What'S The Amount Of Times Of Someone Can Be Excommunicated?

[Duncan]

What is the amount of times someone can be excommunicated from the Church? Is there a difference in gender? does remarriage make a difference i.e name change if you are a lady?

[LordUther]

I don't know that there is definitive answer for this question, but the Saviour did say that we were to forgive 70x7. So at least 490 times for the same transgression then...? I would assume that, depending on the infraction, it would be incumbent on the one re-desiring baptism's sincere repentance, as long as that could be shown there would be no bar to re-admission. I've never heard of anyone being ex'd & rebaptized more than once so I don't really know.

[volgadon]

What is the amount of times someone can be excommunicated from the Church?

As far as I know, the First Presidency decides on an individual basis.

Is there a difference in gender?

No.

does remarriage make a difference i.e name change if you are a lady?

No.

[blackstrap]

Twice.... in this life.

[Duncan]

Twice.... in this life.

twice? hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, what if I were to say I knew someone who was exed 3 times and got rebaptized? is that a glitch somehow?

[ERayR]

twice? hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, what if I were to say I knew someone who was exed 3 times and got rebaptized? is that a glitch somehow?

I don't think there is a glitch in the process but he/she certainly has some kind of a glitch.

[Calm]

Blackstrap is right (I am thinking he means one is allowed rebaptism three times and after that, policy is if excommunicated again, no rebaptism...but I suspect like most policies if there was a good reason, it would be allowed...just that it would have to be a good reason). It is not, imo, about how many times we are willing to forgive, we must continue to forgive but it is whether or not it is wisdom to place a person under covenants that he or she will continue to destroy....just as there is excommunication in the first place to remove a person from spiritually damaging oneself in that way, there is a 'until death' excommunication status that could be seen as the next level up so to speak...kind of like how a spouse might accept a first and a second slip into adultery and believe that the trust and fidelity in a marriage can be reestablished by both spouses, but three times by the one establishes that it is likely more of an addiction/habit than a temporary or overcomable slip and so one has to decide at that point whether or not one wants to accept adultery as a standard part of one's marriage or not and end the marriage if "not".

[Calm]

twice? hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm, what if I were to say I knew someone who was exed 3 times and got rebaptized? is that a glitch somehow?

Possibly, also possible exceptions were made. Very few church polices won't be adjusted for personal need or circumstances, though for the more stringent polices the need needs to be high/extreme.

[rongo]

The "two strike" rule applies generally to adultery only, not other offenses. As with everything else, exceptions can be (and sometimes are) authorized by the First Presidency on a case-by-case basis. It is very, very serious to be excommunicated for adultery, rebaptized and have blessings restored, and to commit that heinous sin again.

[mfbukowski]

As far as I know, the First Presidency decides on an individual basis.

No.

No.

Yes!

Edited June 4, 2013 by mfbukowski

[Pandorian]

I am not too sure, but I know of one person who was exed for committing adultery, went through the process, got rebaptized, and then DID IT AGAIN, got exed a 2nd time, and was able to get rebaptized a 2nd time. I was surprised how 'easy' it was the 2nd time. For all I know it varies from Stake to Stake and from leader to leader.

[The Nehor]

So it is either 2 or 490?

[Calm]

So it is either 2 or 490?

It's both....one is forgiven 490 times, one is rebaptized twice (with one original baptism that makes three total).

[Duncan]

So it is either 2 or 490?

and what if it isn't for adultery?

okay i'll tell you the story- is there is lady that just moved into our ward that is a con artist to no end, the trauma of her drama is long, thick and deep. I had a bad, bad experience in 1990 when I was 12 even. back then she was a serial abuser of the Church welfare system and she hasn't changed sounds like. I helped her move in today and got a call from the Bishop. Anywys she has been exed 3 times and rebaptized, but I am like how is this even possible?(I don't know or care to know why she was exed) she has been married and divorced like at least 5 times from what I picked up. So, she is on a do not contact list, which isn't my call but how is this lady getting back in to the Church?

Edited June 4, 2013 by Duncan

[The Nehor]

It's both....one is forgiven 490 times, one is rebaptized twice (with one original baptism that makes three total).

Welp, the guy next to me at work has hit 477 instances of ticking me off. Almost there.....................

[Storm Rider]

There is no absolute rule; but the process is the same each time. The purpose of excommunication is to signify to the individual a need for serious self-correction. Rebaptism is not a revolving door to that is used to gain forgiveness; it is a serious commitment to take upon ourselves the name of Christ and to seek to follow him. There is no difference in gender and there is no problem when a member marries, their membership number follows them.

[Calm]

So, she is on a do not contact list, which isn't my call but how is this lady getting back in to the Church?

Because there are people out there who never give up hope....which is wonderful for the vast majority of us but for those for whom they are their prey....not good, I am afraid.

The Church is essentially a very large extended family even with all its organization, etc....there is still a response there that 'this is my sister or brother'. It is a wonder what damage children can do to their family when they go to them for 'help' but isn't it better that the people are of the gentle and good hearted type that can be hurt by such things than to be so uncaring as to kick the woman completely out of the church and put out restraining orders or such.

Edited June 4, 2013 by calmoriah

[blackstrap]

Depends on the offence. If one commits murder and gets exed, there is not much chance of being rebaptized. Pedophilia is another offence that will be very difficult to be forgiven for in this life. Sexual sin is a bit more grey because of age , covenants etc.

[Anijen]

I have a question. Please bear with me, this is kind of lengthy and just to let you know I am very active member, strong testimony, and attend the temple monthly (well I try, missed it in April).

Scenario 1.

A young man wants to go on a mission, yet when he was 15 years old he had premarital sex (just once) and resulted in a pregnancy. The baby was given up for adoption and the young man has no contact with the biological mom or the baby or the adoptive parents. The young man approached the bishop (before the birth of the baby) confessed as a part of this repentance process he was placed on probation. After about six months the young man is again interviewed and now he is about 16 and found fully worthy to attend the temple with the youth, to administer in the sacrament etc. He is fully worthy. Two years goes by and the young man is still fully worthy. He applies for a very prestigious scholarship worth about $130K over four years and gets it, but then turns it down in order to serve a mission. His hometeacher blesses him that he will serve a mission in his youth, his patriarchal blessing says he will serve a mission while in his youth, his previous Bishop also gave him that impression. He gives up the scholarship and prepares for his mission. He approaches the new Bishop and the Bishop informs him that it is nearly impossible for him to go on a mission that he will need a Bishops endorsement, a Stake Presidents endorsement and then to be considered by the First Presidency, then the Bishop informs the young man that it is almost impossible for him to go on a mission even though the old Bishop, New Bishop, and Stake President find this young man worthy to serve. The young man remains hopeful.

Scenario 2.

Same young man was told by the new Bishop that he will have to reopen up the painful past sin, explore every detail of that sin even after a person has fully repented and has been temple worthy and has remained so. Why does the bishop have to do this? Even in temple recommend questions they do not do that, they will ask; "have there been any sins or misdeeds in your life that should have been resolved with priesthood authorities, but have not been?" Why is the need to re-explore the sin four years later and the 15 year old now is 19 almost 20 and has remained worthy, why is this required?

Scenario 3.

A BYU professor writes his opinions of "religious stuff" in a very articulate and academic manner, it is peer reviewed, yet it happens to tick off an Apostle. The Professor is excommunicated. The professor fully repents and is temple worthy and has never published anything since concerning his religious opinions, or the church he belongs to. The professor still will never be again employed by BYU (church policy). Even though this professor is serving as Bishop. Why can he not teach again at a church school?

Summary.

It appears the Atonement of the Savior in these scenarios has been omitted and replaced by church policy that protects the reputation of the church. It appears that policy negates the sacrifice of the Savior and replaces the importance of reputation of the church before the atonement of the Savior. The excuse that the church needs to protect itself seems a bit concerning.

Now I realize that many people just have a problem forsaking their sins and are constantly re-baptized and properly so, but my questions are more of a repented person fully worthy but are still held back by church policy. What then?

If Alma the Younger, in his words; "the vilest of sinners" can repent and become a prophet and leader of the church it seems from these scenarios the modern church can learn from Alma.

Edited June 4, 2013 by Anijen

[Duncan]

I have a question. Please bear with me, this is kind of lengthy and just to let you know I am very active member, strong testimony, and attend the temple monthly (well I try, missed it in April).

Scenario 1.

A young man wants to go on a mission, yet when he was 15 years old he had premarital sex (just once) and resulted in a pregnancy. The baby was given up for adoption and the young man has no contact with the biological mom or the baby or the adoptive parents. The young man approached the bishop (before the birth of the baby) confessed as a part of this repentance process he was placed on probation. After about six months the young man is again interviewed and now he is about 16 and found fully worthy to attend the temple with the youth, to administer in the sacrament etc. He is fully worthy. Two years goes by and the young man is still fully worthy. He applies for a very prestigious scholarship worth about $130K over four years and gets it, but then turns it down in order to serve a mission. His hometeacher blesses him that he will serve a mission in his youth, his patriarchal blessing says he will serve a mission while in his youth, his previous Bishop also gave him that impression. He gives up the scholarship and prepares for his mission. He approaches the new Bishop and the Bishop informs him that it is nearly impossible for him to go on a mission that he will need a Bishops endorsement, a Stake Presidents endorsement and then to be considered by the First Presidency, then the Bishop informs the young man that it is almost impossible for him to go on a mission even though the old Bishop, New Bishop, and Stake President find this young man worthy to serve. The young man remains hopeful.

Scenario 2.

Same young man was told by the new Bishop that he will have to reopen up the painful past sin, explore every detail of that sin even after a person has fully repented and has been temple worthy and has remained so. Why does the bishop have to do this? Even in temple recommend questions they do not do that, they will ask; "have there been any sins or misdeeds in your life that should have been resolved with priesthood authorities, but have not been?" Why is the need to re-explore the sin four years later and the 15 year old now is 19 almost 20 and has remained worthy, why is this required?

Scenario 3.

A BYU professor writes his opinions of "religious stuff" in a very articulate and academic manner, it is peer reviewed, yet it happens to tick off an Apostle. The Professor is excommunicated. The professor fully repents and is temple worthy and has never published anything since concerning his religious opinions, or the church he belongs to. The professor still will never be again employed by BYU (church policy). Even though this professor is serving as Bishop. Why can he not teach again at a church school?

Summary.

It appears the Atonement of the Savior in these scenarios has been omitted and replaced by church policy that protects the reputation of the church. It appears that policy negates the sacrifice of the Savior and replaces the importance of reputation of the church before the atonement of the Savior. The excuse that the church needs to protect itself seems a bit concerning.

Now I realize that many people just have a problem forsaking their sins and are constantly re-baptized and properly so, but my questions are more of a repented person fully worthy but are still held back by church policy. What then?

If Alma the Younger, in his words; "the vilest of sinners" can repent and become a prophet and leader of the church it seems from these scenarios the modern church can learn from Alma.

I would agree with that. I was in a somewhat similar situation as a youth (no pregnancy involved!) and I complained to the stake president about it and I went out