Excommunication

[Jamie123]

I just recently read this:

Quote

When someone repeatedly breaks their covenants and refuses to repent or fix the problem, they are heaping sin upon their heads, a disciplinary council is called and excommunicated is discussed. What excommunication entails is the dissolving and “blotting out” the covenants they had entered into. In the eyes of God, it is as if that person never entered into those covenants. The purpose is so that they no longer have that higher level of accountability because they can not break a promise (and commit sin) for a promise that has been erased.

I take this to mean that an excommunicated person would not be judged (by God) for having broken his/her covenants, but rather as an ordinary non-baptized person would be had they done the same things.

That's quite a radical idea. I'd always seen "excommunication is an act of love" as a bunch of flim-flam, but seen this way it does sort-of make sense.

Afterthought: If this is true then when they annulled John D. Lee's excommunication, didn't they effectively put him back under God's wrath for the sin of mass murder?

Edited July 15, 2016 by estradling75
Typo in subject

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

My best guess is that when they annulled his excommunication it was because they decided he was not guilty for the deaths. Because that is how I would interpret that decision.

Edited July 15, 2016 by LiterateParakeet

[estradling75]

Or they annulled it for the living that had to bear the burden of having a infamous ancestor...  Knowing that extending such a mercy toward the living would in no way diminish God's ability to serve justice to both the living and the dead. 

[Guest]

Interesting read that may be applicable.

http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/mountainmeadows/leeconfession.html

[Just_A_Guy]

Lee's excommunication was annulled posthumously; at which time Lee was (one presumes) highly unlikely to continue the sort of conduct that would have heaped condemnation upon him.  If he--or anyone else--is to repent and make any sort of progress in the hereafter; it seems reasonable to conclude that he is going to need the covenant of baptism at minimum.  Thus, I wouldn't be surprised to hear that *most* excommunications will be administratively undone at some point after the parties involved are dead--even if that isn't the church's current practice; I think theologically it's inevitable.

[tesuji]

5 hours ago, Jamie123 said:

I take this to mean that an excommunicated person would not be judged (by God) for having broken his/her covenants, but rather as an ordinary non-baptized person would be had they done the same things.

That's quite a radical idea. I'd always seen "excommunication is an act of love" as a bunch of flim-flam, but seen this way it does sort-of make sense.

Yeah, I almost would say Mormons should come up with a different term than excommunication. it does't mean what it means in the rest of Christianity. It's almost the opposite: Mormon excommunication does not condemn the person, but is rather a blessing.

Other Christians believe:

Quote

Excommunication is an institutional act of religious censure ...

The word excommunication means putting a specific individual or group out of communion.

In some religions, excommunication includes spiritual condemnation of the member or group. Excommunication may involve banishment, shunning, and shaming, depending on the religion, the offense that caused excommunication, or the rules or norms of the religious community. The grave act is often revoked in response to sincere penance, which may be manifested through public recantation, sometimes through the Sacrament of Confession, piety, and/or through mortification of the flesh.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Excommunication

 

Edited July 15, 2016 by tesuji

[Jamie123]

3 hours ago, tesuji said:

Yeah, I almost would say Mormons should come up with a different term than excommunication. it does't mean what it means in the rest of Christianity. It's almost the opposite: Mormon excommunication does not condemn the person, but is rather a blessing.

Just out of interest, if a member resigns from the church, does that have the same effect on their covenants as excommunication?

[tesuji]

1 hour ago, Jamie123 said:

Just out of interest, if a member resigns from the church, does that have the same effect on their covenants as excommunication?

I'm going to say yes, that you are released from your covenants. But maybe someone here knows the full answer.

There is this scripture, though:

Quote

40 Therefore, all those who receive the priesthood, receive this oath and covenant of my Father, which he cannot break, neither can it be moved.

41 But whoso breaketh this covenant after he hath received it, and altogether turneth therefrom, shall not have forgiveness of sins in this world nor in the world to come.

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/dc-testament/dc/84?lang=eng

 

Edited July 15, 2016 by tesuji

[Just_A_Guy]

1 hour ago, Jamie123 said:

Just out of interest, if a member resigns from the church, does that have the same effect on their covenants as excommunication?

I believe so.  A former boss of mine resigned and got a letter informing him that his priesthood and ritual covenants were to be deemed null and void (I don't remember the exact phraseology, though).

5 hours ago, tesuji said:

Yeah, I almost would say Mormons should come up with a different term than excommunication. it does't mean what it means in the rest of Christianity.

Wait--you mean, we don't do this?

That's it--I want a refund, and I want it NOW!!!!!

Edited July 15, 2016 by Just_A_Guy

[tesuji]

38 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Wait--you mean, we don't do this?

 

Uh, no

[NightSG]

4 hours ago, tesuji said:

I'm going to say yes, that you are released from your covenants. But maybe someone here knows the full answer.

There is this scripture, though:

That seems to simply state that it can't be removed by one party to the agreement.  Both parties can alter the agreement by mutual consent, and we can assume HF consents when a person exercises their agency to dissolve such a covenant, in the interest of preserving agency itself.

[Blackmarch]

On 7/15/2016 at 3:31 AM, Jamie123 said:

I just recently read this:

I take this to mean that an excommunicated person would not be judged (by God) for having broken his/her covenants, but rather as an ordinary non-baptized person would be had they done the same things.

That's quite a radical idea. I'd always seen "excommunication is an act of love" as a bunch of flim-flam, but seen this way it does sort-of make sense.

Afterthought: If this is true then when they annulled John D. Lee's excommunication, didn't they effectively put him back under God's wrath for the sin of mass murder?

it prevents one from getting more condemnation. Justice would require a penalty for laws already broken. a murderer who did not have covenants to break cannot recieve the condemnation of breaking those covenants, nor can he recieve any of the blessings associated with keeping such laws, merely only the laws that are associated with murder. Whereas someone who has been bound in further covenants will not only  have the laws in regards to murder broken but also everything tied to those covenants on top of that.

[CV75]

On 7/15/2016 at 5:31 AM, Jamie123 said:

I just recently read this:

I take this to mean that an excommunicated person would not be judged (by God) for having broken his/her covenants, but rather as an ordinary non-baptized person would be had they done the same things.

That's quite a radical idea. I'd always seen "excommunication is an act of love" as a bunch of flim-flam, but seen this way it does sort-of make sense.

Afterthought: If this is true then when they annulled John D. Lee's excommunication, didn't they effectively put him back under God's wrath for the sin of mass murder?

Would you mind providing the link / source of this quote?

[carlimac]

On 7/15/2016 at 2:03 PM, tesuji said:

I'm going to say yes, that you are released from your covenants. But maybe someone here knows the full answer.

There is this scripture, though:

 

This brings up some major confusions then. My uncle removed his name from the records of the church. I doubt he ever received more than the Aaronic Priesthood, if that. I don't know.  It's also my understanding that those who remove their names from the records would need to have first presidency approval to have their temple work done  after their death.   So I was going to look into doing whatever needed to be done so that we could have his work done. I looked him up on Family Search. Apparently some person, unrelated to our family already had his work done. Oops.  

I'm glad that all these human mistakes will be sorted out in the heavens. At least I hope they will be. 

 

Edited July 18, 2016 by carlimac

[Jamie123]

9 hours ago, CV75 said:

Would you mind providing the link / source of this quote?

http://mylifebygogogoff.com/2015/02/mormon-excommunication-explained.html

(I don't usually bother posting links to web pages because they are so easy to find with Google. In fact I had to google the quote myself to re-find it.)

Edited July 18, 2016 by Jamie123

[Guest LiterateParakeet]

2 hours ago, Jamie123 said:

http://mylifebygogogoff.com/2015/02/mormon-excommunication-explained.html

(I don't usually bother posting links to web pages because they are so easy to find with Google. In fact I had to google the quote myself to re-find it.)

You should post the link, if for no other reason than to give credit to the author.  

[CV75]

4 hours ago, Jamie123 said:

http://mylifebygogogoff.com/2015/02/mormon-excommunication-explained.html

(I don't usually bother posting links to web pages because they are so easy to find with Google. In fact I had to google the quote myself to re-find it.)

I do not find this to be a reliable source of information. There are much better definitions and descriptions provided by the Church. Some examples (though I recommend you asking a Bishop of Stake President who have the Handbook that describes it at length):

https://www.lds.org/topics/church-disciplinary-councils?lang=eng

https://www.lds.org/ensign/1990/09/a-chance-to-start-over-church-disciplinary-councils-and-the-restoration-of-blessings?lang=eng

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/why-is-a-mormon-excommunicated

http://www.mormonnewsroom.org/article/church-discipline

http://eom.byu.edu/index.php/Disciplinary_Procedures

 

[Jamie123]

20 hours ago, LiterateParakeet said:

You should post the link, if for no other reason than to give credit to the author.  

OK fair comment.

More to point though, I've got into trouble in the past posting web-links which have had anti-Mormon material on them. Rather than scour every web page for possible anti-Mormon references, I find the safest thing is to quote without linking and let the reader to locate the references (if they are sufficiently interested).

P.S. YouTube excepted. So many people post YouTube links here (despite the vast number of anti Mormon videos) I guess that must be OK.

Edited July 19, 2016 by Jamie123

[Jamie123]

17 hours ago, CV75 said:

... (though I recommend you asking a Bishop of Stake President who have the Handbook that describes it at length):

I believe that handbook is available through Wikileaks. Though how reliable that version is...

Edited July 19, 2016 by Jamie123

[Guest]

On 7/15/2016 at 1:44 PM, Jamie123 said:

Just out of interest, if a member resigns from the church, does that have the same effect on their covenants as excommunication?

The only difference between excommunication and resignation is who initiates the formal process.

[Guest MormonGator]

3 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

The only difference between excommunication and resignation is who initiates the formal process.

Can you resign and then go back? Totally curious, nothing more. 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Can you resign and then go back? Totally curious, nothing more. 

Anecdote:  One woman said that she had been excommunicated twice and resigned once.  She came back each time.

[Guest MormonGator]

2 minutes ago, Carborendum said:

Anecdote:  One woman said that she had been excommunicated twice and resigned once.  She came back each time.

70 times 7 bud. It's all about that. 

[CV75]

On 7/19/2016 at 3:14 AM, Jamie123 said:

I believe that handbook is available through Wikileaks. Though how reliable that version is...

Well, as I said, I recommend you asking a Bishop of Stake President who have the Handbook that describes it at length. Reliably.

[Guest MormonGator]

On July 19, 2016 at 3:14 AM, Jamie123 said:

I believe that handbook is available through Wikileaks. Though how reliable that version is...

Wikileaks is actually fairly reliable, in my view. I have a lot of respect for them. It's how journalism used to be-tough and investigative.  

Edited July 23, 2016 by MormonGator