Ron Schow, moderator, Bishop Robert Rees, 
Bishop Max Berryessa, Bishop Ron Jarvis

(biographical data are available on each of these men by 
clicking on their names as shown on the left of this screen) 

This is a discussion conducted online with several Bishops  who have experience dealing with same sex orientation in a spiritual context

  

Ron Schow:  Bob, you and I have had ongoing discussions for over a year about the challenge facing members of the church with same sex attraction.  I'm impressed that you served as the bishop in the Los Angeles singles ward which has many gay and lesbian members.  I think there may not be many, if any, bishops who have had as much experience in this area as you have.   If we could gather a dozen bishops with similar depth of experience and they were to make recommendations for how to help these individuals in the Church, I wonder how the discussion would go in terms of what could be done and if such adjustments would be helpful.  What is your thinking about this idea?

Bishop Robert  Rees:  I think it is a good idea, if for no other reason than it would begin to establish a cadre of people who are experienced in dealing with SSA issues among Latter-day Saints.  It might also have the effect of encouraging other leaders to be empathetic in dealing with gays and lesbians.  I would 

"When I first became bishop, I wasn't aware that there were many homosexual members of my congregation"
guess that many are simply perplexed or that they are conflicted between what they have been told and their own instincts and impulses.  Of course, many bishops do not have experience because the members of their congregations do not have enough confidence in them to reveal their orientation.  When I first became bishop, I wasn't aware that there were many homosexual members of my congregation, but as soon as I began to deal with those I knew in an open and compassionate manner, some came out to me and others who had been openly homosexual began attending my ward, even when their membership records were in other wards.  I certainly grew in my understanding of homosexuality over that period and learned a lot from those with whom I counseled.  So I would guess that if bishops dealing with these issues knew that there were those of us who had had experience, they might want to learn what we have learned.

Ron Schow:  How many gay and lesbian individuals would you estimate you have counseled with as a bishop or as a former bishop?

Bishop Robert  Rees: To one degree or another, probably fifty.

Ron Schow:  Have you ever spoken with other bishops who seem to have had the extensive experience you have had and do you have any hunches about where we would go to find bishops with such experience?

Bishop Robert Rees:     I believe that Bishop Roberts of the San Francisco Ward might have had more extensive experience than I have had.  I would guess that a good place to start would be large urban wards, especially singles wards-places like Seattle, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Salt Lake City, San Diego, and Phoenix.

Ron Schow:  Bishops who have met and worked with more than one or two gay individuals and bishops who are willing to listen, learn a great deal that is not generally known about how individuals experience this in their lives. One way that I have come to describe those with such experience, whether bishops or not, is to say, "they know the score on this issue." I don't think many people in the church "know the score."   Would you agree?

Bishop Robert Rees: Yes, I agree because there is a general, sustained ignorance in the culture at large and among conservative groups in particular. Also, in such a hierarchical church, most people will go with authority even when it goes against their common sense or their own intuition.

Ron Schow: I believe the issue of change is the first major question that must be answered by those coming to terms with their same sex attraction.   What are your thoughts about change?

Bishop Robert Rees:  In a way, one could say that for many homosexual Latter-day Saints it is the only question--or certainly the most crucial one.  If change is possible then one has hope and with spiritual 

"... the issue of change is the first major question that must be answered by those coming to terms with their same sex attraction."
resources and due diligence then change will come, but if change is not possible then people become like Sisyphus, continually pushing the boulder up the mountain only to have it keep rolling back down again, and that leads to existential and spiritual despair--and often to suicide.  That is, if one knocks on a door with some expectation that the door will eventually open and after years of knocking it doesn't, then one gives up, no matter what promises are made about what lies beyond the door.  The Savior said, "Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me" (Rev 3:20). Many gays and lesbians have been led to believe that all they have to do is knock on that door and Christ will change them, and when change doesn't come they lose faith in the Lord and in the Church, unless, as often happens, they blame themselves for the door not opening. This reminds me of one of Emily Dickinson's poems:

At least to pray is left, is left.
O Jesus! In the air
I know not which thy chamber is,--
I'm knocking everywhere.

Thou stirrest earthquake in the South,
And maelstrom in the sea;
Say, Jesus Christ of Nazareth,
Hast thou no arm for me?

If homosexuals are told that the atonement will change them and it doesn't, then they may wonder, like Dickinson, why a God who uses his power to do mighty things will not do this small thing for them.

It is destructive when some therapists and leaders promise change when they have no sure knowledge that change will come. Such people tend to act out of ignorance rather than knowledge and out of 

"It is destructive when some therapists and leaders promise change when they have no sure knowledge that change will come."
prejudice rather than compassion. They seem to have no idea of the noble sacrifices that many homosexuals have made, many of them over half a lifetime, to change, throwing themselves on the mercy of the Lord, pleading for years that they might be changed, promising God everything they possess if he will just change them.

Their quest reminds me of another Dickinson poem:

I asked no other thing-
No other-was denied-
I offered Being-for it-
The Mighty Merchant smiled-

Brazil?  He twirled a Button-
Without a glance my way-
"But-Madam-is there nothing else-
That We can show-Today?"

Here, "Brazil" stands for the impossible thing that God ("The Mighty Merchant') cannot or will not give.  What is most significant in the poem is that the speaker asks only one thing (for homosexuals, that God will change them) and offers "Being" (that is, everything, including existence) for it.

Some homosexuals, I am convinced, have tried to make such a bargain with God-have been willing to give up their "beings" or mortality in exchange for becoming heterosexual.  Not a few homosexuals have taken their lives in the expectation that death would free them from their homosexuality.  Many more have sacrificed companionship, love, and fellowship, hoping that God would reward them by changing them. As Lear says to his youngest daughter, "On such sacrifices, my dear Cordelia, the gods themselves throw incense."

It is cruel, in my estimation, to suggest, as some influential LDS therapists have, that if homosexuals simply avail themselves of the power of the atonement, they can change.  This is an insidious teaching not only because it fails to understand the purpose of the atonement but because it places homosexuals in an impossible box-if they can't change and yet are led to believe that the atonement will change them, then their only conclusions are either that they are somehow unworthy of the Savior's atoning sacrifice or, equally destructive, that somehow the atonement is not efficacious on their behalf.  There is no teaching either in the scriptures or from the prophets that the atonement of Christ can change a person's sexual orientation.

Ron Schow: One of the most important issues when it comes to "knowing the score" is learning whether sincere, dependable, moral persons can change their same-sex feelings.  Do you think they can?    How would you explain what you have observed with respect to change among the members with whom you have counseled?

Bishop Robert Rees:  First, let me say that those who believe that homosexuality is caused by selfishness or who promulgate the stereotype of homosexuals as lustful satyrs do not give serious consideration to homosexuals as "sincere, dependable, moral persons."  Most of the homosexual Latter-day Saints with whom I have counseled could be so described.  Many are deeply committed to the reality of the Restoration, have intense devotion to the Church, and want desperately to find some accommodation between their faith and their sexual identity.  They want, in the words of one homosexual Christian, to "have a place at the table."  Perhaps the most dramatic evidence of this was the monthly meetings that President Howard Anderson held for homosexual Mormons in the Los Angeles Stake.  As President Anderson reports, "No one who came to those meetings and heard homosexual Latter-day Saints sing the hymns of Zion, pray, and bear their testimonies could ever doubt their love of the gospel or their love of the Church."  Unfortunately, Church leaders closed down these meetings and therefore deprived many homosexuals of a safe, Church-sponsored place where they could come together under the direction of a loving priesthood leader.

My experience with change is that if change were possible, I can't imagine people not changing when they have tried so earnestly, sincerely and patiently over a long period of time to change.  If change were possible these people would have changed because they were so devoted to God, so committed to Christ and his kingdom, and so willing to make any sacrifice asked of them if only they were shown the way to change or if only they had begun to feel some inklings of change.  That is, the emotional and spiritual logic of these people's experience gives the lie to all of the nonsense about change put out by Evergreen and the Christian Right.

Ron Schow: My impression is that both Bishop Roberts from San Francisco and an anonymous bishop whose story was published in a 1986 issue of Dialogue have both given the same general report on the prospects for change. Do you know of any Bishops who would draw other conclusions based on a substantial number of cases?

Bishop Robert Rees: My experience with other bishops is not extensive so I don't know what others might report.  I would guess that any with significant experience in working with homosexuals would have basically the same experience I did.  That is, I can't imagine that my experience would be considered atypical or that the homosexual population in Southern California would not be reflective of the norm. As Thoreau says, somewhat tongue-in-cheek, in the beginning of Walden, "Unfortunately, I am confined to this theme by the narrowness of my experience."  Whatever else others may report, I have not met or worked with a single individual homosexual who was able to change his or her orientation.  Of course I am not a therapist, and so my work was not formally therapeutic, nor was I focused on change, but I worked with people who either had undergone or who were then undergoing therapy and I worked closely with therapists when that was appropriate. Another, perhaps more dramatic, way to frame this is that the cumulative and serious effort toward change among the homosexuals I know might total five hundred years (50 x 10 years) without producing a single instance of change.

Ron Schow:   Why then do you think that we continue to hear these reports that change is possible?

Bishop Robert Rees:  For one thing, it may be complicated by inaccurate data or anecdotal experience.  It also may be complicated by the experience of bi-sexuals who seem to have more flexibility in their sexual choices.  For another, some people can't imagine God creating some of his children with an unchangeable condition, although we accept other conditions as permanent in mortality.  For example, we don't ask God to change people's left or right handedness (and interesting enough a recent report suggests that there is a significantly higher degree of left-handedness among homosexuals), we don't ask God to change a baby born with Down's Syndrome into a "normal" child, we don't ask God to change people's IQs or their bi-polar disorders.  I am not suggesting that homosexuality is a disorder, I am only saying that generally we do not try to change certain genetic conditions, be they classified as disorders or not, or when we do try to change them, as people used to do with left-handed children, the results are unsuccessful and sometimes result in serious problems.

Because matters of sex are so charged emotionally and ecclesiastically, people tend not to be rational in their discussions of them.  Also, historically there has been much misinformation and mythology about homosexuality.  Issues of change, I believe, fit mostly into these categories.  There are no credible, 

"There are no credible,sustained studies of which I am aware that establish that homosexuals can change their orientation."
sustained studies of which I am aware that establish that homosexuals can change their orientation.  All of the anecdotal and pseudo-scientific studies do not constitute proof of change; they only confuse the issue and produce false hope for homosexuals and their families.

Ron Schow:  To get back to our original focus, do you have any idea that we could convene a council of bishops to advise parents and family members?  If so what kinds of issues could we put to such a group?  And if we were to broaden the bishop group a bit, what other persons or professional groups would you add?

Bishop Robert Rees:  I think it is a good idea to try and identify a group of individuals-bishops, ex-bishops, therapists, social workers, parents, and homosexuals themselves-who have had experience in working with homosexuals. The characteristics of such people would include: 1) a compassionate and empathetic personality, 2) significant experience in working with homosexuals, 3) activity in or positive identification with the Church, 4) a deep commitment to the principles of the Christian gospel, 5) and an openness to new information about homosexuality.  What people who are dealing with their homosexuality
need is not judgment but understanding, not condemnation but compassion.  We need to trust them to work these matters out within a supportive context, one that includes both love and faith.  They all know what the Church's position is; they all know the scriptures which others quote to condemn them; they all have experienced rejection; most have had years of painful attempts to find some accommodation between their faith and their orientation.  What they need are people who are willing, in the words of Alma, to help bear their burdens, mourn with them and to comfort them and, especially, to stand as witnesses to them of God's love.

Ron Schow:  When I first began to read and study this issue and determined to be involved in editing Peculiar People, we took as our goal that there needed to be some written material that would allow all of us to hear the voices of individuals, families, therapists, scientists and compassionate Mormons or other Christians who had experience with this situation.  And at that same time I began having a series of discussions with the man who had been brought into LDS Social Services to head up the effort there in this area.  He and I talked about getting together a group who would have the kind of experience we are here describing.  He mentioned Bishop Roberts to me but about that time Bishop Roberts was released.   Unfortunately, this LDS leader in social services was also released and the new leader moved in a very different direction which has seemed to magnify the problems rather than reduce them. In the meantime, we began an effort of meeting with several bishops and families who had experience in this area.  This group was known as Reconciliation and we invited gays and lesbians to meet with us and hold gospel discussions for those who felt disenfranchised and felt keenly the need to sing gospel songs, pray and discuss the scriptures and be nurtured by supportive active church members.  We met in Idaho Falls initially and from the very first meeting a bishop, the father of two gay young men (both returned missionaries) and their mother were some of those involved.  We met in their home, in fact, with one of the young men present.  The other son by then had married based on poor advise following his mission and once into the marriage became despondent and suicidal because his same sex attractions did not 

...married based on poor advise following his mission and once into the marriage became despondent and suicidal because his same sex attractions did not change."
change.   These parents, convinced of their children's good intent helped in beginning these gospel discussions.  Later, similar meetings were held in Pocatello, Logan, Ogden, Salt Lake City, Provo.   In Pocatello, I invited my stake president to meet with us and the director of our local institute and they both after meeting with us commented on the wholesome nature of our activity and the goodness of the gays and lesbians who met together and led our gospel discussions on Sunday evenings.  Through this process we met at least a dozen bishops who had gay sons or lesbian daughters and who expressed very much the same kind of sentiments you have described in our discussion so far.  We continued in these activities over approximately a five year period and such meetings still continue, but sometime toward the end of that period of my personal involvement, I wrote down from my notes and my memory a summary on approximately 200 gay or lesbian individuals who had met with us enough over that period that I knew their basic stories.  In the meantime, we met with therapists and professionals in biology, anthropology and other disciplines.  We met monthly and had one and two hour discussions with a select group including two BYU professors and one from the University of Utah who met regularly with us and ultimately determined that we should organize a conference on sexuality that was held at the U of U and eventually about 400 persons attended that conference.  June Reinish, director of the Kinsey Institue, was our keynote speaker.   The conference has continued and been held on three other occasions since then.  Prior to the conference we also had the first meetings of a group which eventually became known as Family Fellowship.  Many of the bishops and families who had been involved in our gospel meetings and in the conference joined Family Fellowship and continue to be involved in that group.  Yet much of what we learned during that period of time remains unavailable to the general membership of the church.  I'm hoping that perhaps we can introduce and draw into our discussion and onto this web site some of the key people who have insight and experience in this area.  These people, I believe "know the score" as I think you do.  Hopefully, through the internet, we can begin to make this information more available to those who need it most--those individuals who face same sex attraction within their own lives and within the lives of family members.

Bishop Robert Rees:  Who are some of the bishops you think might have helpful input?  Perhaps we can get them to join us and review what we have talked about so far.

Ron Schow:   Unfortunately, Bishop Roberts is sick and unable to participate, but an in depth interview was conducted with him after his release from the San Francisco singles ward and is available as published in Sunstone.  I have asked  Bishop Max Berryessa to join us, who served as bishop twice and also served as a member of the important church correlation committee for about ten years and is currently a sealer in the Provo temple. He is emeritus professor of Education at BYU.  He has been a member of Family Fellowship for more than five years and has a gay son.  Bishop Jarvis, a retired attorney from the Los Angeles/San Diego area has a gay son and has also agreed to join us.

Max, can you share with us something of your experience in the church and with your own son, that speaks to the issues we are raising here.  Namely, do you feel a discussion among experienced church leaders/professionals will be helpful if placed on the internet, and do you agree with what Bob has been saying on the subject of change?

Bishop Max Berryessa:  Although I served in eight different bishoprics, including twice as a Bishop with three of these experiences in student wards, I was not at the time tuned into gay and lesbian concerns.  I believe there were gays in these wards, but none ever came forward to speak to me on the issue.  My own awakening to these concerns began 12 years ago when my son, Guy, told his mother and me of his same sex attraction.  I do have some impressions about the possibility of change based on what I know about Guy and the kind of person he is.

The Church meant everything to Guy in his early years and he looked forward to being called to serve the Lord as a dedicated missionary. When his call came he served in Sweden and upon his return he taught Swedish to missionaries in the MTC.

As a child and later as a young man it seemed I could never  get close to him emotionally.  He explained, after coming out to his mother and me several years after his mission, that the reason he rejected my affection and my attempts at closeness was because society had taught him that because of the way he was he was not worthy of being loved.  Since that disclosure day, we have developed a closeness and loving relationship that even exceeds that of our other children.

He knew he was somehow different from his boyhood friends even at a very young age.  He hoped that being faithful to the teachings of the Savior and serving a mission he would accomplish this end.  After years of hoping for the desired change, he finally accepted the fact that the Lord made him the way he was.  In his desire to do everything right according to Gospel principles during this long period of striving for the desired change, he has developed into one of the most Christlike persons I know.

Following Guy's coming out to us and after years of meeting so many fine young and older LDS gay people through our  affiliation with Family Fellowship, and learning of the trials they face in their lives because of their sexual orientation, I am convinced that they did not choose to be the way they are nor are they able to change this orientation just like they are not able to change the color of their eyes.

Ron Schow:  Max, one thing you say here gives me considerable pause and it reinforces something Bob said earlier.  Namely, it seems inconceivable to me, knowing what I know about the demographics of same sex attraction, that you could be involved in three wards at BYU and not have some experience with this issue.  There simply have to have been young people in those wards who were grappling with this same sex attraction, and if you were bishop for any of the student wards, they should have come to you.  Even the other wards, statistically speaking, should have had those with same sex attraction, but let me ask you this, were you bishop in a student ward at BYU?  If you were I'm persuaded that, as Bob indicated, it is possible to be bishop and not have those dealing with the issue come forward until a certain climate of openness develops between the bishop and the gays and lesbians of a given ward.  There could possibly be many bishops like you, Max, who did not as bishops have experience of this type.

Bishop Max Berryessa:  It does seem inconceivable to me now, that while I served as a Bishop of a singles ward at BYU clear back in 1959-61, and later in a married ward from 1980-83 and still later as a counselor to the bishop in the Edgemont Stake Singles Ward that I never had any students come to me to share that secret of their gayness with me.  On the other hand, maybe it isn't so strange.  I well remember during those days at BYU there was a rumor that there was an undercover hunt for students who were thought to be gay with the result that those so discovered were subject to disciplinary action and/or required to undergo  so called "Aversion Therapy "as administered by counselors in the BYU Counseling Center.  Perhaps gay BYU students were afraid to reveal such secrets to anyone in authority.  In my 40 years as a professor at BYU, I never had a student come to me with this issue.

Ron Schow:  There is another thing you say that impresses me, Max.  When you speak you add your conviction to that of Bob's that based on what you know about your own son, you are convinced that for him change is not possible.  I think the important thing is that both you and Bob, coming out of your combined considerable church experience speak as being convinced that you have credible evidence that change is not possible for a considerable number who are trying to change.    I think when you know someone personally and how much they wanted to change and remain in the church and they could not, even in the context of considerable personal integrity, it is a telling thing.  To me change is a falsehood, 

"To me change is a falsehood, being perpetrated by those who refuse to face the facts."
being perpetrated by those who refuse to face the facts.  This falsity is tormenting young people like Stuart Matis and your son, Max, and your ward members, Bob, and we need to get the people who know better to stand up and tell the truth as we know it and have observed it. This truth is not being believed when it comes from the gays themselves...because they are seen as apostates.  But Bishops are believed in our culture, as well they should be.  And in speaking of your own son, Max, Guy is someone who you know to the core, so to speak, and you believe him in a way you might not believe some stranger.  I have found this to be true also for a number of the Bishops and families we know in Family Fellowship.   They know their sons or daughters to be persons of integrity and they know their kids have tried to change and cannot.

In my mind, it is crucial that enough Bishops speak out with one voice on this issue to help those with no experience understand that gays are not evil, wicked people just bent on fulfilling their own pleasure in sinful activity.  Most gays and lesbians have wanted to change, but It is easy to dismiss gays when they are lost and fallen and out of control with their lives as is true for some of them.  When our own children come to us, and they are sincere and  disciplined and desire to do the right thing, then we cannot dismiss them as we were taught to do and was easy to do when "gay" was just the name for some "evil stranger." We need to communicate something of this and you as bishops and fathers are credible in our culture and your opinion should and will carry some weight.

Bishop Max Berryessa:  I am absolutely convinced that a change is not possible for those gays and lesbians who are at the extreme end of the scale of sexual orientation.  When we have associated with our own gay children and other gays as we have had the opportunity in Family Fellowship for these many years, we can say with all confidence that we know these people have had an intense desire to become as their straight friends, to not have to go through the ridicule and emotional and physical pain that they have had to endure. They have made every effort to change, but changing who they are is just not possible.

On the other hand, at the midpoint of the scale between heterosexuals and homosexuals is an area identified as bisexual orientation.  It seems that those that fall into this mid area can sometimes choose either or both aspects of their sexual response.  It would seem to me that any success that so called Change Therapists claim to have had could very well be that they have been working with bisexuals who could change their sexual thoughts and behavior from one end of the sexual orientation continuum to the other.

Ron Schow:   I agree that those with bisexual orientation may at times act on their feelings of same sex attraction and at other times they could act on feelings of opposite sex attraction.   As you say, Max, this may well explain why some therapists think they have effected change.  In reality, however, it is not so 

"...with bisexual orientation... it is not so much a matter of change as of, for example, a versatile baseball player who can at times hit with right handed batting and at others times left handed batting."
much a matter of change as of, for example, a versatile baseball player who can at times hit with right handed batting and at others times left handed batting.  Masters and Johnson and other therapists who have distinguished between bisexual and homosexual clients have indeed reported better success with bisexuals when they are in reorientation therapy.  This is one reason that those who are married probably can benefit from some therapy.  But a careful analysis of Kinsey Scale position of the client is an important element to the therapy.  This is one reason I found it disturbing when the chief therapist at LDS Social Services told me several years ago that they do not measure the Kinsey Scale position.  He said they do not believe that there is a range of sexual orientation, but rather they view same sex attraction as abnormal and deviant.  To me this is one of the more distressing things about reparative therapy.  The idea that same sex attraction is wicked leaves persons at war with themselves and such therapy in my view is damaging to a person who will likely have such feelings for the rest of his or her life.

Another father and another bishop I know is Bishop Ron Jarvis, released only recently in the Escondido CA area.  I think it would be helpful to have you speak to some of these issues, Ron, and tell us of your experience with your own son, Ben, and whether you think he would have changed his feelings in this area if it were possible.

Bishop Ron Jarvis:  Irene and I have become a resource for those who wish to talk to someone, anyone, about such feelings.  I have discussed the plight and problems of homosexual minorities ever since our son came out and I opened my eyes to the problem.  Those discussions occurred pretty much in my space, which I make wherever I am, at work before I retired, at church when an occasion arises, in the community.  Currently I count 16 families in our own ward who are dealing with the reality of having a homosexual child, father, mother, sibling, cousin, some without knowing, or admitting in public discussion, that the issue is homosexuality. 'Outing" someone is, of course, not permissible, and that leaves so many parents believing they are the only ones in the church facing the problem, perhaps the cruelest of the misrepresentations which flows from the reparative therapy hope.  As soon as an individual learns he or she is not the lone homosexual in the church, one is empowered to approach God with new confidence (my opinion).   I have been released for almost two years, but continue as ward mission leader and regularly challenge homophobic positions, usually with questions, and hope to broaden the love base of my ward members and associates in somewhat the same manner as Stan Roberts so successfully did in his Belmont Ward.  Not only did his ward members regard him as a bishop; they regarded him as a friend.  Stan Roberts is one of the finest bishops I have ever met.  I used to study in his office at the San Mateo Building.  He was then bishop of the Belmont Ward, a ward in which members of all ages fell upon any person who presented himself for the first time with one question, "Are you going to be in our ward?"  I have never forgotten Stan and tried to model his love for people during my bishopric.

Ron Schow:  Ron---Can you speak more directly to the issue of change and whether you feel it was something that was possible for Ben or others you may know?

Bishop Ron Jarvis:   Our son has been what he was born to be since he was born.  We both noted his development and wondered, for we both had experience with homosexuals as a reality in our time overseas and feared from an early age that Ben might be gay.  Neither of us ever really thought the Lord would  deal us such a "low blow."  We had striven to do what was expected of us all of our lives, though we both insisted on thinking our own thoughts for as long as we have been associated with each other.  Our children are likewise, independent.  Ben was always sensitive to others, lived the principles of the gospel as a reality; whereas, many of his peers, including three of his five brothers, were willing to push the outer limits.  Our children are born leaders and with exception of the shyness in our hearing impaired son, are quite willing to face down opposition.  Ben was not afraid to do so, but he did not seek conflict as some of our sons did.  He always reached out to the outcast, helped the one who was left out, and felt a deep love for the Lord, the church, and people.  He has always enjoyed a sense of humor, sometimes a bit ribald, even to Primary teachers at an early age, and a seminary teacher who was gullible enough to accept his story about having cancer as an excuse for being late or absent.  His humor was always good natured.  I don't believe he ever intentionally hurt anyone; from a young age he spoke out against violence and the instruments of violence, to the consternation of his brothers whose encounters were sometimes physical.

Ben was motivated to serve and did so with passion and detail, whether staging a production for church or school or in a leadership capacity.  He was the person one always likes to have around when the party is over, for he assumed responsibility to make sure things were done and the site clean before he left.  He was excited about his mission call to Japan and went through the language training, then got "sick" and was reassigned to South Dakota where he served part of his mission before being sent home ill. He did not acknowledge his homosexuality for several years after that and attended some therapy sessions with Church Social Services.

Ben hoped he could change all the time he attended therapy, even after he "came out."  As recently as 

Ben hoped he could change all the time he attended therapy, even after he "came out."
two years ago he "wished" he could feel attraction to one of his female friends, an outstanding young woman who is a true friend and one we would welcome as a daughter-in-law.  All of his "girlfriends" were of high caliber.  All of them loved Ben; one even tried to enlist Irene's support to carry the debate to Ben so he would marry her.  She is still a firm friend, though married to someone else.

Those who are homosexual in their orientation never leave the realization that life would be sweeter for them if they could change, could fit in, could be like all the other families.  No matter how well accepted they are, they are different.  They do not fit into "the Plan."  They cannot have families in the same way others have families, i.e. procreating children between themselves as a loving couple.  I have never met anyone who would not change if it was possible.  In my heart of hearts I am convinced that everyone I know would do so.

We are acquainted with one "poster child" of change.  The present tragedy is as troubling as the former hateful status, for the former status seems to have returned.  Several children and a distraught wife later, the changeling is in the process of divorce which enlists church leadership and produces more than a little confusion as the children who do not know are shielded and the rope suspending that family above ruin frays, one strand at a time.

Ron Schow:   Other bishops families are represented elsewhere on this site (Bishop Blair, Bishop Van Wagoner, Bishop Frogley) and comments on their sons can be found that are similar to those mentioned above   We thank the families and these bishops for their courage and honesty in addressing these important matters.