FAIR

Marriage

Anger Without A Cause? – President Oaks and a False Narrative

by

 

The debate surrounding LGBT issues is one high in emotion and passion, with all sides having strongly held beliefs and entrenched views. Often, the flash point of these debates revolves around the religious beliefs of those who question the morality of LGBT behavior. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is no exception to this rule, being one of the more conservative religions when it comes to this topic. One church leader in particular has himself become a lightning rod on the subject.

“Harmful rhetoric” and “discrimination” were alleged to have been a part of President Dallin H. Oaks’ recent General Conference talk entitled Truth and the Plan. These claims were made by Lori Davis, a Board Member of a group called Mama Dragons, a group whose stated purpose is to provide support for Mormon and former Mormon mothers of LGBT children. A brief review of social media and other contemporary news articles will quickly demonstrate that the Mama Dragons were not alone in their feelings that some wrong was committed by Elder Oaks. Others actually implied that people may have to call a crisis line following the talk. Such drastic condemnation would certainly lead the reasonable reader to ask what horrible thing President Oaks said to possibly elicit such a strong response.

Unfortunately, despite the strong rhetoric, many who made the condemning statements on social media and elsewhere failed to cite what words were actually offensive. General indignation seemed to be sufficient for those people. Some, fortunately, were more specific. I’d like to look at several of them, and analyze what they might tell us about this issue, how those from different viewpoints are approaching it, and what we can learn from it. [Read more…] about Anger Without A Cause? – President Oaks and a False Narrative

“Obey … With Exactness” (Stories of the Saints in the DR Congo Part 3)

by

Author’s note: This series shares six stories about members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Each story is framed in the context of a Christlike attribute. This article with examples of obedience is an adapted and expanded from part 3 of a presentation given at the FairMormon 2018 Conference.

The Congolese saints are on the whole a faithful and obedient people. This is epitomized in the fact that, according to Elder Joni Koch, the DR Congo Kinshasa mission is not only among the fastest growing in the world, but also has the highest rate of sacrament meeting attendance — double the percentage of a typical stake in the United States. Quiet evidence of this faithfulness and devotion is to be found everywhere.

The video version of the entire FairMormon presentation is available on the FairMormon YouTube channel at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJl9FvLKmjw

The article relating to this story can be found at the Interpreter Foundation website: “Obey … With Exactness” — Stories of the Saints in the DR Congo, Part 3

If you would like to watch the other presentations from the 2018 FairMormon Conference, you can still purchase video streaming.

RiseUp Podcast: President Eyring Defending Marriage at Vatican Colloquium

by

Podcast: Download (24.5MB)

Subscribe: RSS

EyringHB_1Apr10President Eyring of the First Presidency of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints was invited to speak at a gathering at the Vatican-The headquarters for the Catholic Church worldwide—Think of it as the Salt Lake City of the Catholic Church..sort of….

(Here is a link to the Church’s press release and world report video on the gathering)

This gathering featured religious leaders from all over the world and from a variety of denominations. In some cases this gathering was called Humanum, in others the gathering was simply referred to the Colloquium.

The website for the event states this as the purpose of the gathering:

The Complementarity of Man and Woman: An International Colloquium is a gathering of leaders and scholars from many religions across the globe, to examine and propose anew the beauty of the relationship between the man and the woman, in order to support and reinvigorate marriage and family life for the flourishing of human society.

Witnesses will draw from the wisdom of their religious tradition and cultural experience as they attest to the power and vitality of the complementary union of man and woman. It is hoped that the colloquium be a catalyst for creative language and projects, as well as for global solidarity, in the work
 of strengthening the nuptial relationship, both for the good of the spouses themselves and for the good of all who depend upon them.

The Colloquium is sponsored by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and co-sponsored by the Pontifical Council for the Family, the Pontifical Council for Interreligious Dialogue, and
 the Pontifical Council for the Promotion of Christian Unity.

In short, the Catholic church put on a meeting of religious leaders from across the world to talk about and defend the family unit, but more specifically, marriage between a man and a woman. His presentation was about 13 minutes long. This was an important presentation for a few reasons that I can see, but there may be even more.

It was important because historically, such a connection between the LDS Church and the Catholic church was not such an open door. I personally consider this to be a tremendous act of kindness and christian fellowship on the part of the Catholic church to invite President Eyring, but also for President Eyring to attend.

This was also significant in light of the various perspectives and direction the laws of many nations throughout the world have taken with respect to legalizing same-sex marriage. Sometimes we might feel like a small minority of people who believe that marriage should be only between man and woman legally and lawfully married. This event stands to show that some of the largest and most well respected faith traditions in the world can be unified in our defense of God’s moral standard regardless of where some in the world advocate.

President Eyring stood as a prime example of what it means to defend our faith to all the world. He is an apostle and hopefully you will sense the nature of his calling coming through in the message he was sharing. He spoke with authority, and with purpose. While this particular environment was not considered hostile, other engagements between the communities of some of these faiths have not always been so kind to the LDS Church. President Eyring, without fear and without reservation bore his testimony of God our Father, Jesus his divine Son and our Savior, and of the central role of eternal marriage in the plan of Salvation. His example of both missionary work and being one to stand and defend the faith is a powerful example to the membership.

Additionally, this became a message to the larger audience of people that may have misconceptions about the LDS views on marriage in a polygamous sense. While not a direct part of his message, it should be clear that a top leader of the faith has 1 wife. The relationship of current church practice with regard to polygamy is still in question with many people in spite of a tremendous amount of transparency on the part of the church with regards to this issue.

His message is a call for a renascence or a rebirth of happy marriages. While many of you listening to this are young adults, and probably not married or even engaged, marriage is a topic that is something you should be educated on in order to either put your life in order, or know what it means to seek for and work towards having a happy marriage. When that time comes to get married, or what qualities you are to look for is a topic for another time. However, as you listen to President Eyring’s message, you may hear some important advice as you move on in life towards that goal.

So, I am going to play for you parts of the presentation, but I would encourage you to watch the presentation in its entirety.

Articles of Faith 10: S. Matthew Stearmer – A Reflection on the Cultural Construction of Sexual “Needs”

by

Podcast: Download (41.8MB)

Subscribe: RSS

stearmer_picMatt Stearmer is a Ph.D. Candidate of Sociology at The Ohio State University. His academic interests include social movements, gender, networks, public health and religion. His work has appeared in the Journal of Peace Research, and in a book titled Sex and World Peace. He currently serves as the first councilor in the Young Men’s Presidency. He and his partner Janille have four children ages 5-16. He is the author of an article entitled, A Reflection on the Cultural Construction of Sexual “Needs” in the journal SquareTwo found at SquareTwo.org Welcome S. Matthew Stearmer.

Questions addressed in the interview:

Your article is quite possibly one of the most potentially volatile mixes of topics; sex, and religion. Throw in politics and you will probably have a perfect recipe for social conflict cocktail. Let’s try and ease into a bit by maybe first addressing why sex in a religious or faith based context is either difficult or even contentious at times?

In your article you open with, “Recently, the topic of male sexuality, responsibility and faithfulness came up in a discussion among several LDS friends and co-workers.” First of all, I am glad to hear that even after this conversation you are still referring to them as friends and co-workers, not enemies….if one were to be a the proverbial fly on the wall in that discussion what would we have heard? What were some of the opinions that were injected in that conversation?

Is there a doctrine on this subject of marital intimacy? Responsibility of sex in the marriage? Your article asserts the following: “The central aim of the doctrine of the Restored Gospel is unity. Anything that divides us and creates hierarchy, especially between spouses, must be renounced for the evil it is.”

Your article presents another good quote, “The goal from a gospel perspective is not more sex, but more unity. Intimate sexual relationships between a husband and wife may be one means of getting there, but it is not the locus of the unified relationship.” The article makes the assumption, and there are probably statistics to make this a well founded assumption, that men see sex as a need, and women see responsibility as filling that need, as something to give up to their husbands. This paradigm, according to your article, leads to disunity. The next assumption, and maybe I am reading this wrong, is that this condition is far more universal than many may notice, even in temple sealed LDS marriages.

You give one such example of a couple who came to you for some counseling on the matter. Could you share that example?

There are three points that you feel is critical to having a healthy relationship, but one that actually falls in line with doctrinal precepts. Let’s go through those three:

– The first, sex is not intimacy.

– Second, even in marriage, sex does not necessarily lead to unity.

– Third, a focus on who “needed” what, and who did or did not get what they felt they “needed” from their spouse sexually, would have been an unnecessary, confusing, and further damaging approach to the problem being faced.

When one ventures into calling sex a spiritual or sacred thing, that can sometimes be a bit off putting, maybe even a mischaracterization. Here again, you face the idea head on with the article by making an assertion that placing sex as a “need” in a marriage is spiritually damning. How are these things connected?

This is even tied further to the idea that people who have committed sexual sins, either in or out of marriage covenants, seek to establish an excuse for their actions because sex was a need that was not being met.

This same idea is actually tied back to the Oath and Covenant of the Priesthood. How is that?

S. Matthew Stearmer is author of the article A Reflection on the Cultural Construction of Sexual “Needs” in the journal SquareTwo found at SquareTwo.org Thank you for coming on.

 

Isn’t same-sex marriage just like couples that don’t have children?

by

Monte Neil Stewart (President, Marriage Law Foundation) deals with this argument here (p. 344 / 32nd page). To summarize his argument:

  1. Marriage is society’s mechanism to regulate and ameliorate the consequences of passion (that is, children). Even in our contraceptive culture there are many unintended births. Marriage law isn’t to make all sex procreative, but only seeks to encourage that man-woman sex occur within marriage as a protection when it is procreative.
  2. There is no procreation requirement of marriage because government has not felt that it was their place to ask.
  3. During centuries marriage has encompassed the central facts of child-bearing and child-rearing and laws have been designed to regulate entry into and continuation of the child-centered institution. This has continued without a specific request that parents declare any intentions about children.

Regardless of the claims that no harm would be done with same-sex marriages, there would be significant harm to the understanding and nature of marriage and to the usefulness of that institution for society’s goals.