LDSLiving: One Gay Man's Powerful Journey Away From the Church and Back Again


skippy740
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've been away from the forum for quite some time.  When I last visited, there were (and I'm sure there still are) some threads addressing same sex attraction, family acceptance, and other topics.  I remember reaching out to a member of the Christofferson family a few years ago, but she never responded back to me.  (Wasn't sure if I was treading on something too hard to share, or if she never really got my message.)  I genuinely wanted to know how their family dealt with such a hot topic for so long.

This article embodies a GREAT example for us and how we can and should treat our family members - particularly those who have same-sex attraction.  I found the motives to be right - we are going to keep our family together through love and acceptance.

http://www.ldsliving.com/One-Gay-Man-s-Powerful-Journey-Away-from-the-Church-and-Back-Again/s/86366

I look forward to reading Tom's book when it becomes available (I prefer Kindle books whenever possible).  I would guess that it would be a decent reference for families and church leaders on how we should BE when relating to those with same-sex attraction.

 

I suggest, that for any family that is dealing with this, to consider this article as how we should be - not that it will change things - but so we can be the kind of people we should be, so others may want to be like us and see the Light of Christ shown in our lives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a similar article, but different.  

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/865688689/Gay-brother-of-Mormon-apostle-shares-his-spiritual-journey.html

I wanted to highlight this particular paragraph:

Christofferson's story will also be shared in a KSL TV special between sessions of this October's LDS General Conference. The program will feature an interview with Christofferson and his brothers, along with ward and stake leaders who helped fellowship him back into the LDS faith after nearly two decades.

This should be an interesting program to watch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wanted to add that it's NOT the fact that Tom came back into the membership of the Church that I find fascinating.  That's a complete by-product of this whole thing.  I also had no idea that Tom was rebaptized and returned to the Church until I read these articles.

I wanted to learn from another family who successfully raised their children, and integrated their faith along with welcoming and loving their same-sex attracted son and his partner into their lives.  Quite frankly, I'm not sure I'm "big enough" to do that, but learning from another family AND ward family of how and why they did it has been of interest to me.  I would think it would be of interest for anyone who has ever served in a leadership capacity.  I would imagine that some members of Tom's ward/stake probably went to their bishop to discuss "their" concerns, and that the Bishop would've had to counsel with them.  

It's the journey and the other people I find interesting, not the fact that Tom came back into the Church.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, skippy740 said:

I wanted to add that it's NOT the fact that Tom came back into the membership of the Church that I find fascinating.  That's a complete by-product of this whole thing.  I also had no idea that Tom was rebaptized and returned to the Church until I read these articles.

I wanted to learn from another family who successfully raised their children, and integrated their faith along with welcoming and loving their same-sex attracted son and his partner into their lives.  Quite frankly, I'm not sure I'm "big enough" to do that, but learning from another family AND ward family of how and why they did it has been of interest to me.  I would think it would be of interest for anyone who has ever served in a leadership capacity.  I would imagine that some members of Tom's ward/stake probably went to their bishop to discuss "their" concerns, and that the Bishop would've had to counsel with them.  

It's the journey and the other people I find interesting, not the fact that Tom came back into the Church.

Wait.  Are my eyes deceiving me?  Does it say that skippy posted?  Wow...welcome back dude.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I actually think this is a really insidious article and several evil ideologies are being espoused (not necessarily evil people but evil ideologies).

"By the time he was 5 years old, Tom Christofferson knew he was gay—he just didn’t have the vocabulary to express what he was feeling. “I found the language to name it when I was 12 years old,”

Give me a flipping break; at age 5 he knew he was homosexual, he was having sexual desire to members of the same sex . . .really??  Anyone who believes that garbage has never raised kids.  Yeah some boys are a little more feminine and some girls are a little more boyish . . .they are called either tom-boys or sissies.  But b/c one is a tom-boy or a sissie boy does not a homosexual make.  In addition, this statement does not in any way shape or form jive with the medical and scientific research on homosexuality.  Biggest lie ever told "they are born that way".

"“My partner and I had a wonderful life, and we had been together about 12 years at that point. But there was a deeper element and a spirituality that I wanted to have in my life that I didn’t feel, and so after we moved [to New Canaan, Connecticut], I felt like I wanted to attend church. That was where I had felt the Spirit in the past, and it was where I felt I would be able to have those feelings again.”"

In other words; my life was absolutely wonderful committing deviant whoredoms.  You see there was nothing wrong with homosexual behavior; I was living a wonderful live . . .but I wanted more "spirituality"

"This marked a new beginning for him in the Church but also a heartbreaking end to a 19-year relationship. "

More gag-worthy material.  You see it was just so so incredibly "heartbreaking" to end a relationship . . .steeped in SIN!! Do we as Latter-Day Saints, followers of Christ, ever talk about any other sin like this?  That is was "heartbreaking" to end a sin!!!  Oh you know it was just so heartbreaking to end my 19 year relationship with pornography, but I wanted to join the Church so I did.  

"“Being gay is not simply an attraction, nor does it necessarily refer to sexual behavior. It is a way of being itself, an existence, an identity."

Okay . . .so what exactly is it then.  You can't even define it; if it's not attraction, if it's not sexual behavior then what exactly is it?  This is more evil ideology wrapped in "love".  Words matter, words have definition and they mean things.  An existence or and identity is based on behaviors and thoughts.  When I say I am an engineer-it means specific things, it means things about what I believe, how I act, how I behave, what I've studied.  I can define it to the nth degree what it means to be an engineer to have an identity as an engineer.  Telling me being homosexual is an identity but you say well it's not an attraction or well it's not behavior . .. well then exactly praytell what is it?

More post-modern relativism bull that has seeped into this culture-explain away words so the very definition of the word is so ephemeral that it means absolutely nothing.

I also point this as to exhibit A as to the actual doctrine of the Church has changed.  20 years ago he was excommunicated for identifying as homosexual. In other words identifying as homosexual was a sin, yet today he is welcome with full fellowship regardless of what evil ideology he believes in and spreads.

Of course b/c he is an Apostle's brother, we don't dare say anything negative about this ridiculous Satanic ideology.

There are some good things in the article-just b/c someone teaches and believes a Satan inspired ideology does not mean we scourge them or beat them or do anything like that.

But here is the kicker " his partner began to wonder if people he thought had accepted and loved them were really just being well-mannered and kind. "

Umm . . .so you are telling me that loving them really means that one accepts their ideology.  Accepting can't just be well-mannered and kind.  Okay got it.

What a evil load of junk in this article . . . Oh Zion . . . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet
On 9/14/2017 at 8:35 AM, skippy740 said:

I wanted to add that it's NOT the fact that Tom came back into the membership of the Church that I find fascinating.

It's the journey and the other people I find interesting, not the fact that Tom came back into the Church.

Same here.  What I love about this story is the love shown to Tom by his family and his ward.  I think Pres. Uchtdorf's, "Don't judge me because I sin differently than you do," fits in well here.   :)  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, I think that Christofferson's return to the Church IS a major theme of the story; even if he himself chooses not to present it thus.  I mean, yes, we continue those relationships of love with wandering family members for their own sakes; but in the grand scheme of things the point is that sooner or later the tentacles of divine providence catch up with them (and if they don't, then the eternal potential of those relationships remains perpetually stunted to some degree).  

 @JoCa strikes me as being partially correct; insofar that these warm fuzzies about "acceptance" tend to evaporate the minute the Church says "thus far and no further"; and at such times what had been acknowledged as love and support suddenly gets recharacterized as some sort of cynical masquerade.  I suppose the trick is--you love wanderers for their own sake and try to avoid coming across as if you see them as merely some sort of "project"; but you also never stop praying that they'll allow the Atonement to turn them into something better than the goals they've currently set for themselves.

Between this experience and that of Bennett and Becky Borden, I think maybe we are being shown that there *is* a way to reclaim folks who have allowed themselves to be swallowed up in homosexuality.  Maybe their experiences do leave scars in the form of incorrect thinking patterns and self-identities that persist even after the behavior has been shunned (it would be interesting to know whether Christofferson now has a testimony that gay relationships are per se contrary to God's plan; or whether he just sees himself as jumping through an arbitrary and temporary hoop to claim a higher spiritual plane.  I also want to know why in Sam Hill it's supposed to be a "blessing" to be gay; and whether Christofferson would also say--or be comfortable with someone else saying--that it's a "blessing" to be straight.  If I'm not supposed to stereotype, and "anyone" can be gay and my "gaydar" shouldn't be tripped by speech patterns, dress styles, interests, supposed effeminacy, etc; then what exactly *does* constitute being "gay" other than sexual attraction?).  

But, typical progressivist doublespeak aside, the key to me is--they came back.  They ended sinful relationships out of a desire to pursue something better.  And they weren't beaten into it by a series of relational, economic, or health setbacks--they just realized, for various reasons, that there wasn't enough God in the choices they had been making; and then Church members loved them the rest of the way back.  What a story!

Mormonism used to be a green field in the middle of a desert, and it didn't take much to keep sheep in the fold or to herd the wanderers back where they belonged.  But Satan's spent the last thirty years seeding the desert with locoweed and then keeping the sick sheep from finding their way home.  It may be that the best strategy for today is to re-design the sheepfold gate in a way that still deters exit but also facilitates re-entry for those lost sheep who finally realize they've been gorging themselves on spiritual junk food.  I think I'll spend some time trying to understand how the shepherds are trying to rebuild the gate, before I start sniping about how different this gate is from the old one.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, JoCa said:

I actually think this is a really insidious article and several evil ideologies are being espoused (not necessarily evil people but evil ideologies).

"By the time he was 5 years old, Tom Christofferson knew he was gay—he just didn’t have the vocabulary to express what he was feeling. “I found the language to name it when I was 12 years old,”

Give me a flipping break; at age 5 he knew he was homosexual, he was having sexual desire to members of the same sex . . .really??  Anyone who believes that garbage has never raised kids.  Yeah some boys are a little more feminine and some girls are a little more boyish . . .they are called either tom-boys or sissies.  But b/c one is a tom-boy or a sissie boy does not a homosexual make.  In addition, this statement does not in any way shape or form jive with the medical and scientific research on homosexuality.  Biggest lie ever told "they are born that way".

"“My partner and I had a wonderful life, and we had been together about 12 years at that point. But there was a deeper element and a spirituality that I wanted to have in my life that I didn’t feel, and so after we moved [to New Canaan, Connecticut], I felt like I wanted to attend church. That was where I had felt the Spirit in the past, and it was where I felt I would be able to have those feelings again.”"

In other words; my life was absolutely wonderful committing deviant whoredoms.  You see there was nothing wrong with homosexual behavior; I was living a wonderful live . . .but I wanted more "spirituality"

"This marked a new beginning for him in the Church but also a heartbreaking end to a 19-year relationship. "

More gag-worthy material.  You see it was just so so incredibly "heartbreaking" to end a relationship . . .steeped in SIN!! Do we as Latter-Day Saints, followers of Christ, ever talk about any other sin like this?  That is was "heartbreaking" to end a sin!!!  Oh you know it was just so heartbreaking to end my 19 year relationship with pornography, but I wanted to join the Church so I did.  

You don't know the family.  And apparently, you can't see beyond doctrine to take a larger view.  Such are the Pharisees in the gospel who cannot see the beauty of the gospel without dispelling the rules that the beauty seems to violate.  You have completely missed the spirit and the message of the article and instead substituted it for your own brand of judgment.  I sure hope you're not a Bishop or Stake President somewhere.  I've dealt with that kind before.

Now, I won't disagree that it's COMPLETELY possible (and plausible) that just his last name helped along the way in his ward, but I wanted to showcase the meaning behind the message.

I'm sorry that you can't see that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, JoCa said:

I tell you now.  The entire point of this is to bring acceptance of homosexual behavior into the Church.  People who don't see this are whistling past the graveyard; it is the entire objective.

I'll tell YOU now.  There was NO instance in any of these articles talking about homosexual behavior happening IN the church.  He was a member, served a mission, and was once married in the temple.  He knows the standards of conduct in the building and respected it.  

Your bigotry is astounding.  You see a conspiracy where there is none.  And I can tell you that the family would NOT appreciate being labeled as part of such an agenda.

May the Lord so bless you that you never have to deal with such an issue of morality in your family.

Perhaps you missed this part of the LDSLiving article:

A couple years after Christofferson came out to his family, they had a family reunion that would define them for life. “One night, Mom and Dad asked all the boys and their spouses to put their kids to bed and come into their room to have a family meeting. We had prayer together, and then our dad talked about his concern that we would be unified as a family and have loyalty to each other.”

Christofferson remembers, “Mom told us, ‘I’ve realized  that there is no perfect family, but I believe we can be perfect in our love for each other.’ And then she turned to my brothers and sisters-in-law and said, ‘The most important lesson your kids will learn from the way that our family treats their Uncle Tom is that nothing they can ever do will take them outside the circle of our family’s love.’ That set the tone for everything that happened in our family after that—we were going to love and enjoy each other wherever anybody was in their journey, and we were going to be loyal and united as a family. [My parents] couldn’t give up on either the Church or their child because each one was essential to the other. The Church gave meaning to their understanding of family, and the family fulfilled their understanding of the gospel, so they were unwilling to let either go.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciated the article, as I have many of the similar ones posted here recently, because it shows that you can repent of serious sins even when you have been entrenched in their practice for a very long time. While I appreciate the message on familial love and the efforts the Christofferson family went too, to love their wayward son, the true beauty for me was when he rejected everything to come back into the gospel of Jesus Christ. He rejected the World's teachings and the feelings of his partner and decades of poor personal decisions to become clean again through Christ's Atonement. I feel like the Church is demonstrating that you can reject even the most insidious of inner desires, in an effort to reach out to people who may have considered themselves lost long ago due to their participation in homosexual activity. While I may quibble with some of the words Brother Christofferson used to describe his journey, I feel as the father of the prodigal son when he told the faithful brother in Luke 15:32 "It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found." Brother Christofferson was dead but now is alive again and found and to me that is reason to celebrate.

Edited by Midwest LDS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then it comes down to this:

- Who would you rather be?

- How would Christ want us to be?

- If you met the family, what would you want to tell them?  Words of support/encouragement?  Or how wrong their family member was and dwell on it.

They are happy!  That's obvious to me!  They do miss their other uncle (whom I will not mention), but they remember him fondly.

For me, I'd rather be inclusive than exclusive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, skippy740 said:

Then it comes down to this:

- Who would you rather be?

- How would Christ want us to be?

- If you met the family, what would you want to tell them?  Words of support/encouragement?  Or how wrong their family member was and dwell on it.

They are happy!  That's obvious to me!  They do miss their other uncle (whom I will not mention), but they remember him fondly.

For me, I'd rather be inclusive than exclusive.

I think it depends on the circumstances and situation.  I would want to be inclusive, but not enabling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
Guest LiterateParakeet
6 hours ago, MrShorty said:

If anyone is interested, Deseret Book apparently hosted a panel discussion with Tom and his Bishop and Stake President of that era to discuss the book and those issues. http://www.ldsliving.com/Watch-Gay-Mormon-His-Bishop-and-Stake-President-Hold-Panel-Discussion-on-How-to-Include-LGBTQ-Mormons-in-the-Church/s/86595

 

That's awesome, thanks for the link!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/19/2017 at 2:28 PM, The Folk Prophet said:

I see in these conflicting views, one slurping up the poisoned garnish along with the meal and the other throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

As I see it, and to avoid wrongful discrimination or extremes, believing LDS should treat family members who engage in homosexual behaviors no differently than they would treat family members who have committed other serious sexual sins or major transgressions. The Lord's path to repentance  and full fellowship is the same for one and all

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/18/2017 at 7:58 PM, JoCa said:

I actually think this is a really insidious article and several evil ideologies are being espoused (not necessarily evil people but evil ideologies).

"By the time he was 5 years old, Tom Christofferson knew he was gay—he just didn’t have the vocabulary to express what he was feeling. “I found the language to name it when I was 12 years old,”

Give me a flipping break; at age 5 he knew he was homosexual, he was having sexual desire to members of the same sex . . .really??  Anyone who believes that garbage has never raised kids.  Yeah some boys are a little more feminine and some girls are a little more boyish . . .they are called either tom-boys or sissies.  But b/c one is a tom-boy or a sissie boy does not a homosexual make.  In addition, this statement does not in any way shape or form jive with the medical and scientific research on homosexuality.  Biggest lie ever told "they are born that way".

"“My partner and I had a wonderful life, and we had been together about 12 years at that point. But there was a deeper element and a spirituality that I wanted to have in my life that I didn’t feel, and so after we moved [to New Canaan, Connecticut], I felt like I wanted to attend church. That was where I had felt the Spirit in the past, and it was where I felt I would be able to have those feelings again.”"

In other words; my life was absolutely wonderful committing deviant whoredoms.  You see there was nothing wrong with homosexual behavior; I was living a wonderful live . . .but I wanted more "spirituality"

"This marked a new beginning for him in the Church but also a heartbreaking end to a 19-year relationship. "

More gag-worthy material.  You see it was just so so incredibly "heartbreaking" to end a relationship . . .steeped in SIN!! Do we as Latter-Day Saints, followers of Christ, ever talk about any other sin like this?  That is was "heartbreaking" to end a sin!!!  Oh you know it was just so heartbreaking to end my 19 year relationship with pornography, but I wanted to join the Church so I did.  

"“Being gay is not simply an attraction, nor does it necessarily refer to sexual behavior. It is a way of being itself, an existence, an identity."

Okay . . .so what exactly is it then.  You can't even define it; if it's not attraction, if it's not sexual behavior then what exactly is it?  This is more evil ideology wrapped in "love".  Words matter, words have definition and they mean things.  An existence or and identity is based on behaviors and thoughts.  When I say I am an engineer-it means specific things, it means things about what I believe, how I act, how I behave, what I've studied.  I can define it to the nth degree what it means to be an engineer to have an identity as an engineer.  Telling me being homosexual is an identity but you say well it's not an attraction or well it's not behavior . .. well then exactly praytell what is it?

More post-modern relativism bull that has seeped into this culture-explain away words so the very definition of the word is so ephemeral that it means absolutely nothing.

I also point this as to exhibit A as to the actual doctrine of the Church has changed.  20 years ago he was excommunicated for identifying as homosexual. In other words identifying as homosexual was a sin, yet today he is welcome with full fellowship regardless of what evil ideology he believes in and spreads.

Of course b/c he is an Apostle's brother, we don't dare say anything negative about this ridiculous Satanic ideology.

There are some good things in the article-just b/c someone teaches and believes a Satan inspired ideology does not mean we scourge them or beat them or do anything like that.

But here is the kicker " his partner began to wonder if people he thought had accepted and loved them were really just being well-mannered and kind. "

Umm . . .so you are telling me that loving them really means that one accepts their ideology.  Accepting can't just be well-mannered and kind.  Okay got it.

What a evil load of junk in this article . . . Oh Zion . . . 

From last General Conference:

40120.jpg?1506954136

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share