woundedknee

Yes. Thanks for commenting further. I should have been clearer. If we have no choice but to sin, there's no use in trying to live a sinless life because that would be impossible. Yet, we do sin. I thank God that Christ has set us free from the slavery of sin.

I think that anything in the story could be viewed as symbolic. I once had a Stake President who told us, in a Bishop's training meeting, that the flaming swords guarding the tree of life were Bishops...relating that to temple recommends. This man, and he wasn't an idiot by any stretch, could see his way to grab some pieces of the story and use them in his own way to make a point. I think Paul had done the same, a few times, with other scriptures. My personal view is that the creation story is literal...but one can use it as it seems wise.

It sounds as if this kid could be a relative of J. Golden Kimball. Sin ought to disgust people. Not that we can stop ourselves from sinning. We will sin. We at least can repent of it. When we start to look on sin with tolerance the path is already chosen. There are many these days, even in the church, who quit looking on sin as something disgusting. They are starting to embrace it and look at themselves as enlightened. To me, that is scary. Still...it is so wonderful to have a Savior providing us the gift of grace. We cannot make it otherwise.

I very much like your response.

No worries. I just replied to your comments because it talked about child molestation. I just wanted to get the thread back on track. Most people's experience with rebaptism is going to be through excommunication. It seems easy for people to bring that up in a thread on rebaptism.

The original post of this thread was talking about rebaptism AFTER RESIGNING not after being exed. While some paperwork is the same it's not all the same. We can all agree that child molestation is not the same as stealing a candybar. In both instances these two perpetrators may fully repent. However, the temptation to steal another candybar could still be there...and the consequences would be the loss of a candybar from the store owner. On the other hand, if the child molester goes back to his way, then the loss is much more detrimental and long lasting. Innocence is lost. Psychological issues ensue. Resigning church membership, by loss of belief, then gaining belief again to be baptized, likely results in no personal harm to others in the Ward. Even if the person loses belief again, it is likely that no physical loss or harm will come to others. Quite different in the scheme of things. I'll enter into a bit of my personal story now. The Bishop told me I should resign my membership. We were friends and co-workers and he was able to shoot straight with me. I essentially became inactive from my gradual unbelief. I had been EQ President twice, counselor in a few EQ Presidencies, Branch President, Branch President Counselor, Gospel Doctrine teacher, returned missionary, Sunday School teacher, Priests Quorum Advisor, Young Men's President, etc. The Bishop felt that it was in my best interest to resign and gave me the general format for the letter. He felt that at one point I would be able to make a fresh start all over again. I sent the letter back to him and the end of the story is that I got a letter from SLC saying that my name had been removed from the Church records. What the Bishop and I did not know were the full consequences of resignation that would follow me if I ever did decide to come back into the fold. I just talked with him today(he is no longer a Bishop). He just said that he did not know about the records having annotations like that...as he never had seen one from a person who was resigned then came back. He had seen records from exed people. They contain annotations but he figured there was a difference at the time. That has been many years ago now. I can recall many of the conversations over lunch, dinner, and ballgames that we had. Seems like yesterday to me.

Thank you all for your kind comments and responses to my questions and comments. I think I have received many answers to the questions I had on this topic. There appear to be many good people on this forum with refreshing points of view and opinions. I hope I have not offended others and may have helped some others that were having similar questions.

I do not believe this is at all scriptural. Maybe my scriptural knowledge is not up to date or haven't seen this. If you could point this out that would be helpful.

I would likely want to know if I had a child molester or rapist in my church. That is due diligence. Other than that, would I care if someone fell out of belief and then believed again? But really, how many times is one to be forgiven anyway? 70 x 70.

The CHI says, "In all cases, annotation of membership records is removed only with First Presidency approval upon request from the Stake President." It does not state this for removal of restoration of blessings. That is automatic once the action is completed(once the unit sends the paperwork back to SLC). A new membership record is then sent to the Ward.

Michael, I am curious. Are you able to tell if your Ward membership record, and you should be able to look at it and at least verify correctness, has any annotations of restored blessings, note of resigning, any mention of rebaptism, or anything else on it that codes restorative ordinances? If you don't want to go there not to worry. Thanks! SLC has it in their database. This I do know. I'm not sure how much access the local clerks and Bishops have to that database, though.

Essentially, the do what they want as no one else higher up has a cow about it. Don't worry about it. If you can do the job do it and serve happily, as you appear to be.

I don't think so. The original dates are there. However, there is a message on the record, given to the Ward, that states: "Restoration of Blessings Required". THEN...another record is apparently sent out after that showing the original dates...and the CHI says "with no reference to excommunication". It is unclear to me, based on the CHI, whether the annotations are for the list of transgressions or for what is on the Report of Disciplinary Actions. Either way, it takes the 1st Presidency to get it off the record. That may take years or not happen at all from what I am hearing from others. The level of transgressions depend on the SP and the Bishop. To one, unbelief after being taught and talked to could be considered transgression.

Thanks for posting this. It helps others in this situation. Many always ask about this very thing but few have answers. The answer is that one is never FULLY restored in the church. God may wipe clean but the church doesn't. For me, this is disheartening.

Interesting. I've never seen it except in a branch I had been in one time that was fairly hard up for workers. They had a guy whose wife was a member but he was never LDS. He was asked to go along on home teaching visits. In that Branch, if you were willing to home teach you had a LOT of people to visit. In slamjet's case I can't help but think about as ..."Well, we will try you out for a while and see how it goes before we baptize you again." Good enough to serve in a calling but not to be rebaptized and restored.

Help me understand, please. You are an exed member. You have not been rebaptized yet and hold a stake calling? I am not sure about this calling, as I don't see it in the CHI. I guess I did not know non-members could hold any calling in a stake, though. Your name was announced in some meeting and people raised their hand to your calling?

I believe for you the answer is no. I imagine they don't have deep secrets on you tucked away in their records. For others, they do. For people who resigned, repented and rebaptized, they do have that in the official records making it, for the most part, impossible to even be asked to serve in certain leadership positions such as Bishop, SP, maybe even counselors to them, etc. I understand your point about not wanting those leadership positions. You don't want them and so you may not be called. Maybe they know you would not take the job if you were called? Maybe you live in an area where most people can't expect more of a job than an assistant magazine rep(that's the job for me that i've never had). In other words, they are forever tainted but you have no such stink upon your records. I am making a distinction here between ex-communication for some heinous transgression(such as sexual predation) and resignation due to a period of unbelief. I am curious. In your Ward, are there many 50 year old Elders still physically sitting in the Elder's Quorum? Do you meet with the High Priests and are still an Elder? Many have chimed in to me on this saying they have received social promotions to the High Priest Group. It has been inconsistent across Wards, too. Some get socially promoted but not ordained to the HPG, some get ordained at a certain age to the HPG, and some have mentioned 49 being a magic number in their Ward. Some say 48, and some 50. It's inconsistent from unit to unit.

I had no idea at all that it would take 3 years to regain PH and temple. That's one long wait. Two years if you count the one year you had to wait for being rebaptized. Am I correct on this? The two people I have heard from about this have still not had their official membership record cleared of anything by the 1st Presidency...and they have been waiting longer than you. They did get their temple ordinances back but I believe one said it took 1.5 years. They don't think their scarlet letter of resignation/rebaptism will be removed. I'm not sure Paul or Peter would be good LDS members in the in the church today. They could not make an Apostle today. Peter would have the denying Christ three times on his record and Paul would have the Stephen stoning on there. This is a tad upsetting to me because while Christ is able to wash away the dirtiest of sins and not remember them anymore, the church is not incapable of doing that. They will not forget even a period of unbelief that led to resignation.

I think I am in agreement with you. It would appear it does go with you on your record wherever you go. "Scarlet lettered" as it were. I am not quite sure about the statistic you provide but it seems likely to be the case if one has the mark on their record. I am not saying that it would not happen(I know of no such cases) but I have a hard time believing it would since the record would be a large roadblock. Are you saying that Jesus may forgive, and pronounce one clean, but Church Headquarters Records might not be so kind?

I am sorry for your loss and the pain in your heart. Your father was an alcoholic. I have had alcoholic family members and can relate somewhat. I personally choose not to drink but I have reasons other than JUST moral reasoning to not imbibe(I do not exactly consider drinking an immoral thing either. If one chooses to drink it is their choice. Immorality may come depending on the church, or life path covenants, they have chosen. I know plenty of good and moral people who tip a beer once in a while, or have a hot toddy. Some are not LDS.). I guess I could have easily been driven to drink over life's circumstances like your father. I feel that God has blessed me that I was able to overcome that. My thought is that God did not drive your father to drink but things happen in life due to the choices we make and the circumstances around us. I cannot say why your father became an alcoholic. Genetics? Lack of faith? Loneliness? All of the above? What you may be looking at is a wonderful opportunity to bless your father with prayer, fasting, and kindness. He may come around if not already. It is a sad thing your mother was taken. I have a strong feeling in my soul that you will see her again, though. I believe I will see my father and grandmother one day again. I was very close to them. You lack faith. At this point your name is Faithless. God can change your name to Faithful...just as he changed Jacob's name to Israel. Give it to God. Even Jacob had to wrestle with God. Confess to God your shortcomings and lack of faith. Ask for faith. I believe Christ has that power to give it to you. Ask yourself and analyze why you lack faith when in the asking process. I can relate to lack of faith in my own life, too. God has healing power. I'm not sure anyone here is able to sway you. That is the job of the Holy Spirit. If anyone here can sway you then it may be short-lived anyway. Better to rely on God. Some here may facilitate that experience as led by the Holy Ghost.

Fairly certain this thread started out as resigned, as in name removal. And that is my context, too. Inactivity would not usually require rebaptism unless a church court was convened after finding out that the inactive person transgressed one of the listed transgressions in the CHI.

Good reference on the CHI. Thank you. To be more exact I'll go into a bit more detail on name removal. There are obviously others on the forum asking these questions and it might be good to know. The CHI points out: 1) A year waiting period if need be(depends on the Bishop and seems to refer to one year after name removal action). 2) SP tries to find out if person was in transgression at the time of name removal...or after. Transgression is defined as formally joining another church, teaching apostate ideas, following apostate ideas, plural marriage, teaching incorrect doctrine after being corrected by the Bishop, Repeatedly act in clear, open, and deliberate public opposition to the church or its leaders, etc. 3) Restoration of PH, blessings, and temple handled same as exed. It appears that there can likely be an official member record annotation of a person who has once asked that their name be taken off the records of the church. So, it could be, depending on the Bishop(and SP), one might not exactly be fully restored I would think. CHI states that the church HQ "...will automatically annotate a person's membership record in any of the following situations:" CHI then lists the situations including name removal as, "...the person has committed one of these transgressions before or after excommunication or name removal." Annotations MAY be removed if the SP recommends it and IF the 1st Presidency approves it. The one comment I have heard back from two people is that the 1st Presidency may never get around to approving. I wasn't sure on the record but the CHI states it now that I read it. So, the record may never remove an annotation and one will be looked at as "tainted goods" even if they have repented. There is a "Special Comments" section listed in the CHI but it doesn't say too much about that. It just says there may be "special comments" in the membership record. It all depends on the SP, and Bishop. If the SP, or Bishop thinks that unbelief or attending another church are transgressions, after the Bishop tried explaining things then that may be cause for a disciplinary council. The CHI does not delve into the small details of transgressions. What one Bishop thinks is a transgression another might not. The Bishop and SP are the wildcards here. There are many kinds of SPs and Bishops out there. Some might be merciful and forgiving. Some might be hard hearted. It depends. I have had them both in my life. For me, I think I was automatically a member of another church, as they count you a member after a few months of regular attendance. So, I probably fail on that one...as I knew this was the church's bylaw. I had long discussions with the Bishop about doctrine before I resigned(Even after that as the next Bishop worked for me and we lunched often. He talked a lot and I disagreed some.). I might fail on the Bishop talk and my unbelief after it is all said and done with. It is highly possible that I could be brought up on charges in a disciplinary council. Not exactly the same as exed...but some similarities.

I am quite convinced that no one on any forum, and even the Bishop I know in Ward boundary where I live, doesn't have much of a clue how it all works for someone who has resigned their membership...not exed. Many have questions on a number of forums around this topic. It is a frequently appearing topic. One will get every answer in the world, as seen in this thread. Many do know how it works when exed but not a resignation. People always have questions like whether the resignation/rebaptism stays on ones official membership record or whether only the initial record is just restored. Probably most who resign just stay gone and there aren't too many experiences to tell about, nor likely are there many Ward Clerks or Bishops on the forums with such an experience to tell how it all works. However, like I mentioned, even the Bishop doesn't know exactly how it works. He did mention he could find out. Maybe Greg Dodge could get on a forum and explain it all one day(that will never happen unless he retires). Even better to have it on lds.org or something like that(that isn't likely either). All good questions you ask, though.

I'm not quite sure what I might contribute to the conversations here but I'll chime in where I can. Thanks, LittleWyvern! wk

Thanks for posting. I imagine many are asking lots of questions regardless of their religious orientation. I do not feel your comments are anti-LDS here. Here is the thing about searching(my experience), one can find anything about anything, in many different flavors and varieties. The difficult part is just sorting through it all to find truth. Some may twist, some may have different perspectives, some may lie, some may lie only a little, while others are well versed in banter and debate and can play it either way with their words. Some get satisfaction in taking your beliefs apart, and yet some are helpful.