Disciplary council, confession and permanent record

[Guest]

Doctors keep databases of what diseases and ailments people have, that are permanent and could be hacked into! What do they hope to gain? 

Pharmacies keep track of drugs that people have been on, and even when they buy cold medicine. That's private information. Anyone could break into that!

Court records are permanent. Anyone could get into them, and it will still be there whether time is served or not.

Banks even keep record of how much money we put in and when, and where we spend it! I've heard there are even organizations who track how we manage our debt, ago they can use it against us later! That's information that anyone could find right on the internet, if they have a little information about a person.

All of these databases have our personal information, including past and present addresses, birth dates, social security numbers... 

 

OP, first of all it disingenuous to say that the church is "keeping a database of people's sins". That unfairly implies motive that isn't there (and makes me question yours).

Second, even of people if the world hacked into church records, including the parts that I'm sure are encrypted that include notations about church discipline, I doubt most people would even care. A lot of the things we deem as sins whose repentance is critical to our salvation, are things that many of the world do weekly without thought. I'm sure sometime with an ax to grind might want to try and dig up dirt on certain people, but the majority of people with hacking skillz wouldn't even have motivation or interest to go to the trouble. 

Third, and most importantly, God will not be mocked. If someone serially violated their temple covenants, without annotation it would be easy for them to just move instead of going through discipline and repentance. Judges in Israel and church leaders have a solemn responsibility to see, to the best of their ability, that people aren't partaking of the most sacred ordinances while they are not living worthy, or not resolving things that need repented of. That's to protect the sinner more than anyone.

Edited March 21, 2016 by Eowyn

[NeuroTypical]

It seems like a relevant fact is being lost here.  Yes, disfellowshipment is noted on a member's record, and church HQ makes the note, and updates the member record using the form.  

However, after a person has been reinstated to full fellowship, Church headquarters or the assigned administrative office removes the notice of disfellowshipment and provides an updated membership record. So no, a member who has been reinstated to full fellowship does NOT have the details of their prior sin carried around in their record, for church leaders to see.

My source is the current edition of the church handbook #1, section 6.13.2 "Records of Disfellowshipped Members and Those Reinstated to Full Fellowship" from which the italicized portion above is a direct quote.  

Edited March 21, 2016 by NeuroTypical

[estradling75]

The church teaches people the things then need to know when they need to know it...  For example most people can go their entire lives without ever needed to know everything a bishop does.  So the church teaches us what we really need like faith, repentance, obedience.. etc.  When we get a calling (like a bishop) then we start getting training as new things come up.  Therefore a bishop who is doing their first disciplinary council is going to be rougher and less experienced/knowledgeable of the process, then someone that has had the sad experience of doing 50 or 100 of them.

However to many people think that when they hear about something for the first time that for some reason the church should have taken time away from teaching about faith, repentance, obedience.. etc. to teach everyone that one little detail... and that because they didn't they are being secretive and hiding things.  When I hear that I can't help but think they need a refresher on faith, priesthood, and how God calls people.

Now I have never been a bishop... but I have been in a couple of bishoprics.  The thing that most people are likely to think of as their "Permanent Church Records"... I have seen hundreds of them.  Chances are you have seen yours too.  When you show up for tithing settlement chances are the clerk handed you not only a paper with a record of your yearly donations, but also a paper with your name, address, dates of ordinations, who in your family etc.  And the clerk asks you to look it over and verify correctness.

That is your "Church" record, that is what moves with you from ward to ward.. Now there is a box on the record for bishop's notes that is not shown.  This is empty for most people.  However for some small number of people it will contain a phone number for the bishop to call to get more information, at their earliest opportunity.  This is the annotation mentioned before for Child Molesters.  I have also see it in cases were the member has moved while undergoing church discipline.  This is necessary for the process to continue and hopefully complete.  In the case of ongoing discipline it does indeed follow you because it needs to.

But I have never ever seen a record contain a indicator of resolved disciplinary action (besides the before mentioned annotation).  I have worked with bishops who when they became aware that someone that they were working through the discipline process was moving out and they did everything they could to wrap up the process before the move so that the member (if truly repentant) would not need to have it brought before a new bishop to finish it out.

I have seen a bishop working with an excommunicated members (who had no records following them at all) who had to jump through several hoops to request the records and get approved and then wait 2-3 weeks for the records of the council to be mailed to him so that he could reopen it and start the official process of reinstating the member.

I have not seen any means by which a bishop might know about resolved disciplinary action that he did not take part in (and did not result in an annotation) unless the member tells them.  I have never, ever seen a bishop waste time  "going fishing" for old disciplinary record just to see if their was one... And from what I have see of the process I am pretty sure he would be stopped cold if he tried.

Now again I have only personally seen the workings at the ward level.  I don't expect the Stake to be much different at all.  But there are callings that require General Authority approval.  I have no knowledge of the process of how the General Authority vet or otherwise approve of the callings of people they do not know.  But it would not surprise me if old disciplinary records are something they can check.  The reasons for this have already been explained.

 

 

   

Edited March 21, 2016 by estradling75

[Guest]

That's interesting, estradling, and makes sense. Thanks.

[thoughts]

OP, you are not required to confess at a church disciplinary proceeding at all.   And unless you give the bishop permission to disclose to the others what you told him in confession, that won't be used either.   And disciplinary action must be taken only on the testimony of two witnesses.   And, obviously the person recording the minutes can only record what you say.

Yes, it is true that the council will likely see your refusal to confess in front of them as a form of unrepentant attitude, no matter why you are doing it.  

I'd suggest you figure out the category in the disciplinary code that you should be disciplined for.   If it is sexual, all you need to say is that you violated the law of chastity  ___ times, from [insert dates] because [describe any mitigating circumstances that apply:  "I was trading sex for affection because I really wanted someone to love me.   I'm here now because I want to be square with God even if I never get hugged again."  or something else.    You are not required to answer their questions, nor to be more explicit and you can ask them why they are asking you things, if it seems untoward.  If you are asked who your partner is, then you can either give the name or decline to give the name.   You could also say that you will pray on whether God wants you to give the name, but so far you don't think he does.   If he is a member then you should consider the likelihood that he is also taking advantage of other women and reporting him might get it stopped (or might not since unrepentant people typically deny sins when called to account for them). 

In other words, go in having thought of possible responses and prayerfully deciding what you want to say.   Remember that the disciplinary council is looking at where you are presently in the process and trying to decide with God thinks you need some form of disciplinary action.   You'll want to be doing what you can to show them where you are spiritually and in the repentance process.    But you really shouldn't feel you have to say things you are uncomfortable being in a written records.   The details of your sin are generally not important except to establish how much of a problem it is, any reasons for it, and/or value to you of it, and whether it is all the way over.  And what you've done to make it right.  And your testimony of Jesus Christ.

Edited March 23, 2016 by thoughts