The Gospel According to Jeffrey

I’m going to say something that may not be popular, something which might even cause some people some hurt. I preface this by saying that I grew up in the New York City area, where people have the reputation for being rude and unfriendly, which I personally find insanely laughable. You want to find rude and unfriendly, go to the Midwest or to Utah; I’ve experienced quite a bit of each, in both places. Conversely, New Yorkers are very open and accepting; we just don’t beat around the bush. We tell it like it is and expect everyone to accept that, because in our world, everyone does. If you don’t want to hear me tell it like I see it, feel free to read something else. Yesterday afternoon, Elder Neil L. Andersen  (of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles ) addressed the 184th Annual General Conference of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints . In his discourse, he reiterated two of the Church’s consistent positions: 1) We should respect everyone and bully no one. ...

It’s time, once again, for everybody’s favorite column, Slam the Press! Honestly, this isn’t going to be so much of a slam as a series of corrections that is much, much too long for the comments, so I figured I’d post them here. The article in question is from the Humboldt County, California,  Journal article The Mormon Moment , by Scottie Lee Myers. Overall, it’s a pretty good article, and it left me feeling very good about both the missionaries and the reporter himself. However, there are a few significant errors throughout the peace, along with a several more minor ones that could also stand a fix. So as usual, let’s take them one at a time. “In 1827 [future Church President Joseph] Smith was a 25-year-old New Yorker who made a living using psychic powers to find treasure.” First of all, a minor historical point: Smith was born in December 1805, so in September 1827, he would have been 21. This is actually quite significant, because when he was 25, he was serving as Presi...

It’s time again for everyone’s favorite game show, Respond to Michael ! Seriously, though, I want to begin this entry by explaining that I really do respect Michael Crook. We’ve disagreed before , and I’m sure we will again. However, the guy’s got a good head on his shoulders and makes a lot of good points. My issue is generally not with his positions so much as the abrasion with which they tend to be presented. That being said, Michael’s latest post, entitled No Victims They , has made a rather interesting claim: that homosexuality cannot be innate because “our Heavenly Father would force such a sick, foul, and obscene desire on any of his children.” While I recognize that Brother Crook is mostly paraphrasing and expanding upon President Boyd K. Packer ’s instructions regarding pornography in the Church’s 180th Semiannual General Conference (which I commented on , at the time), I think he’s taking things a little farther than even President Packer intended. So for th...

Following my August 26 post regarding Michael Crook and Mitch Mayne, I received a question in the comments. Strangely, I was not notified of its existence until just now, so I am now endeavoring to respond. Hopefully the author won’t be too unhappy with me. The question was as follows: Jeff, I appreciate that you've thought about the situation critically. That's awesome. That got me on a deep-think track about a few subtle differences between sexual orientation and the inclinations to which you've referred (e.g., to steal a Twix bar). You've basically asserted that all inclinations are basically on the same playing field. What happens, though, when God says to one person "You can act on this inclination" then turns to another person and says "I'm sorry, you can't act on this inclination"? That's how I view sexual orientation in the LDS Church: God has told straight Mormons, Date! Hold hands! Kiss! Develop these powerful urges withi...

For those of you who have been following my serialized conversion story , I apologize for the interjection. However, there is an issue floating around the internet that I felt I must weigh in on, while the opportunity still presents itself. The issue is that of two Latter-day Saints, Brother Mitch Mayne and Brother Michael Crook. Brother Mayne, for those who haven’t heard, is an openly gay man who has supposedly been sustained as the executive secretary (his web site erroneously states “a member of the Bishopric”) in his San-Francisco-Bay-Area ward. This is, of course, not a problem, if Brother Mayne be committed to living the gospel (a willingness which I do not feel at liberty to judge). What is a problem, however, is that according to Brother Mayne’s web site , he is “open to a relationship if fate brings that my way,” and “not committing to a lifetime of celibacy.” If this “relationship” he speaks of be an indication of continued homosexuality, it certainly sounds like he has...

First of all, if you’ve somehow missed the first four parts, I invite you to start at the beginning . Enjoy! At some point this morning, a friend wrote me to see if I had noticed the major differences between President Packer’s spoken Conference address. Curious, I decided to listen to the audio of the discourse while reading the official transcript. I didn’t have any trouble with the obvious verbal slips that anyone can make (misread words, etc.), but I thought it rather interesting that one of the paragraphs I cited in Part III —the one that had so many people up in arms—had, in fact, been slightly changed. Spoken version: “Some suppose that they were preset, and cannot overcome what they feel are inborn tendencies toward the impure and the unnatural. Not so. Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone? Remember, He is our Father.” Printed version: “Some suppose that they were preset, and cannot overcome what they feel are inborn temptations toward the impure and the unnatu...

I’ve had quite a few people contact me about this post, both those few who took the time to comment on this blog and many others with whom I’ve discussed and debated on other sites. I think a fitting conclusion to this topic, however, comes not from me, but from a self-described “(Gay) Mormon Guy,” whose treatment of President Packer’s discourse is more powerful and poignant than anything I could ever hope to write. Please check out what he has to say about President Packer’s talk. You won’t be sorry. Update: I thought this was the end, but of course, people just can’t let it go. Check out The President Packer Postulate Revisited   for even more on this long-dead horse. ;-)

If you’re just coming in now, you may want to check out the first two parts of this discussion. As always, I’ll wait. ;-) So now we come back to President Packer’s discourse, and particularly the passages people are complaining most vocally about: “Some suppose that they were pre-set, and cannot overcome what they feel are inborn tendencies toward the impure and the unnatural. Not so. Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone? Remember, He is our Father. “Paul promised, ‘God… will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it’ ( 1 Corinthians 10:13 ). You can, if you will, break the habits and conquer the addiction, and come away from that which is not worthy of any member of the Church.” (President Boyd K. Packer, Cleansing the Inner Temple , 180th Semiannual General Conference of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.) Why are people so up in arms about this? He’s right...

Missed Part I? Check it out here . In the last few decades, our society has grown increasingly tolerant of homosexuality. Despite the best efforts of various (primarily religious) organizations, none have been able to fully stem the tide of this acceptance. This failure stems partly from a lack of knowledge: since most religions don’t even know why homosexuality is wrong, their arguments against it are generally along the lines of “because God said so,” with no further explanation—in other words, fairly useless. Unfortunately, this is not the most significant problem with fighting this battle. In George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four , the government—best known to the masses by the omnipresent “Big Brother”—takes control of the people using an extremely simple, yet amazingly effective, tool: the English language. By slowly removing words from the language, these words likewise retreat from the public consciousness. What few words remain, the government subtly changes to meet its ow...

This past Sunday, President Boyd K. Packer of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles gave an amazing discourse in General Conference, entitled Cleansing the Inner Temple . In this talk, President Packer had the audacity to state that—surprise!—sin is bad. A lot of people didn’t like it that he said that, and even many members of the Church are calling for President Packer to apologize for his comments, particularly with respect to homosexuality. Now, before I continue with this post, I want to emphasize something: I am not a “gay-basher.” I have friends and family who identify themselves as gay. Some of them are probably better people than I am! And while I don’t agree with their decision to live that way, I love them and treat just like I do anyone else. (As I told one such friend: if I stopped being friends with everyone who did something I don’t agree with, I’d be a very lonely man, wallowing in a pit of self-hatred.) ;-) Demonizing others is wrong. Persecuting others is wrong. Hurtin...