Not Peace, But A Sword

The stomachache has subsided a bit since yesterday. I can focus on other things again. I no longer spontaneously cry from confusion and helplessness. I am no longer huddling with friends in tear-punctuated conversations in which we search and wonder. The initial emotional response from the new additions to the Handbook regarding same-sex married couples and families has given way to a sincere desire to understand this new reality I am living with and that my children are growing up with.

I start by identifying two separate factors that created this perfect storm that has rocked even the most stalwart members. The first – and this cannot be understated – is the method through which many members first found out about this change. If anyone has doubted the power before of strategic messaging – of introducing a message at the right time in the right way – this is Exhibit A in persuading them otherwise.  From what I can uncover, the Church’s official communications department, Public Affairs, didn’t know this was coming down the pipe and had not prepared for it. Those within the Church Office Building may see the Public Affairs team as optional, as their lack of involvement suggests; I argue they are essential. Some complain about Public Affairs’ inserted presence in our prophetic communications, but how this information was presented – the context, the messenger, the broader explanations from the start – would have gone a long way in mitigating the furor that erupted when it was instead “leaked” with a “gotcha” spin. I, with many others, responded to the shock value of the presentation method.

And what might have been different if Public Affairs had been involved, or if there had at least been some strategic thinking put to the presentation of the new policies? Perhaps we would have then understood from the start why our leaders feel this change is necessary at this time, what the intentions are behind it, what these policies are intended to facilitate or prevent. Our leaders could show compassion for their people – us – by recognizing that this shift is big and using Public Affairs to present it in a way that doesn’t demand just sheer obedience, but instead brings us along in the reasoning and inspiration. Even though there are now some answers from Elder Christofferson’s video interview, questions remain unanswered that seem vital to our willingness to continue sustaining leaders and changing church policies. When we have covenanted to follow an inspired prophet and dedicate our lives to the Church, we deserve to know who is making these policy decisions and why they are being made. It is a form of love for the people to communicate in a thoughtful and comprehensive manner. I do not want my leaders to take advantage of my obedience. It still is mine to give.

It is an enormous sacrifice to give our hearts to the Lord; do we not deserve the right to be fully and transparently informed if we are to offer broken hearts upon His altar? With a change of this size, do we not deserve to know that our Prophet himself is asking us to stretch into new, unknown and scary territory, rather than have to speculate about who's involved with Handbook changes and wonder if it is in fact prophetic? And what if this change wasn’t considered new or challenging enough to warrant such handholding? That lack of sensitivity is disheartening in itself.

But maybe there was a strategic announcement planned. Maybe our hands were going to be held as we entered into this uncomfortable new era. Maybe the unfortunate presentation was good intentions gone awry. That still leaves the content of the policy changes to wrestle with. I admittedly have not spent nearly as much time on considering how the Church would integrate gay members as others who work in this space. The women’s space is enough for me. But I did assume it would be just that: an integration.

What is this line our leaders are asking us to walk in regards to gays and gay rights? I think some of the reaction to this week’s announcement came from the whiplash of thinking we knew what direction we were going, and then being tugged in a seemingly opposite direction: between Utah’s “compromise” making legal news and Elder Oaks’ comments about Kim Davis a few weeks ago, many including myself rejoiced in the compassionate overtures. We thought this is what integration looked like, what open arms outstretched would feel like. But in the modern world of equality and love for all, we sometimes forget or choose to gloss over the fact that the Savior came “not to send peace, but a sword.” He is demanding, as well as compassionate. He is exacting, as well as embracing. What does this balance look like in the modern world? I don’t know, but I do think that the discomfort we’re experiencing now is a result of trying to find that line as a people.

We believe in right and wrong. Elder Christofferson reminds us of that in his interview. Is it right to love unconditionally and extend a hand to all? Yes. Is it right not to look at sin with the least degree of allowance? Yes. How do we reconcile those two? It is our daily challenge to wrestle with this conundrum in our personal lives; the institutional wrestle is now thrust upon us too. The institutional stance towards gays is at odds with the way I would personally like to negotiate this balance. I’m struggling with having that agency consumed by policy, or knowing that at least that agency was in the hands of local bishops and stake presidents who might know the personal stories of those involved.

In seeking solace, I turned to the scriptures and started where I had last left off in my personal reading: Alma 1. The chapter opens with Nehor, an anti-Christ figure. What makes him an anti-Christ? He was “bearing down against the church: declaring unto the people that every priest and teacher ought to become popular…. And he also testified that all mankind should be saved at the last day, and that they need not fear nor tremble.” I was curious about the word “popular.” Did it mean Nehor wanted the leaders themselves to become more well-loved among the people, or that their tenants should be more in line with what the people wanted? The footnotes seem to suggest the latter: they led me to 1 Nephi 22: 23. “For the time speedily shall come that all churches which are built up… to become popular in the eyes of the world… are they who need fear, and tremble, and quake; they are those who must be brought low in the dust; they are those who must be consumed as stubble; and this is according to the words of the prophet.”

That’s hard for me to read. I don’t want to align myself with something that is unpopular because it makes it harder for me to connect with friends and family who are now shut off to my influence and friendship. More significantly, it’s hard to embrace something unpopular when the popular viewpoint seems to embody so many good qualities itself as the gay rights movement does. But I have covenanted to offer a broken heart, and right now I feel that is literally all I have to offer. I’ve always thought my broken heart would come as a result of my own sins, my own mistakes and imperfections. Or perhaps the mistakes of others wrought upon me, resulting in my personal loss. I don’t think I’ve ever fathomed that my broken heart would be the result of causing others’ pain, or my institutionally proscribed inability to say to brothers and sisters, “You are wanted here. There’s a place for you. We need you.” Because now my ability to say that is qualified. Period. It may be constrained in the name of some greater principle -- specifically an upholding of a divinely mandated moral code -- but it is constrained nonetheless.

I’ve been touched recently by several accounts of polygamous wives, reflecting on the request that was made of them to embrace something entirely unpopular in their day. The definition of a family was of course at the heart of the discomfort they were asked to wrestle with, with others hurt or left behind in their wake.  One statement found in the Newel K. Whitney Collection at BYU and brought to light by historian Robin Jensen moved me to tears this week:

"When the heart is sick and the soul faint and we feel we have no friend on Earth to whom we can go with feelings of perfect confidence and trust the very mind seems ready to burst, Could I go to the Lord and tell him all but I do not know what to say. since Friday night I have been thinking of some things which makes my heartache. What shall I do or what shall I say can I ever be the same happy girl again at this time feeling as I do I answer never no never. When my friends are grieved on my account what can be worse? Nothing…. If I only knew what the Lord required of me I feel almost humble enough to do anything and I pray that I may be made so."

The author? A young polygamous wife named Emmeline Harris, known years later as Emmeline B. Wells, the fifth general president of the Relief Society and one of my personal heroes. My prayer now is that whatever confusion I am feeling now, whatever grief my friends are feeling on my account will refine me as these same feelings did for Emmeline, and that I will go on to do greater good—as she did—than I feel capable of today.

 

 

 

Comments

[Merinda]

Thank you, Neylan. I can always count on you for a thoughtful, inspired and faithful perspective. You unpacked perfectly what is going on for all of us, why it matters, but why ultimately (yet again), we can choose the path of faith, not yet having a perfect knowledge.

[Rebecca]

I appreciate your words. Thank you for sharing this.

This comment struck a chord, though, "It is an enormous sacrifice to give our hearts to the Lord; do we not deserve the right to be fully and transparently informed if we are to offer broken hearts upon His altar? With a change of this size, do we not deserve to know that our Prophet himself is asking us to stretch into new, unknown and scary territory, rather than have to speculate about who's involved with Handbook changes and wonder if it is in fact prophetic? And what if this change wasn’t considered new or challenging enough to warrant such handholding?"

My thoughts turned immediately to Adam when he was cast out of the garden. The scripture is in Moses 5:5-9 and I have included it here for ease of reference. Adam's understanding of the WHY of the commandment to offer animal sacrifice was not obtained until AFTER he had faithfully obeyed the commandment.

The explanation does not come BEFORE the faithful obedience. I know the world would have us believe that we should do it the other way around. As a critical thinker, my mind is constantly in motion, asking "Why?" not petulantly, but faithfully looking for answers. However, I have never hesitated to follow obediently while searching for those answers (and I think that is what you are saying here). While that search is sometimes painful, and while I still don't have nearly enough answers to completely quiet my soul, I keep having faith that if I keep searching, and keep following, someday it will all make sense to me. My feeble mortal mind is just no match for the knowledge and wisdom of God, and my poor broken heart is struggling to keep beating sometimes. But I say, with Adam, "I know not, save the Lord commanded me."

Fortunately, the Lord has not commanded me to be hateful or judgmental, so I will keep loving. And those who struggle I will keep trying to find a way to be compassionate. And I will keep faithfully obeying until the day the Lord sends and angel to explain it to me.

Moses 5:5-9

5 And he gave unto them commandments, that they should worship the Lord their God, and should offer the firstlings of their flocks, for an offering unto the Lord. And Adam was obedient unto the commandments of the Lord.

6 And after many days an angel of the Lord appeared unto Adam, saying: Why dost thou offer sacrifices unto the Lord? And Adam said unto him: I know not, save the Lord commanded me.

7 And then the angel spake, saying: This thing is a similitude of the sacrifice of the Only Begotten of the Father, which is full of grace and truth.

8 Wherefore, thou shalt do all that thou doest in the name of the Son, and thou shalt repent and call upon God in the name of the Son forevermore.

9 And in that day the Holy Ghost fell upon Adam, which beareth record of the Father and the Son, saying: I am the Only Begotten of the Father from the beginning, henceforth and forever, that as thou hast fallen thou mayest be redeemed, and all mankind, even as many as will.

[eponymous]

Thank you Neylan. Such a beautiful statement on a day when I really needed to hear it. Your sentiments echo my own. My eyes have watered my pillow early in the morning as I lay contemplating this new normal. I want to sustain our prophets, seers and revelators even though some days they make it more difficult than it need be. I've balanced back and forth trying to put words in the fog that this change has created. The intellectual part of me wants to explore the decisions and direction and understand why, while the my heart is grieved for the pain this is causing so many and the walls this throws up between us as Mormons and our brothers and sisters (of all creeds, beliefs and experiences).

[Tatiana]

Thank you. Needed to hear this.

[watermelongirl]

Thank you, Neylan.

[Kimberly Warburton]

beautiful, stunning article thanks for sharing :)

[Elana Jan Bodine]

Beautifully written--thoughtful, caring, humane, all the things we should seek to be if we are finding ourselves wrestling with a reality that is uncomfortable and, for some, confusing. Praying and pondering, exercising faith in those two elements of a spiritual life can bring us answers and confidence, and soothe the troubled mind and spirit.

[Lindsay McPhie Hickok]

Oh thank you, thank you for this response to the recent policy change. I have wrestled all weekend, and your thoughts are like balm on my seared soul. This is a difficult policy to accept (And I am not fond of their delivery mode!), but I stand with you - that the broken heartedness we feel isn't always from our personal lives.
Just - thanks.

[James Olsen]

Thank you.

[Caroline]

This is what that I've wanted to say but haven't know how and then even more that has rang true to my heart. Thank you for this post!

[Kathy alexander]

Can you honestly believe the church doesn't want the children of gay couple's? We know they want the gay people themselves....follow the principles of the gospel and join us. Just because someways is asked to wait till adulthood to be placed on the records of the church is not a rejection, only a postponement. The church is not willing to divide a child's loyalties, to insist they denounce the validity of their parent's relationship. They deem this a decision better left to adults. Seems compassionate to me.

[Luisa Perkins]

Thank you, Neylan. My heart is in perfect sync with yours.

[Brandon Osmond]

Neylan,
Thank you for your open and honest seeking for understanding. It has been so hard for me to see friends and others quickly dismiss the church as an unnecessary practice and life style. I too have had to think hard over the shock of this policy. It was a big slap in the face to me with where I thought we were going—love and understanding. Your words about your searching have brought me peace and hope that tomorrow will be a better day. We miss you here at boncom. Hope all is well.

[Emily Flinders]

I don't know how to express how much I needed your words, Neylan. I feel significantly less lonely today because of them. Dozens of my dearest friends and mentors have had such strong reactions to this, and so much hurt is flying around. My heart is just broken as I watch some of the kindest and best people I know decide that this is too much for them and that they are done trying to reconcile the church with their own consciences. That pain combined with the flagrant sense of justification expressed by so many who left before now, it has left me in a very sad place with very little solace. (The rather unthoughtful and unfeeling rebuttals coming from members aggravate this for me, and so far none of them have helped me.) The one benefit that has come of all of this, perhaps, is that I have been in a state of near-constant prayer as this has unfolded, because really I have nowhere else to turn. Being driven to desperate prayer like that is very humbling in the most constructive of ways, and I think has had a refining effect on me over the last days of conflict. I do long for and miss the peace that I felt before this occurred, and I wonder when I will find my emotional bearings and be able to function without a fog of grief over the way this has affected so many people I care deeply about. I struggle to know how to express love for them in a way that leaves room for my own imperfect faith and understanding and my determination to continue to nurture these things.

[Josh]

This is a very thoughtful piece, and I commend you for writing it. However, I kept thinking that what makes this policy so troubling for many Mormons like me is that it seems to contradict our basic sense of right and wrong. And yet, after careful thought and prayer, most of us will eventually follow the leaders anyway. Why? Why would we go against our inner moral compass, or the Holy Ghost? A quote by Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg kept coming to my mind while reading: "With or without it (religion), you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion."

[Angie Mohsenian]

Rebecca! Loved your comment! So insightful and, I feel, inspired. thanks you for articulating what I have been feeling!

[Ronnie]

Very beautiful Neylan. Thank you all for those comments and I feel your pain and see the inner light within you. I love the good members of the church. This policy does not seem like divine love. It seems like human love, reasoned through by men. When the savior forgave the woman taken in adultery, he showed us that there is a love that admits of no opposite - divine and free from all taint. It sheds its light on all alike. Only that love that seeks no personal reward, that does not make distinctions, and that leaves behind no heartaches, can be called divine. The church does not realize this love at present because it is grasping at the fleeting shadow and ignoring, in its blindness, the substance. And so suffering and sorrow continues, and must continue, until the church, taught by its self-inflicted pains, discovers the love that is selfless, the wisdom that is calm and full of peace. The church admitted that this is partially in response to the supreme court ruling. They are fearful, and the opposite of love is fear. The harvest from this sowing will be more suffering. The church does not understand the love that is selfless because it is engrossed in the pursuit of its own goals, protecting itself, and cramped within the narrow limits of its perishable interests - mistaking in its ignorance those goals and interests for real and abiding things. Feeding on error and self-delusion, it is shut out from the mansion of all-seeing love. Not having this love, not understanding it, the church institutes policies such as this which involves no inward sacrifice, and they imagine that their reform is going to right the kingdom for ever. They propagate evil by engaging in it themselves. Not until the church ceases from selfishness and party strive, can they learn the lesson of divine love and be a source of blessedness. Let Latter Day Saints cease to despise their LGBT brethren, and the LGBT to condemn the Latter Day Saints, let the church learn how to be inclusive, and the LGBT community how to tolerate religious belief; let the partisan cease from strife, and the uncharitable begin to forgive; let us all endeavor to rejoice with others, and the slanderers grow ashamed of their conduct. Where hatred, dislike, and condemnation are, selfless love does not abide. It resides only in the heart that has ceased from all condemnation. Some may say that they are compelled to dislike and condemn their LGBT brethren. They show that they are not acquainted with the great over-ruling love. Because it is possible for you to attain to such a state of enlightenment that will enable you to perceive the train of causes by which they have become as they are, to enter into their intense sufferings, and to see them in an eternal light as loved children of our Heavenly Father. Possessed of such knowledge it will be utterly impossible for you any longer to dislike or condemn them, and you will always think of them with perfect calmness and deep compassion.

The Church condemns the homosexual, the homosexual satirizes the Church; members on facebook and comment boards are ceaselessly engaged in wordy warfare, and the spirit of strife and hatred rules where peace and love should be.

Until the church can regard people of all sexual orientations with the same impartial spirit, with all freedom from dislike, and perfect equanimity, they have yet to strive for that love which bestows upon its possessor freedom and salvation.

The realization of divine knowledge, selfless love, utterly destroys the spirit of condemnation exemplified by the church - it disperses all evil, and lifts the consciousness to that height of pure vision where love, goodness, justice are seen to be universal, supreme, all-conquering, indestructible.

The church should exemplify strong, impartial, and gentle thought; they should focus their policies on purity, compassion, and inclusiveness; we should train our tongue to silence and to true and stainless speech; so shall we enter the way of holiness and peace, and shall ultimately realize the love of the Savior. So living, without seeking to convert, we will convince; without arguing, we will teach; not cherishing ambition, the wise will find us out; and without striving to gain men’s opinions, we will subdue their hearts. For love is all-conquering, all-powerful; and the thoughts, and deeds, and words of love can never perish. The way we are going now teaches only contempt and alienation.

To know that love is universal, supreme, all-sufficing; to be freed from the trammels of evil and dogma; to be quit of the inward unrest; to know that all people are striving to realize the truth each in their own way; to be satisfied, sorrow-less, serene; this is peace; this is gladness; this is immortality; this is what Christ would have you be; this is the realization of selfless love. The unrest you feel is a sure sign of the light within you. With everything you have, don't let that light die. When I first heard the news I couldn’t believe it. Before I knew it, I started to justify why I should accept it.

[Joanna Legerski McCormick]

Thank you for sharing the quote by Emmeline Harris. I had forgotten about that particular time in history where heartache, pain, and confusion were felt by many families that struggled and sacrificed much. For some reason that quote was comforting to me and feels applicable to this day, week, month....Thank you.

[Susan Kate]

Impressive and articulate post. For me the issue begs the question: whose conscience do you honor, your own or that of the institutional church? Are loyalty and obedience always valued over and above other values of love and compassion, diversity and inclusion? It's easy when there is no conflict between the two, but increasingly in my life I have found them to be in tension. In trying to be thoughtful about the tension, I have found myself looking to the history of our church and culture; leading to a second question: have there been issues in the past when the institutional church has been and done wrong, and when individual members could have, perhaps should have, acted in opposition to the Church in order to prevent that wrong? Clearly, yes.

It is easy to make assumptions about those whose actions or conclusions differ from your own. There are people who chose to remain active and whose hearts are broken or breaking by these policies. It is harder, especially for Mormons, to accept that many who have left also do so with a broken and breaking heart. Perhaps, we are the sword?

We give a lot of lip service to the idea that prophets can and do make mistakes, but we are reticent to speak up about those mistakes when they happen in real time. What does a society look like when people do not act on the feelings of their heart? And what do we think about an institution that denies many individuals (women especially) a voice in the creation of policy and an avenue of voicing dissent and concern?

There is clearly room for growth both personally and institutionally in the circumstances in which we presently find ourselves. Can we open our hearts to the idea that perhaps God is working on us as a people, asking us to grow into a place where we learn from the past, where we do not give our obedience blindly, where do not let an institution take responsibility for our salvation? Specifically, I wonder about the Mountain Meadows Massacre, perhaps it could have been totally avoided and innocent lives spared. I wonder about suicidal teens who are in our congregations already, in the closet or out.

Institutionally, I wonder if God is not perhaps demanding some humility. Since the Reid Smoot Trial I have not seen much of this heralded virtue from our leaders. Repentance can and should occur institutionally. It's hard to forgive and move forward without an apology. There is much to apologize for: polygamy, priesthood bans, Native Americans being taken from their homes and labeled Lamanites, the premise of the Book of Abraham, the very existence of a vault where things are hidden. That list might sound angry but it's not. There are so many wonderful things too. Strong institutions are capable of admitting wrong. We have the example of the Catholic Church apologizing for it's role in the holocaust, and of South Africa holding Truth and Reconciliation hearings. It will break our hearts, but after all, that is what is required of us.

[Charlotte]

This is so helpful. Thank you.

[Mike Parker]

With all due respect to Neylan (and she deserves a lot of respect) and the others here, there seems to be a misunderstanding the scriptural term "broken heart."

A broken heart doesn't refer a sad heart or a pained heart; it refers to a tamed heart, in the way we refer to a horse being "broken": It obeys the will of its master.

If my heart is "broken," it means that I have given up my own will and succumbed to the Lord's will. The Lord can take anything from me he chooses; my heart is the only thing I can give freely. And I must give it to him if I have any hope of salvation.

This means I must accept his will even (or perhaps especially) when it is difficult for me to carry out.

[Grethe Peterson]

Neylan,
Thank you for your great heart and clarity of mind. In my many years of assisting in building the Kingdom, nothing as been more conflicting and difficult as the recent action toward the LGBT community.

Up to now we have made great steps forward encouraging our gay brother and sisters to join us at church. Many of our leaders have led the way. Now that invitation is hollow

I pray for a reconciliation before my time comes for me to leave this planet. Your strong testimony and that of my daughter move me to tears of hope.

Grethe