Yesterday, I sat in a stake priesthood leadership meeting in a chapel full of men in their white shirts, suits and ties. I had never felt more "different" from everyone in that room. I wondered if any of these brethren had any idea what was going on inside me, or if any of them felt the same way. There had to be 150 men in the room - you'd think I wouldn't be the only one, (and even at 2% there statistically should be at least another) but I sure felt like it.
The meeting concentrated on socializing the youth and building them up with positive experiences and encouraging interaction. But, it also concentrated heavily on how to teach morality to the youth and to demand more of them, and to keep ourselves morally clean, including avoiding the evils of heterosexual infidelity and heterosexual pornography. Jokes were made about youths not even being permitted to watch DVDs at home - as that leads to cuddling and closeness that can lead to immorality. But, we were encouraged to watch DVDs at home with our wives to encourage us to cuddle and have closeness with them, and to focus our attention on them.
I know I'm a slow learner, but at that point I realized just how out of the picture I was from this meeting. I felt like I really wasn't there - like this was some surreal existence or world that I was visiting and it didn't apply to me and my situation at all. I mean, here were a room full of men, 99% of them married, and we were talking about the difficulty it is to live in this sex-charged world, for us as leaders, and particularly for our youth, and how things will be better when our youth are married or when we focus on our marriage. And yet, they don't have a clue on how that translates to a homosexual equivalent. Since homosexuals can't get married (in the eyes of God) we are still living in this sex-charged world, and can't even date or socialize at all with others of our kind, as heterosexual youths are encouraged to do, to appropriately handle the sexually-charged energy of this life, and there is no alternative but complete isolation and celibacy. I began to feel very saddened and reflected on my single gay members of the family in this church...
After setting the ground rules, the Stake President felt inspired to call us to repentance saying that with the prevalence of heterosexual infidelity and heterosexual pornography in the Church, he is convinced "some of us" have this issue right now, and as such, we shouldn't even be in this chapel, and that we should excuse ourselves and go take care of things with our Bishop right now!
There was silence in the room... At first, I wanted to stand up and leave - feeling unworthy because of my thoughts, and some of my recent actions, tame as they may be, always toying with crossing the line, but, you know what? I didn't feel guilty! I wanted to feel guilty but I couldn't. Instead, I wanted to stand up (in the spirit of Scott) and say: "Yeah, but what about us gay guys? How do we fit in this scenario?" I mean, am I allowed in any way, shape or form, any interaction of any kind as a gay married man toward those I'm attracted to? Is it okay to see gray in the spectrum of cuddling?, friendships?, tame images that might titillate? Or, is anything to do with this subject that does not center on my wife mean that it is wrong and inappropriate - on the verge of infidelity and unworthiness - in other words: black and white? And what about my gay single brothers who have no source for comfort at all? At least we MOM guys have our wives to turn to - but what about them?
Are there really just two choices for me?: 1) complete fidelity in thoughts and deeds, or 2) complete infidelity by having thoughts and deeds - innocuous as they may be? In one am I the hero and shining knight, and in the other a scoundrel and demon? Is there any other choice?
As I stated in a previous comment in the last post: "It isn't so cut and dry. I'm trying to find some happy medium where I can cling to that which I know and love without going crazy in the meanwhile. How do I find that middle ground, that gray area?"
I know this isn't breaking new ground with anyone reading this, but I wonder if my state of mind was finally opened to see the irony of the situation and to realize that I wasn't seeing anything that applied to me in this meeting. It was like I was so different from them, that I was no longer a part of them, and that there was no "them" left in me. There was no "us". I finally felt a complete outsider. And not feeling guilty in one of those to-the-point meetings is a step for me. Whether in the right direction or not I guess depends on your point of view of my situation. But, all of a sudden, I'm feeling very gray, very neutral, very non-guilt charged. I'm seeing gray in a lot that is being said and taught and mandated as "black and white" - and I guess I should excuse myself from future leadership meetings - as I'm finding myself now not seeing "black and white" in any other topic being discussed - and as such I must be walking into apostasy and should turn in my "membership worthiness" card, and be considered a dangerous brother to watch out for.
Or, I guess my other choice is to keep looking "straight"ahead and keep my mouth shut and keep saying nothing...
9 comments:
"we shouldn't even be in this chapel, and that we should excuse ourselves and go take care of things with our Bishop right now! "
That statement, if that's how he actually made it bugs me to NO END.
That's not at all what Christ said--he didn't kick people out for their sins, he encouraged them to repent.
Kicking people out of a meeting is INSANE.
"taking care of things with your Bishop right now" implies "encouraging them to repent", but the message came loud and clear... if we are leaders in the kingdom we better be morally clean if we are to expect our youth and those we lead to be morally clean. It was pretty harsh, and yeah, I was bugged, but I don't think he really expected anyone to walk out...
Of course, in the temple they do...
My world used to be very black and white, too. Then I decided that there was a lot more gray than I used to believe.
Now I've changed my mind again, and decided that there's a whole rainbow of color between black and white. It seems more appropriate somehow. :)
Here's how I see the "gray": (this is from something I posted to my Facebook profile this morning)
"We've all heard Church leaders speak on the actions of a suicide victim, reassuring the grieving family that the circumstances and situation of the deceased will be taken into account at the judgment and warning us that it is not our place to make any declarations of what his or her eternal fate might be.
I believe that the same principle can be applied to every action that another person performs. What may appear to be a sin to us (and what may, in fact, be a sin if we were to perform the same action ourselves) might not be seen as such by Him who sees everything and who knows the heart and mind of the individual."
The rules themselves might be black and white--don't lie, steal, kill, commit adultery, etc.
But once we apply the rules to human beings (with all their differences and uniqueness) and the situations that the find themselves in, they take on all sorts of shades and hues and tones that make them anything but black and white.
So... to apply this to myself, and to use some of your post so that it seems like I'm actually saying something relevant:
Is it okay to see gray in the spectrum of cuddling?, friendships?, tame images that might titillate?
...
Are there really just two choices for me?: 1) complete fidelity in thoughts and deeds, or 2) complete infidelity by having thoughts and deeds - innocuous as they may be?
I'm a big believer in the spirit of the law.
The law says that I must be faithful to my wife. The law says that looking upon a woman (or, I assume, a man) to lust after him/her is adultery. The letter of the law says that any thought or deed that strays from my wife in the slightest is black.
The spirit of the law (in my opinion) says that I should view my commitment to my wife as being of the utmost importance, and that I should never to anything to detract from that commitment.
If I enjoy admiring a cute waiter, have I done anything to detract from my commitment to my wife? Some would say yes, I suppose. I believe I haven't (especially when she's admiring him with me).
If I give a guy friend a hug, or have gay friends, or enjoy looking at the photos that Beck likes to put on his blog posts, have I done anything to detract from my commitment to my wife? I don't think so.
Living in color (or shades of gray) is a lot harder than black and white, because it means I need to evaluate every thought and action to determine how it fits into the spirit of the law, but I think it's also a much more realistic view of the world.
I strongly believe in the comments regarding suicide victims - we have no concept of what circumstances led to their decision and as such cannot or should not judge or hold in judgment those decisions or eternal consequences.
But, thank you for putting that same divine principle into this realm for my consideration. It rings true and helps me tremendously as I look at the "colorful" world before me.
SCOTT said: "If I give a guy friend a hug, or have gay friends, or enjoy looking at the photos that Beck likes to put on his blog posts, have I done anything to detract from my commitment to my wife? I don't think so."
I hope not, seeing that I've given you a Beck hug, I hope I am one of your "gay friends" and yes, I'm guilty of the occasion photo... and no, I don't do any of these things to reduce your commitment to your wife.
But, yes, guilty as charged! :)
But, thank you for putting that same divine principle into this realm for my consideration. It rings true and helps me tremendously as I look at the "colorful" world before me.
There has been some somewhat heated discussion in the comments on the Facebook post on which I originally suggested that we could look at all sin in a similar manner to how we view suicide.
I was accused of attempting to justify my own sins by attempting to apply that principle to actions other than suicide.
In case anyone who reads these comments has gotten the wrong impression, I'll clarify that I did not intend that comment to be used to justify my own mistakes. I believe that I am completely responsible for my own actions and that I need to repent when I screw up (though I do believe and hope that my own circumstances will be taken into account when I am judged).
My intended point was that we can't see the world as black and white and assume that just because we know someone else has done something "wrong" we can be sure of their eternal destiny (e.g. certain that they're destined for terrestrial glory unless they shape up and repent).
It is always based on what we do with what we've been given... And since what I've been given isn't necessarily the same as what you've been given (i.e. the Parable of the Talents) then comparing us is not the point - it is doing the best within our abilities.
I'm not condoning sin either, nor remove responsibility for my own actions, and I'm not looking for an excuse to go out and sin - I'm just commenting that what seemed so black and white before, has been "colored" or has "gray-tones" when looked at from a different perspective.
One of the "benefits" of my checkered past is that I am much less judgmental than before. I find goodness in places and people that before I would have snubbed my holy nose at. Differing points of view don't threaten me like they once did.
I think the "gray" out there gives us the opportunity to exercise our agency, which is essential to our spiritual growth. If it were all black and white, I think our agency would be compromised. When we rely on the promptings of the Holy Ghost to guide our use of agency in a gray world, we grow and obtain the experience we were sent here to acquire.
BRAVONE: You have a perspective that I don't have, one that even in a certain odd way I am envious of. I do not want to feel your pain and agony you've endured, but I want to "know" that which you know.
This is my path. And yes, I need to maneuver through the gray by faith and agency.
Post a Comment