I’ve heard and read a great many things these last few days about the new policy change concerning children of same sex marriages and baptism in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. People outside the LDS Church—and sadly even some within—see this policy as hateful and full of bigotry. Many claim this has “rocked” and “questioned” their faith. Others are using misleading and false interpretations as a reason to spread more hatred against a church that they have no interest in joining anyway.
I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised at the response this policy change gathered. Especially since the first headlines were slanted to incite an emotional response to anyone who read it. And no wonder since the first articles published received their “news” and insider info about the policy not from a real representative of the LDS Church but from John Dehlin, an excommunicated member with an ax to grind against the LDS Church. Was the entire story and reason behind this policy given or written so that everyone could understand it? That’s a big “no.” The number of people rushing to judgment and grabbing their metaphorical pitchforks was no small amount. This saddened me greatly. Whatever happened to actually gathering all the facts instead of letting social media be your guide and source of truth?
To be honest, I am confused as to why this would make anyone question their faith. If they are, then they obviously have not listened to or read the official position of the LDS Church about this policy. Contrary to what many are saying, this policy is not about hate against children or the parents of same-sex marriages. Some are even saying that this policy is holding the children responsible for their parent’s sins. This is simply not true. This policy does not seek to make children disown their parents or even keep them from coming to church if they want to and participating fully. In contrast, this policy seeks not to bring added conflict into those homes.
This policy does however, seek to help protect those innocent children, who should not have to be put in a situation where they are being baptized into a church that does not support their parent’s marriage. Every child under the age of 18, no matter what type of home they live in, must have parental permission to be baptized into the LDS Church. Even if a same-sex couple accepted the child’s decision to get baptized, would it be fair to put that child at constant odds at their parents’ lifestyle? Would you have that same child either reject their parents they are subject to, or later reject the covenant they made at baptism because it causes too much trouble at home?
Children, including teenagers, should not be put in a situation where they are being made to choose to either follow their baptismal covenants or accept their parent’s lifestyle. That is not a fair thing to ask of them. This policy helps to keep families together, no matter what kind it may be. The family in the LDS Church is infinitely more important than racking up baptism numbers. This policy is simply asking them to wait until they are the legal age of 18 to be baptized.
Why is this so wrong? Would those who claim discrimination rather have the LDS Church baptize every child no matter what type of home situation they are in, not caring about how that will impact their life not only as a child but also as they grow? I am pretty sure that many people would have a problem with that type of policy. Baptism is not something taken very lightly or a frivolous thing in the LDS Church. There are expectations for the person being baptized that come with this choice, one of those expectations being that they are willing to follow the teachings of the LDS Church, including not living or accepting a same-sex union as a marriage ordained by God. The church understands that current law does allow for same-sex marriages to be legal in the U.S. Religious freedom laws, however, allow churches to have their own beliefs and standards for their religion, no matter what current law says.
This policy is not about shunning or turning anyone away. Everyone baptized, not baptized, gay, straight, or whatever has a place to worship if he or she so chooses and is welcome. Are people perfect? Of course not. If they were, there would be no need for churches. Are some people prejudiced? Yes, sadly they are. However, true disciples of Christ welcome all and try to be inclusive since they know that we are all sinners in our own way.
This is really not a new policy. The church has in fact had a very similar policy intact concerning the children from polygamist families and even for children and young adults from Islam or other faiths where joining the church could cause them harm. I heard someone recently say, “The intent is to have those who choose to follow the teachings do so on their own terms. Not their parents, not because of church pressures, or of societal pressures. But because they truly believe what is being taught, and they want to follow it.”
I believe that this is one of the important reasons behind this policy: not to shame, single out, or hurt anyone, but to make sure they truly wish to follow the teachings of the church. Unlike what many people believe about this new policy, everyone, including children and members of a LGBT household, can receive blessings of healing, comfort, and the like at anytime it is needed or requested.
I am sorry if those who are in these types of homes are feeling hurt or rejected. I hope that if they are feeling this way they look beyond their immediate gut reactions and know that they are welcome and loved. Beyond that, it comes down to freedom to choose and faith. The apostle Paul, when teaching faith, defined it as “… the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen” (Heb. 11:1). Lets all have a little more faith and a little less hatred.
RELATED ARTICLES:
Thank you, this is the best opinion on this issue that I have ever heard. I especially like the paragraph which says that children should not be forced to resolve their living in a family whose marriage the church does not condone, but honor their baptismal covenants.
Thank-you Paul, I appreciate it.
So, rather than explaining her views on the subject, she spends her first two, rather long paragraphs, attacking those people who are opposed to the policy, and who first exposed the policy. After that I don’t need to read anything else she writes.
This author has no interest in helping people in need of further understanding. She’s simply out to demonize people who disagree with her, and attempt to smear their reputation–something she likely learned from her years of unquestioned devotion to her church leaders.
I agree she could have dispensed with a lot of material in the beginning and the negative tone, but there’s not much difference between her supposed “years of unquestioned devotion to her church leaders” and coming across something you disagree with and saying “After that I don’t need to read anything else.” Different beliefs, same closed mind.
I’m sorry, but this letter adds nothing new to the positive spin the church is trying to put on this new policy. To illustrate the reason so many find the policy offensive, let’s contrast two hypothetical.
EXAMPLE 1 – Tim is a 10 year-old. His parents divorced when he was a toddler. His dad is single, and his mom has married another woman. Tim hasn’t seen his mother for six years.
When Tim turns eight, he’s excited to be baptized just like all of his friends. The bishop apologetically tells him he’ll have to wait until he’s 18, and no longer living with his parents, at which point he will need to disavow the lifestyle choices of his mother in order to be baptized. In the meantime, when his friends go through the rites of passage for Mormon youth – receiving the priesthood, performing baptisms for the dead, and preparing for missions – Tim gets to watch from the sidelines.
EXAMPLE 2 – Billy is 10 years old. Billy’s mother and father smoke and drink, and occasionally use illegal drugs. Billy’s dad winds up in jail every so often for petty theft. Billy’s mom has had several affairs. Billy’s mom and dad both used to be LDS, but they resigned several years ago, and have been outspoken critics of the church ever since. Oh, and they rarely bathe.
Billy’s grandparents invite him to attend church. He decides he likes it, and he wants to be baptized. Assuming Billy’s parents allow him to choose for himself, the fact that he’s living with parents who are sinning and opposing the church would not prevent him from being baptized, because no matter how bad they might be, at least they’re not gay.
There are some differences between the two situations you have posed:
1) According to the church, “apostasy” is considered to be “a turning away from truth.” A same-sex couple show this turning away from the truth when they get married, which also implies that they have no intention of repenting or changing their behavior. A smoker & drinker however may be trying to quit (obviously there’s no way of truly knowing if they are trying or how hard they are trying).
2) Also, the marriage of the parents is central to a family, whereas drinking & smoking is not central to the family.
3) The gravity of the sin of same-sex marriage is in many cases much worse than that of drinking or smoking. Here are some scriptural evidences of this truth. While smoking & drinking is in no way a good thing, the same-sex marriage is “grievous” (Gen. 18:20) very contrary to God’s plan and purpose. Here are some scriptural examples of this truth:
Whenever I have a gospel related concern I always ask myself, “Does this fit into God’s plan? Why? or Why not? Then I search the scriptures for answers to those questions. For example: Does same-sex marriage truly fit into Heavenly Father’s plan for His children? To me, the following scripture passages briefly summarize God’s plan for His children and help me understand why the Church and the Lord consider same-sex marriage to be a particularly “grievous” sin (Gen. 18:20).
Note that these verses contain basic, core doctrines of the Church.
Moses 1:39
39 For behold, this is my work and my glory—to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.
(This is Heavenly Father’s whole purpose)
Gen. 1:27-28
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth…
“To the first man and woman on earth, the Lord said, ‘Be fruitful, and multiply’ (Moses 2:28; see also Gen. 1:28; Abr. 4:28). This commandment was first in sequence and first in importance. It was essential that God’s spirit children have mortal birth and an opportunity to progress toward eternal life” (Elder Dallin H. Oaks, “The Great Plan of Happiness,” Ensign, Nov. 1993, 72).
Gen. 2:24
24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.
Doctrine & Covenants 131:1-4
1 In the celestial glory there are three heavens or degrees;
2 And in order to obtain the highest, a man must enter into this border of the priesthood [meaning the new and everlasting covenant of marriage];
3 And if he does not, he cannot obtain it.
4 He may enter into the other, but that is the end of his kingdom; he cannot have an aincrease.
(In summary, these verses state a core belief/doctrine of the Church, that in order to receive eternal life (return to God’s presence and become like Him), one must be sealed to their spouse (of the opposite gender) in the temple by one holding the proper authority/priesthood.)
Doctrine & Covenants 132:19
19 And again, verily I say unto you, if a man marry a wife by my word, which is my law, and by the new and everlasting covenant, and it is sealed unto them by the Holy Spirit of promise, by him who is anointed, unto whom I have appointed this power and the keys of this priesthood; … shall inherit thrones, kingdoms, principalities, and powers, dominions, all heights and depths—… it shall be done unto them in all things whatsoever my servant hath put upon them, in time, and through all eternity; and shall be of full force when they are out of the world; and they shall pass by the angels, and the gods, which are set there, to their exaltation and glory in all things, as hath been sealed upon their heads, which glory shall be a fulness and a continuation of the seeds forever and ever.
(Note that the Church believes that all those who are exalted will continue to procreate after this life)
It is understandable that those who do not believe these core truths/doctrines may struggle to understand why the Church opposes same-sex marriage. However, if the above scriptures are true (and I believe that they are) then, it should make sense why the Church must oppose same-sex marriage. I would invite all who are seeking understanding to accept James’ invitation:
James 1:5
5 If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him.
To those who believe that some are born with same-sex attraction, the following scripture may be relevant. I’m not saying whether this is or is not the case, nor am I saying that I don’t think God would allow someone to be born with same-sex attraction. I’m unsure what I believe regarding that. I believe the following verse is relevant in both cases:
1 Corinthians 10:13
13 There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.
(In no way am I suggesting that it is easy to overcome same-sex attraction or any other sin for that matter. I am only sharing a scripture from the Bible, and I do know that through the grace of Jesus Christ we can bear, overcome and/or escape ALL temptations (to say otherwise would imply that the Savior is not capable of helping us). I am grateful for all that the Savior has helped me to overcome in my life.)
With all due respect to both parties, I foolishly ask the following question. What if ones child unfortunately dies before reaching the age of 18 and is not baptized into the LDS religion? This issue is way too complicated for me to comment, and perhaps not appropriate for me to do so, as I am not baptized and only know the Mormon religion from listening to the book of Mormon on CD.. But for me Ocam s razor is contained in the potential answer to the question above… I don’t know the answer, but isn’t this the crux of the issue on behalf of the child or children involved? Am I missing something? Just a fool pondering the issues mentioned in the letter above. Don’t shoot the messenger.
The LDS religion’s doctrine provides that children under the age of 8 are saved with God, and people who are unable to be baptized for whatever reason outside of their control still qualify for the same eternal rewards/blessings as those who are baptized, etc. Although, from that you could make a few more hypotheticals like why be baptized at all then or why not ignore everything, etc. Believer-types will find answers that explain and support the doctrine, and skeptical-types will just find questions that become impossible to answer – just human nature.
Don’t feel like a fool for asking questions. This is how we all learn. I would rather someone ask questions than just make assumptions ,so I thank you for that. As to your questions, I think it is a fair one. I don’t claim to be an expert, But I believe that a loving Heavenly Father would never punish someone just because they didn’t have the opportunity to be baptized when they wished to. If that were the case, much of the Human race would be dammed forever. God knows the intents of our hearts, and who we are. He loves us all equally and wants us to be back with him. Our church does not believe that death is the end, and that we all will have the opportunity to live with God again thanks to the atonement of Jesus Christ. We will not stop progressing and learning and be able to be with our loved ones. Everyone will be given the opportunity to accept the ordinances of baptism. If you would like to learn more besides what I can write here, please visit http://www.mornmon.org where more in depth answers can be given to you and can probably explain better than I can.
Thank you for your answers.