Temple Recommends and Prop. 8

[Solon]

The bishop of our area swung by on Sunday to visit (I think I'm one of his "projects."). He's a class act and a great guy and I'm always glad to have a chance to talk with him informally.

While we were chatting, Prop. 8 came up. I asked him if he would have a problem giving a temple recommend to someone who opposed Prop. 8 (that is, supported homosexual marriage in california), considering there's a question that asks something along the lines of:

"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?"

He said he didn't know, but that he would look at the issue more closely and ask his higher-ups before getting back to me. It's not exactly a hot-button issue out here in my neck of the woods, so his unfamiliarity is understandable, but his uncertainty still surprised me just a little.

As usual, we don't need to delve into the debate itself (unless you want to), but have any of you bumped into this, either personally or through the grapevine? Has anyone lost or been denied a temple recommend - and, by extension, been sanctioned as being "unworthy" - because of an opinion on Prop. 8?

[Indy Coug]

The bishop of our area swung by on Sunday to visit (I think I'm one of his "projects."). He's a class act and a great guy and I'm always glad to have a chance to talk with him informally.

While we were chatting, Prop. 8 came up. I asked him if he would have a problem giving a temple recommend to someone who opposed Prop. 8 (that is, supported homosexual marriage in CA), considering there's a question that asks something along the lines of:

"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?"

He said he didn't know, but that he would look at the issue more closely and ask his higher-ups before getting back to me. It's not exactly a hot-button issue out here in my neck of the woods, so his unfamiliarity is understandable, but his uncertainty still surprised me just a little.

As usual, we don't need to delve into the debate itself (unless you want to), but have any of you bumped into this, either personally or through the grapevine? Has anyone lost or been denied a temple recommend - and, by extension, been sanctioned as being "unworthy" - because of an opinion on Prop. 8?

If you donated $1M to fight prop 8, made Youtube videos railing against church leadership and took out full page ads in the paper to fight it, you potentially have cause for concern. If you were considerably more muted in your views and actions, you're probably OK.

[Solon]

If you donated $1M to fight prop 8, made Youtube videos railing against church leadership and took out full page ads in the paper to fight it, you potentially have cause for concern. If you were considerably more muted in your views and actions, you're probably OK.

Indy, I'm sorry I accidentally edited your post, thinking it was mine. I changed "supported" to "opposed" and put in the parenthesis in the "QUOTE SOLON" section.

Sorry.

[Indy Coug]

No problem.

[Non Sequitur]

If you donated $1M to fight prop 8, made Youtube videos railing against church leadership and took out full page ads in the paper to fight it, you potentially have cause for concern. If you were considerably more muted in your views and actions, you're probably OK.

By "OK", do you mean the Church is fine with it or that one's views will not likely be discovered? If the temple recommend is a true indicator of personal worthiness, then it shouldn't matter whether one's dissent is private or public. Unless, of course, the overriding concern has more to do with maintaining public relations. Then it's a big deal.

[Indy Coug]

Let's just take the simplest case of where you disagreed with Prop 8, but didn't say anything to anyone about your disagreement except at your temple recommend interview. I don't think there's any way in the world that would keep you from getting a recommend, unless you happen to let slip out that you believe that Pres. Monson is a fallen prophet... but then again, that's covered by another recommend question anyway.

It's my experience that bishops err on the side of leniency more often than not, sometimes to a fault.

[Jeff Lebowski]

From the Salt Lake Tribune on October 26, 2008:

Latter-day Saints are free to disagree with their church on the issue without facing any sanction, said L. Whitney Clayton of the LDS Quorum of the Seventy. "We love them and bear them no ill will."

Unfortunately, discipline matters are left to the discretion of local leaders who sometimes show a little too much zeal.

[RobinFinderson]

One of the burdens of church membership, which is probably an imperceptible weight to most members, not because it is negligible but simply because they have been carrying it so long that they have long forgotten what it would be like without it, is the weight of saying/believing things that aren't acceptable to the church on whole. As non-sequ points out, and Solon seemed to be getting at in the first post, being subject to the whim of local authority over matters that primarily regard your private relationship with God just sucks.

Ideally a church should serve as a tool for those who seek to strengthen their relationship with the divine. When membership in a church becomes its own reward, and something quite separate from being an uplifting tool, then the gatekeepers of membership have a dangerous kind of authority.

The best answer that I can think of is simply to stop caring about what the gatekeepers think. Live a life where you try to be guided by the spirit and your conscience. Trust your conscience. Believe what seems right in your heart, regardless of what church leaders say. Listen to church leaders, because access to their wisdom is what membership should be about, but recognize that the church is a tool, and if it isn't the right tool for the job at hand, find the right tool wherever it might be. Finally, be ready to happily live with the consequences of following your conscience, even if that means the church might take disciplinary action. These would be rare situations, and outside of Prop 8, or Helmut Hubner situation, it is hard to imagine where it might come up. But one needs to be prepared for the possibility that, while the individual might never leave the church, the church might one day leave the individual.

[All-American]

A very hot friend of mine who lives in California has told me that she's heard of bishops in her area that have withheld recommends. Her dad is a bishop, and doesn't seem to disagree with them.

[creekster]

I have heard of persons beign denied a recommend but the situations seem to involve more than a simple vote against prop 8, so it is hard to know how the decision was reached. In our stake, it has been made pretty clear, over the pulpit, that this wil nto happen (assumign the only issue is a vote against prop 8 or an opinion about that).

[Jeff Lebowski]

A very hot friend of mine who lives in California has told me that she's heard of bishops in her area that have withheld recommends. Her dad is a bishop, and doesn't seem to disagree with them.

The thought of someone losing a recommend over Prop 8 makes me ill. I hope it is rare.

[Donuthole]

A very hot friend of mine who lives in California has told me that she's heard of bishops in her area that have withheld recommends. Her dad is a bishop, and doesn't seem to disagree with them.

I fail to see how her temperature is relevant.

[Solon]

A very hot friend of mine who lives in California has told me that she's heard of bishops in her area that have withheld recommends. Her dad is a bishop, and doesn't seem to disagree with them.

But she's very hot, so I have no problem with this.

[Solon]

The thought of someone losing a recommend over Prop 8 makes me ill. I hope it is rare.

Me too.

I imagine it's a nuanced, case-by-case issue, like Indy wrote. Since I was just asking my bishop informally and hypothetically, he probably felt that he couldn't give a blanket answer. (just my guess)

[wuapinmon]

Me too.

I imagine it's a nuanced, case-by-case issue, like Indy wrote. Since I was just asking my bishop informally and hypothetically, he probably felt that he couldn't give a blanket answer. (just my guess)

You can appeal the decisions of local leaders up the ladder until you get someone who sees the larger issues.........we go to Church because we are flawed, so it stands to reason that flaws should be expected in decision making sometimes.....118 pages and all that. If my bishop told me I couldn't renew my recommend over this, I'd ask for an interview with the Stake Pres, if no, then AA, then 70, then Qof12, then 1st Pres......after that, if I was still told no, then I'd have a serious fasting and praying session and see if I was jeopardizing my salvation over the issue. If we listen quietly, the Spirit will tell us when to push something or just drop it.

Dissention is NOT sedition.