March 24, 2010

The Big Q

I got a phone call from the Secretary of the Stake Pres. because the Pres. would like to meet with me... Uh oh.

Part of my disfellowshipment was that I was suppose to meet with the Bishop every other week. Due to going home, work and finals, I have not met with him once since I was D'ed. The Bishop told me if I did not meet with him he would assume I am digressing and would assume I needed more discipline.

Now the Stake Pres. is calling?!

I am meeting with him tonight, and I will let you know what happens....


  1. Gotta keep that "gay demon" suppressed.

  2. Wow, that sounds intense! I hope it all goes well. Let us know what happens, Ill be thinking about it today.

  3. Sweet mother, why not just drop you a line and ask you how you are doing. I swear some priesthood leaders are queens:) Between you and Konrad, I'm about ready to go over to the east side and start knocking some heads around:)

  4. That's wild. I guess that's why I made sure to meet with my bishop when I was on probation...

  5. Thank guys. Nice to know someone is on my side!

    Honestly, I'm just to the point of saying, "fine ex me, then I don't have to worry about stupid checkups with the Bish, and reporting."

    I'm almost wanting to say something like that, albeit more polite, to the Pres. tonight.

  6. Wow--this is one intense situation for you.

  7. Mind if I ask you a couple questions? If the church were wrong about gays - and by that I mean if God intentionally created some men who would love each other and He valued that love - how would you know?

  8. Jduersh-
    I suppose if the church were wrong on gays, I wouldn't know he church was true. I have a very different view than many of my moho friend, which I can address in a long format in a post (soon).

    For me I don't think the church is partly true, and just have it wrong on a few issues. I believe the church is 100% true. I am choosing to go against, or personally think differently on this one issue. Deep down I believe I shouldn't act on my gay feelings, but I am choosing to, knowing full well the eternal consequences.

    So if the church were wrong on the gay issue, to me, the church wouldn't be true at all. I believe its all or nothing with the church. Like I said thats different than a lot of my moho friends.

  9. @Quinn: Please know that I'm not trying to be confrontational--I honestly want to know what you think. (And you do indicate that a post might be forthcoming, so perhaps you don't want to get into a discussion in the comments here. If that's the case, I understand, and I hope that the promised post doesn't take too long). :)

    My question: How far does your "all or nothing" position go? Is everything that comes from church leaders (prophets and apostles) true?

    I used to think so, but then I realized that if I believed that I had to believe that "truth" changed over time--that right now it's not right for gay men to get married (unless they can develop a "great attraction" for a woman), but that 20-30 years ago it was right. Or that right now orientation may or may not be changeable, but that 20-30 years ago it was (which sucks for those of us that didn't manage to change back then--too bad we couldn't get it taken care of before orientation started to solidify across the human race and become more immutable).

    It's not just the gay issue, either. A hundred years ago any effort to prevent conception (pulling out before ejaculation, etc.) was a major sin. Fifty years ago condoms and birth control pills were condemned. Now the official rule is that couples are to prayerfully consider how many children they should have. Did God's law change (from "have as many as you can" to "talk to Me about it")?

    A hundred and thirty years ago men needed more than one wife to make it to the highest level of the celestial kingdom. Now we just need to be sealed to a single woman. Sucks for those women who lived back then, to have to share their men, while modern women can have a husband to themselves, eh?

    For decades blacks were inferior. They bore the mark of Cain because they were less faithful in the pre-existence. They weren't supposed to mix with whites--and they certainly weren't supposed to marry whites! At least they were promised that they would be made white in the next life--that the curse would be removed. Modern blacks aren't inferior any more, but they don't have that promise. So heaven is going to have 19th century blacks who've been turned white and late-20th century blacks who are still black, right?

    If it's "all or nothing", then all of these things have to be true for the church to remain true. When I faced that conflict I just couldn't reconcile it. It was easier for me to believe that the true church could make mistakes in its principles and practices. So I'm wondering how you've managed to hang on to the "all or nothing" and make sense of it all?

  10. @Scott-
    No worries, you didn't sound confrontational at all!

    With the issues you raise I think one needs to remember the different between truths,(which is unchanging and eternal sometimes truth refers to doctrine but not all doctrine is truth ), and principles, which changes with time.

    So for the issues you raised:

    Gay therapies were ideas or principles (according to their [leaders] understanding at the time, with more time and information they change.) We can all agree that the ideas for therapy are moving in a better, healthier direction.

    Bring children to earth: The Truth is that we are vehicles that bring Gods children to earth. The principles of how many, how and how not to (premarital sex) are principles to guide us. With new technologies and medicines the principles can change.

    Black and the Priesthood: This was not and never was a truth, I wouldn't even put it in a principle category. It was a matter of timing. Why didn't Christ allow Gentiles to hear the gospel from the apostles when he was on earth... Donno, it was just a matter of timing.

    Polygamy: 1- Remember less than 10% of the church members were allowed to practice this.
    2- I don't believe it was said you must live this law or you will not get to the celestial kingdom.
    3-The truth is marriage. The principle of polygamy was practiced several times through the earths history to bring about God's purposes (which are several, but not important to this topic).

    So when it comes to Truths, the all or nothing applies. When it comes to principles, things change with time, (EX: blacks, conception ideas,

    The Law of Marriage, man and woman (with occasional, rare man and women principle), is a truth. That why I believe man and man marriage will never be introduced by the church, because it is not in the way of the Lord.

    I hope that makes sense. If not please ask me to clarify.

    Remember this is my understanding, and not an official response from a church leader. This is just how I see it.