Officially withdrawing my support for "Circling the Wagons" Mormon LGBT Conference

Friends-

It is with much thought and disappointment that I write this post. I am publicly withdrawing my support for the Mormon LGBT Conference “Circling the Wagons,” and have resigned my position as member of the board of directors.

“Circling the Wagons,” to date, has been a wonderful experience. It has offered an alternate view for LGBT Mormons and their families who wish to allow gay Mormons to live their lives authentically as LGBT individuals. It has given hope to many, and been a great breath of fresh air from the outdated guidance that has dominated the Mormon LGBT landscape for decades.

Unfortunately, that has changed. The conference being held in Salt Lake City this November features speakers and messages that I, as an openly gay Mormon, cannot support. These include:

• Josh Weed, who is well known for his individual choice as a gay man to be married to a woman
• Steven Frei, President of North Star, an organization that positions LGBT Mormons as “struggling with same-sex attraction” and encourages them to change or suppress their orientation

The messages that will be delivered in this November’s “Circling the Wagons” are in direct conflict to everything my heart and spirit tell me about the nature of being a gay Mormon. North Star encourages LGBT Mormons to view themselves as broken and afflicted, while Mr. Weed’s message is routinely co-opted by many within our faith as the preferred path for LGBT Mormon youth, despite his insistence that it may not be the path for everyone. 

I have spent many years holding the belief that we as LGBT individuals are perfectly fine in the eyes of our Father—we don’t need to lead other people’s versions of our lives. Our path is uniquely our own, and just because humans don’t quite yet understand how we fit in our Father’s kingdom doesn’t mean our Father hasn’t known all along. And I have spent many years helping others who’ve struggled inside the confines of existing folklore-based policies—including many depressed and suicidal youth.

As a member of the board, it is my responsibility to help design direction and strategy for these events, including our mission. This conference represents a significant shift in my understanding of our purpose, and is one on which I was not consulted and do not support.

What is most disturbing to me is that we now have evidence-based research from The Family AcceptanceProject that demonstrate that encouraging LGBT children to suppress or change their orientation is actually a factor that contributes greatly to health risks of LGBT youth—including suicide. 

According to the impeccable research done by Dr. Caitlin Ryan of San Francisco State University, LGBT young people whose parents reject them are: More than eight times as likely to attempt suicide, nearly six times as likely to report high levels of depression, more than three times as likely to use illegal drugs, and more than three times as likely to be at high risk for HIV and sexually transmitted diseases.

An LDS oriented version of the booklet that suggests ways families can insure a safer life for their LGBT children, co-authored by former bishop Robert Rees, is found at the site mentioned above.

In addition, based on scientific data from the American Psychological Association demonstrating that conversion therapy (encouraging people to change or suppress their orientation) poses significant risks to youth (including depression, anxiety, and self-harm), has been banned in the state of California. To quote the author of this article, “Young people in this country must be allowed to grow up knowing that they are accepted and loved no matter whom they love.”

Given these factual sources of scholarship, it not only feels unethical to give platform to these messages, but it is, quite frankly, dangerous. I am disappointed that the leadership of “Circling the Wagons” does not recognize the threat to LGBT Mormon youth they implicitly endorse with this conference. Combined with the lack of inclusion on a major shift in direction, I must respectfully withdraw my support for and involvement in the organization.

I wish my friends at “Circling the Wagons” well, and send my kindest regards to Mr. Weed and those within North Star. But I cannot be part of an organization that disseminates messages that are proven to increase the risk of suicide and other serious health issues to the same group of people that I seek to help.

Circling the Wagons: Bishop Don Fletcher's talk

The talk given by my Bishop, Don Fletcher, at the Circling the Wagons Mormon LGBT Conference in San Francisco last month, shared with his permission. I'm a blessed man to get to serve with a human who has such an amazing spirit.

Enjoy.
________________________________________________________

One of my favorite scriptures is 1 Nephi 11:17.  In this passage Nephi is being grilled/peppered with questions by an angel.  Not personally being a scholar on all points of gospel nuance, I can readily identify with his answer to the angel in this verse: “And I said unto him: I know that He loveth his children; nevertheless, I do not know the meaning of all things.” (1 Nephi 11:17)

As a human, I certainly don’t know the meaning of all things either--yet I am also totally confident that God loves all of His children.

There are a vast array of challenges that beset the members of my ward – some are very emotionally distressing.  In my calling as a bishop, I love to make use of priesthood blessings – like Peter said in Acts, it is a gift that is very concrete and real that I can offer my ward members. The words of the Lord through a priesthood blessing can often be not only comforting, but sometimes very instructive also.

“Then Peter said, silver and gold have I none; but such as I have, give I thee.” (Acts 3:6)

My ward in San Francisco may have the distinction of having more members that are gay than any other on the planet.  I have had the privilege of meeting with many of these members and they have blessed my life greatly. A common thread that I hear repeatedly is an ongoing testimony of the gospel, a love of the Savior and a total confusion about how a gay person fits into the Lord’s eternal plan. 

In each of the many blessings I have given to these individuals, as I have laid my hands on their heads, I have felt strongly impressed to always start each and every blessing with the simple declaration that “you are loved by the Lord, right now, exactly as you are”.  It has amazed me at how powerfully those words have affected these members.  It may seem simple and obvious but it has had a deeply positive impact for my members to know that.

Bishop Fletcher at the Statue of Liberty

The history of the world is replete with various groups of people not being loved, accepted, or respected.  In a recent trip to New York, I had the opportunity to visit Liberty Island and gaze at that beautiful symbol of our freedom moving forward, even Lady Liberty.  I was interested to hear the story that in the 1896 unveiling party for that strong feminine form, women were not invited, not allowed on the island for that occasion.  The suffragettes circled the islands in boats, protesting their exclusion!
 
I have served as a bishop in 3 different states – Florida, Alabama and California.  Each location has afforded me the opportunity to advocate for the inclusion of sometimes marginalized members.  In Florida, I do not think that my older members were always given the respect and opportunities that they should have had.  (I must admit some bias here being a physician with an almost entirely geriatric practice – I love my senior patients.) 

In Alabama, my wonderful ward in inner city Birmingham was made up of about 65% African American members.  These fine Saints were familiar with the sting of not always being seen as equal.  My first counselor recounted the story of how several years earlier (but after 1978) he had been interviewed for the Melchezidek priesthood.  One evening, while cleaning the Stake President's office while working as the janitor for the stake center, he was hurt deeply to find his recommend with bold red letters scribbled on it proclaiming “THIS MAN IS BLACK.” The culprit was never identified, but the critical lesson was the Christlike manner in which this man responded. Though hurt, he proceeded on with full activity in the church, humbly serving around those who did not see things as the Savior would have had them.

The Bay Ward in San Francisco tries hard to be exemplary of Christ like love and acceptance to all in our diverse congregation – I am honored to be one of its members.  As I have visited as a bishop with our many gay members, I have been overwhelmingly saddened to hear their stories of great emotional suffering.  The feelings of isolation from gay members who have reached the conclusion that they are not worthy of God’s love are the most heart wrenching I have heard.

I have a family member who is gay and is not currently attending church meetings.  He still has a testimony of the restoration.  He knows the Book of Mormon is true.  But with reference to his ward, he simply states, “If they knew who I was, they would not want me there”.  That is his honest well considered perception—and his sad reality.
 
Primary songs bring the spirit into my life with great dependability.  One of my favorite Primary songs has always been the song – “I'll Walk with You”, the words of that song composed by Carol Lynn Pearson.  (pg 140, Children’s Songbook)

   If you don't walk as most people do,
   Some people walk away from you,
   But I won't! I won't!
   If you don't talk as most people do,
   Some people talk and laugh at you,
   But I won't! I won't!
   I'll walk with you. I'll talk with you.
   That's how I'll show my love for you.
   Jesus walked away from none.
   He gave his love to ev'ryone.
   So I will! I will!
   Jesus blessed all he could see,
   Then turned and said, "Come, follow me."
   And I will! I will!
   I will! I will!
   I'll walk with you. I'll talk with you.
   That's how I'll show my love for you.
 Words: Carol Lynn Pearson, © 1987 IRI
 
In the words of Carol Lynn Pearson from her wonderful book, “No More Goodbyes”, Carol Lynn has this to say about the song. In the Children’s songbook there is a lovely picture of one child pushing another in a wheelchair…"but as I wrote it I also had in mind the little children who, as they grow up, will find themselves of a sexual orientation sure to present a challenge for them in our church and our society."
 
I love these words of Elder Jeffrey Holland: "Some members exclude from their circle of fellowship those who are different. When our actions or words discourage someone from taking full advantage of Church membership, we fail them—and the Lord."  The time has come for us to work diligently to make sure that this admonition is applied to Latter-day Saints who are gay.  I cannot imagine how it would feel; to think you are not were not capable of being loved of God.  The priesthood blessings I have been privileged as a bishop to give many gay members have not only instructed the receivers of the blessings, but me, as well. And that instruction is quite clear: All of us are loved by the Lord.

This church is truly the church of Jesus Christ.  He lives and He loves us - each and every one.  We are loved and we need to love each other as He loves us.  I hope that as a church we can all shed some of the cultural relics that have prevented gay members from viewing themselves as the loved children of God that they are. 

Such is my prayer, in the name of Jesus Christ. Amen.

Our Not-so-Mormon Moment

I’m a pretty easy going guy. Very little gets under my skin these days. I am, after all, a gay Mormon. If I were easily offended I’d have left the playing field a long time ago. And, I’ve often remarked that the only opinion of me that matters more than my own is that of my Savior—and quite honestly, that’s a place I am quite content to remain.

Something happens, though, when I see my Mormon fellows joining hands, and engaging in a spiritual round of, “Tick, tock, the game is locked, and nobody else can play.” I jokingly told my friend Joanna Brooks that maybe this was evidence that I have a paternalistic instinct after all, despite a house full of dead plants that seem to provide evidence to the contrary. But humor aside, not only is this a hurtful, unkind signal to anyone who doesn’t fit our own personal definition of “Mormon,” it completely misses the primary message of our Savior: “Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them.” (Matt. 7:12.)

Last week’s Rock Center special on “Mormon in America” provided us as a faith with a potentially amazing opportunity to give our fellows across the country a look at Mormons at their best—honest, kind, compassionate, diverse, and a people who genuinely aspire to be emissaries of our Savior’s unconditional love. And by and large, while it wasn’t perfect, I tip my hat to my new friends at NBC for doing a pretty darn good job with what they had to work with.

But then it went wrong.

The post-interview on KSL (a local Salt Lake City station) featured the Mormon family that had been interviewed in the same segment as Joanna Brooks, Abby Hunstman, and me. And as I listened to what was said, I felt a familiar hot feeling crawling up my gut and into my face—shame. Rest assured, I was not shamed by the messages they delivered—I believe what we say about others tells the rest of the world a lot more about us, than it does them. I was ashamed, as a Mormon, for them.

In the KSL commentary from the Mormon family, there was no gratitude. Humility was shockingly absent. There was no wish that more of our church had been presented, or that more time had been dedicated to what the sacrament or other cherished parts of our faith represent to us. It wasn’t about our religion at all. It was about being better than others.

Said the wife, smiling: “I always am concerned when they focus on circumstances or exceptions that are the fringe element of the faith. I think 98% of the members of the church are indicative of how our family is, but they seemed to focus on more of the 2% that are disenfranchised at some level, so I always go, ‘Oh…’ (rolls eyes). Because they spent three days with us! And so we know what they saw, and what they could have highlighted, and it seemed like it was a little superficial in some of the clips they did on us, and more in depth on those that were...” (groans, winces)

Said the husband, smiling: “I wish they had shared more in depth things, as my wife just said, about, like kind of the way they did with the 2%, and the folks that are disenfranchised…I wish they had shown more of our kids because that’s really who we are.” 

Said the wife, again, while the husband smiles in the background: “I wish they would have highlighted a little more of mainstream Mormonism, instead of highlighting some of these, unusual, (winces, looks pained) circumstances, situations or feelings (of) a small minority of members, they always seem to focus on those who have issues with the faith, and I think, ‘Well..’ (winces again). I’m not sure that’s the best, you know, indicator of a faith.”

Said the husband: “But I want to add to that, most of America, when they’ve been exposed to people of our religion and our faith, are impressed and they know who we are.  And I think for the most part, we’re becoming more and more accepted into the mainstream, and you know, a tree is known by its fruit. And members of this faith who live their faith religiously, faithfully, their fruit is good. And that’s really who we are and what we’re about, and we go about letting our light shine, and I wish NBC had shown more of that tonight, but, (deep breath) it’s NBC, and they’re a little different in terms of, uh, what they wanted to portray tonight, and I understand. But we know who we are, and we put our best foot forward for those three days.”

We are the better Mormons, their message implied. We deserve more. And the element we consider “fringe diversity” didn’t merit representation to such an extent—or maybe even at all. They don’t really count. After all, the fringe, in our estimation, only accounts for 2% of our faith—so clearly they deserve less.

They deserve less.

At its best, this message tells the rest of the world that Mormons are elitists—that while we may smile when you’re with us, underneath simmers an ugly disdain and scorn for anyone we determine to be different in any regard; that while our smiles may be warm, our hearts are not.

At its worst, it’s a way of legitimizing persecuting and humiliating those we think, in our imperfect mortal state, are less than us. It tells the world that we believe that anyone different from us not only deserves less air time—but less church, less inclusion, less love, and perhaps even less God.

I suspect there’s not a Mormon out there who hasn’t heard (or been the recipient of) one of these messages—so sadly, this isn’t just a horribly unfortunate and isolated mistake. Instead, it exemplifies one of the most significant challenges within our faith today. Facebook chatrooms and individual blogs share thousands of stories where Mormons have dishonored their own covenants to ‘bear one another’s burdens’ and instead, castigated their fellows and heaped upon them scorn and rejection.

After the NBC special and following interview aired, the emails and messages started pouring in from the ‘fringe:’

I went to the Mormon Church while I visited Utah. I’ve seen these kind of people. Never before have I met such intolerant people who smile so much.

I was raised in the Mormon Church, and there are parts of it I love and miss. But I got tired of the Relief Society sisters bringing over plates of cookies and looking at me with pity and saying (about my non-member husband), ‘Don’t you hope one day he’ll convert?’ My response was, ‘No, I married him because I love him for who he is.’

I heard these same messages over and over again in my ward. I’m not gay, I’m not a feminist, but I couldn’t watch these people claim to be Christlike and hurt others in His name. When I resigned, I put my Sunday School teaching manual down on my Bishop’s desk and said politely, ‘I’m sorry…I’m just too compassionate to be a Mormon.’

I don’t know how you and Joanna [Brooks] do it. Good thing Jesus didn’t have the attitude many Mormons seem to have. There sure would have been a lot of disappointed lepers.

What troubles me the most is we know better—and we can certainly do better. This isn’t Mormonism at its best. And it certainly doesn’t exemplify what each of us strives to be—examples of our Savior’s unconditional love.

In fact, if we think about it, our Savior was chiefly concerned with the fringe—one of his mottos, after all, was “leave the ninety-nine to get the one.” And as always, His example is the penultimate when it came to expressing unconditional love.

When Christ was on an urgent rescue mission for the daughter of one of the Jewish synagogue leaders, he was followed by a large crowd of people. Among the throngs of individuals, there was a "certain woman," who pressed through the crowd to touch His robe in an act of faith--that by doing so, she might be healed. We are told that for twelve years she suffered a vaginal flow of blood, an almost constant hemorrhage. But worse than her physical illness was the suffering she had to endure at the hands of her brothers and sisters--because of mental and emotional shame inflicted upon her by her fellows.

Like so many, her desire was to be near the Savior, to look into His eyes, to feel His love for her. But this she could not do, because according to Jewish law, she was unclean. She, like so many ‘fringe’ Mormons, was judged unfit to mingle with the community, unfit to worship in the temple. She was an outcast--scorned, and unclean.

Yet, like so many times in His mortal ministry, Christ stopped and healed this woman. True, the physical healing must have lifted a tremendous burden. But the most important aspect of His kindness was healing her aching and broken spirit. For the rest of her life she would know that Christ knew her, that he noticed her, and that he accepted her. What a profound demonstration of our Savior's love, mercy, and kindness. What a tremendous example of reaching out to someone on the fringe, regardless of consequence.

Being numbered among the fringe is not a plague; but what many of us suffer at the hands of others, is. What an amazing invitation this story is for us within the Mormon Church to reach out to others and emulate our Savior—for as Mormons, there can be no more worthwhile pursuit than becoming like our Savior. And what an equally moving cry for those of other faiths, or none at all—for there is little more virtuous a pursuit than striving for what is right. 

Over time, I’ve come to view my church much the same way I view my mortal fellows—imperfect, and presented with constant opportunities to improve. As such, there are things we will get amazingly and stunningly right. And there are things we will get horribly, painfully wrong. But like the humans who inhabit it, our Church will learn, grow, and continue to improve as long as we’re mindful of where we’re off course, and gently guide ourselves back to where we should be.

I believe that I cannot be an ambassador of my LGBT brothers and sisters and ask for compassion, understanding, inclusion and patience from my Mormon fellows—if I am not among the very first to offer those same qualities to them. It is the responsibility of every Mormon to help our church and our membership continue to become better children to our Father, and better disciples to our Savior.

Often, for me, I’ve found one of the most effective ways I improve is when someone has the courtesy—and the courage—to hold a mirror up to me, to allow me to see myself as others view me. Sometimes I don’t like the image that’s reflected back. But invariably—and especially when I don’t like what I see—I’m always grateful for the chance to make a course correction, and come a little bit closer to the kind of person both I and my Savior want me to be.

And it is in that same spirit in which I write this post—with love for my fellows both inside our church and out, and the confidence that we, too, can improve and grow. 

As for me personally, I believe every single one of us is equal in the eyes of our Savior, regardless of orientation, ethnicity, gender–or any other marker we use as humans to define differences between ourselves and others. As such, I don't believe it is ever my job to condemn, criticize, or mock another. My job, as my Father’s son, is to walk beside you as you learn the lessons life is intended to teach you; to celebrate your joys with you, and to lend a hand when you stumble. The true spirit of love we have for one another is kind, patient, and doesn’t demand its own way. It doesn’t scold, condemn, or criticize. I am most certainly an imperfect human–but this is the spirit I think our Savior wants us to strive to achieve throughout the human family, and it is the spirit that I endeavor to bring to my entire life–and most certainly my faith in this Mormon Moment. 

So to my new friends at NBC, thank you. I know how many nights, weekends, and labor-intensive hours went into this production. I know your hearts were in the right place. I know it was your desire to produce something that would represent us honestly and that would make us happy—yet not be a manufactured PR infomercial. And I, for one, think you did a pretty good job. Any time we can get an hour of Mormon time on national TV, it’s a win for us—and one that many, like me, appreciate.

And to those who have heard a scornful Mormon remark that makes you feel like ‘fringe diversity,’ I am sorry. We’re not perfect, and our words and our actions may not always show the love we strive to hold in our hearts for you. But we’ll get better—it’s part of who we are.

While no one speaks for 98% of our faith, I do speak for myself. And you’re welcome in my ward any Sunday—regardless of your color, stripe, spot, pattern, or any other marker we use to create distance between ourselves and others. I’d love to see you there.

Heck, I might even take you out for a Diet Coke afterward.

A parent's letter to their family: Our son is gay--and we love him

This post is dedicated to my friends the Montgomerys. Below you will find a letter they sent to their family late last week, explaining that while their son is gay, not much of anything else has really changed: They still love their Savior, they're still active Mormons, and they still love their son--the same way they always did. 

It is my hope that other parents of Mormon LGBT children out there see this and realize it is possible--very possible--to love your child unconditionally, keep them safe from health risks, and still remain true to your faith. In fact, I think this is one of the truest representations of our faith there is--putting into action the principle that our family is first, our children are precious, and no other success can compensate for failure in the home. 

I think my favorite part is how this helps dispel the illusion that you have to choose between your church and your child. Kudos to the Montgomerys for not allowing anyone to force them into that horrible Sophie's Choice. 

Enjoy the read from my new friends--and my new heroes. And pay special attention to the postscript from their son at the end--that's a message we all need to hear.

_______________________________________________________________

To all our friends and family, we feel that it’s time share something that has been a significant experience in our lives.  Many of you already know this, or may have heard secondhand, so we wanted you to hear it directly from us (Tom and Wendy): our oldest son, Jordan, is gay. You may wonder why we would share this information (and of course it’s with Jordan’s permission).  We will explain, but first we want to share our experience through some excerpts from Wendy’s journal.

BEGINNING OF EXCERPTS FROM WENDY’S JOURNAL:

On the last Sunday in January, I stayed home from church with my daughter, Emma, who was sick.  Tom took the other 4 kids to church with him.  They weren’t even gone 5 minutes before I had a strong feeling to go read Jordan’s journal.  That feeling came twice before I acted on it.  (Jordan started keeping a journal as a Duty to God requirement a couple weeks before this.)  I’m not sure I can adequately describe my feelings as I read the things my sweet son wrote.  The entries clearly portrayed his conflicted feelings of being attracted to other guys, and not feeling anything towards his friends that are girls.  He knew he was different, that there was something “wrong” with him. 

The next day I drove down to visit my brother who is a Bishop in his ward and has had some gay teens in his ward.  I also stayed with my sister for a couple days.  I was afraid to come home and be around Jordan until I knew I could control my emotions and tears.  Tom is much better controlling his emotions and was able to be around Jordan without him sensing that anything was wrong.  I didn’t want Jordan to know that we knew yet and that we had read his journal because if that was the only way I could find out what was going on with him, I didn’t want that window shut. 

Tom and I met with our Bishop that week and talked with him about what to do.  He referred us to LDS Family Services to see a counselor about it.  In the meantime, we had several talks with Jordan, trying to let him know that he could talk to us about anything, we would love him and accept him no matter what, and so on.  We were hoping he would open up and talk to us about it, but he didn’t. 

After a few weeks, we decided that we couldn’t wait any longer for him to come out to us on his own.  So Tom gave Jordan a Priesthood blessing that night after the other kids were in bed.  It was a beautiful, powerful blessing.  Afterward, Jordan sat next to me on the bed and I just hugged him.  Tom looked at Jordan and said, “Jordan, I feel like I need to ask you something.  Are you struggling with feelings of homosexuality?”  I felt Jordan start to tremble and cry.  Then he nodded.  He looked absolutely terrified.  Jordan just clung to me, for almost 2 hours.  We told him how much we love him, how this changes NOTHING of how we feel for him.  We accept him completely and will help him through this.

I have come to learn that how we handled that moment was an exceptional “coming out” for a gay teenager.  Many (including LDS teens) are disowned, kicked out of their home, screamed at, had hateful, awful things said to them, etc.  I can’t imagine EVER feeling like that towards one of my children.  But I know it was a tender mercy of the Lord that we had a couple weeks of knowing before this moment, so we could get a handle on our own difficult emotions and not experience the shock that so many parents do when their kids come out to them.

There is no way to adequately explain how we feel, the emotions we are going through, or what we need to do to cope with all of this, all while trying to hold it together enough for our other 4 kids.  I didn’t know it was possible to cry so much, to have emotional pain be so intense that it becomes physical pain, to grieve over someone who wasn’t dead.  I feel like I am mourning the loss of the life I wanted for my son, and thought he would have: a mission, temple marriage, being a father.  It was as though the boy I raised was gone and I had to get to know this new boy.  He was different now, but still the same.  Such a confusing place for me!  I have read and studied this subject in the Church so much that I have a very good idea of what his life will be like as a gay LDS man.  If he chooses to stay true to the teachings of the gospel, then he will have a life of loneliness and celibacy.  Never having a companion or someone to love breaks my heart for him.  If he chooses to leave the Church and live an openly gay life, then he gives up the blessings associated with the Church.  He will likely pull away from his family because it will be awkward for him (even though we will try to not make it so).

My poor son!  This is an impossible situation, with no good solution in this life.  He is only 13, and most 13-year olds are not looking that far into their future.  But as his parents, we know this.  And it is an excruciating thing.  But he is STILL that wonderful, amazing, happy, always smiling, enthusiastic boy he has always been.  He is STILL the child I have loved the longest, my first-born, and will forever love regardless of what happens with this or what choices he makes.  

END JOURNAL EXCERPTS

So why are we sharing this with you now?  Our belief is that the choices before Jordan are both unfair and horrible.  They are complicated by both ignorance of fundamental facts and the polarizing political world surrounding gay issues.  Wendy, in particular, has made it her mission to be as educated on the subject as possible. She has studied both scientific research on it and read church leaders’ statements on same-sex attraction, which in recent years has evolved significantly.  She has read and listened to the experiences of hundreds of LDS gay men and women.   She has also waded through the majority of political, hate-filled misinformation out there.   She loses sleep regularly in her search for answers and help for Jordan.  Every spare minute she has is devoted to this.  From all her study and from our discussions with Jordan, I would like to share with you some of the important things we have learned:

(1) Being gay is not a choice.  Science and psychology have recognized this for a long time, and even the church has come to recognize this in recent years. I have read some of the scientific research (mostly from Bill Bradshaw, a BYU biology professor and former mission president), which is quite compelling. But more compelling than the science is the experience and testimony of numerous faithful LDS gay people, including Jordan.  They sincerely tell us that they never chose to be attracted to the same sex; in fact many have tried in various ways to ignore it, fight it or change it – but it doesn’t go away.  Moreover, why would an honest, faithful young man or woman ever choose to be gay in our church and suffer the shame, guilt and rejection that too often come with it?  Those who doubt this proposition should ask themselves, did I ever have to make a conscious decision to like and be attracted to the opposite sex, or was it natural and instinctive? Likewise, it is natural and instinctive for those who are attracted to the same sex.

(2)  Sexual orientation doesn’t change.  Again, numerous studies and the experience of numerous faithful LDS gay people can’t be ignored.  As Bill Bradshaw observes, “honesty compels us to consider the experience of a very large number of LDS gay people, who in spite of exhaustive, lengthy, and totally sincere efforts have not been able to change the fact of who they are sexually.  A testimony of the gospel, faithful church activity, fasting, prayer, missionary service, temple service – all of these are important, but none, in any combination, has been able to alter sexual orientation.” Any doubters should ask themselves, is there anything that would cause me to lose my feelings towards the opposite sex and be attracted to members of the same sex?

(3)  Being gay is not just about sex - any more than being heterosexual is just about sex.  Gay people are no different than straight people when it comes to relationships.  Like all human beings, they desire emotional, spiritual and physical attachment. They feel the same compulsion to fall in love, find a companion and share their life with someone. The desire for physical intimacy is just one aspect of the spectrum of feelings and emotions that humans, whether gay or straight, experience in a relationship.

As we learned these things, we have become comfortable with who Jordan is; and we no longer feel a need to hope for things that cannot happen.  For whatever purpose the Lord has, a certain number of people are faced with same sex attraction.  This does not change the fact that Jordan will need to choose how to live with being gay, but it circumvents a lifetime of petitioning the Lord for something that will never happen and focus his choices on how to live now.  He can move forward secure that he is as the Lord made him and not a broken or wicked person.  Our hope is that he continues to build his faith in the Savior and that he can find happiness in the Church, and we will do everything we can to assist in creating a place for gay people in the Church.

The points outlined above should help secure our compassion and empathy for those who are gay.  There has been too much pain and suffering, mistreatment and rejection – all because of ignorance, fear and misunderstanding.  This isn’t a political effort to get you to vote one way or another, but as long as this subject is taboo and people are too afraid or intimidated to speak about it, then young gay people in the church will continue to suffer.  Today in the Church (and our communities) there is bullying, fear and self-loathing – even suicide.  We will continue to lose too many wonderful gay men and women (and often their families) because they feel unwanted and unwelcome among us.

This should not happen in our Church.  This is why Wendy and I have decided that we can no longer be silent, closeted parents.  We don’t want to be a part of the problem.  We want all gay people, particularly that young man or woman in our midst who is silently suffering with nowhere to turn, to know that we love them and support them.  We are there for them and for their family if they need help, encouragement or understanding.  The Church at this time has no official outreach or instruction on this subject, other than a few statements over the years and a pamphlet.  Local leaders are mostly left on their own on how to counsel gay members.  Among other things, Wendy and I have spoken with our local church leaders about our willingness to be a resource to help educate fellow members and especially to help individuals and families who just need someone to talk to.  There shouldn’t be one member of our Church who thinks it is the Church’s position that they should turn against their children, throw them out of their homes or shun them.  This is the opposite of what Christ would do.

Here is our final point:

To be members of the church in full fellowship, gay members must make a sacrifice of supreme proportions. They are not allowed to fall in love, show physical affection, or be married to those to whom they are naturally attracted.  They are required to be completely celibate.  Being gay is not like having a disability, as some have tried to tell me. Gay people are capable of living and loving like everyone else. A disabled person is never told that they are not worthy of God’s choicest blessings, they always have hope and admiration. As do single women in the church, who are progressing in years without a prospective husband on the horizon. Again, they have hope, support, and love. Our church is all about the eternal family and the only group of people who have no hope of attaining this are homosexuals. To deny a Latter-Day-saint this goal is to strip them of their very reason for being. So, no, nothing can compare.

To give it a personal perspective, if you were told that you could not marry or that you had to give up your spouse or boyfriend/girlfriend in order to retain your membership in the church, how would you choose?  Thankfully, most of us don’t have to make such a difficult decision, but most gay people do. And because falling in love and having someone to share your life with is such a major part of our earthly experience (and a major focus of the church), the great majority of gay people at some time or another choose that path.  We have heard statistics that say up to 80% of gay children leave the Church.

Our only purpose in bringing up this point is so that we might have an extra measure of empathy and compassion for our gay brothers and sisters.  Many of us, Wendy and I included, gave of our time and resources fighting for prop 8 in California, but have we spent one moment of our time to reclaim or show love to some of these rejected souls?  And we wonder why our efforts are perceived as hate.  We should welcome them with open arms into our congregations with love and acceptance, no matter their status or circumstances.  We are simply asking that we love them as the Savior does.  Love Jordan as you always have.  This does not require any doctrinal changes or threaten the sanctity of marriage.  It might just make us all a bit more Christ-like.

While this has probably been too wordy already, there are many things that have been left unsaid.  If you have any questions, please feel free to talk to us.  Also, feel free to share this letter with anyone you feel may benefit from our story.

With love,

Tom and Wendy Montgomery 

P.S from Jordan: I wanted to say something to you guys. Many of you know that we went to San Francisco this past weekend. It was one of the best experiences of my life. We went to a conference for gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgender people (LGBT). They are wonderful and amazing people who have been so devastated and hurt by what society and their families have said and done to them.  Some were thrown out of their homes, others beaten, and some lost everything when they came out. I don’t want this to keep happening. I and my parents are only the start of something that can take the blinders off of people’s eyes and let them see that we should all just love and accept each other for who we are. I’ve been bullied a lot by people at my school and previous schools. That bullying can drive people to suicide, cutting themselves, and all these awful things that I would never throw on anyone for as long as I live. All I’m asking of you is that you love and accept EVERYONE. Not just gays and lesbians, but EVERYONE.

Jordan Montgomery  

A father's poem to his gay son (from Circling the Wagons Mormon LGBT Conference)

On the weekend of August 11, 2012, we held the third "Circling the Wagons" Mormon LGBT conference here in San Francisco. There, I had the great honor to meet the Montgomerys--a solid, kind, Mormon family from California with a young gay son.

At the conference, Tom Montgomery, the father, shared this poem he'd written about his son. I share it here with his permission.

What a great Dad--thank you, my Savior. Please send more like Tom. Fathers like him make the world a better place for all of us.

Enjoy.

___________________________________________________________

I See The Image Of Christ In My Gay Son, Lord

I held him in my hand when he was newly born;

Perfect and innocent, filling me with joy.

I held his hand at his first steps,

I watched him play and smile and talk.

This boy that I have been given,

Has been a gift and my joy,

With a voice that touches the heavens,

And hands that bring music.

He is unique and he is gifted,

And his smile lights up a room.

But the greatest gift I see in him, Lord,

Is that he reminds me of You.

I see love in his eyes and hear trust in his voice,

He cares more readily for others.

I have taught him all Thou hast given me, Lord,

And he has become a better man than I.

I see the Image of Christ in my gay son, Lord,

He is chaste and young and pure.

But we need a new way to live today,

To fill with joy and hope and love.

He is Yours, Lord, and he is mine,

So let us set his feet

On a path that leads him back to You,

As Thou hast made him - perfect and complete.

By Tom Montgomery

With Jordan Montgomery’s permission

Circling the Wagons Mormon LGBT Conference: Matt Mosman's Talk

I've remarked before what a lucky guy I am to serve with the leadership team I have. And here's more evidence, in case you had any doubts before. Matt Mosman is our San Francisco Stake High Councilman, and an all around articulate, kind, and great guy.

The talk he delivered at Circling the Wagons left many teary-eyed, myself included. Matt is another guy I am honored to call my friend.

Enjoy.

___________________________________________________________

Learn to Labor and to Wait

Circling the Wagons Conference, in San Francisco, CA

8/12/12

Thank you very much for asking me to be a part of this program.  I can’t tell you how happy it makes me to see people gathering in support of gay Mormons.  I love the Mormon church, and I have so many friends that I love so much who are gay.  Like any follower of Christ, I am a supporter of love and friendship and acceptance and understanding, so this is a great event, as far as I’m concerned.

I feel it is my duty to point out, to begin with, that I firmly believe that the main issue in the gay community is not the set of difficulties placed on them by those outside the community.  No, it is the truly terrible acronyms.  LGBTQ/SSA?  C’mon.  You’re telling me that roughly 7% of the population is gay, and nobody’s in marketing?

Like some of you, I am an active member of the LDS church.  I believe that the Book of Mormon is divinely inspired, I believe in Joseph Smith as the prophet of the restoration, and I believe that Thomas S. Monson is a prophet today who receives divine guidance.  My current church calling is as a high councilor in the San Francisco Stake.  For those of you who are not members of the LDS church, that sounds like a much bigger deal than it is.  It is literally true that the average traffic cone exercises more authority than I do.  In short, though: I have no major axe to grind with the LDS church, and I don’t speak for the church in any way in these remarks.  Like all of the rest of you, I’m not here to pick a fight. 

But, well...I’m here.  I’m here because I have great friends and family members who are Mormon and gay, and I wish they didn’t have to struggle the way that they do.  I’m here because I’ve watched good things come into people’s lives in the Bay Area, not because we’ve innovated on church doctrine, which we absolutely have not, but just because we’ve tried to open up the culture of a few wards.  Frankly, because we’ve tried to make those wards more Christian places to worship than many wards seem to be.  And I’m here because I think every ward can and should be like that.

I’d like to spend a little time today talking primarily to members of the LDS church, but what I’d like to talk to them about is what I believe are common misconceptions about the church’s actual policies and positions with respect to LGBT people, and about how I think members of the church can use the correct positions to be far more welcoming to gay people in their congregations.  I’ll talk about two things, really: first, about the correct positions on church disciplinary councils, and second, about the church’s position on choice as it relates to LGBT people.  I hope that those of you who have no current affiliation with the church can glean something good from what I have to say, as well, even if it is only some comfort to your broken heart.

I want to begin, though, with a brief diversion on a couple of things I heard at yesterday’s sessions: First, l was really distressed yesterday to hear that the Montgomerys had been advised by a church leader to seek for their son re-orientation therapies from groups that are known to practice types of aversion therapies that -- I want to make this clear -- the church has specifically counseled against.  I know it’s not just the Mongomerys -- in fact, I know that this occurred with many of you in this room --, and that distresses me even more.

Elder Dallin H. Oaks of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles made this very clear in 2006. In a widely-published interview, he suggested that we simply do not know whether or not any therapy is likely to change anyone’s orientation, and that the church has no particular position on conversion therapies generally.  But he specifically acknowledged that aversion therapies have “contained some serious abuses,” and he made it clear that the church wants no part of those abusive therapies.

Churches tell us that sex is not to be taken lightly, and they are not wrong.  Where they often miss is that they fail to take that statement both ways.  It is not to be trivialized by silly immaturity, engaging in sex willy-nilly.  Of course.  But it is also not to be trivialized by pretending that a practice that contains within it the possibility of forever traumatizing a person with respect to sexuality is not the embodiment of evil.

Second, on nomenclature, and this is the only point where I’ll outright say that I’d like the church and its members to make a change: the church seems to encourage people to refer to LGBT people as people who “suffer” from “same-sex attraction.”  I don’t believe that most Mormons understand that the term “same-sex attraction” is diminutive and offensive.  I think we don’t grasp that.  It reduces a gay person’s feelings for a partner, which are as rich and varied as yours and mine are with our spouses and which involve feelings of connectedness and a shared life, to “attraction.”  The term tries to make it all about sex.  I’ve joked with friends that if you were to continually try to contend that what I feel for Shantele is sexual attraction and nothing more, eventually you’d be coughing up some tooth fragments.  I wish we would reconsider the use of terms that trivialize the gay experience or make it all about sex or attraction.

Okay.  On to what I really wanted to talk about: 

It will be very difficult to get the LDS church membership to be more welcoming of gay members if nearly all LGBT people leave the church.  And many of them do not attend for a perfectly good reason, so I want to start for a moment on the elephant in every Sunday School room where an LGBT man or woman chooses to go: Will I be excommunicated from this church that I love because I’m gay?

I want to acknowledge that sitting here we have people who have had just that happen to them.  I’m so happy that you’re here, demonstrating at least a measure of connection toward the church, if that has happened to you.  I would say that to anyone who has been excommunicated, for any reason.  It’s hard to retain that connection.  It takes a special person to be here anyway.  Thank you for that.

I want here to take a step to the side to address for the larger audience the entire concept of church discipline, since not every listener will be a member of my church.  First, I want to point out that the church has every right to decide who is a member in good standing and who is not.  Any organization does.  If we’re a Boston Red Sox fan group, it is perfectly fair to remove the guy who always wears the Yankees gear from the group.  So I don’t have a problem with excommunication in theory, and neither should you.  Second, let me just say here that disciplinary councils in the Mormon church are exceptionally rare.  In most of our congregations this year, exactly no one will be excommunicated.

I want to suggest that the actual policies of the church imply that such a thing should be uncommon for gay people; at least that it should not be even close to the norm for LGBT people to face church discipline.  Here I want to leave the world of conjecture and opinion and delve straight into LDS church policy, and for this part of my talk I’d like to thank my good friend Bishop Matt Marostica of the Berkeley Ward for his wise instruction.  I’m going to speak now about what it actually says in the Church Handbook of Instructions, so I have very little fear that what I’m about to say represents anything other than the actual policy of the LDS church.  I don’t make any claim to speak for the LDS church, but the church’s own manual does.

The Church Handbook of Instructions is a document that any reader would conclude is written with exceptional care.  As this is the document that guides the policies of the church throughout the world, it is pored over, edited and re-edited to ensure that it accurately reflects the policies that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints would like to see instituted everywhere it operates.  It is not a book to be trifled with, as every bishop or stake president will tell you.

In that Handbook of Instructions, where it talks about church disciplinary councils, there is a short list that gives very few reasons -- very few things that a church member may have done -- that would require a bishop or stake president to convene a church disciplinary council, which is the council that could in theory end with a disfellowshipment or an excommunication.  Very few.  And homosexual behavior is not one of them.

It then lists certain things for which a bishop or stake president may choose to convene a council, and there we see homosexual behavior listed as one possibility.

Okay, so there are two lists: the short list of things that require church discipline, and a longer list of things that do not require it, but for which discipline is a possibility.  Now then, there are two things that absolutely must pop out at any serious reader of the Handbook:

First, it should be abundantly clear that if a bishop or stake president institutes a policy whereby church members who are LGBT always face a disciplinary council -- and forget whether or not they are disfellowshipped or excommunicated; we’re just talking about convening a council at all -- that church leader is acting outside of the policies of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints.  That is a guaranteed fact.  The End.

When the church says “must,” and gives a very short list, we assume that it means what it says.  The local leader is not at liberty to institute another policy that adds to the list.  That would be a different policy, not supported by the Church.  Just as you would be out of bounds to independently add something to the second list -- for example, you can’t just randomly decide to start holding disciplinary councils for people who aren’t full tithe payers --, you are also out of bounds to independently decide to move things from the second list to the first.

The second thing that seems obvious is that disciplinary councils are to be entered into with exceptional care and tons of thought and prayer.  The small set of things that require a disciplinary council are real horror stories -- I won’t list them here since they’re in a handbook that is not available to the general public, but trust me on that one -- so one is left to assume that whenever I’m convening a council I’m dealing with an exceptionally serious matter, presumably a matter on par in egregiousness or extent with those horror stories.

So to any local church leader who may be looking for a way not to force their gay members to be involved with church discipline, I’d just encourage them to read their Handbook.  It’s right there, plain as day.  And to a bishop or stake president who is disfellowshipping or excommunicating gay members as a matter of policy, I’d like to use this forum to encourage them to re-think that position to get more in line with church policy.  This isn’t just my opinion.  Again: read your own Handbook, and read it carefully this time.  Yours will say the same thing mine does.  You may choose, with love and care and prayer and presumably fear and trembling, to occasionally hold disciplinary hearings for offenses not on the first list.  But you don’t have to, and it cannot be your policy.

So if we’re doing it right in the LDS church, meaning if we’re doing it the way that the church’s Handbook outlines, our gay members should feel comfortable coming to church and worshipping with us.  As I’ve noted in other places: there is no recommend interview that you have to pass to worship with us, and no hurdle you have to clear to be a recipient of our love and concern.  I hope that our gay brothers and sisters will choose to do that, and I hope they find a spiritual home in our wards and branches.  It would be great for our straight members to have more experience with their gay brothers and sisters, in any case. 

I think gaining that experience will help to change some people’s minds with respect to who gay people are in the first place, and I think that’s important.  I’ve been in congregations where, even fairly recently, it has been suggested that being gay is a “choice,” which is both disappointing to me and surprising, every time I hear it.

Part of the reason that I feel that way is that people who are holding that position seem to feel that they are somehow supporting the church’s stated position, when in fact they are not.  To be clear: the LDS church’s stated position on the question of whether or not being gay is some kind of a choice is that the church has no position on that matter.  No position.  None.

The Apostle Dallin H. Oaks said, “The Church does not have a position on the causes of any of these susceptibilities or inclinations, including those related to same-gender attraction. Those are scientific questions — whether nature or nurture — those are things the Church doesn’t have a position on.”

This means two fairly important things: first, it removes any sort of halo effect from those who hold the truly insane position that being LGBT is a choice.  They cannot argue that that is the position of their church.  They are left to themselves with the weird argument that millions of people are making that choice, I guess because of all the awesome benefits that accrue to gay people in this society. 

Or they are left to argue in greeting-card fashion that “God don’t make no junk,” thereby becoming guilty all at once of the logical fallacy of begging the question, and of having delivered massive offense while claiming to be loving people.  It’s the same form of argument, really, that some evangelical churches use to define Mormons as being non-Christian, and it annoys us when they do it to us, because it is a rhetorical point that has zero value.  I feel slightly dumber every time I hear it.

It’s a difficult position to be in.  To hold the position that gay people in most cultures have the slightest say in the matter requires a twisting of normal thought so thorough that it makes the Gordian Knot look like a Girl Scout’s hair bow.

Second, the church’s position implies that an individual member of the church can with perfect propriety believe that being gay is an inborn trait.  There is nothing whatsoever wrong with a Mormon holding this position, as so many of us do.

The LDS church is right to hold the position it does.   Whether or not a man loving another man is “normal” or “natural,” or whether a person is “born that way,” or not are not religious questions, really.  These are not conjectures about the nature of the human condition; these are in the realm of verifiable facts.  By way of analogy: You don’t pray about whether or not I’m 6 feet 4 -- you bust out the tape measure.

As to whether it is natural to be gay, it would require a fairly tortured definition of “natural” to decide that it is not.  It happens, and it happens at roughly the frequency of left-handedness in the U.S. population, according to a 2011 UCLA study.  Believe me when I tell you that a long line of people think I’m a little odd, but it’s not because I’m left-handed.

Many conservative churches suggest that being gay is not an inborn trait, but this is absurd.  You don’t need to peer into the eternities to divine some highly-prized pearl of an answer when you can simply walk up to a gay man or woman and ask them.  Their answers will, of course, run the gamut -- I mean, yes, there is such a thing as a person who is gay through a collection of sociological factors --, but by and large they will tell you that they have been gay for as long as they can remember, and since before they knew what name to put to it.  I guess you can decide that you somehow know all of them better than they know themselves, but Occam’s Razor suggests to me that the better idea is to take them at their word.

Put another way: no one questions my recollection or wonders if something happened to me when I tell you that my first crush was a girl named Melissa in Lewiston, ID.  Why, when another man tells us that his was some boy named Brad in Kansas City, do we question him?  Is there any reason, other than the lame excuse that his experience is in the minority of experiences, for us to do anything other than simply believe him and move on?

But for those who are not convinced by these arguments, I’ll give you a religious one: I want you to consider the possibility that you should believe that some people are born gay... because Jesus Christ said so.

To understand what Jesus said, you have to understand what the word “eunuch” meant to a person in Jesus’ time.  From the time of the Assyrian Empire and of the Pharoahs, a eunuch was a male slave who had a particular job close to the king.  Sometimes that job involved menial service to the king, where he would have the king’s ear.  More often, it involved guarding or protecting the women of the royal family.  Either way, either because the king didn’t want his confidantes to have divided loyalties through children or in-laws or because the servant would be in near-constant contact with the royal family’s women, the job description of a eunuch had one requirement above all: that he not be a threat to engage in sexual congress with women.

Probably because it’s more sensational to our minds, we tend to focus on what at the time they called “man-made eunuchs,” who became eunuchs through castration or genital mutilation, typically at a young age.  By late Antiquity, though, the term had come to refer not only to castrated men, but to a wide range of men who could not or would not have sex with women.  There were “religious eunuchs,” which was normally just a term for a monk.  And importantly, probably the most common eunuch was referred to as a “natural eunuch” or a “eunuch from birth,” which referred to a man who just didn’t want to have sexual relationships with women.  A man who didn’t do that...because it just wasn’t their thing.  A natural eunuch...was a gay guy.

That this interpretation is true is enshrined in the Roman law known as the Digest or Pandects under Justinian I.  In that law, they created a separation of rights between a “natural eunuch,” who had the normal rights of a Roman citizen, and “man-made eunuchs,” who had lesser rights.

Knowing that “eunuch” was a term in the meridian of time that meant something like “a man who cannot or will not have sexual relationships with women” can really help us.  In particular, it can help us understand something that Jesus said in Matthew chapter 19, verse 12.  If what I just said was news to you, then I’d guess that every time you read this passage before, you were puzzled by it.  If that’s true, then you’re about to understand it really clearly and simply for the first time:

For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.

Now, I’m just a regular church member.  Maybe I’m not right.  For sure, you will hear people disagree with this interpretation.  But I want you to pay attention to the game of logical or factual Twister that they have to engage in when they do it.  Let me just say that for my own part, I think I just heard Jesus tell me that gay people are born gay: “For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb.”

Why do I care so much about that?  Why does it matter if we believe that gay people are born that way, versus thinking that being LGBT is a choice?

Well, to begin with, I guess I care because it’s obviously true, and I care that members of my church follow the example of Joseph Smith, and seek after truth, wherever they may find it.  But maybe equally important is just this: Because it’s a kinder way of thinking about our gay brothers and sisters.

People who talk about being gay as a choice cannot seem to do it without a little bit of a snarl.  There is disdain in their voices, not acceptance.  Not compassion.  Definitely not love.

As soon as you accept that gay people are part of God’s wonderful creations, they can be beautiful.  They become brothers and sisters on the path, and not outsiders with an agenda to push.  It opens a pathway to friendship and love and acceptance that really wasn’t there before.

I’ve heard people who believe it is a choice argue that they’re still “tolerant,” and even that they “love” their gay brothers and sisters.  But tolerance is not acceptance, and a form of love that looks down on the supposed beloved is not love at all.  It is not hard to divine whom we love and whom we don’t -- we show it by the way we act towards them, and by how thoroughly we wish happiness for them.

No, to love our brothers and sisters asks us to accept them as they are.  The risk for straight church members who cannot find it in their hearts to truly accept their LGBT brothers and sisters is that they will fail in a covenant that they have made with God: that they will bear one another’s burdens, that they may be light.

One of the key thoughts I want to share with my LGBT brothers and sisters is this: that I love you.  That I take you as you are.  And that in my long experience in this church, I have never been met with greater faith and heroism than among my LGBT friends.  My friend Mitch Mayne doesn’t like me to use the word “struggle,” but oh my have you struggled.  You have fought and you have cried and you have made decisions and committed to efforts that are heart-wrenching and difficult and far beyond anything I have experienced in my own life.  You are stronger.  I want you to hear, more than I want you to hear any other thing that I say today, that I admire you.

I admire you in part because you are trailblazers.  You have hacked your way through a difficult path in order to make that path easier for those that follow.  Henry Wadsworth Longfellow was talking about you, I think, when he wrote:

Lives of great men all remind us

We can make our lives sublime,

And, departing, leave behind us

Footprints on the sands of time; -

Footprints, that perhaps another,

Sailing o’er life’s solemn main,

A forlorn and shipwrecked brother,

Seeing, shall take heart again.

Let us, then, be up and doing,

With a heart for any fate;

Still achieving, still pursuing,

Learn to labour and to wait.

In the name of Jesus, Amen.