Church discipline

[bytor2112]

My best friend is returning to church after 15 years of inactivity. He is an endowed member of the church and was sealed to his wife when he was 20 years old.

Fast forward to present. He left his wife for a younger woman and now that has ended. He wants to try and repair his life and I have encouraged him to come to church. He tells me that he has been feeling the Spirit and wants to continue. He has also been reading the Book of Mormon and praying. In conversations with him I have learned that he never really had a testimony, he was just going through the motions because that was what was expected of him. ( he grew up in the church)

Over the last 15 years he has committed adultery on numerous occasions and ultimately left his wife for a younger woman. He did not live the gospel at all. Given the fact that he is been inactive for 15 years and even when he was he was just going through the motions, do you think he will be excommunicated?

If you have experience with these type of councils, I would appreciate your input.

-Bytor

Edited April 2, 2009 by bytor2112

[hordak]

My best friend is returning to church after 15 years of inactivity. He is an endowed member of the church and was sealed to his wife when he was 20 years old.

Fast forward to present. He left his wife for a younger woman and now that has ended. He wants to try and repair his life and I have encouraged him to come to church. He tells me that he has been feeling the Spirit and wants to continue. He has also been reading the Book of Mormon and praying. In conversations with him I have learned that he never really had a testimony, he was just going through the motions because that was what was expected of him. ( he grew up in the church)

Over the last 15 years he has committed adultery on numerous occasions and ultimately left his wife for a younger woman. He did not live the gospel at all. Given the fact that he is been inactive for 15 years and even when he was he was just going through the motions, do you think he will be excommunicated?

If you have experience with these type of councils, I would appreciate your input.

-Bytor

Really depends on the Bishop.

I know a Priest who after 4 years of inactivity was excommunicated for shacking up with his wife 4 months before they were wed. Of course her father was the bishop ,and really didn't like the priest dating his daughter

I know a Temple recommend carrying Elder who was only disfellowshiped for cheating on his wife.

I know anther person, who got into, tattoos, piercings, drugs ,alcohol, premarital sex, in his past but was cleaned up his act 5 years before stepping into a church again and so he got a pass.

[bytor2112]

I am guessing he will at the very least be spending some time with the Stake President.

[rameumptom]

There will be many issues that will be considered. Was the guy married in the temple, or only for time to his wife? When was the last time he committed adultery/fornication? How long has he stayed clean?

He needs to talk with the bishop. There probably will be at least a period of probation or disfellowshipment. But it is the path towards getting himself back in line with God's will.

[BenRaines]

I agree with what Hordak said.

When in the position of responsibility over this type of matter I had a man come to me. He had been a missionary, married first wife in the temple, was unfaithful, left her, supported his children, turned to drugs, later cleaned up, remarried, had two kids, been married for ten years and felt the time was right to get back to church. He came to me fully repentant for what had happened earlier. It had been many years and he had been tormented by his past. Much suffering for the things that he did, suffered in spirit. He was humbled and ready to begin fresh. After consulting further with those over me he was told that based on his repentance to go forward, continue to honor his marriage and his children and to bring them the gospel and teach them how to prepare to serve the Lord. A couple of weeks later he baptized his wife and daughter, two years later they were sealed in the SLC temple and son had been baptized.

Awesome story of someone who made it back.

Ben Raines

[bytor2112]

There will be many issues that will be considered. Was the guy married in the temple, or only for time to his wife? When was the last time he committed adultery/fornication? How long has he stayed clean?

He needs to talk with the bishop. There probably will be at least a period of probation or disfellowshipment. But it is the path towards getting himself back in line with God's will.

Well he is civilly divorced, but still sealed to his former spouse and I am fairly certain he has only been living church standards for a couple of weeks. So, he has a long way to go.

[Vort]

If he's endowed, he will deal with the stake president for any excommunication procedure.

[WillowTheWhisp]

There's never any general answer to these sort of questions. The only person who will know what needs to be done will be the Bishop who speaks to him. His first step is coming back to Church and it is wonderful that he is already feeling the Spirit. The soone he comes out to Church the sooner he can start onthe road back home.

[Moksha]

When people have a renewed interest in God, should they be punished for past indiscretions or should they be welcomed into the fellowship of the Gospel?

I think the underlying question is one that has not been thoroughly answered when I hear it depends on the Bishop.

:confused:

[Vort]

When people have a renewed interest in God, should they be punished for past indiscretions or should they be welcomed into the fellowship of the Gospel?

What's with the "punishment" infatuation? It's not about "punishment". It's about "repentence". Why is this so hard to understand?

If a man has broken his temple covenants and committed adultery, that's serious. If he is repentant and wants to come unto Christ, the Church's duty is to help him do that. Such repentance will include overcoming the effects of previous sin, including (especially) something that serious.

Of course, if you don't believe that the LDS Church is God's kingdom and that LDS Church leaders are subject to inspiration from God, then none of that is meaningful. But why would someone who disbelieves the LDS Church's authority participate in the LDS Church, or even on an LDS-oriented discussion list?

[FunkyTown]

I wouldn't be surprised if he was excommunicated, simply because he clearly needs to struggle back to the church and show himself that he's willing to make the effort. I had a roommate who wasn't endowed, didn't go to church and ended up living with a woman. He was excommunicated.

Then, after soul-searching, he came back to the church. He spent months getting on track.

[MarginOfError]

If he's endowed, he will deal with the stake president for any excommunication procedure.

I just looked this up after sticking my foot in my mouth in another thread. If it looks likely that a Melchizedek Priesthood holder is going to be excommunicated, then the Stake President must preside. For all other disciplinary action, the bishop may preside. It doesn't matter if the member has been endowed or not.

Also, the stake president may choose to preside over any disciplinary council for any member of his stake.

[MarginOfError]

I think we need to be really careful about suggesting what may happen in the case of this brother. Disciplinary councils are sacred and heavily individualized affairs. The people I have known that have sat on--and especially presided over--these councils have found it to be an agonizing experience to make sure they fulfill the Lord's will. In my conversations with these leaders I've learned of many surprising twists that have taken place in these councils. For instance

• Two sisters happened to get pregnant within a few weeks of each other. Sister A had a discussion with her boyfriend and they decided to get married and raise the child together. Sister B's could not convince her boyfriend to do the same. Sister A, although getting married, was excommunicated; Sister B, becoming a single mom, was disfellowshipped.
• A sister was excommunicated by her bishop three years after she had gone inactive when the bishop found out she'd had a baby. Five years after her excommunication she decided she wanted to return to the Church. The mission president who was to preside over her council couldn't figure out why she was ever excommunicated in the first place.
• A brother had been excommunicated 7 years earlier, and since the day of his excommunication had been trying to regain his membership. The disciplinary councils continually denied his request.

I've heard many more stories, many of which are just too sacred to share, and almost all of which defy what the "logical" course of action would be. The simple fact of the matter is we cannot know the mind of the Lord for this brother, and we must leave it to those who preside over him to decide. Let's not speculate and risk creating an expectation that could result in disappointment and heartache for bytor and his friend if it is not met.

[Moksha]

What's with the "punishment" infatuation? It's not about "punishment". It's about "repentance". Why is this so hard to understand?

Actually it is not hard to understand, instead I think it is difficult to interpret. Jesus once told a woman that she should go forth and sin no more and that he was not going to punish her. He wanted her to cease doing what what she did and repent. That was sufficient.

Like I previously asked: When people have a renewed interest in God, should they be punished for past indiscretions or should they be welcomed into the fellowship of the Gospel? I think Shakespeare had a good answer then he wrote:

The quality of mercy is not strained. It drops as the golden rain of heaven upon the place beneath.

Would it be a punishment to place barriers to the welcoming fellowship of the Gospel, for one who seeks reconciliation with God? I think so.

Of course, if you don't believe that the LDS Church is God's kingdom and that LDS Church leaders are subject to inspiration from God, then none of that is meaningful. But why would someone who disbelieves the LDS Church's authority participate in the LDS Church, or even on an LDS-oriented discussion list?

Do you really believe that everything you, I or a Bishop does is by divine inspiration? I suspect you are chomping at the bit a little too hard to work that up into a conclusion of disbelief of things LDS or even the suggestion that someone who views things a bit differently should not post here.

.

[RachelleDrew]

This thread has brought up a question i've been meaning to ask, but always forgot to.

What is the difference between being disfellowshipped and being excommunicated? I always thought they were the same thing.

[MarginOfError]

This thread has brought up a question i've been meaning to ask, but always forgot to.

What is the difference between being disfellowshipped and being excommunicated? I always thought they were the same thing.

How about an overkill of information. Church discipline consists of two informal levels, and three formal levels of discipline. The informal action consists of

• Private Counsel and Caution is appropriate for minor transgressions when the bishop and the member want to safeguard against more serious transgressions. This is especially appropriate when members have committed minor transgressions and are repentant
• Informal Probation is an action in which the Church officer (usually a bishop or stake president) may place restrictions on a member to not take the sacrament, exercise the priesthood, attend the temple, or hold a position in the Church (or any combination of those). No record of this action is made and the officer does not normally notify anyone of the action. It remains strictly confidential between the member and the officer. This is not an option for serious transgressions such as murder, incest, transgression while holding a prominent calling, or embezzlement of Church funds. Most other transgression, including immorality, may be handled with informal probation at the officer's discretion.

The formal action consists of

• Formal Probation is similar to the Informal Probation, with the chief difference being that the formal probation is administered by a disciplinary council (instead of an individual officer). It is not an option for the transgressions listed under informal probation. Formal probation is recorded and reported.
• Disfellowshipment -- when disfellowshipped membership is retained, but the member may not hold a temple recommend, hold a Church position, or exercise priesthood. He should attend meetings, but may not give talks, public prayers, partake of the sacrament of participate in sustainings. Disfellowshipped memberse are encouraged to pay tithing and wear temple garments. Disfellowshipment is intended to be temporary and usually lasts a year.
• Excommunication is the strongest discipline the Church can impose. Excommunicated members do not have the privileges of the Church, may not pay tithing, and may not wear temple garments. He may attend meetings, but participation is restricted as in the case of disfellowshipment. His standing in the Church may only be regained through baptism and confirmation. All blessing relating to baptism, confirmation, the priesthood, and the temple are lost.

[Traveler]

My best friend is returning to church after 15 years of inactivity. He is an endowed member of the church and was sealed to his wife when he was 20 years old.

Fast forward to present. He left his wife for a younger woman and now that has ended. He wants to try and repair his life and I have encouraged him to come to church. He tells me that he has been feeling the Spirit and wants to continue. He has also been reading the Book of Mormon and praying. In conversations with him I have learned that he never really had a testimony, he was just going through the motions because that was what was expected of him. ( he grew up in the church)

Over the last 15 years he has committed adultery on numerous occasions and ultimately left his wife for a younger woman. He did not live the gospel at all. Given the fact that he is been inactive for 15 years and even when he was he was just going through the motions, do you think he will be excommunicated?

If you have experience with these type of councils, I would appreciate your input.

-Bytor

Some points:

1. Disciplinary courts and counsels are for the purpose of helping a person repent and renew their covenants. After 15 years away it is likely that your friend will not be excommunicated.

2. Excommunication nullifies one’s covenants with G-d and they must start over again – including baptism. Disfellowship suspends one’s covenants with G-d while they get themselves together. They will not be re-baptized but following their repentance they will resume their covenants where they left off.

3. In most cases that I have seen when someone falls away, especially with severe moral problems they become so lost to the spirit they will believe that they never really had a testimony in the first place. Then after they have returned and are renewed by the spirit they will express the feeling that they never completely lost their testimony. Other than being touched or untouched by the spirit I do not know why this happens.

Good for you Baytor for helping your good friend when your example was most needed.

The Traveler

[Just_A_Guy]

Like I previously asked: When people have a renewed interest in God, should they be punished for past indiscretions or should they be welcomed into the fellowship of the Gospel?

"Interest" does not necessarily equal "repentance". The Church is under divine injunction not to administer that which is sacred to those who are not truly repentant. We may not fulfill that injunction as well as we ought, but that doesn't mean we should stop trying.

That said, I would agree with you that we should work to lessen the social stigma that often comes with excommunication or other church discipline.

What is the difference between being disfellowshipped and being excommunicated? I always thought they were the same thing.

If you're disfellowshipped, you're still technically a member. Priesthood ordinances you've received (including baptism, priesthood ordinations for males, and temple sealings) are still "on the record" (though they are arguably in a state of suspension pending full repentance--a disfellowshipped male, for example, will usually be prohibited from exercising his priesthood)l

If you're excommunicated, you're no longer a member and all those ordinances are officially deemed "canceled".

[Maya]

Disfellowshipping is like you cant take the sacrament and you cant have ja calling... excommunication is that your name is taken away from the membership list. But your spouse and family dont loose their sealings. Disfellowship is over when it is over, maybe they need to wait a year before going to Temple. Excommunicated need to be babtized again and they wait a year for getting the priesthood back and an other for getting in to the Temple.

I know someone, who was excommunicated for 12 years, but never missed a Sunday, always supported the family in church things and believed in the teachings of the church! His son babtized him back.

[MichaelPAGuy]

MarginofError, Why would the church deny anyone's request to return to the church of the lord? To me that does not make any sense?

[MarginOfError]

MarginofError, Why would the church deny anyone's request to return to the church of the lord? To me that does not make any sense?

Presumably, he wasn't particularly repentant. As I understand it, he claimed he never did anything wrong. The leadership saw differently.

[Jim108]

The only way to get better is through Jesus. He is the way. ...and to bring it down to Earth, we are all wretched, so lets not point fingers, Jim

[Vort]

Actually it is not hard to understand, instead I think it is difficult to interpret. Jesus once told a woman that she should go forth and sin no more and that he was not going to punish her. He wanted her to cease doing what what she did and repent. That was sufficient.

Very true. For her, that was sufficient. For others, it would not be.

Like I previously asked: When people have a renewed interest in God, should they be punished for past indiscretions or should they be welcomed into the fellowship of the Gospel?

You keep talking about people being "punished". I reject your classification. Excommunication is not about punishment, but repentence.

Would it be a punishment to place barriers to the welcoming fellowship of the Gospel, for one who seeks reconciliation with God? I think so.

Of what "barriers" do you speak? You mean, the Church leader might remove membership or refuse to reinstate membership at the moment? I would argue that for a person who wishes to find God through his restored gospel, these things are not barriers. If the leader sees fit to impose that "barrier", then we must assume that the leader is being led by the Spirit, who knows much better than you or I what ought to be done.

Do you really believe that everything you, I or a Bishop does is by divine inspiration?

I think the question is non sequitur. When a man who holds the keys of Priesthood leadership exercises those keys, he is acting within the power given him of God. It is as if God is acting. If there is evidence of malfeasance by the Priesthood holder, there is a system whereby that can be corrected. But to sit here and second-guess hypothetical situations, calling excommunication and such "barriers", is not helpful.

I suspect you are chomping at the bit a little too hard to work that up into a conclusion of disbelief of things LDS or even the suggestion that someone who views things a bit differently should not post here.

Then you are mistaken.

[Vort]

The only way to get better is through Jesus. He is the way.

So true. Thank God he has restored his kingdom (aka the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints) here on earth so that we can find the Way.

...and to bring it down to Earth, we are all wretched, so lets not point fingers, Jim

I've noticed you use the term "wretched" quite a bit, Jim. Judging by its inclusion in the hymn Amazing Grace, I gather it's a common and popular term among some Christian sects, but it's not a term much used among Latter-day Saints. As I understand the word, it means a despicable person meriting scorn. Is that what you mean by it?

If so, understand that we Latter-day Saints don't typically think in such terms. While we acknowledge our unworthiness before God and our inability to save ourselves by our own power, we think of human beings as children of a divine Father. We don't dwell on the fallen, "wretched" condition of mankind so much as we recognize and strive for the Godly potential inherent in each of us. Saying, "Well, you know, we're all wretches anyway, so don't worry about such-and-such a sin" doesn't really carry much weight with Latter-day Saints, since we don't see our fallen nature as a legitimate excuse to live in squalor.

As for pointing fingers, there is a world of difference between saying "So-and-so commited Sin X, which is a grevious sin; punishment typically consists of Y and Z", and saying "So-and-so commited Sin X, the scumbag!"

[Palerider]

My best friend is returning to church after 15 years of inactivity. He is an endowed member of the church and was sealed to his wife when he was 20 years old.

Fast forward to present. He left his wife for a younger woman and now that has ended. He wants to try and repair his life and I have encouraged him to come to church. He tells me that he has been feeling the Spirit and wants to continue. He has also been reading the Book of Mormon and praying. In conversations with him I have learned that he never really had a testimony, he was just going through the motions because that was what was expected of him. ( he grew up in the church)

Over the last 15 years he has committed adultery on numerous occasions and ultimately left his wife for a younger woman. He did not live the gospel at all. Given the fact that he is been inactive for 15 years and even when he was he was just going through the motions, do you think he will be excommunicated?

If you have experience with these type of councils, I would appreciate your input.

-Bytor

This is my expierence. ...The Bishop will contact the Stake President and tell him about this person and whats going on. The Stake President will then decide if the Stake will hold the Council or if the Bishop should hold the Council. Regardless of whether the member in question is a Priesthood holder or not the Bishop always makes the Stake President aware of any worthiness issues in regards to a member.

Now...my opinion...Yes...I think based on the facts you have stated your friend should be ex'd and if he has a desire to return he can start fresh.