potentially-lemongrass

[potentially-lemongrass]

[potentially-lemongrass]

i know its the mets, but this is the coolest shit i’ve ever seen a human being do

[potentially-lemongrass]

There is a real physiological aspect to things like anxiety and depression, and to ignore that and suggest that simply believing in Christ is a guarantee to make those problems go away is a form of prosperity gospel.

[potentially-lemongrass]

Christ and Nikolai Gogol Eating Spaghetti by Andrei Bodko

[potentially-lemongrass]

A response to the LDS Church's new Anti-Trans Policies

I just sent the following email to lgbt@churchofjesuschrist.org, and thought it would be worth sharing here, as well:

To whom it may concern, assuming it concerns anyone in HQ-

This email may not be perfectly worded, but I felt it was more important to voice my concerns now than to wait to word them perfectly. I may send more emails in the future.

As far as I can tell, I am exactly the sort of person you want to remain in the church: lifelong member, returned missionary, temple recommend holder, temple worker, sealed in the temple, 3 kids, upper middle class educated Millennial straight white male Melchizidek priesthood holder with nonmember friends that I talk religion with on occasion. However, you're losing me and people like me. I listened to what the church has taught me all my life. I served a mission and went to a non-church college with an institute program and met all sorts of new people from all sorts of backgrounds. I learned that my mission president was secretly gay, and had been repressing it all his life due to harmful church teachings and cultural pressure. I sat with these experiences. When we started the Come, Follow Me program, I faithfully studied all 4 books of scripture in a way I never had before. As I did so, I recognized that the messages I saw taught over and over and over were ones of love and grace. I learned that Sodom and Gomorrah's sin wasn't homosexuality, like I'd heard all my life. It was pride and a refusal to care for the poor and needy. Jesus didn't call people to repentance for being lax in their temple worship or observance of church law; he called them to love one another, pray for one another, be humble, and actually feed and care for one another, especially those we deem unclean, unworthy, or the "least" of us. He showed over and over that his good news is often a kind word, a loving hug, and an invitation to share a meal and a table.

Today, as is poignantly demonstrated by remarks by leaders like Elder Holland and President Oaks, and by relevant church handbook policies over the last decade and the last month, it is easy to conclude that in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, our LGBTQIA2S+ siblings are considered the least of us, even unclean, unworthy, and unwelcome. I had a Jewish friend ask me to tell him about the recent policy changes re: how the church treats trans members, and I had gotten maybe halfway through the changes when he simply said, with a sober expression "so the church has made it clear they aren't welcome, then?" Whether that was the intention or not, that is the message we are sending, loud and clear. That simply cannot be the message our loving Heavenly Parents and loving Savior have for us and our queer siblings. If the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints is meant to share the good news of Christ with all of God's children, then we need to actually figure out what good news we have to share with God's children who are queer, or who are like me and care about those that are, and we need to do it quickly, because right now, the only news we have is that they aren't welcome, that we don't particularly have a place for them, and that we don't especially care to. We can do better. We must do better. Right now, we are failing far too many, and it breaks my heart, and the hearts of so many who want to heed Jesus' good news and the 2 great commands to love. We went through a very similar struggle with regards to our black siblings, and did at least 1 right thing in 1978. We can do more right things again.

Regards,

[radvimes]

[potentially-lemongrass]

is she... you know... *recites nicene creed*

[potentially-lemongrass]

this blog stans David Archuleta. in case y'all forgot.

[potentially-lemongrass]

It took a while, but I finally wrote my letter to the first presidency. Not gonna lie, this was really hard.

I've been a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints my entire life, which is almost 40 years now. It hasn't always been easy, as I've struggled with my mental and physical health, but I always cling to my faith and my love for the Saviour and His gospel to get me through.

In 2020 I publicly came out as transgender, announcing my desire to medically transition. I did not make this decision lightly, as I had prayed and wept about it for years until I finally came to the conclusion that I couldn't face living as a woman for the rest of my life. I felt the Lord's guiding hand in this, as He let me know that it wasn't important to Him whether I was a man or a woman, as long as I was His child and continued to strive to return to Him.

Remaining active in the Church while being openly transgender is a challenge. Often I feel like the leadership sees me more as a problem to be solved than a person who deserves the same love and guidance as everyone else. More than once I've broken down in tears as I wondered why I try so hard to pick up the breadcrumbs thrown by people who don't feel that I deserve a seat at the table of the feast of Christ.

Hearing about the new changes to the handbook in regards to people like me hit me hard. I'd already been struggling so much, and the thought of being treated like a sex offender who can't be trusted around children was so frightening to me that I couldn't bring myself to go to church that Sunday, depriving myself of the Sacrament and the healing word of Christ.

I know there is room for me in God's kingdom - for the real me, not just the neutered, fake version I've hid behind for so many years. I have felt His assurance in my heart on many occasions. Unfortunately His followers here on Earth often make me feel dirty and unwanted. So I beg you with all of my heart to please fix this. I don't want to leave a church that I love, but I deserve to feel that it loves me back. Until then I will pray for you to have mercy and compassion in your heart, not just for myself, but for all of my queer siblings in Christ. We deserve better.

Yours,

Brother Nikolai

[potentially-lemongrass]

the thing that gets to me about "purity culture" is how women's bodies are objectified. like yes, okay, being pure is good for you and super healthy for your soul but if you've had sex you are not a licked cupcake. you are not a chewed stick of gum, or a crumpled piece of paper. if you haven't been living the most holy pure life ever guess what? you're normal, you're not alone, you're not broken or damaged, you're completely lovable and completely worthy, and you are still called to chastity like everyone else.

purity is not a god you worship. you are not a virgin sacrifice to it. you are not to lay prone on the altar to be burned. you can kiss your boyfriend before you get married. if you've messed up you can try again. if you've made mistakes you are still good. chastity is a virtue, not a god. gods are worshiped. virtues are practiced.

[potentially-lemongrass]

"These are the women from Mormonism that the public has made famous. Predictably, they fit the only narratives LDS women have been permitted to fill for the past two hundred years. As a result, nothing in the Latter-day Saint women's status quo changes. We're still endless pools of low-cost domestic labor and baby machines to one group, and hopeless imbeciles who exist to be mocked and scorn to entertain the masses to the other. We exist to be used by them all as objects, with no respect for how we feel about it in either case.

What Latter-day Saint women continue not to be, to either group, are people.

The flavor of the dehumanization is different, but the outcome is still the same."

[potentially-lemongrass]

[potentially-lemongrass]

So I went to my Bishop with my concerns about the new policies (figuring, hey, if I lose Bishop roullette and get my temple recommend taken away for criticizing the Church, it might as well be worth it), and he showed me a really interesting verse. In D&C 74, it's talking about the early Church being conflicted about children of mixed member/non-member (aka Christian and Jewish, basically) marriages, and how they were considered unclean by the Jews since they were no longer circumcised. Anyway, long story short, the Lord reveals the following:

"Wherefore, for this cause the apostle wrote unto the church, giving unto them a commandment, not of the Lord, but of himself, that a believer should not be united to an unbeliever; except the law of Moses should be done away among them"

The key to this verse is that Peter gave a commandment that was not of the Lord. We tend to attribute a lot of infallibility to our leaders in the Church, but this verse plainly says that here was the head of the Church, a prophet of God, giving a commandment of himself in order to solve what he saw as a problem for the Church.

I see this as a direct rebuke of the doctrine of prophetic infallibility, and a reassurance that the Lord lets his prophets have agency, for better or for worse. As my Bishop said, "The Lord allows agency at all levels of the Church." We also chatted about the Plan of Salvation, and how there's a plan for everyone, even if the Church doesn't acknowledge one currently. It was an incredible talk with an ecclesiastical leader, and it showed me that there is hope that the Church can and will change over time, especially as we strive to live the Two Great Commandments of God.

You've been a huge help to my testimony when it's been weak, and I hope this helps you as much as it helped me. Much love from Colorado!

Thank you for that kind note. Also, I recognize the courage it took for you to speak with your bishop.

Your bishop gave great insight, that here we have being taught in our scriptures that sometimes apostles teach their own opinions as commandments when they are actually in opposition to the Lord.

I think it's insightful to see that the Lord's way was more liberal and inclusive than the apostle thought, which reminds me of Joseph Smith's teaching that "Our Heavenly Father is more liberal in his views, and boundless in his mercies and blessings, than we are ready to believe or receive."

The LDS Church teaches that prophets and apostles are capable of error, despite being called of God and receiving revelation, which makes sense because these are imperfect men so it seems obvious they may make mistakes. If it weren't this way it would be unique in the history of the world.

However, in practice Latter-day Saints often teach that the prophet of the church literally cannot lead church members astray or teach false doctrine, as a way of emphasizing the importance of following the prophet.

I think holding up our apostles and prophets as infallible is unfair to them as it puts them in an impossible situation, it doesn't allow them to grow, it makes them less likely to correct previous errors and therefore prolongs the time we live under the incorrect teachings & policies, and it may make them cautious to act.

I agree with your bishop that there's a plan for everyone, even if the Church doesn't acknowledge this. I have said something similar, that I believe I'm included in God's plan even if I'm not in the church's version of that plan.

I think your bishop gave some wise insight and underlines my belief that the things which are right about the church can fix the things which are wrong.

Also, I think it's useful to think of the two great commandments and use that as a filter to determine if these teachings from our leaders are more or less likely to be the Lord's will .

Thanks so much for sharing!💖

[potentially-lemongrass]

From The Backwater Sermons, Jay Hulme

[potentially-lemongrass]

(TW: Religion)

My dear lgbt+ kids, 

When we think about reconciling Christianity and our identity, then we are often automatically jumping to „re-interpreting Bible verses that are used to justify homophobia/transphobia“ or to „looking for Bible verses that can be interpreted in a lgbt-supportive way“. 

Both of that is valid and definitely has its place. And if you are someone who (or trying to discuss with someone who) believes everything in the Bible is true and to be taken literal, then looking for the most accurate interpretation of each passage is also pretty much the only thing you can do.

In that case, take comfort in knowing that there is often historical, cultural etc. context missing from conservative interpretations and learning about that context lets us see seemingly hateful verses in a much more inclusive light! 

That Bible verse that seems to be against gay sex may very well be against rape, that Bible verse that seems to be against trans people dressing the way they want to may very well be condemning old rituals that have nothing to do with modern life. I don’t think looking for these alternative (or maybe *better*) explanations is heathenish at all. God wants you to think critically, that’s why he gave you the ability to. If he gave you a book to live your life according to, then it stands to reason that he’d want you to find the most accurate meaning of his words, and that means looking past the most superficial interpretation.

But if you are (or the person you’re talking to is) open to the idea that maybe the Bible isn’t meant to be taken literal in its entirety - then it can feel tedious to dissect singular verses. 

In that case, you probably don’t feel the need to dissect other parts either and you just disregard them. For example you look at certain verses containing rules on hygiene or health, and you disregard them because you figure those were written in, and for, wildly different times and they just do not apply to modern life anymore, and you believe that one can be a good Christian while also disregarding those specific verses. 

If that’s you, then an approach that might fit you better would be to look at the bigger picture instead. Treat the Bible like you would any self-help book - look at the overall messages but don’t assume that every single line is applicable to your life or even holds meaning. 

This may seem counterintuitive or even like a “bad” thing to do, especially if you grew up in a taking-the-Bible-literal household, so I’ll give you some potential questions that may help you get into the mindset: 

Which messages are repeated often throughout the Bible? Which messages are repeated in most big religions you know? Which messages would come to your mind first if you were to teach a child about God? Which values or attributes describe God best? 

For me, and for many people, the biggest ones would be “God loves you unconditionally” and “God wants you to love others”. Another important one might be “God created you, and everyone else, because he wanted you to exist”. 

When you identified some big picture core messages, and are open to the idea that the Bible may not be meant to be taken literal in its entirety (for example because it was inspired by the Holy Spirit but written by humans and humans can make mistakes or add their own personal agenda, or also simply because it’s so old and over time some of its original teachings got mistranslated or lost), then you may be able to look at these seemingly hateful verses with new eyes - not seeking to find a more accurate explanation, but rather being able to compare them to those core messages and being able to say “this fits in with the core message” or “this doesn’t fit in with the core message”. 

With all my love, 

Your Tumblr Dad 

[potentially-lemongrass]

she only plays minecraft and spore

[potentially-lemongrass]

in 1992, Douglas Coupland envisioned what North America would look like in 2092.

[potentially-lemongrass]

"supernatural is catholic" "supernatural is protestant" "supernatural is pagan"

god is in the american midwest telling men to dig for tablets that only they are allowed to read supernatural is mormon