Bishop tells Mormon Lesbian to divorce or be ex'd

[JLHPROF]

Just now, Gray said:

I guess it's just a bit jarring that bishops are going around trying to get families to either divorce or leave the church. It's pretty awful stuff.

Something tells me that there is a bit of bias in that particular reported turn of phrase.

It may just be semantics, but I would hazard a guess the Bishop worded things a bit differently.

[ALarson]

Just now, oremites said:

It is precisely the duty of the Bishop to call people to repentance or excommunicate them.

Yes, if a member comes in and wants to repent or if an inactive member is preaching against or attempting to harm the church in anyway.  This couple was friendly to the church and had a love for the church even though they were no longer active.  There was no need to seek them out and threaten them with a disciplinary court.  Of course, it's within a Bishop's stewardship to do this if he chooses to, but I can see no good that will come of it.

[Gray]

1 minute ago, JLHPROF said:

Something tells me that there is a bit of bias in that particular reported turn of phrase.

It may just be semantics, but I would hazard a guess the Bishop worded things a bit differently.

I don't know how he worded it, but that appears to be what he's trying to do. 

 

[JLHPROF]

3 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Yes, if a member comes in and wants to repent or if an inactive member is preaching against or attempting to harm the church in anyway.  This couple was friendly to the church and had a love for the church even though they were no longer active.  There was no need to seek them out and threaten them with a disciplinary court.  Of course, it's within a Bishop's stewardship to do this if he chooses to, but I can see no good that will come of it.

I disagree 

Continued membership in an organization is subject to abiding the rules of that organization.  It doesn't matter if you attend the organization meetings on a regular basis or not, there are conditions for membership.

[smac97]

28 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

This kind of stuff, like what this bishop is up to, doesn't seem to be helping. 

We don't know the details, of course, but I could see a well-intentioned motive here.  Bishops are generally supposed to give individuals an opportunity to repent.  However, I can't help but think that in some circumstances a bishop should proceed directly with the disciplinary proceedings.  I hope the Church provides bishops with training on what to do in circumstances like this.  

I suspect that the Church's policy change in November 2015 was designed to avoid these circumstances.  I think the Church does not want to be creating the dichotomous choice which the bishop has presented here.  Instead, I think the Church has found certain circumstances to be fundamentally incompatible with membership in the Church.  While some "circumstances" can be modified through individual choices to reinstate an individual's ability to remain in the Church (a fornicator can stop fornicating, for example), other "circumstances" require modification that will substantially - and potentially adversely - affect third parties.  I suspect that Church members who enter into polygamous marriages are not given the choice of either being excommunicated or remaining in their marriages.  In such a circumstance, the person is simply excommunicated (I am open to correction on this point).  If this is the standard way of handling apostasy-by-polygamy, then I think it will also become the standard way of handling apostasy-by-same-sex-marriage.

Thanks,

-Smac

[will227457]

27 minutes ago, rockpond said:

FYI on policy implementation.

I am sure that this is not the policy of the church, to seek out members in sin and threaten them with excommunication?

 Sounds like an overzealous Bishop who is overly full of himself. Same kind of chest thumper who goes home and slaps his wife and kicks his dog.

 

You can't trust those types.

[ksfisher]

38 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Of course he has other options.  How about just leave them alone since they were no longer even active?  

I feel it is wrong to seek people out and call them to repentance or excommunicate them.  Are they doing this to couples living "in sin" who are not married but who are members of the church?

It would be different if this couple had been actively preaching against the church.  Were they?

D&C 88:81 would seem to be applicable here

"Behold, I sent you out to testify and warn the people, and it becometh every man who hath been warned to warn his neighbor."

You feel this is wrong?

[ERMD]

16 minutes ago, ALarson said:

They have sought out inactives and held a court on them?  Please supply a link for info on this.  Thanks.

"They" don't publicize the who and why of disciplinary councils.  I served as a bishop for almost 6 years and am personally familiar with such cases.

[will227457]

1 minute ago, JLHPROF said:

I disagree 

Continued membership in an organization is subject to abiding the rules of that organization.  It doesn't matter if you attend the organization meetings on a regular basis or not, there are conditions for membership.

That's not the kind of club we run. No good will come of this unless this individual was actively promoting her lifestyle or speaking out against the church. Which it does not sound like this is the case

[ksfisher]

1 minute ago, will227457 said:

I am sure that this is not the policy of the church, to seek out members in sin and threaten them with excommunication?

 Sounds like an overzealous Bishop who is overly full of himself. Same kind of chest thumper who goes home and slaps his wife and kicks his dog.

 

You can't trust those types.

Your comments here about the character of bishops is offensive.

[Gray]

3 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

I disagree 

Continued membership in an organization is subject to abiding the rules of that organization.  It doesn't matter if you attend the organization meetings on a regular basis or not, there are conditions for membership.

I can see bishops are going to be very busy in the coming years excommunicating many of the 10 million members on the rolls who are inactive and sinning in one way or another. 

Edited February 25, 2016 by Gray

[ALarson]

1 minute ago, will227457 said:

I am sure that this is not the policy of the church, to seek out members in sin and threaten them with excommunication? 

I agree. (At least I have not seen any "policy of the church" coming down the lines of communication instructing Bishops to start seeking out SSM couples.)

[will227457]

2 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

Your comments here about the character of bishops is offensive.

I said Bishop not Bishops. I know that most Bishops are very, very good people.

Edited February 25, 2016 by will227457

[ALarson]

2 minutes ago, ERMD said:

"They" don't publicize the who and why of disciplinary councils.  I served as a bishop for almost 6 years and am personally familiar with such cases.

Well, I've served in Bishoprics several times and have never seen this done.  I think it's wrong and counterproductive when we are working hard and spending a lot of time trying to reactivate the inactive members of our ward.

[mtomm]

33 minutes ago, JLHPROF said:

Is that an "option"?  Sure.

The Bishop can leave anyone committing sins while listed as members of the Church alone.
But then they wouldn't be much of a Bishop.

Do I really need to start listing scriptures to the contrary?  There are so many.

I'll be sure to let my husband know he has sucked as a bishop. He really should have been much more aggressive in pursuing those sinners the past 6 years. But then I think he's felt the line at his door each week is long enough already.

[bluebell]

23 minutes ago, ALarson said:

They have sought out inactives and held a court on them?  Please supply a link for info on this.  Thanks.

I personally know of such cases, but they were in the 90s. 

[ERMD]

1 minute ago, ALarson said:

Well, I've served in Bishoprics several times and have never seen this done.  I think it's wrong and counterproductive when we are working hard and spending a lot of time trying to reactivate the inactive members of our ward.

I know many stake presidents who would disagree.  Again, it is a matter of understanding the reasons for disciplinary councils.

[ksfisher]

1 minute ago, will227457 said:

I said Bishop not Bishops. 

Your characterization is still offensive. 

Are you saying that this bishop is going home and slapping his wife?  That's what it sounds like.  Unless you have personal knowledge of this happening your comment is unwarranted and slanderous.

[ksfisher]

7 minutes ago, will227457 said:

That's not the kind of club we run. No good will come of this unless this individual was actively promoting her lifestyle or speaking out against the church. Which it does not sound like this is the case

We don't run a "club."

[smac97]

30 minutes ago, ALarson said:

Yes, if a member comes in and wants to repent or if an inactive member is preaching against or attempting to harm the church in anyway.  This couple was friendly to the church and had a love for the church even though they were no longer active.  There was no need to seek them out and threaten them with a disciplinary court.  Of course, it's within a Bishop's stewardship to do this if he chooses to, but I can see no good that will come of it.

I think the Church will probably provide clarification and training to bishops to address this issue.

But as far as what "good" can come from such things, I can see all sorts of "good."  "Good" is obeying God, both when it is easy and feels "good," and also when it is not easy and feels difficult.  God sometimes asks us to do unpleasant, but necessary, things.  Disciplinary proceedings fall within this category.  God has instituted His Church on the earth, and gave it certain mandates pertaining to addressing the conduct of those who voluntarily associate with it:

• D&C 50:8-9 - "But the hypocrites shall be detected and shall be cut off, either in life or in death, even as I will; and wo unto them who are cut off from my church, for the same are overcome of the world. Wherefore, let every man beware lest he do that which is not in truth and righteousness before me."
• D&C 64:34-37 - "Behold, the Lord requireth the heart and a willing mind; and the willing and obedient shall eat the good of the land of Zion in these last days. And the rebellious shall be cut off out of the land of Zion, and shall be sent away, and shall not inherit the land. For, verily I say that the rebellious are not of the blood of Ephraim, wherefore they shall be plucked out. Behold, I, the Lord, have made my church in these last days like unto a judge sitting on a hill, or in a high place, to judge the nations."
• D&C 104:6-10 - "For I, the Lord, am not to be mocked in these things. And all this that the innocent among you may not be condemned with the unjust; and that the guilty among you may not escape; because I, the Lord, have promised unto you a crown of glory at my right hand. Therefore, inasmuch as you are found transgressors, you cannot escape my wrath in your lives. Inasmuch as ye are cut off for transgression, ye cannot escape the buffetings of Satan until the day of redemption. And I now give unto you power from this very hour, that if any man among you, of the order, is found a transgressor and repenteth not of the evil, that ye shall deliver him over unto the buffetings of Satan; and he shall not have power to bring evil upon you."
• D&C 51:1-2 - "Hearken unto me, saith the Lord your God, and I will speak unto my servant Edward Partridge, and give unto him directions; for it must needs be that he receive directions how to organize this people. For it must needs be that they be organized according to my laws; if otherwise, they will be cut off."
• D&C 63:60-64 - "Behold, I am Alpha and Omega, even Jesus Christ. Wherefore, let all men beware how they take my name in their lips. For behold, verily I say, that many there be who are under this condemnation, who use the name of the Lord, and use it in vain, having not authority. Wherefore, let the church repent of their sins, and I, the Lord, will own them; otherwise they shall be cut off. Remember that that which cometh from above is sacred, and must be spoken with care, and by constraint of the Spirit; and in this there is no condemnation, and ye receive the Spirit through prayer; wherefore, without this there remaineth condemnation."
• D&C 133:63 - "And upon them that hearken not to the voice of the Lord shall be fulfilled that which was written by the prophet Moses, that they should be cut off from among the people."
• D&C 85:11 - "And they who are of the High Priesthood, whose names are not found written in the book of the law, or that are found to have apostatized, or to have been cut off from the church, as well as the lesser priesthood, or the members, in that day shall not find an inheritance among the saints of the Most High."
• D&C 1:14 - "And the arm of the Lord shall be revealed; and the day cometh that they who will not hear the voice of the Lord, neither the voice of his servants, neither give heed to the words of the prophets and apostles, shall be cut off from among the people."
• D&C 134:10 - "We believe that all religious societies have a right to deal with their members for disorderly conduct, according to the rules and regulations of such societies; provided that such dealings be for fellowship and good standing; but we do not believe that any religious society has authority to try men on the right of property or life, to take from them this world’s goods, or to put them in jeopardy of either life or limb, or to inflict any physical punishment upon them. They can only excommunicate them from their society, and withdraw from them their fellowship."
• Alma 1:24 - "The hearts of many were hardened, and their names were blotted out."
• 3 Ne. 18:31 - "If he repent not he shall not be numbered among my people."
• D&C 42:24 - "Adulterers who do not repent shall be cast out."
• D&C 42:28 - "He that sinneth and repenteth not shall be cast out."
• D&C 41:5 - "He that receiveth my law and doeth it, the same is my disciple; and he that saith he receiveth it and doeth it not, the same is not my disciple, and shall be cast out from among you."
• Helaman 12:25 - "And I would that all men might be saved. But we read that in the great and last day there are some who shall be cast out, yea, who shall be cast off from the presence of the Lord."

So the Church has a role to play in such matters.  That role has some real and meaningful constraints (see D&C 134:10 above).  And that role must be played with soberness, discretion, reason, compassion, inspiration, and so on.  And that role sometimes requires bishops and stake presidents to do unpleasant, but necessary, things.  So a bishop can enjoy doing things like conducting baptisms, helping a young woman or man prepare for a mission, helping with necessaries (food, clothing, shelter), and so on.  But then a bishop is also called upon to do less-than-pleasant things, such as disciplining members of the Church.

I think we err if we conflate "good" with "feels pleasant."  These concepts overlap, but they are not interchangeable.  To do "good" is to obey God.  And obeying God may sometimes require things that don't feel pleasant in the moment.

Thanks,

-Smac

 

Edited February 25, 2016 by smac97

[ALarson]

Just now, ERMD said:

I know many stake presidents who would disagree.  Again, it is a matter of understanding the reasons for disciplinary councils.

I think if church leaders were doing this (seeking out inactive couples who were not married to discipline and excommunicate), many would be publicized (just as this one is).  There may be rare instances where this has happened in the past, but I hope it's not currently going on.  Disciplinary councils are mainly for those seeking out repentance and forgiveness, not as a form of punishment or threat.

[bluebell]

11 minutes ago, will227457 said:

I am sure that this is not the policy of the church, to seek out members in sin and threaten them with excommunication?

 Sounds like an overzealous Bishop who is overly full of himself. Same kind of chest thumper who goes home and slaps his wife and kicks his dog.

 

You can't trust those types.

You don't know anything about this man. It's offensive to imply such things about him. 

[ERMD]

Just now, ALarson said:

I think if church leaders were doing this (seeking out inactive couples who were not married to discipline and excommunicate), many would be publicized (just as this one is).  There may be rare instances where this has happened in the past, but I hope it's not currently going on.  Disciplinary councils are mainly for those seeking out repentance and forgiveness, not as a form of punishment or threat.

If you see them as a form of punishment or threat, then you do not understand the reasons for disciplinary councils.

[CA Steve]

Just now, ALarson said:

Well, I've served in Bishoprics several times and have never seen this done.  I think it's wrong and counterproductive when we are working hard and spending a lot of time trying to reactivate the inactive members of our ward.

Here is the thing and why this case is interesting.

It's called Bishop roulette. I have seen dozens and dozens of bishops and a few stake presidents over my lifetime and observed how each one fulfilled their duties. What I have observed is there is a wide spectrum of how each one implemented discipline as well as the other duties of their office, they are after all, fallible men are they not?

8 minutes ago, ERMD said:

"They" don't publicize the who and why of disciplinary councils.  I served as a bishop for almost 6 years and am personally familiar with such cases.

I think both ERMD and ALarson are truthfully describing their own experiences.

So this case is interesting because we have a chance to see if we are dealing with a bishop who is just on the stringent end of the discipline spectrum or whether or not we are witnessing the start of a church wide policy. My money is on the former.

[JAHS]

I would think that a Bishop does not need to seek out such violators unless they were more active and  started making themselves more visible to ward members or the public in general. For example if they were to go to the media and say, "See we are married gay Mormons and our Bishop did not excommunicate us, so why can't other Bishops do the same."