In the wake of Sam Young's excommunication from the LDS Church (occasioned by his vocal opposition to the church's practice of closed 'worthiness' interviews with minors), and a flurry of leaks revealing sexual abuse and cover-ups within said church, I thought it was a good time to speak my piece about Mormonism and sexuality.
Today, my topic is maybe the second most uncomfortable subject to bring up in Mormon conversation besides a frank and detailed history of the temple endowment! The dreaded M-word: Masturbation.
The third sin on the list, just slightly less bad than murder and two slots below denying the Holy Ghost, is sexual sin. But what exactly qualifies as sexual sin? In the chapter of the Book of Mormon which reveals the hierarchy of Big Bad Sins, the man who is guilty of sexual sin has been chasing after a harlot, Isabel (one of the three non-Biblical women mentioned by name in the Book of Mormon). From this, we may deduce that one or all of these things are sexual sins:
In a General Conference talk last spring, Quentin Cook, one of the top 15 leaders of the LDS Church, spoke about the value of speaking out against "non-consensual immorality," by which he appears to mean rape, molestation, and other forms of sexual assault. (1) He follows this by saying that “Those who understand God’s plan should also oppose consensual immorality, which is also a sin.” With this phrasing, Cook implies that all sexual activity which falls outside the parameters drawn by Mormon leaders is on the same level as sexual assault and abuse, and can be considered a ‘third worst’ sin, less severe only than apostasy and murder.
An Overview of Sexual Sin in Mormonism
In Mormon doctrine, there are three sins that are worse than all the others. The second worst sin is murder. This is extremely self explanatory, so I won't try to explain it. The VERY WORST SIN OF ALL is called "denying the Holy Ghost," and what that means is the subject of some confusion. Back when I was a believing Mormon, I had a hazy belief that it entailed having sure, incontrovertible proof of God's existence (on the level of standing face to face with him) and then denying it for your own selfish purposes. (3) Since leaving the church, I have learned that to many Mormons "denying the Holy Ghost" simply means taking a position against their church after having had a testimony of their gospel, which means that in their estimation I qualify for an eternity in Outer Darkness! Very exciting, I know.The third sin on the list, just slightly less bad than murder and two slots below denying the Holy Ghost, is sexual sin. But what exactly qualifies as sexual sin? In the chapter of the Book of Mormon which reveals the hierarchy of Big Bad Sins, the man who is guilty of sexual sin has been chasing after a harlot, Isabel (one of the three non-Biblical women mentioned by name in the Book of Mormon). From this, we may deduce that one or all of these things are sexual sins:
- Harassing women
- Purchasing the sexual use of another's body
- Having sex outside of marriage
In a General Conference talk last spring, Quentin Cook, one of the top 15 leaders of the LDS Church, spoke about the value of speaking out against "non-consensual immorality," by which he appears to mean rape, molestation, and other forms of sexual assault. (1) He follows this by saying that “Those who understand God’s plan should also oppose consensual immorality, which is also a sin.” With this phrasing, Cook implies that all sexual activity which falls outside the parameters drawn by Mormon leaders is on the same level as sexual assault and abuse, and can be considered a ‘third worst’ sin, less severe only than apostasy and murder.
What Qualifies as Sexual Sin?
The short answer is “everything besides heterosexual intercourse between a legally married couple.” There is no official list of what is okay and what isn’t. Things I have seen condemned by Mormon teachers and leaders include:- All homosexual activity, including kissing and hand-holding.
- Kissing with tongue (or kissing any body part below the face) outside of heterosexual marriage.
- Lying down next to each other outside of heterosexual marriage.
- Oral sex even within heterosexual marriage (explicitly banned by the First Presidency in 1982, and never officially sanctioned since.)
- Use of birth control even within heterosexual marriage (universally condemned by Mormon prophets and apostles for over 50 years, and outlawed by a First Presidency letter in 1969, but now permitted as a personal decision for couples.)
- Engaging in sexual activity for pleasure and not for procreation (It is generally taught within modern Mormonism that sex is for the dual purposes of procreation and bonding, and sexual pleasure is not demonized, but there are many older Mormons who report learning that sexual pleasure even within marriage is a temptation from the devil and that couples should only engage in sex for the purpose of having a child.) (4)
- Anything that causes sexual arousal outside of marriage (I have seen this one from local leadership and lay Mormons, but not from the top leadership: if you have sources, please share)
- And finally … masturbation. This has generally been negatively spoken of by Mormon leaders, with the most recent specific mentions by General Authorities being a 2013 speech by a member of the First Quorum of the Seventy at BYU, who said that God “condemns self-abuse,” and a conference talk by apostle Boyd Packer in 1976, ‘Message to Young Men,’ which has been widely distributed as a pamphlet through the following decades. (2)
Why Are Mormon Definitions Dangerous?
It is clear that within Mormonism, the line between appropriate sexual behaviour and sexual sin is blurry and ever-shifting. Some things, like birth control and oral sex within marriage, have been explicitly condemned by the absolute highest authorities in the church, and then quietly rolled back into a ‘personal choice’ by later leaders. Some things are heavily discouraged but poorly defined, such as ‘necking’ and ‘petting’ … a fun game is to ask five different Mormons what kind of kissing is okay outside of marriage, or what ‘necking’ means. (Seriously, who still says ‘necking’ outside of an awkward chastity lesson???)
The Mormon sexual code of conduct is horribly ill-defined, and the stakes could not be higher. The Mormon belief in the severity of ‘sexual sin’ means that anyone who has committed one is required to confess in a private interview with a member of the lay clergy in order to be forgiven by God. These interviews are high risk situations, in which children and teens are frequently subjected to invasive, explicit sexual questions, and in which an unfortunate few have been physically molested by leaders of their congregations. The absence of clear boundaries between sexual sin and permissible behaviour causes great anxiety in many Mormons, and renders them subject to the whims of their local leaders when they go to confess.
My First Confession
I remember being taught as a teenager that “if you are wondering if you need to confess something to your bishop, you do.” That lesson tortured me with guilt until I finally went to the bishop to confess my secret vice: I had been rereading kissing scenes in books repeatedly because I liked how they made me feel.
That was my dirty secret. I was perhaps sixteen and had never even kissed anyone, had not masturbated since I was told it was bad at five or six years old, and yet I was tortured with guilt to the point of a private, shameful confession because I got turned on when I read about fictional characters making out, and I liked it.
I was very, very lucky. My bishop laughed and said he thought I was normal. My memory is hazy beyond that point. He may have asked if I touched myself … if he did, I (truthfully) said no … and he may have told me not to do it anymore (I was already traumatized enough by the ordeal of confession that I didn’t need to be told). I left that meeting somewhat relieved of my terrible guilt, slightly embarrassed that I had just confessed my secret sexual feelings to a grown man from my neighbourhood, and feeling very grateful that I had nothing more explicit to confess.
I still had no idea what sexual behaviours would require confession, and what I was allowed to think, feel, or do. At all costs, I wanted to avoid being back in that small room with a terrible secret to share, but I was still a sexual creature, and I had no permissible outlet.
Something was wrong with the system.
[Originally, this was meant to be a reasonable-length essay about masturbation, Mormonism, and morality. Unfortunately, I’m long-winded as hell. So now this is Part I, covering Mormon perspectives on masturbation and sexual sin. In a follow-up post, I will attempt a moral analysis of masturbation, and will share more of my personal experiences and beliefs. Thanks for reading.]
Footnotes
(1) This is a worrisome choice of words. The phrase "non consensual immorality" implies a moral stain on the victim as well as the perpetrator, bringing to mind the passage of the Book of Mormon in which the mass rape of young women is described as “depriving them of that which was most dear and precious above all things, which is chastity and virtue.” (Moroni 9:9) Here’s a good article about Mormon victim blaming and this talk, written from a faithful perspective.
(2) It is interesting to note that Packer called masturbation a ‘transgression,’ not a sin. These words are given different weights in Mormonism (or at least in modern Mormonism), and would imply that masturbation does not qualify as sexual sin.
(3) EDIT: I would like to clarify this. When I was a believing Mormon, I chose to interpret 'denying the Holy Ghost' to mean rejecting Jesus Christ's atonement, while knowing that it was freely available to you. The reason it was 'unforgivable' was because God wouldn't force you to be saved if you didn't want to be, so you couldn't be saved unless you stopped rejecting the atonement. This was what my mother taught me it meant, and I believed it because it was the only thing that made sense. However, my conviction of this always had a cloud of insecurity around the edges, because 'denying the Holy Ghost' does not in any way appear to mean the same thing as 'refusing Christ's atonement,' and it was always a little unclear to me WHY the Book of Mormon would say one thing if it meant the other. Thank you to the believing Mormon who remembered conversations with me from the past and pointed this inaccuracy out to me.
(4) EDIT: I want to emphasize here that I was never taught that sex is not for pleasure and that sexual pleasure in marriage was bad. I WAS taught from the pulpit that married couples had to be careful not to be 'lustful' towards one another, and I believe those who report being taught that sexual pleasure was of the devil in the past.
(3) EDIT: I would like to clarify this. When I was a believing Mormon, I chose to interpret 'denying the Holy Ghost' to mean rejecting Jesus Christ's atonement, while knowing that it was freely available to you. The reason it was 'unforgivable' was because God wouldn't force you to be saved if you didn't want to be, so you couldn't be saved unless you stopped rejecting the atonement. This was what my mother taught me it meant, and I believed it because it was the only thing that made sense. However, my conviction of this always had a cloud of insecurity around the edges, because 'denying the Holy Ghost' does not in any way appear to mean the same thing as 'refusing Christ's atonement,' and it was always a little unclear to me WHY the Book of Mormon would say one thing if it meant the other. Thank you to the believing Mormon who remembered conversations with me from the past and pointed this inaccuracy out to me.
(4) EDIT: I want to emphasize here that I was never taught that sex is not for pleasure and that sexual pleasure in marriage was bad. I WAS taught from the pulpit that married couples had to be careful not to be 'lustful' towards one another, and I believe those who report being taught that sexual pleasure was of the devil in the past.
you are very condescending towards this faith.
ReplyDeleteThey are speaking from how they see it nothing wrong with that
DeleteI can certainly see how my perspective might come across as condescending. I was a passionate, all-in believer in Mormonism for two decades of my life, and part of how I manage the trauma of a life-altering faith transition is with dry humour -- I point out the things that I find ridiculous. I do this with everything, not just Mormonism. What I am writing about here are my own past beliefs, my own past self, and I am entitled to my own perspective on that.
DeleteOne thing I have going for me: I write under my real name. I'm not ashamed to own my beliefs, even though they are contradictory to many people I love and respect. There are many people who genuinely aren't safe to share their beliefs and rely on anonymity, and I understand that -- but I'm still pretty proud of myself for getting to this place.
Also, transgression and sin are used interchangeably except in reference to the fall of Adam.
ReplyDeleteI was also taught that children could commit transgressions but not sins.
DeleteIf fall of Adam = transgression but not sin, and children's misdeeds = transgression but not sin, than transgressions and sins are different in Mormonism, wouldn't you say? I would.
If what you were trying to say is that Packer meant 'sin' when he said 'transgression', that's entirely possible. I wasn't alive when he gave that talk -- maybe the words were interchangeable back then. Or maybe they weren't, but he chose to use a longer word in order to make himself sound more important. Or maybe a dozen other things. I don't claim to know what he meant -- I was simply pointing out a word choice I found interesting.
Delete