Exiled

[Kenny]

Can someone be exiled from their ward?

[Just_A_Guy]

Officially? I suppose the bishop could ask the person to attend another ward if, say, there was a court-ordered no-contact order between that person and another person in the same ward. But otherwise, I'm not aware of any procedure that would ban a person from one particular ward.

[WmLee]

It would have to be in compliance with a court order and only after a Stake President's has approved it, (can't think of why he wouldn't). OR, if there was a severe personal problem with that individual and there is NOTHING else the Bishop can do. In which case he may ask one or the other to change Wards.

But, i don't think either cold be considered "exiled".

Now, what did you do??? :) (just kidding here)

[Moksha]

I suppose they could be sent to some Branch gulag to serve their time (but not eternity).

[ryanmercer]

Well, they could do you like me... transfer my records without my request, then claim they were misplaced... as the family ward always kicks mine to a singles branch, despite the fact I hate the singles branch and am not inactive because I don't feel like being in high school again and dealing with snobbish cliques.

[Misshalfway]

Can someone be exiled from their ward?

Are you talking about people who get stuck with nursery callings for years??

[Hemidakota]

Can someone be exiled from their ward?

There is no such church policy.

[mnn727]

Kenny

It would help if you told us what you meant by "exiled from their ward"

We had a person in a former ward that was a registered sex offender with a court order to not come within so many feet of kids, so he was not allowed to come to Church, we still home taught him and fellowshipped to a certain extent --mainly EQ members - no kids. That's about as close as you can come to being exiled I guess.

[Kenny]

You must first understand that I write fiction and like to make up complex scenarios as part of my plot but I also like to be realistic.

Hypothetical let’s say our two principle fictional characters are friends and both are married. We will call them A and B. They have become close because of marital problems and almost have an affair with each other. There is inappropriate behaviour mainly from A but B likes the attention and does not put a stop to it. Out of guilt A confesses to the bishop taking all the blame but B sees that as an opportunity to lessen the embarrassment so changes the events slightly making B out to be a victim. What was an unfortunate human failing now becomes something it never was. Bishop feels there is mistruths being told here and passes the problem over to the Stake President. The Stake President asks A not to attend the ward because B claims emotional distress and is not progressing as quickly as A.

B, enjoying the attention from the estranged spouse compounds the situation by calling in the police. A is arrested and due processed but it is quickly established no crime against B has been committed and released.

A, full of remorse for having instigated the inappropriate behaviour in the first place does the Christian thing and sends a letter of apology to B and the spouse. B reports this to the police and A is then cautioned by the police that anymore contact could see harassment charges brought.

I’ve tried to find if a bishop or a stake president has authority to exile someone from their ward and can only find that if a person is repentant we should not deign them access to the gospel.

If you do know of of some president it would help.

[NeuroTypical]

Sounds like great fiction. I don't see it happening in real life.

One thing to consider - Bishops don't get involved with disciplinary matters dealing with Melchizedec priesthood holders in the first place. Bishops are over the Aaronic only.

LM

[ryanmercer]

Well people can and have been excommunicated... although they dress it up in fancier terms... My friend and his wife were last year because of blog posts on religion from them. They were made to do some kind of hearing thing, and then were removed as members of the church by the church.

[NeuroTypical]

The Stake President asks A not to attend the ward because B claims emotional distress and is not progressing as quickly as A.

That's the part I think is unrealistic. This church pays equal attention to both repentence and forgiveness. It's not a church of psycobabble and victim culture. "Emotional distress" in person B's case, is caused by being out of harmony with the gospel (i.e. needs to forgive person A and move on with life.) The church isn't about to harm person A because person B is having a problem living the gospel.

(Keep in mind, I'm not saying this wouldn't be a great work of fiction. I'm not telling anyone how to write a book.)

LM

[Kenny]

Yes I hear what you are saying but would your friend still be exiled from church if he repented.

[Kenny]

That's the part I think is unrealistic. The church isn't about to harm person A because person B is having a problem living the gospel.

LM

That is the theory but you might be surprised to hear is not always adhered too.

I know of someone listening to the Priesthood session and the speaker looked him right in the eye and said words to the effect of 'you are transgressing, speak to your bishop and if not him your stake president and have this burden lifted'"

He felt the spirit and acted upon it, did as he was urged to do, hope for a release from it, but lives with the regret that he ever opened his ears to the speaker let alone his mouth to his leaders.

We have to remember the church is perfect; it has been that way long before the current membership were baptized or even born. The Lord does not call you or me or anyone to improve the church but to learn to apply its concepts and grow.

I've seen so many people thus called and spend most of their time trying to improve things. Bishops who see only status while their flock wonder off down strange paths and stake presidents who despite all the evidence to the contra refuse to admit they might have got it wrong.

Part of the reason for asking the original question was to explore the possibility that someone truly repentant can actually be still exiled despite it being against all the principles the Church stands for.

Edited August 10, 2009 by Kenny

[WmLee]

On paper, according to what is right and true, no one can be "exiled". But you've made a very good point. I have seen members think themselves to be the compass for the church as they direct the flock towards the promise land. I have seen members, "forgotten" or left by the wayside because leaders didn't find them "worthy" of being recognized as members.

What is sad is that after reading what Kenny wrote I remembered those individuals who thought so much of themselves they forgot the ones trying to return. After years of service I do remember those three people, in different places at different times, but they are out there.

I've seen so many people thus called and spend most of their time trying to improve things. Bishops, (and members) who see only (their presumed) status while their flock wonder off down strange paths and (members) stake presidents who despite all the evidence to the contra refuse to admit they might have got it wrong.

Good point Kenny!