Why Same Sex Marriage Will (Literally) Divide the LDS Church

I think that same sex marriage will compel some of its LDS supporters to start a new church.  It would not be the first time either external or internal pressures caused members of the Church to break off to form their own church: both the Book of Mormon and the New Testament contain several examples.  And more specifically in this dispensation, there have been at least two times (there are others) when major shifts resulted in LDS break-offs.  First, Joseph Smith’s death and the resulting succession confusion led to the formation of the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (now called the Community of Christ).  And second, around the turn of the 20^th century when the Church enforced its new prohibition against plural marriage, many members believed Wilford Woodruff had led the Church astray and left the Church to form the kind of organizations now widely known as being part of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. 

I believe that the fact that same sex marriage is so deeply incompatible with the Church’s doctrine, and the fact that many faithful members feel so strongly about it, will eventually collide on a massive scale  – and the collision will cause some of those faithful members to leave the Church and start a new church. 

Degrees of Dissent

I think that members’ feelings about same sex marriage can probably be measured on a scale.  (As a note, for the purposes of clarity, the “Church’s political position” is that same sex marriage will be bad for children and society.)

An (0) on the scale of dissent might be that the member agrees both with the Church’s political position on same sex marriage and the Church’s decision to put its support behind measures like Prop 8.

A (1) might be that the member generally agrees with the Church’s political position on same sex marriage but doesn’t think the Church should support measures like Prop 8.  In other words, the Church should stay out of the dispute about the meaning of a legal designation.

A (2) might be that the member does not agree with the Church’s political position on same sex marriage and, by extension, does not think the Church should support things like Prop 8.

A (3) might include not only the (2) level of dissent, but also the belief that the Church’s internal doctrine concerning marriage is wrong and should be changed to accommodate same sex relationships – including temple sealings for same sex couples.  

So that I am very clear, I think that most faithful members who feel strongly about same sex marriage probably register on the (1) or (2) level.  I do not think the (1) or (2) level of dissent can cause the formation of a new church. 

I think only the (3) level type of dissent is what can cause members to break off and start their own church – and only if the number of members that hit the (3) level reaches some kind of critical mass.

Enforcement Will Be the Tipping Point

We can only keep the belief that the Church is led by an actual prophet, and the belief that characterizes level (3) type dissent, in our hearts at the same time for so long.  Eventually, one of them has to give way.  That is because opposite sex marriage is absolutely fundamental to the Plan of Salvation.  Elder Bednar’s April 2013 General Conference talk on the law of chastity is an excellent refresher course on the centrality of opposite sex marriage and opposite sex marital intimacy to all LDS doctrine.   

If (3) develops in the hearts of just a few members, then wins the battle over the belief that the Church is led by an actual prophet, those few might just leave the church and join the vogue ranks of the spiritual but not religious crowd – or perhaps join an ordinary Christian denomination.  However, if (3) develops in the hearts of lots of members and then wins the battle, I think it is pretty likely they’ll form a new church.

The first reason I think this is because I think the members who develop (3) and let it win out over their belief in the prophet will be sincere and otherwise devout.  They’ll probably believe much of the doctrine the Church teaches and have a belief in the veracity of the Book of Mormon.  I think those sincere people will want to worship in a church that, for example, both studies from the Book of Mormon and recognizes same sex marriages as legitimate in the eyes of God.  In other words, I think they’ll want to essentially remain Mormon, but will simply believe that President Monson (or whoever the prophet will be) has led the Church astray – just as members of the FLDS organization(s) generally believe that Wilford Woodruff led the Church astray.

The second reason I think a schism is coming is because same sex marriage will eventually be legal in every state and be widely accepted.  Once that happens, two things will probably occur: the number of members whose dissent has reached (3) will dramatically increase, and as a result, the Church will have to more often enforce the already existing requirement of “sustaining the prophet” as a condition of full fellowship. 

I think a really interesting example of the Church enforcing the requirement of sustaining the prophet as a condition of full fellowship was reported by Joanna Brooks, and later by the Salt Lake Tribune.  The Tribune conspicuously fails to explain the crucial nuance described in my “Degrees of Dissent” above (and that Emmett C., himself, describes in his interview with Brooks), and presents Emmett’s story as if his dissent is simply (1) or (2) rather than (3) – but that isn’t my topic.  The reason I link to the story is to show the difference between (1) or (2) and (3) at the place where the rubber meets the road: our temple recommend interviews.

If members whose dissent level is (3), like Emmett’s, are as courageously honest as Emmett was (who seems like an extremely sincere guy), they’ll know that they can’t honestly say that they sustain the prophet as an actual prophet.  And the member of the stake presidency interviewing them will know that he cannot give the member a temple recommend unless the person lets the belief that the Church is led by an actual prophet prevail over (3). 

I think that as the number of members with (3) increases, scenarios like the one Emmett experienced will begin to occur at the ward and stake level throughout the world.  And I think that the scenario will occur often enough that the members who experience it will want to get together and form an LDS church that does consider same sex marriages as legitimate in the eyes of God.

Again, just to be clear – I don’t want the schism I’m describing to happen.  I just think it will.  There is  no reason to think that the modern Church is somehow exempt from the kind of schisms that have happened in the past. And I think same sex marriage is weighty enough of an issue to cause the same kind of schism that has happened before.