Introduction and Episode Overview

John Dehlin [00:00:00] Mormon Stories is a production of the Open Stories foundation and relies solely upon the support of people like you, its listeners to help keep the podcast alive or to become a member of the community. Please become a monthly subscriber by visiting MormonStories.org and clicking on the Donate button on the right side of the page under Support. All contributions to Mormon Stories are completely tax deductible and go towards producing the podcast and building communities and programs of support for Mormons like you. Thanks for your support.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:00:36] The kindly light a myth encircling gloom

Guest [00:00:43] Lead thou me on the night is dark and I am far from home.

John Dehlin [00:00:54] Hello and welcome to another edition of Mormon Stories Podcast. John I'm your host, John Dehlin. This is a special edition of Mormon Stories podcast because it is November 6, it is 4:16pm Mountain time, and we are all reeling from an announcement, a leak that happened on November 5, 2015, wherein it was leaked that changes have been made to the LDS Church Handbook Number one. The changes are around what the Church is calling same gender relationships or same gender cohabitation or same gender marriage. That in and of itself is a topic worth discussing, but the basic upshot is basically two things. People who are in a same gender marriage are now, according to the handbook, specifically in apostasy of the church. And so we're going to talk about that, that now they are officially apostates according to the manual. And the second big news, which is even bigger, is that children of a living parent who's in a same gender relationship are now apparently prohibited from getting a baby blessing, baptism, confirmation, ordination, or even missionary service until they reach the age of 18. And even if they're 18, they have to denounce or disavow the practice of same gender cohabitation in marriage. And they have to be 18 and not live with the parent. So this is huge. And it's already been written up in the Wall Street Journal in I've spoken to the Wall Street Journal, New York Times, cnn, Huffington Post. Like it's all over. It feels as big as the Kate Kelly thing and the John Dehlin sort of thing. It feels really big. And so the Internet is exploding and we need to talk about it. So I have assembled three of my favorite humans on the planet. I'm actually hoping to assemble five, but Seth Anderson and Michael Ferguson said they'd be joining us, but we haven't been able to get a hold of them. So we're gonna wait and see if they join us. But we have a fabulous panel. Without them, we have all three returning participants to Mormon Stories and I'll introduce them. I'll let you guys introduce yourselves. We will start with Natasha Helfer Parker. Natasha, give us a brief little introduction about you.

Guests Introduce Themselves and Their Perspectives

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:03:49] Yes. Hi, I'm Natasha and I'm a marriage and family therapist. I'm also a sex therapist and I've been working with Mormons for about almost 20 years now on all kinds of issues. And I run a blog called the Mormon Therapist and I'm currently the president of the Mormon Mental Health Association. So this is a very relevant topic that I'm very concerned about and very glad that we're discussing today.

John Dehlin [00:04:14] Excellent. Well, thanks for joining us, Natasha. Christy Money, you're returning for another visit on Mormon Stories. Why don't you introduce yourself, please?

Guest [00:04:24] Sure. And thanks for having me, John. So I am Dr. Money and I am a licensed psychologist. I also work with mostly Mormon population having faith crises or transitions. And also I do relationship counseling. And so I was trained by BYU and I'm on the Mormon Mental Health association board with Natasha. Happy to be here.

John Dehlin [00:04:51] Excellent. Well, welcome, Dr. Money. And to round out our panel for now is someone who needs no introduction on Mormon stories, Dr. Jay Nelson Seawright, graduate of Berkeley, and I'm introducing you. Jay, tell us about yourself a little bit. Hi.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:05:11] I'm a political science professor at Northwestern. I work on parties and identity stuff. And the issues that are coming up today are important for me from a very different point of view in terms of how Mormonism presents itself to the outside world and what that boundary looks like. So there's the inside part, which I think Natasha and Christy will tell us a lot about, and then the outside part as well.

John Dehlin [00:05:33] Excellent. Okay, so I've got a huge list of like 20 things we could talk about. And again, you know, listeners who are joining us for the first time. I have a PhD in psychology. I studied the LGBT Mormon experience as part of my dissertation. I've published probably eight or nine peer reviewed scientific journal articles on what it's like to be LGBT and Mormon. And so I'm not just sort of a host. I'm also sort of someone who has thought a lot and written a lot and cares a lot about this issue. Again, I'm going to acknowledge that we don't actually have a person on our panel that I'm aware of that identifies as lgbt. We tried to get Seth and Michael on and we hope they join us soon because that is really important. I should also note that I plan on bringing on to Mormon Stories members of the church who are affected by this policy. Look, look to that as a follow up episode, but that's something I plan on doing. All right. So I think there's a lot that we, we could say about this. And I think what I want to do is maybe, maybe first thing is we can actually just read some of the text and comment on the text and then we can go around and each share other topics that we think are worth discussing. But we'll start with the text, if that's okay. So I have a document called, it's called Changes to LDS Handbook 1. It's on scribe.com I'll put a link to it on the post. This is a memo that I received through what I'll just say an unnamed source at this point who got it from, I believe a bishop. And it has as a subtitle policies on ordinances for children of a parent living in the same gender relationship and a heading of when a disciplinary council may be necessary. So under serious transgression, it has now added, in addition to attempted murder, these are all sort of serious transgressions where a disciplinary council may be necessary. It has attempted murder, forcible rape, I don't know any other type of rape, sexual abuse, spouse abuse, intentional serious physical injury of others, adultery, fornication, homosexual relations. And then it says in parentheses, especially sexual cohabitation. Now I'm going to pause right there and I'm going to have, we'll have Kristi or Dr. Money start. Any reaction so far to the text?

Examining the New LDS Handbook Policy

Guest [00:08:18] Well, I, what you highlighted, it's kind of a softball.

John Dehlin [00:08:21] It's a softball.

Guest [00:08:22] Yeah. Yeah. When you highlighted, I also highlighted in my mind that especially sexual cohabitation, that, that is on par with these, with these grievous sins. And yeah, the whole forcible rape part too. Like, I also don't know what, what other type of rape there is as someone who specializes in women's mental health. But anyway, so, yeah, it's, it was just so devastating to see especially sexual cohabitation along in the list with all those other sins. It's just, I can't, I'm still reeling from this. I can't believe it.

John Dehlin [00:09:02] Yeah. Jay, anything to add about that particular part of the document?

J. Nelson Seawright [00:09:07] Yeah, there's something, I mean, I'm going to say actually a little bit unintentionally funny about it because the homosexual relations part of the list has been there for a very long time. And sadly enough, the church has a very long history of excommunicating people for nothing other than Having sex with someone of the same gender. So now to put in parentheses. But it's even more bad if you live together. I just don't get it. How much more than excommunicated are these? Double plus secret. Excommunicated. Now, I don't really understand the change.

John Dehlin [00:09:41] I want to let Natasha talk, but it's also, it seems like it's not reinforcing in the direction you would think the church would want to go. Because I would think that if they had to choose between random, anonymous, dangerous, you know, multi partnered sex, or like sexual cohabitation where you're in a committed, loving, safe relationship, you think that they wouldn't hold those equal, right?

J. Nelson Seawright [00:10:08] No, I think they think the anonymous kind is much better. Because if there's an anonymous sort of thing, you're ashamed and you see it as secret and shameful and sin and you might be brought to repent. But if you're just openly living with someone, you've accepted your sin and become blind to the spirit. I think that's what they think.

Guest [00:10:26] I think you're right too.

John Dehlin [00:10:28] Yeah. And I just would hope that they would say committed, loving relationships are good even if we can't have our ideal. I would hope that they would privilege one over the other. All right, Natasha, did you want to add something to this part of the discussion?

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:10:48] Yeah, I'm always concerned when these kinds of lists are made. I mean, this list has been problematic for a long time before yesterday. But yeah, to have any type of sin kind of put together with murder and rape and even abuse. I mean, we're talking about people having relationships and trying to figure out their sexual orientation. And even with heterosexual relations, you know, I mean, that's what fornication is about. Right. So premarital sex. But it is interesting that we're making this sexual cohabitation such an issue around homosexual relations and not heterosexual relations. You know, it's not necessarily after the premarital sex of heterosexual couples. Right. So it's just so problematic on so many levels.

John Dehlin [00:11:40] Would that be what? Fornication? But, but you're saying it doesn't have.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:11:44] Right. So especially sexual cohabitation seems to be only mentioned after homosexual relations. I mean, the church has been dealing with people who live together in heterosexual relationships for a long, long time. Right. And, and yeah, they, they can't get baptized, but their sh. Their children sure can. And you know, so there's, there's a huge difference here. And even the, the way that premarital heterosexual relations are being treated versus homosexual.

John Dehlin [00:12:13] Yeah. Relations that's super important. Okay, all right, so, so that's the serious transgressions part. And, and so now and again I just, I'll just repeat. But like really rape and murder and child abuse, you know, it's just, it's mind boggling. Okay, So I don't want to belabor that point. The next major point of this memo is, is the list for apostasy. Now I know this list very well because I was excommunicated for apostasy just, you know, a few months back. And when I was excommunicated, I think I remember only, only four bullets. And so now there are five. And basically what they've done is they've added a bullet to include are in a same gender marriage. Now reporters are like, you know, non LDS reporters immediately were saying to me, well, you know, the church has always been against same gender marriage. That's obvious. Why is this significant? So I'll let Jay start this time answering that question. Jay?

Apostasy, Sin Lists, and Local Leadership

J. Nelson Seawright [00:13:25] Yeah, no, I think this is actually really important because for Mormons, apostasy has always meant that you have wrong beliefs and deliberate sort of malicious wrongs beliefs. So the only specific practice in Mormon history that has inherently been apostate has been polygamy. And that's really different because to be a polygamist is to believe in an alternate priesthood succession. It's to believe a bunch of theology that the LDS Church deliberately rejects. And putting same gender marriage is the only other action alongside polygamy that in a belief free way becomes apostasy is to make it equal to that. To sort of say that marrying someone the same gender as you is inherently to believe a theology that's deeply in opposition to the church. I find that very strange. It's certainly new. This is not what we've always said.

John Dehlin [00:14:17] Why not consistent? Why not just say you can only have sex with one person who is of the opposite sex and it sort of, it fits right along with polygamy, you know.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:14:25] Well, certainly. But I mean, look, people who have lots of illicit sex have never been, never been apostates. It's not apostasy. That's like carnal temptation or weakness or something. That's how Mormons have always framed it. Apostasy is belief in theology and teaching and ideas. It's stuff to do with your mind. And sex is always seen as part of the body. And here we're crossing that and we're saying, no, no, no, no, no. This one particular kind of sexual relationship is so bad that to have this kind of relationship Inherently means you have wrong and uncorrectable ideas. And I think that's a huge demonization.

John Dehlin [00:15:05] And if I'm putting on my apologist hat, I could see myself responding and saying, well, if you're in a same gender marriage, it means you don't understand the plan of salvation that we're supposed to be sealed to an opposite sex person in heaven and become mother and father God. And so there is a theological misunderstanding in that arrangement.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:15:23] Yeah, sure. And if you're addicted to cigarettes, you don't understand the plan of salvation either, because you haven't. I mean, come on. Any sin can have that argument made. To make it apostasy has to mean that we think people have deliberately accepted beliefs that go against the church. And that's not a behavior thing. Traditionally.

John Dehlin [00:15:43] Yeah. And I've heard other people express that concern. Natasha, anything about that that you want to add?

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:15:48] Well, I think it's really problematic because there's no other behavior on this list. So you can murder somebody and not. I mean, you might get excommunicated, but not for apostasy. Right. And that's true for all of these other kind of heinous crimes, but same gender marriage and putting on the apologetic hat. I mean, I know many members who I've worked with who are gay or lesbian, and they believe the teachings of the church and they see it as a choice of their mortal survival to be in a same sex marriage or relationship with the idea that they will still very much either be fixed in the afterlife or something will miraculously happen or they'll be healed or however they frame that for themselves. I'm not saying this is healthy. I'm just saying this is the perspective of a lot of believing LGBT members who try to make the church work while they're trying to integrate their sexual orientation. And so they may be, in their own eyes, sinning as they're having sexual relations with somebody in the same gender, but they have this hope that all will be well in the afterlife and they'll be able to heal and get better. So to now tell those types of people who are already really struggling to survive within our structure that, oh, no, by the way, you are actually an apostate. That's not going to resonate. They're going to be. No, no, no. I believe in the restoration. I believe Joseph Smith was a prophet. Right. I believe in the eternal salvation. I just don't know how to make that work for myself.

John Dehlin [00:17:39] Got it. So the practical concerns, but not belief concerns, right? Yeah. Okay.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:17:45] Survival.

John Dehlin [00:17:46] Yeah. All right. Christy, Any doctor, money, anything? Nat?

Guest [00:17:50] Well, just, I'm just going to get real vulnerable here and just share my reaction to seeing that list and seeing, you know, the, that addition. I've been accused of two of those five things for apostasy because being an apostate is just such a stigma, such a, such a shaming thing to do. So I, you know, I, having experienced that at the same time, when I saw that same gender marriage was included, my heart just broke because I like, I can't imagine what that would be like to have my, you know, my marriage to my spouse be something like, because I'm married, I have two kids and twins on the way and I know a lot of couples. One, in fact, who's, who are, they're pregnant with twins too. And you know they're going to be affected by this, this number, number four. I think that's what they put it in. They just snuck it in there. And I mean, so for my, you know, when I've, when that language from the handbook has been used toward me by my leaders, you know, I feel like, I mean it's not, I mean, yes, it hurts to be called an apostate, but you know, there are things I could do, I could choose. But choosing to say goodbye to my spouse, to say, well, okay, I guess we need to separate to avoid excommunication. I just, I couldn't, I can't ever imagine that. So I'm just, yeah, someone with personal experience with that list, seeing that new one, just I, I can imagine the pain that this is going to cause when others see that.

John Dehlin [00:19:46] Yeah, it kind of goes to that tribal shaming kind of thing. And having, having been through it, there are awful things about it. I won't say it's all awful having been through it, but it certainly feels awful and can be awful and is certainly intended to be awful. Okay, so I do want to correct. I don't know if this is a correction or not, Jay and Natasha, but, but maybe in addition to polygamy and same gender gender marriage, the formally joining another church is a, is a behavior

J. Nelson Seawright [00:20:18] that it doesn't just say that. It says formally join another church and advocate teachings.

John Dehlin [00:20:24] Right, right, right.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:20:24] Okay, that's, it's ideas there too.

John Dehlin [00:20:27] Okay, very good. So really quickly, I think we, we glossed over one really important point. It's that heading when a disciplinary council is mandatory. So what, and we'll start with you, Natasha. Do you have any thoughts on the implications of that heading now coupled with this new item around same gender marriage and what that's going to lead to, again, this is a bit of a softball question, but what do you envision?

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:20:54] Well, it totally ties the hands of local leadership. You know, it doesn't really give them much opportunity for their own inspiration or their own ability to see the situation within their own congregations and see the needs of their members. And I think that, I mean, it's just. For me, this is a real nail in the coffin because I feel like there are so many LGBT members in our church and in our congregations who in spite of being really persecuted and just over and over again, like, I mean, all we've been hearing about is this issue, especially here recently with the United States situation with legal gay marriage. But they still come. They still try to make it work. They're like, okay, maybe times will change, maybe they won't. But there's so much here that's of value to me that it doesn't matter that I'm getting whipped on this side. I'll just really try to engage and appreciate the good things that the church and the gospel gives me, and I'll bring my children and I'll try to, you know, I'll try to make this work, even though it's incredibly painful and it comes at an incredible personal cost. And now they're basically saying, no, you can't even do that. You can't even be among our midst in a general way without having to face a disciplinary court, which in of itself for most people is tremendously traumatic. And with what end? I mean, the church already itself says, yeah, we're not changing orientation here, so we're going to force you to go through these disciplinary courts that I don't know what the end is. Maybe like Christy is saying, we'll terminate your marriage, which I don't know who benefits from that? That's not going to change orientation. So now we're just going to have miserable people or we're not going to terminate the marriage. So now you're going to have to have some type of disciplinary action against you in the church, and that's going to even lessen your status even more than it already has been for the last, you know, 20 years. I'm sorry, I just don't get it.

John Dehlin [00:23:16] Yeah, I think there were progressive Mormons that were sort of hoping, and I was one of these, that, like, what would happen? So often the church just sort of doesn't want to make a big change or apologize. But slowly, now that same sex marriage has been legalized in all 50 states that slowly they would sort of come to wards and slowly incorporate, and then maybe in five or 10 years, slowly get some soft callings and then maybe get some normal callings. And that, you know, within 10, 20 years, you would see same sex married couples being able to just be normal participants in a ward. And that in that way, the church could slowly move into a change that wouldn't be too disruptive. And I think some people feel like this just slams the door shut on that possibility. And they're basically just saying, oh, go ahead.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:24:05] The tragedy that there are a few wards that are actually doing that already and that have made it a real priority to make LGBT members feel welcome in their wards. So now, yeah, welcome. We want you to come. Please come. We're not going to worry about whether or not you have a partner or not. Just come. And, yeah, they're not getting callings. Nobody's getting a calling in those awards, but they're allowed to participate just in the worship. And now they're like, well, yeah, glad you showed up. But now guess what? We need to schedule a disciplinary court.

John Dehlin [00:24:42] I mean, it really is just saying we don't want you.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:24:45] Absolutely. How can you even. It was barely manageable before, is what I'm saying. So how is it going to be manageable now?

John Dehlin [00:24:54] Yeah. All right, Jay, your reactions.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:24:59] Yeah. So I mean, first off, if there's anyone listening to this who's a bishop or branch president and thinking about how to deal with this, let me teach a principle here which is you, as a bishop, don't have to know anything. You don't know. If people tell you that so and so is married, that's gossip. And you don't have to believe that. If there's a marriage invitation, you don't know for sure it's a legal marriage unless someone comes to your office and says, bishop, I want to confess that I'm married, same sex, you don't have to know. That's true. So the word mandatory doesn't have to apply to you. You have that choice. For those bishops who want to make this work, that's your workaround. Just don't know. But for people who do follow the guidance here, I think it's straightforward what the Church wants. The Church is drawing a line. They do not want openly gay and lesbian members. They don't.

John Dehlin [00:25:55] They want people who are cohabitating.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:25:58] Exactly. And we know that most do. Very few don't. And the Church wants those people to be sort of quiet about it. They want them to be indirect about it. They want to draw a line and say that this church is a straight people church. You know, other people can cope, but this church is for straight people. I think the attempt is to lock this down and tie the hands of future generations. The leaders have seen what's happened in the past with other social issues and the church has evolved and they want to try to make it hard. They want to make sort of make the church pay so many costs and draw so many sharp lines that it's impossible to reverse this later on.

John Dehlin [00:26:36] Yeah, all right, Dr. Money.

Guest [00:26:40] Well, I, yeah, along the lines of what Jay said, I think that bishops and stake presidents do have options. I mean, yes, there is the mandatory workaround. I think there's another workaround too. I mean, and that's your conscience. And you know, you can say, I'm not going to do this and yes, it will have consequences. But I've been thinking a lot about what we can change and what we can't change in the church. And I think me as a lay member, I don't have, I can't change much. I mean, I'm going to do what I can in my own sphere with my kids and with my spouse and for my own mental health. But I'm not in a position of leadership. Also, I'm a woman, so there's that. But leaders, I mean, you can make a difference if you dissent as hard, as painful as that would be. And I understand the individual circumstances and that not everybody can do that. And so, and I think that, you know, above all, like I said, you have this other factor here. You know, you've got the handbook, we've also got your conscience. So, you know, I would just urge you, every leader who's listening to this to listen to their conscience. And so, I mean, don't listen to me necessarily, but listen to that and let that guide what you're going to do from here on out, because you do have a bit more influence than me.

John Dehlin [00:28:21] I think that's really healthy and constructive that you guys, that Jay and Christy both immediately go to please leaders, you don't have to do this. And I think that's great. If I'm just being honest, one of the first places my mind went to is, well, now it's going to be like hunting season. It's like now bishops and stake presidents have to go find anytime any member that is aware needs to report. And now any bishop or stake president that needs either scour their roles or who becomes aware now, their hand is forced. And if they're an honest person who wants to follow the letter of the law. They're going to have to go after these people. And I'm envisioning just hundreds and even thousands of wards all over the country over the next several years, sort of going after these couples that are just trying to live happy, healthy, committed marriages. Now, am I over dramatizing things? Does that possibility occur to any of you or, you know, what do you think? Is that gonna happen?

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:29:31] I think you're right. And I think that that has already been happening. I mean, I know very few people that I've worked with that are openly homosexual in a relationship who haven't already been disciplined in some way, shape or form. So this is just gonna exacerbate that. But to add to what Christy and Jason are saying is I want to be very clear and go on the record. I mean, I know I do not have priesthood authority and that I will never trump, even though I have 20 years of clinical experience and can back up all of my opinions with research, I will never trump in the culture of the church, priesthood authority in that regard. But I do just want to go on the record and say, this is harmful. This will harm members of your congregation. And just like people have had to make throughout history ethical decisions, whether it's in their governments or in their wars or in their religions, as to whether or not they're going to follow the harmful practices of their leaders. Each of our leaders now are in that position. And that's a call to arms. From my perspective, I am literally putting that challenge on the table. Are you going to follow the leader blindly or are you going to understand that there's harmful consequences to this? And I think I totally support Dr. Many's statements of conscience.

Survey Data on LGBT Mormon Experiences

John Dehlin [00:31:02] And I'm going to now take off my moderator hat and put on my pundit hat for a second. So Dr. Bradshaw and Renee Gallaher and myself, we surveyed over 1,600 Mormons and former Mormons who identified as LGBT or as same sex attracted. And I actually did a statistical analysis across several factors. So factor one is that one of the choices that's offered to LGBT individuals is to be celibate, which is sort of what one of the things that they're implicitly sort of recommending here.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:31:42] This is also emotionally and spiritually abusive.

John Dehlin [00:31:44] That's what I'm saying. Celibacy, according to our data, was the single worst choice that anyone could make. They could stay or leave the church. They could get married or not. They could, you know, believe in God or not. Like lots of different things they could do come out or not. The single most damaging thing that a person could possibly choose in terms of self esteem, depression, quality of life, sexual identity distress, was being sexually active. And that's, I didn't expect that. It's more important than having a good income. It's more important than being in a committed relationship, actually, it's more important than believing in God. It's more important than being active or not. Being sexually active was the single most important factor I could find that would influence quality of life.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:32:36] And so, and let's be careful about that, John, because it's not just sexually active, it's romantically active.

John Dehlin [00:32:42] No, no, no. Well, I'm, I'm telling you, the data I looked at being sexually active in and of itself was extremely important. Now, now being in a committed, committed, sexually active relationship was the optimum choice. But I don't think, I think it's important to emphasize that we are sexual beings and that many of us, for many of us, just simply being sexually active is actually an essential component to mental health. I would also add that being in a committed, loving relationship, it seems to be the best way to do that according to our data. But celibacy had quality of life ratings according to our study, worse than having lupus. So basically, if you are expecting your members to be celibate, you're basically saying suffer with a condition that people you know suffer deeply about suffer worse than that. And to be honest, mixed orientation marriages, which is the only other option for LGBT Mormons, which is where a gay or lesbian or bisexual person marries, in many cases a heterosexual person that had only slightly better outcomes, but still very dismal. So we really are inflicting egregious suffering and misery on the members when we expect them to be either celibate or in a mixed orientation marriage. And the flip side of that is if you picked one category of participant in my study that showed healthy quality of life, healthy sexual identity, healthy self esteem and minimal depression. Who was it? It was people in committed, loving, married, legal, same sex relationships. So we're basically flipping the Book of Mormon mandate that man is that he might have joy. We're basically flipping that and saying joy for the straight people, misery and suffering for you who happens to be lgbt. And so I just have to say, Natasha, I can back up what you say, not just with the anecdote, but with the largest study ever conducted on the health and well being of LGBT Mormons and saying that this is going to significantly harm people.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:35:06] Yeah, and I'm sorry, because I just want to clarify really fast, I wasn't saying that the sexual. I totally agree with you about the sexual celibacy piece. What I'm saying is that the church isn't asking for just sexual celibacy. The church is asking for romantic celibacy. Right. So you can't even like have a romantic interest or hold hands or kiss or any of the things that even single heterosexual members are allowed to do prior to marriage?

John Dehlin [00:35:33] Well, I don't know. I don't know. Does this say that it says sexual cohabitation?

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:35:39] Well, maybe not for the mandatory discipline, but I just know that that's the expectation for gay members in our church is that they do not want, especially like from BYU protocol and honor codes and all kinds of documents in those areas. They do not want any type of romantic expression of any LGBT same sex attraction, as they would call it. So it takes it to a whole nother level of you can't even have that romantic companionship, even if you like. I've had couples who commit to not having sex, but they're still together, but they're trying to keep the law of chastity. But even that would be frowned upon by our church because they're allowing for that romance to exist.

John Dehlin [00:36:21] James, you want to say something?

J. Nelson Seawright [00:36:22] Just following up on that really quickly. I know dozens of people who've gone through disciplinary councils because of just romantic relationships. So this does happen too, even though it's not in the handbook. But the other thing I wanted to say, the other side of this, if there's LGBT people listening to this who might be affected by this, and you're thinking, now you're going to be excommunicated, that's really not the end of the world. It's going to feel like it in the moment. But, you know, I've gone through a separation from the church and I know a couple dozen people that I've talked with a lot who've been excommunicated for same sex relationships. And the fact of the matter is that that is not going to be as bad as you think it is. It's not nice, it's not a nice thing to do, but life on the other end is okay. And this does not take away from you your identity. It doesn't even mean you stop being a Mormon if you don't want to. It just means that one particular organization takes your name off and we have to cope with that.

John Dehlin [00:37:24] Yeah, okay. Very, very good. I'm going to jump back to something that we've kind of already covered a little bit But I just want to again play devil's advocate for a second. Well, really quickly, do we agree that it could be not only a tragedy to be inflicting disciplinary councils on all these people, but also damaging for the church's public relations and for just the health of its membership for the church to be like open hunting disciplinary council season on legally married people. Do we agree that that's just not good for anyone?

Institutional Consequences and Church Discipline

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:38:06] Oh my gosh, I sure hope so. And I sure hope that they feel the wrath. I mean, I hope that we start getting football teams that don't want to play byu. I hope that we start getting speakers that don't want to speak at our conferences. I hope that there's all kinds of social justice ramifications towards us for this really awful behavior.

John Dehlin [00:38:27] And I hope that every disciplinary council that gets held becomes a media circus, you know, like.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:38:35] But the Church wants that. I mean, you know, I think that the kinds of consequences we're talking about here are not a downside. The Church is losing its liberal and soft members. I mean, the people that they see as peripheral members, they've decided to write off, more or less, I think. And I think what they're doing is they're trying to harden identity boundaries. They're trying to make the costs of being Mormon higher so that people who are committed will stay high cost religions retain a lot better than lower cost religions and increasing the cost of the identity, which this will certainly do, will help with retention of core members. So I think there' swhether this is explicitly thought through or not. I think there's a pretty good chance that there's a rational strategy on the part of the church to cause exactly these sorts of conflicts and that that's a survival strategy.

John Dehlin [00:39:25] And I've actually been told by sort unnamed inside sources that that's actually been said that this is a separating the wheat from the tares. This is a separating the sheep from the goats. That the Brethren are actually, that's part of their motivation. They want the progressives to leave. They want to clean house and reinforce. However, you know, we all know Armand Moss and Angel, you know, angel, the Beehive or whatever the book is that talks about retrenchment and assimilation. And we know that there's a tension there and that there is a point where the Brethren will realize they're doing too much harm, whether it's with polygamy or blacks, and they have to eventually cave. So, Jay, you'd acknowledge that there's going to be a limit to that, right?

J. Nelson Seawright [00:40:12] Well, Maybe. I mean, this is history, not physics. Right. It's social sociology. The people who did things in the past may have different priorities and different agendas and different coalitions than the people today. The coalition that exists between the church and Catholics and the evangelical right gives the church a lot of COVID They can take a lot more costs than they could in the past when Mormons were much more isolated. I mean, there's never been one of these episodes where the church had the kind of broad coalition they have now. And so I think these costs are polarizing, but they're much more sustainable. And it's entirely possible that this won't hit a limit in the same way things have in the past when the church was more alone.

John Dehlin [00:40:53] Yeah, some people like to think the church is going to become more progressive over time. But Jay, you've made the argument to me elsewhere that you think the church is going to become. There's good evidence from the social science research that the church is going to become more conservative over time. Is that your.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:41:10] Yes, that's right. I mean, this is certainly, for example, what we see with the Catholic Church in a lot of countries around the world. When churches start losing ground when their membership is no longer growing or, but maybe shrinking as a percentage. One thing that means is that the liberalizing pressures within the community tend to bleed out. And so the people who stay behind are the people who like the especially hardcore polarized version of the religion, which gives incentives for the church to sell a harder core version of that message, which in turn pushes anyone who's moderate relative to the new message to leave. And so this can be a self reinforcing spiral where a church stops growth and instead becomes sort of retrenched and entrenched. And that's a very real possibility for Mormonism right now.

John Dehlin [00:41:59] Yeah. And if you look at who they're calling as apostles, whether it's Bednar or Cook or whatever, I just don't think they're signaling with their choices that, you know, that a progressive new horizon awaits us. It just doesn't seem to be looking good in that regard. One other quick point and then we'll move to the children, because I think that's what's really causing the most sadness and grief. I wonder if we commit a bit of a logical fallacy when we. And this is going to our original point, you know how they list murder and rape and sexual abuse and then they have sexual cohabitation or homosexual relationships. I think it would be unfair and probably a fallacy to say that that Means that because they're all in the same sentence, that the church equates them all. And I could hear an apologist saying, certainly sexual abuse and murder and rape are worse in the church's eyes, but it's just listing things that reach that threshold of a council being necessary, and it's unfair to say that the church is putting all those on the same level. Any response to that?

Guest [00:43:14] Okay, yeah, I mean, maybe, maybe, but I'm just thinking of a gay kid or a gay teenager. They're not going to understand that that's a logical fallacy. And if you try to get an apologist to try to convince them of that, is that really going to change their emotions and their feelings of worthlessness and shame? No, I don't think so. So that's where it's still the. To me, though, yeah, I do see your point.

John Dehlin [00:43:39] Okay.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:43:40] Plus, we suck at this. This is like our worst history, especially around sexuality. Right. Because it's the sin next to murder. And I've got teenagers in my office, in and out all the flipping time telling me that the sin next to murder is the fact that they're masturbating once a month.

John Dehlin [00:43:55] Right, Right.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:43:56] So we have no capacity within Mormonism to even have a correct spectrum of criminal behavior versus, like, normative behavior that we have expectations we shouldn't engage in.

Guest [00:44:06] Yeah, yeah, I saw that at BYU's counseling center, too. Absolutely.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:44:10] Well, and this paragraph is a paragraph that historically has often been read at disciplinary councils where they'll break it out and someone who's done one of these things will have it read to them so that they can hear that, you know, having sex with their fiance is pretty much on the same list as murdering someone. So these equivalences aren't, you know, exactly emphasized, but they are felt.

John Dehlin [00:44:33] Yeah. Yeah. So even if technically, logically, Brian Hales could make the argument that. That they're not equating all these things as equal in the lived reality of most members. That's. That's how it is often interpreted to significant damage. Do we agree?

J. Nelson Seawright [00:44:50] Yeah. People read this book like a legal code, and it isn't.

John Dehlin [00:44:53] Yeah, it's.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:44:54] It's really just, you know, it's just some stuff. People will read this however they read it.

John Dehlin [00:44:59] Yeah. Okay, let's jump to the children. And I'm going to do something fun, I think, and I hope it. It's. It's still efficient. It's not fun, but it's. I think it could be effective. I'm going to just start reading the text and I want you to stop me when you have a concern or an issue and we'll just. And I, and I, I don't want to go overboard on this. Right. So, so don't be too nitpicky. But when I read something that's just really alarming to you, say stop and we'll talk about it. And, you know, we've got about you know, 15 to 20 minutes left, so we, we want to kind of measure out our time to hit all the important points. So I'll just start going, and then we'll. We'll see how this goes. So children of a. You guys say stop when you've got a big problem. Okay. Children of a parent living in a same gender relationship.

Policy Details for Children of Same-Sex Couples

Guest [00:45:57] Stop.

John Dehlin [00:45:57] Okay, go.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:45:59] I mean, what other relationship of parents do we even have these kinds of policies for? I mean, do we have a paragraph that starts with children of a parent living in a single parent home? Do we have children of a parent living in an adopted home? Do we have children of a parent living in a home where they're being raised by foster parents or grandparents or whoever else flippant is raising them? This is unprecedented.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:46:28] Well, almost unprecedented. Like there's something like this for children in a polygamous home.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:46:33] Okay. Yes. Our wonderful relationship.

John Dehlin [00:46:36] And that's, that's probably something that we need to discuss at some point. So some people are equating this to a policy, our polygamy policy. Do you want to talk about that really quick, Jay?

J. Nelson Seawright [00:46:49] Yeah. So, I mean, starting as I understand it, starting in the 1990s, we had essentially these same policies for children raised in polygamy because there was a concern that children in polygamous families might get baptized and take advantage of church ordinances while secretly believing the polygamous doctrines and intending to live that lifestyle. So there's some sort of separation. And these policies seem to be modeled directly on what the current standard is for polygamous families. Kids.

John Dehlin [00:47:17] Okay, and is that good or bad or just. It is what it is?

J. Nelson Seawright [00:47:21] I don't know. I mean, how could it be good?

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:47:23] It's ridiculous.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:47:25] It's really strange to me. I mean, polygamy in Mormonism is another religion. It's another faith tradition within our faith family. Same sex marriage is not a religion. It's a very strange equation.

John Dehlin [00:47:39] Okay, got it. Now, some people are making issue with the fact that they're using the language same gender relationships instead of same sex relationships. Do either of you have anything to say about that?

Guest [00:47:51] I think it's because they don't want to Say sex.

John Dehlin [00:47:54] That's just the word.

Guest [00:47:56] That is because sex. Honestly, guys. Because sex and gender are so different. And. Yeah, I think it's just. I don't want to say sex, but it's also.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:48:05] There are implications for gendered issues. I mean, there's transgender members who. I don't think the church even has a clue as to how to start dealing with that, you know, with that population.

John Dehlin [00:48:19] But would you prefer they use same sex instead of same gender? Is it more accurate?

J. Nelson Seawright [00:48:24] You know, same gender is insane. I mean, it's an escape clause. Like I could go marry a guy and I could say I have a different gender identity than my husband. Like, you know, he's a butch and I'm not or something. And then we'd be cutting.

Guest [00:48:37] Yeah,

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:48:41] I think that they care about penis on penis, vagina and vagina. That's what they care about. And that same sex.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:48:49] Yeah, yeah, I think that's right. And they don't even want to think about the fact that not everybody fits in one of the two sexes.

John Dehlin [00:48:55] Yeah. And most would probably just say they don't even really know the difference between sex and gender.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:49:00] Agreed.

John Dehlin [00:49:01] Yeah.

Guest [00:49:02] Yeah.

John Dehlin [00:49:02] Okay. All right. So I just wanted to highlight.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:49:07] Can I just quickly say something else about this clause you've already read, please? So there's some. I can't tell if this is worded carefully or not. So a natural child of a parent living in a same gender relationship. I'm worried about whether this means. What if the child doesn't live with those parents? Does that apply? Is living in the same gender relationship, does that attach to the parent or to the child? Because if it attaches to the child, you could end up with situations where your parents divorced when you were one and your dad goes off and marries a guy and you've never seen him in your life and you're excluded, even though you and your family you live with are totally normal Mormons.

John Dehlin [00:49:46] Yeah. You can be totally estranged. You could be estranged.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:49:49] You could be someone you've never met in your life. And it might apply if living in a same gender relationship attaches to parent. This is a terrible policy, but a much less terrible policy if living attaches to the child than to the parent.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:50:04] I'm guessing it's going to attach to the child because that's probably what they're going to. I think there's news about some type of statement, clarification. Right. That they're going to come out with and they're probably going to clarify that kind of thing. The problem that. Okay. So here's the scenario that just drives me mad. Back when I was at BYU, which wasn't that long ago, let's say 25 years ago, the official status on the church was marry in a mixed orientation marriage. That means people in their 40s and 50s and 60s and definitely above were given that type of counsel if they went to their ecclesiastical leaders and told them that they had same sex attraction issues. Many of those marriages, like John just pointed out with his research, have not survived.

John Dehlin [00:50:50] Yeah, it's about a 70% failure rate.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:50:52] Right. So many of those marriages have not survived, which means now those children, you know, they've had children, they've tried to survive. They're usually married for about 10 to 20 years in my experience because they've desperately tried to make this Mormon thing work now and many times. These are very, very loving couples. Like they've been through hell and back together. They are, they advocate for each other, they're very loving towards each other, they're co parenting extremely well. So but now the gay spouse has gone off and is cohabitating or has married a same gender, same sex person. The straight spouse has remarried as well and they're sharing custody. That is a very common scenario in our current demographics of our church today. And so it's not going to matter because the, whether it's attached to the child or the parent, the child is living in both homes.

John Dehlin [00:51:48] Yeah, yeah.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:51:52] But I sort of want to encourage again, any leaders who are listening to remember that this isn't a legal document and they can read this different ways. One possible way of reading this. Yeah. Certainly ignore it. I think that's the best choice of all. Or resign. But if you don't want to do those things, here's another sort of lesson dramatic option which is to read this as saying only that it applies to children who live solely with parents who live in a same sex relationship. That would avoid it for most relevant children.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:52:25] Yeah. Which is still heinous. But.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:52:27] It's still heinous. But again, reducing harm is really important here.

John Dehlin [00:52:31] Okay, good. All right, so now I'm going to read now that we've gotten past the title. All right, I'll go to the next. Oh, it's good, it's good.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:52:40] Hey John, I'm picky. That's good.

John Dehlin [00:52:41] No, it's good, it's good. A natural or adopted child of a parent living in a same gender relationship, whether the couple is married or cohabitating, may not receive a name and a blessing. Any, any objections there?

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:53:03] Other than it's Just plain awful that I want to throw up in my mouth right now. I don't know. No, that's the thing.

John Dehlin [00:53:08] You're supposed to jump in.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:53:10] Okay, well I'm throwing up in my mouth right now.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:53:12] You're going to punish babies.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:53:16] I think this is really about punishing the parents.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:53:19] Well, I mean, of course it is, but.

Guest [00:53:21] Well, and discouraging youth from getting into gay marriages. Yeah. Because you wouldn't want that for your child. This is horrible.

John Dehlin [00:53:29] Why, Natasha, why are you throwing up in your mouth?

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:53:33] I just, I mean I have been to so many baby blessings where the parent isn't married, it's a teenage parent. It's like the parents aren't even around, they've abandoned their child. And here's people like we already know from the research that quite frankly, same same sex parents are doing a better job than the rest of us in many ways.

John Dehlin [00:53:59] Yeah.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:54:00] And I think that's partly because, I mean you've really got to want to be a parent. Right. Whereas the rest of us have just been able to do it whether we want to or not. And so they're very dedicated parents, they're offering wonderful homes to all kinds of children and we're going to start the discipline in disciplining. I mean this isn't even like the whole protective measures that they're saying, oh well, you know, you don't want to have a child be baptized or ordained because then you know, they're held accountable.

John Dehlin [00:54:31] It's confusing.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:54:32] Blessings are not even about that. It's not even a saving ordinance. It's a ritual in our, it's a ritual about bringing this child, giving them a name, which I think everybody has the right to do and welcoming them into the congregation that's going to be their ward family. And we can't even do that for a baby. For this type of baby. Every other flippin baby we can,

J. Nelson Seawright [00:55:02] the baby doesn't know. Right. So if we think about it, who is this actually targeting? And for the most part, I don't know if you're in a same sex marriage, you're comfortable with a certain amount of distance with the church. I think that's clear. So this isn't necessarily punishing you, it's punishing probably extended family members. Right. It's your fam, it's your parents, it's your sibling, it's all the other people who want to see this baby be blessed who don't get to.

John Dehlin [00:55:30] But it's basically just saying we don't want even the babies here. Like none of Them. It's almost like vermin. It's sort of like a big fu. It's just like, if you're in this deal, just leave. We don't want you even from the beginning, Right?

J. Nelson Seawright [00:55:46] Not even in the database.

John Dehlin [00:55:48] Yeah, we don't want to have any attachments to you. Suffer the children to get the heck out. Right.

Guest [00:55:57] Well, that may be the message, but when I read it, they said they may not receive a name and a blessing. I mean, this is just more my personality. But I was thinking, well, says who? Like, you can't control that these people can give names and blessings to babies. So. Right. That might have been the message. But I mean, I just. I read it because, you know, I can be a bit, you know, nonconformist, but that, like, you know, it's time for us to claim the power that we have and to just say, okay, that's one opinion, but I'm not going to do that.

John Dehlin [00:56:31] Yeah, yeah, yeah, but I mean, it really is just saying, get out. We don't want you. I mean, it's. People are interpreting this as just being really insulting and just. Just sort of just. Yeah, okay, we'll keep going. A natural or adopted child of a parent living in a same gender relationship, whether the couple is married or cohabitating, may be baptized and confirmed, ordained, or recommended for missionary service only as follows. So a mission president or stake president may request approval from the Office of the First Presidency to baptize and confirm, ordain or recommend missionary service for a child of a parent who has lived or is living in a same gender relationship when he is satisfied by personal interviews that both of the following requirements are met.

First Presidency Involvement and Policy Implications

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:57:24] Okay, so stop for a minute.

John Dehlin [00:57:25] Okay.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:57:26] Because the Office of the First Presidency, I mean, that's three people. Do they realize how many LGBT members there are in the church? Of course. After this policy, you know, it may be reasonable to think that the First Presidency can handle this type of demand. But, like, that sounds like. I mean, that sounds really. How is that even going to be a sustainable practice?

J. Nelson Seawright [00:57:52] How are they going to run a lot of things through the Office of the First Presidency? This is not unusual. I mean, anyone who's left the church and wants to rejoin, anyone who's been excommunicated and wants blessings restored, cancellations of temple ceilings, There's a ton of different stuff that runs through the office.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:58:11] So the office must mean, like a bunch of.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:58:14] The office includes staff, certainly. And an auto pen and all those great things.

John Dehlin [00:58:19] I think you guys are lacking imagination. What I envision is A tinder like app that President Monson has. And as he's sitting up for General Conference, he can swipe left or right, depending on if he wants the child to be baptized or be a missionary. Swipe left if you don't, Swipe right if you want. What do you think? Make it really efficient.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:58:40] Well, if there are no sort of bones of pigeons that you could toss instead.

John Dehlin [00:58:46] I'm sorry. I'm trying to be funny. I don't mean to be.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:58:49] I guess I was too. I mean, I don't think there's any way that there could be sort of deep personal thought that goes into these decisions, that's for sure.

John Dehlin [00:58:57] No, I mean, President Monson probably can't even tie his shoes. How in the world is the office of the First Presidency going to personally approve all these things? It's crazy that it has to personally approve all the missionary assignments and divorce temple sealing annulments. Right.

J. Nelson Seawright [00:59:15] And all the people who've ever been on sort of disfellowshipped and need a calling and all those things. Yeah.

John Dehlin [00:59:21] And what that's got to mean is there's got to be some list like the strengthening the Members Committee list, and they're going to check to see who the parents are and if there are any red flags and you know, that sort of thing. Right. I mean, what else could it be? Why would they have it go to the First Presidency? I mean, what are they thinking? Anyone? Guess

J. Nelson Seawright [00:59:40] they want to scare people. I think they want to scare people.

Natasha Helfer Parker [00:59:44] And it's so demeaning to the. To the local leaders. I mean, after. Especially after the debacle with you and Kate, you know, about. Oh, all the, all the powers with the local leadership. But I mean, this is not being allowed to be handled by the local leadership at all. They're mandating disciplinary councils. They're saying you can only allow for this if you go through this huge process where we are involved. I mean, it's a huge shift away from local leadership authority.

John Dehlin [01:00:19] Yeah, that's huge. I agree.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:00:20] I don't know. I almost feel like that's kind to the local leaders rather than putting them in a position where they sort of have to guess what the higher reps want them to do and try to do that to just explicitly tell them. It seems nicer when. When. When the authority flows top down.

John Dehlin [01:00:37] Okay, let's keep going. Condition number one. Now remember, both of these requirements need to be met, so stop me when you've got a big problem. Condition number one, the child accepts and is committed to live the teachings and doctrine of the church and specifically disavows the practice of same gender cohabitation and marriage.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:01:05] Okay, well, I. Stop, stop, stop, stop. I mean, like there's five stops in there.

John Dehlin [01:01:08] Okay, well what's wrong?

J. Nelson Seawright [01:01:10] And another five.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:01:14] Well, first of all, one of the things that I think the spokesperson, the PR person said yesterday was something about how we don't want children who are so young and developmentally unable to make these types of decisions to have to make these types of decisions. But what the hell are we doing with the rest of the eight year olds in the church? So why are we waiting for these particular children who are going to be so confused and aren't developmentally at a point where they can commit themselves to an entire religion to wait until their 18, although it doesn't say that here, so we'll have to talk about that. But anyway, I just think that's total, total doublespeak as far as, I mean, if we just want to make it like a blanket thing, like let's just all wait till we're adults to commit to the church at the level that we do when we're eight,

Guest [01:02:09] and then

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:02:09] this whole specifically disavows the practice. Hasn't the church told us that we can actually be, have a position towards pro gay marriage and not have disciplinary action be against us as long as we're not public about it? So you can have a, you can have a kind of like laissez faire attitude about it. Oh yeah, well, I think that's politically okay for me to have that belief. But if it's my own parents who lived it and did it and supported me and raised me and loved me in that system, then I have to disavow it. I mean, that's traumatic. That's a traumatic request.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:02:53] Yeah, I mean, it is, it is a, you know, it's written in terms of disavowing a practice and a system. But yeah, that's implicitly asking these kids, explicitly asking these kids to disavow their parents. Right. Which is the same thing we ask of people who come out of polygamous backgrounds. And I mean, I can see that the 18 versus 8 thing as saying, you know, most kids when they're baptized, don't disavow their families to do it. So that seems a serious thing to ask an 8 year old to do. So I can see that and I appreciate that they're not asking 8 year olds to disavow their parents. That would be worse. But asking anyone to disavow their parents. Seems odd. I mean, if your parents weren't Mormon and you become a Mormon, you don't have to disavow their religion. We don't ask you to do that.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:03:43] No, we just ask you to abandon

J. Nelson Seawright [01:03:44] them and not invite them to your wedding and anything like that. I agree there are a lot of things we ask, but we don't ask you to write a written statement about how evil Episcopalianism is or anything.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:03:56] Exactly, exactly. And that's psychologically traumatic because there's a natural loyalty that we have to our parents. I mean, we already know through the legal system that it's very difficult and actually unethical in many cases to ask a child to like, witness or go against a parent in testimony or things of that nature. And yet that's what we're asking for from these children. And it totally depletes the authority of the parent, which is that what we're in the business of doing.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:04:29] Well, I think what we're really in the business of doing here is deterring people who might, because of their personal background, have a favorable outlook towards same sex marriage from becoming Latter Day Saints. I think that's what this is about.

Guest [01:04:41] Me too. I think that's exactly what it's about. Breaks my heart. Yep.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:04:52] It's about hardening that identity line and making it harder to be an LGBT friendly ally and a Mormon.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:05:03] Well, and for some people, because some kids will actually do this, they'll take the religion seriously enough that they'll do it and then it'll damage their relationship with their parents, which is what we see all the time already with people who doubt or people who leave the church or people who are doing something that isn't according to the precepts of the church, that parent child relationships are damaged because the child is taught not to respect the parent.

John Dehlin [01:05:29] Yeah. It just seems ugly. What does that disavowal look like? Is there going to be an oath? You know?

J. Nelson Seawright [01:05:36] Well, it isn't written down, which means it varies based on your leader. So if you live in Berkeley, then you're great. And if you live somewhere else, she might have to, you know, stand up in priesthood meeting and make a statement or something.

John Dehlin [01:05:49] Yeah. So something I want to tie back to the, to the opening part. Okay. Baptism. So we've already got baby's blessings. We've got baptism, confirmation, ordination, or missionary service. Okay. So in theory, let's just say that there's this mother raising a divorced mother who's raising a bunch of kids. You know, her husband came out as Gay and just said, this isn't working. He went off and got, you know, legally same sex married. Now we've got kids in the system who it's like, oh, I'm almost eight, sorry Johnny, you can't get baptized. Oh, you know, sorry, Sally, no baptism for you. Oh, you know, time for priesthood. Okay. Johnny's got all his buddies, he's been in Sunday school with all his buddies, are advancing to the priesthood. And now Johnny isn't going to be able to be ordained or pass a sacrament. So he sits in deacons quorum, but he's a second class member. Like, what in the world is that going to be like for the children?

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:06:58] This is why, Emily, do we not have any brains where people are making these types of decisions? Are there no mental health counselors in any of our leadership capacities that can kind of come to these types of very simple conclusions? And I think this is what also the media is not completely understanding about our culture because you know, a Catholic person, if they're not confirmed, it's not really going to affect how they live out their Catholic life with their peers. In Mormonism, it affects everything, every ritual. It affects whether or not they can give a talk in sacrament. It affects whether or not they can go to the temple trip with their friends. It affects whether or not they can, like you said, pass the sacrament or even take the sacrament. I mean, we allow guests to take the sacrament, we're not stopping them from doing it. But really it's a covenant that you make as a member of the church. It's an ordinance. You're not even really supposed to really take the sacrament if you're not a member. It affects callings and leadership positions and how you're perceived in seminary and adolescence isn't hard enough.

John Dehlin [01:08:03] Yeah, my kids just having acne is catastrophic. Right? A bad hair day can be cataclysmic. Sort of being unbaptized or not having the priesthood, not being able to go to the temple, like what's that going to be like for a kid? Christy, what do you think?

Guest [01:08:25] I think it's going to be devastating. And again, back to what I've been saying about the worthlessness and the shame that these kids are going to carry with them is something that, that no kid deserves, no adult needs either. And these kids, they grow up, they become parents, they have kids and they have to carry this with them. And I can't disagree with that more. And I'm sorry, John, I'm going to interrupt because I actually have to go and let me Just say yes, yes, say one word about self care. Because I know this has been a devastating weekend. And I would just suggest for people who are feeling a bit overwhelmed, nauseous, who are just, you know, at the brink to, yes, to have some self care planned. I'm going actually to the mountains, you know, an hour drive up and just to spend some time with my kids and my husband. And I'm gonna unplug from the Mormon news for a bit and just center myself and focus on what's important, you know, my relationships. And I'm just. Yes, I mean, this is devastating and at the same time it's, you know, you have options to take a break from the constant face of Facebook, Twitter updates, everything that's going on. It can wreak havoc on your mental health.

Personal Reactions and Emotional Impact

John Dehlin [01:10:07] And three quick things. It's important people realize that this is a deliberate decision you made. You warned me about this beforehand and it's not some emotional reaction of being overwhelmed. And it's an important message you're sharing and we've loved your participation so far and look forward to coming back. So real quick, Dr. Money, how do people get a hold of you if they want you to be their therapist or coach?

Guest [01:10:33] Yeah, I do Skype sessions to my just doctormoney.com I've had a lot of sessions today and actually it's been great. A lot of Mormons who are just processing through this and I love every minute of it. And at the same time, you know, it's time to take a break.

John Dehlin [01:10:56] Okay. All right.

Guest [01:10:56] Yeah, but it's been a plan, a planned break, so. No, this is. You're right. I'm glad you clarified that. This isn't an overwhelming reaction. It's a planned self care to unplug.

John Dehlin [01:11:08] All right, Christy, well, you're excused. Have fun. Thanks for joining us. And we're going to want you back. Okay.

Guest [01:11:12] All right, thanks.

John Dehlin [01:11:13] Thanks, Christie. Okay. All right, take care. Okay, so I still want to continue. Christy makes a good point about self care, but we're not done. So this is going to be devastating to the children. You know, again, I think it's almost a non starter. Just a really quick question though, sorry.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:11:34] I wanted to talk about the part with the children, if that's okay.

John Dehlin [01:11:36] Please, Jay, go ahead.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:11:38] I mean, I agree completely that this is a totally devastating idea. And the saving grace here is that I sincerely expect that it will be almost totally not implemented. I mean, again, I'm going to come back to these. These aren't laws. This isn't government policy. These are Statements run in a book that nobody really knows how to read. So we have things in the temple recommend interview that already nobody takes seriously. Do you have a friend who might be apostate or something? Then you shouldn't have a temple recommend. Except nobody takes that question at face value. I confidently predict that this will be treated the same way. There will be workarounds that people find for almost single kid who falls in this category because otherwise people wouldn't be able to live with themselves.

John Dehlin [01:12:22] Yeah, well, that may or may not be true.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:12:28] I'm pretty sure we are a church that's not very good at being at enforcing these things in a uniform way. And this one in particular, you're asking bishops to go shatter the dreams of teenagers and stuff. I just don't think bishops want to do that.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:12:45] I think this is where we'll see a lot of the bishop roulette kind of, you know, I guess process that we've seen with a lot of different issues where some people will be very OCD and strident and rigid and how they preside and others will be very open and kind of, you know, flexible. Because we see that with all kinds of things currently that I think are extremely damaging to our teenagers.

John Dehlin [01:13:10] Well, that'll be interesting. And Jay, I think you, you certainly have to be right to some degree because right now I know, I know cohabitating, you know, gay men that like serve in the church and have callings and the bishop doesn't care like, you know, I. So that's got to be true on some level, but it probably won't be true on other levels. Right. It'll just kind of depend.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:13:37] I think that's probably right, I guess. I mean, I say, you know, I think it mostly won't be implemented because I really think most people in Mormonism are good people and when they have to sit down face to face with an 8 year old or a 10 year old or an 18 year old and say, oh no, I'm sorry, you have the wrong kind of parents. I think that just isn't going to sit well and it shouldn't. And I'm glad that people are humane and that they won't follow a book over the person in front of them most of the time.

John Dehlin [01:14:02] Yeah, well that'll be interesting. One thing that occurs to me just as we're talking about the pain of the children. I imagine this is going to put really tremendous pressure on again, a mixed orientation marriage, couple or a divorced family where the gay or lesbian person is considering marriage. I just have to Think that one of the effects of this is to basically have that, let's just say divorced gay man as he's thinking about cohabitating and maybe even marrying the love of his life. I could see him saying, I can't do this to my children. I'm going to either hide and live sort of in more secrecy or just deny myself a loving, committed relationship because I can't do it to my kids. Can you guys imagine that?

J. Nelson Seawright [01:14:58] Surely it will happen. Yeah, I mean, I don't know. I hope not much, but definitely that will happen.

John Dehlin [01:15:06] Natasha, what do you think?

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:15:09] Yeah, I don't know what will happen. I think I'm kind of back on this comment of self care that Christy was talking about. And I think what's really so tragic, and this is where it gets very personal. Oh, I think. I'm so sorry. I don't know why that happened. Where it gets very personal for me is that about a year and a half ago, we had to make a decision to, as a family, to take a sabbatical from church, which had nothing really to do with my beliefs or how I value Mormonism, but really just to protect a child of ours. And that has, in effect, ruined the relationship that my children can have with Mormonism. And so I just see this really forcing the hand of a lot of families to really have to decide what's in the best interest of my child. And is this a safe space? And I just think that's just horrendous that a church would put us in that position where we have to choose the safety of our children or whether or not we can attend on a certain. On a weekly basis.

John Dehlin [01:16:22] Yeah.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:16:24] I think it's certainly the case that this policy serves as an invitation for every single member who cares about this issue to reconsider their relationship to the church. And I think there's a tendency to say for dissidents to look at this and say, how could you live with the church that does this? Or for liberals to say, no, it's about coping and finding your peace with this. And I want to say you don't have an obligation to take either of those views. If you're troubled by this statement, I want to encourage you to live with that trouble and to find out whether this is something you can live with or whether this is something that breaks your relationship with the church, because either of those outcomes is legitimate. I mean, it is completely fair to say I can't live with a church that does this, but it's also completely fair to say there's a million things about the church I love and I'm going to find an angle on this and I want to encourage people who are worried about this to leave that open and feel what feels and seems right to them.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:17:29] I totally second that. And I would just add that third option that we're doing, which is just kind of taking a break and exploring. Like we're not making any final decisions, but in the process, our children are growing up, you know, and they're having a very different relationship with Mormonism than I was able to have.

John Dehlin [01:17:48] Yeah, yeah, okay, that's fair. All right, so we'll just go to the last part of this and then any, any final analysis we want to do. And it's basically just says the child is of legal age and does not live with a parent who has lived or currently lives in the same gender, cohabitation, relationship or marriage. Is there anything about that that's worth expressing frustration over?

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:18:18] Well, that's where my 18 year old came in. I was looking for the number 18 earlier. But yeah, so basically we're not allowing this decision to even be made at all during their being a minor in this type of home. So that means that, yes, there's no really room according to this, for them to participate in Mormonism like their peers would, regardless of their own behavior. Right. And so I guess what makes me sick about this is that it goes against what I feel is a huge part of Mormon doctrine, which is this idea that we're not punished for Adam's transgression. Right. I mean, this is the whole reason why Mormonism is so different from a lot of Christianity is. Or one of the reasons is that were not seen as being punished for somebody else's sins or perceived sins or whatever that may be. So now the child's entire developmental stage and arena with them with Mormonism is tainted by a decision that parents are making. And then also even after legal age, I mean, a lot of children don't move out when they're 18. A lot of children go back and forth, you know, into their parents homes as they go to college and come back for summer vacation. A lot of, especially in other countries, again, this is oftentimes very USA centric, but I know that in the country where my mother came from, Argentina, there's a lot of people who really, it's the norm to live with your parents until you get married. There's not this idea that we go off and have our own apartments. You just kind of coexist. I mean, there's not really a Lot of the money for that or the resources for people to live in those types of situations where they just get to go off and live by themselves. So again, it's that you've got to make that break at a very early age. And just because you're of legal age doesn't mean that you're necessarily developmentally ready to leave your home or that it, it's even necessary for you to do so. It's just so problematic on so many different levels. I don't even, I can't even keep my thoughts straight anymore.

John Dehlin [01:20:28] Yeah, it's easy to get flooded with all this, isn't it?

J. Nelson Seawright [01:20:33] Can I point out something? I think there's, I hope, unintended bit of extra ugliness in this last phrase, which is, if you read it carefully, the stigma here doesn't attach to a particular kind of relationship, but in fact to a kind of person. Because even if your parent gets out of the same sex relationship and stops doing it, this clause doesn't go away. A parent who has ever done this ever disqualifies their children.

John Dehlin [01:21:02] Ugh, I didn't even notice that.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:21:04] Exactly.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:21:04] And I hope that this is something that can be clarified because that's a degree of creating a stigmatized class out of gay and lesbian people that the rest of this policy doesn't even reach. There's no repentance here. Yeah.

John Dehlin [01:21:18] What if they have repented and, and renounced it? It's still, which even.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:21:25] That is awful that we're even having to use that language.

John Dehlin [01:21:29] Yeah, of course, I know, I know.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:21:32] I don't think there's any repentance. That's not a concept I would use. But in their framework, someone who gives something up, I mean, the parent could be a calling holding, temple attending person. You know, maybe they repented when the kid was 4 or before the kid was born, but they lived this way. And according to the policy, that means the kid can't be baptized.

John Dehlin [01:21:55] It kind of goes to that asterisk thing that Benji Schwimmer talked about or that like pedophiles might have on their record where like you get that asterisk and then once it's flagged, there's certain callings or things you'll never be able to do again. You know what I mean?

J. Nelson Seawright [01:22:12] Right. But the thing that's especially horrible here is, yes, certainly someone who has been in a same sex marriage is never going to be a stake president or a bishop. That's never going to happen. But they might be an elders quorum president. Right. They Might. They might be being celibate and everything that could happen. That does happen. These things happen. But their child can't be baptized.

John Dehlin [01:22:31] Yeah, yeah. Let's talk briefly just about the scriptural and doctrinal, you know, support or non support for this policy about punishing the children. I'm kind of, of. It's a leading question because I have some scriptures at the ready, but before I pull them out, is there any argument that makes that could be made that this is actually not. This goes against scripture.

Children, Families, and the Church's Obligations

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:23:00] Well, have the children come unto me. It's pretty basic, right.

John Dehlin [01:23:04] So Matthew 19:14, Jesus said, Suffer the little children and forbid them not to come unto me, for such is the kingdom of heaven. Anything else

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:23:15] slam dunk right there. I mean, there can be 50 other things, but that pretty much.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:23:20] Except for the scriptures that talk. And I bugged John about this earlier. The scriptures that talk about punishing someone into the seventh generation.

John Dehlin [01:23:29] Right. Yeah. So the scriptures in some ways, but

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:23:32] that's not like a literal punishment. Like this is usually what that's ascribing to. Right. You know, but even from a family systems perspective, I kind of get that. I mean, choices that people make, you know, have reverberations. Right. Towards your generations. And so there's something actually kind of symbolically accurate about that. But I don't know that churches were counting for seven generations. Maybe they were. I mean, I don't know.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:24:02] Well, I mean, so in the Old Testament, we see the, you know, bastards can't be part of the congregation and so on and so forth. I mean, there's a long history of stigma attaching to children. That's in our canon too. So I mean, I just want to say. Not say that this is right, but just that like every other issue, the scriptures say both things.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:24:24] Sure. Except for the New Testament supposedly trumps the Old Testament as far as the Mosaic Law. Right. So a lot of these are the arguments that I get when I bring up those Old Testament issues. People will say, well, yeah, but then

J. Nelson Seawright [01:24:37] the New Testament Doctrine and Covenants talks about punishing the children in Missouri.

John Dehlin [01:24:42] No, it's a fair point. It's a fair point.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:24:43] I mean, it just goes both ways.

John Dehlin [01:24:44] It's a fair point. Let me just. Let me just. Yeah, so that's a fair point, I think. I mean, at least we can see that in the scriptures. I think we also have article, article of Faith 2, which I think you referenced. Satosha. Right.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:25:02] Yeah. That we are not punished for Adam's

John Dehlin [01:25:05] transgression, meaning everyone kind of stands on

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:25:08] their Own, Right, exactly.

John Dehlin [01:25:10] Yeah.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:25:11] And I think contemporary Mormonism is big on this. Right. I mean, individualism is totally the way. And, you know, any idea that there's like, we're not saved by our community in the way that maybe Joseph Smith's Mormons were, but we're saved by individual righteousness. Right. And so I think this does go against a lot of the ways that Mormons like to believe now.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:25:32] And every soul is great in the sight of God.

John Dehlin [01:25:36] Yeah.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:25:36] Oh, they're great. They just can't be baptized.

John Dehlin [01:25:41] And then there's 2 Nephi 26, which talks about how the Lord inviteth all to come unto him and partake of his goodness. He denieth none that come to him, black and white, bonded free, male and female, and he remembereth the heathen and all are like the God. Now, obviously, I can see an apologist saying, well, we still have baptism interviews. We deny people all the time. And so that can't be taken too literally because there are always going to be conditions and you have to be worthy. Right. So, you know, but still the scriptures seem to be saying, anyone's welcome, so

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:26:23] knock and ye shall enter.

John Dehlin [01:26:25] Yeah.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:26:26] This entire issue is one that has nothing to do with the scriptures. I mean, you can play scripture games for years, but you'll never find anything in the Mormon canon that says anything about same sex marriage. So the entire conversation is not scriptures to begin with.

John Dehlin [01:26:43] Yeah, yeah. I think we highlighted this before. Right. But we did mention that the children of rapists and murderers can get baptized. Right, right, we did mention that.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:26:54] I don't know that we did.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:26:55] Salient point.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:26:56] I've written about it.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:26:58] I mean, yes, you could be the son or daughter of Hitler if there were such a person, and you would be able to be baptized with no problem.

John Dehlin [01:27:06] But for some reason, same gender cohabitation, no soup for you. Right.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:27:12] Which really goes back to this kind of polygamy discussion because I think it was really shocking to people just several months ago when the daughter of one of the sister wives on that reality TV show, she had turned 18. And she all along, throughout I've watched the show somewhat, and all along she's been pretty adamant that I respect my parents, but this really isn't a lifestyle for me. She's been saying that since she was probably 14 or so. Then she gets of legal age and she makes this effort to join our church and she was denied. And that was the first time I had kind of become aware of those types of practices that you're saying, Jay, I think that have been around since the 1990s, you said, or longer than that.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:27:58] That's my understanding. My understanding is that these policies were introduced around the time that I think he was named. Tom Green was doing his big media push about how cool polygamy is right around then.

John Dehlin [01:28:10] All right, so I think we're all feeling the energy of sort of feeling overwhelmed by this discussion, and Christie's point looms large. Jay, I think you've got to go in just a bit. I'm going to quickly sort of. I've got a bunch of topics that I've got a bunch of topics that I wanted to cover, and I'm just going to do a really rapid fire round. Okay, so real quickly, just sort of say yes or no if you can, if it's that simple. So is this going to cause progressive Mormons to kind of leave the church or resign? Natasha?

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:28:48] Yes, they're already doing it. There's all kinds of announcements on the Facebook pages.

John Dehlin [01:28:51] Jay?

J. Nelson Seawright [01:28:53] Yes, it will. It is. And for some people it should. I think this is a moment to be serious.

Mental Health, Youth Wellbeing, and Church Culture

John Dehlin [01:28:59] Okay, next question. Is this going to cause TBMs to start having their shelves fall? Natasha?

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:29:07] Some and some they'll retrench. We're seeing both.

John Dehlin [01:29:10] Okay. Jay?

J. Nelson Seawright [01:29:11] I think that's right. I mean, there are plenty of people who will just roll with whatever the church says, and that's the core audience. But there are also people who've coped for a long, long time by saying that gay people and lesbian people are treated just the same as single people. And this shows that that's not true, right?

Guest [01:29:27] Absolutely.

John Dehlin [01:29:28] Okay. We know that there are high levels of depression, homelessness, and suicide amongst our LGBT youth and young adult population. Jay, is this going to make that better or worse or keep it the same?

J. Nelson Seawright [01:29:43] Probably it won't make a real difference. This is oriented at people in a much later and more stable part of the life cycle where they're approaching relationships.

John Dehlin [01:29:52] Okay. I react differently. Natasha, do you have a different response?

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:29:56] Yeah, I disagree. Because our children are living listening to us and all of these dialogues happening. And this does not. I mean, it's like any family system. The kids know what's up. And so I would really talk about suicide awareness. I mean, that's something that we should all be talking about. And I hope, John, that you link to suicide hotlines and all of that when you post this. And I would hope that leaders of the church would really be aware of that in their congregations, young men's and young women's leaders. I would really call out to really study up on suicide awareness warning signs and what you should be looking for. And please, if you're congregants in congregations where people are saying really kind of awful things like we tend to do when we think we're amongst our own selves, not realizing that so many of our members are still closeted to really be advocates in those situations and try to help people who don't have a voice right now.

John Dehlin [01:30:47] Excellent.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:30:48] All right, you're right, I was wrong. I take it back. You two are right. It's worse than thought.

John Dehlin [01:30:53] Yeah, I think this just takes a really bad situation with awful messages and just makes it worse.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:31:01] And it justifies really bad behavior like the kicking out of your child and things of that nature that even though they've said those things at times very lightly, they've said these types of messages much more strongly over time.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:31:13] I mean, I'm going to underline the fact that there's still a pamphlet out there that encourages people to beat up gay and lesbian people. I mean, that's as extreme and that's still there. It's hard for me to think. It's honestly hard for me to think that things are getting worse, but they might be.

John Dehlin [01:31:30] Okay. All right, next question. To what extent is this a function of a gerontocracy of leaders that were raised in the Cold War, out of touch, too old and just not capable of really making decisions that are good for the health and well being of all, and a function of not having a resignation or an emeritus kind of opportunity where we're stuck with these guys until they're 95. Jay,

J. Nelson Seawright [01:32:06] I don't want us to say that this is about age. There are plenty of people of all generations who are totally open and accepting and have learned that gay and lesbian people are totally beautiful, normal people. I think what this is is a problem of a self co opting hierarchy that just doesn't ever bring in anyone who isn't like the people already there. Even the youngest members of the 12 signed onto this change because it has to be unanimous to go into the handbook. So I think this is more about the sort of central committee structure of Mormon leadership than the age.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:32:36] I totally agree with that. I'm such a frickin tired of giving these men the age card. First of all, it's a form of ageism. Some of the most enlightened people I know are in their 80s and 90s and have tremendous amount of wisdom and charisma. Now should we have some of those policies in place where people can retire from leadership of the church? Yes, I think that, but that's a different issue to give them the H card and oh these poor old white men that don't know better. Well then that's our leadership. Give me a flippin break. Especially when this is causing the amount of harm it is in families of our church. It makes me just livid to give them that type of excuse.

John Dehlin [01:33:15] Got it. Okay, so is this going to be good for the overall. Let's define good for the church in the way they probably define it, which is butts in seats, activity rates and tithing donations and number of hours members are willing to contribute in service. Let's just stipulate that that's what we're going to call health and well being for the church and not some type of morality. Is this healthy for the church, neutral for the church or negative for the church defined in that way? Natasha, what do you think?

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:33:50] Well, I am really trying to listen to what Jay said earlier about the benefits of this, the organization to retrench in this type of way or have members retrench. But really looking at our history, I mean we've had to, you know, write essays now about blacks in the priesthood and we're still dealing with all this polygamy stuff. I mean, I just don't know how in the long run it really benefits the church. Even from that perspective. I think that they may become smaller and those members may be more, I guess, committed and loyal. So I guess if you measure success that way. But I just don't really see it being sustainable over time.

John Dehlin [01:34:32] So in your mind.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:34:33] So in my mind it's a bad because I mean really it's bad for

John Dehlin [01:34:37] church health and growth in terms of membership and tithing and hours spent by members.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:34:45] Well, I think so. I mean I have always wondered what our church would be like if we didn't have polygamy. I mean I think that our church has such wonderful principles. I mean my parents are converts. They were successfully converted to hippie intellectuals that are pretty smart people because of the basic principles of the gospel. And then their relationship with Mormonism got ruined because of things of polygamy and blacks and the priests, things that they didn't know about when they converted. So I just wonder how much larger we could be as an institution if we really had stuck to the things that were inspired in my mind, in my opinion.

John Dehlin [01:35:26] Okay Jay, what's your answer?

J. Nelson Seawright [01:35:29] So I mean I think in 100 years this may well be a thing where there's an essay that says oh well you know, the church had this position, but look at the several hundred other organizations that had the same view. It was just the ting of its times. I think it's hard to know what that's going to look like for the medium term. I think this is probably not a plus in terms of membership numbers, but I think the church has realized that membership numbers are fundamental. I think it's a huge plus in terms of donations because it helps create a feeling of embattledness. Embattledness is good for motivating people to sacrifice and for the same reason. It probably increases time and volunteerism and obedience, all these things. The more you can feel that the outside world is a threat, the easier it is for people to make truly remarkable sacrifices.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:36:14] Yeah, it's good for self persecution and

John Dehlin [01:36:17] cleaning out the riffraff. Right. The less troublemakers you have, the less the virus of doubt and questioning and disobedience gets spread. Right?

J. Nelson Seawright [01:36:27] Absolutely. If all of your listeners stop going to Sunday school, then Sunday school is suddenly a much safer place of my listeners. Yes, of course. Exactly.

John Dehlin [01:36:36] All right, all right. Okay. Well, that's sort of most of the topics or questions that I had for today. Jay, is there any final thought or concern or feeling you want to express before we sign off?

Closing Reflections and Looking Forward

J. Nelson Seawright [01:36:54] My deep disappointment that the hopes of my progressive Mormon friends are not being met, that the church is not deciding to be generous and kind and find a middle ground in the way that they wanted to signal they were earlier this year. I'm deeply disappointed. I'm not surprised. But I'm sad that that's the case.

John Dehlin [01:37:16] Natasha?

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:37:18] Well, I just want to reach out to the families and listeners who might be suffering. I think that this is not the Mormon God that we've been taught to believe in and worship. And I do think that self preservation and safety needs to be your first priority. And whatever it takes to get to that point is an okay step to take. And again, no decision needs to be final, but taking the steps that you need to protect yourself and your children is paramount at this time. And then I will just forcibly say, I know this isn't going to come off as very. I've been kind of pissy this whole podcast, which I'm trying not to normally be during podcasts, but I'm calling out for a call of repentance for my church.

John Dehlin [01:38:08] So you want them to repent?

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:38:10] Yeah, yeah. I mean, they need. They need to repent for a lot of things. Like they still need to apologize to the black members of our church. Well, or brown. Any Colored, I guess.

John Dehlin [01:38:23] Yeah.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:38:23] They need to retract polygamy and apologize to women and there's lots of issues. But right now I'm, I'm calling for a call for repentance.

John Dehlin [01:38:36] Yeah. All right. Well, that's powerful. Well, Natasha, how do people get a hold of you if they want to Procure your services?

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:38:46] NatashaParker.org is how you contact me.

John Dehlin [01:38:50] And Jay, if somebody wants to procure your services, how do they get ahold of you?

J. Nelson Seawright [01:38:54] Right. You can give me a jcwriteorthwestern Edu. I'd be happy to analyze your data for you.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:39:03] I will do a big shout out for the Mormon Mental Health Association. So please, I mean, there's lots of really great clinicians. I can't take care of the entire membership that's hurting from this and neither can you, John. Right. So there's a great directory on there for people who are very LGBT affirming. That's one of the things that we look for when we put people in that directory. And so, and they're culturally competent to deal with LDS issues. So I would just put a shout out to them and I would also put out a shout out to just, just all the national resources we have around suicide prevention.

J. Nelson Seawright [01:39:35] All right, I have to run right now.

John Dehlin [01:39:37] All right. Thanks, Jay. Thanks, Natasha. And listeners, thank you for joining us. Thanks for your support. Your financial support makes this possible. And please check us out@mormonstories.org if you want to comment. Christy J. And Natasha and I will be there to respond to your comments. Thanks so much for your interest and we'll talk to you guys again soon on Mormon Stories and we'll hopefully have a follow up episode where we bring on people who are affected by this policy to hear their point of view. So thanks, Natasha. You're the last person standing.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:40:09] Thanks, John, and peace out to everybody, please. Lots of love.

John Dehlin [01:40:13] All right, likewise. Take care.

Natasha Helfer Parker [01:40:15] Bye bye.

John Dehlin [01:40:23] Thanks for joining us today on Mormon Stories. If you enjoyed this episode, please help us make more like it by becoming a monthly subscriber@mormonstories.org music for this episode was provided by the Lower Lights. When with the world, wounded heart, anger

J. Nelson Seawright [01:40:52] or mouth I draw myself apart, searching my soul.

Transcript © 2026 John P. Dehlin. All rights reserved. Brief quotations are welcome with attribution and a link to mormonstories.org; all other use requires written permission.