Losing Sight

"We cannot and we must not allow ourselves to get distracted from our sacred duty. We cannot and we must not lose focus on the things that matter most." President Uchtdorf.

The past month or so has been filled with doubt. I think for the first time in my life I am not ignoring the fact that I am sexually attracted to my own sex. The implications of that attraction are profound, whether I act or not act on them. Unfortunately, I have acted on these attractions to a small degree, enough at least to put me in limbo. My Stake President still has not decided on whether a Disciplinary Council should be convened. The fact that it has been over three months since I met with the Stake President is certainly a source of stress in my life.

I continue to struggle with the simple and small things: reading my scriptures and praying. It is tempting to say I am doing these things, as a way to rationalize my thoughts of leaving the church. Yet, as Elder Holland pointed out the Book of Mormon and what it means is a stumbling block for leaving the church. I find this to be very true.

But let me give some structure and context. The last couple of months I have been doubting every week or so, well more like trying to rationalize why I am still in the church. The most obvious answer is the compelling experience I had that can not be ignored. However, that does not provide sufficient faith to overcome the thoughts of leaving, nor has it become a motivating factor for reading the scriptures or even praying. Rather, the strength of that experience has compelled me to stay in the church but not to make the sufficient and needed adjustments to my life to reflect that of a disciple's life.

I met with my bishop yesterday and indicated that I had thoughts of leaving the church. He responded in love. I respect him deeply, though he is only a few years older than me, he is wise and compassionate. Lately, I've been thinking how much I would like to experience and fulfill the physical desires of my heart. I think how much "happier" I would be finding a partner, someone to love, someone to be a part of my life, someone who I could love intellectually, emotionally, and physically. Yet, the reality is that may never be. I will never experience that type of love and relationship. When I look down the road of disciple-ship it is a hard and lonely road; I often wonder if I am ready and willing. I am definitely not ready; for years I thought I was willing. AS I struggle with my addictions, the memory of that weekend fades quickly. The urgency I felt in needing to repent diminishes as well. What remains now are yearnings to be with a man and my addiction to pornography.

The past five months since that weekend have been hard, in terms of the pornography. I am addicted. It is difficult to get away from. I think I am not trying hard enough; I probably am not. Yet, as I reflected on why I am not making progress in abstaining and overcoming my addiction, I asked what motivation I have in doing so? I asked why I continue to be in the church. The answer came down to me not wanting to disappoint my parents. I am still in the church because leaving would be devastating to my parents. I lack sufficient motivation to overcome my addiction, because my motivation in remaining in the church is not to disappoint my parents, it is not related to becoming fully converted to Christ.

Since my mission, I have lost focus of things that matter most. I know leaving the church would damn me; yet my complacency in the church is still damning me. I am refraining from partaking the forbidden fruit because I fear my parents more than I fear God. This is indeed troubling. But it is so complicated. I have a testimony of the gospel and know deeply that God the Father lives; yet, that testimony is not sufficient to motivate me to change. Further, I know this, yet, I have no desire to obtain the necessary motivation. As a result, I feel mired.

I peek onto Craigslist, I engage in pornography and its practice and I fantasize and deeply lust after being intimate with another man. These things feel so natural. Yet, I do not hunger after righteousness. I think of finding a partner, I think of being mates with that partner. I have lost sight of the most important: my salvation. I have lost focus. I understand I have lost focus, yet, I do not feel motivated to do anything about it. I often wish I were never born into the church. I wish I had never made covenants. I wish I had no connection to the church. Somehow, logically in my mind, these would free me to act on the physical and emotional desires of my body. Yet, as I think of this, I feel condemned to be in the church, living out my days journeying the not-so-easy path of discipleship.

There is a small desire within that draws me back, there is a small connection I feel to heaven that fixes me in the church; but the motivation to press forward, to feast on the words of Christ, to embark on that journey is not sufficient. I suppose I can make that appearance, as I did for nearly ten years. But that seems contrary to my own integrity. I do not want to live the lie anymore. Yet, I need to shift my motivation from parents to Heavenly Parents. From fear to the hope of salvation and exaltation. However, while I say the rights things, my actions and thoughts say otherwise. I am confused. I am a child of God who is confused. I hope that I can awake and "come to" myself (as did the Prodigal son). That "coming to" is seemingly far off and intellectually out of reach. However, I have hope that transformation will follow introspection, as explained by Elder Neal A. Maxwell.

Thinking Deeply

Being the 12-step program definitely has its benefits. Going through that program really is a program on learning how to let go of myself. It's hard. I keep thinking that I, of my own accord, have the capacity to do things that would propel me to eternal glory. This is not so. Yet, I believe that I can do it on my own. I try to give my life over, but it has become increasingly difficult.

As I think about my crimes against heaven, I come to feel they are really crimes. I have violated and broken sacred covenants and have sought to touch the unclean thing. I have broken my promise to God. It has been four months since I did what I did, and now I am coming to realize its severity. I thought I did before. I thought I understood pain for what I have done. But for whatever reason, the fact that I broke a law of heaven is now taking on a new light.

Perhaps this is what I have been praying for. Before I wanted to believe I could be healed and forgiven as quickly as I committed the crime. Not so. God does not work that way. This is heavy. I find my thoughts wandering to my actions and my state - I can barely concentrate on my work.

Repentance is hard. Turning one's life over is hard.

I am lonely.

The struggle continues

I wonder why I am not humble enough to admit that I can do nothing of my own accord. I continue to struggle. But I am resolved to examine the source of pride and overcome it.

President Packer

Let me first say, I struggled with President Packer for so long. Initially, it was his statements that nearly drove me out of the church. But it also was his statements that brought clarity and relief to my struggle. His conference talk ten years ago this conference saved me.

"Sometimes we are asked why we do not recognize this conduct as a diverse and acceptable lifestyle. This we cannot do. We did not make the laws; they were made in heaven "before the foundation of the world" (D&C 132:5; 124:41; see also Alma 22:13). We are servants only....

"When any unworthy desires press into your mind, fight them, resist them, control them (see James 4:6-8; 2 Ne. 9:39; Mosiah 3:19). The Apostle Paul taught, "There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it" (1 Cor. 10:13; see also D&C 62:1).

"That may be a struggle from which you will not be free in this life. If you do not act on temptations, you need feel no guilt. They may be extremely difficult to resist. But that is better than to yield and bring disappointment and unhappiness to you and those who love you."

I recall listening to this soothing explanation. I realized then, it was not President Packer that was speaking to me, but the Lord. President Packer was his servant. While I may not know if the language was given him or the principles - it does not matter. President Packer made very clear that whether its a biological concern or not is not the issue - the issue is choice: it's our agency!

While President Packer had previously been a polarizing for me, I realized then, that he was a servant of God and under obligation to share the message impressed upon his soul. My obligation was to listen, President Eyring spoke of our covenant to keep the commandments of God, and one of those commandments is to heed the words of his servants. They will lead us to light and salvation.

As I listened to President Packer speak Sunday morning, I understood.

"If we're not alert, there are those today who not only tolerate but advocate voting to change laws that will legalize immorality, as if a vote would somehow alter the designs of God's laws and nature ... what good would a vote against the law of gravity do?


"Some suppose that they were preset and cannot overcome what they feel are inborn tendencies toward the impure and the unnatural.. Not so. Why would our Heavenly Father do that to anyone?"

President Packer or rather the Lord was not saying that being gay is preset, but rather saying that having no choice in how we respond to the circumstance is preset. This is in harmony with what he said ten years earlier. God would not put us in a situation where we have no choice - there is always a choice, always a way out.

In his address ten years ago he noted:

"Some think that God created them with overpowering, unnatural desires, that they are trapped and not responsible (see James 1:13-15). That is not true. It cannot be true. Even if they were to accept it as true, they must remember that He can cure and He can heal (see Alma 7:10-13; 15:8)."

He can heal and cure. Does that mean God will make me straight? Probably not, but rather the miracle and healing comes in my ability to access the enabling power of the Atonement to endure and align my will to the will of God. The power of the Atonement will provide me grace sufficient to overcome, or control sufficiently with God's grace, the desires of my body. The perception I have of God and of myself will be healed through the Atonement. As I come to know who I really am, I will be healed.

I thank the the Heavens for prophets!

Afterall, Elder Anderson explained:

"There are no assigned subjects, no collaboration of themes. The Lord’s way, of course, is always the best way. He takes the individual prayerful efforts of each speaker and orchestrates a spiritual symphony full of revelation and power. Repeated themes, principle building upon principle, prophetic warnings, uplifting promises—the divine harmony is a miracle! I testify that in this conference we have heard and felt the mind and will of the Lord."

Distractions

There is still no word on the Disciplinary Council, but that's OK with me. Last night I attended my recovery group meeting; the men there are amazing. I always feel that I am no measuring up, but at the same time feel their support.

I have been struggling with trying to figure out how to trust God; I'm not sure what this is/was so hard for me. But it is.

The past few weeks have had their challenges. I had installed Covenant eyes on my computer. There are a couple of things I realized about myself: 1) I did not realize what I would do to try to access porn. This was a scary realization. I tried to circumvent the program, but it didn't work, then I went to the university library and tried downloading porn onto a thumb drive or email it myself, to get around the program. I was successful at this scheming. After it was done, and I completed my use of it, I though to myself "what the heck are you doing?" I realized then, that if I didn't try to trust God and truly give my life over, who knows what other things I would do. It has been over a week and I feel in a stronger position.

The second thing I learned about myself, well it's more of an epiphany of sorts, I learned that my previous notion of perfect behavior equals trust in God was a misnomer. I was reading in the seventh chapter of Mosiah, about Limhi's excitement about the prospects of being free from the Lamanites. There Limhi made a statement that stung me to my core: "I trust there remaineth an effectual struggle to be made." I realized then, though my behavior was not perfect, I could still trust God - because there remaineth and effectual struggle to be made. I think I am coming to trust God, even though I do not understand.

I am resolved again to immerse myself in the gospel so that I might be changed, and I trust that though I may not notice it, a change will occur.

Failure and success

Most of the time I feel like a failure. I look at the brothers in my ward and I envy them. They appear to be faithful. But mostly, I envy them, because, in my mind, they do not view pornography or masturbate. I wonder why I feel like a failure.

I'm enslaved by my addiction to pornography and to masturbation. When I go without one, I usually slip and do the other. When and how does this stop?

I have slipped at least once a week for the past seven weeks. I pray for strength. But then I realize that there is a part of me that does not fully trust God. Perhaps it's because I don't really know who He is. I hope I can come to know who He is. But I suppose that comes by first trusting in Him.

Why is it so hard to trust God? There is a part of me that assumes I can do this of my own accord, yet I know I can't. Why am I so stubborn?

Mortal Thinking

Given the pending decision on whether a Disciplinary Council will be convened, I have been given to much thought on my predicament.

I am not afraid of the Disciplinary Council. If that is the decision, then I willingly submit to this course of corrective action. However, I must admit, I find faith that I did not know I really had. It is certainly small and un-nutured, untended for years. But it is there. This got me thinking about being gay in the Church.

Over the past years, I have had numerous discussions with many people about the place homosexuality has in the church. This discourse is dominated by two primary arguments. If I can summarize as generically as possible: 1) God makes no mistakes and 2) God makes no mistakes. These are clearly indistinguishable arguments on their surface. As I thought about this, I realized that my devotion to God and to His organization on earth (i.e. the church) is predicated on that primary assumption (we'll call it assumption for arguments sake) that God does not make any mistakes.

Before I go on, let me analyze each argument. For the left, the argument that God makes no mistakes is fundamentally not an issue of God, rather, one of equal or human rights. As such, the argument fundamentally rests on the notion of a right...of liberty. It is not a logical leap then to characterize this "God makes no mistakes" as a purely secular argument attempting to stress the importance of rights, namely that of equality before the law. Certainly, this has merit. However, there are numerous iterations of this argument. This brief commentary is a gross simplification.

The second argument, again to simplify a rather complex set of arguments, is primarily spiritual in its context. This argument is clearly connected to a set of beliefs about the nature of God, human rights or the dealings of man are a secondary consideration. This argument embodies millenia of norms and powerful institutions that have shaped the understanding and perception of human behavior and sexuality. These norms and institutions, tradition if you will, have been derived from and perpetuate a belief in God and proper human behavior. As a result, when this group argues that "God makes no mistakes," they are saying there is a reason for why things occur they do, it is not random - there is order.

To summarize, these two arguments are fundamentally different, which is nothing new. In short one argues for a more secualarized acceptance of human behavior, because liberties and a plurality of beliefs is sustained with least resistance in a secualized society. The other contends the moral absolutes are authored by a being known as God, and that socities for millenia have maintained certain moral standards because they have worked to the betterment of society.

This is what is problematic about the discourse. Each group has failed to find common ground. A belief in God is common ground, but easily given up when each attempts to articulate what that means. As such, they tend to argue past each other and fail to geniunely engage each other.

I find this same pattern in the Church. There are the many gays who have left the church because God does not make mistakes, and many who remain in the church because God does not make mistakes. It is here that I wish to spend some time.

I am gay, I have come to terms with my sexual attractions to men. I may still need time to come to terms with my sexuality, but I have consciously chosen to stay in the church as have many others. The argument where God comes to represent an all-loving being who upholds equality is problematic. This argument, first assumes that all share the concept of God, that is God is all-loving, which He is, and that he makes no mistakes, which He doesn't, and that God desires each of us to be happy, which He does. Thus, God is all-loving, omniscient, and desires our happiness. I agree. However, this is as far as this argument seems to take the character of God. Those of this persuasion fail to define God adequately to get a sense of His full character. That is, what does it mean for God to be all-loving? and so forth? Certainly, those of this stance would argue that there are certain moral standards - incarnate principles of behavior, if you will - that govern human interactions. In other words there are generally accepted norms proper human behavior - the new morality. This consists namely of not harming others (honesty, integrity, reciprocity, equality, etc). And there are behaviors that are not proper (i.e. those that harm others). As such, the question often asked, since God is all-loving, who is my behavior harming? If this argument seems to make logical jumps from God to harming, it is. Those in the church who attempt to define their behavior on an ill-defined concept of God, find themselves in a logical quandry. It seems that because God is all-loving, He does not punish. But what are the parameters of God's love?

This argument while logically incoherent, raises some very important issues: 1) How does one define harm? Certainly both stances would argue that God asks us to love one another. Those of us in the church who feel we have been harmed, what is the foundation of that assertion? Are we the object of harm? If we are harmed, does that mean particular type of behavior that caused harm is not God-like? But the problematic is what constitutes that harm? Who defines that harm? How does one know they are harmed? I submit that this failure to define the limits of harm is a result of a faulty understanding of God. Even in secualar society, harm is up for debate, there are degrees of harm. For example some indigenous people completely reject the notion of human rights as a western imposition on their way of life - this because the very notion of rights is inherently western. As a result, human rights harm their way of life. Human rights is seen a western universalism gone awry. As such, the pluralistic secular society struggles with defining the limits of harm. This failure is easily transposed into the church, those advocating the church harmed them, fail to define the limits of harm - it is difficult to understand what is meant by the term. But yet, it is that very notion that provides the impetus for their aspersions against the church. It is here that individuals of this persuasion politicize the church and more importantly the gospel. This ill-defined theology them provides lens for them to interpret the scriptures and re-define the meaning of salvation. This then leads to characterizations that the church is out of touch with reality, but they fail again to properly define reality - whose reality? These arguments however are merely justifications for the individual to behave according to the desires of their body. Following the desires of the body is implicitly included in the notion of an all-loving God. As such, their statement that God does not make mistakes, says a great deal about God, the human condition, and the body. That is, in short, I have the desires I have because God does not make mistakes, if He did I would not have these feelings; because I have these feelings, God must want me to act on them within the accepted norms of incarnate principles of behavior. This argument then makes implicit critiques about the nature of revelation, the validity of Prophets, and moral absolutes. In short, the argument is, in essence,"who knows?"

The second argument has just as many problems, but within the church, there is clarity on the nature of God, there is clarity on moral standards, and there is clarity on harm. However, the problem is that individuals who understand this, cower before its clarity and attempt to find fault with the clarity by then attempting to re-interpret God, to cause confusion. Because within confusion, the range of acceptable behavior is expanded.

I struggled coming to know God, rather I struggled to come to know that there was a God. Coming to know God allowed me to come to understand Hid character, however firm it might have been at times. But God loves me always; this I am coming to find out.

It is late, and I did not intend to ramble this long...I will try to address the second argument in the near future.

For the time being, I await the decision on my Disciplinary Council. I continue to struggle with unwanted behavior, but I am becoming increasingly hopeful.