Better him than Packer.
But seriously if the church can wax philisophical on pretty fundamental points of doctrine like exaltation when presenting it to the world, I'm pretty sure I can sustain Monson as a pretty good guy until my immediate family is all married so I can at least attend their weddings. They'd better hurry up, if one of my daughters gets old enough to get into the young women's program before they get married I may have to out myself for my daughters' well being.
Sorry it's taken a few days to reply I've been trying to formulate a good reply for this and your previous post because I think it touches on so much that's wrong with the church, and what I think is the biggest problem the church faces right now, more than gay rights, more than media attention, more than a message that's stuck in the last century for many, more even than the internet. And frankly I don't know what the church can do to fix it.
I think the best way is to start out with this post from you. As I read it and the truth of it sunk in it blew my mind that I accepted this as OK. Let's be clear here. Here we have a man feigning belief as best he can for what? So that he wont be excluded from the weddings of those he loves. Because if he doesn't he wont be allowed to go.
Now I know those that believe will say things like "Well it's a sacred ordinance..." and I get it, I was sealed too. But the importance the church gives to a temple and temple only wedding excludes anyone who isn't not only mormon but mormon in good standing.
Which sorta brings me to the point of what the church's problem is. It's that it's little surprise that a religion that has exclusion worked into its very structure has members that act in exclusionary ways.
For example, in the church you cannot practice the priesthood at all if you're a woman, if you're a guy well you can't pass the sacrament unless you're older than 12, and you can't bless the sacrament unless you're older than 16, and you can't bless or perform ordinance unless you're older than 18-19. You can't be in the bishopric just as an elder. But if you don't keep the commandments you can't do any of the above.
So it is no surprise at all that members act the same way. I know apologists have the whole "the church is perfect but the members aren't." ever at the ready but it's been my experience when I go into a company to save a "toxic" team it usually isn't because the team itself is toxic it's that the organization allowed or even fostered it.
A good example is general conference. There's always one talk about accepting those that have left or aren't mormon. But then there are five talks about the "ever darkening world" and evils of the world and how bad the world is. Followed by talks about how lucky we are to have the truth. Follow that up with a priesthood session of "don't be the weak link that puts your family's eternity in jeopardy!!" You've just told them that exclusion is orders of magnitude more important than accepting those who aren't.
Sorta like Packer's press conference talking about how anti-gay bullying is just wrong. I was like "You mean those gays you called an abomination? The ones you said threaten decency and very structure of our society? Those gays? Cause that bull's out of the pen already, and you let it out."
I get that with any group there's exclusion. Sports fans of one team don't like the other. Sony-bots hate X-bots and everyone hates Nintendo fanbois. But in those it's the rarity to hear someone stop being friends with another because they liked the Giants or something. But to hear that someone was shunned from their family and friends because they left the church isn't normal but it also isn't uncommon. So one must ask why isn't it uncommon? Surely mormons aren't worse family and friends than other people. So the only thing left is the church.
I've seen tons of marriages torn apart because one spouse thinks they can't get to the appropriate level of heaven with a spouse that stopped believing (which is ironic because I'd think if you were willing to abandon someone you loved for salvation you failed the salvation test). I personally lost all but a handful of mormon friends that I had when I left. And those that stayed haven't stayed too close. When my wife and I decided to get married I had been divorced and needed a sealing clearance to get married in the temple. That could've taken days, weeks, months, years? We just didn't know and after consulting with our bishops we decided to get married and do the sealing later. This caused all kinds of drama with my wife's family, we went from being the favorites to suddenly being "persona non grata" to many in the family. And got several "how could you"s? and more than one "What am I supposed to tell my kids?!"
Of course looking back at it, it should have been utterly unsurprising. The church, as someone pointed out, is very good at giving check lists. Get the priesthood, go on mission, get married, have kids, endure til the end. And with its emphasis on exaltation and all the ordinances it takes to get there combined with the eternal family idea it's no surprise that people just freak out when there's something that's not according to the check list. It leads people to have kids before they're ready, it causes people to get married before they're ready, it causes people that are perfectly young and normal feel like a menace to society because they're not married yet.
And frankly I don't know what the church can do to fix it. I mean honestly I can't call a religion that even has a heaven that's split into different glories depending on how righteous you are anything other than exclusionary. It's therefore unsurprising when some of its members act the same way their church does.
I'm not doing a good job of putting this down. But I do think it's a huge issue. Because exlcusion works both ways, inward and outward. And when it happens inward those people start to look elsewhere and leave. Oh well I guess I'll stop trying to explain and maybe pick up some other day.