A Flip-flop of Latter-day Proportions

A Flip-flop of Latter-day Proportions

Today, under the direction of Russell M. Nelson and by way of calling it a revelation from God, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has rescinded the policy they enacted 3.5 years ago in November of 2015. This policy stated in its Handbook of Instruction 1 that, regarding 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 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.” ¹

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints also rescinded its policy regarding disciplinary councils as they pertain to gays. There were two changes made. One change regarding when a disciplinary council may be necessary and the other change regarding when a disciplinary council is mandatory. See below.

“When a Disciplinary Council May Be Necessary

Sexual Transgression

…It includes (but is not limited to) attempted murder, forcible rape, sexual abuse, spouse abuse, intentional serious physical injury of others, adultery, fornication, homosexual relations (especially sexual cohabitation), deliberate abandonment of family responsibilities,…” ¹

“When a Disciplinary Council is Mandatory

Apostasy

As used here, apostasy refers to members who:

1. Repeatedly act in clear, open, and deliberate public opposition to the Church or its leaders.

2. Persist in teachings as church doctrine information that is not Church doctrine after they have been corrected by their bishop or a higher authority.

3. Continue to follow the teachings of apostate sects (such as those that advocate plural marriage) after being corrected by their bishop or a higher authority.

4. Are in a same-gender marriage.

5. Formally join another church and advocate its teachings.” ¹

From a Mormon Newsroom article, President Dallin H. Oaks had the following to say:

“At the direction of the First Presidency, President Oaks shared that effective immediately, children of parents who identify themselves as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender may be baptized without First Presidency approval if the custodial parents give permission for the baptism and understand both the doctrine that a baptized child will be taught and the covenants he or she will be expected to make.

A nonmember parent or parents (including LGBT parents) can request that their baby be blessed by a worthy Melchizedek Priesthood holder. These parents need to understand that congregation members will contact them periodically, and that when the child who has been blessed reaches 8 years of age, a Church member will contact them and propose that the child be baptized.

Previously, our handbook characterized same-gender marriage by a member as apostasy. While we still consider such a marriage to be a serious transgression, it will not be treated as apostasy for purposes of Church discipline. Instead, the immoral conduct in heterosexual or homosexual relationships will be treated in the same way.

The very positive policies announced this morning should help affected families. In addition, our members’ efforts to show more understanding, compassion and love should increase respect and understanding among all people of goodwill. We want to reduce the hate and contention so common today. We are optimistic that a majority of people — whatever their beliefs and orientations — long for better understanding and less contentious communications. That is surely our desire, and we seek the help of our members and others to attain it.” ²

I feel the need to provide some clarification. Russell M. Nelson gave an address given at Brigham Young University, Hawaii, at a worldwide devotional for young adults, shortly after the original November 2015 policy enactment. In this address, Nelson said,

“The First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles counsel together and share all the Lord has directed us to understand and to feel individually and collectively. And then we watch the Lord move upon the President of the Church to proclaim the Lord’s will…. 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 and 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.” ³

In this address it is clear that the November 2015 was believed by Russell M. Nelson and the rest of the Apostles to be a revelation. It was considered to have been received under divine inspiration.

In the statement released today, it was communicated that,

“President Russell M. Nelson reflected that throughout this past year, the Lord has blessed us with “revelation upon revelation, knowledge upon knowledge … that which bringeth joy, that which bringeth life eternal” (Doctrine and Covenants 42:61). We are all eyewitnesses to revelations from the Lord as He guides the affairs of His Church. President Nelson taught of ministering and repenting, sharing that as we embrace the gift of repentance we will rise up and minister in a holier way and make our homes centers of gospel learning. Israel will be gathered on both sides of the veil, and we will help in preparing the world for the Second Coming of Jesus Christ.” (Bold and italics added for emphasis.)

Furthermore,

“President Henry B. Eyring spoke of continuing revelation in the true and living Church, teaching that the Lord has led by revelation through prophets from the time of Adam and Eve to the present day, and such revelation to His servants will continue until He comes again. One reason is that we need the Lord’s direction to meet changing circumstances, and He has guided changes in practice and policy throughout the history of the Church.” (Bold and italics added for emphasis.)

And lastly, if there was any doubt as to how this new rescinding was to be treated, it was written that,

“These policy changes come after an extended period of counseling with our brethren in the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and after fervent, united prayer to understand the will of the Lord on these matters.” ² (Bold and italics added for emphasis.)

I believe it’s safe to conclude that this was absolutely regarded as another new revelation by Russell M. Nelson and all of the Apostles.

Allright. Now that that context is out of the way, this brings me to the entire point of this write up. The Church said that the November 2015 policy was revelation when it was instituted. After 3.5 years of heavy disapproval by the world at large as well as the shaking of so many members’ faith, the Church has had another revelation that completely flip-flops on its relatively recently enacted 2015 policy, once again claiming revelation.

This is a dilemma. The Church had an original position that they decided to clarify via the November 2015 policy. ⁴ This was not a change, but rather a clarification of an existing policy, as indicated by the verbiage that D. Todd Christofferson employed in the referenced article and video. Two months after this clarification occurred, in January of 2016, Russell M. Nelson stated that it was in fact a revelation from God as I previously mentioned. ³

The November 2015 policy enactment was controversial, to say the least. The general public saw it as a furthering of discrimination against gays and the membership was quite divided on it, some so dismayed that they resigned immediately, whilst some vehemently defended it saying it was our duty as members to follow the prophet.

Today’s announcement however, is what presents the dilemma. The Church has stated that this rescinding was received by way of revelation by President Nelson and the Apostles. It is however in absolute contradiction to the previous 3.5 years’ policy. This is a contradiction of the highest importance when it comes to the claims of divinity that the Church touts. It makes absolutely no sense that they would put these policies into action under the auspices of having received revelation, then renege on them, once again under the auspices of revelation. It quashes the Church’s premise of divine authority or revelation. It is damning.

As a more viable reason, the Church most likely is hedging its bets with regards to how many members it can keep by reneging on the discriminatory policy to appease the up and coming millennial generation. Sure it will lose some members who see this as absolutely flawed reasoning (which it is) but that won’t matter because the younger generation is what matters. This is an important topic to the millennial generation and the millennial generation will be the generation that takes over the church leadership, not the older generation. 

I should also disclose my intentions in writing this essay as someone suggested (incorrectly) that I was writing this as a form of trying to convince myself that I'm correct in my actions with respect to the Church, as well as convince others to leave the church. That's not true. Not even remotely. As a matter of fact, I am still a technically active member of the Church. Rather, my intentions are similar to when I wrote my first essay, "Why I No Longer Believe in the LDS Church" which can be read on this blog. It's the only other post at the time of this writing.

My intentions in writing this essay are to point out a very obvious dilemma in the Church's actions before it's simply forgotten or glossed over. I have already seen people praising the Church's revelation yesterday while not mentioning the fact that the previous revelation was the antithesis of what was revealed yesterday, nor any mention of the teen suicide body count associated with it. That is not ok. It is not ok to light a fire and then congratulate yourself when you put it out as well as ignore all the things that burned from said fire. The dilemma deserves to be discussed. I have no other intentions in writing this than to bring to discussion what actually happened. Anyone that attributes any ulterior motives or intentions to me from speculation or inference, is incorrect. 

As a last note, I have intentionally chosen not to write about whether or not this was the right or moral step from the Church. Instead, I chose to write about the bigger question this situation is begging of us, which is about the Church’s claims of divine authority and revelation, especially when these revelations are in absolute contradiction to one another.

Oh I almost forgot! What is the church going to do about all those cute gay couples it excommunicated that are, as of today, no longer considered to have been acting in apostasy when they were excommunicated in the first place…? Oh well. 

 

EDITS: April 4th, 2019, 10:21 PM - Corrected some spelling errors and added italics for emphasis.

EDITS: April 5th, 2019, 1:46 PM - Added paragraphs 34-35 regarding intent in writing essay, "I should also disclose..." to "...is incorrect." As well as changing some grammar and word choices.

Resources

1. https://www.scribd.com/doc/288685756/Changes-to-LDS-Handbook-1-Document-2-Revised-11-3-15-28003-29. November 2015 changes to LDS Handbook 1. Retrieved April 4, 2019.

2. https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/first-presidency-messages-general-conference-leadership-session-april-2019. Rescinding of November 2015 changes to LDS Handbook 1. Retrieved April 4, 2019.

3. https://www.lds.org/study/ensign/2016/10/young-adults/stand-as-true-millennials?lang=eng. Address by Russell M. Nelson in which he claims the November 2015 policy was revelation. Retrieved April 4, 2019.

4. https://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/handbook-changes-same-sex-marriages-elder-christofferson. Church issued clarification after initial poor reception of November 2015 policy. Retrieved April 4, 2019.