The Ninth Article of Faith
in Action

The Faith of Continuing Revelation

The Latter-day Saint faith is unique among Christian traditions in its explicit theological commitment to ongoing revelation. The Ninth Article of Faith does not merely suggest that God might reveal additional truths—it declares that He will. This is not a footnote to Latter-day Saint theology. It is the foundation upon which the entire Restoration rests.

This document examines how the Church’s positions on homosexuality have evolved across seven specific doctrinal dimensions—not to indict the institution, but to demonstrate what the Restoration itself promises: that God continues to speak, that human understanding is limited, and that course corrections are not signs of failure but evidence of a living faith. Each shift documented here follows a pattern the Church has already acknowledged in other areas—most notably race—where decades of institutional teaching were eventually recognized as the “philosophies of men, mingled with scripture.”

What follows is the evidence.

The Race Parallel

Before examining the specific doctrinal evolution on homosexuality, it is essential to understand the precedent the Church itself established with the priesthood and temple restriction on members of African descent. This history demonstrates that the pattern of doctrinal course correction is not hypothetical—it has already happened, on a matter the Church once treated as equally settled.

The Pattern

Date	Position	Source
1836	Joseph Smith ordains Elijah Abel, a Black man, to the Melchizedek Priesthood. No racial restriction exists.	Historical Record
1852	Brigham Young institutes the priesthood ban, teaching that Black people bear the “curse of Cain.” No revelation is recorded.	Brigham Young; Journal of Discourses
1949	First Presidency declares the ban is “not a matter of the declaration of a policy but of direct commandment from the Lord.”	First Presidency Statement
1958	Joseph Fielding Smith: Black people would not receive priesthood “until Abel had posterity” and possibly “on some other world.”	Answers to Gospel Questions
1963	Kimball signals openness: “The Lord could change his policy and release the ban and forgive the possible error which brought about the deprivation.”	Spencer W. Kimball
1969	David O. McKay states on national television: “Not in my lifetime, young man, nor yours.”	David O. McKay
1978	Official Declaration 2: “Every faithful, worthy man in the Church may receive the holy priesthood, with power to exercise its divine authority.” The ban is reversed.	Spencer W. Kimball; OD2
1978	McConkie: “Forget everything that I have said, or what President Brigham Young or President George Q. Cannon or whomsoever has said in days past that is contrary to the present revelation. We spoke with a limited understanding.”	Bruce R. McConkie
2013	Church essay: “Today, the Church disavows the theories advanced in the past that black skin is a sign of divine disfavor or curse, or that it reflects actions in a premortal life.”	Race and the Priesthood (Gospel Topics Essay)

The lessons are unmistakable: (1) A practice originating without recorded revelation was maintained for 126 years. (2) It was repeatedly taught as “direct commandment from the Lord.” (3) Leaders who questioned it were overruled by those who insisted it could never change. (4) When it was reversed, the Church acknowledged “limited understanding” and disavowed the theological justifications entirely. The architecture of the homosexuality question follows this identical pattern.

Seven Doctrinal Dimensions

Each section below traces a single doctrinal claim about homosexuality through its progressive changes, demonstrating the trajectory of continuing revelation in real time.

1. Causation: “What Makes Someone Gay?”

Perhaps no doctrinal position has shifted more dramatically than the Church’s teaching on what causes homosexuality. For decades, the Church promoted pseudoscientific theories as doctrine. Each theory was later abandoned—not through formal acknowledgment, but through quiet replacement.

Date	Institutional Position on Causation	Source
1964	Homosexuality is a “malady” and “disease” caused by moral weakness, curable by “self mastery.”	Kimball, “A Counseling Problem”
1965	It is a “damnable heresy” to say God made someone this way.	Kimball, BYU Speech
1969	Masturbation leads to homosexuality, which can lead to bestiality.	Kimball, Miracle of Forgiveness
1971	Being “born that way” is a “base lie.” Homosexuality is “curable.”	Kimball, New Horizons for Homosexuals
1973	Caused by childhood molestation.	Bishop/Stake President Guide
1975	Caused by “lack of proper affection in the home” and “absent father, controlling mother.”	Victor L. Brown; R. Blattner
1981	“Not inborn.” A homosexual man “does not fully understand how to act and think like a masculine man.”	LDS Social Services Guide
1992	“No conclusive evidence that anyone is born with a homosexual orientation.”	Understanding & Helping pamphlet
2006	Church takes “no position” on causation. Compares to alcoholism as “condition.”	Oaks & Wickman Interview
2012	Individuals “do not choose” same-sex attractions.	MormonsAndGays.org
2016	Orientation change therapy described as “unethical.”	MormonAndGay.org update
2019	“We are opposed to conversion therapy.” Church supports Utah ban on conversion therapy for minors.	Official Church Statement

2. Curability: “Can Homosexuality Be Changed?”

For over fifty years, the Church endorsed, promoted, funded, and in some cases directly administered programs designed to change sexual orientation. This included electroshock aversion therapy at BYU, endorsement of conversion therapy organizations, and institutional literature promising “cure.”

Date	Institutional Position on Curability	Source
1959–83	BYU administers electroshock and vomit aversion therapy to gay students.	BYU Institutional Programs
1970	“Homosexuality CAN be cured, if the battle is well organized and pursued vigorously and continuously.” (emphasis in original)	Hope for Transgressors
1971	“Homosexuality CAN be cured.”	New Horizons for Homosexuals
1975	“Most people can be helped by electric shock behavior modification.”	LDS Social Services (R. Blattner)
1978	Homosexuality is “curable.” Those who say otherwise teach “false doctrine.”	Packer, “To the One”
1989	Evergreen International founded (Church-supported) to “diminish same-sex attractions.”	Evergreen International
1992	“In some cases, heterosexual feelings emerge leading to happy, eternal marriage relationships.”	Understanding & Helping pamphlet
2000	“God can cure and heal” homosexuality.	Packer, General Conference
2009	“If you are faithful, on resurrection morning you will rise with normal attractions for the opposite sex.”	Hafen, Evergreen Conference
2016	Orientation change therapy described as “unethical.”	MormonAndGay.org
2019	“We are opposed to conversion therapy and our therapists do not practice it.” Church supports Utah ban for minors.	Official Church Statement

3. The Nature of Orientation: Identity vs. Behavior

A subtle but crucial shift has occurred in how the Church conceptualizes homosexuality itself—moving from treating it as a sinful identity to drawing a distinction between orientation (not sinful) and behavior (sinful). While the behavioral prohibition remains, the identity framework has shifted dramatically.

Date	Institutional Position on Nature of Orientation	Source
1965	Homosexuality itself is a “gross, heinous, obnoxious, abominable, vicious sin.”	Kimball, BYU Speech
1976	Church Handbook changes grounds for discipline from “homosexual acts” to “homosexuality”—making orientation itself punishable.	Church Handbook
1992	First distinction: “There is a distinction between immoral thoughts and feelings and participating in homosexual behavior.”	Understanding & Helping pamphlet
1995	Oaks urges members not to use “gay” or “lesbian” as identity nouns.	Oaks, Ensign Article
2006	Attraction is not sinful; behavior is sinful. Feelings are “controllable.”	Oaks & Wickman Interview
2012	“Gay” used as descriptor for first time on official Church platform. Stories of gay members featured.	MormonsAndGays.org
2016	“Gay” accepted as self-descriptor. Orientation acknowledged as real, persistent component of identity.	MormonAndGay.org
2019	Exclusion Policy reversed. Same-sex marriage no longer automatic apostasy (though still “serious transgression”).	Policy Reversal (Nelson)

4. Disciplinary Treatment: “What Happens to Gay Members?”

Date	Disciplinary Framework	Source
1968	First mention of homosexuality in Church Handbook. “Homosexual acts” require a church court.	Church Handbook
1976	Grounds broadened from “homosexual acts” to “homosexuality.” Orientation itself becomes grounds for discipline.	Church Handbook
1983	Softened: Church court “may be” convened—no longer mandatory.	Church Handbook
2006	Attraction is not sin. Discipline reserved for sexual behavior, not orientation.	Oaks & Wickman Interview
Nov 2015	Same-sex married members classified as “apostates”—mandatory excommunication. Children barred from baptism until 18. Nelson calls this “revelation.”	Exclusion Policy (Monson/Nelson)
Apr 2019	Policy reversed. Same-sex marriage no longer apostasy. Children may be baptized. Oaks: “No doctrinal change.”	Policy Reversal (Nelson)

5. The Family Proclamation: Doctrine or Policy?

The 1995 Family Proclamation has become the primary doctrinal anchor for the Church’s position on same-sex relationships. But its own status—whether it represents eternal, unchangeable doctrine or institutional policy reflecting a generation’s understanding—is itself a matter of evolution.

Date	Status of the Family Proclamation	Source
1995	Issued as a “proclamation”—not canonized as scripture, not presented for sustaining vote, not added to D&C.	Hinckley, Relief Society meeting
1995–2017	Used primarily as political document in legal battles over marriage equality (Hawaii, California Prop 8, Obergefell briefs).	Multiple legal filings
2017	Oaks declares its teachings are “not changeable policies but statements of eternal truth, the will of God.”	Oaks, General Conference
Present	Still not canonized, still not added to standard works, still not presented for sustaining vote—the formal process by which the Church establishes binding doctrine.	Church procedure

Dallin H. Oaks has compared the Proclamation to the 1978 priesthood revelation in its importance. But the 1978 revelation was canonized as Official Declaration 2 and added to the Doctrine and Covenants. The Proclamation has not undergone this process. The Church’s own procedures for establishing binding doctrine have not been applied to it—raising the question of whether it represents eternal truth or a generation’s understanding.

Consider the parallel: Brigham Young’s 1852 justifications for the priesthood ban were taught by multiple prophets as “direct commandment from the Lord” for 126 years. The 2013 Race and the Priesthood essay disavowed every one of those justifications. A “proclamation” carries no more doctrinal weight than the First Presidency statements that supported the priesthood ban.

6. Marriage Theology: “Everlasting Covenants” That Change

The Church’s invocation of eternal marriage theology against same-sex relationships must be understood alongside the dramatic evolution of marriage theology itself. The concept of what constitutes God-ordained marriage has already undergone revolutionary change within the Restoration.

Date	Marriage Theology Position	Source
1835	D&C section on marriage: “One man should have one wife; and one woman, but one husband.” Polygamy explicitly denied.	Doctrine & Covenants (original)
1843	D&C 132 received: Plural marriage is the “new and everlasting covenant.” Required for exaltation.	Joseph Smith; D&C 132
1852	Polygamy taught publicly as divine requirement for celestial glory.	Brigham Young
1886	President John Taylor receives revelation that the everlasting covenant of plural marriage “cannot be revoked.”	John Taylor revelation
1890	Manifesto: Polygamy officially discontinued. Framed as revelation.	Wilford Woodruff (OD 1)
1890–1904	Plural marriages quietly continue in Mexico and Canada with Church approval.	Historical record
1904	Second Manifesto: All plural marriages cease. Non-compliance leads to excommunication.	Joseph F. Smith
1995	Family Proclamation: Marriage “between a man and a woman is ordained of God.” Singular.	Hinckley
Present	Men may still be sealed to multiple women in temples (if prior wife deceased). The celestial theology of plural marriage remains in D&C 132.	Current practice

The Church’s definition of God-ordained marriage has changed from monogamy (1835) to required polygamy (1843–1890) to prohibited polygamy (1904) to exclusively heterosexual monogamy (1995)—while the scriptural basis for polygamy (D&C 132) remains in the canon. An “everlasting covenant that cannot be revoked” (1886) was revoked four years later. If the definition of celestial marriage has changed this dramatically, the claim that it can never change again is not supported by the Church’s own history.

7. The Voice of Leaders vs. The Voice of God

The Dear Forrest letter draws a careful theological distinction between God’s voice and institutional voices. This distinction is not new to Latter-day Saint theology—the Church has repeatedly acknowledged it in retrospect while resisting it in the present.

Date	On Distinguishing God’s Voice from Leaders’ Voices	Source
1945	“Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine.”	J. Reuben Clark
1978	“Forget everything that I have said… We spoke with a limited understanding.”	Bruce R. McConkie
1988	“I’m not sure I could justify the difference in doctrine and policy.” Yet acknowledges reasons for the priesthood ban were “spectacularly wrong.”	Dallin H. Oaks
2007	“Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine.”	LDS Newsroom, “Approaching Mormon Doctrine”
2013	“The Church disavows the theories advanced in the past.”	Race and the Priesthood essay
Present	Kimball’s teachings on homosexuality—delivered with the same prophetic authority as teachings on race—have not been formally disavowed but have been quietly abandoned on every substantive point.	Institutional silence

The Architecture of Revelation

Across all seven dimensions, the evidence reveals a consistent pattern:

1. A position is established by leaders drawing on the cultural assumptions of their time.

2. The position is taught as doctrine, sometimes explicitly as divine revelation.

3. Dissent is treated as faithlessness; those who question are marginalized or disciplined.

4. Over time, the position quietly softens as scientific and cultural understanding advances.

5. The original position is eventually abandoned, though rarely formally acknowledged.

6. In some cases, the Church issues a retrospective acknowledgment that earlier leaders “spoke with a limited understanding.”

This pattern is not a failure of the Restoration. It is the Restoration working. The Ninth Article of Faith anticipates exactly this process—that human understanding is incomplete, that God continues to reveal, and that the Church’s understanding will deepen over time. The only theological failure would be to insist that the process has stopped.

What Has Already Changed

On homosexuality, the Church has already reversed or abandoned its positions on:

Causation: From “disease caused by masturbation” to “not chosen.”

Curability: From electroshock therapy to “we oppose conversion therapy.”

Identity: From “homosexuality is sin” to “attraction is not sinful.”

Terminology: From “never say ‘gay’” to featuring the word on official Church websites.

Discipline: From mandatory excommunication to policy reversal within 3.5 years.

Science: From “pseudoscience as doctrine” to acknowledging that orientation is real and persistent.

What Has Not Yet Changed

The behavioral prohibition remains: same-sex sexual relationships are still considered sinful. Same-sex couples cannot be sealed in temples. Gay members who marry are still subject to Church discipline. These are the positions that, if the pattern holds, will eventually be recognized as reflecting “a limited understanding” of God’s purposes—just as every prior position on this timeline has been.

The question is not whether the Church will change. The question, as it was with race, is how much harm will accumulate before it does.

The Theology of Hope

This document is not written in anger. It is not written to indict the Church or its leaders. It is written in the very faith the Restoration demands—the faith that says God has not finished speaking, that human understanding grows, and that the same Spirit that moved Spencer W. Kimball to reverse 126 years of racial exclusion can move again.

The Dear Forrest letter holds testimony and questions together because that is what the gospel requires. To hold testimony without questions is to deny the Ninth Article of Faith. To hold questions without testimony is to lose the anchor. Both are needed. Both are faithful.

To every gay Latter-day Saint reading this: the trajectory is clear. On every measurable dimension, the Church has moved toward you. Not far enough. Not fast enough. At tremendous cost. But the direction is unmistakable, and the theology is on your side—because it was always God’s theology, even when it was obscured by a generation’s limited understanding.