Apostle says it's okay to support gay marriage

[marc]

Tony, did you read the article and watch the video interview?

Jesus Christ's Church will never support iniquity. Hence, it will never support gay marriage, just like it will never support fornication.

But now they won't discipline you if you support the grievous sin of homosexuality, and the abomination that is gay marriage.

But they will discipline you if you don't support THEM (the Top 15 PSRs)

So what this boils down to, if I understand this current issue, is that it is now safe to openly support one iniquity without losing one's temple recommend? Maybe approved isn't the right word...I'm trying to think of a more appropriate word. Sanctioned? I think sanction is appropriate.

Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

Is Elder Christofferson saying that it is now ok to answer yes? It sounds to me like a definite yes.

With this new precedent, will members have the same safety to openly support any other sin or iniquity from losing one's temple recommend? If it's not okay to "support" one iniquity, why is it okay to "support" another? Is the only answer because our leaders say so? Does that make it right in the sight of God? Did Paul compromise with Rome? O, what a slippery slope we have been thrust onto. It is no longer an issue of liberty or preserving the individual and unalienable rights of all. It probably hasn't been for a long time.

[jwharton]

Tony, did you read the article and watch the video interview?

Jesus Christ's Church will never support iniquity. Hence, it will never support gay marriage, just like it will never support fornication.

But now they won't discipline you if you support the grievous sin of homosexuality, and the abomination that is gay marriage.

But they will discipline you if you don't support THEM (the Top 15 PSRs)

So what this boils down to, if I understand this current issue, is that it is now safe to openly support one iniquity without losing one's temple recommend? Maybe approved isn't the right word...I'm trying to think of a more appropriate word. Sanctioned? I think sanction is appropriate.

Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

Is Elder Christofferson saying that it is now ok to answer yes? It sounds to me like a definite yes.

With this new precedent, will members have the same safety to openly support any other sin or iniquity from losing one's temple recommend? If it's not okay to "support" one iniquity, why is it okay to "support" another? Is the only answer because our leaders say so? Does that make it right in the sight of God? Did Paul compromise with Rome? O, what a slippery slope we have been thrust onto. It is no longer an issue of liberty or preserving the individual and unalienable rights of all. It probably hasn't been for a long time.

A slippery slope is indeed a good way to describe the landscape we now stand on in relation to gay activism.
Romans chapter 1 will keep marching on until the fullness of the Gospel is returned to.

[marc]

A good number of my coworkers are LGBT. One is a young man whose parents were in my previous ward. He's a great kid and I chat with him occasionally. He just friended me on Facebook recently. Maybe he finally felt comfortable around me after a few years. Another gal has been a friend for a few years. She's a wonderful person. Opposed to religion, is now married to another gal. But though her views on religion are clear to me, she never talks about it, as I never talk about gay marriage. We always greet each other with smiles and sometimes big embraces.

I love my fellow man and woman no matter what choices they make. I don't feel the need to impose my beliefs on anyone and most don't impose theirs on me either. While I am happy for them for finding their happiness, I know it won't last beyond this life. Because of this, I can only be a little happy for them, but overall, it hurts my heart. And therefore, I cannot support their decisions. Deep down inside, I just can't. I don't judge them. It's not my place to judge anyone. I just love them. That's all I have to offer.

[Tony]

Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

1. If a member has a friend who lives with a girlfriend, and the member thinks it is OK to do that, the member will not be denied a Temple recommend. Many members have friends who drink, but the member can still get a Temple recommend.

2. Elder Christofferson was not speaking for the Church. You can interpret it however you want, but I do not think the Church accepts gay marriage in any way. I do not think they will adjust the Temple recommend interview to make sure people know homosexuality is a sin.

[Tony]

The Church Officially Opposes Gay Marriage

This is from a July 2006 Ensign.

In April Church leaders added their voices to those of the leaders of many other religions in support of an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to protect and preserve the institution of marriage between a man and a woman.

“We take the unprecedented stand of uniting to call for a constitutional amendment to establish a uniform national definition of marriage as the exclusive union of one man and one woman,” states a letter signed by American religious leaders, including Elder Russell M. Nelson of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. “We are convinced that this is the only measure that will adequately protect marriage from those who would circumvent the legislative process and force a redefinition of it on the whole of our society” (“A Letter from America’s Religious Leaders in Defense of Marriage,” http://www.religiouscoalitionformarriage.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;).

The doctrine of the Church affirms marriage between a man and a woman, and it opposes same-gender unions and any other sexual relations outside of marriage.

“The union of husband and wife assures perpetuation of the race and provides a divinely ordained setting for the nurturing and teaching of children,” stated a news release based on a letter dated February 1, 1994, from the First Presidency to priesthood leaders. “This sacred family setting, with father and mother and children firmly committed to each other and to righteous living, offers the best hope for avoiding many of the ills that afflict society.”

“The Family: A Proclamation to the World” states, “We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society” (Ensign, Nov. 1995, 102).

Because national campaigns on moral, social, or political issues often become divisive, the Church urges those who participate in public debate to be respectful of others.

“We can and do work with those of other religions in various undertakings in the everlasting fight against social evils which threaten the treasured values which are so important to all of us,” President Hinckley said in April 1998 general conference. “These people are not of our faith, but they are our friends, neighbors, and co-workers in a variety of causes. We are pleased to lend our strength to their efforts. But in all of this there is no doctrinal compromise. There need not be and must not be on our part. But there is a degree of fellowship as we labor together” (“We Bear Witness of Him,” Ensign, May 1998, 4–5).

The Church has previously issued two statements in support of a constitutional amendment on marriage—on July 7, 2004, and on October 19, 2004.

The October 2004 First Presidency statement reads: “We of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints reach out with understanding and respect for individuals who are attracted to those of the same gender. We realize there may be great loneliness in their lives but there must also be recognition of what is right before the Lord.

“As a doctrinal principle, based on sacred scripture, we affirm that marriage between a man and a woman is essential to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children. The powers of procreation are to be exercised only between a man and a woman lawfully wedded as husband and wife.

“Any other sexual relations, including those between persons of the same gender, undermine the divinely created institution of the family. The Church accordingly favors measures that define marriage as the union of a man and a woman and that do not confer legal status on any other sexual relationship.”

[Tony]

Elder M. Russell Ballard of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles gave a BYU address in August 2009 and stated, "No one is to engage in sexual relationships outside the bounds the Lord has set. This applies to homosexual behavior of any kind and to heterosexual relationships outside of marriage. It is a sin to violate the law of chastity . . . . We follow Jesus Christ by adhering to God’s law of marriage, which is marriage between one man and one woman."

[samizdat]

Elder M. Russell Ballard of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles gave a BYU address in August 2009 and stated, "No one is to engage in sexual relationships outside the bounds the Lord has set. This applies to homosexual behavior of any kind and to heterosexual relationships outside of marriage. It is a sin to violate the law of chastity . . . . We follow Jesus Christ by adhering to God’s law of marriage, which is marriage between one man and one woman."

Elder Nelson was quoted as saying that "Disciples of the Lord are Defenders of Marriage." That brought out quite the hate from many people at BYU graduation when he said that.

[marc]

Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

1. If a member has a friend who lives with a girlfriend, and the member thinks it is OK to do that, the member will not be denied a Temple recommend. Many members have friends who drink, but the member can still get a Temple recommend.

2. Elder Christofferson was not speaking for the Church. You can interpret it however you want, but I do not think the Church accepts gay marriage in any way. I do not think they will adjust the Temple recommend interview to make sure people know homosexuality is a sin.

1. While I agree with you, Elder Christofferson conceded that anyone can post on Facebook, join in parades, etc (because we are a very diverse group with diverse opinions, etc) without fear of losing their temple recommend.

2. How do you know he was not speaking for the church? Is he an apostle off the clock at certain times of the day? Should an apostle be an apostle while it is his calling to be one? Or was Joseph Smith truly accurate when he said a prophet is only a prophet when acting as such? I don't think the temple recommend interview will be adjusted either so I agree with you there, too.

[Lizzy60]

When any of the Apostles is sitting in their Priesthood Attire, speaking to the press in a formal interview, you can be gosh-darned sure that they are speaking in agreement with the other PSRs. To do otherwise, especially for a junior Apostle, would not fly.

[A Random Phrase]

When any of the Apostles is sitting in their Priesthood Attire, speaking to the press in a formal interview, you can be gosh-darned sure that they are speaking in agreement with the other PSRs. To do otherwise, especially for a junior Apostle, would not fly.

Wasn't there a senior Apostle there, also? Like Oaks or somebody?

[marc]

Perry, if I recall.

[A Random Phrase]

Okay. I remembered seeing a picture and it looked like someone else was in the background. I think you are right. Perry.

[Obrien]

Do you support, affiliate with, or agree with any group or individual whose teachings or practices are contrary to or oppose those accepted by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

1. If a member has a friend who lives with a girlfriend, and the member thinks it is OK to do that, the member will not be denied a Temple recommend. Many members have friends who drink, but the member can still get a Temple recommend.

2. Elder Christofferson was not speaking for the Church. You can interpret it however you want, but I do not think the Church accepts gay marriage in any way. I do not think they will adjust the Temple recommend interview to make sure people know homosexuality is a sin.

Now, if only you were an apostle all your thinking might be worth the electrons you used to post your thoughts. You and I have virtually no say in policies, and that is how it will remain for the time being. Think what you want, just keep filling the pews, temples and tithing slips.

[Sirocco]

Lmao i love that hahaha

I didn't make it but I do often photoshop cats into things

Interesting...

Usually less about the LDS church and more about North Korea

[Original_Intent]

1. If a member has a friend who lives with a girlfriend, and the member thinks it is OK to do that, the member will not be denied a Temple recommend. Many members have friends who drink, but the member can still get a Temple recommend.

2. Elder Christofferson was not speaking for the Church. You can interpret it however you want, but I do not think the Church accepts gay marriage in any way. I do not think they will adjust the Temple recommend interview to make sure people know homosexuality is a sin.

Now, if only you were an apostle all your thinking might be worth the electrons you used to post your thoughts. You and I have virtually no say in policies, and that is how it will remain for the time being. Think what you want, just keep filling the pews, temples and tithing slips.

It strikes me how apostate the TBMs can become when one of the PSRs says something that they interpret to be "out of bounds".

Or in other words, the prophet is infallible as long as he doesn't say anything to make me fly apart like glass.

[Sirocco]

North Korea is a better target.

Far funnier, and everyone can enjoy the humour... I loved The Inverview for example...

Though everyone loves cats.

[Sirocco]

North Korea is a better target.

Far funnier, and everyone can enjoy the humour... I loved The Inverview for example...

Though everyone loves cats.

I hate cats but they are still funny.

Oh...now I am just deeply offended! X(

[Thinker]

I think he's just saying that they aren't going to come after you for openly expressing your support for gay marriage, because we have that right. But that where the church draws the line is openly joining organizations who are openly defiant to the church and its teachings. And not using any authority to try and persuade others into supporting such causes.
I see no problem with it.

You see no problem with prioritizing the corporation above family - the base of society?

God created us male and female - and with the ability to procreate only be male/female.

What I see a problem with is that no matter what evil a church leader says, some members blindly follow, because church leaders are prioritized above God.

It's not ok to support homosexual marriage.
It is unethical and illogical.
Children should not be legally denied a mother or father.
We, as a society should not legally encourage homosexual behavior, statistically KNOWN to be harmful (STDs, AIDs, mental illness).

[Thinker]

He's got a brother that is openly gay, so I kind of understand his reply.

Though I am rather taken aback at his legalese: It's okay to support same sex marriage but it is not okay to join organizations that fight against the Church's gospel.

He was a lawyer too.

I don't get what he is trying to say with this to tell you the truth. Just say the truth!

Those that know the Scriptures very well should be able to say that it is definitely NOT okay to support same sex "marriage."

At least there are some who show they are capable of thinking without being told, regarding this issue of marriage, the foundation of society.

[Col. Flagg]

A good friend of mine who sings in the tabernacle choir was really bothered and saddened by Elder Christofferson's comment, in fact, his reply to me when I first informed him of this was 'brother, we are singing to the tune of the world as a church right now'. It's one thing to advocate unconditional love and acceptance of those who are homosexual or who struggle with same-sex attraction, but it's another entirely to condone same-sex marriage as it is not only in opposition to the plan of salvation, the family unit, God's natural laws of pro-creation and even the proclamation to the world on the family, it violates moral codes of conduct and standards that we have, as a church for a very long time, frowned upon as abominable in the sight of God. But now it's OK according to one Apostle? :-\ God will not be mocked. :-s

[samizdat]

A good friend of mine who sings in the tabernacle choir was really bothered and saddened by Elder Christofferson's comment, in fact, his reply to me when I first informed him of this was 'brother, we are singing to the tune of the world as a church right now'. It's one thing to advocate unconditional love and acceptance of those who are homosexual or who struggle with same-sex attraction, but it's another entirely to condone same-sex marriage as it is not only in opposition to the plan of salvation, the family unit, God's natural laws of pro-creation and even the proclamation to the world on the family, it violates moral codes of conduct and standards that we have, as a church for a very long time, frowned upon as abominable in the sight of God. But now it's OK according to one Apostle? :-\ God will not be mocked. :-s

I don't think Elder Christoffersen was condoning same sex marriage. In his legalese, he said that the Church would no longer pursue or excommunicate those that said they supported it on Facebook (but the Church would come after those that repeatedly attacked the Church's position on it).

Marc raised a point about the temple recommend questions which I wholeheartedly agree with. Hopefully there is some damage control, if not, it would be a sign that there are starting to see cracks forming higher up.

You have to realize that Christoffersen is probably being pressured more than others considering he has an openly gay brother "married" to his partner.

[dtanner]

Agree with the above. It's sad that the winds of change blew us into needing mormonsandgays.org, which have blown into these latest statements. They're still blowing. The LGBT crowd have a track record of not being impressed with baby steps and small concessions. If we only had an Anchor that would stop the drifting!

[dtanner]

Two things about his statements that have been on my mind:
1. Why do rights to express personal belief (whatever they are) without fear of persecution need to be given by the 15?
2. Elder Christofferson only mentioned going against the position of the Church. What about God? I thought the whole idea was to do God's will, not the church's will.

[Col. Flagg]

A good friend of mine who sings in the tabernacle choir was really bothered and saddened by Elder Christofferson's comment, in fact, his reply to me when I first informed him of this was 'brother, we are singing to the tune of the world as a church right now'. It's one thing to advocate unconditional love and acceptance of those who are homosexual or who struggle with same-sex attraction, but it's another entirely to condone same-sex marriage as it is not only in opposition to the plan of salvation, the family unit, God's natural laws of pro-creation and even the proclamation to the world on the family, it violates moral codes of conduct and standards that we have, as a church for a very long time, frowned upon as abominable in the sight of God. But now it's OK according to one Apostle? :-\ God will not be mocked. :-s

I don't think Elder Christoffersen was condoning same sex marriage. In his legalese, he said that the Church would no longer pursue or excommunicate those that said they supported it on Facebook (but the Church would come after those that repeatedly attacked the Church's position on it).

Marc raised a point about the temple recommend questions which I wholeheartedly agree with. Hopefully there is some damage control, if not, it would be a sign that there are starting to see cracks forming higher up.

You have to realize that Christoffersen is probably being pressured more than others considering he has an openly gay brother "married" to his partner.

Good points and I agree, however, given the comments he made, he’s leaving the door open for anyone to believe that gay marriage is OK and that is just not the case.

[jwharton]

Agree with the above. It's sad that the winds of change blew us into needing mormonsandgays.org, which have blown into these latest statements. They're still blowing. The LGBT crowd have a track record of not being impressed with baby steps and small concessions. If we only had an Anchor that would stop the drifting!

Romans chapter 1 is the anchor that would put a stop to the drifting if the members were willing to see that Paul was prophesying of them.

We are in the very same juncture that existed in the War in Heaven just prior to the cycle of creation we are now in.
This is because we are in the latter days that is the pre-existence of the new cycle of creation soon to be born.

We are experiencing what always happens when Michael first goes down to lay the foundation of the new Creation.

It happened before in the pre-existence and it is happening now in the new pre-existence of the world to follow.

Read this chapter carefully, it is charging the latter day saints who were given the fullness of the priesthood and the keys of the Father's Kingdom with rejecting it. We have rejected the fullness of the Gospel and the Father's Celestial Kingdom and we are paying a very expensive price for it.

The advent of Michael-Adam is in the latter days according to Daniel 12 and Revelation 12. When Michael-Adam stands up and is given the keys of dominion over the Father's Kingdom, then a time of trouble and a War in Heaven takes place. We are the spirit children (baptized converts who have the gift of the Holy Ghost) of our Father in Heaven (Michael-Adam) and our Mother in Heaven (Eve-Church).

We knew God personally because we collectively as a priesthood body are the flesh and bone body of the Father Adam prophesied to come in the latter days to lay the foundation of the new Creation. But, we no longer respect the early Celestial Law of the Father's Kingdom and have rejected it and now count it as foolishness and we are climbing fool's hill doing Lucifer's bidding to support his counterfeit alternative plan. Because of this, we are cursed and we are put under the buffetings of the adversary to be taken for a spoil. The Luciferian agenda is advancing more and more all the time and it is growing more and more prone to expect unquestioning obedience with the immune system of the church being eviscerated.

It is time to wake up and really see the reality of the awfulness of our situation.
We are doing it to ourselves as our leaders likely feel helpless to arrest our drifting.