If we had to leave every institution that has problems with racism, queerphobia, ableism, sexism, xenophobia, classism, heterosexism, anti-semitism, Islamophobia, ageism, and so on, where would we go? Whatβs institutions could we engage in?
We all live with contradictions we have to navigate. We all choose places where we are comfortable and work for us, but are we voicing a desire and need for change? We can choose to work to make places better
Every Christian wants to change who they are, to be reborn and become new creatures in Christ. But ask a cisgender Christian if they want to change their gender orientation as part of that and they are likely to look at you with confusion. That doesnβt make sense for them as part of the equation.
I like growing fruit trees. Caring for my orchard has been a fun way to develop new skills and the fresh fruit from our trees is a rather tasty reward.
Agricultural analogies occasionally find their way into gospel discussions. Iβve written before about being cautious in this regard. However, Iβve been working with my fruit trees again this spring and just canβt resist:
My pear trees have fire blight. Fire blight is an infectious disease caused by a type of bacteria (Erwinia Amylovora). The bacteria gets inside the tree and cankers the wood. Fire blight is easily distinguished by the way it turns the bark black/brown and the leaves black, dry and shriveled. The tips of the tree will appear burned, hence the name.
Fire blight is dangerous. It will destroy a tree and can spread to other trees. One can attempt to control it by heavy pruning of affected branches (cutting 12-18β below signs of disease), but the prognosis is bleak if not discovered fairly early. I have 1 tree with significant infection and two others with traces of the disease on 1 or 2 branches. If I were running a large commercial orchard, I might just destroy the tree with the primary infection and possibly all 3 affected trees just to ensure the disease did not spread.
When looking at my pear tress through a gospel lens, there may be some who see this analogy as proof that disease (sin, apostasy, and so on) must be eradicated from the church orchard. Preventing or removing disease in the church is a valid concern, yet I feel there are some observations to take into consideration:
1. People are not pear trees. Our souls are precious to God and we should be precious to each other. We do not see a physical disease and destroy the human. Jesus healed the lepers, the unclean and the unwell. He ministered to them and did not cast them out. I have the time to care for these trees individually, exhausting all other options before resorting to the most drastic measures. From what I have seen so far, my efforts to control the disease and restore my trees to health are likely to succeed. How much more important to care diligently for each other?
2. My desires as an orchardist are not driven by a production-oriented profit motive, meaning I do not judge the value of my trees based solely on their fruit production in any given year. I appreciate their other qualities, such as ornamentation, resistance to other kinds of disease that could harm my orchard or particularly tasty varieties of fruit even when production is low yield. My viewpoint differs from that of a farmer who grows trees with an eye single to the most efficient means of making money. When we minister as Jesus does, we realize that outward productivity is not our most important goal.
Consider:
Not everything that looks like a concern at first glance is actually a problem. Some things are just part of a treeβs natural life cycle. A new peach leaf may look like one with a Peach Leaf Curl infection when it is actually just a healthy young peach leaf with wrinkly bits. Some insects, like the Peachtree borer, are harmful. Others, like various types of pollinating bees, help a tree be healthy and productive. Some growth patterns which might initially appear to be defects to the untrained eye can actually be advantageous. Peaches prefer to be pruned to an open center whereas pears are trained more often to a central leader. Pruning these different tree types with a one-size fits all approach may result in varieties that are damaged or produce less fruit.
In most circumstances, it is perfectly fine to have different kinds of fruit trees with different kinds of fruits in the same orchard. In fact, within the same species and within the same orchard, diversity can ultimately be a key component of greater overall yields (in both quantity and quality). Different varieties of trees in our orchard can help us avoid the problems that come with monoculture.
In the past, LGBTQIA+ individuals have been perceived as disease agents, told that certain characteristics of our growth are unnatural and undesirable, or treated with a one-size fits all mentality. In some church situations, these precious individuals have even been uprooted and cast aside. I feel these approaches have needlessly damaged many trees and the longer I look at it, the larger orchard as a whole.
Over time, I have moved beyond my childhood perception that being LGBTQIA+ was some sort of disease of the soul. I believe weβre just slightly different types of trees with unique needs and unique strengths. I believe our Heavenly Parents love the diversity of their creations and love to see all of us thrive and grow.
Queer followers of Jesus Christ can produce our own amazingly tasty fruit and actively benefit the entire church orchard, leading to higher and better outcomes for everyone.
The world is oftentimes such an ugly place, but sometimes it can be so beautiful.
Like, when two choirs, one from Croatia and the other from Zimbabwe, met on the opposite sides of a Lisbon subway station and both sang to each other.
I unfortunately do not know what the Zimbabwe children choir sang to them (although it was so beautiful), but the Croatian klapa Kastav sang 'KuΔa puna naroda' (a house full of people).
And let my reward be a house full of people,
my life, give me a voice, so I can embrace you with songs.
Kurt Vonnegut wrote: βWhen I was 15, I spent a month working on an archeological dig. I was talking to one of the archeologists one day during our lunch break and he asked those kinds of βgetting to know youβ questions you ask young people: Do you play sports? Whatβs your favorite subject? And I told him, no I donβt play any sports. I do theater, Iβm in choir, I play the violin and piano, I used to take art classes.
And he went WOW. Thatβs amazing! And I said, βOh no, but Iβm not any good at ANY of them.β
And he said something then that I will never forget and which absolutely blew my mind because no one had ever said anything like it to me before: βI donβt think being good at things is the point of doing them. I think youβve got all these wonderful experiences with different skills, and that all teaches you things and makes you an interesting person, no matter how well you do them.β
And that honestly changed my life. Because I went from a failure, someone who hadnβt been talented enough at anything to excel, to someone who did things because I enjoyed them. I had been raised in such an achievement-oriented environment, so inundated with the myth of Talent, that I thought it was only worth doing things if you could βWinβ at them.
In the early 1970β²s, a young man named Byron Marchant moved with his new family into a little house in Salt Lake City across the street from Liberty Park. His new congregation asked him to serve as scoutmaster for their Scout troop.Β
He encouraged neighborhood boys to join regardless of whether they belonged to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.Β His neighborhood had a large minority population and that was reflected in the Scout troop. Byron selected two African-American scouts to be the senior patrol leader and the assistant patrol leader.Β
Then in 1973 the Church announced a new policy, the Deacons Quorum presidency was to also be the scout troop leadership. That meant Byron would need to replace the top two leaders in his troop. And even if they joined the Church, since African-Americans were not allowed to be ordained to the Churchβs priesthood, and therefore couldnβt be president of a priesthood quorum, the former troop leaders would not be allowed to be troop leaders again.Β Β
Byron Marchant figured that whoever conceived of this policy just didnβt consider that some church troops would have the demographics that his had. He went to his bishop and continued all the way up the ladder of leadership, thinking if they heard about his troop that he could get an exception. Instead he was rejected at every level and warned that his pleas could result in church discipline
For Byron, this was not the end. He stood outside of General Conference passing outΒ literature questioning the Churchβs discrimination of Blacks and he contacted the NAACP. This resulted in Byron meeting President Spencer W. Kimball so that he could explain to the President of the Church his reasons for alerting the NAACP.
In 1974 the NAACP accused the LDS Church of discriminating against a 12-year-old Black child by not allowing him to be a senior patrol leader and planned to file suit against the Boy Scouts of America for violating the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (they decided not to take the LDS church to court because of the special protections that religions have under the First Amendment).
βWhile we very reluctantly acknowledge the L.D.S. churchβs legal right to maintain its doctrine excluding blacks from the priesthood, we are outraged when that doctrine finds expression in the churchβs secular activities.β
That lawsuit led to an audience with the Churchβs First Presidency for Byron to explain himself for why he took actions which led to the lawsuit which the Church saw it as the most significant challenge to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints since the 1890s polygamy days.
Eventually the Boy Scouts reached a settlement with the NAACP and the Church had to reverse the policy and priesthood was no longer required for a boy to be a leader in Church-sponsored troops.
The refusal by the Church leadership to recognize the discriminatory effect of its policy on African-American youth affected Byron.Β He started learning about the origins of Churchβs ban of Black people from the temple and the priesthood.Β
In 1977 he even visited Church archives and saw the priesthood ordination certificate for Elijah Abel, an African-American. With permission of the archivist, he made a written copy of the certificate, typed it up at home, and began distributing it to the press & public in August 1977.
He no longer felt he could remain silent about the discriminatory policy of the priesthood/temple ban and one afternoon each week Byron would carry a sign in front of the Church Office Building in Salt Lake City.
Byron and a few other like-minded Mormons planned to carry out a protest on Temple Square during the October 1977 General Conference.Β
Marchantβs local leaders threatened to hold a disciplinary court, but he promised to stop the protest if his leaders promised not to convene a court.Β
Byron still wanted to make his point and in the General Conference of October 1977, when it was time to sustain Church leadership, Byron spoke up from the balcony of the Tabernacle.Β This was the first opposing vote in General Conference since the 1800β²s.Β
The cameras didnβt turn to see him cast his dissenting vote, but hundreds of thousands of people listening by radio or watching on TV heard his voice.
President Tanner: It seems, President Kimball, that the voting has been unanimous in favor of these officers and General Authorities, and we would ask those new members of the First Quorum of the Seventy to take their seats with their brethren, please.
Voice from the gallery: President Tanner? President Tanner?
President Tanner: Yes?
Voice from the gallery: Did you note my negative vote?
President Tanner: No. Let me see it.
Voice from the gallery: Up here.
Security escorted Byron from the building and he explained to the press that his negative vote was to highlight the injustice of the priesthood ban.Β
Twelve days later he became the 2nd member excommunicated for opposing the Churchβs priesthood ban. He was also fired from his job as ward janitor. His excommunication made national news.Β Eight months later, President Kimball announced to the world that male members of African ancestry could now hold the priesthood.
Byron Marchant truly embodied the Mormon phraseΒ βDo what is right, let the consequence follow.β Itβs easy to conform and go along, and difficult to stand alone.Β
It was the treatment of children which opened Byronβs eyes. This still happens today, parents have a child come out as LGBT or they learn of the sexually-explicit questions that had been asked to their child by a bishop, and it opens their eyes to some problematic things in this Church, and those parents speak up.Β
I also think itβs illustrative that the Church was resistant to this internal dissent, only once outside organizations and the press brought pressure did the Church change who is allowed to be scout leaders, or make adjustments to grown men asking teens about sex.
At my most recent visit with Elder Renlund, the first thing he did was hand me a copy of his latest book and describe the process of how it came to be and briefly describe what itβs about. Then we had a meaningful conversation.
I got back home to Florida and opened the book to find heβd written a note inside. π₯Ή
Itβs a bit surreal to receive such a note from an apostle. As a gay man serving in church and who also shares about his experiences with faith & church, both the positive and negative, I have haters who think itβs inappropriate or who quibble that I have some opinions which differ from current church orthodoxy.
While I do have some opinions about what should change or about things preached to queer members and policies & restrictions against us, I live my life in a way that conforms to church standards, not perfectly but I strive, which to my way of thinking is a higher testimony than the doubts and opinions I sometimes express.
I canβt help but think of two times Jesus declared someone has great faithβa Roman centurion and a Canaanite woman. Both were outsiders, members of groups the Jewish religious establishment would have overlooked or despised.
Now hereβs an apostle saying something similar to a gay man. Not that this note makes me feel validated, instead it makes me feel seen and cared for and loved.
βApril 2026. To David Doyle with admiration and appreciation for your faith, faithfulness, and example over decades. Dale Renlundβ
This is beautiful David. Thank you for sharing this with us.
Speaking for myself and many other LGBT members and nonmembers alike, we have all heard significant negative, even harsh, things said about us and sometimes directly to us. To hear an apostle warmly recognize the contributions and faithfulness of even one of us is Balm of Gilead for all of us.
At my last visit with the Renlund's, I gave them a copy of The Book of Queer Mormon Joy and bookmarked my story and one written by my friend Erran Speaker (@loveerran) and he asked me to bring her with me the next time I visit. That visit took place today.
He began by commenting how much he loves my pink tie. Really likes it. In fact, referenced it a few times during the meeting, even commenting on how my pink phone matches my tie. It was cute.π
βββββββββ
I shared about Elder Anderson's visit to my church building and that I was in charge of lunch. The wives were oohing and ahhhing over the tablescape and the food and took pictures and offered to airdrop photos to me and asked for what my phone is called. "Bootyyyshaker9000." Elder Renlund laughed at that.π
Then I shared how Elder Anderson came to the kitchen afterwards to thank everyone who was cleaning and commented that he's never seen it be all men washing up. I immediately commented that cooking and cleaning are not among the duties listed in the Handbook for the sisters' callings. Elder Renlund responded, "Good for you."πππ Then he asked how Elder Anderson reacted. "He looked over at me for a 1/2 second, then carried on with what he was saying."π
βββββββββ
Elder Renlund asked how I was doing healthwise. I let him know that since we last met I had completed therapy for eating disorders. He was very kind as he noted that this is a difficult thing to overcome.
I spoke about how this has been something I've done daily for decades, it started as a teen. He asked how frequently I engage in disordered eating now having completed therapy? I've had a few incidents but they've been months apart. He especially found it interesting that the types of food I used depended on what feelings triggered the disordered eating, such as comfort foods when anxious or crunchy foods I could chop down on when feeling angry.
βββββββββ
I shared with him that I was aware someone had made very negative comments about me serving as a stake executive secretary which caused me some hurt feelings. Elder Renlund expressed his sorrow that such a thing happened and what it implied about me as a gay man serving in church. That if I'm doing a good job and the stake president wants to keep me on, that's the only opinion that matters.
I stated that I recently completed 10 years in this calling, and it was after these negative comments were made about me that led to the first time in all these years that the stake president and I had a conversation about whether it's time for me to be released. Elder Renlund responded I'm doing a great job and he thinks I should serve for 23 years! π My stake president and I should be open to the Lord's timeline and revelation of when it's time for a change, but "there's no reason to stop serving."
βββββββββ
I brought up his recent General Conference talk with the story of his dog having trouble choosing whether to chase the blue ballπ΅ or the yellow ballπ‘, and using that to teach we should choose to focus on the Savior's atonement which gives Him power to help us along our earthly journey. He showed us a drawing by an Idaho cartoonist named Bagley of his dog and the yellow and blue balls. Very cute!
He let us know his 10-year-old had asked to get a pet dog and Elder Renlund thought he'd get a big dog and name it Spike so when he walks it down the sidewalk he'd look very manly. His wife Ruth suggested getting a small dog with a feminine name. So they compromised and for 17 years had a small dog named Lady whom he loved very much. πΆ
βββββββββ
At some point we mentioned we know people who came home early from their proselyting missions who have transitioned to service missions. Elder Renlund wanted to make clear there should be NO stigma about serving service missions instead of a proselyting mission. Sometimes parents think of it as a lesser option, the fallback position, and they don't want that for their child.
He shared with us a quote made by Gordon B. Hinckley in his first General Conference after becoming president of the church. "Your obligation is as serious in your sphere of responsibility as is my obligation in my sphere. No calling in this church is small or of little consequence." Ruth Renlund had joked, "Oh sure, being the Primary pianist is as important as being president of the Church." But a week later as she sat at the piano in the Primary room she thought, "Well, Gordon isn't here, guess it's up to me." πΉ
Elder Renlund wants service missionaries to know that their calling isn't secondary, it isn't lesser, it is an opportunity to serve and contribute to the Kingdom of God which makes it equal to all other callings to serve.
He followed this up by saying on some Sundays he doesn't have an assignment and will choose to attend a local ward, and after Sacrament Meeting he goes to Primary. His favorite is the singing of songs. He asks the Primary children what their favorite songs are and it used to be that the answer almost always was "I am a Child of God," but nowadays he most often hears, "This Little Light of Mine," along with one or two others of the new hymns. While he no longer is overseeing the new hymnal, which gets released in 2027, he delights that the new hymns are being embraced even by the children. πΆ
Oh, that morning I shared with Erran a joke Elder Renlund told me, that he thinks the war in heaven started over the creation of a new hymnal because there's so many strong opinions. He delivered that joke again today and Erran laughed (while politely not saying that I already told her that jokeπ¬)
βββββββββ
One thing I appreciate about meeting with Elder Renlund is he asks me to be my authentic self, to be honest about my thoughts and feelings, and that he will be his honest, authentic self in return. That a conversation where we can be honest with each other is important.
We had such a conversation today, some hard things, some hurtful things, some personal things being shared, things too personal for a public blog post. And his response was empathetic, and to share his opinions on the matters, and even to thank us for things we shared and an invitation to come again.
Given the small number of apostles and how many members there are in the LDS Church, I know only a limited number get to have the experience of one-on-one conversations like we had today. I am fortunate that an apostle takes interest in me, a gay Latter-day Saint, and in my friend who is a trans member of this church, and the hardships we encounter and in our thoughts on our experiences with church. I wish more people could experience the care, concern, and love expressed. π
What a wonderful opportunity to meet with Elder Renlund! We parked in the βtunnelsβ downstairs and then checked in with the security desk in the lobby. Elder Renlundβs secretary, Becky, came down and showed us the way up. She was previously the secretary for Elder Richard G. Scott, and we shared our fondness for our favorite conference talks from him.
Elder Renlund had recently moved offices in the building. The building itself is quite beautiful. Elder Renlund met us at the door and said hello to David and then to me, shaking my hand and looking me in the eyes as he asked my name and had me spell it for him. He conveys an immediate sense of warmth and inclusion. I appreciated his kindness in using my name and pronouns during our visit.
We were shown into his office, where I was somewhat surprised to find a rather utilitarian and unassuming desk like one might find at a typical office furniture store (I suppose I was expecting a rather larger, more ornate, all-wood version with a historical vibe). Elder Renlund had his chair pulled out and invited us to sit in two side chairs facing him, with nothing between us. After spending a few minutes catching up with David, he asked me about my work and where I was from, then he and David discussed some things about Davidβs experience as Stake Executive Secretary. His compassion and concern for David was evident. Also, he has apparently heard that David does an excellent job, which surprises none of us who know him!
Elder Renlund said he had read both mine and Davidβs stories from the Book of Queer Mormon Joy. My story in that book is about when I and a friend attended Relief Society for the first time. I related a follow-up story from another church meeting that included a sacrament meeting and a Relief Society meeting that became the most important church meeting of my life. In a previous visit, the Renlunds had jointly gifted David a copy of their book The Melchezidek Priesthood to bring to me. I have since read the book a couple of times and mentioned how much I enjoyed his relating a personal story about training a newly ordained elder serving as Branch President in administering blessings. Itβs a wonderful story of how to train and strengthen with kindness and the spirit, and it has become my model for training others in both church and work settings. Elder Renlund gave us a copy of his new book, Learning to Listen. Itβs a book on receiving personal revelation and I am looking forward to reading it!
One of my favorite parts of the conversation was the discussion on service missions and service missionaries. I know a number of service missionaries and they are amazing! Elder Renlund spoke to the desire in church leadership that there never be any stigma attached to a service mission. They are not lesser missions (and in my opinion they may be the best kinds of missions in a lot of ways)! I deeply appreciated the sincerity he evidenced in saying how much the brethren want people to know that every calling matters and is important. He also mentioned that his favorite second hour meeting is Primary, and he loves singing time! I love knowing that about him!
And when Elder Renlund told the joke about the war in heaven starting over a new hymnal, he told it much more funny than David.
It was a wonderful visit, and I felt heard and ministered to. I donβt suppose there have been many opportunities for someone like me to speak with an Apostle of the Lord and receive counsel. It was humbling and I am very grateful.
In 2024, the Church expanded these restrictions on trans people's participation in church worship and activities...In general, these policies worked from the assumption that trans Latter-day Saints presented some threat to those around them or would make others feel uncomfortable, without much consideration to the threats and discomfort faced by trans individuals.
In this case, biological sex alone is insufficient to be ordained to the priesthood. A βbiologicalβ male must also perform and present as male socially in order to be eligible.
For instance, a fertile cisgender male and a transgender male may biologically reproduce, but their relationship is ineligible for sealing. In contrast, an infertile cisgender male and female may adopt or use in vitro fertilization, sperm, egg donors, or surrogacy and are eligible for sealing. Even in the context of reproduction, gender performance supersedes biological function and ultimately determines ecclesiastical acceptance.
In a September 2025 amicus brief to the Supreme Court, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints argued that trans rights are in conflict with religious rights and that to accept trans people in society will bring βstigmaβ upon anti-trans religious people...The brief draws on a recent trend in conservative jurisprudence that suggests that accommodating the existence of trans people in public is itself a challenge to religious freedom.
Kit Hermanson describes the Church's documentation of its members from birth until death and how the archive of these documents fails to βencompass narratives of the human experiences it claims.β In particular, Hermanson analyzes how nonbinary trans identity challenges the authority of specific documents: the birth certificate, the temple recommend, the marriage certificate, and the death certificate. They note the βproblem of the limitation of the archive's ability to encapsulate the full range of gender and sexual experience...The inability of these documents to actually produce the normative outcomes expected by the Church (and the state) exposes their insufficiency as constraints on experience and on βGod-granted agency.
When Church leaders have historically referred to intersex and trans people as βaccidents of nature,β they imply a theology of a divine design which may be βaccidentallyβ thwartedβresisting divine providence. By contrast, many trans Latter-day Saints have embraced their created status not as an accidental deviation from divine intention, as if such a thing were possible, but an expression of it.
Are all bodily characteristics that appear at birth representative of an eternal identity, or only some? Do eye color, skin tones, or genetic predispositions to addiction also reflect an eternal identity? How does one decide whether the conditions set at birth contain ranges of possibilities and epigenetic outcomes, including things like height or hair color, resemblance to a genetic relative, or to more consequential things, such as disease, life span, weight, race, and more? Which are fixed expressions of an βeternal identity,β and which are contingent or even changeable features? Is medical intervention to address some conditions set at birth an interference with divine design in some circumstances, but in others within the realm of human agency? For instance, is wearing a hairpiece or having hair replacement surgery to treat male pattern balding (a form of gender-affirming surgery) a violation of one's eternal identity as set at birth, or only certain changes of appearance are prohibited? The appeal to mortal birth as providing an unambiguous standard for resolving something like a fixed eternal identity raises more problems than it resolves.
There are two problems with this attempt to define βgenderβ in the proclamation as βbiological sex at birth.β The first is that the methods used to fix sexual difference in this way do not lead to binary outcomes between male and female. Medical examinations of the genitals (phenotype) and chromosome testing (karyotype) still allow for ambiguous, indeterminate, or mixed cases. These two methods of morphology and chromosomes, among other medicalized ways of assigning sex like gonads and hormones, are not always consistent, and in fact, result only a pluralist theory of βbiological sex.β There are conditionsβsuch as in androgen insensitivity syndrome, congenital adrenal hyperplasia, or gonadal dysgenesisβthat may not be apparent at birth and often manifest later in life or remain undetected. The binary between male and female is one that is forced by cultural expectations, not scientific ones. Further, such biological determinism of the relationship between βsexβ and βgenderβ are cultural norms that vary across time and place.
Second, despite the idea of an βeternal gender,β the notion that the conditions set at mortal birth are the expression of a premortal set of characteristics introduces several problems to Latter-day Saint theology besides its account of providence. Are all bodily characteristics that appear at birth representative of an eternal identity, or only some? Do eye color, skin tones, or genetic predispositions to addiction also reflect an eternal identity? How does one decide whether the conditions set at birth contain ranges of possibilities and epigenetic outcomes, including things like height or hair color, resemblance to a genetic relative, or to more consequential things, such as disease, life span, weight, race, and more? Which are fixed expressions of an βeternal identity,β and which are contingent or even changeable features? Is medical intervention to address some conditions set at birth an interference with divine design in some circumstances, but in others within the realm of human agency? For instance, is wearing a hairpiece or having hair replacement surgery to treat male pattern balding (a form of gender-affirming surgery) a violation of one's eternal identity as set at birth, or only certain changes of appearance are prohibited? The appeal to mortal birth as providing an unambiguous standard for resolving something like a fixed eternal identity raises more problems than it resolves.
In a 2016 article, I noted that a great deal of Latter-day Saint discussion of Jesus's atonement emphasizes his universal access to the human experience. In his suffering, Latter-day Saint thinkers across the ideological spectrum have made clear that Jesus understands fully, in his very body, what it means to be a woman. It is precisely in this act of atonement that Jesus becomes something other than a man. By this logic, Christ is then a trans or nonbinary figure whose soul and body cannot be reduced to male alone.
Further, I have pointed to the Holy Spirit as another figure who performs gender in nonbinary ways and whose gender changes over time and place. In Greek, the βSpiritβ or pneuma is a neuter noun, while in Semitic languages it is feminine and in Latin it is masculine. Further the metaphors to describe the Spirit range from masculine penetration to feminine imagery of being βbornβ in the Spirit. These linguistic factors are not incidental. Latter-day Saint leaders and theologians have identified the Spirit as both a male and a female in the history of interpretation. This figure, frequently described as βfluid,β challenges cisgender norms and thus provides an archetype for locating trans identities in the divine realm
The field of trans and nonbinary Latter-day Saint theology is still in its infancy, as are the Church's evolving teachings on this topic. While the Church has long opposed transgender identity, its teachings and policies on the issue have undergone significant changes in the past fifty years.
This dynamic of social and intellectual change is likely to continue, partly due to the politicization of the topic between those who seek to expand and include a wide range of individuals into society and the church and those who do not. The interdisciplinary treatment of the issue comprising science, psychology, theology, and church authority will continue to play a crucial role in addressing these issues with utmost care and consideration.
This Good Friday I want to share my favourite poem by Jay Hulme, a queer, trans and Christian poet
God as a carpenter. Jesus as a familiar to wood and nail. The beauty of all Creation evident and true even in pain.
image and image description taken from Jay Hulme on Twitter
βLet a man live as a woman among women, put himself into women's clothing, visit their social circles, their intimate meetings, take part in their small joys and their sufferings, their playful games [Spielereien], let him above all experience long talks face to face! If one had the moral courage and strength to not break character, he would experience things of which our most bold fantasies could not dream. We will look into the soul of women as an open book of wonders.β
β Emma Trosse
Since some of you don't seem to understand how this 'new notes' thing works, I'll break it down:
I'm the OP. I'm making this post. If you like, comment, reblog (without comment) on this post, then I'm the one who will see all those notes in my activity page.
However...
If you reblog (with comment), I will get a notification that you did that, but any likes/comments/reblogs (without comment) you get on that reblog will only be shown to you. As OP I won't see them.
If someone adds a reblog (with comment) to your reblog...as OP I won't see that. I won't see any of those notes in my activity page.
Basically, if someone with a large following makes a comment, then they will get all the notes and OP will see nothing. If OP has said something silly because they're, y'know, 21 and it happens, and then someone reblogs it onto the dash of someone with a large following who then dunks on them for fun? OP doesn't see it, doesn't get notes for it, but they're gonna get the harrassment for it in their inbox.
If I, someone with a 5 digit follower count, reblog something to correct misinformation on Ancient Egypt, then OP will never see it unless it was on the original post, but I will continue to get notes on that post even though it's not my post. If I reblog fanart, or just art in general, with a comment like 'Oh this is so lovely!' then OP will not see any of the notes from people reblogging it from me. They'll only see my reblog. So it's possible for an art post by someone else to have 200 notes for them, but 9000 for someone who reblogs it with a comment, and the OP artist will have no idea it's been seen by that many people.
It's killing blow to the community we've built here, by someone higher up who doesn't understand that being able to see all the comments and reblogs is what makes this site the place I keep coming back to.
That's what sucks.
I encourage people to go to tumblr's support page, select contact support, and then in the dropdown menu select 'Feedback' and leave polite and constructive feedback (for those of you who enjoy 'emails worded politely but are a strong 'are you an idiot?', try that way of wording it). They're more likely to listen to you if you're not an asshole about it. I've already gone and done this, and I hope others will too.
Hey OP, thank you explaining this for us. I'd like to also add to please submit all feedback by commenting on tumblr's CHANGES sideblog (link below). based on the tumblr support email i just received and many others have already received, tumblr engineers are monitoring their feedback more closely there.
You can access it here.
Please.
We need all the feedback we can. Support tickets, reblogs, but most importantly THE CHANGES SIDE BLOG.
If I understand this correctly, if I reblog a friend's post and comment, and someone we both love reblogs and comments, then my OP friend will not see the comment or get a note. Only I will see that third generation activity with comment. My OP friend would have to go looking for the post to see the reblogs, but they won't even know to go looking because they can't see the third reblogs notes.
But we all know and love each other (looking at you quirky niche mutual community). Those long chains of notes are community. They're part of our love for each other.
Just remembering this morning that the first people at the tomb on Easter Sunday were women, and the first person to meet Jesus after his resurrection was a woman.
In a time when women could not offer witness in legal proceedings, the first witnesses chosen by the resurrected Lord were all women.
Just remembering this evening how John says the first person to bear witness of Jesus as the Messiah is the Samaritan woman at the well - and many believed on her words.
At a time when women could not offer witness in legal proceedings, the Lord's first witness is a woman who is an outsider.
