Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
smac97

Jeremy Runnells Excommunicated

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

Questioning sincerity is a pretty tiresome activity.  I know because I do it, often.  It seems to me many do it.  It almost feels like we have to.  But it's really difficult to determine his sincerity when we are seeing things all after the fact of his loss of faith.  It likely started with concerns and grew over time as he learned more and more.  The issues and questions he raised, as far as my memory has it, were nothing new at all.  They were the same things many of us have thought of and read about for years.  I tend to think everyone is full of sincerity in life and yet all of us are to some degree insincere.  To define one person as lacking sincerity is judging someone based on part of who he/she is. 

Yes, I completely agree with what you wrote above.

I'm sure he sincerely wanted help in the beginning.  Many can relate and that's why his letter has gotten so much exposure (and will continue to get exposure, most likely).

As far as the "issues and questions he raised", I agree that there was nothing new (from what I saw).  But, I think they are new issues for many who decide to read the letter.  I also think it became popular (within questioning members) because it was one document that contained most issues and concerns.  It certainly has generated a lot of discussion too.

.

Edited by ALarson

Share this post


Link to post
12 minutes ago, Rain said:

When people ask for names to be removed they do remain in some way, but not in the roles or membership. A friend of mine asked for name to be removed when young, but later was baptized again and found name was still in the records  - just not as a member.  It makes sense though.

Yes, that's how databases work. You can't just delete people. You need a record that they've asked to be deleted, and move them to a different list. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, Gray said:

Yes, that's how databases work. You can't just delete people. You need a record that they've asked to be deleted, and move them to a different list. 

It makes ya wonder how big the list is after hearing the number of members on record.  How many are on record?  That'd be interesting. 

Share this post


Link to post
10 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

It makes ya wonder how big the list is after hearing the number of members on record.  How many are on record?  That'd be interesting. 

None. These would no longer be "members".

Share this post


Link to post
16 hours ago, smac97 said:

Here:

So what's with him purportedly having "excommunicated the LDS Church?"  We he excommunicated, or did he resign?  Was he disfellowshipped, and did he then resign?

Thanks,

-Smac

I think your thread title isn't correct (I'm sure it wasn't intentional as it's confusing to figure out what really happened).

From what I've read, he was not excommunicated, he resigned (but then he used the word "excommunicated").

Was there even a court held or did Runnells just show up and submit his letter of resignation before the proceedings began?

.

Edited by ALarson

Share this post


Link to post

I hope he can quickly move on in life

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, ALarson said:

I think your thread title isn't correct (I'm sure it wasn't intentional as it's confusing to figure out what really happened).

From what I've read, he was not excommunicated, he resigned (but then he used the word "excommunicated").

Was there even a court held or did Rummels just show up and submit his letter of resignation before the proceedings began?

.

Rummels called it a 'kangaroo court' and that his stake president and the councelmen refused to answer any of his questions so it sounds like he did attend.

Share this post


Link to post
2 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Rummels called it a 'kangaroo court' and that his stake president and the councelmen refused to answer any of his questions so it sounds like he did attend.

Oh, ok....then when did he hand in his letter of resignation, do you know?  Before they deliberated maybe?

Edited by ALarson

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, ALarson said:

Oh, ok....then when did he hand in his letter of resignation, do you know?  Before they deliberated maybe?

I'm not sure.

Share this post


Link to post

I still hold to the idea that he was ex'd.  

Edited by Tacenda

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I still hold to the idea that he was ex'd.  

Yes, well it sounds like an issue of control for him.  

He wants to be able to say that he "resigned" instead of that the church "excommunicated him", (from what I can tell).  It's all a bit odd, but I guess I can understand that.  I just don't like all the publicity surrounding it, but also imagine that this was his intent.

.

Edited by ALarson

Share this post


Link to post

Jeremey Runnels officially RESIGNED.  But some have asked why?  Why go through all of the drama to then just resign?  While I do not know Jeremy nor have I personally spoken with him on this matter, from what I have read I believe that he was pretty confident that the his goose was already cooked so what's the point.  Rather than submit to their claimed power...he took the power back and set his own course.

 It had become quite evident that he would not be given a fair hearing at his church court.  His SP had set unreasonable parameters and had made it quite clear that the court was a mere formality necessary to deliver the formal excommunication.  Rather than offering Jeremy a fair hearing one where Runnels could present his side of event, could offer a defense, seek answers to his questions, allow witnesses to his defense or even have a hearing interpreter present to allow Jeremy to actually have access to what was being said at the hearing (he's deaf after all)...his SP said NO.  So what's the point of allowing them to make a mockery of the process and him.  Instead he took control of his own destiny and resigned.

 

Edited by Johnnie Cake

Share this post


Link to post
7 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Yes, well it sounds like an issue of control for him.  

He wants to be able to say that he "resigned" instead of that the church "excommunicated him", (from what I can tell).  It's all a bit odd, but I guess I can understand that.  I just don't like all the publicity surrounding it, but also imagine that this was his intent.

.

When I went to his website to see the CES letter from the link on Fox13Now, it was a maze of things to even see the letter and gave up.  But having a hard day brainwise so maybe that's why.   I'll try again.

Share this post


Link to post

I think the Jeremy Runnels episode has illustrated to a wide audience not only that there are numerous problematic issues surrounding Mormonism, but that Mormonism has few good answers for them.

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe Jeremy is going by the adage that if the church isn't true it should be harmed.  

“If we have the truth, it cannot be harmed by investigation. If we have not the truth, it ought to be harmed.”

– President J. Reuben Clark

Not that this is verifiable, but he think's it is. 

Share this post


Link to post

I think the policy used to be that name removal could not be used in place of church discipline if the member is suspected of transgressions that would warrant church discipline. But now the policy states:

6.14.1    
"Name Removal and Suspected Transgression

A request for name removal should be acted upon whether or not priesthood leaders suspect or have evidence of transgression. Any allegations or evidence of unresolved transgressions are noted on the Report of Administrative Action form so priesthood leaders may resolve such matters in the future if the individual applies for readmission into the Church." (CHI)

 

Share this post


Link to post
37 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Yes, well it sounds like an issue of control for him.  

He wants to be able to say that he "resigned" instead of that the church "excommunicated him", (from what I can tell).  It's all a bit odd, but I guess I can understand that.  I just don't like all the publicity surrounding it, but also imagine that this was his intent.

.

Kind of like the fights that some couples have about who broke up with who.  I don't think the church cares (as far as its reputation goes) one way or the other, but Jeremy seems to care a lot about it.

Share this post


Link to post
31 minutes ago, Johnnie Cake said:

Jeremey Runnels officially RESIGNED.  But some have asked why?  Why go through all of the drama to then just resign?  While I do not know Jeremy nor have I personally spoken with him on this matter, from what I have read I believe that he was pretty confident that the his goose was already cooked so what's the point.  Rather than submit to their claimed power...he took the power back and set his own course.

 It had become quite evident that he would not be given a fair hearing at his church court.  His SP had set unreasonable parameters and had made it quite clear that the court was a mere formality necessary to deliver the formal excommunication.  Rather than offering Jeremy a fair hearing one where Runnels could present his side of event, could offer a defense, seek answers to his questions, allow witnesses to his defense or even have a hearing interpreter present to allow Jeremy to actually have access to what was being said at the hearing (he's deaf after all)...his SP said NO.  So what's the point of allowing them to make a mockery of the process and him.  Instead he took control of his own destiny and resigned.

 

Yes, after reading more, he did resign.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

Questioning sincerity is a pretty tiresome activity.  I know because I do it, often.  It seems to me many do it.  It almost feels like we have to.  But it's really difficult to determine his sincerity when we are seeing things all after the fact of his loss of faith.  It likely started with concerns and grew over time as he learned more and more.  The issues and questions he raised, as far as my memory has it, were nothing new at all.  They were the same things many of us have thought of and read about for years.  I tend to think everyone is full of sincerity in life and yet all of us are to some degree insincere.  To define one person as lacking sincerity is judging someone based on part of who he/she is. 

Sincerity or not..doesn't change the questions and doesn't change the answers or non answers.  No one made me read the CES letter and it was published way before I left the church.  In any case, I wish him and his family many good things.  IMO, with peace I wish him humility, which he needs to move on.  God Bless You Jeremy. 

Edited by Jeanne

Share this post


Link to post
34 minutes ago, consiglieri said:

I think the Jeremy Runnels episode has illustrated to a wide audience not only that there are numerous problematic issues surrounding Mormonism, but that Mormonism has few good answers for them.

That is the bottom line.  Jeremy in interviews hesistated in talking about his family.  I am thinking that a resignation was/may have been the better benefit for them.

Share this post


Link to post
On 4/18/2016 at 8:31 AM, Johnnie Cake said:

Jeremey Runnels officially RESIGNED.  But some have asked why?  Why go through all of the drama to then just resign?  While I do not know Jeremy nor have I personally spoken with him on this matter, from what I have read I believe that he was pretty confident that the his goose was already cooked so what's the point.  Rather than submit to their claimed power...he took the power back and set his own course.

 It had become quite evident that he would not be given a fair hearing at his church court.  His SP had set unreasonable parameters and had made it quite clear that the court was a mere formality necessary to deliver the formal excommunication.  Rather than offering Jeremy a fair hearing one where Runnels could present his side of event, could offer a defense, seek answers to his questions, allow witnesses to his defense or even have a hearing interpreter present to allow Jeremy to actually have access to what was being said at the hearing (he's deaf after all)...his SP said NO.  So what's the point of allowing them to make a mockery of the process and him.  Instead he took control of his own destiny and resigned.

What was unfair about the hearing?

What parameters set by the SP were unreasonable?

A disciplinary council is not an appropriate venue for hashing out or arguing about Church doctrines/beliefs, problematic aspects of Church history, etc.  Do you disagree with that?  If so, could you explain your position?

Thanks,

-Smac

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, stemelbow said:

.  But it's really difficult to determine his sincerity when we are seeing things all after the fact of his loss of....[sorry, edited too much by accident]

Stem, we have his own conversations (they were still in a public forum when I posted the quotes here) from the time he was compiling the letter.  I am not questioning the sincerity of his doubt crisis or that it might have taken time.  What I am questioning the sincerity of is his leaving out the reason he originally stated for the letter as well as the fact he stated at that time he no longer believed.  We are not seeing stuff all after the fact of when it happened, but material from when it was happening.

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, consiglieri said:

I think the Jeremy Runnels episode has illustrated to a wide audience not only that there are numerous problematic issues surrounding Mormonism, but that Mormonism has few good answers for them.

I have to disagree.  I did read it carefully, responded at length, and I think it demonstrates why Jesus said of the Parable of the Sower, "Know ye not this parable?  How then can ye know all parables?"  Soil, nurture, and patience can make huge difference in the harvest from the same seeds, whether nothing, or a hundred fold.  I find what I have harvested both abundant and nourishing.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Canonsburg, PA

Share this post


Link to post

Getting rebaptized by proxy is dependent on the FP's decision on a case by case basis last I heard.  Do you have any documentation that suggests the rules are different for resigning as opposed to excommunication?

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...