Excommunication in the Church

[Jason]

If that were the only reason, we'd never excommunicate penitent people. But we do.

I said "repentant", not "penitent".

[MorningStar]

Yep, and often penitent people want to be excommunicated.

MorningStar

Under no circumstances would a person who has been abused be excommunicated for being abused. That makes no sense whatsoever.

I never said that. My friend had a couple questions about excommunication. She wanted to know if it was possible her soon to be ex would be excommunicated. She also wanted to know if she would be exed for her current choices. I decided to look up an article on church discipline. Of course no one would be in trouble for being abused.

[mercyngrace]

I said "repentant", not "penitent".

Jason, the words are synonyms.

[MorningStar]

I think it is sometimes necessary for people to be excommunicated for the sake of others. My friend's dad "repented" for raping his daughter for 10 years, but that wasn't until she finally told someone. He spent many years bitter that his dad wasn't excommunicated. The lack of justice for what he did to his sister hurt him terribly. I believe his dad was lying though. He claimed that he was later exed for fornication, but when his blessings were going to be restored, the church contacted his mom and sister to ask if they were OK with that. I asked him, "Why would the church ask them if he were really exed for fornication?" I think he was just too ashamed to admit it was for sexual abuse.

For sins that serious, I think excommunication is called for. It is still mercy and a chance for them to start over, but a wake up call that the behavior is completely unacceptable.

[mfbukowski]

nack,

Though I've never had the experience of being present, I'm familiar with the process based on what D&C 107 (iirc) says and discussions with my husband, father, and brothers, all of whom have served on the high council. Their experiences generally support what you've said here however, they've also each got tales to tell where the process went awry.

It is my opinion that having codified reasons in the CHI for excommunication for any other reason than lack of penitence allows room for travesties. The norm should be codified, rare exceptions should be dealt with individually as situations arise.

Having unfortunately been involved in more councils than I care to remember at the moment, both in ward and stake levels, I think that yes, the process can "go awry", no question, but in each case in which I have been involved where this has happened, it has usually been because the person facing the council has in some way been offended unintentionally by the process itself, or some insensitive comment made during the council, or frankly more often than not, just by having to face a council in the first place. Sometimes you see them come in with a "chip on their shoulder" and you just know it is not going to go well.

Councils tend to be, understandably, very difficult for everyone involved- I just dread them.

The challenge for everyone is to be, and remain, Christlike while yet being the very imperfect people we all are.

[Jason]

Jason, the words are synonyms.

There are more steps involved in repenting than there are in being merely penitent.

[mfbukowski]

Yes. One such was the prodigal. He said "I am no longer worthy to be called your son."

And how did His Father react?

Maybe we are not understanding each other.

They want to be excommunicated so they can be re-baptized.

They just want to push the "format disk" button and start over from scratch.

[bluebell]

The CHI indicates reasons for excommunication. Two of the three I remember have nothing to do with whether a person is penitent. It's that simple.

None of us like to believe that the church makes policy for expediency but the fact is that it does. This is why in the most recent meetings at which the new CHI was distributed statements were made to the effect that some procedures and policies were made for the sake of managing an organization the size of our church but that the Spirit should be the primary guide in the execution of all callings.

edit: Bluebell, after reading your post a couple times, I'm not positive what you think my previous post is implying. So I'm not entirely sure I'm responding to the point here.

My point is quite simply that our efforts are supposed to be to reclaim the sinner. D&C 42, the Law of the Church, is quite clear that reasons for excommuncation are based (except in the case of murder) on whether or not one is penitent. Without fail the words "cast out" are in response to "will not repent". Shouldn't excommunication be solely dependent upon repentance?

When i read your post, it seemed to me that you were saying that excommunicating a penitent person would never be approved of by Jesus regardless of the reasons and that those who do such excommunications don't care about mercy.

Is that what you were saying, or did i misunderstand you?

[mercyngrace]

Gotta go be "mom" for a bit so I'll try to quickly respond:

For sins that serious, I think excommunication is called for. It is still mercy and a chance for them to start over, but a wake up call that the behavior is completely unacceptable.

I agree that excommunication can be merciful to the unrepentant. To one who has truly suffered for his/her sins, no matter how gross, excommunication can send the damaging message that one is beyond the reach of the atonement.

Having unfortunately been involved in more councils than I care to remember at the moment, both in ward and stake levels, I think that yes, the process can "go awry", no question, but in each case in which I have been involved where this has happened, it has usually been because the person facing the council has in some way been offended unintentionally by the process itself, or some insensitive comment made during the council, or frankly more often than not, just by having to face a council in the first place. Sometimes you see them come in with a "chip on their shoulder" and you just know it is not going to go well.

Councils tend to be, understandably, very difficult for everyone involved- I just dread them.

The challenge for everyone is to be, and remain, Christlike while yet being the very imperfect people we all are.

I think you are absolutely right about the challenge - which is to remain Christlike. The first step, imo, would be to stop thinking of people who have seriously sinned as "them" and to start thinking of everyone as "us". (Galatians 6:1 ... considering thyself...)

Maybe we are not understanding each other.

They want to be excommunicated so they can be re-baptized.

They just want to push the "format disk" button and start over from scratch.

The format disk button is called repentance and it should be pressed often, at the least weekly before partaking of the sacrament.

[BookofMormonLuvr]

Gotta go be "mom" for a bit so I'll try to quickly respond:

I agree that excommunication can be merciful to the unrepentant. To one who has truly suffered for his/her sins, no matter how gross, excommunication can send the damaging message that one is beyond the reach of the atonement.

I think you are absolutely right about the challenge - which is to remain Christlike. The first step, imo, would be to stop thinking of people who have seriously sinned as "them" and to start thinking of everyone as "us". (Galatians 6:1 ... considering thyself...)

The format disk button is called repentance and it should be pressed often, at the least weekly before partaking of the sacrament.

I agree with M&G...

Moroni 6:8

But as oft as they repented and sought forgiveness, with real intent, they were forgiven.

[bluebell]

I agree with M&G...

I don't think there's a poster on here yet that DOESN'T agree that the repentant should be forgiven. Excommunication isn't a contradiction to that scripture in Moroni. It's a part of the repentance process not outside of it.

[mercyngrace]

When i read your post, it seemed to me that you were saying that excommunicating a penitent person would never be approved of by Jesus regardless of the reasons and that those who do such excommunications don't care about mercy.

Is that what you were saying, or did i misunderstand you?

I am indeed saying that those who repent are to be received.

If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him. ~ Luke 17:3-4

Behold, he who has repented of his sins, the same is forgiven, and I, the Lord, remember them no more. ~ D&C 58:42

Yea, and as often as my people repent will I forgive them their trespasses against me. And ye shall also forgive one another your trespasses; for verily I say unto you, he that forgiveth not his neighbor

[MorningStar]

I don't think excommunication equals rejection or lack of forgiveness. It is to help them truly repent.

[mercyngrace]

I don't think there's a poster on here yet that DOESN'T agree that the repentant should be forgiven. Excommunication isn't a contradiction to that scripture in Moroni. It's a part of the repentance process not outside of it.

Excommunication is designed to bring men to repentance. Read what JS said to the RS(iirc) about how the goodness of the society would cause people to dread losing membership therein. (TPJS)

Repentance literally means turning toward God with a desire for reconciliation. In a penitent person, this has already happened as exhibited by the confession and forsaking of sin. Excommunication serves no purpose at that point.

[MorningStar]

From the article I linked to:

The How of Disciplinary Councils

The bishopric, in consultation with the stake president, has the responsibility and authority to hold disciplinary councils for all ward members. However, if excommunication of a Melchizedek Priesthood holder is thought to be a possibility, the matter is transferred to the stake presidency, who, with the assistance of the high council, may convene a stake disciplinary council.

An appeal of a decision of a ward disciplinary council goes to the stake presidency and high council. Any further appeals go to the First Presidency.

Missions and districts have jurisdiction similar to that of stakes and wards, with mission presidents having jurisdiction over the missionaries and branch members in districts over whom they preside.

A disciplinary council begins with an opening prayer, followed by a statement of the reason for the council being convened. The member is asked to tell in simple and general terms about the transgression and to explain his or her feelings and what steps of repentance he or she has taken. The member may respond to clarifying questions from the leaders. Then he or she is excused, and the leaders counsel together, pray, and reach a decision.

The council takes into consideration many factors, such as whether temple or marriage covenants have been violated; whether a position of trust or authority has been abused; the repetition, seriousness, and magnitude of the transgression; the age, maturity, and experience of the transgressor; the interests of innocent victims and innocent family members; the time between transgression and confession; whether or not confession was voluntary; and evidence of repentance.

Those who sit on the council are to keep everything strictly confidential and to handle the matter in a spirit of love. Their objective is not retribution; rather, it is to help the member make the changes necessary to stand clean before God once more.

Bolded emphasis mine. I think it is absolutely necessary to take into account the victims of serious sin.

[Calm]

excommunication can send the damaging message that one is beyond the reach of the atonement.

Only if misunderstood...and since part of the entire process of which excommunication is a part of is rebaptism, it seems to me if a person believes that excommunication is telling him/her that things are hopeless, there is something else going on with them that is leading to the misunderstanding, something that those on the Council are not part of.

The format disk button is called repentance and it should be pressed often, at the least weekly before partaking of the sacrament.

In the early days of the modern Church, people were rebaptized for many reasons, including a statement of recommitting themselves to their covenants. I think after a very grievous lapse into sin (something that qualifies for possible excommunication) the symbolic nature of rebaptism can help an individual in ways that the weekly form of repentance process cannot.

[mercyngrace]

I don't think excommunication equals rejection or lack of forgiveness. It is to help them truly repent.

The language for excommunication in the scriptures is "cast out". Being ejected is a pretty clear rejection no matter how you frame it.

I think what is telling is that in the Savior's mortal ministry, He was moved with compassion for any and all who called upon His name. Even the devils who pleaded for mercy were cast into swine per their request.

Those who received no mercy were those who refused to give it to others and instead used the law to elevate themselves and exclude those they deemed sinners.

[mercyngrace]

Bolded emphasis mine. I think it is absolutely necessary to take into account the victims of serious sin.

I agree that needs to be taken into account. True repentance requires that the penitent person do all they can to make amends for wounds inflicted. I haven't suggested otherwise.

[Calm]

I think it is absolutely necessary to take into account the victims of serious sin.

Part of the process of repentance is being willing to give restitution to those one has harmed. There are few ways of truly doing so when it comes to abuse and some other sins including when one's example has caused another to stumble and lose faith. Showing that one is willing to humble oneself and accept discipline and a temporary limitation of one's blessings can help those one has hurt know that one has acknowledged the wrongness of one's behaviour, the harm that one has caused them.

A loving God provides a way for us to attempt to make restitution to others when we have sinned not only against Him, but them even if it only amounts to a public statement that we have done wrong.

[Calm]

The language for excommunication in the scriptures is "cast out". Being ejected is a pretty clear rejection no matter how you frame it.

But this is not what happens in our society for the repentant so it would seem to me that your argument is with scriptural language, not with the actual process.

[mercyngrace]

Only if misunderstood...and since part of the entire process of which excommunication is a part of is rebaptism, it seems to me if a person believes that excommunication is telling him/her that things are hopeless, there is something else going on with them that is leading to the misunderstanding, something that those on the Council are not part of.

I agree that this is a misunderstanding. It's one that exists for people who get excommunicated but it also sometimes exists among the general membership of the church and those who sit in seats of judgment.

In the early days of the modern Church, people were rebaptized for many reasons, including a statement of recommitting themselves to their covenants. I think after a very grievous lapse into sin (something that qualifies for possible excommunication) the symbolic nature of rebaptism can help an individual in ways that the weekly form of repentance process cannot.

Perhaps but in the early days of the church people did a lot of things we don't do today.

I don't think it's something one can understand fully unless they've experienced it and I haven't but I feel a distinct disconnect between what the scriptures say on the matter and how we practice it in the church currently. If I'm wrong, the Lord will lead me to the light at some point, I'm sure, but my current reading is that the scriptures rarely support casting off those who've already repented (see D&C 42 for exceptions).

[mercyngrace]

But this is not what happens in our society for the repentant so it would seem to me that your argument is with scriptural language, not with the actual process.

I think it is what happens, Cal.

We refuse their tithing. We don't let them partake of the sacrament. They aren't allowed to pray. There is clear casting out, going on.

[MorningStar]

I guess I'm confused. Do you think excommunication should never be done if the person repents?

[Calm]

I think it is what happens, Cal.

We refuse their tithing. We don't let them partake of the sacrament. They aren't allowed to pray. There is clear casting out, going on.

I define "casting out" as denying of association.

I had a very close friend who was excommunicated for adultery (both she and the man were leaders in the ward and very, very visible to the youth). The excommunication process taught her (according to her own comments) not only what she could have lost, but how close she came to losing it. She had never realized just how much of a blessing she had considered the garment until she was not able to wear it was one aspect of what she learned. Sometimes if one doesn't go through some aspect of discipline one doesn't realize completely the difference that sin could have caused in your life if you didn't forsake it. This not only gives you additional reason to avoid anything that would incline you to sin in the future, but I think gives you insights that can be helpful in teaching others how to avoid the traps you stepped into.

God allows for some consequences to be attached to any sinful behaviour that we cannot avoid even if on an eternal basis all is forgiven and as if it never happened. I believe he does this not only so that others can learn from our mistakes and thus avoid sin (part of the way the Lord allows for us to give restitution to the society we have sinned against by being examples of how not to seek God), but so that we can truly understand the depth of what sin does do us. It is not a superficial thing that can be wiped away by saying "I'm sorry". It causes a change in the spirit, mind and body. Yes, the Lord's Atonement can restore us to purity and even innocence; but if we do not truly comprehend the magnitude of a sin we cannot truly repent of it (which is why I believe full repentance will not take place until the next life when we will be shown just how our actions affected us all through our lives and especially the impact our actions had on others). As is taught in the scriptures, knowing the bitter is one of the necessary ways to know the sweet.

[bluebell]

I don't think excommunication equals rejection or lack of forgiveness. It is to help them truly repent.

This is my thought as well.