Where we were going, and now this!

Two posts from one of my news threads June 22, 2008.

The first illustrates the direction that we (gay Mormon's) were going before the "letter from the pulpit" was announced to be read on June 29th, 2008. The second illustrates what the "letter from the pulpit" will continue to perpetuate.

* * *
"Just wanted to share an experience running into a friend at pride in SLC two weeks ago. I think she was on this list at one time but I haven't seen her post in a long time. Her name is [Mary - name changed], she came out to her parents a few years ago and they were NOT HAPPY. Her father could hardly talk to her, said she had ruined their eternal family, etc. (My parents and her parents were best friends in grad school at Indiana University years ago).

What a change a few years has brought about. Three years ago when [Mary] met her partner, the parents had accepted [Mary] a little bit more but were a bit cold to the partner.

It didn't help things that [Mary's] younger sister decided post-mission she was lesbian, had several girlfriends, then suddenly decided she wasn't and married a guy. Of course the parents were thinking "if she can do it, surely [Mary] can." Anyway, a year ago most of [her] family came to SLC to see "Facing East" and spent the evening talking with her and her partner. She's only got one brother who is holding out a bit, the rest of the family is totally on her side (and all of them very church active). Recently her mom's sister was planning the huge family reunion for the year to be held in CA, but wanted it known that [Mary's] partner was not invited, and [Mary] only would be if she wouldn't talk about her life. The aunt basically received a huge WTF from the rest of the family...not just [Mary's] immediate family, but even the other aunts and uncles. It's caused a huge controversy in the family with almost everyone on [Mary's] side. I don't know what's going to happen, or who will go, but this one aunt is really isolated because of her behavior.

Anyway, all that just to say that watching [Mary's] family has been amazing, I know they're all still TBM's (True-blue Mormons) and active, but they fully support [Mary] and her partner ."

* * *
Contrast this to the following post on the thread.
* * *

"I sure envy [Mary] with her family's being able to come around to her side. I've been out to my family for close to 10 years now. I can't believe how time flies. Anyway, they are still as cold to me as they were from the start. I've been in a relationship for almost 8 years now and they have refused to meet my partner (soon to be husband). Only my brother has met him and even that is uncomfortable.

I was hospitalized twice in the last two years and was told by doctors that I nearly died both times, but my family refused to even visit because they didn't want to meet my partner. Last week I mentioned that my partner and I were going to take advantage of the court decision [allowing marriages in California] that was becoming final this last week. They didn't say much then, but I just got this e-mail from my father.

"We choose not to participate in your efforts to forfeit your salvation and break the sealing ordinance. Have you given much thought to what this does to your family? There have been several talks given by members of the church leadership inviting persons living that lifestyle to return and that it is not too late."

Of course I didn't expect them to come. But I did want to give them the opportunity of taking part in something that matters a great deal to me. I figure it is their loss not mine. If they are so concerned that we won't be together in the next life then why do they refuse to be part of my life in the here and now? I do feel hurt, but I'll survive.

[name withheld]

* * *

If you're new to this line of thinking, read on and you will find out where this man's family get their thinking from. This is a quote from http://www.lds.org/ (the official site of the Mormon Church). It was a staged interview with the general authorities of the church, Dallin H. Oaks and Lance B. Wickman.

PUBLIC AFFAIRS: At what point does showing that love cross the line into inadvertently endorsing behavior? If the son says, ‘Well, if you love me, can I bring my partner to our home to visit? Can we come for holidays?’ How do you balance that against, for example, concern for other children in the home?’

ELDER OAKS: That’s a decision that needs to be made individually by the person responsible, calling upon the Lord for inspiration. I can imagine that in most circumstances the parents would say, ‘Please don’t do that. Don’t put us into that position.’ Surely if there are children in the home who would be influenced by this example, the answer would likely be that. There would also be other factors that would make that the likely answer.
I can also imagine some circumstances in which it might be possible to say, ‘Yes, come, but don’t expect to stay overnight. Don’t expect to be a lengthy house guest. Don’t expect us to take you out and introduce you to our friends, or to deal with you in a public situation that would imply our approval of your “partnership.”
There are so many different circumstances, it’s impossible to give one answer that fits all.

ELDER WICKMAN: It’s hard to imagine a more difficult circumstance for a parent to face than that one. It is a case by case determination. The only thing that I would add to what Elder Oaks has just said is that I think it’s important as a parent to avoid a potential trap arising out of one’s anguish over this situation.
I refer to a shift from defending the Lord’s way to defending the errant child’s lifestyle, both with him and with others. It really is true the Lord’s way is to love the sinner while condemning the sin. That is to say we continue to open our homes and our hearts and our arms to our children, but that need not be with approval of their lifestyle. Neither does it mean we need to be constantly telling them that their lifestyle is inappropriate. An even bigger error is now to become defensive of the child, because that neither helps the child nor helps the parent. That course of action, which experience teaches, is almost certainly to lead both away from the Lord’s way.

ELDER OAKS: The First Presidency made a wonderful statement on this subject in a letter in 1991. Speaking of individuals and families that were struggling with this kind of problem, they said, “We encourage Church leaders and members to reach out with love and understanding to those struggling with these issues.” Surely if we are counseled as a body of Church membership to reach out with love and understanding to those ‘struggling with these issues,’ that obligation rests with particular intensity on parents who have children struggling with these issues… even children who are engaged in sinful behavior associated with these issues.

PUBLIC AFFAIRS: Is rejection of a child to some degree the natural reaction of some parents whenever their children fall short of expectations? Is it sometimes easier to ‘close the window’ on an issue than deal with it?

ELDER OAKS: We surely encourage parents not to blame themselves and we encourage Church members not to blame parents in this circumstance. We should remember that none of us is perfect and none of us has children whose behavior is entirely in accord with exactly what we would have them do in all circumstances.
We feel great compassion for parents whose love and protective instincts for their challenged children have moved them to some positions that are adversary to the Church. I hope the Lord will be merciful to parents whose love for their children has caused them to get into such traps.

* * *

Reading the lines highlighted by bold type. most notably the very last line, it is easy to see why this man's parents are refusing to have anything to do with him. Their "love" is conditional on him living the kind of life that they want him to live, not the life he was born to live.

Dallin H. Oaks is an apostle, one of twelve who are second in authority only to the prophet. To go against his counsel would be interpreted as apostacy by fellow congregants in the Mormon Church.

Thankfully, Mary's parents had the spine to do it anyway.