Church's Stance on Disfellowship and Excommunciation


Kayvex
 Share

Recommended Posts

So I was just researching willy-nilly the other day as I tend to do. I've always been a studier of doctrine, and recently saw a blogger got excommunicated. I don't have any clue who this guy is, but I understand that excommunication is a touchy subject and didn't want to think much of it. But I couldn't help it. I started digging with a desire to find what causes excommunication, what it means to be excommunicated on a spiritual scale, and understanding how and if one rebounds from such a blow.

 

And frankly, I was shocked a bit.

A good handful of people were waddling around the woodwork of my studies, telling their own tales of excommunication and disfellowship. I was surprised at how little some had done to experience such a punishment! But you can't trust everything you read on the internet! So I tried to search church documents. But I found so little on the matter that I can't combat everything else I've read.

 

So tell me folks. What do you know about excommunication? As civil and unbiased as possible if you could. I don't know... What I've studied has just seemed a bit... off... People who had come to their bishop in repentance, excommunicated for all assortments of things. Crimes I understand, major sins I do too. But one that really struck me was that many couples had been ex-communicated for fornicating with their fiances before marriage! As an engaged woman, such an idea is kinda terrifying! (not saying that's in my plan-book, but the work to prevent temptation is a hard ride, and I can imagine it being easy to slip up if you were less prepared)

 

Anyone know anyone who has been excommunicated? Has anyone been excommunicated themselves? I truly just want to understand this part of our faith and culture. I've never met anyone in that kind of situation, or even in the situations that causes excommunications (or at least, anyone who had been public about it).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator

As a convert, I can tell first hand that the thought of excommunication is like "ouch! That's harsh" It still does seem harsh to me. Logically I understand why they do it. 

 

Emotionally though it's a a tough one. It seems like a hard method of justice. 

 

There is a difference between "honest mistake humans can make" and "woefully disregarding church teaching". IE-I'm a single guy, 25, ready to marry my fiancee. We make a mistake and commit adultery. I'm no expert, but I can not imagine a bishop excommunicating a couple for that. 

 

Instead, I'm a 25 year old woman who is living with my fiancee. I tell everyone that we have no intention of ever getting married.  Does that merit excommunication? I don't know, but there is a difference between the two situations. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....major sins I [understand]...

 

 

But one that really struck me was that many couples had been ex-communicated for fornicating with their fiances before marriage! 

 

By these two statements, it reads like you don't think fornicating with a fiance before marriage is a major sin. I'm not saying one way or the other about excommunication -- as that's between each individual and their ecclesiastical leaders. But still...fornicating before marriage = major sin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By these two statements, it reads like you don't think fornicating with a fiance before marriage is a major sin. I'm not saying one way or the other about excommunication -- as that's between each individual and their ecclesiastical leaders. But still...fornicating before marriage = major sin.

 

Oh no I agree it's a major sin. But excommunicating someone for it, especially if they come to the bishop about it honestly, seems so harsh. And I agree MormonGator, harsh is the word I'd use! I don't comprehend how someone who slipped up could earn the same punishment as someone who committed a crime such as child abuse or attempted rape. The list on the link estralding gave says

 

"Disciplinary councils may also be convened to consider a member’s standing in the Church following serious transgression such as abortion, transsexual operation, attempted murder, rape, forcible sexual abuse, intentionally inflicting serious physical injuries on others, adultery, fornication, homosexual relations, child abuse (sexual or physical), spouse abuse, deliberate abandonment of family responsibilities, robbery, burglary, embezzlement, theft, sale of illegal drugs, fraud, perjury, or false swearing."

 

That's quite the list, and a lot of it justified through the fact that law is involved, etc.

 

 

Was it that they fornicated before marriage, or that they did so and then lied about it so they could save face and get married in the temple?

 

I've read tales of both. The ones where people lied or flat out stated it wasn't a sin to the face of church leaders I understand the punishment for. But people who had gone to confession and gotten excommunicated for being honest, it was kinda heart wrenching. A lot of people stated being scared of confessing in fear of such punishments, and several people ran from the church after being excommunicated because the shame was so great.

 

I feel theres a lot of culture things that aren't stated. I see how excommunication and disfellowship are used by our leaders reverently and properly, but it's so hard to guarantee that a person's spiritual development won't be stunted by members who quickly judge or otherwise harass. I don't know how common these things are, and it's a bit confusing! When I was little I didnt even really know the LDS church had excommunication (born in the church but it just doesn't come up that much). It seemed like such an alien concept.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator

I'm not sure if people are excommunicated nowadays for word of wisdom violations or business failure. You probably need to really, really screw up several times to get excommunicated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. I don't think anyone would know a member had received church discipline unless the person told them. For instance, John Dehlin made it public and wears it like a badge. Same with Kate Kelly. On the other hand, one of my best friend's husband was excommunicated, and no one knew except a very few of us that they told. Even his re-baptism was small and quiet on a weekday. 

 

2. Lying to get into the temple and taking covenants when you're knowingly not worthy to do so is pretty serious. 

 

3. If the leadership is acting properly and the member is penitent, church discipline (as I've heard from both leaders and aforementioned friend) is a loving, spiritual experience that is partly to release someone from covenants they currently can't or won't keep, and most importantly a vehicle to get them back on the straight and narrow. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if people are excommunicated nowadays for word of wisdom violations or business failure. You probably need to really, really screw up several times to get excommunicated.

 

My dad has a friend who has a coffee problem, has for years. Still serves the church loyally. Don't know what permissions he isn't allowed but even though the church is well aware he drinks coffee they certainly don't prevent him from lending a hand in the ward and with activities. And he is a very good man. Maybe it means alcoholism or severe drug abuse

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. I don't think anyone would know a member had received church discipline unless the person told them. For instance, John Dehlin made it public and wears it like a badge. Same with Kate Kelly. On the other hand, one of my best friend's husband was excommunicated, and no one knew except a very few of us that they told. Even his re-baptism was small and quiet on a weekday. 

 

2. Lying to get into the temple and taking covenants when you're knowingly not worthy to do so is pretty serious. 

 

3. If the leadership is acting properly and the member is penitent, church discipline (as I've heard from both leaders and aforementioned friend) is a loving, spiritual experience that is partly to release someone from covenants they currently can't or won't keep, and most importantly a vehicle to get them back on the straight and narrow. 

 

1. I suppose. But if someone suddenly gets pulled from all callings and no longer preforms "normal" LDS tasks, close friends are sure to wonder. It isn't right of them to, but curiosity is a natural state of being.

2. BEYOND serious

3. And of course! The church is not trying to hurt anyone or their feelings, or put anyone through something they can't handle and use to grow. But what is a release from covenants exactly? And what does it do to the people who weren't really in the know that excommunication was something that could happen to them? A few of the stories I read, the people felt scared and blindsided, not really understanding that what they had done was so bad to warrant excommunication. For many, the fear and shame caused them to push the spirit away. While that is of course their choice, sometimes I wonder if we're taught enough about how truly severe consequences can be for serious sins. I know the excommunication is showing them how serious it is... but maybe if they knew beforehand, they wouldn't have gotten to such a dark point

 

Heck, until I was 18 I didnt know people got excommunicated.... 18 years in the church and I had no clue.

 

I'd been through some disciplinary processes in the church before even by that age, and to be honest... They were terrifying. I thought I was a terrible, undeserving person, and for a good chunk of time was tempted to seek peace elsewhere. It wasn't until a lucky day when the Bishop caught something I said and understood that my sin wasn't a sin, but sexual abuse, and managed to get me a good councilor guided by the spirit that I was finally able to be free from that sickness. If he had been just a moment later, I may have left the church or worse. Thank the Lord he had been listening to the promptings of the spirit! But it's so delicate. Excommunication just seems so much more delicate. I want to understand it's dynamics and the people who have to pray and ponder and worry over such things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator

 Maybe it means alcoholism or severe drug abuse

 

 

Even those should be treated like sicknesses and not just sins or defects. Drug addiction isn't like apostasy or adultery. 

Edited by MormonGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My take... the discipline actions are for those who refuse the steps of repentance. Disfellowship is a bit of a warning shot - hey, get your act together. Excomunicaiton is a final step that says you appear to have no intent to comply with the standards of the Church.  In the example of the blogger, he simply refused any instruction in how to correct his behaviors that were detrimental to the Church. To allow a person to publicly persue behaviors known to be detrimental to the Church or its members would be to sanction their words and actions - regardless of the sin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And that's kind of the vibe I had, that it was meant for the rebellious and people who had committed legal crimes that could cause serious trouble for them and the church. But there's so many examples of outliers, I'm just trying to understand it. Many of the people whose stories I read worked to come back the moment they were excommunicated, and fought to be redeemed. If that is the case, then why excommunicate them when the effort is so pure?

 

Of course, I am NO priesthood authority nor do I know much on this subject to begin with, so I can't be waving my opinions around. I guess I'm more just curious. I'm very much a "Why?" person. I want to understand genuinely ^_^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kayvex, one thing I would suggest is that you try to avoid looking at church discipline as a traditional penal code where punishments are supposed to "fit" some sort of "crime". 

 

The words discipline and disciple share the same Latin root, which means "instruction" or "knowledge".  Discipline is the process by which we make people into better disciples.  Church discipline is not retributive in nature and therefore looks primarily to the future, not the past.  So, while there are certainly specific offenses in the Church that will "trigger" a formal disciplinary process; once the wheels are set in motion the decision won't be geared towards "doing justice" based on the gravity of the offense.  Rather, it will be tailored towards rehabilitating the transgressor's soul, along with--as necessary--protecting the innocent and safeguarding the Church's doctrinal integrity and/or good name.  That's inevitably going to yield inconsistent results, because not everyone who undergoes Church discipline is in the same state of penitence and/or poses the same threat to the Church or to individuals. 

 

A more formal and legalistic system might yield greater outward consistency; but one needs to bear in mind that legal codes are usually developed--and always applied--as the result of an interaction between a governing authority that wants to know just how much it can control before its subjects revolt, and a subject that wants to know just how much it can get away with before the governing authority takes action against it.  That's a necessary dynamic in civil governance; but it is anathema to the ideals of agency, accountability, and Christian liberty that are core tenets of LDS teaching.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator

 

 

Of course, I am NO priesthood authority nor do I know much on this subject to begin with, so I can't be waving my opinions around. I guess I'm more just curious. I'm very much a "Why?" person. I want to understand genuinely ^_^

Even those of us who are Priesthood authorities may not understand much about the subject.

 

And never apologize for asking why. That's how I joined the church. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I've gathered fornication prior to marriage and prior to being endowed max discipline = disfellowship, unless there is a combination of sins.

 

Fornication prior to marriage after being endowed max discipline = exed.  But each case is very specific and the church has IMO a very good system in place for this things.  Personally, I'd be a little leery of "stories" read on the internet . . . everyone is trying to sell something.  Those who put their story out of being ex'ed are in many cases trying to sell pity, sympathy, etc. 

 

There are a few who don't . . . one or two of those exist on this board and they have a very humbling and inspiring story to share. 

 

The Lord and His church judge us according to the light, knowledge and covenants we have received.  The more we have received, the more we are expected to comport ourselves in a manner fitting of being His disciples.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3. church discipline...is partly to release someone from covenants they currently can't or won't keep... 

 

I've heard this a lot. Any maybe what you mean by it is not exactly what I'm reading into it -- that excommunication takes away covenants so the person is somehow less responsible to them, and thereby somehow less culpable.  If that's not what you meant then forgive the question. But I have, actually, heard people say exactly that, in church even. That excommunication is somehow a good thing because it "releases" (the word you use here that leads me to the inferred idea) people from their covenants.

 

My question is simply this: Where does this idea come from? I keep hearing people say it, and/or say they've heard leaders say it. But can it be supported doctrinally or otherwise through any comments, quotes, talks, scriptures, or the like?

 

I mean, what's the idea here? The person who doesn't get excommunicated and continues to commit adultery stands up at judgment day and gets assigned the Telestial Kingdom, but the person who did get excommunicated and continues to commit adultery gets the Terrestrial?

Edited by The Folk Prophet
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the difference between a baptized and endowed person committing adultery, and someone who is neither of those things? What is the consequence of breaking covenants?

 

I'm not sure that's really the valid comparison. Though I'd think that, based on knowledge, ether one would stand just as accountable as the next, as our accountability is directly linked to our knowledge of right and wrong. So compare, perhaps, the person who was baptized and endowed because they were just born and raised that way, but they never really understood it, and the person who has had spiritual witnesses, understand covenants, and then chooses to not be baptized or endowed.

 

Regardless, what we're talking about is someone who's made promises to God. I would contend that excommunication does not release us from those promises. A promise to God is a promise to God. He or she who does not keep said promises, excommunicated or not, will stand just as accountable for not keeping them, excommunicated or not. And he or she who is unrepentant for adultery within a covenant and not excommunicated is on the same level as someone who is unrepentant for adultery within a covenant and is excommunicated. Either way, unrepentant adultery (under covenant at the time of adultery) is the sin. Either way the promise was broken.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless, what we're talking about is someone who's made promises to God. I would contend that excommunication does not release us from those promises.

 

I like that Folk Prophet. Excommunication just doesnt seem like something that "frees" someone from responsibility for the covenants that they made.

 

 

  Personally, I'd be a little leery of "stories" read on the internet . . . everyone is trying to sell something.  Those who put their story out of being ex'ed are in many cases trying to sell pity, sympathy, etc. 

 

There are a few who don't . . . one or two of those exist on this board and they have a very humbling and inspiring story to share. 

 

The Lord and His church judge us according to the light, knowledge and covenants we have received.  The more we have received, the more we are expected to comport ourselves in a manner fitting of being His disciples.

 

One of the reasons I came here for other opinions. I know for a fact theres a good number of people who tell lies about the church, or take things they misunderstood or didnt like and tell it in a perspective that just doesn't hit all the bases. But there are many stories of people who overcame great trials, and sometimes I wonder why they did. Why is my favorite word!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't making comparison, I was stating fact. It's a difference of whether you're sinning under covenant or sinning without the weight of the covenants added on. It's part of adding some mercy in with the need for justice. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you conceptually, Eowyn.  But I think what TFP may be getting at, is this notion that excommunication "releases" us from the obligations of the covenants previously made.  I know the idea is widespread within the Church.  But what's the authority for such a teaching?  Has any GA specifically said as much over the pulpit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In LDS parlance, "fornication" means sexual relations outside of marriage. Under what circumstances might someone be excommunicated for fornication? I am no authority on the matter, but from my understanding and experience of others, I can come up with some possibilities:

  • Adultery. This is generally understood to mean the breaking of marital vows. In LDS parlance, as in scripture, it appears to refer to covenant-breaking. Thus, the unmarried but endowed individual (e.g. returned missionary) who fornicates is guilty of adultery. Adultery does not always automatically result in excommunication, but that is a possibility. In some cases, it probably does, e.g. if a Church leader such as a bishop commits adultery.
     
  • Raping someone, either forcibly or statutory rape. This is self-evident, though if an 18-year-old young man has sex with his 16.9-year-old girlfriend, I do not know that excommunication is necessarily automatic.
     
  • Incest. I am not sure exactly what the Church views as "incest", but obviously this would apply to any parent-child coupling, and probably brother-sister (though I'm guessing about that).
     
  • Child molestation. Again, this is pretty self-explanatory.
     
  • Unrepentant transgressors. I have a relative who as a young woman was cohabitating with her boyfriend. She made it clear she had no intent to stop, so she was excommunicated. It was many years before she (with her husband and children) was rebaptized, and their Church activity was, sadly, of short duration.
     
  • Long term relationships and/or relationships lived under false pretenses. I am not sure of these, but I have heard (how's that for reliable?) that ongoing sexual transgression is much more likely to result in excommunication than a one-time or very short-term slip. I also imagine that fornication committed while ostensibly preparing for a mission or other times where the fornication is a mockery of what you're doing and a clear example of hypocrisy must be viewed much more seriously.

Just for thought and conversation. Again, I have never been a bishop or sat in on a DC, so I have no experience or authority in what I wrote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I sat in on a DC once and the brother was excommunicated for multiple sexual transgressions as an endowed and sealed member of the church. I don't recall the SP saying anything about covenants per se, though I do recall him explaining that the excommunication meant that he was no longer a member of the church and no longer had the gift of the Holy Ghost.

 

While forward thinking as JAG describes perhaps, I remember the somber tone of the council and everyone, myself included felt very sad for the brother who seemed truly broken. He is still not re-baptized and I hope he finds his way back.

 

His wife was guilty of the same sins and was not excommunicated and received a very short (3 months) informal discipline....

Edited by bytor2112
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator

 

 

His wife was guilty of the same sins and was not excommunicated and received a very short (3 months) informal discipline....

That's not right, but it's often what happens. There is a double standard there. 

 

It happened frequently in my catholic school while growing up. Boys and girls would do the same thing and only the boys would get punished. 

Edited by MormonGator
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share