If you look back in the archives of the site you’ll find a heated discussion on several posts regarding the California Proposition 8. While I opposed Prop. 8, and still do, and the LDS church’s involvement in it is what ultimately convinced me to have my name taken off their records I still held out the hope that the Church would come around on their LGBT stance, as they did with Blacks in the Church.
It seems that a small step toward fully accepting LGBT into the Church has been taken. The Mormon church still thinks homosexual relationships and acting on homosexual thoughts is still a sin, but they no longer consider thoughts of such activities a matter for confession and therapy. This seems like a tiny, inconsequential step, and in many ways it is. But, it’s also a big shift from what has been standard church policy and not what I expected from a Church run by conservative, old, white men.
I’m hopeful that this is a first step and that as LGBT’s rights are recognized in the United States and across the world the LDS Church will continue to revise its procedures and statements until one day one of their prophets has the revelation that God loves LGBTs just as much as he loves the rest of us. If it doesn’t then the hope and nostalgia I still carry for what was a very large part of my life will die as will my respect for an organization that does a great deal of good work in this world.
I’m hopeful it won’t come to that though. They have taken this step and they’ll eventually take the others and the hateful bigots who hide amongst the many good people in the LDS church will have to find a new way to cover their hate.
You can call me a dreamer, that’s okay I’m in good company.
While laudable, the LDS Church probably felt compelled to take this step. Why? A few reasons:
1) Past reforms have come only on the heels of threats or heavy criticisms.
2) The LDS Church is a deeply conservative institution that doesn’t reform lightly.
3) Your response to the LDS Church’s heavy involvement in Prop 8 was probably not atypical.
4) Association with “anti-homosexuality” is one of the most negative perceptions of Christianity, particularly among the young, both Christian and non-Christian.
I’m sure they were compelled to do it, just as they were with giving Blacks the ‘priesthood.’ The intent of my post wasn’t to say that the LDS church was progressive. Rather, it was to point out that the church has changed in the past and can change in the future. I’m hoping that change happens sooner rather than later as LGBT’s rights get recognized in the United States.
That fight to get LGBT rights recognized is the one I’m interested in prosecuting. I’m always happy to see that that battle is being won. Thanks for the comment.
What about this is a different stance? I remember distinctly talking to my father about the church’s position some time ago. He didn’t like it. He probably fit your stereotype, (as perhaps many other people we know) but the official communications of the church have been holding this line for years. (Whether members have recognized it or not.)
If anything is novel here, it is that they added it to a leadership handbook and indexed it so that Bishops (who might have otherwise fit your stereotype) might have a ready reminder, thus making it “more” official. I think it’s a good step, as conversations with others has made me aware that people haven’t been listening closely to what is being said. (As you apparently weren’t either, since this seems new to you.)
Some clarifications (see: http://loydo38.blogspot.com/2010/11/homosexuality-in-2010-church-handbook.html): While reworded a bit, information regarding possible counseling is still available (in Book 1, but not Book 2). In the older version, counseling was not mandated. It said, “MAY need professional counseling”, and actually, it still does in Book 1. (So… no change on this point.)
Too little, too late. The elders of the church are old men and so they think they have taken great strides when in fact they have only avoided falling down.