bytor2112 Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 My friend was excommunicated a couple of years back. He was an endowed member of the church, inactive for 15 years and even when active...not really. He was just going through the motions to please family. He has since returned to church and was exed after confessing to numerous adulteries and fornications after divorce. His former wife (endowed) has now returned after 15 years of inactivity and has confessed to fornications after divorce and well, no disciplinary action towards her other than briefly abstaining from the Sacrament? Two different Bishops....same Stake President. Odd? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slamjet Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 Not odd at all. Outside of the "non negotiable," It's case-by-case and a lot of the decision to ex someone comes from where they are at in their attitude towards what they've done wrong. If they come in with a contrite spirit, they have a better chance of not being ex'd. If they have a lackadaisical attitude about their sins, well, they are not serious about repentance and need to get to that point before they can continue in membership within the church. I think it's wonderful because it shows that 99.999% of the time, the facts and the person is taken into consideration and not just a blanket judgement. At least that's been my experience and understanding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palerider Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 The stake president is responsible for Mel priesthood holders and will handle their church councils unles he directs the bishop to handle. The sisters case was handled by her bishop. Not odd at all. Each case is always different Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted March 5, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 Seems odd...given they both broke Temple Covenants involving chastity issues. FYI....both came in on their own, humbly seeking to repent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 She didn't cheat on him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted March 5, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 She didn't cheat on him.True...but, still, she did violate the LOC multiple times....I guess, I am curious as to why she wasn't ex'ed as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 You don't think adultery is a bigger deal than fornication? I sure do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted March 5, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 You don't think adultery is a bigger deal than fornication? I sure do.Bigger deal? Yes...but the question is....how much bigger? enough not to merit the same requirements for repentance? Not sure......So, do you think she would have been ex'ed if she had committed adultery rather just numerous fornications? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 I think it would be more likely. She'd have been breaking covenants against 2 beings/people instead of just one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted March 5, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 I have seen return missionaries, unwed violate LOC and get ex'ed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 So? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted March 5, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 (edited) So?Seems a bit arbitrary to me....and it is. In the long run, I suppose it won't matter. Our current SP excommunicates a lot....in fact he ex'ed his own son, because he didn't fess up to sex before his Temple marriage and did a year later and boom.Our former Sp, didn't ex alot. One of his counselors had an extra-marital affair with someone on the Ward and he was dis-fellowshipped...not ex'ed and he was a member of the SP. Edited March 5, 2012 by bytor2112 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 Two different children can commit the same infraction, and may or may not get identical consequences from me. It would depend on circumstances, attitude, age and understanding, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 What's more, the fact that your friend is focusing on what discipline his ex-wife who he cheated on didn't get, instead of repenting of the sins he committed, says a lot to me about how contrite he probably isn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted March 5, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 I think we can all agree that a member of the Stake Presidency understood things pretty well and my former friend, knew it was wrong, but he and his wife had both been long removed from the church before he committed adultery. Neither were living the gospel... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeuroTypical Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 Seems a bit arbitrary to me....and it is.As I'm sitting here, thinking about how I discipline my two very different children, it occurs to me that an outsider would think the same thing. For a similar level offence, one kid might get a stern look, and the other one will need a heftier punishment that lasts all day. The reason for the difference, is one kid only needs a stern look, and anything more would do more harm than good. She's so good at punishing herself, we have to take a light touch to keep it good. And the other needs something beefier, anything less and it doesn't stick.God didn't make us cookie-cutter images of each other. I'm very glad church discipline recognizes this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted March 5, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 (edited) I'm very glad church discipline recognizes this.To a certain extent. But as I said both were repentant and long since changed when they came to church.....arbitrary I think and very often. I was in the Council that ex'ed my friend......I think he should have been shown some leniency...as his ex wife was.....given, his remorse, the years that had passed since any offense had occurred. Edited March 5, 2012 by bytor2112 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bytor2112 Posted March 5, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 What's more, the fact that your friend is focusing on what discipline his ex-wife who he cheated on didn't get, instead of repenting of the sins he committed, says a lot to me about how contrite he probably isn't.Not sure where you got that....my friend is the one that encouraged his wife to attend church and get her life together. He cheated yes, he was an alcoholic yes...but so was she and their lifestyle invited bad behavior. My friend is ecstatic that his wife is in church and he is trying to mend his family relationship. The questions are my own....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Palerider Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 No case is the same. You can't base it off what happens to one. I can tell you this from my expierence, the spirit tells you what to do. In the case of stake pres councilor he probably acted under direction of area authority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blocky Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 I know 'someone' that isn't myself, who slept with quite a few people after they got home from their mission. They haven't been excommunicated, they haven't even been disciplined. The reason is that it wouldn't help. I"ve always been in the understanding that the consequences of a disciplinary council are based on what will most help that person repent. People can be at different levels of repentance, plus people are so different, I'm glad there isn't a hard and fast rule of 'you did this, this is going to happen exactly like this now.' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slamjet Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 We need to accept that we were not in the room and do not know 100% all the circumstances, attitudes, discussion nor what was the complete spectrum of sin was committed. Thus, it's meaningless to speculate as to why one thing happened to one person, and a different thing happened to another. Just be agreeable that the Church is lead by inspiration and the Lord has had done what he want's to be done. I can say unquestionably that the Spirit is extremely strong in those rooms and the deliberations are taken very seriously. What was done is what needed to be done. It's our job to fellowship them, not re-hash what sins were committed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rameumptom Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 Without knowing the real particulars regarding both situations, it is difficult to conclude why they occurred this way. From what you've given we can make some speculations. First, adultery is considered a greater sin than fornication. Also to be considered would be the number of times committed, the time period that has passed since the last event, whether the person has been before a council before for sexual sin, and the level of repentance the person has gone through prior to confession. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackmarch Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 My friend was excommunicated a couple of years back. He was an endowed member of the church, inactive for 15 years and even when active...not really. He was just going through the motions to please family. He has since returned to church and was exed after confessing to numerous adulteries and fornications after divorce.His former wife (endowed) has now returned after 15 years of inactivity and has confessed to fornications after divorce and well, no disciplinary action towards her other than briefly abstaining from the Sacrament? Two different Bishops....same Stake President. Odd?Perhaps or perhaps not. I have no idea of what exactly happened, or how repentant the parties were, or how inspired the judges in the cases were, or what they were inspired to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just_A_Guy Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 The cases of two adulterers, one an endowed male and the other an endowed female, are not analogous. The endowed male has been ordained to the priesthood, which is its own set of covenants in addition to the endowment--and therefore, a greater set of responsibilities.It may also be, as a practical matter, that on an interpersonal level it's much harder for a bishop to excommunicate a female in a one-on-one situation, than it is for a stake president to excommunicate a male in a high counsel proceeding--the stake president can cloak (what I understand to be solely) his decision with the authority of the high council (which I understand is technically there in an advisory role, but has no actual say in the decision). If that's the case, then simply by virtue of the Stake President's jurisdiction over MP holders you're inevitably going to see more harshness against males than against females who have committed similar offenses.I always just figured that it's one of the added burdens of having the priesthood--where much is given, much is required, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rameumptom Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 JAG, Not sure if you've ever been involved in disciplinary councils on both the ward and stake levels, but what you describe seems very different than the experiences I've had. Each council is a council of love. Each focuses on the needs of the individual and the Lord's will. I've seen a former bishop who was only disfellowshipped by a stake high council, for example. The process is the same for stake and ward. The stake president has his counselors and high council to advise him. The bishop has his counselors to advise him, and often in the case of excommunication of members, will also get the stake president's advice, as well. Second, each individual will judge according to his understanding and ability. Third, each should hopefully receive confirmation by the Holy Spirit in the decisions made. Fourth, the stake president/bishop must receive a full ratification of his decision by the counselors involved. For the stake president, this mean he must not only have his two counselors ratify the decision, but also all of the 12 high councilors. It is a taller order to receive it. So, I don't see how your broad-brushed claim fits. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.