. There will be
those who want to tamper with the doctrine, but you don’t listen to that
because you stay anchored to the fundamental doctrine and gospel of Christ. May
God bless you with the courage and the strength to stand wherever you are
serving and whatever your circumstances may be—that you may stand never never
ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ; never with a wonderment or concern about
the leadership of the Church. We are led by a prophet; there are fifteen
apostles on the earth. We meet together. And I said earlier, we cannot and we
will not lead you astray. Keep your eyes upon us. . . .
I leave you my
witness and testimony. I know that Jesus is the Christ; I love Him. I know you
do to. But I witness to you that He lives.[20]
Bearing false witness for others
A Salt Lake newspaper website posted
a letter from an old man who is the grandson of a deceased apostle and a
descendant of some prominent early Mormons. This aged man, long known for his heretical
religious views, apostatized and left the Church years ago to join a protestant
denomination. In the letter the man castigated Church leaders for the manual
changes, and declared them in apostasy and in danger of hell-fire. He then
reverses himself and says he loves and sustains them and acknowledges that they
speak for “the institutional church” (that he himself has left). He then
declared that he speaks for his ancestors and announced that they would approve
of gay marriage.[21]
He evidently doesn’t know his Mormon history and how these earlier (actually) faithful
latter-day saints reacted when they learned of homosexual practices in their
midst. One of his named ancestors was Zina D. H. Young, a plural wife of
Brigham Young and part of the most prominent circle of leading women in Utah
and the Church. Her associates were women of profound spiritual stature like
Eliza R. Snow, Emmaline B. Wells, Mary Isabella Horne, and Helen Mar Kimball
Whitney. Helen Mar was a plural wife of Joseph Smith, daughter of Heber C.
Kimball, and the mother of Elder Orson F. Whitney. She and Zina Young and the
others all worked and traveled together in Relief Society matters and held harmonious
views on fundamental gospel principles. On learning of the specific homosexual sins
that lead to the excommunication of a local ward bishop, Helen wrote the
following in her dairy for Sept. 3, 1886: “Stopt quite a time to rest &
visit with Em. & Elmira Taylor, & there I learned the facts concerning
Bp Taylor’s being excommunicated from the Church—I was too horrified to give
expression to my feelings—I never dreamed that Salt Lake was so near being
another ‘Soddom’ . . . I thought What will be the next horror in Zion.”[22]
Our activist letter writer should
have done his homework before claiming to speak for Zina and his other
ancestors who were not steeped in today’s secularism and moral relativism. He
is the one who apostatized, not they.
It is amazing what can be heard
from ignorant critics. One explanation that I heard was that when the
strengthened handbook wording leaked and the liberal dissidents filling social
media didn’t like it and therefore called it “changeable policy”, that Church
leaders quickly got together and decided to have President Nelson give a talk proclaiming
it revelation. Besides revealing a complete lack of understanding of how such internal
things work, this fellow didn’t realize that the published Church Correlation
approval date for the talk was 11/15. This means that the talk was written by
November, the same month the unscrupulous blogger leaked the confidential
changes and that Elder Christofferson gave
his video interview. No conspiracy there, sorry.
President Nelson would never speak
of internal processes, procedures, decisions, and revelations that take place
in sacred and confidential council meetings without authorization. Similarly,
as the President of the Quorum of the Twelve and the next senior apostle in the
line of succession to become the President, he is positioned to appropriately
explain such developments. He declared: “I love and sustain President Thomas S.
Monson in this sacred work of Almighty God. Jesus Christ is our Savior. This is
His Church. We are His people!” So it is.
Where the line is drawn
The Church is not anymore against gay
sex than it is abortion, fornication, adultery, stealing, lying, and serious sin
of any kind, all of which it opposes to the extent it can; but activists
usually confuse sin with sinners. All mankind are sinners, they just don’t always
become activists seeking to justify sin by calling evil good.
Some activists express regret for
the Church’s firm stand because they desire to continue living in the “Mormon
culture.” They see the good it does for people and desire to combine that good
with their sinful lifestyle. While they find that such a course doesn’t work
and makes life untenable, they are still welcome to eat green jello and funeral
potatoes, show up ten minutes late for meetings, and enjoy any other trappings
of the culture that they like. But they are not welcome to foul the inner
vessel with iniquity.
Following Jesus’ example, Church
leaders teach love for all men and women. But, as Elder Packer taught, that
love and compassion and hope for others does not include efforts to save people
IN their sins, but rather to save people FROM their sins (see Alma 11:34-37). Nor
do Church leaders allow gay activists to blackmail them by predicting suicide
increases among same-sex attracted members if they won’t change church
doctrine. While Church
leaders mourn the tragedy of people taking their own lives for whatever
reason, they do not soften the commandments to accommodate sin for any reason.
A common word cast about by gay
activists is “pain”—meaning the Lord’s position as given by His prophets to His
Church regarding homosexual activity causes those involved in it pain. And this
is seen as bad; even intolerable; and some think to avoid it by lashing out
publicly at the Church or the Brethren. But pain, spiritual and emotional and
even social, is simply the price of sin. Until relieved by true repentance and
forgiveness, anyone involved with homosexual sin, adultery, fornication, and
any other kind of serious sin will experience a degree of pain. Others may
grieve to watch their loved one suffer this pain, or feel it themselves for
that person because of their love, but it is a consequence of sin that activism
will not alleviate. Only the atonement can do that when properly applied. People
who sin can, by process of spiritual law, expect to experience pain.
Many people want to stretch the
virtue of tolerance so far as to cover serious sin, turning that virtue
into a vice. Or they want to say that the Church’s position on gay marriage
is not “Christ-like.” They incorrectly seem to think being Christ-like means
tolerating anything and everything evil found in the world. We are told we must
love and accept gay people to the point of condoning and normalizing and
accepting their sexual lifestyle, even though it is contrary to the
commandments of God. If we don’t, they say we are “judging” others—a
misinterpretation of scripture. On the subject of loving God and His children, Elder
Jeffrey R. Holland taught:
My beloved
brothers and sisters, I am not certain just what our experience will be on
Judgment Day, but I will be very surprised if at some point in that
conversation, God does not ask us exactly what Christ asked Peter: “Did you
love me?” I think He will want to know if in our very mortal, very inadequate,
and sometimes childish grasp of things, did we at least understand one
commandment, the first and greatest commandment of them all—“Thou shalt love
the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy
strength, and with all thy mind.” And if at such a moment we can stammer out,
“Yea, Lord, thou knowest that I love thee,” then He may remind us that the
crowning characteristic of love is always loyalty. “If ye love me, keep my
commandments,” Jesus said.
Some people evidently forget that
Jesus cast the money-changers out of His Father’s House—if He wouldn’t tolerate
greedy merchants making money off temple rites, what do we suppose He would do today
with those seeking to marry people of the same sex in His Holy House (or
anywhere)? Even the mere thought of such desecration and abomination taking
place in the House of the Lord causes one to shudder and to thank God for
prophets that safeguard and protect the keys of the sealing power from the
worldly and unworthy.
If the Lord decided to permit
people with same-sex inclinations/temptations to engage in sexual relations
without spiritual penalty, then he would also have to allow others to commit their
own favorite sins with impunity—fornication, petting, adultery, pedophilia,
rape, incest, stealing, drug abuse, alcoholism, abortion, even murder—all would
cease to be sinful.[23] The list of commandments
would disappear and God would cease to be God.
The apostle Paul taught:
This know also, that in the last
days perilous times shall come.
For men [and women] shall be lovers
of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to
parents, unthankful, unholy,
Without natural affection,
trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that
are good,
Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers
of pleasures more than lovers of God;
Having a form of godliness, but
denying the power thereof: from such [the wicked] turn away.
In a sense, we turn away from sin and
especially the activist who promotes sin, not the sinner (unless the sinner is
also the activist); we try to save the sinner from the sin by teaching repentance
and forgiveness and about the power of the atonement of Jesus Christ and faith
in Him. And sometimes we try to clarify some of the nonsense posted by
activists on the internet. Conversely, if something upsets the gay activists,
it may very well be good and true. Some correct doctrine:
It’s true that the law of chastity
forbids all sexual relations outside the bonds of a married heterosexual
relationship. And while same-gender attraction is not a sin, you need to resist
cultivating immoral, lustful thoughts toward those of either gender. It’s no sin if a bird lands in your tree,
just don’t let him build a nest there.
The adversary will tempt you by constantly “enticing” you to “do that
which is evil,” because “there is an opposition in all things.” (2 Nephi 2:11)
But God will also constantly “entice” you “to do good continually.” (see Moroni
7:12-13. No temptation is so strong that
you can’t resist it, unless you have already given away some portion of your
agency to a total addiction. So will you choose to “yield” to temptation, or
will you “yield to the enticing of the Holy Spirit”? (Mosiah 3:19) It’s up to you.[24]
Bundles of Sin
Having now
reviewed the profound implications of promoting homosexual sin, a further
generalization is in order, one that pertains to the sophistry used by
activists. While not applying in all cases, we should remember that often, if someone
engages in one weighty sin, they are usually committing others at the same
time. Sin, especially serious sin, is usually present in groups or
bundles—meaning that lying, deception, Word of Wisdom violations (especially
drug use), viewing pornography, and other kinds of sin are often indulged in
together. These sins of commission
are also usually accompanied by sins of omission—meaning
offenders stop praying, stop reading the scriptures, stop attending church, stop
heeding prophetic counsel, lose the Holy Spirit, and so forth. These behaviors
usually lead to loss of testimony, rejection of God, and rank personal
apostasy. They purposely walk a path of great “pain” leading to spiritual death,
and they call it standing up for right. People in this category often seek
support by commenting on or engaging in discussions in online support groups,
where bashing the Church is considered sport. This kind of vicious religious
hate speech and bigotry fill the comments sections of many online newspaper stories
and blogs about the Church. When gay activists criticize the Church for being
true to God’s commandments, they often purposely mislead by withholding the
fact that those they write about are often committing other serious sins that
also interfere with their ability to be faithful latter-day saints.
One
such gay activist-apostate used his position in the music industry to
release videos and song lyrics containing sacrilege, blasphemy, religious hate
speech, and mockery of the sacred. (He spoke of getting drunk as he began his
descent into bitter apostasy and sin. All the disbelief he can muster will do
him no good when the inevitable time comes to account for his behavior.) Others
have likewise used what pulpits the media have offered them to do all in their power
to harm the Lord’s Church; all to no avail.
The Future of the Church
In conclusion, despite all that gay
activists can and will yet do, we rejoice in a bright future for the truly faithful
and for the Church, which can and does include many same-sex attracted yet
chaste and worthy people on an upward path of spiritual progression. Things
will be well at the final judgment and throughout eternity for any and all who
keep the commandments and receive the ordinances and live clean truly faithful
lives of love and service—whether they are same-sex attracted or otherwise.
Some have foolishly predicted the
eventual demise of the Lord’s Church because of its uncompromising stand on
this central issue. A few once thought to be strong have said it
may cause them to leave the Church. Hundreds of those who have already left
(in every way but that of formally writing a resignation letter) have joined
publicity stunts of protest, seeking to harm or influence the Church. But their
actions are negligible and barely noticed. Although church leaders are saddened
by the loss of any soul to the deceptions of the Adversary as voiced by gay
activists, we note that recently a
church spokesman released the statistic that less than one-tenth of one percent
of members resign their membership each year. Such a tiny number shatters the
illusions so carefully created by the activists and anti-Mormons.
On President Boyd K. Packer’s
passing, his
son noted: “Dad was always optimistic and positive and not afraid of
anything. He said over and over again—we've heard him say—'The Twelve are not afraid of what's going on in the world.' That
brings great peace to the church and the family.”
Those paying attention to the
prophets, seers, and revelators know what the eventual destiny of the Church
is. President Packer has prophesied: “No matter if the Church grows to be a hundred million (as it surely will!), it will still be no
bigger than a ward. . . . Whatever happens in the world, whatever heights of
civility or depths of depravity emerge in
society, the plan remains unaltered. The Church will grow until it fills the
whole earth.”[25]
That time of fullness, of course, will occur during the Millennium. Until then,
things will get more and more ugly in the wicked world around us. Elder Bruce
R. McConkie declared: “We know that the world will go on in wickedness until
the end of the world, which is the destruction of the wicked. We shall continue
to live in the world, but with the Lord’s help we shall not be of the world. We
shall strive to overcome carnality and worldliness of every sort and shall
invite all men to flee from Babylon, join with us, and live as becometh Saints.
. . . Our only hope is to free ourselves from the bondage of sin, to rid
ourselves from the chains of darkness, to rise above the world, to live godly
and upright lives.”[26] Further, “We weep for
those in the true Church who are weak and wayward and worldly and who fall by
the wayside as the caravan of the kingdom rolls forward. We rejoice because of
the glory and honor that awaits those who come forth out of all this
tribulation with clean hands and pure hearts.”
The prophesy of the future is clearly
set before us:
But the vision of
the future is not all sweetness and light and peace. All that is yet to be
shall go forward in the midst of greater evils and perils and desolations than
have been known on earth at any time.
As the Saints
prepare to meet their God, so those who are carnal and sensual and devilish
prepare to face their doom.
As the meek among
men make their calling and election sure, so those who worship the God of this
world sink ever lower and lower into the depths of depravity and despair.
Amid tears of
sorrow—our hearts heavy with forebodings—we see evil and crime and carnality
covering the earth. Liars and thieves and adulterers and homosexuals and
murderers scarcely seek to hide their abominations from our view. Iniquity
abounds. There is no peace on earth.
We see evil forces
everywhere uniting to destroy the family, to ridicule morality and decency, to
glorify all that is lewd and base. We see wars and plagues and pestilence.
Nations rise and fall. Blood and carnage and death are everywhere. Gadianton
robbers fill the judgment seats in many nations. An evil power seeks to
overthrow the freedom of all nations and countries. Satan reigns in the hearts
of men; it is the great day of his power.
But amid it all,
the work of the Lord rolls on. The gospel is preached and the witness is born.
The elect of God forsake the traditions of their fathers and the ways of the
world. The kingdom grows and prospers, for the Lord is with his people.
Amid it all, there
are revelations and visions and prophecies. There are gifts and signs and
miracles. There is a rich outpouring of the Holy Spirit of God.
Amid it all
believing souls are born again, their souls are sanctified by the power of the
Spirit, and they prepare themselves to dwell with God and Christ and holy
beings in the eternal kingdom.
Is it any wonder
that we both rejoice and tremble at what lies ahead?. . .
If we, as a
people, keep the commandments of God; if we take the side of the Church on all
issues, both religious and political; if we take the Holy Spirit for our guide;
if we give heed to the words of the apostles and prophets who minister among
us—then, from an eternal standpoint, all things will work together for our
good.[27]
The only question then, is who will
loyally come along for the ride, or, who will be left behind; who will have
their lamps trimmed and lit or who will run out of oil. The wheat is being
separated from the tares with the hastening of the Lord’s work.
[2] Deseret Morning News, Oct. 20, 2004,
“Statement from the LDS First Presidency”.
[3] https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1998/10/what-are-people-asking-about-us?lang=eng
[4] https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2015/04/why-marriage-and-family-matter-everywhere-in-the-world?lang=eng
[5] “For
the Time Will Come When They Will Not Endure Sound Doctrine,” General
Conference address, October 1975. https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1975/10/for-the-time-will-come-when-they-will-not-endure-sound-doctrine?lang=eng.
While these quotations are directed at adulterers, there is no question they
apply equally well to same-sex relationships and that Elder Perry would so
apply them today.
[6] I
say this because some reporters and semi-apostate bloggers seem to react with
surprise to each successive reaffirmation of the Church’s position by its
leaders or spokespeople.
[7] http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/elder-bruce-c-hafen-speaks-on-same-sex-attraction.
He also taught: “Having same-gender attraction is NOT in your DNA, but being a
child of God clearly IS in your spiritual DNA—only one generation removed from
Him whom we call Father in Heaven.”
[8] http://janariess.religionnews.com/2016/01/11/mormon-lgbt-ban-was-revealed-to-the-prophet-as-gods-will-says-elder-nelson/
[9] https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2000/10/living-prophets-seers-and-revelators?lang=eng
[10] https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1998/10/what-are-people-asking-about-us?lang=eng
[11] https://www.lds.org/ensign/1992/10/religious-values-and-public-policy?lang=eng
[12] https://www.lds.org/ensign/1995/11/stand-strong-against-the-wiles-of-the-world.p10?lang=eng
[13] https://www.lds.org/ensign/1994/05/the-father-and-the-family?lang=eng
[14]
As quoted in Mine Errand from the Lord,
chapter on Leadership and Following the Brethren.
[15] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/14/us/mormons-set-to-quit-church-over-policy-on-gay-couples-and-their-children.html?_r=0
[16] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/mormon-gay-dads_56606307e4b079b2818d685d
[17] http://janariess.religionnews.com/2016/01/11/mormon-lgbt-ban-was-revealed-to-the-prophet-as-gods-will-says-elder-nelson/
[18] http://janariess.religionnews.com/2016/01/11/mormon-lgbt-ban-was-revealed-to-the-prophet-as-gods-will-says-elder-nelson/
[19] https://www.lds.org/broadcasts/article/worldwide-devotionals/2016/01/becoming-true-millennials?lang=eng
[20] M.
Russell Ballard, typescript excerpt from an address given at Provo, Utah, MTC,
June 17, 2014, np.
[21] http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/3410898-155/letter-denying-sacraments-to-children-is
[22]
As quoted in Hatch and Compton, “A Widow's Tale: 1884-1896 Diary of Helen Mar
Kimball Whitney”, (p.
187).
[23]
As the guide to the scriptures says regarding “Sexual Immorality” is defined
as: “Willful participation in adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism,
incest, or any other unholy, unnatural, or impure sexual activity.”
[24] http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/elder-bruce-c-hafen-speaks-on-same-sex-attraction
[25] https://www.lds.org/ensign/1999/05/the-bishop-and-his-counselors?lang=eng
[26]
“Stand Independent Above All Other Creatures,” April 1979 General Conference; https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1979/04/stand-independent-above-all-other-creatures?lang=eng
[27]
Bruce R. McConkie, “The Coming Trials and Tests and Glory,” April 1980 General
Conference; https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1980/04/the-coming-tests-and-trials-and-glory?lang=eng
No comments:
Post a Comment