Any Sacrifice Is Worth It

Each Saturday morning I work at the Provo temple as an ordinance worker. And each Saturday morning, as I stop and listen... I feel like life is all in place. Everything I'm dealing with stays outside the temple walls, and for a few hours I'm free from the problems and issues I face. Safe, free, happy, and whole. I feel like I belong. I feel loved and valued and know that I'm making a difference. And life is worth it.

The transcendent moments I find there in the temple remind me that keeping the commandments always brings the greatest happiness. Pornography might be exciting. Hooking up with a guy might feel good. Dating and marrying a guy might fill a real desire to love and be loved. But staying close to God, and keeping His commandments, will always bring greater blessings than any other alternative... for everyone.

I wish I could go back to myself ten years ago, when I was deep in addiction and fighting to stay alive day to day... and been able to share the hope and peace and faith that I feel now. To be able to say, "David. It's okay. If you're willing to push through the hardest parts of your trials, and come closer to God and really be humble... life will have hope and peace and happiness. You can do it, and it's worth moving forward."

But, then again, maybe the faith that I've developed came in part because I didn't know if it was possible. Faith to turn to God and trust Him when I didn't know what to do or even hope for. Because I, like a lot of people, thought I was the only person in the church trying to live and be attracted to guys... and definitely had no role models to look up to.

To anyone who is struggling with faith... I want to say that it's worth fighting for. It's worth the pain, isolation, frustration, anxiety, loneliness, sorrow, and anything else that will make me humble enough to open my heart to God. Ideally, I'd be willing to do it without going through pain. But I know that's not the case in my life - God has pushed me through the fire so that I would turn to Him.

It's worth it. The gospel is worth it. Having to never have a family, or never get married, or never have friends, for all of life, is worth it. Anything is worth sacrificing to God for the salvation that He offers. Chances are, He'll ask me to sacrifice the things I value most - to see whether I truly trust Him and place Him first. If I refuse to believe that He would ask me to sacrifice the deepest desires of my heart... I will never be able to truly follow Him when He calls. But if I'm willing to have faith, give Him everything and let Him lead and guide me, the rewards are infinite.

Living the gospel is so worth it. Just keep living. Have faith. Be patient - even if it means all of life. God will make up for it all in the end... and support me in my day-to-day.

Gay Mormon Law of Chastity - Part 2

Last post was about the basic law of chastity, as it's (from my perspective) applied doctrinally and culturally towards the opposite gender.

This is about the Law of Chastity as it applies to the same gender: guys/guys... or girls/girls.

Before I go anywhere, there is a vitally important point to make at the beginning:

Doctrines are eternal, universal, and unchanging. The doctrines of the law of chastity must apply equally to each person, regardless of same-gender attraction or non-attraction. That means that if (taking from the last post) it's okay for a straight guy to kiss a girl, it's okay for a gay guy to kiss a girl. Ultimately, there is just ONE doctrine for the Law of Chastity... and it's in the conclusion at the end. Everything else is a cultural pull that causes trouble.

The different groups from the last post were:

1. Missionaries
2. Currently Married
3. 16 and under
4. Single

Again:

Doctrine: Things that are OK have clearly illustrated examples in Church hierarchy, statements, scripture, or stories. Things that are NOT OK have clear and specific statements that prohibit them.

Culture: Things that are OK are issues that are accepted by the populace at large and have not been addressed by official Church statements. Things that are NOT OK are either prohibited to leaders and/or frowned upon but not specifically prohibited by the general Church population.

And one more definition.
Sexual relations of any kind include any acts involving sexual organs, pornography, and masturbation.


Missionary Same-Gender Law of Chastity

Doctrine:

OK
- Talking in a public place
- Working together alone (on exchanges)
- Writing personal notes/ letters to people outside the mission
- Writing personal notes/ letters to people outside your area
- Writing notes to people inside your area (without romantic overtone)
- Touching shoulder to get attention
- Looking at each other
- Sitting next to each other
- Being in the same vehicle
- Hugging
- Sleeping in the same location (companion in the same room)
- - - - - - - - - - - The Line - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NOT OK
- Sleeping in the same bed
- Dating
- Passionate Kissing
- Touching sexual areas
- Sexual relations of any kind (see definition at top)


Culture (additional to Doctrine):

OK
- Professional contact (doctor)
- Bacci (cheek-kisses)
- Other types of cultural touch
- - - - - - - - - - Fuzzy - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- Holding hands (outside of group prayer)
- Cuddling
- - - - - - - - - - The Line - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NOT OK
- Kissing (non-cultural)


This one is pretty simple, but isn't as straightforward as the opposite-gender guidelines. Missionaries live with someone that is the same gender. In fact, they must always be together. Major physical differences: they can be alone together, sleep in the same room, hug, and cross the cultural barrier that comes from bacci or other cultural touch (...yes, I served in Italy. I am constantly thinking about missionary work in Italy...)

The two fuzzy areas come clear with in light of the guidelines given to missionaries as a whole. Don't engage in anything that is going to jeopardize having the Spirit... and don't develop a romantic relationship with your companion. If your companion is having a breakdown on the couch, it's totally okay to go over, wrap your arms around him, and just stay there until he's okay. That's probably what you should do. And as far as hand-holding goes, I remember being at a soccer game in Napoli where the only reason I didn't become hopelessly lost (at least in my memory, which is abysmal) was that my companion pulled me along by hand through the fray.

Actually cuddling just to cuddle, or holding hands to hold hands, between the same gender, isn't addressed anywhere that I've personally seen. I think it would fall under the counsel of avoiding romantic relationships if both people were attracted to each other.

Next, married men and women, interacting with members of the same sex.


Married Same-Gender Law of Chastity

Doctrine:

OK
- Talking in a public place
- Working together at work or on a calling
- Writing personal notes / letters (assuming no romantic overtone)
- Touching shoulder to get attention
- Sitting next to each other
- Being alone in a car
- Being alone in a closed room
- Hugging
- Bacci (culture-dependent - cheek kisses)
- - - - - - - - - - - The Line - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NOT OK
- Kissing 
- Passionate kissing
- Touching sexual areas
- Sexual relations of any kind (see definition at top)


Culture (additional to Doctrine):

OK
- Professional contact (e.g., massage therapist, doctor)
- - - - - - - - - - Fuzzy - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- Holding Hands (outside of group prayer)
- Cuddling
- Falling asleep in each others' arms
- - - - - - - - - - The Line - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NOT OK


There are a couple differences for married people when you cross over to relationships with the same gender. The biggest ones are that holding hands, cuddling, and falling asleep in each others' arms are no longer doctrinally barred. You can see that in historical examples in the Church - the first one that comes to mind was Joseph Smith, sleeping on the floor with some of his closest friends in prisons or traveling. (Side note: From my limited perspective, hand-holding and cuddling seems to have been a readily occurring part of normal male intimacy throughout history... until about the 1950's. During the time of Christ, the Apostles actually laid around the table and rested their heads on one another (which would definitely count as cuddling today). Ironically, today many guys avoid 'intimate' touch like hand-holding or cuddling out of a desire to not be labeled homosexual (ironic because people who lived pre-1950, when the understanding of same-sex attraction was definitely different from today, may have actually had an easier time getting positive touch from the people close to them without incurring social stigma).

The fuzzy area, like always, has at least one thing that can help make it slightly clearer. The injunction is "Do not do anything that arouses sexual feelings."

The biggest pro and con with that counsel is that it applies differently to each individual person. If a married man never does anything with another guy that arouses sexual feelings, then he's fine. But without really clear distinctions of what is okay, there's the fuzzy area. On that account, holding a guy in a bear hug, or falling asleep like Joseph did with his friends, may be totally okay for me... yet totally not okay for the other guy involved.


Next up, kids and teenagers.


Pre-16 Single Same-Gender Law of Chastity

Doctrine:

OK
- Talking in a public place
- Working together at work or on a calling
- Writing personal notes / letters
- Touching shoulder to get attention
- Sitting next to each other
- Holding hands
- Hugging
- Bacci (culture-dependent - cheek kisses)
- - - - - - - - - - - The Line - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
NOT OK
- Passionate kissing
- Touching sexual areas
- Sexual relations of any kind (see definition at top)


Culture (additional to Doctrine):

OK
- - - - - - - - - - Fuzzy - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- Holding hands
- Cuddling
- Falling asleep in each others' arms
- - - - - - - - - - The Line - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NOT OK
- Kissing


With younger kids, there's the same fuzzy area as in opposite gender interactions. But this one doesn't resolve as cleanly.

There are cultures that are totally okay with holding hands with the same gender. America is one of those - women walking down the street holding hands are totally okay. Right now there seems to be growing pressure on both sides of that issue - some people barring boys from holding hands with other boys, some not caring, and (if I can remember accurately), there's a growing group of young teenagers in Britain who are totally heterosexual who just hold hands with their best same-gender friends just because.

Cuddling and falling asleep in each others' arms are along the same lines. Not part of the doctrinal discussion, but definitely part of the cultural one, with strong evidence pointing to cultural pulls on one side and the other.

Again, "do not do anything that arouses sexual feelings."


And now for the spot where most people with SSA live. Singles.


Single (Everyone Else) Same-Gender Law of Chastity

Doctrine:

OK
- Talking in a public place
- Working together at work or on a calling
- Writing personal notes / letters
- Touching shoulder to get attention
- Sitting next to each other
- Hugging
- Bacci (culture-dependent - cheek kisses)
- Be alone together
- Sleeping in the same location 
- - - - - - - - - - - The Line - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NOT OK
- Passionate Kissing
- Touching sexual areas
- Sexual relations of any kind (see definition at top)


Culture (additional to Doctrine):

OK
- Professional contact (e.g., massage therapist, doctor)
 - - - - - - - - - - - - Fuzzy - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- Holding Hands
- Cuddling
- Falling asleep in each others' arms
- - - - - - - - - - - - The Line - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NOT OK
- Kissing
- Public Displays of Affection - PDA


Cuddling and sleeping together follow the same pattern as everyone else. Single guys or girls can cuddle or sleep together and be okay. As before, there are strong cultural feelings about it... and where you live or who you live with will have a big influence on those.
 
And then there's kissing. There is a very strong cultural pull on the NOT OK side of The Line. I think that kissing crosses over The Line. Either way, it's playing with fire. My suggestion: don't kiss.


Ultimately, right now there is a lot more fuzzy area in the world of same-sex applications of the Law of Chastity. There is one way to clear up all the fuzzy spots... and I think this is the take-away in my mind.

"Do not do anything that arouses sexual feelings [in you or in others]." (ref)

This is the Law of Chastity and the standard that is expected of every Church member, among all their interactions - with men or women - outside of marriage between a man and a woman. There is no distinction for gay or straight, male or female. It applies perfectly to every situation and ensures that everyone who follows it will always be safe behind The Line.

The issue is that, while perfect and universal, that principle can be rough to apply.

Relying on personal inspiration and being aware of your feelings at every given moment is a crazy huge amount of work. Most sexual sins happen in the moment. And since all physical contact with both sexes causes the release of oxytocin, which interferes with cognitive processing (makes you temporarily dreamy/stupid), realizing what is happening in the moment is even more work.

With opposite-gender interactions, we have a map of what will probably ignite sexual feelings. If you're not involved in passionate kissing, then you probably aren't going to go further. But with same-gender interactions, where so much can seem fuzzy, The Line can easily be in one place one day... and in another place the next. Is it okay to cuddle with another guy? Is it okay to hold hands? In avoiding situations that arouse sexual feelings in ourselves and others we have to navigate the world of our own feelings, our temptations, our weaknesses and strengths, as well as those of others.

It's possible. Following the principles of God's Plan of Happiness will always bring greater happiness and peace, for everyone.

But it's definitely more complicated.

Gay Mormon Law of Chastity - Part 1

Is kissing OK? Cuddling? Making out?

Being gay and Mormon is honestly confusing at times. This is the first in a two-part series on the Law of Chastity - specifically, what is okay and what is not within both official Mormon doctrine and unofficial (yet still very influential) Mormon culture.

To start out, current teachings about the Law of Chastity, with its many appendage counsels, seem very much to be designed with straight people in mind. I remember knowing as early as 12 exactly what lines I wasn't supposed to cross with a girl, even if I had no idea what petting or necking meant. (Petting means touching the sexual areas of another person, with or without clothing; necking now means "passionate kissing")

First we'll talk about the most restrictive form of chastity - what is expected from missionaries in contact with someone of the opposite sex, according to doctrine and culture.

Doctrine: Things that are OK have clearly illustrated examples in Church hierarchy, statements, or stories. Things that are NOT OK have clear and specific statements that prohibit them.

Culture: Things that are OK are issues that are accepted by the populace at large and have not been addressed by official Church statements. Things that are NOT OK are either prohibited to leaders and/or frowned upon but not specifically prohibited by the general Church population.


Missionary Opposite-Gender Law of Chastity

Doctrine:

OK
- Talking in a public place
- Working together with your companion and another person of your gender present
- Writing personal notes / letters to people outside the mission
- Writing notes to people inside your area (without romantic overtone)
- Touching shoulder to get attention
- Looking at each other
- Sitting next to each other
- - - - - - - - - - - The Line - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NOT OK
- Writing letters to people outside your area in the mission
- Being in the same vehicle without another person of your gender
- Being in the same room without another person of your gender (exception: leaders during interviews when companion is just outside the door)
- Holding hands (outside of group prayer)
- Hugging
- Cuddling
- Dating
- Sleeping in the same location
- Falling asleep in each others' arms
- Kissing
- Passionate Kissing
- See each other without clothing
- Touching sexual areas
- Sexual relations of any kind


Culture (additional to Doctrine):

OK
- Professional contact (doctor)
- - - - - - - - - - The Line - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NOT OK
Bacci (cheek-kisses)
Other types of cultural touch


That's pretty straightforward. The only romantic outlet for missionaries is writing letters to people back home. Everything else is safely behind The Line to remind them and others that they are representatives of Christ... and to keep them safe. And, even though sometimes the placement of The Line may cause cultural issues (I had people get really mad at me for not allowing them to give me bacci), for the most part it works. The extra additions here (compared to the following groups) are with the addition of moral counsel from the white handbook (missionary guide).

Next we'll move on to the next most stringent application - married men and women, interacting with members of the opposite sex.


Married Opposite-Gender Law of Chastity

Doctrine:

OK
- Talking in a public place
- Working together at work or on a calling
- Writing personal notes / letters (assuming no romantic overtone)
- Touching shoulder to get attention
- Sitting next to each other
- Hugging (short)
- Bacci (culture-dependent - cheek kisses)
- - - - - - - - - - - The Line - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NOT OK
- Holding Hands (outside of group prayer)

- Cuddling
- Falling asleep in each others' arms
- Kissing
- Laying on top of each other
- Passionate kissing
- See each other without clothing
- Touching sexual areas
- Sexual relations of any kind


Culture (additional to Doctrine):

OK
- Professional contact (e.g., massage therapist, doctor)
- Professional performance (e.g., kissing on-stage as an actor in a tasteful performance)
- - - - - - - - - - The Line - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NOT OK
- Being alone in a car
- Being alone in a closed room (exception for leaders interviewing; there must be someone outside)


Some interesting differences: it's okay for married people to hug and they can engage in cultural stuff like bacci, as well as professional performance which is allowed by culture though not addressed doctrinally. Either way, The Line is pretty clear. Anything beyond The Line (except potentially being alone in a car - that could be a totally innocent thing) could be an issue. Traditionally, The Line here has been to promote fidelity within the relationship a man has with his wife, and vice versa.

Next up, we have kids that are pre-dating age. This includes really little kids and young teenagers... and it's also where stuff starts to get interesting.


Pre-16 Single Opposite-Gender Law of Chastity

Doctrine:

OK
- Talking in a public place
- Working together at work or on a calling
- Writing personal notes / letters
- Touching shoulder to get attention
- Sitting next to each other
- Holding hands
- Hugging
- Bacci (culture-dependent - cheek kisses)
- - - - - - - - - - - The Fuzzy Area - - - - - - - - - -
- Cuddling
- Falling asleep in each others' arms
- - - - - - - - - - - The Line - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NOT OK
- Kissing
- Passionate kissing
- See each other without clothing
- Touching sexual areas
- Sexual relations of any kind


With younger kids, there's a bit of an interesting fuzzy area, but it actually resolves pretty cleanly when you split the group again into really young kids and early teenagers. Seeing two toddlers asleep, cuddled together, is cute and totally innocent. And while it may be just as cute and innocent, I would deter 15-year-olds from doing the same thing. There aren't a lot of cultural norms here because it's pretty clear.

Then we enter the world of dating, and the expectations of people who are actively courting a spouse. This is where the bulk of the law of chastity stuff seems to be targeted.


Single Opposite-Gender Law of Chastity

Doctrine:

OK
- Talking in a public place
- Working together at work or on a calling
- Writing personal notes / letters
- Touching shoulder to get attention
- Sitting next to each other
- Hugging
- Bacci (culture-dependent - cheek kisses)
- Holding Hands
- Be alone together
- Cuddling
- Kissing
- - - - - - - - - - - The Confusion - - - - - - - - - 
- "Passionate Kissing"
- - - - - - - - - - - The Line - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NOT OK
- Sleeping in the same location
- Falling asleep in each others' arms
- Laying on top of each other
- See each other without clothing
- Touching sexual areas
- Sexual relations of any kind


Culture (additional to Doctrine):

OK
- Professional contact (e.g., massage therapist, doctor)
- Professional performance (e.g., kissing on-stage as an actor in a tasteful performance)

- - - - - - - - - - - - The Line - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NOT OK
- Public Displays of Affection - PDA (depending on context)


The Line definitely moved when we hit this group. Suddenly cuddling, kissing, holding hands, and being alone together are OK (and kissing in public is even sometimes frowned upon depending on culture - the PDA issue), while sleeping together and sexual activity are still not OK. In this group, The Line on the doctrinal side is very clear on everything except for "passionate kissing." What does passionate kissing really mean? Some prophets have counseled against French kissing; is that because it can arouse too much passion, or is it an injunction completely? The fuzzy/confusing area here resolves and becomes personal through the context of a statement in For the Strength of Youth - don't do anything that arouses passion in you or in the other person. So if French kissing, or making out for an hour, arouses you, don't do it. There isn't a lot of cultural (non-doctrinal) guidance here because the doctrine is pretty clear.

Those are the divisions involved with opposite-gender contact. The next post will be a little more complicated... and cover same-gender contact within those same groups.

Pain: This is Why

I've wondered what pushes men to drink themselves numb. What feeds conquered addictions to pornography and slashes carefully set boundaries of morality. What makes people do things they would never do otherwise... decisions made in a moment that destroy their lives.

It's feeling.

Not just any feeling. This one.

Maybe it's not the exact feeling for everyone. Maybe it's different. But I think that it's similar. A feeling so intense that it feels like you're drowning... so painful that your options slim to few. And so completely opaque to rational inquiry that only emotions seem to matter.

Right now I feel awful. Absolutely and totally awful... to the point that not being alive almost sounds preferable (if there were a way for that to happen righteously... there's always that caveat that keeps me safe). I feel incredibly lonely, yet push some people away. Incredibly frustrated, but not sure about what. Tempted in a thousand different directions far more than I should be.

I wonder where it came from.

I've decided what I'm going to do with the feeling: I'll write about it, then go work out until I'm exhausted enough to go to sleep... and forget about it entirely. That solves the crisis, but it doesn't fix the issue. Where did it come from? And how can I keep it from coming back?

Or should I?

This is the same feeling I get when I honestly look at my life and gauge where I am. I feel totally and completely alone, and that's incredibly miserable. Especially when I know, completely, that there are people who love me... because that then makes me feel guilty for feeling alone.

...just like I used to feel guilty for being depressed...

Dear self:

It's okay to feel alone. It's okay to be in pain. It's okay to want things in life to change and to find yourself crying because life hurts. I can't promise it will change today, or tomorrow, or even sometime in mortality. But it'll be okay. Eventually the crisis passes and you go on with life. Maybe God will do a miracle and everything will become perfect. Maybe not. But realize that everything He gives you in life is to help you and the people around you come closer to Him. That's the only reason you have hard experiences... or that anyone does. God loves you and gives you exactly what you, and others, need to find faith. Stay close to God, and it will all work out. 

Yes. It's painful. That's okay. It'll all work out in the end. You know that's true. Right now you just need to believe it.

Wondering

I realized today that I have almost no specific memory of the people in my life. 

I remember little bits of many people - sometimes I can wrack my brain and if they were influential I can remember their names and a few things about them. 

But even those memories are actually scenes, details that describe a picture in my head. 

I can vividly remember seeing Richard Heaton at Bridal Veil Falls with his son, or talking in his MTC office about how he balances being a father and his other responsibilities. Or being in his Church office when he was in my stake presidency and I told him about (G)MG.

I remember throwing a ball at a girl's face during gym class water polo because I thought the rules were unfair, then later throwing the ball into the second-story bleachers. I don't remember her face. I remember her name, and sitting with her at a table in a classroom, laying out a recreation of a Roman newspaper, complete with recipes for stuffed mice. But I don't remember anything really about her.

I remember nothing about my grandfather, even though he lived nearby and I was 8 when he died.

I don't remember my siblings' favorite colors. My brother has to remind me that he doesn't like peanut butter, and the other brother either doesn't like mustard or mayo... I can never remember which.

And, perhaps worst of all, I don't remember much about my mission companions, the girls I've dated, people at my work, and the many people I've gotten close to over the years. It's one thing to forget someone's name... but there are full months-long swaths of my life, in the recent past, that I don't remember at all, even with a journal to try to help. People that I've spent hundreds, or thousands, of hours talking with... and all I remember are a few scenes and bits of one or two conversations that happened. And sometimes not even that. I have no memories at all of one of my mission companions. None at all.

I've always been amazed when people remembered me, and not only remembered me, and my name, but also remembered a lot of stuff about me. I realize that I'm strange/unique/whatever. But I'm realizing that it's not just the fact that I'm memorable that makes a huge difference between our recollection when I meet a long-lost friend. It's also the fact that I remember so little.

Today a guy stopped me on campus. He was on his bike riding past me as I walked back to my car (I was there writing just to get away from home). He seemed really excited to see me. I had no idea who he was. I didn't know his face, and when he said his name I still didn't remember anything about him.

He was my roommate. And not just any roommate - he was my roommate from right before I moved into the house where I live now. At least that's what he said, and he was being sincere. I know we must have had discussions and talks. That always happens with people. But I don't remember anything about him except for when he said he was studying trombone, that felt right inside my mind. He knew my name, and remembered a ton about me. And I knew nothing, and still can't remember anything.

I find myself wondering if this - my inability to store or process or remember important information about people - is at the root of some of my issues with relationships.

I don't know.

But it's incredibly disheartening.

I mean, who wants to be forgotten? Who wants to ever talk with someone who will not only forget their name, but everything except a few intense emotional scenes in a few years? A few minutes later I heard my name called by a group of MBA students. I knew them less than a year ago. They introduced me to a first-year MPA and invited me to go to a lecture with them. And, again, all I could remember were fragments of scenes. A shot of us deep in conversation in the MBA Lounge. No idea what the conversation was about.

I don't understand. I can remember factual information for forever. And yet when it comes to stuff that matters... people... I know nothing no matter how hard I try.

On a potentially bright side, it's been a blessing in my life. I don't remember almost any of the heart-wrenching stories that make me cry when people reach out for help... I forget them sometimes within days (hence why if I don't reply quickly, it takes forever - until I do a sweep of all my emails again)... and I also don't remember feeling those emotions myself, except again for a few scenes. It makes living in the moment, and looking forward, a thousand times easier because I have no rocky past to build on.

And yet it means that every time I see someone again I feel like I need to start over. Maybe I know your name, your passions, even how to motivate you to be a better person... but I don't know the first thing about what you do in your spare time... unless one of those rare moments happens to have captured it.

I remember people only as parts of intense emotional or intellectual scenes. Their faces aren't there. Or what they wore, or how they spoke or who they are... just a stand-in that says "person" in my mind, with a name attached... or not.

My brain doesn't see people the way it should. Maybe that's why, even after learning coping skills, I still feel disconnected. Maybe that's why I feel like I don't know really anyone when the world seems to know me.

...

So now I realize it might be an issue.

*sigh*

What can I do about it?

The City of Enoch and Female Ordination

This is going to be controversial.

But hey. (Gay) Mormon Guy already addresses the most volatile topic in modern culture - being Mormon and gay. What's some tangential controversy?

I was on Twitter during Conference this year, participating in the livetweeting with thousands of other members, when I learned about the protest that was staged by a handful of women outside Priesthood session. At first, I didn't really have time to think about it - when the prophets are speaking, nothing else really matters - but today I pulled up an article about the protest and actually looked up their site.

The focus wasn't getting into Priesthood meeting. (They didn't - just like Relief Society meeting is designed specifically for sisters in mind, Priesthood is designed for brothers. Seats at Priesthood to attend in person are reserved exclusively for them.) It was attracting public attention with the hope that women would be ordained to the Priesthood.

There's a lot of things I could write about this, but this afternoon, while researching doctrine for work, I found myself wondering about the doctrinal evidences that would preclude or support this issue. I think I found a few.

1. The first is resurrection. Christ taught, and we have supporting evidence in the form of modern interpretation of His word, that all ordinances must be completed before the resurrection. It was in the "neither are men married nor given in marriage" context of explaining issues to the Sadducees. I could look up talks that support this interpretation of His words, but I'm crazy busy. I know it's in Jesus the Christ.

The result is that, if, like claimed on their website, women need to be ordained to the Priesthood in order to return to God and be like Him, this would need to happen to all women before their resurrection. With men, Priesthood ordination is required even before the temple endowment can be given, which is required before a temple sealing can be performed. Even if we made the assumption that ordination was a higher ordinance than marriage (and hence would be performed after temple sealing... which is not an option in my mind, since temple marriage is said many times throughout scripture to be the crowning ordinance), or believed that it was part of a separate, non-linear track of required ordinances, it would still have to be done before the ordinance of resurrection.

Matthew, in his gospel, describes the resurrection and includes a part that explains:

"And the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints which slept arose, and came out of the graves after his resurrection, and went into the holy city, and appeared unto many."

This was the beginning of the first resurrection, composed of the people who had completed all the necessary ordinances and had lived faithful lives... who were resurrected with Christ at His own Resurrection.

The same thing happened in the New World - and it was so important that Christ reproved Nephi for forgetting to include it in their record.

"And it came to pass that he said unto Nephi: Bring forth the record which ye have kept. And when Nephi had brought forth the records, and laid them before him, he cast his eyes upon them and said: Verily I say unto you, I commanded my servant Samuel, the Lamanite, that he should testify unto this people, that at the day that the Father should glorify his name in me that there were many saints who should arise from the dead, and should appear unto many, and should minister unto them. And he said unto them: Was it not so? 

And his disciples answered him and said: Yea, Lord, Samuel did prophesy according to thy words, and they were all fulfilled. And Jesus said unto them: How be it that ye have not written this thing, that many saints did arise and appear unto many and did minister unto them?

 

And it came to pass that Nephi remembered that this thing had not been written.

And it came to pass that Jesus commanded that it should be written; therefore it was written according as he commanded."

We know that Priesthood ordination of women was not practiced during the time of the Nephites, and from history that it was not practiced among pre-Christian Jews in Jerusalem. If this was an essential ordinance, lacking such an ordinance would preclude their rising from the dead. The preclusion of female ordinance does assume that "many saints" includes both men and women, but, at least in my limited perspective, it would be grossly unfair for a God to make a wife wait extra thousands of years while her husband had been resurrected, only because God had not yet revealed an essential ordinance to salvation.

2. Since there is the potential that all the saints resurrected at the time of Christ and in the thousands of years since were, in fact, male (though I think that quite unlikely), the next issue is translation. This subsists upon the same basic principles as resurrection; both are physical changes in the body that take place under the influence of the Spirit that are required before an individual can permanently reside in the literal presence of God.

The City of Enoch was translated. Zion included men and women. The assumption, that essential ordinances would need to be completed before they could have physically been taken to Heaven to live forever in the presence of God, is pretty simple. That's the one with which I concur. There are doctrinal questions with this one, too - for example, we don't have specific evidence that children (who would not have had saving ordinances performed) were not included in the translation of the city, except in the case of Enoch's own progeny. On that note, we could use the reference that the people of Zion won't return to the earth until the Second Coming... and that all translated beings, if it has not happened sooner, will be resurrected at the time of the Second Coming... and if they haven't had essential ordinances, then they won't be resurrected. And exceptions usually become the rule if they are more than 50% (like in Zion - married women and children, if present).

-----

So yeah. Those are my thoughts. Women play an essential, unique role in God's Plan as outlined in modern doctrine and supported by living prophets. I do not think that their ordination to the Priesthood is essential for their eternal salvation, or for the Church to accurately fill their needs as women.

Personal Post Conference Thoughts - October 2013

Conference this year was most of what I asked for. President Uchtdorf gave a passionate talk about reaching out to others. Elder Holland spoke about depression, mental illness, and learning empathy for those with major trials and pain in life. And, among others, Elder Nelson and Elder Oaks spoke crystal-clearly about the eternal nature of morality and the Church's unchanging stance on homosexual activity.

I felt loved, understood, vindicated, supported, and uplifted in a thousand ways.

But in the wake of an amazing experience, I find myself now wondering exactly what I am going to do to apply the principles I learned. And, instead of looking for answers to the questions (and requests) I made of God, looking for what I should do.

It didn't take long to identify something. And yet...

Some of you know that I have a really hard time reaching out to people. Even when they reach out to me. This has been a painful realization for most of my life, and a constant reminder that I have room for improvement.

Part of me hurts when I think about trying to reach out to people. It makes me want to curl up in a ball and cry, because I am sooooo miserably bad at this. Either that or God always intervenes to ensure I come running back to Him. I don't know how it works with other people, but I've got to be horrible. I'll finally get up the courage to ask someone to be my friend, and 19 times out of 20, they'll say no. Or worse (and more common), say nothing and ignore me. Really. In maybe 5% someone that I approach will actually respond positively... and even those relationships don't last long. It's not the rejection that hurts persay... but wondering exactly what it is that I'm doing wrong... with no way to know how to fix it.

I know some people who would be willing to be friends, but another issue is that if people aren't involved in my day-to-day (or at least weekly) life, I forget major things about them. I forget their names, their professions, where they are from, what they like to do, even how I met them. On a good day, I can easily remember half of the names of my mission companions.

When I finally get some type of positive response, I let relationships fall flat because I don't know what ingredients to add to them. I'm terrified of doing something that will lessen my chances of getting closer to people.

If I could trade this struggle - the frustration and sorrow and bewilderment and unknowing and pain and overthinking and fear and incredible unmet longing - for anything, some days I would. I'd trade it for intense, permanent, physical pain. I'd trade it for numbness of mind (I'd probably be a drunk... more likely a suicide... if I didn't have the gospel) if that were an option. I'd trade it for blindness, or deafness, or lost limbs, or paralysis... I'd trade it for anything that I can imagine - even all the rest of the trials I've seen rolled into one.

This isn't meant to be a "woe is me." Just background.

Most of the time the part of me that tries to connect with people is quietly absent. I can serve, give, teach, and meet the needs of others, but I relegate my social needs to my relationship with God because anything else is too painful. And they're not going to be easily met anyway; even when people care about me, breaking through to get me to feel their love... yeah. That's not likely.

Compound the fact that now I'm at a stage of life when people around me already have close friends. They don't want me as a friend. They've known people for years and developed relationships... and science has shown that you actually only have space for a certain number of close people in your day-to-day life.

So right now, as I feel pressure from God to try to reach out again and develop relationships with people, I honestly feel sick. I don't have a slew of people to try with anymore. I'm not a BYU student; I work from home; I don't meet anyone new except for sometimes people through North Star, some of their friends, and the new people in my ward.

And then when I finally convince myself that I'm going to do it, when I get up the courage to act, I don't know what to do. I don't know how to be someone's friend. I know how to be a counselor, a teacher, a mentor... I know how to listen, to help people answer hard questions, to spend time with someone doing anything at all... but I don't know how to help someone have fun or relax from life.

And I find myself wondering if I really have anything to offer as a friend to people who seem to (at least on the outside) have their lives together. Including the people who were part of my life when they had major needs.

I don't know.

I'm sure that some of the people I know will read this and then immediately try to assure me that I offer plenty in our relationship. But the fact stands that, in all the things I've been able to learn or in which I've improved, this still stands as a glaring crater in my life. Yeah, part of it isn't my fault. Maybe most of it. But it's still there, still painful, still resistant to everything I've tried to fill it in. 

So I guess it's understandable that, after a glowing session of General Conference, taking honest stock of what I face in life would bring me back here to its edge. Wondering what else I can do, feeling the pain start to wake up again to give me nightmares.

I should have brought this question to Conference with me. *sigh*

I don't know what to do. Which means it probably won't work. Maybe God will give me some ideas. Either way, the pain is back... and I'm going to keep trying.

Oxytocin, Autism, Touch, and Standardized Tests

Last year my dad gave me a priesthood blessing in which he promised that some of the things I face would go away. Specifically, after the blessing, he explained that it was about bipolar & autistic spectrum disorder.

At the time, I had never heard of either being cured or spontaneously disappearing - especially autism. And yet, in the year since, life has seemed to push me into places where they are disappearing. Or at least seem to be.

The bipolar is responding to an extremely low carb diet - I no longer cycle into depression when I stay under 10g each day of non-fiber carbs. And after two years of the diet (I'm just a few months in), there's a chance my brain will be changed permanently. I may never have to worry about bipolar again.

The autism has also seemed to be changing. It sometimes seems easier to tell when people are serious or sarcastic, even if habit tells me they're always serious.

This morning, I was reading on the Autism Speaks website about research into oxytocin and autism. A number of studies have found reduced autistic behaviors and dramatically improved social function in volunteers who inhale nasal oxytocin. Right now, there is a year-long study with thousands (I think) of patients testing the efficacy of oxytocin on autistic development and adequate socialization... and it made me wonder.

Oxytocin is a natural hormone that, in most people, comes from social and physical interaction throughout life. Just making eye contact increases oxytocin levels, or touching someone, or being close. It modulates social bonding, increases fidelity in marriage, makes people more trusting and generous, and essentially empowers every social interaction and feeling.

A number of studies have shown a correlation between autism and a lack of certain oxytocin receptors - which could potentially be the main difference between those on and off the spectrum.

Oxytocin also impairs cognition and decision-making skills, creating a type of amnesia for certain types of information, preferentially storing social information at the expense of all else. I've always felt that ASD was simply the brain showing a marked preference for non-social information... and this could support that theory. A lack of everyday oxytocin (or its receptors that modulate physiological functions) could be the reason why kids with ASD have a higher proportional fluid IQ than their neurotypical counterparts. And the reason why they both feel isolated from others (since oxytocin is the connecting hormone) and unable to develop better social skills.

And then there's the world of touch. Many kids with ASD are hypersensitive to touch, and shy away from it at all costs. I know I did. Oxytocin functions using a positive feedback loop - more oxytocin makes it easier to get more oxytocin... and less makes it harder. Without social cues and the resultant chemical reward for appropriate social behavior, touch becomes one of the easiest ways to improve oxytocin release, except that people with ASD don't want touch. The thing that crossed my mind when I realized this was: that means you may have to touch people with ASD more in order to help them function better in social interactions... even if at first they are uncomfortable with any touch at all. So strange.

In the last year, I've shifted my preference for touch from "don't even think about touching me, even in passing, because I will stare you down and burn you to a crisp" (not kidding) to "touch is an important part of every social interaction" (you definitely don't cuddle with everyone... but I don't flinch when someone brushes against me in the hall at church anymore). And I wonder if that shift has been an influence in my ability to understand people. If oxytocin is the underlying reason, and it works using positive feedback loops, then it would make sense that, in the beginning, increasing oxytocin would have only a minor effect... that would grow exponentially with time.

Who knows? Maybe the study being done will show that intranasal oxytocin can flip the switch between preferential processing of cognitive and social data. Then people with minor forms of ASD would be able to have the best of both worlds - dramatically increased productivity and focus while working or solving problems, and, with a spray/sniff some time before a date or meetup with a friend, more adequate social processing and reciprocity. That would be amazing... and a modern miracle. Maybe that's what my dad was talking about.

Dating Quandaries

I don't think I've been on a date in a long time. Almost a year. There have been times people tried to set me up, but they all fell through... we never crossed paths, or the girl actually already had a boyfriend and wasn't interested in a blind date.

Part of the reason is that I don't know how to approach dating anymore. Girls have told me that hearing "I'm really not attracted to you" is a painful, undesirable thing... and I guess I understand their perspective somewhat. 

Some people say that you should only date people you're attracted to. But is that really a set-in-stone requirement? 

I mean, in the past I dated for two reasons - because I wanted to show my faith to God and give Him something to work with (so that eventually He could light a spark of love in my life), and because I wanted to show people that I cared about them. Unlike most guys, though, who I've learned have basic and then complex metrics to determine who to ask out (physical attraction being up there, along with emotional and intellectual), I also have two somewhat unique reasons to ask people out. 1: Because God told me to (I used to pray to figure out who to date all the time). 2: Because I thought a specific girl was interested in me.

Even though sharing my identity here on (Gay) Mormon Guy didn't really change much, it seems to make developing relationships even harder. I think it's because the girls who are interested in me don't know about SSA. I'm scared of hurting people, and I don't relish broaching the topic... but I feel sort of dishonest just asking someone out when I have totally different motivation compared to another guy.

There's a girl in my ward who wants me to ask her out. I don't think she reads (Gay) Mormon Guy. She asked me about North Star because I mentioned it a few times in passing, and I explained what it is - an organization that helps men and women with same-sex attraction live faithful lives in the Church. She didn't really respond in a way that let me know her thoughts, but still asked for a ride home.

I guess I'm just... afraid of the unknown. I've never dated someone and been open about the fact that I have to go about it differently. I don't know what's going to happen, I don't know how to communicate what's in my head effectively, and I don't know how it's going to affect the people on the other side of the relationship.

And yet...

I feel like I should just move forward. You know the inexplicable feeling to do something even when your brain and heart protest? A quiet voice, most definitely the Spirit, just tells me to go.

I guess that answers my question.