Response to The Church of Jesus Christ's Policy on Same-Sex Couples and Children

The young man and his girlfriend had lived together for 8 years. They’d had a daughter together. Both their paychecks went towards sustaining their small home. And they wanted to be baptized. Normally, it would seem rational to tell them to stop living together so they could get baptized. But this was a family. And that’s not how things worked. While separation still an acceptable solution, we were instead encouraged to have them get married before baptism. Why? Because a temporary separation just for the benefits of baptism was no security that they wouldn’t end up living together again—this time breaking sacred covenants. It was strongly urged, then, that they wait for marriage before getting baptized. The waiting process in Brazil is long. And sometimes, one couple or the other also has to  go through a complicated legal process of divorce from a previous partner. But, we tell them, it’s better to wait.

The church has never been interested in a numerical manifestation of church growth. They are more interested in retention and life-long conversion.

Elder Dallin H. Oaks once said: “We do not preach and teach in order to ‘bring people into the Church’ or to increase the membership of the Church. We do not preach and teach just to persuade people to live better lives. … We invite all to come unto Christ by repentance and baptism and confirmation in order to open the doors of the celestial kingdom to the sons and daughters of God.”

The point is that baptism means covenants which brings an added level of personal accountability to the individual who has accepted such covenants. Due to the serious nature of the promises, the church is very careful about the process of who is able, in a given moment, to be baptized.

This is not an immediate indication or confirmation of eligibility for salvation. On the contrary, the pure in heart who would accept the Gospel if given the chance, will always be exalted. However, it does mean that in the formal process of church membership here on earth, precautions are taken to ensure that no one could ever, in any way, be disadvantaged from their membership in the church.

We don’t want to put anyone’s salvation at risk. We don’t want covenants to be casually entered into without the necessary level of conversion and support that would ensure the individual the greatest chance at endurance to the end.

If you haven’t guessed it, this is my response to the recent reports on church changes in policy regarding the baptism of children adopted by same-sex couples (married or cohabiting).

As a friend of mine eloquently put it:

“The idea behind this is not a new one and is not to single out LGBT families. Children of polygamist families are also not allowed to be baptized at 8 years old for the same reason, as well as children whose parents are not members and won't support them and their beliefs. When I was on my mission we taught many children who were interested in learning about the Mormon faith but we were not permitted to baptize them without their parents committing to learn the teaching and commit as well. This was to ensure that the children would have support in the home of their beliefs and support to come to church. These children waited until they turned 18 when they were at an older age to be able to support themselves potentially alone in their beliefs. This was out of respect for both the children, and the parents. The church does not desire to cause confusion and contention in the home.”

The point of any policy in the church is ALWAYS one of maximizing the individual’s chances of eternal life and exaltation. It is a concern for the welfare of souls. It is a loving effort from a wise Heavenly Father who always sees the bigger picture.

Imagine, then, the life of a child who chooses with hesitant parental consent to join the church when everyday it is teaching that the people who raised him are living in fornication and sin punishable by God except on conditions of repentance. To pretend that the child would not be placed in an intense emotional and spiritually difficult situation would be to ignore reality.

That said, it needs to be understood that the policy is less of a change than it is a clarification of how those children still COULD be baptized. A church handbook is not a guideline for how we interact with our neighbors. It is to help church leaders know how to handle specific situations. Like when that Mission President calls about the child raised by a same-sex couple and he wants the First Presidency to help him figure out what would be most advantageous to the spiritual progression of the child.

There could be arguments on both sides. The point of the policy is that the First Presidency will prayerfully examine the case and decide—so that God can tell us how best to save his children.

Can we not see that this is a merciful policy? God is always merciful and sometimes it is our own blindness and limitation that convinces us to trust the mind of man rather than the eternal omnipotence of God.

It doesn’t mean this is an easy policy. We feel for the children. If it’s anything like my mission, there are times where you just want the child to have some spiritual influence because they aren’t getting anything uplifting from home. You long to help them, heal them, and show them the love of God. Can we not just baptize them?

God will never forget his children. This is all an indication to me that we need to trust that His process, policy, and plan has been created as a means best suited to the maximization of salvation for all. God sees all sides of a picture, and sometimes we have to trust him and his servants.