Reports of new church policies re: same sex couples and children

[Crypto]

Here's a "What If"  scenario:   Child was born to a married man/woman couple.  Mother leaves marriage to live with/marry same sex partner. Child now lives part time with father and part time with lesbian "mothers".   Still no baptism before 18?

That is probably a case where the bishop decides, likely getting counsel from their stake president (which may go all the way up the chain of authority)

[lagarthaaz]

At this point I have not googled any other discussion about this topic so all I have is the information in this thread - but I'm a bit upset right now. I don't want to end up in a huge quagmire of church bashing on the net over this which is why I'm not clicking any further. But I need help understanding - prior to this I wasn't aware that children of polygamous marriages were not allowed to be baptised.  

 

Please help me understand if you can.

 

Isn't this policy punishing children because of the sins of their parents? 

 

Let's say an 8 year old desires to be baptised, and his gay parents agree to let him attend church, primary, etc, (perhaps with member relatives or friends), then where is the harm in that if the parents are ok with it?

 

How does this relate to our 2nd Article of Faith or the principle contained in scripture in John 9:13, where the Saviour says the blind man was not born that way because of the sins of his parents?

 

If the children of gay couples can't be baptised because of their parents' lifestyle, then how is that different to baptising the child of unwed or co-habiting parents who have no interest in the church but are willing to allow their child to be part of it?

 

I'd like to share my own personal example so you know where I'm coming from - I was born into a dysfunctional situation of every conceivable kind of immorality you can think of. In fact, I am the product of a brief sexual relationship between my then teenage mother and my then professional athlete, married with children - father.  He was never in my life growing up. My own mother at one point was into Satanism and when I was 16 she refused permission for me to join the church as she was told it was a cult (oh, the irony). As a child I rebelled against it all (by not participating) and was punished severely for my views. I was naturally drawn to churches - any Christian church. I would walk by myself to local churches where-ever we lived (we moved often) and loved hearing the stories of Jesus Christ and looking at images of the Passion of Christ in some churches I visited. Where did this desire come from? Somehow the light of Christ found me even thought I lived in a situation where spiritual darkness was all around me. I can only praise God in my heart every time I think of how he let me know of the reality of his love in spite of my family background.  

 

So, let's say my mother was gay (she was bi-sexual) and raised me in a lesbian relationship (she didn't, it was much worse than that). As a child I would have leaped at the chance to be baptised into the church if my mother gave permission. I would have been hungry to be around good, solid families and spiritual beliefs that were wholesome and pure. How on earth would it benefit anyone -  if a child like the one I was, is denied baptism and full fellowship in the gospel until they are an adult?

 

I do not want to argue, but I do need some clarity here.

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

I do not want to argue, but I do need some clarity here.

 

I wish I could give you some good answers, but I can't.  All I can say is, I understand because some very similar questions came to my mind.

 

The approach I'm taking these days with things, like this, that I don't understand is to be like Nephi and ask Heavenly Father.  It's perfectly ok, in fact I recommend it, to tell Heavenly Father in prayer what you've told us here.  You can't surprise Him.    Pour your heart out to Him, and ask Him WHY?   

 

Be especially careful not to be like Laman and Lemuel and allow your questions to fester in your own mind (the fact that you asked for clarification here, suggestions you are not going to be like that.  Remember this is advice I give myself...over and over...  :) )  Don't say, "No I didn't pray about it because God won't tell me."  We see what happened to them . . .

 

I don't know how Heavenly Father will answer your prayer.  The key thing is that He will answer you.  Maybe He will give you a direct answer right away.  Maybe He will simply give you peace.  Maybe He won't answer right away at all and you will need to keep asking.  I really can't say.  But He found you and guided you in the dark place that was your childhood.  Remember that.  He can guide you through this.  And He can guide other children through their dark and troubled childhoods too.  

[Guest]

At this point I have not googled any other discussion about this topic so all I have is the information in this thread - but I'm a bit upset right now. I don't want to end up in a huge quagmire of church bashing on the net over this which is why I'm not clicking any further. But I need help understanding - prior to this I wasn't aware that children of polygamous marriages were not allowed to be baptised.  

 

Please help me understand if you can.

 

Isn't this policy punishing children because of the sins of their parents? 

 

Let's say an 8 year old desires to be baptised, and his gay parents agree to let him attend church, primary, etc, (perhaps with member relatives or friends), then where is the harm in that if the parents are ok with it?

 

How does this relate to our 2nd Article of Faith or the principle contained in scripture in John 9:13, where the Saviour says the blind man was not born that way because of the sins of his parents?

 

If the children of gay couples can't be baptised because of their parents' lifestyle, then how is that different to baptising the child of unwed or co-habiting parents who have no interest in the church but are willing to allow their child to be part of it?

 

I'd like to share my own personal example so you know where I'm coming from - I was born into a dysfunctional situation of every conceivable kind of immorality you can think of. In fact, I am the product of a brief sexual relationship between my then teenage mother and my then professional athlete, married with children - father.  He was never in my life growing up. My own mother at one point was into Satanism and when I was 16 she refused permission for me to join the church as she was told it was a cult (oh, the irony). As a child I rebelled against it all (by not participating) and was punished severely for my views. I was naturally drawn to churches - any Christian church. I would walk by myself to local churches where-ever we lived (we moved often) and loved hearing the stories of Jesus Christ and looking at images of the Passion of Christ in some churches I visited. Where did this desire come from? Somehow the light of Christ found me even thought I lived in a situation where spiritual darkness was all around me. I can only praise God in my heart every time I think of how he let me know of the reality of his love in spite of my family background.  

 

So, let's say my mother was gay (she was bi-sexual) and raised me in a lesbian relationship (she didn't, it was much worse than that). As a child I would have leaped at the chance to be baptised into the church if my mother gave permission. I would have been hungry to be around good, solid families and spiritual beliefs that were wholesome and pure. How on earth would it benefit anyone -  if a child like the one I was, is denied baptism and full fellowship in the gospel until they are an adult?

 

I do not want to argue, but I do need some clarity here.

 

 

I don't understand why people think it is a "punishment" to withhold baptism until a certain age.  Are 7-year-olds punished because they can't be baptized?  Are the dead descendants of the holocaust punished because they can't be baptized for the dead in the Holy Temples?

 

As far as homosexual marriage versus a child born through adultery:

Everybody has sin, in some form or other.  We don't necessarily require parents to be good Mormons themselves for the children to be baptized.  A sexual union between a married man to an unmarried woman is not necessarily apostate if the parent with custody of the child is repentant of the sin.  A homosexual couple still married is actively apostate and repentance requires that they stop engaging in the sin by separation - which then automatically qualifies the children for baptism.

Edited November 6, 2015 by anatess

[estradling75]

At this point I have not googled any other discussion about this topic so all I have is the information in this thread - but I'm a bit upset right now. I don't want to end up in a huge quagmire of church bashing on the net over this which is why I'm not clicking any further. But I need help understanding - prior to this I wasn't aware that children of polygamous marriages were not allowed to be baptised.  

 

Please help me understand if you can.

 

Isn't this policy punishing children because of the sins of their parents? 

 

Let's say an 8 year old desires to be baptised, and his gay parents agree to let him attend church, primary, etc, (perhaps with member relatives or friends), then where is the harm in that if the parents are ok with it?

 

How does this relate to our 2nd Article of Faith or the principle contained in scripture in John 9:13, where the Saviour says the blind man was not born that way because of the sins of his parents?

 

If the children of gay couples can't be baptised because of their parents' lifestyle, then how is that different to baptising the child of unwed or co-habiting parents who have no interest in the church but are willing to allow their child to be part of it?

 

I'd like to share my own personal example so you know where I'm coming from - I was born into a dysfunctional situation of every conceivable kind of immorality you can think of. In fact, I am the product of a brief sexual relationship between my then teenage mother and my then professional athlete, married with children - father.  He was never in my life growing up. My own mother at one point was into Satanism and when I was 16 she refused permission for me to join the church as she was told it was a cult (oh, the irony). As a child I rebelled against it all (by not participating) and was punished severely for my views. I was naturally drawn to churches - any Christian church. I would walk by myself to local churches where-ever we lived (we moved often) and loved hearing the stories of Jesus Christ and looking at images of the Passion of Christ in some churches I visited. Where did this desire come from? Somehow the light of Christ found me even thought I lived in a situation where spiritual darkness was all around me. I can only praise God in my heart every time I think of how he let me know of the reality of his love in spite of my family background.  

 

So, let's say my mother was gay (she was bi-sexual) and raised me in a lesbian relationship (she didn't, it was much worse than that). As a child I would have leaped at the chance to be baptised into the church if my mother gave permission. I would have been hungry to be around good, solid families and spiritual beliefs that were wholesome and pure. How on earth would it benefit anyone -  if a child like the one I was, is denied baptism and full fellowship in the gospel until they are an adult?

 

I do not want to argue, but I do need some clarity here.

 

 

Was it punishment toward individual members of African decent who could not hold the priesthood?  No it was not.  You can debate for a very long time what it was, but to say it was a punishment (even if it might feel like it) is to ignore a very simple gospel truth.  One is not held responsible for things they can not do.  If a person desires baptism and there is no priesthood holder around to perform it the the failure to be baptized is not on that individual.

 

Same here if a child of a couple living in a homosexual relationship.  They can't.  They of course are affected by the actions of their parents(we all are), but they are not accountable for it.  They are accountable only for their actions and desires

[AnnieCarvalho]

If the child is of age to be baptized, and is not allowed to be baptized, and dies before 18 ... does the fact that the child was not baptized have any impact on which Kingdom he goes to?

[Guest]

That would be no different than any other person who may have vicarious work done for them in the Temple.

 

As far as the announcements, let's wait until the Mormon News Room says somthing.

[AnnieCarvalho]

This is all over the news... has it not yet been officially announced?

[Guest]

Apparently these are pretty credible announcements.  But the "characterization" is what I'd like to avoid.  I want to hear if from the Church.

 

Here's my analysis:

 

1) The fact that a same-sex marriage is considered apostasy has always been the case.  They're just putting it in writing.  There really is no change there.  I don't know why anyone is making a stink about it.

2) Infant blessings are for "Children of Record".  If the parents are excommunicated or are non-members at all, then their children are not children of record.  Why on earth would you consider an infant blessing?

3) The same goes for a child being baptized at age 8.

4) While I have seen children of non-member parents between 9 and 18 baptized, it is very rare to even get the parents' permission, much less actually have a reasonable situation where this might work out well.  That goes double for parents who are not only neutral on the topic, but have openly apostatized.  See JAG's post #6.

[carlimac]

So many situations come to mind that aren't black and white. One of my friends husband came out several years ago, left her and now is living with a man. They have joint custody of the kids. She is very faithful to the church. I would imagine it would be a no brainer that her little ones be baptized since they only spend one out of three weekends with the dad.  But, he is actually apostate and living in sin. If he were to deny them baptism, what then? ...ack! It seems to be getting messier than a can of worms. 

 

I only pray that each and every bishop who has to deal with these situations does so with great love and wisdom beyond their own- meaning with exceptional help from the Lord. I fear there will be many(people and maybe a few bishops) who twist and turn things and just make a bigger mess of it all. Yet a bigger stumbling block. (Big sigh!)

Edited November 6, 2015 by carlimac

[Blackmarch]

 

Children of same sex couples cannot be blessed or baptized

http://kutv.com/news/local/lds-church-to-exclude-children-of-same-sex-couples-from-membership

 

Same sex marriage officially considered "apostasy".

http://kutv.com/news/local/lds-church-issues-update-on-what-is-considered-apostasy

 

These are from local news and not from the Church itself. Can anyone confirm or refute these reports?

Good. These make sense.

Edited November 6, 2015 by Blackmarch

[Blackmarch]

If the child is of age to be baptized, and is not allowed to be baptized, and dies before 18 ... does the fact that the child was not baptized have any impact on which Kingdom he goes to?

unless that child is has absolutely no custody of by either parent till that age that sort of thing will fall upon the head of the parent.. so no it shouldn't have any impact per se.

what he is taught by his parents should the child internalize that and make it their own certainly can tho.

[AnnieCarvalho]

I guess I just wonder what's next?

 

Do parents of gay adult children who choose to marry need to worry about being excommunicated or having to choose between their children and the Church?

[Guest MormonGator]

I trust that the church leadership knows more than I do, but I'm not wild about this one. I'm setting aside my personal feelings. I think Alma 30:25 states that child isn't guilty for the sins of the parents. Yes, I do think homosexual actions are sinful, but so is a heterosexual couple who lives together out of wedlock. 

Even if I personally disagree, I have to admit it doesn't effect my testimony in the veracity of the Book of Mormon/or Joseph Smith Jr. My heart breaks for people who have left the church over this, but I can not relate with them. I can't imagine leaving the church for this. 

Edited November 6, 2015 by MormonGator

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

I guess I just wonder what's next?

Do parents of gay adult children who choose to marry need to worry about being excommunicated or having to choose between their children and the Church?

Do you think that is really the same as a 10 yr old feeling the need to chose?

[estradling75]

I trust that the church leadership knows more than I do, but I'm not wild about this one. I'm setting aside my personal feelings. I think Alma 30:25 states that child isn't guilty for the sins of the parents. Yes, I do think homosexual actions are sinful, but so is a heterosexual couple who lives together out of wedlock.

 

Why do you assuming it is guilt and sin?  Because by that reasoning we should all be living in the Garden of Eden with only Adam and Eve being cast out.

[Guest MormonGator]

Why do you assuming it is guilt and sin?  Because by that reasoning we should all be living in the Garden of Eden with only Adam and Eve being cast out.

 I'm not really sure what you are trying to say, Estradling. Personally, I accept that the church knows more than I do and can make decisions for us (us=all LDS). I have full confidence in them, 100% 

But my personal, subjective opinion is different from theirs on this one. 

Edited November 6, 2015 by MormonGator

[Blackmarch]

I guess I just wonder what's next?

 

Do parents of gay adult children who choose to marry need to worry about being excommunicated or having to choose between their children and the Church?

No. authority doesn't go in that direction. The parents have authority over their children.

[estradling75]

 I'm not really sure what you are trying to say. Personally, I accept that the church knows more than I do and can make decisions for us (us=all LDS). 

But my personal, subjective opinion is different.  

 

I am trying to help you understand what the church knows (or at least what I think the church knows).

 

Ask yourself if you think restricting children because of the actions of a parent is "punishment" of the children then how do you reconcile the Second Article of Faith 2 

 

We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression 

 

With simple fact that we do not live in the Garden of Eden?

[Guest MormonGator]

I am trying to help you understand what the church knows (or at least what I think the church knows).

 

Ask yourself if you think restricting children because of the actions of a parent is "punishment" of the children then how do you reconcile the Second Article of Faith 2 

 

We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam’s transgression 

 

With simple fact that we do not live in the Garden of Eden?

Thank you for explaining to me. My bad, I totally misunderstood you.

[Blackmarch]

 I'm not really sure what you are trying to say, Estradling. Personally, I accept that the church knows more than I do and can make decisions for us (us=all LDS). I have full confidence in them, 100% 

But my personal, subjective opinion is different from theirs on this one. 

I don't know if this will help but to me it appears to be a case of authority. As long as the child is under a custodian that can have final say in what the child can recieve then this policy will protect both the church and the child- as we are seeing that the LGBT movement in communities and etc become more antagonistic towards Christian principle this will have a double shield;

Should the parent change their mind (about letting their child be baptised after such an event,) they will not be able to hold the church liable for any sort of abuse towards their child (claims of brainwashing or grooming sort of thing), and that should the child be baptised but have to live in an environment where they will be continually taught things that will put more burden on them spiritually (IE being actively taught things that in direct contradiction of the gospel)  without any means to remove themselves from that environment that is harmful to them. (before they can really get any experience with dealing with that sort of thing). as well as the potential to be harmed by the parent for adopting christian principles that would be in direct conflict with the parents belief. (which in turn would lay even greater damnation upon the head of the parent)

I'd say that this mostly comes down to more legalistic matters than anything else.

Edited November 6, 2015 by Blackmarch

[Guest MormonGator]

I don't know if this will help but to me it appears to be a case of authority. As long as the child is under a custodian that can have final say in what the child can recieve then this policy will protect both the church and the child- as we are seeing that the LGBT movement in communities and etc become more antagonistic towards Christian principle this will have a double shield;

Should the parent change their mind they will not be able to hold the church liable for any sort of abuse towards their child (claims of brainwashing or grooming sort of thing), and that should the child be baptised but have to live in an environment where they will be continually taught things that will put more burden on them spiritually (IE being actively taught things that in direct contradiction of the gospel)  without any means to remove themselves from that environment that is harmful to them. (before they can really get any experience with dealing with that sort of thing).

I'd say that this mostly comes down to more legalistic matters than anything else.

I appreciate that explanation, thank you. Again, sorry I wasn't clear. 

But I have to be honest-For the life of me, I don't know why anyone would leave the church over this. 

[estradling75]

I guess I just wonder what's next?

 

Do parents of gay adult children who choose to marry need to worry about being excommunicated or having to choose between their children and the Church?

 

Since when has the church ever "punished" parents for the actions of adult children?  As for having to choose between them...The Church does not force that choice.  Its been my experience that if such force is applied it is from the excommunicated person.  Not the church

[skippy740]

Just share this on your facebook page:  https://www.facebook.com/christine.mcknight.5/posts/1069435566430706

 

 

I absolutely love this response from a gay man that posted about the churches decision!! Thought I would share because there is a lot of truth to this:Hey all you beautiful uninformed people who are making a big deal out of nothing but I love you anyway. READ THIS and then Shut up.

There have been a lot of posts about the recent LDS news regarding children of same sex marriages and also same sex marriages being viewed as apostasy. I'm sorry to add to those posts filling up your newsfeed but as a gay man who does not feel victimized by this decision I feel the need to share my side. I'm confused by a few things. First off, why is everyone so surprised! The church has never pretended to be anything other than exactly what it is. Their stance on same sex marriages has never changed. I also don't understand how this affects about half of the people posting about it. Over half the people posting about it are not members of the church or don't believe in the LDS church to begin with. How does this decision in anyway affect you. If you are a gay couple, were you really going to send your child to an LDS church to begin with? If you are an active LDS member posting, again, why are you so surprised!!! If you truly believe in your church, then you believe that the prophet is a prophet of God who speaks directly to him. If this is you... then have some faith and then be quiet. If you disagree with this view on same sex marriage, then by all means just choose another church. No one is forcing you to stay. I guess being from South Carolina I get confused when people act like the Mormon church is the only religion that exists, or the only religion that does not believe in same sex marriage for that matter. In South Carolina it was just another church, there to seek shelter from the storm if need be. It wasn't a cultural thing, which I guess could be the reason for everyone commenting on something that I don't believe affects them. In the LDS church, whether your parents are gay or not, you still have to have permission to be baptized either way. I'm sorry, but I don't disagree with the church when they say that it might not be in the child's best interest to be baptized into a church that does not support their parents marriage, seeing as this could cause issues in the home and could even result in the child being kicked out of the home. This is something that often happens with gay children who come out to straight parents, which is not something the church supports doing by the way. In my opinion, the church is not shunning these children but rather asking them to wait till they are 18 and can move out in hopes to prevent them from having issues at home. I'd also like to pose the question: do these children of same sex marriages really want to join a church that doesn't support their parents marriage? If they do, well then the church is not asking the children wanting to join the church to disown their parents. They just want them to understand that the church does not support same sex marriages and wants to make sure this is something they support as well before being baptized into a church that believes this. AGAIN, not something you HAVE to do! You do not have to join a church you disagree with! I don't feel children of same sex marriages are being outcast. They are still welcome to attend. But it has always been the churches policy that whether your parents are gay or straight, if your parents disagree with the beliefs of the church, you need to wait until you are of legal age to be baptized in an effort to keep the peace at home. Let's all stop victimizing people who are not being victimized.

If you still disagree. That's ok. We will have to agree to disagree.

[Blackmarch]

I appreciate that explanation, thank you. Again, sorry I wasn't clear. 

But I have to be honest-For the life of me, I don't know why anyone would leave the church over this. 

ah ok sorry . probably becasue they don't understand that and view it as an attack against a certain type of people.. and that they put how people are treated more important than a testimony of Christ., or that their testimony of christ is weaker than that belief.