Sunday, November 15, 2015

First Presidency Changes the Handbook Updates

Two days ago the First Presidency sent a letter to the general and local leaders of the Church, changing some of the recent policy changes that were made last week to Church Handbook of Instruction, Handbook 1 regarding same-sex couples and their children.  The explanation video with Elder Christofferson that was rushed to the public was for the members, to calm them down and ease their minds on the matter; this letter is guidance for the leaders, probably in response to the continued social media outcry over these new policies.

First, here is the part of section 16.13 that this new letter references:
  •      A new section in Handbook 1, 16.13 will be added as follows: 
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 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."

And here is the copy of the letter that was just sent out to the leaders of the Church:

THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS
OFFICE OF THE FIRST PRESIDENCY
47 EAST SOUTH TEMPLE STREET, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84150-1200
November 13, 2015
To: General Authorities; Area Seventies; General Auxiliary Presidencies; Stake, District, Mission, and Temple Presidents; Bishops and Branch Presidents
Dear Brethren and Sisters:
The Council of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles provides the following guidance in applying provisions on same-gender marriage recently added to Handbook 1:
Revealed doctrine is clear that families are eternal in nature and purpose. We are obligated to act with that perspective for the welfare of both adults and children. The newly added Handbook provisions affirm that adults who choose to enter into a same-gender marriage or similar relationship commit sin that warrants a Church disciplinary council.
Our concern with respect to children is their current and future well-being and the harmony of their home environment. The provisions of Handbook 1, Section 16.13, that restrict priesthood ordinances for minors, apply only to those children whose primary residence is with a couple living in a same-gender marriage or similar relationship. As always, local leaders may request further guidance in particular instances when they have questions.
When a child living with such a same-gender couple has already been baptized and is actively participating in the Church, provisions of Section 16.13 do not require that his or her membership activities or priesthood privileges be curtailed or that further ordinances be withheld. Decisions about any future ordinances for such children should be made by local leaders with their prime consideration being the preparation and best interests of the child.
All children are to be treated with utmost respect and love. They are welcome to attend Church meetings and participate in Church activities. All children may receive priesthood blessings of healing and spiritual guidance.
May the Lord continue to bless you in your ministry.
Sincerely yours,
I'm going to get into lawyer mode for a few paragraphs because I want to address this letter as not being only a "clarification" of the original wording of the Handbook 1 changes (as the Church page's title suggests here: https://www.lds.org/pages/church-handbook-changes?lang=eng ) but rather this letter is also acting as an addendum to what the original changes said, because this letter adds to and changes the original wording, it does not simply clarify what's already been said.  I'll explain what I'm talking about.

The main issue that stemmed from the wording of the original policy changes was this: there are no provisions for minors of gay parents; in fact, minors were specifically excluded from everything if their parent was sexually cohabiting with or married to someone of the same sex.

Take a look at these two quotes together from the original policy changes:
"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 a same-gender relationship when he is satisfied by personal interviews that both of the following requirements are met:"
"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."
Notice the second "or" in that first sentence.  If you write that out in a long non-combined sentence and then combine that with the second requirement, here's what it says:
"A mission president or a stake president may request approval from the Office of the First Presidency to baptize and confirm, or to ordain [if already baptized and confirmed], or to recommend mission service [if already baptized and confirmed], for a child of a parent who has lived or is living in a same-gender relationship when . . . 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."
This new policy did three things:
  1. It stated that it didn't matter whether the parent used to live or currently lives in a same-gender relationship; it's enough that the parent had at all for these restrictions to be in effect.
  2. It stated that an unbaptized child living with a parent who has lived or is living in a same-gender relationship couldn't get baptized into the Church until they reached adulthood and didn't live with that parent.
  3. It also stated that a baptized child living with a parent who has lived or is living in a same-gender relationship couldn't progress in his or her membership activities (being ordained or recommended for a mission) until they reached adulthood and didn't live with that parent.  It halted their progress.
Elder Christofferson expounded on the reasoning behind this new policy (I hate to quote all this text, but I need this for context):
"[This policy] originates from a desire to protect children in their innocence and in their minority years. When, for example, there is the formal blessing and naming of a child in the Church, which happens when a child has parents who are members of the Church, it triggers a lot of things. First, a membership record for them. It triggers the assignment of visiting and home teachers. It triggers an expectation that they will be in Primary and the other Church organizations. And that is likely not going to be an appropriate thing in the home setting, in the family setting where they're living as children where their parents are a same-sex couple. We don't want there to be the conflicts that that would engender. We don't want the child to have to deal with issues that might arise where the parents feel one way and the expectations of the Church are very different. And so with the other ordinances on through baptism and so on, there's time for that if, when a child reaches majority, he or she feels like that's what they want and they can make an informed and conscious decision about that. Nothing is lost to them in the end if that's the direction they want to go. In the meantime, they're not placed in a position where there will be difficulties, challenges, conflicts that can injure their development in very tender years."
This upset a lot of people for many reasons, one of which was because neither the original policy changes nor Elder Christofferson's explanation addressed the family situation where a straight parent lives apart from his or her gay spouse and together they share custody of their child, and so the child technically lives in both residences.  What about getting that child a name and a blessing or being baptized?  What about that child's Church progression?  And why halt a child's Church progression if he or she is already baptized and active in the Church while still living with gay parents who have clearly given the child permission to participate in Church life?

So the leaders sought to address those situations.  And to do so, they discarded the original wording of the 16.13 addition to the Handbook and instead said this:
 "The provisions of Handbook 1, Section 16.13, that restrict priesthood ordinances for minors, apply only to those children whose primary residence is with a couple living in a same-gender marriage or similar relationship."
and this:
 "When a child living with such a same-gender couple has already been baptized and is actively participating in the Church, provisions of Section 16.13 do not require that his or her membership activities or priesthood privileges be curtailed or that further ordinances be withheld."
That first statement is actually incorrect, because the second statement shows that the restrictions for minors apply only to children who haven't been baptized yet and whose primary residence is with a gay couple.  The first statement should actually say something like this:
"The provisions of Handbook 1, Section 16.13 that restrict priesthood ordinances for minors apply only to those unbaptized children whose primary residence is with a couple living in a same-gender marriage or similar relationship."
That way the second change regarding baptized children living with a gay couple makes sense.

Now let's look at the specifics of what these newest policies do:
  1. They say that an unbaptized minor child of a gay couple can freely be baptized and confirmed as long as the child's primary residence isn't with that gay couple.  So as long as the child's primary residence is with their straight parent, if they have one, then they can get baptized into the Church as early as 8 years old and all that other stuff can follow.
  2. They also say that a baptized minor child of a gay couple whose primary residence is with that gay couple and who is active in the Church can continue freely with being ordained or recommended for a mission.
  3. They still exclude unbaptized minors of gay couples whose home is the primary residence of their child.  Those children still have to follow the restrictions set forth in the Handbook 1 changes: before they can get baptized into the Church, they still have to wait until they are legally adults, not reside in their gay parents' house, specifically disavow their parents' sexual life choices, and then get approval from the First Presidency.
The first of these newest policies isn't worded quite right, and both of these newest policies contradict the original policy changes and the explanation given by Elder Christofferson.  But that's for the Church's legal department to handle if the need arises.  ;)

Those who have faith in and support the leaders of the Church have to claim that this letter was continued revelation for how the Church should be run, but let's be honest: this was the leaders having an "oh crap!" moment and changing the guidelines to better meet the desires and concerns of the Church members.  This wasn't God changing his mind on His policies, it's the leaders trying to cover their butts.

Still didn't stop thousands of members from handing in their letters of resignation yesterday.  The Salt Lake City news station covered the story:  http://kutv.com/news/local/group-holds-mass-resignation-from-lds-church-in-slc-saturday

None of my conclusions from my last post have changed with this addendum.  Gay parents are still viewed as worse than parents who are involved in any of those other LDS-labeled serious transgressions (attempted murder, adultery, physical abuse, etc.), since they're the only ones whose unbaptized children are affected by their "serious-transgression" decisions.  And to back up Elder Christofferson's claim, this addendum also contains the underlying lie of this whole issue: "Our concern with respect to children is their current and future well-being and the harmony of their home environment."  Gay parents are the only ones whose children have that "consideration" given to them.  By singling out the unbaptized children of gay parents, the Church leaders are still insinuating that only children who live with gay parents would experience difficulties, conflict, and disharmony at home if the children were to join the Church while still living at their home (regardless of cultural, religious or sinful differences in other households that don't mesh with Church expectations).  Remember, converts to the Church who join despite their family's objections are praised as being faithful, spiritually strong people who are dedicated to the Lord and His church.

I am glad that those children of gay parents who have already been baptized into the Church don't have to worry about what will happen to them as far as their membership is concerned.  I'm also glad that children who don't primarily live with their gay parent also won't have to worry about Church actions against them.  But I feel for the people who think that the LDS church is the one and only true church on the face of the Earth and who are now excluded from joining it or who will be excommunicated from it for choosing to marry someone of their same sex.  I truly hope they will find peace and happiness outside of a Church that discriminates against them and rejects them.

No comments:

Post a Comment