Church to allow baptisms, blessings for children of LGBT parents

[RocknRoll]

Church to allow baptisms, blessings for children of LGBT parents, updates handbook regarding 'apostasy'

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900 ... stasy.html

"Children of parents who identify themselves as lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender may now be blessed as infants and later baptized as members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, according to updates announced Thursday to November 2015 church policies intended at the time to maintain family harmony but perceived as painful among some supporters of the LGBT community.

The church also will update its handbook of instructions for leaders to remove the label of apostasy for homosexual behavior that also was applied in November 2015, said President Dallin H. Oaks, first counselor in the First Presidency, who announced the changes on behalf of the First Presidency on Thursday morning during the leadership session of the church’s 189th Annual General Conference."

Oh man! This is such great news! I'm almost in tears sitting here at work. Yes! the church continues to be a place for everyone regardless of the "sins" or actions of their fathers/mothers. My testimony of and belief in our Prophet and Apostles just increased 2x. Many members have been praying for this to take place.

[mirkwood]

Beginning immediately, children 8 and older whose parents identify themselves as LGBT may be baptized without First Presidency approval, President Oaks said. Latter-day Saints baptize by immersion, and baptism and confirmation give a person membership in the church.

President Oaks said local church leaders should obtain permission from custodial parents for a child's baptism and ensure that they understand the doctrine church members will teach a baptized child and that he or she is making a covenant to live the principles of the gospel as taught by the church.

In my mind this was the issue the whole time and probably will still cause issues in those homes.

[Sirius]

So where is the change for those children of polygamist families/parents?

The church also will update its handbook of instructions for leaders to remove the label of apostasy for homosexual behavior

entering a same-sex marriage was apostasy requiring a church disciplinary council, Disciplinary councils can lead to excommunication.

But any entering into a plural marriage still will be labeled "apostate" and those individuals will be excommunicated?

We continue down a very slippery slope, pandering to the world.

And yes I saw,

All parents, including those outside the church or LGBT, now may request a blessing for a baby by a worthy, authorized priesthood holder, President Oaks said.

I would think it deserving to be just as specific with children of polygamist families as they have been with lgbt.

[kittycat51]

3...2...1...GO!

[RocknRoll]

We continue down a very slippery slope, pandering to the world.

Nah. We continue to be guided by Apostles and Prophets, who are led by the Lord, helping to bring Christ’s church into the 21’s century.

[gangbusters]

I can't wait until I AM hears the news! He will be overcome with emotion and his testimony of our living prophets will be even more strengthened!

[LucianAMD]

We continue down a very slippery slope, pandering to the world.

Nah. We continue to be guided by Apostles and Prophets, who are led by the Lord, helping to bring Christ’s church into the 21’s century.

LOL. It is hard for me understand how anyone can still think they speak for God when they makes change based on social pressures and study groups.

[Fiannan]

So, I took flak when I said the policy, now being dumped, was just that, a policy. It was not revelation.

The mistake is being corrected.

[RocknRoll]

So, I took flak when I said the policy, now being dumped, was just that, a policy. It was not revelation.

The mistake is being corrected.

^^Same

[Michelle]

It doesn't really change anything.

If you a living a homosexual lifestyle and you want your kid to be blessed and baptized, they make it clear that they will be taught your relationship is a sin.

Why would anybody want that?

It is simply a means of avoiding contention and putting responsibility squarely back on the shoulders of the sinner.

Same with the discipline: not apostasy, but still church discipline for gay sex. Guess what. Unrepentant heterosexuals who break the law of chastity can still be excommunicated.

Notice how often they said that this doesn't change doctrine.

[Sirius]

We continue down a very slippery slope, pandering to the world.

Nah. We continue to be guided by Apostles and Prophets, who are led by the Lord, helping to bring Christ’s church into the 21’s century.

LOL. It is hard for me understand how anyone can still think they speak for God when they makes change based on social pressures and study groups.

Exactly. Shouldn't policy reflect doctrine? If the doctrine doesn't change, I don't understand why policies head in the opposite direction.

[creator]

I would think it deserving to be just as specific with children of polygamist families as they have been with lgbt.

Exactly. This ^

[ShockHouse]

I was literally going to post yesterday in another thread about how people need to not worry about the Church's stance on LGBT. I was going to say "Look, married LGBT members are considered to be in apostasy, we are fine as long as that remains."

Now I wake up, and either decide whether my words were revelation from God to me saying watch out. Because it sure seems like that.

Edit: I agree with all the comments on polygamy, why don't they get the same treatment, oh that's right because there is not pressure from the world.

[RocknRoll]

We continue down a very slippery slope, pandering to the world.

Nah. We continue to be guided by Apostles and Prophets, who are led by the Lord, helping to bring Christ’s church into the 21’s century.

LOL. It is hard for me understand how anyone can still think they speak for God when they makes change based on social pressures and study groups.

You don’t believe God can make corrections to manmade policies if he sees fit? You don’t believe the correction to the “Blacks and the Priesthood” policy in 1978 was inspired by God? Polygamy? You don’t believe church leaders should be able to change policy? For example, length of missions for men from 24 months to 18 then back to 24 (1982) or dropping Jesus Christ from the name in 1834, then restoring it in 1838.

If you don’t believe our leaders speak for God (when God speaks to them. All men are fallible), then what’s the point in staying a member? (maybe you’re not. I just assumed). Let us know when you find the “true church” where the leaders really do speak for God. I’d truly be interested in your findings.

[BringerOfJoy]

Shifting sands.

A smart guy I know, said this back in 2014:

In LDS Mormonism there is really only one doctrine left. Everything else is subordinate and changeable. But this single demand is paramount. If you disbelieve this position, then LDS Mormonism has no place for you. The doctrine:

We follow a man whom we call a prophet.

https://denversnuffer.com/2014/07/only- ... rine-left/

[drtanner]

Shifting sands.

A smart guy I know, said this back in 2014:

In LDS Mormonism there is really only one doctrine left. Everything else is subordinate and changeable. But this single demand is paramount. If you disbelieve this position, then LDS Mormonism has no place for you. The doctrine:

We follow a man whom we call a prophet.

https://denversnuffer.com/2014/07/only- ... eft//quote]

A more intelligent man I know said this:

“In coming days, it will not be possible to survive spiritually without the guiding, directing, comforting, and constant influence of the Holy Ghost.”

[Lizzy60]

Another smart man once said, "For every vision, there's an equal and opposite revision."

[Mindfields]

I think God changes his mind a lot. Before you defenders of the faith say it was just a policy. Read this. https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php? ... type=cmsid

A short synopsis of the linked article. President Monson's regime announces the November policy. A couple of months later President Nelson, then the senior apostle, calls it a revelation. So which is it? A policy or a revelation.

Gaslighting at its finest.

[Juliet]

These policies need to be announced with a vote to sustain it. Many people did not feel right about the initial policy, and paying attention to the majority of church members would have fixed this sooner.

[RocknRoll]

I think God changes his mind a lot. Before you defenders of the faith say it was just a policy. Read this. https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php? ... type=cmsid

A short synopsis of the linked article. President Monson's regime announces the November policy. A couple of months later President Nelson, then the senior apostle, calls it a revelation. So which is it? A policy or a revelation.

Gaslighting at its finest.

Elder Nelson said it was a revelation, but none of the other apostles have said as much. And the Prophet at the time, President Monson, never mentioned it at all.

[drtanner]

I think God changes his mind a lot. Before you defenders of the faith say it was just a policy. Read this. https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php? ... type=cmsid

A short synopsis of the linked article. President Monson's regime announces the November policy. A couple of months later President Nelson, then the senior apostle, calls it a revelation. So which is it? A policy or a revelation.

Gaslighting at its finest.

Or that God is able to allow differing policy changes in differing times and seasons. Key word allow.

[BringerOfJoy]

These policies need to be announced with a vote to sustain it. Many people did not feel right about the initial policy, and paying attention to the majority of church members would have fixed this sooner.

That is an interesting point, Juliet. However, the members would have needed advanced notification that it was coming, because if you were sitting there in General conference, and had no idea what was coming at you, you wouldn't have time to think about it. But some things require careful and ponderous thought. Or at least Joseph thought so.

[Hie'ing to Kolob]

I would think it deserving to be just as specific with children of polygamist families as they have been with lgbt.

Exactly. This ^

Agree. The optics aren't favorable though. Also, the pressure isn't there. This is monumental hypocrisy.

[Mindfields]

Though they'll never admit it, sometimes they're just plain wrong. All the rest of us have to admit when we're wrong, why can't they. I would have much more respect for them if they did.

No mental gymnastics required.

[iWriteStuff]

A short synopsis of the linked article. President Monson's regime announces the November policy. A couple of months later President Nelson, then the senior apostle, calls it a revelation. So which is it? A policy or a revelation.

Gaslighting at its finest.

Oof.