Stake disciplinary council

[SouthernMo]

20 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

It would also be fair to say that the member in whose behalf the council is being held helps to set the tone as well.

True.

I recall the video of Runnells’ council, in which I didn’t observe a lot of love. The backstory and context is complex and debated, but it seems to me that Runnells could have shown more humility, and his stake president could have shown more love.  Tough situation for all, I am sure. 

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Everything Rongo and KSfisher said is correct.

The council is called by the SP who makes the accusation against the sinner. The SP then prosecutes the evidence. The SP then judges. So one man accuses, prosecutes and then judges. HC members may ask questions (depending on the SP) but they have no vote. The decision is wholly up to the SP. I wonder how likely it would be for someone on the HC to oppose the decision of the SP when the SP has just judged a man for not sustaining his priesthood leaders and called that apostasy.

 

IIRC correctly, I have participated with 3 stake presidents, and that kind of situation never arose. HC members were free to express any kind of disagreement, and often did.

[Bernard Gui]

51 minutes ago, SouthernMo said:

Have you seen these firsthand?  Have you been in disciplinary councils?

I have. The ones I participated in were in no way kangaroo courts, vindictive, judgmental, or anything other than total respect and love. I can't speak for the church as a whole, but I would expect that to be the rule, not the exception.

[Duncan]

52 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Rongo's description of the proceedings is very similar to how things worked when I was involved as well.  

On a personal note for disciplinary councils from my perspective.  They were the absolutely worst part of my calling in the HC.  I didn't have one disciplinary council where I felt uplifted after it was all said and done.  I always felt exhausted spiritually and emotionally.  There is something about sitting in judgment of others that I just never felt comfortable with. 

I've heard this stated from numerous people, it's not a cherished experience to be sure

[rongo]

3 minutes ago, california boy said:

I never sat on a disciplinary council when I was on the high council, but this was very similar to my own excommunication court.  It personally was a very positive experience.  I didn't feel any animosity towards me.  Nor did I have any animosity towards the church for the actions taken towards me. Of course, I felt sorrow for having to leave the church.  But I knew it was the right thing for both me and the church given its current position on gays.   I already knew that what I needed to do was not in alignment with church policy.  In the end, when the decision was announced, each person on the high council stood up, gave me a hug as I went around the room and wished me the best.  Of course almost all of them knew me well and had served with me.  

I would hope that every person who is excommunicated receives such a positive experience.  I wondered if Sam felt he had been treated fairly given the whole 45/15 minute thing.  

I've mentioned this before, but we had a gay man who wanted to set things right with God and the Church, and who cooperated with the stake level disciplinary council. Given that he was involved with male prostitutes, excommunication was extremely likely from the outset, but he was also not bitter. He was asked in his DC to bear his testimony, and he spoke glowingly about his mission. He called it the happiest two years of his life. He also bore a strong testimony about God's existence and love for him and for us. I learned at this about Elder Ballard overruling his mission president and and encouraging him to let him stay on his mission (following confession that he had not been honest in his mission interviews about homosexual acts prior to the mission). I'm glad he was able to stay because that is literally the core era of his testimony. 

This man was the one that a high councilor asked about having over for dinner and checking up on. He also, long before he confessed to me and sought help, had a really cool family tradition I want to do if we ever have the money to do it. For Christmas, he wanted to provide new bikes for a family, and he asked me to come up with one. Mother, father, kids, little kids (hot wheels tricycle or something like that). What a really cool twist on "providing Christmas for a family!", and delivering the bikes with him was a lot of fun. 

I also learned a lot in trying to help him. He wanted treatment to overcome homosexuality, but had already done exhaustive research and knew everything I did and then some. North Star / Evergreen had ceased to be helpful for him, and he didn't like Affirmation's anti-Church approach. He was skeptical that anything would work, but reached out and "outed" himself and threw himself on the mercy of the Lord (he knew and wanted to put things right through the atonement, and he knew what that meant, practically speaking). I was able to put him in contact with Dean Byrd, and he was very frank with both of us: some gay men are able to overcome it, and some aren't, and it is really impossible to tell in advance which will be which, and everyone's different. It is impossible to have a one size fits all approach, and with some people, little or nothing may work. Generally, if the homosexual acts were at a young age with zero beyond around 20 or so, the chances are much better than if acts had been engaged in after age 20. In that case, it becomes a real uphill battle. So, it was a frank and sobering assessment, with realism. 

I have never been involved with a DC where the person didn't view it as an important step in the repentance process, and I think that's a big, big difference. When it's a rancorous, adversarial relationship --- especially with public denunciations, live streaming antics, vigils, and the circus atmosphere ---- that's a whole different story. 

[SouthernMo]

8 minutes ago, e-eye said:

I have sat on a bunch.  They really are courts of love and although there is protocol to follow, all of the ones I have been on I have felt the spirit of unity and love.

I also have never been on one where the person didn't agree with the accusation.  All mine were confessions and the repentance process had started with the results of the council being a necessary part to repenting.  

I’ve only been in one. I was the accused. I went in with humility, and did not contradict any accusations.  I fully accepted responsibilities for my mistakes.

I didn’t feel berated or abused, but I would not describe it as a court of love. It was justice and process.

My point is this - I disagree when people defend excommunications or disciplinary councils as courts of love.  They can be. Maybe they should be. But they are not all that way.

[Bernard Gui]

52 minutes ago, hope_for_things said:

Rongo's description of the proceedings is very similar to how things worked when I was involved as well.  

On a personal note for disciplinary councils from my perspective.  They were the absolutely worst part of my calling in the HC.  I didn't have one disciplinary council where I felt uplifted after it was all said and done.  I always felt exhausted spiritually and emotionally.  There is something about sitting in judgment of others that I just never felt comfortable with. 

The ones that were elating were the reinstatement councils. For those where transgression was being judged, I imagined myself sitting in the chair and hoping for fairness, mercy, and justice. I never observed a council where those three things were not present. It's a solemn obligation, but for the people seeking repentance it was a huge step towards wholeness and peace. In that sense, it was a blessing to participate. I did not participate in any where there was rancor and recrimination from either side of the table.

[rongo]

1 minute ago, Bernard Gui said:

The ones that were elating were the reinstatement councils. For those where transgression was being judged, I imagined myself sitting in the chair and hoping for fairness, mercy, and justice. I never observed a council where those three things were not present. It's a solemn obligation, but for the people seeking repentance it was a huge step towards wholeness and peace. In that sense, it was a blessing to participate. I did not participate in any where there was rancor and recrimination from either side of the table.

That is the other side of the coin. I worked assiduously to get people back (who had been disfellowshipped or excommunicated for years), and I'd say we had slightly more discipline councils than we had reinstatement/rebaptism councils. It was clearly a focus for me, and my first stake president was very supportive and my second much more cautious (likely to take years more to be sure). 

[Bernard Gui]

6 minutes ago, Duncan said:

I've heard this stated from numerous people, it's not a cherished experience to be sure

I cherish the reinstatement experiences, but I don't regret the judgement ones. I can't remember one that was not a big step in the repentance process, and I observed the member left with renewed optimism and hope. The follow up process was always well-defined and followed through diligently with the goal of reconvening the council and removing the restrictions. 

[rongo]

I always asked people --- emphasizing that it didn't determine the outcome, but that I wanted to consider it --- what they felt the outcome should be. What would be best for them. And to have them talk a bit about that: why, why not, etc. That can be very revealing and useful to consider: some people need the harshest outcome available, or they wouldn't feel comfortable with the outcome (I would be this way). Some are expecting too harsh of an outcome, and are terrified of it (the terror is normal and understandable, but they may feel things are in a far worse state than they are). Sometimes the name of the Church and victim considerations may tip the scale further towards harshness than would otherwise be the case (the danger and damage of a slap on the wrist. This can also be damaging to the person himself, too). Sometimes people have confessed but aren't very penitent, and may need harsher measures to bring them to a state of true repentance (the primary reason for disciplinary councils). 

The main purpose is to get at the heart of what happened, where they're at, what's in their heart and mind, and above all, what God would have done. 

I also emphasized that it was important for the band aid to be big enough for the wound, but not too big for the wound. That in itself is complicated, but God reveals things to us through the process. 

I had a reinstatement council where I felt to invite the person to pray with us, instead of leaving the room for us to pray. That was unusual and never happened before. 

[CV75]

1 hour ago, HappyJackWagon said:

Everything Rongo and KSfisher said is correct.

The council is called by the SP who makes the accusation against the sinner. The SP then prosecutes the evidence. The SP then judges. So one man accuses, prosecutes and then judges. HC members may ask questions (depending on the SP) but they have no vote. The decision is wholly up to the SP. I wonder how likely it would be for someone on the HC to oppose the decision of the SP when the SP has just judged a man for not sustaining his priesthood leaders and called that apostasy.

 

LOL nice spin! I believe the post above mine actually quotes the Handbook so how would you spin that?

[Avatar4321]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

Five hours? How can it take that long? I am now glad I am not on a High Council. After five hours I think my impatient response to the situation would be:

”I will see you HANG FOR THIS!”

There is a reason you haven’t been called to this;)

[california boy]

28 minutes ago, rongo said:

I've mentioned this before, but we had a gay man who wanted to set things right with God and the Church, and who cooperated with the stake level disciplinary council. Given that he was involved with male prostitutes, excommunication was extremely likely from the outset, but he was also not bitter. He was asked in his DC to bear his testimony, and he spoke glowingly about his mission. He called it the happiest two years of his life. He also bore a strong testimony about God's existence and love for him and for us. I learned at this about Elder Ballard overruling his mission president and and encouraging him to let him stay on his mission (following confession that he had not been honest in his mission interviews about homosexual acts prior to the mission). I'm glad he was able to stay because that is literally the core era of his testimony. 

This man was the one that a high councilor asked about having over for dinner and checking up on. He also, long before he confessed to me and sought help, had a really cool family tradition I want to do if we ever have the money to do it. For Christmas, he wanted to provide new bikes for a family, and he asked me to come up with one. Mother, father, kids, little kids (hot wheels tricycle or something like that). What a really cool twist on "providing Christmas for a family!", and delivering the bikes with him was a lot of fun. 

I also learned a lot in trying to help him. He wanted treatment to overcome homosexuality, but had already done exhaustive research and knew everything I did and then some. North Star / Evergreen had ceased to be helpful for him, and he didn't like Affirmation's anti-Church approach. He was skeptical that anything would work, but reached out and "outed" himself and threw himself on the mercy of the Lord (he knew and wanted to put things right through the atonement, and he knew what that meant, practically speaking). I was able to put him in contact with Dean Byrd, and he was very frank with both of us: some gay men are able to overcome it, and some aren't, and it is really impossible to tell in advance which will be which, and everyone's different. It is impossible to have a one size fits all approach, and with some people, little or nothing may work. Generally, if the homosexual acts were at a young age with zero beyond around 20 or so, the chances are much better than if acts had been engaged in after age 20. In that case, it becomes a real uphill battle. So, it was a frank and sobering assessment, with realism. 

I have never been involved with a DC where the person didn't view it as an important step in the repentance process, and I think that's a big, big difference. When it's a rancorous, adversarial relationship --- especially with public denunciations, live streaming antics, vigils, and the circus atmosphere ---- that's a whole different story. 

I don't want to make this thread about me, but I certainly identify with what this man has done and why he wishes things could change for him.  I hope he finds peace.  I know that is possible.  If there is anything that you want to talk to me about or if you think I could help him in any way, just PM me.  I am more than happy to do what I can. 

[california boy]

44 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

This matches my memories of participating in both HC and bishopric councils, except I don't remember the straw poll before the presidency retired from the room. I do remember the SP asking the HC for comments, though. Maybe that's what you meant by straw poll. One side of the table spoke to defend the member, the other side spoke to defend the Church. There was never contention, judgement, recrimination, shaming. It was always done with the greatest respect, decorum, love, and concern. The member could request a spouse or bishop to sit with him/her during the council.

 

I am pretty sure there was no straw vote at my excommunication.  It has been 20 years ago, but. I think I would have remembered that.

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

I've mentioned this before, but we had a gay man who wanted to set things right with God and the Church, and who cooperated with the stake level disciplinary council. Given that he was involved with male prostitutes, excommunication was extremely likely from the outset, but he was also not bitter. He was asked in his DC to bear his testimony, and he spoke glowingly about his mission. He called it the happiest two years of his life. He also bore a strong testimony about God's existence and love for him and for us. I learned at this about Elder Ballard overruling his mission president and and encouraging him to let him stay on his mission (following confession that he had not been honest in his mission interviews about homosexual acts prior to the mission). I'm glad he was able to stay because that is literally the core era of his testimony. 

This man was the one that a high councilor asked about having over for dinner and checking up on. He also, long before he confessed to me and sought help, had a really cool family tradition I want to do if we ever have the money to do it. For Christmas, he wanted to provide new bikes for a family, and he asked me to come up with one. Mother, father, kids, little kids (hot wheels tricycle or something like that). What a really cool twist on "providing Christmas for a family!", and delivering the bikes with him was a lot of fun. 

I also learned a lot in trying to help him. He wanted treatment to overcome homosexuality, but had already done exhaustive research and knew everything I did and then some. North Star / Evergreen had ceased to be helpful for him, and he didn't like Affirmation's anti-Church approach. He was skeptical that anything would work, but reached out and "outed" himself and threw himself on the mercy of the Lord (he knew and wanted to put things right through the atonement, and he knew what that meant, practically speaking). I was able to put him in contact with Dean Byrd, and he was very frank with both of us: some gay men are able to overcome it, and some aren't, and it is really impossible to tell in advance which will be which, and everyone's different. It is impossible to have a one size fits all approach, and with some people, little or nothing may work. Generally, if the homosexual acts were at a young age with zero beyond around 20 or so, the chances are much better than if acts had been engaged in after age 20. In that case, it becomes a real uphill battle. So, it was a frank and sobering assessment, with realism. 

I have never been involved with a DC where the person didn't view it as an important step in the repentance process, and I think that's a big, big difference. When it's a rancorous, adversarial relationship --- especially with public denunciations, live streaming antics, vigils, and the circus atmosphere ---- that's a whole different story. 

This is extraordinarily similar to an experience with a man who was brought into the Church through miraculous means involving Sister Gui and I in 1973. After joining the Church and serving a mission, he went full-out life-style, ended up contracting AIDS, and left the Church. I don't recall if there was a council involved. One day he looked at himself in the mirror and thought, "This is not who I am!" Since then he has come back through the repentance process and has served in a branch presidency and as branch mission leader. For a while he was an ardent participant in various LDS groups (can't remember the name, but an antecedent to Evergreen, and then Evergreen). His health is extremely poor now, but he spends all his days that he can in service to others and trusts that God will recompense and make all things right. I have posted his testimony here before with his permission. His is a remarkable story.

Edited September 17, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, rongo said:

That is the other side of the coin. I worked assiduously to get people back (who had been disfellowshipped or excommunicated for years), and I'd say we had slightly more discipline councils than we had reinstatement/rebaptism councils. It was clearly a focus for me, and my first stake president was very supportive and my second much more cautious (likely to take years more to be sure). 

Caution can be good sometimes. It would not be a happy time to have to do it all over again.

I just got a phone call from a friend who has been through the ringer with drugs, jail time, divorce, excommunication, bitterness. He is out of jail, working, living with his mother, and he called to tell me he just had his membership restored and will receive the MP again in 12 months. Man, that's good news!

Edited September 17, 2018 by Bernard Gui

[blueglass]

1 hour ago, hope_for_things said:

Rongo's description of the proceedings is very similar to how things worked when I was involved as well.  

On a personal note for disciplinary councils from my perspective.  They were the absolutely worst part of my calling in the HC.  I didn't have one disciplinary council where I felt uplifted after it was all said and done.  I always felt exhausted spiritually and emotionally.  There is something about sitting in judgment of others that I just never felt comfortable with. 

From the 8 stake disciplinary councils I participated in 3 returns and 5 exits there were 3 (exits) in which the HC decision was overturned by the stake presidency.  Enormous time exhausted on determining whether to excommunicate or disfellowship, and on returns where many of us were not on the HC at the time of discipline we depended on the stake presidency on the details of what transpired.  THe choice of who would advise the stake presidency was determined as per sec102 according to "difficulty".  Normally 2 only of the 12 were appointed and in 2 other occasions the full 6, but the even/odd draw didn't result in any change of how questions were asked of the stake presidency or accused.  In the end we would produce our counsel, and then the stake presidency would then re-convene their own council of 3 and ultimately decide.   On the 2 ward disciplinary councils I participated in it was very challenging to rise above our own short-sighted weakness to provide counsel to women.  No women in the bishopric, no women on the HC, no women in the stake presidency, no women in any authority to provide much needed emotional intelligence to truly help.  I suppose we try to draw upon the male/female infinite empathic knowledge of Christ who gave birth to salvation.  One thought I had was that the pericope of John 7:53–8:11 was brought up a lot as insight into the mind of Christ on these matters, when it is doubtful to be real scripture from Jesus as it is not found in any of the earliest greek manuscripts.  You have to go out to year 400 to find this story, yet it is so ingrained and in a way overthrows the idea of these disciplinary councils.  

[Hamba Tuhan]

I have participated in a number of disciplinary councils both at the ward level and at the stake level. In no instance has there been anything other than frank and open discussion by all participants. In no instance has a decision been imposed on the other members of the council by the bishop or stake president. (I have previously written at length on this board about the ward disciplinary council where I was the dissenting voice and how we simply didn't stop seeking revelation until we were all in complete unity.) In no instance have I felt anything other than the love of God for the person involved -- by which I mean specifically that when I didn't love the person, I was immediately impressed with how much the Lord does love the person. I have never felt anything other than edified and humbled by a disciplinary council.

We are actually holding one in our stake in about three weeks. When I notified the brother for whom the council is being held, he asked if we could move it up. Unfortunately, we can't, but he's keen to move forward, and though I don't know him (yet), I love him for this already.

In our last stake disciplinary council, I was the first person the stake president called on to give input after the couple had left the room. I said what I felt had been revealed to me by the Spirit, and then literally every other man said he'd been told the exact same thing. I know the cynical and the skeptical look on the unanimity that comes out of these events as some evidence of coercion from the top or fear to speak out by all, but it's really just what happens when the Lord speaks through His Spirit to all involved.

When we called the couple back into the room and shared with them what had been revealed to us, they both wept openly. Since then, we've become Facebook friends, and when they saw me in the shops a couple of weeks back, they called out to me, and we had a warm and wonderful chat right there. God is good.

[rongo]

2 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

(I have previously written at length on this board about the ward disciplinary council where I was the dissenting voice and how we simply didn't stop seeking revelation until we were all in complete unity.)

I would be very interested in whether the outcome was that they came around to your view, or you came around to theirs, in the end. No right answer ---- it's just that that's happened to me. Like I said, my pre-conceptions and thoughts have been completely moved and changed by the counsel of the deliberation, so I can see that happening in either direction.

People who think it's a foregone conclusion have no idea. 

[Hamba Tuhan]

31 minutes ago, rongo said:

I would be very interested in whether the outcome was that they came around to your view, or you came around to theirs, in the end.

I think I would more accurately describe it as I came around to the Lord's view, but first He validated my concerns. I've found my most recent account, which is a shorter version:

Quote

I've shared on this forum before the deliberations we engaged in as a bishopric one evening as part of a disciplinary council. The 'consensus' was two against one, I being the odd man out. We prayed. We discussed again. I shared my concerns, at length. We prayed again. On and on it went. Our bishop made it clear that we wouldn't act until all three of us were in perfect agreement. The next step was to ask me to pray. I happily agreed.

In my prayer, I clearly delineated all of my concerns to God and then explained how I felt. When I had exhausted all of this verbally (and it was a long prayer!), I paused, and in the silence, I heard a voice call me by name and then tell me clearly that my concerns were correct, followed by this question: 'But how many times have I taken you back when you weren't ready, just because you wanted it?'

I then 'saw' a quick succession of times when that very thing had occurred, and a wave of peace filled me from head to toe. Perfect unanimity!

 

Quote

People who think it's a foregone conclusion have no idea. 

This!

Edited September 18, 2018 by Hamba Tuhan

[sunstoned]

7 hours ago, ksfisher said:

"After the stake president reaches a decision and his counselors sustain it, he announces it to the high council and asks them as a group to sustain it. The high council cannot veto the decision; it is binding even if it is not sustained unanimously. However, if one or more high councilors object to the decision, the stake president makes every effort to resolve the concerns and achieve unanimity. He may recall witnesses for further questioning. If necessary, the disciplinary council may again review the evidence, but not in the presence of the member."

Honest question:  Have you  ever been in a court where the accused was fully acquitted? 

[katherine the great]

4 hours ago, blueglass said:

 On the 2 ward disciplinary councils I participated in it was very challenging to rise above our own short-sighted weakness to provide counsel to women.  No women in the bishopric, no women on the HC, no women in the stake presidency, no women in any authority to provide much needed emotional intelligence to truly help.  I suppose we try to draw upon the male/female infinite empathic knowledge of Christ who gave birth to salvation.  One thought I had was that the pericope of John 7:53–8:11 was brought up a lot as insight into the mind of Christ on these matters, when it is doubtful to be real scripture from Jesus as it is not found in any of the earliest greek manuscripts.  You have to go out to year 400 to find this story, yet it is so ingrained and in a way overthrows the idea of these disciplinary councils.  

I've always wondered how it feels for the women who are tried in these courts. I've had a single conversation with one woman who went through this process (for adultery) and she described it to me in some detail. Maybe these courts are appropriate for men but frankly I was absolutely horrified at the thought of a single woman in a roomful of men discussing such intimate details. Would men be comfortable confessing sexual sins to a roomful of women? Would it be a healing experience? I sincerely just can't see it.

[Duncan]

18 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

Honest question:  Have you  ever been in a court where the accused was fully acquitted? 

not personally but I know a man in our Stake that was acquitted. He had this business and depending on who you talk to he either fleeced members of the Stake or he got them all involved in a business that flopped. There was just not enough evidence either way to determine what he did. They couldn't figure it out so they let him go

I met a lady that had her DC overturned and justice prevailed so to speak

[Hamba Tuhan]

28 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

Have you  ever been in a court where the accused was fully acquitted? 

I have literally never been in a disciplinary council where the person denied wrongdoing. Typically, the council has been convened at the request of the person involved as part of a confession and stated desire to repent.  I have, however, seen no action taken. Is that what you mean by ‘acquitted ‘?

[Hamba Tuhan]

20 minutes ago, katherine the great said:

I was absolutely horrified at the thought of a single woman in a roomful of men discussing such intimate details  

People can certainly bring moral supports with them. I’ve been that person before. In addition, I’ve never heard a council get into ‘intimate’ details. Usually it’s enough to know, for example, that a person has committed adultery. Questions after that might focus on what needs to happen to avoid repeating the occurrence, whether the person understands the harm done to his/her spouse, etc. 

Edited September 18, 2018 by Hamba Tuhan