Sex, Gender, and the Proclamation on the Family

I recently shared a TED Talk on my personal Facebook page. This talk, about intersex individuals, challenges viewers to break down the false male-female binary construct we’ve developed around biological sex . Sharing this talk was motivated in part by reading an article published in the Salt Lake Tribune reporting on a talk in which Dallin H. Oaks, first counselor in the First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, stated that the word gender, as it is used in the The Family: A Proclamation to the World, actually means biological sex at birth–which has significant implications for intersex and transgender members, and potential members of the Church .

After I posted the TED Talk, I was asked, “how [do] you reconcile this with the proclamation to the world- that [sic] there are only two genders” (K. Allred, personal communication, October 3, 2019). My response was that the short answer was that I didn’t, and that if this person was asking in good faith, I would write a longer response. This post is that longer response. The opinions expressed are mine alone.

I want to be clear that I am only addressing the specific question posed above: how do I reconcile sex assigned at birth as non-binary, and the Family Proclamation. Certainly, the precipitating event has implications for transgender (and LGB) individuals as well , but I will restrict my comments here to intersex individuals only.

Proclamation on the Family

In 1995, then Church president Gordon B. Hinckley, spoke in the General Relief Society Meeting, and introduced a “Proclamation to the Church and to the world” outlining the “standards, doctrines, and practices relative to the family” . It outlines the Church’s position on gender, gender roles, and the importance of family. It also indicates that only marriage between one man and one woman is ordained of God. This Proclamation on the Family, or Family Proclamation, as it came to be known colloquially, was and is widely distributed and quoted both within and outside of the church .

In his October 2010 General Conference address, Elder Boyd K. Packer called the Proclamation on the Family, revelation , but later, the official Conference Report test was edited to say that the Proclamation is a guide . Although it is fairly common to make minor edits to the written Conference Report, major edits, such as those made to Elder Packer’s talk are fairly uncommon , and given Elder Packer’s senior position in the Quorum at the time, the edits made to his talk suggest they were not made lightly.

Although introduced by the president of the Church, and signed by all three members of the First Presidency, and all 12 members of the Quorum of Twelve Apostles, the Proclamation on the Family has never been presented to the church for canonization. Many of us have an example of this process that has occurred in our life time. On June 8, 1978, then Church President Spencer W. Kimball announced that he had received revelation that all worthy men could be ordained to the priesthood, regardless of race . Less than 6 months later, this revelation was presented in General Conference for a sustaining vote to be accepted as revelation and “the word and will of the Lord”. The vote was observed to have been unanimous, and “the motion…carried” . After this vote in General Conference, the revelation was considered canonized and was added to the Doctrine and Covenants as Official Declaration 2 .

The fact that the Proclamation on the Family has not been canonized presents some interesting problems–members of the Church recognize as scripture any words “written and spoken, by holy men of God when moved upon by the Holy Ghost” , but make a distinction for canon, a subset of scripture that are “[a] recognized, authoritative collection of sacred books” .

I am able to accept the Proclamation on the Family as an inspired document, however, I cannot accept it as canon scripture on the level with the Book of Mormon or Bible.

Sex vs. Gender

Language is complicated. Sex and gender are no less complicated. In English, the terms have generally been used interchangeably since the 14th century. In the 20th century, sex began to be used to describe biological forms, and gender to describe behavioral, cultural and psychological forms . In some circles, the terms continue to be used interchangeable, and in others, they are used to describe distinctly different constructs .

For myself, and others, the separate definitions of sex and gender actually made the Family Proclamation a source of hope for trans and intersex people as gender was defined as “an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose” . One could believe that gender is an eternal and fundamental part of human identity and still recognize that, in a fallen and imperfect world, one could be born into an imperfect body whose biology did not match their gender identity , something that could be corrected in the resurrection (Alma 11:42-45; 41:2).

By defining gender as it is used in the Family Proclamation as biological sex at birth , President Oaks has changed the conversation and in a problematic way. We must now accept that the body we were born into is the body that God intended, and further, President Oaks said, there is no spectrum–biological sex exists on a binary that is eternal and unchangeable.

The problem is that binary biological sex doesn’t exist . This is an observable phenomenon that exists in our world at a rate on the low end of about 1 in 1500 births for those with visibly atypical genitalia , to as high as 2% of all live births if you include in your estimate intersex individuals without visibly obvious conditions .

In case you’re keeping track, that’s 150 million people world-wide whose biological sex does not fit into neat binary boxes of male or female. According to Quinn, that’s the same number of individuals born with red hair . I’ve heard people argue that since intersex individuals represent such a small percentage of the world’s population, these individuals are exceptions that will have their questions answered in the next life. But again, to put it in perspective, the total church population right now is 16 million , we’re talking about 10 times that number of people.

Prophets

If our Heavenly Parents can attend to the specific needs of the 16 million of their children who are members of the Church, then They must have a plan for their 150 million intersex children. If God is invested in our lives to the point that He can reveal that we should combine the High Priests and the Elders into one quorum , and allow any baptized member of the church to witness a baptism , then certainly it seems that our Heavenly Parents’ are aware of Their children’s needs.

For example, when the change from 3 hours to 2 hours of church services was made, we were told about the “deliberations of the Council of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles in the temple” because of concerns brought to them from members of the church. As a result, “our beloved prophet petitioned the Lord for revelation , and adjustments were made. We know that God cares about and reaches out to individuals (see Matthew 10:29-31; Luke 15:4; Joseph Smith History 1:16-17), and yet that doesn’t seem to be happening in this case.

We know that prophets are not infallible , and yet we make jokes about it . Nevertheless, there was only one perfect person to walk the Earth, and that was Jesus Christ .

Each of us, including those called to be prophets and Apostles, are imperfect and subject to sin and error (Romans 3:23). Being mistaken about something does not void a prophetic call. See here for a discussion of this topic with some good examples [edited 10/31/2019].

Truth

As Latter-day Saints, we believe that we can know truth by asking God to reveal it to us (Moroni 10:5-8; James 1:5). In fact, the foundational claim of our faith is that a teenage boy had questions about which church to join and that God answered him definitively and personally (see Joseph Smith History 1:16-17) and that God continues to speak to his prophets (Amos 3:7; Doctrine & Covenants 107:91-92). In addition, we believe that each individual can learn truth for themselves (2 Nephi 32:5; Mormon 9:7-8; Doctrine and Covenants 42:61).

In 1829, Oliver Cowdery was scribing for Joseph Smith during the translation of the Book of Mormon. Oliver wanted to translate as well, but when he tried he failed miserably. He asked Joseph to ask God why this had happened. Joseph received a revelation where God instructed Oliver that he had failed because Oliver assumed that all he had to do in order to receive inspiration from God was to ask, rather, he was told, “you must study it out in your mind; then you must ask me if it be right” (Doctrine & Covenants 9:7-8). Later, talking to others, the Lord teaches that we must “study and learn, and become acquainted with all good books, and with languages, tongues, and people” (Doctrine & Covenants 90:15), and to “seek learning even by study and also by faith” (Doctrine & Covenants 88:118; 109:7; emphasis mine).

Conclusion

We come back to the central question, how do I reconcile these two things: the existence of intersex people, and in interpretation of the Proclamation on the Family that says that biological sex exists on a binary?

The answer is, I don’t.

There is a disconnect between what I have learned for myself through “study and also by faith” about sex and gender, and what is being taught recently. Without additional clarity, there is no way for me to reconcile these two positions.

Fortunately, Latter-day Saints believe in ongoing revelation, including that God will “yet reveal many great and important things pertaining to the Kingdom of God” (Articles of Faith 1:9)–perhaps someday soon there will come revelation that reveals God’s plan for His intersex children in a way that helps reconcile this disconnect.

References