Autumn Reverie: My Husband's Childhood

I had a beautiful experience yesterday afternoon. It was a lovely fall day. As I sat down at our dining room table with some of Mark's childhood photo albums, the sun's gentle rays shown through the window behind me and over my shoulder, casting light and shadows on the pictures and table in front of me. Outside, I could hear the junior high kids walking home from school past our place, laughing and talking

I suddenly realized I was fully in this beautiful moment. That moment was all there was. How comfortable, cozy and lovely it felt. From somewhere in the depths of my memory came an image and a feeling of working a jigsaw puzzle on a card table set up by the living room window on a snowy Saturday afternoon, or of laying on the couch in front of the fireplace after having played in the snow for hours. It was that same feeling of contentment, experienced more frequently as a child but elusive once one becomes an adult.

Then, as I was looking at the pictures of Mark, something else came. As I focused on various ones, I noticed more things in the pictures and - surprisingly - a feeling came that I was somehow there. A witness, yet not a witness. Present, but not present.

It was a strange yet wonderful feeling. Mark and I have always felt, since the moment we met, that we have - in an undefinable way - known each other all our lives. I don't want to overthink this, but as I looked at those pictures, I thought about how coming out later in life and meeting the love of one's life somehow imbues the images of childhood with special meaning. "Each photograph," I wrote in my journal, "makes me love Mark all the more."

That's when I decided to get out my new camera and take it's very first pictures. How appropriate they were images of Mark. Looking through the lens presented new insights as I noticed details that I might not have otherwise seen. The patches on Mark's jeans with the plaid cuffs, for example. I think every kid in our generation wore jeans with those big huge patches on the knees and didn't think a thing of it.

Mark holding a string. The Japanese girl with a camera hanging from her neck. Mark's sister Deb playing with the dog. But most of all, that shy look on Mark's face; or, as in the one above, that faraway look that evidences a sensitive soul.

Deb and Mark older, playful. Notice the Japanese sandals.

There is more I could write ... When I look at these photographs, I don't so much see a cute kid in Japan in the Eisenhower and Kennedy years. What I see is a beautiful child who grew into the man I love. 

Of Essays, 14-Year-Olds, Gays and Revisionism

The LDS Church recently published another anonymously-written essay on its website about Joseph Smith's marriages to girls, currently-married women and other females. The New York Times even ran a front-page (above the fold) story about it. I, along with many other Mormons who tend to be more well-read in Mormon history, was not surprised by anything in the essay. I already knew about it. But it was interesting to read the (few) comments I browsed through in various places in reaction to this publication.

Here, too, I wasn't surprised. That doesn't mean, however, that I was not dismayed and even a bit angry. Why? Because of comments left by people - a lot of whom seemed to be younger - that this was no surprise to them, that they had been taught all this in seminary (wrong) and that it doesn't make any difference. In other words, it's ancient history; move on.

The ignorance of these people is astonishing. And that's what it is: ignorance ... combined with arrogance and willful blindness. Oh, and did I mention revisionism?

I don't really follow Mormon issues all that closely anymore, but what I read reminded me of something that was (and to an extent still is) close to my heart. What is that? The revisionism that has taken place within the Mormon community (and hierarchy) - even within the gay Mormon community - concerning the Church's historic stance on homosexuality.

In this regard, I'd like to republish below a piece I wrote in August of 2012, originally entitled "Apologetics vs. Apology," that addressed this subject.

********************

“There hasn’t been a major change in doctrine like some people suggest.”

~ Joshua Johanson

Speaking at the recent [8/2012] FAIR conference concerning same-sex attraction

Joshua Johanson is a youngish Mormon who is married to a woman but admits – publicly and loudly – that he “has” “same-sex attraction” (SSA).  A couple of days ago, he presented at the annual conference of the Foundation for Apologetic Information and Research (FAIR) held in the Salt Lake area.  

There is much that could be written about Johanson’s remarks, but I wish to focus on the sentence quoted above and some comments along the same line that Johanson left on a post I published on Main Street Plaza (MSP) over a year ago.

The MSP post generated over 160 comments, many written by Johanson (“An Inner Light”).  Again, there is much that could be written about all that he and others expressed on a number of issues relating to Mormonism and homosexuality, but I want to focus in this post on only one:  Johanson’s revisionist view of Mormon doctrine concerning homosexuality.   

In typical apologist fashion, Johanson goes through an extensive number of rhetorical gyrations in the numerous comments he left on the post (and in his FAIR presentation) in order to advance the position that Church leaders have never condemned homosexuality per se, only the practice of engaging in lustful homosexual sex acts.  He argued that Elder Packer’s infamous speeches in the late 70’s (as well as his October 2010 address) were misinterpreted by the men and women who heard and read his remarks.  He does this to prove (mainly to himself) that the Church’s position on homosexuality has never changed; it was just misunderstood.

Though I don’t doubt Johanson’s sincerity, I took strong exception to his position, because to me it was revisionism, plain and simple.  I summarized my thoughts in the following comment:

"I’m sorry [Peculiar Light], but I have felt a growing, very strong reaction to your comments, which have the effect of minimizing what for generations of Mormon men were deeply significant statements and teachings – teachings that altered their lives; teachings which conveyed that to have same sex attractions was sinful, dirty and (to use Packer’s recent phrase) “impure and unnatural.” I know – I lived through that era. I was there. 

"So to read statements such as yours, it’s the height of apologetics: whitewashing. Denial of what really happened; what was really said. It’s deeply disturbing. Do you think that BYU conducted those electric shock therapy sessions because only homosexual *acts* were viewed as wrong? No! They conducted those sessions to try to condition responses to erotic male images. They were trying to kill same-sex attraction in their victims.  

"To advance a theory now that the Church didn’t really teach what it did in fact teach, that it was all semantics, minimizes the trauma that countless men went through and are still feeling the effects of. It relieves the Church of responsibility for what it did, and it relieves the modern thinking member of the Church of responsibility for contemplating WHY the “doctrine” has changed so significantly over the past few decades …”

Apologetics vs. apology …

A couple of months ago, I received an e-mail from a guy I know who is about my age, is married (to a woman) and is gay. We have corresponded for well over a year.  By way of background, he was raised in the Church, but knew he was gay. He came out for a number of years, but then met a woman with whom he felt he could make a life and “live the Plan of Happiness” (i.e., be a devout heterosexual Mormon).  They got married and had children.  Now, however, though he loves his wife, he feels somewhat trapped.

“I was cleaning out some old magazines and books,” he wrote, “when I came across an issue of the Ensign dated November 1980 (conference issue).  On page 94 there is an article by President Spencer W. Kimball [president of the Church at that time] entitled "President Kimball Speaks Out on Morality."  I want to quote some parts.”  

This friend then went on to quote extracts of President Kimball’s address.  Kimball, though feeble, was president of the Church when I converted to Mormonism.  His books, sermons and other writings and pronouncements were extremely influential in my early days and years in the Church, as they were to countless other men of my generation who either were raised in or joined the Church during the 70’s and early 80’s.

Though I was familiar with President Kimball’s teachings, and though I have reviewed many statements about homosexuality made by leaders of the Church over the last 50 years, I do not recall reading this address that my friend referred to in his email.   I want to quote from it at length because it so clearly reveals the teachings of the Church regarding homosexuality during this period, teachings which dramatically affected me, my friend and tens of thousands of other young Mormon men (and women).

“The unholy transgression of homosexuality is either rapidly growing or tolerance is giving it wider publicity. If one has such desires and tendencies, he overcomes them the same as if he had the urge toward petting or fornication or adultery. The Lord condemns and forbids this practice with a vigor equal to his condemnation of adultery and other such sex acts. And the Church will excommunicate as readily any unrepentant addict.  

“Again, contrary to the belief and statement of many people, this sin, like fornication, is overcomable and forgivable, but again, only upon a deep and abiding repentance, which means total abandonment and complete transformation of thought and act. The fact that some governments and some churches and numerous corrupted individuals have tried to reduce such behavior from criminal offense to personal privilege does not change the nature nor the seriousness of the practice. Good men, wise men, God-fearing men everywhere still denounce the practice as being unworthy of sons and daughters of God; and Christ’s church denounces it and condemns it so long as men and women have bodies which can be defiled …   

“This heinous homosexual sin is of the ages. Many cities and civilizations have gone out of existence because of it. It was present in Israel’s wandering days, tolerated by the Greeks, and found in the baths of corrupt Rome.   

“This is a most unpleasant subject to dwell upon, but I am pressed to speak of it boldly so that no youth in the Church will ever have any question in his mind as to the illicit and diabolical nature of this perverse program. Again, Lucifer deceives and prompts logic and rationalization which will destroy men and women and make them servants of Satan forever …    

“‘God made me that way,’ some say, as they rationalize and excuse themselves for their perversions. ‘I can’t help it,’ they add. This is blasphemy. Is man not made in the image of God, and does he think God to be ‘that way’? Man is responsible for his own sins. It is possible that he may rationalize and excuse himself until the groove is so deep he cannot get out without great difficulty, but this he can do …” 

My friend had highlighted numerous objectionable terms used by President Kimball, but if I were to do that, the entire passage would be highlighted.

He continued:

“I could go on.  This makes me sick and I started shaking when I read it again for the first time in many years.  Is it any wonder so many of us fought with ourselves for so long?  Is it any wonder we put on the mask and thought if we acted the way we were told to that eventually we could be cured?  

“If the church really wanted to change, really wanted to heal wounds, then they would recant these types of messages and extend an olive branch to the downtrodden.  Instead we just get a general "love the sinner but not the sin."  Or the equally loving 'hey, you're OK just they way you are, just don't act on it.'  

“Anyway, it does make me realize how hard I fought, and why I fought.  I wanted to please the prophet, my prophet.  In the end I was just betrayed. "I'm sorry" could go a long way towards healing old wounds, but it won't happen.”

He’s right:  it won’t happen. Not only that, but it is infuriating to hear Church leaders (and members such as Johanson) soft-pedal rhetoric like that of President Kimball – a man revered within the Church as a prophet, seer and revelator – and Elder Packer and others.  At the time of Kimball’s address, Church leaders – both local and general – encouraged young men who “confessed” to homosexual “inclinations” to go ahead and marry (but not to tell their prospective wives anything), claiming that once they did so and experienced heterosexual sex, they’d be cured.  Now, apostles of the Church claim that this counsel was never given and that the Church is interested in protecting “the choice daughters of God.”  Well, they sure weren’t 30 years ago.

There will be no apology because to do so would be to admit that President Kimball – and many other leaders recognized as prophets – were wrong.  And that will never happen.

What apparently will continue to happen, particularly if left unchallenged, is apologistic revisionism.

Sunset, Sunrise, Mahalo

"Mahalo" is a word one commonly hears in Hawaii. In the sense in what it is used today, it means "thank you." However, according to Wikipedia:

 "'Mahalo' is a Hawaiian word meaning thanks, gratitude, admiration, praise, esteem, regards, or respects. Some sources support that the meanings "thanks" and "gratitude" were appended to the word following contact with Westerners. While the word mahalo is found in Lorrin Andrews' 1865 dictionary, the English-Hawaiian section does not provide any Hawaiian word intended to mean gratitude or thanks. Also, early visitors noted that the Hawaiians were generous and grateful people, but had no word to express gratitude or to say 'thank you'."

Mahalo is what I felt last night watching the sunset over the ocean and what I again felt this morning as we watched the sun rise over Mauna Kea, Hualalai and Kohala. I felt gratitude to be able to witness these scenes of incredible beauty. I felt that I wanted to offer Mahalo to the universe for creating such beauty. And I also wanted to say "Maholo" for Mark, for his presence in my life, for his love, for the fact that he is here with me. Still here, healthy and strong (except for the fact that he has incurable cancer). 

Before I get to the sunrise pictures from this morning, here's one from yesterday, when not one but two turtles were resting on the beach about 20 yards away from us.

Last night's sunset and this morning's sunrise were our going away presents. Tonight, we head home.

So, again, I feel Mahalo for all we have seen and experienced here on the Big Island. But most of all, I feel Mahalo for my beautiful children (and grandchildren) who light up my life and for my beautiful husband Mark, the love of my life.

Same-Sex Marriage in 16th Century Rome

I have been reading a fascinating book entitled, Homosexuality and Civilization, by Professor Louis Compton. I have previously considered blogging about passages of the book; but I read something yesterday that I decided I had to blog about. In concerns an event that occurred in 1578 in Rome.

During the papacy of Pope Gregory XIII (who reformed the calendar and also hounded and burned "sodomites" with a vengeance), the Venetian ambassador to the papal court wrote in a dispatch in 1578:

"Eleven Portuguese and Spaniards have been captured. They had assembled in a church near Saint John Lateran where they had performed some ceremonies ... which sullied the sacred name of matrimony, marrying each other and being joined together as husband and wife. Twenty-seven or more, it is said, were discovered altogether on other occasions, but at this time they were not able to capture more than this eleven, who were given the fire as they deserved."

Another account was written by French writer Michel de Montaigne upon visiting Rome two-three years later. His Travel Journal confirms, as Compton writes, "that the ceremonies were conducted in full seriousness and were an attempt, however foolhardy, to give dignity to relationships the men took seriously. Montaigne wrote:

" ... [At the Church of] San Gionanni Porta Latina [pictured above], in which church a few years before certain Portugese had entered into a strange brotherhood. They married one another, male to male, at Mass, with the same ceremonies with which we perform our marriage services, the same marriage gospel service, and then went to bed and lived together. The Roman wits said that because in the other conjunction, of male with female, this circumstance alone makes it legitimate, it had seemed to these sharp folk that this other action would become equally legitimate if they authorized it with ceremonies and mysteries of the Church. Eight or nine Portuguese of this fine sect were burned."

The story behind this event would make a fascinating read. Obviously at least one priest was involved to say mass and perform the marriages. These men almost certainly knew that they would - if discovered - be burned. Why did they do it? Did someone betray them?  Herein lies a tale worthy of being written about.

Being Gay: The Matter of "Choice"

Texas Senator Ted Cruz made headlines last week when he said that Apple CEO Tim Cook's sexuality reflected his "personal decisions" and "personal choices." This statement - that being gay is a choice - unfortunately reflects the view of a large portion of the American population and of the Mormon population. Two years ago, I published a post on my Beyond the Closet Door blog (now closed) entitled, "An Open Letter to Mormons: The Matter of Choice." In light of Cruz's recent comments, I have decided to republish this post today.

*********

Some of you may have family members or friends who are gay. Perhaps you have had an opportunity to talk to them about this issue. Many if not most of you, however, have never knowingly been acquainted with someone who is gay; and even if you have, you have probably never had an in-depth conversation with them about what it means to be gay.

There are a number of reasons why you may not have ever had such a conversation. But if we were to be honest with each other, I think you would agree that one of the main reasons you have never had such a conversation is that, as active members of the LDS Church, you believe that being gay is a moral choice. Because of this belief, you tend to shy away from gay people, believing them to be immoral. And because of this, a conversation never occurs.

Some of you may never know a gay man or a lesbian. Others of you, however, will discover, if you haven’t already, that you have a son or a brother or a father who is gay; or a sister or a daughter or a mother who is lesbian. You will then be confronted with a choice: do you simply accept discredited notions that erect stone walls of misunderstanding, suspicion and condemnation; or, do you let what you know of your loved one lead you into a conversation that allows for education, understanding and respect?

If you choose the former option, you embark on a road that will bring heartache to both you and your loved one. Guaranteed. Sooner or later, you will regret the choice that you made.

If, on the other hand, you choose the latter option, any degree of effort you put into such conversation will correspondingly benefit both you and your gay loved one.

To inaugurate such a conversation, I would suggest that you first ask your loved one whether he believes being gay is a choice. Then listen, really listen, to his response. What you will likely hear is a firm “no.” This may be followed by a more lengthy account, describing how he became aware of his sexual orientation; how it did not appear fully “grown” on a certain day as a result of a “choice”; how, rather, it is something that grew and developed without nurture and sometimes in spite of efforts to weed it out of oneself.  

He may then describe the torment he faced as a boy, as an adolescent, as a young man and as a mature man. He may describe the challenges he has faced since coming out.  He may describe the taunts and insults that he has endured. He may describe how his soul has been wracked, time and time and time again, with guilt and self-loathing, believing himself to be unworthy of God’s love, of being someone whom, in fact, God hates. 

And then he may ask you: “Do you seriously believe I would choose all this?” 

It is entirely possible (if not probable) that you may come to the point where you can see/believe that your loved one did not choose to be gay. However, again because of social and religious conditioning, you consciously or subconsciously believe that there must be a cause of homosexuality (i.e., just like there must be a cause for things such as cancer), so you start looking for one.  In future posts, I’m going to take a look at what some in our society believe might be possible “causes” for homosexuality, including the “sissy syndrome” and the “distant father/overbearing mother” syndrome.

For now, I’d like to close this with my own “testimony,” i.e., my own story.  I have known since I was 12 years old, at the latest, that I was attracted to guys. This isn’t something I sought. It isn’t a condition I woke up with one morning. And it is most definitely not something I “chose.” 

Like virtually every other boy like me growing up in the time I did, I desperately tried to hide these feelings so that no one would ever guess that I was “queer” or a “homo” or a “fag.” I did not nurture these feelings; rather, I tried every way I knew possible to kill them.  

Of course, I never succeeded in this effort; but what I did succeed in is developing a hatred of my inner self as something that was dirty, perverted and detested and rejected by God. I succeeded in growing to maturity as a fragmented human being who had carefully partitioned off bits of himself, never knowing the joy of living as a whole person. And I succeeded in becoming a person who desperately sought the approval of others, fearful that if they only knew the real me, I would lose the love and the regard of those close to me.

Like I would choose all this?

What I'm Reading Right Now

I'm spending a lot of time reading on the beach these days. Thanks to Kindle, I can read several books at a time. Here's what I'm reading right now:


The Spark: A Mother's Story of Nurturing Genius

My daughter, Hannah, recommended this book to me on Thursday. I'm now almost halfway through it. It is the remarkable story of a mother's determination to heed what she intuitively felt needed to be done to help her autistic toddler achieve his potential. What I've read so far is not only an amazing story, but a story that provides wisdom, insight and courage to parents, whether or not their children are autistic. Favorite quotes so far:

"I learned that *everyone* has an intrinsic talent, a contribution to make, even if it comes in an unexpected form. And I began to believe that each person's potential to achieve great things depends on tapping into that talent as a child."

"I had believed for years that any child will out perform your expectations [in various skills, academics, etc.] if you can find a way to feed his or her passion."

The book caused me to ponder how I helped raise my older children and given me much food for thought on helping my younger children - ages 8-15 - find their intrinsic talent, that which they are most naturally passionate about, and pursue that passion. I will finish the book before we head home next week.

Homosexuality and Civilization

I've been reading this book, by Louis Compton, for several weeks and am now 39% of the way through it. Though the author is an academic, I have found it to be very readable and quite fascinating. It begins at the beginning of recorded history and works its way up through the centuries, through Judea, Bronze Age Mediterranean civilizations, Ancient Greece and Rome, the Dark Ages and into the Renaissance, where I now am, reading about homosexuality in Florence during the 1400's.

Along the way, I have learned how the writings of the early Israelites impacted early Christian fathers, then the jurisprudence of Rome, then Medieval Europe. How forgeries, misunderstandings, mistranslations, superstitious fear and brutality came to effect western Civilization's views on homosexuality for 2000 years. It makes for a very insightful, fascinating and sobering story. Did you know, for example, that Julius Caesar was the butt of many jokes as a result of a same-sex affair he had early in his career? Or that the practice generically known as "pederasty" in the Greek world existed for 1000 years until the burgeoning power of the Christian church finally succeeded in crushing it?

The David Suzuki Reader 

I knew of David Suzuki from my years in Vancouver, B.C., primarily from the CBC show, "The Nature of Things," which he hosted. I was reminded of this when we recently went to visit Mark's brother and sister-in-law, Tim and Marie, in Colorado. One night, we were sitting around talking about books, and Tim suggested the Mark read Suzuki's book, Tree: A Life Story, which is a "biography" of a single Douglas fir. Mark downloaded that book, but it is still a few books down in his queue.

I am not very far into the Reader, but I like that it is a collection of  relatively short essays about the environment, about sustainability, about climate change and about Suzuki's life story. Reading the essays has reminded me of when I lived in Vancouver and was attending law school at the University of British Columbia. Those were the days Gro Harlem Bruntland, the prime minister of Norway and chair of the United Nations' World Commission on Environment and Development, was advocating sustainable development. The Commission issued its report in 1987 - the year I commenced law school - entitled "Our Common Future," which I recall reading. Those were the days of "Think Globally. Act Locally." It was the time in my life when I was most engaged in what was going on in the environment.

Four Seasons in Rome

I read Anthony Doerr's book, All the Light We Cannot See, while we were in Europe. Although there was much about that book I liked, it was, in my view, dark and unredemptive. I decided to pick up Four Seasons in Rome because I had just been in Rome and hope to go back some day. It is a memoir of a year he and his wife and newborn twin sons spent in Rome in 2004-2005. This book is on my "slow read" booklist. I typically read a few pages at a time, then move on to something else. While I am not captivated by it, I am only halfway through. Perhaps it will get better.

Greece: A Short History of  Long Story

I came aware from our Greek cruise with a desire to learn more about the history of Greece - buy gently. I long, long ago realized that I am what I could call a "cyclic learner." I learn a little bit about something, then a bit more, then a bit more - in cycles. Perhaps many if not most people learn that way. I don't know. But when I searched about for a short, approachable yet serious history of Greece, I landed here.

I'm about 20% of the way through this book by Carol Thomas and have already learned quite a bit, putting pieces of information together that I learned while in Greece. This is another one of those books, however, that is not a page turner and which I have to absorb slowly.

The HeartMath Solution

This is another book that was recommended to us by Mark's brother and sister-in-law, Tim and Marie. I'm sure I'll blog more about this in the future. For now, let me say that I am finding it fascinating and enlightening. I'm only 13% into the book, but I think it's fair to say that the basic premise of the book is that science is proving that the heart has an intelligence, a brain, of its own apart from the mind's brain. And all sorts of things flow from that.

The Novels of Alexander the Great, by Mary Renault

Mary Renault was both a product of her times and in advance of her times. A lesbian, she wrote ground-breaking novels that had gay themes, primarily from the Classical period of ancient Greece. She was English, but spent the last few decades of her life in South Africa with her partner. When reading the first novel of her's that I've read, i.e, The Last of the Wine, I realized that I needed to learn a lot more about ancient Classical Greece in order to appreciate what I was reading. Renault was dealing with pederastic themes within the context of historical Greece during the Peloponnesian war. Thus, that first book was somewhat challenging. I kept waiting for the climax of the love between Alexis and Lysis ... but I came to realize two things: Renault was writing in the 50s' and 60's, and she was writing about a form of love that is foreign to 20th and 21st-century readers - even gay readers.

Now, I'm reading her trilogy about Alexander the Great. I still wish I knew more about Greek history; thus my reading of Greece: A Short History of a Long Story. But the story is fascinating. Alexander. His mother, Olympias. His father, Philip. Of course, Alexander was gay, or at least bisexual. Thus, I know the story is to be developed. Where I'm at in my reading, he's about eight.

Flora and Fauna of Hualalai

I'm feeling kind of lazy, so this post simply features photographs of plants we walk by on our way to the beach every day and of a sea turtle that came up onto the beach yesterday. He (she?) finally came to rest about 10 feet away from us and then spent the entire afternoon there, sleeping.

The turtle emerges from the water

He/she was swept a bit further onto the beach with each incoming wave

Once beyond the waves, he used his fins to slowly propel himself 

Ahh ... rest