Read on Twitter
Yesterday, I listened to a recent episode of Leading Saints. In it, Richard Ostler went through an abbreviated version of his 'fireside' presentation.
You can find it here. https://leadingsaints.org/listen-learn-and-love-lgbt-latter-day-saints-an-interview-with-richard-ostler/
You can find it here. https://leadingsaints.org/listen-learn-and-love-lgbt-latter-day-saints-an-interview-with-richard-ostler/
I have... reservations about both Francom/LS and Ostler (that's for another time, perhaps), but this is a potential blind spot for me. I thought it important to hear it out.
tl;dr - it's worthwhile to approach discerningly, but I have concerns with aspects of the approach.
tl;dr - it's worthwhile to approach discerningly, but I have concerns with aspects of the approach.
If you want my broader thoughts... here we go. This will probably get long; there are some important ideas at play.
(I'll throw some out now, and I'll add more later.)
(I'll throw some out now, and I'll add more later.)
Thought 1:
A great deal is made about being a former priesthood leader.
In a way, I understand this. Our callings inform our life experiences, and that's going to come out through the stories we share.
Yet it's so important not to try and claim any authority from that.
A great deal is made about being a former priesthood leader.
In a way, I understand this. Our callings inform our life experiences, and that's going to come out through the stories we share.
Yet it's so important not to try and claim any authority from that.
If you're a Elders Quorum President or Bishop or Stake President, you hold keys and that's an incredible thing!
Those keys also have an incredibly finite geographic "range." Outside of that range, you're just another man with another opinion. There's no special authority there.
Those keys also have an incredibly finite geographic "range." Outside of that range, you're just another man with another opinion. There's no special authority there.
(Not to mention... I could name former priesthood leaders that have had their memberships in the Church withdrawn.)
Thought 2:
There's a lot of talk about "respecting" and "honoring" the choices of those who step away.
I wonder if that goes too far.
I can respect *agency*. Without agency, the Plan falls apart, and that's not a small thing.
But why am I bound to honoring a given choice?
There's a lot of talk about "respecting" and "honoring" the choices of those who step away.
I wonder if that goes too far.
I can respect *agency*. Without agency, the Plan falls apart, and that's not a small thing.
But why am I bound to honoring a given choice?
There's a right way and a wrong way to handle these situations. Ostler shares a good personal example.
We need, above all else, Christlike love for anyone - especially a member of our own family - regardless of whatever choice they make.
But blanket esteem? Admiration? No.
We need, above all else, Christlike love for anyone - especially a member of our own family - regardless of whatever choice they make.
But blanket esteem? Admiration? No.
The nominal purpose behind this kind of talk is preserving relationships, and there is good in that. We want that.
But don't forget what the Savior said:
But don't forget what the Savior said:
How we reconcile these ideas - preserving family relationships while honoring our covenants - is a difficult, difficult thing.
To his credit, Ostler suggests that this is something each person will need to settle for themselves using inspiration.
To his credit, Ostler suggests that this is something each person will need to settle for themselves using inspiration.
But starting at "respect" and "honor" for choices that will likely devastate someone's mortal experience and put into jeopardy their chance at eternal life is a place where we disagree.
Charity might look like "honor". It might look like something much, much different.
Charity might look like "honor". It might look like something much, much different.
Thought 3:
And this is a big one.
We have to be *so* careful about drifting into advocacy, especially as leaders.
And Ostler provides a great example of why I worry about this so much, just here in this podcast.
And this is a big one.
We have to be *so* careful about drifting into advocacy, especially as leaders.
And Ostler provides a great example of why I worry about this so much, just here in this podcast.
He, like many in the Church, talks about Alma's invitation in Mosiah 18 as part of our covenant responsibility.
I worry about that - I think people usually do that to harp on a gospel hobby and it's ripe for misuse - but let's take it at face value.
I worry about that - I think people usually do that to harp on a gospel hobby and it's ripe for misuse - but let's take it at face value.
Ostler says (paraphrasing),
'here we have the baptismal covenant, and you can see two kinds of responsibilities. First we have horizontal responsibilities - bearing burdens, mourning, comforting - and only then do we have vertical responsibilities with the Savior.'
'here we have the baptismal covenant, and you can see two kinds of responsibilities. First we have horizontal responsibilities - bearing burdens, mourning, comforting - and only then do we have vertical responsibilities with the Savior.'
Hey, that's interesting! And he's not wrong that doing better ‘horizontally’ - with our fellow man - improves our 'vertical' relationship with the Savior. Bueno!
But... did you notice what he included in our horizontal responsibilities? Did you notice what he omitted?
But... did you notice what he included in our horizontal responsibilities? Did you notice what he omitted?
*enhance*
What about standing as a witness?!
It looks pretty foundational to our 'horizontal' responsibilities. Why was it left out? Why is it *always* left out?
I feel like "standing as a witness" modifies the other qualities in significant ways (just as it itself is modified).
It looks pretty foundational to our 'horizontal' responsibilities. Why was it left out? Why is it *always* left out?
I feel like "standing as a witness" modifies the other qualities in significant ways (just as it itself is modified).
A past dean of BYU's law school once said that it's not enough to do the right thing; we have to do the right thing in the right way.
In my experience, we are best able to do the right thing in the right way when we do it for the *right reason*.
In my experience, we are best able to do the right thing in the right way when we do it for the *right reason*.
Ostler's omission of this pretty foundational horizontal responsibility was likely unintentional, but this is why we need be concerned about *why* we do what we do.
Ostler wants us to listen, and that's a good thing! But you listen differently when you're standing as a witness.
Ostler wants us to listen, and that's a good thing! But you listen differently when you're standing as a witness.
Now, even if you're really about that 'witness' part, ministry will look different on the ground. Each situation is different and requires inspiration.
If you're a friend or family member, maybe 'listening' really is just letting someone talk.
But this is *Leading* Saints.
If you're a friend or family member, maybe 'listening' really is just letting someone talk.
But this is *Leading* Saints.
If you're a leader, it's going to be a little different. We still need inspiration, and as Elder Holland suggests (PMG Ch. 10 friends), listening is still *huge*.
But you are not listening in order to be a better advocate. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/preach-my-gospel-a-guide-to-missionary-service/how-can-i-improve-my-teaching-skills?lang=eng
But you are not listening in order to be a better advocate. https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/preach-my-gospel-a-guide-to-missionary-service/how-can-i-improve-my-teaching-skills?lang=eng
Remember what President Packer taught about facing the right way.
I see people *constantly* who, worried about listening, seek to become advocates, and then they turn, ever so slightly. They face the wrong way.
They leave out scriptures that counter their purpose.
I see people *constantly* who, worried about listening, seek to become advocates, and then they turn, ever so slightly. They face the wrong way.
They leave out scriptures that counter their purpose.
Again-
We have to be *so* careful about drifting into advocacy, especially as leaders.
Sorry about sprinting through that last part. (This is Twitter, what can you do).
We have to be *so* careful about drifting into advocacy, especially as leaders.
Sorry about sprinting through that last part. (This is Twitter, what can you do).
