- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Another question I have, when a person is excommunicated, they are not to take the sacrament. How is this enforced? Has anyone seen it enforced in your ward or stake?
Quote:Ann wrote:
In a way it’s a testament to my LDS childhood that I’m having trouble taking excommunication at face value anymore. Or, more like it – to the truths I learned as a child, forgot in middle adulthood, and have returned to now.
It’s also a fact of modern life in relatively luxurious North America that the impact of being expelled from the community isn’t what it was in times past.
Ann, thank you for the Common Consent link .. And I agree whole heartedly with your above statement. Excommunication does not have the same power that it once did. Our communities are larger.
A prohibition on the sacrament can’t be enforced – and, fwiw, that is one thing I don’t like about the restrictions many put on church discipline. We tend to conflate baptism and the sacrament, and I understand why, but I don’t like it. Non-members are not forbidden to take the sacrament. When someone is excommunicated, that person is a non-member. To me, it is that simple.
Quote:Old-Timer wrote :Non-members are not forbidden to take the sacrament. When someone is excommunicated, that person is a non-member. To me, it is that simple.
I just had that exact same conversation with someone last week ..
We welcome non-members to join us in SM and invite them to take the sacrament .. Yet we tell excommunicated members that they are not worthy. Crazy logic.
We invite non-members to become involved in our congregations. We tell disfellowshipped and excommunicated members that they can show up, but they need to just be quiet and not participate.
When I was a child, I was always told that non-members were not supposed to take the sacrament. It is just recently that I have seen that changed. It is a good change. When I visit other churches, I likes the fact that all are invited to join in the sacrament.
Another question .. We believe confirmation gives the Gift of the Holy Ghost. .. and yet I believe non-LDS people are guided by the spirit. One of my sisters was excommunicated many years ago. She tells me she never has felt a difference in how she feels the spirit between before and after her excommunication.
Any thoughts on the subject?
amateurparent wrote:We invite non-members to become involved in our congregations. We tell disfellowshipped and excommunicated members that they can show up, but they need to just be quiet and not participate.
I’ll raise you one. Non-members can hold certain callings in church.
Edit: From handbook 2:
19.1.1 wrote:People who are not members of the Church may be called to some positions, such as organist, music director, and assistant Scout leader. However, they should not be called to teaching or administrative positions or as Primary music leaders. The allowance to call nonmembers to some positions does not apply to excommunicated members, who may not have any callings.
I guess the theory is that the excommunicated has already shown that they have an agenda to lead people astray, at least through the eyes of the church.
amateurparent wrote:When I was a child, I was always told that non-members were not supposed to take the sacrament. It is just recently that I have seen that changed. It is a good change. When I visit other churches, I likes the fact that all are invited to join in the sacrament.
Leadership roulette comes into play here. Most people I know wouldn’t care if a non-member took the sacrament. Their reasons may vary, they want the non-member to get in a few practices before it becomes a legit ordinance for them, they don’t want to offend someone/scare them away, etc. That said I’ve seen the leader that will approach investigators, tell them they shouldn’t be taking the sacrament and why. Personally I don’t get it but to each their own. I’ve seen the practice of making sure visitors know that they shouldn’t take the sacrament within the last year.
amateurparent wrote:Another question .. We believe confirmation gives the Gift of the Holy Ghost. .. and yet I believe non-LDS people are guided by the spirit. One of my sisters was excommunicated many years ago. She tells me she never has felt a difference in how she feels the spirit between before and after her excommunication.
I think an orthodox member would claim that she had already lost the spirit well before the excommunication (hence the excommunication). That or some crafty soul cheater has led her carefully down to hell. Myself? The holy ghost is a member of the godhead, right? I’d wager an omnipotent being has the ability to operate outside of human social constructs.
She may have grown spiritually self sufficient, no longer needing the training wheels.
I have not seen the no sacrament to the excommunicated actually enforced, but I was once asked as a bishop’s counselor to observe whether someone did and return and report to the presiding SP. FWIW, the ex member did not partake. I have no doubt
😯 I have mixed feelings about the sacrament. I do believe it is an ordinance instituted by Christ to remember Him. I think it is actually very personal, and I’m not totally sold on its link to baptism. I think anyone should be allowed to take it regardless of membership status. Were I excommunicated and desirous to take the sacrament I can think of four options:
1. Go to my ward and take it anyway
2. Go to another ward
3. Go to a different church
4. Do my own ceremony, perhaps based on standard church prayers or perhaps based on the accounts in the NT.
The gift of the Holy Ghost is not bestowed; we are told to receive it. There is a huge difference between those two, and the difference is why, imo, the influence of the Holy Ghost is available to anyone who seeks to receive it. Not everyone feels it, particularly the same way, but I don’t believe religion has anything to do with its interaction with us – as a general rule. Religion can and does, however, impact one’s willingness to be open to personal revelation and spiritual guidance/impressions – and that is not a minor or trivial thing.
I understand and respect greatly the ordinance and its symbolism (the concept and principle involved) and how it can open our hearts and minds to what many others aren’t told they can seek or expect, so I don’t devalue it in saying what I just did – and I am careful where and to whom I say it, simply out of respect for those for whom a literal view is meaningful and important.
I also remember a time when excommunications were announced to the Melchizedek PH on Sunday. I don’t know exactly why. I’m not sure why it stopped.
Quote:Old-Timer wrote:
The gift of the Holy Ghost is not bestowed; we are told to receive it.
There is a huge difference between those two, and the difference is why, imo, the influence of the Holy Ghost is available to anyone who seeks to receive it. Not everyone feels it, particularly the same way, but I don’t believe religion has anything to do with its interaction with us – as a general rule. Religion can and does, however, impact one’s willingness to be open to personal revelation and spiritual guidance/impressions – and that is not a minor or trivial thing.
I understand and respect greatly the ordinance and its symbolism (the concept and principle involved) and how it can open our hearts and minds to what many others aren’t told they can seek or expect, so I don’t devalue it in saying what I just did – and I am careful where and to whom I say it, simply out of respect for those for whom a literal view is meaningful and important.
Ray, you perfectly captured what I have always felt but have never been able to put into words. Thank you.
Quote:It’s also a fact of modern life in relatively luxurious North America that the impact of being expelled from the community isn’t what it was in times past.
I agree with this,too. Excommunication was probably very isolating back in the day before the internet and pervasive social media. In addition, the whole process seemed shrouded in mystery. Now it is relatively easy to make connections with others and even share the experience of your excommunication with others. The result is that I imagine some don’t really fear it much and have the ability to publicize the process and their reaction to the world quickly and easily.
When I was younger and learned about excommunication, my perception was that it was the worst thing that could ever happen to you. I can remember picking up a book written by a member who had been excommunicated (for adultery) who described in the detail the spiritual torment that he went through. I assumed that anyone excommunicated would have that same experience. My ideas have changed now mainly because I actually met individuals who had been excommunicated and the reality was that it was often a messy process that did not automatically result in spiritual upheaval and misery. My sister in law was excommunicated as a twentysomething for sleeping with her (nonmember) boyfriend. I don’t know all the details but the decision to excommunicate her always seemed an odd one to me. She never returned to membership and activity but married the boyfriend and went on to have two children and a nice life.
I think (as others have mentioned) that excommunication has whatever power over you that you let it have. It can be a horrible consequence for some and perhaps liberating and useful for others.
NonTraditionalMom wrote:I remember my dad talking about a feminist who was excommunicated in the 90’s and how she would certainly be going to outer darkness. I think he even equated her punishment to a “cast off forever” kind of thing, along with mass murderers, devil-worshippers, and, you know, fornicators. Eternal damnation stuff.
I find it helpful to think of the people that were excommunicated for political reasons or in error and then had their blessings restored (in some cases post-humously). I think of Helmuth Hubener, John D. Lee, and others. My bishop told me of a person that he knew that was excommunicated in error. She appealed. It took a long long time and through the whole process she had to be meek and faithful (My bishop was making the point that had she grown bitter, defensive, or combative – she would never had gotten anywhere). Eventually, the appealate body reviewed her case and felt that excommunication was inappropriate in her case.
But it makes me wonder. What is the state of these souls while excommunicated? How might their state be different after the “blessings” are restored?
I know that nothing is perfect in this life but I also have a hard time believing that God would eternally exile people based upon our limited and subjective suppositions and transient political expediancy.
Gerald wrote:When I was younger and learned about excommunication, my perception was that it was the worst thing that could ever happen to you. I can remember picking up a book written by a member who had been excommunicated (for adultery) who described in the detail the spiritual torment that he went through. I assumed that anyone excommunicated would have that same experience. My ideas have changed now mainly because
I actually met individuals who had been excommunicated and the reality was that it was often a messy process that did not automatically result in spiritual upheaval and misery.
We’re meeting many more these days, so I can only hope that the option to excommunicate is used judiciously.Old-Timer wrote:The person is removed from the active membership “rolls”, but their record is maintained in order to reactivate it upon re-baptism.
The process doesn’t lead to re-activation often enough, which points to a flaw in the application too often (and its validity in quite a few others), but the intent almost always is to provide a way back into full membership.
Hi folks. I’m a newbie, but very familiar with the blogging of such sites, and respectful of what is said.
When someone is exed, there are multiple records kept of the proceedings, including careful notes of the disciplinary council in the first place, as well as other logistical notes. The main membership record–the one you can see if you go into the clerks office and request to see your records–is removed. That is the official “name removal” process.
If you have a desire to return to activity through re-baptism, you will probably need to setup a meeting with your bishop, and he can request copies of your disciplinary council notes be sent. He will have access to those, but might be instructed (I think they are actually) to NOT show those to you (and I disagree with this policy). Through interviews and time, your bishop may recommend you for re-baptism. If at the stake level, he will have to talk with the SP who would have original jurisdiction.
Your re-baptism does NOT restore your temple blessings nor your priesthood if male. You have to wait a minimum of another year, and at that time, their is a formal petition process you engage in to request, from the First Presidency, to have your blessings restored. I believe, but am not sure, that the FP has delegated this review process to others to act in their place. However, unless someone at head quarters turns the key, nothing happens.
A letter is sent at that time to your SP (who handles this blessing restoration process) from head quarters. The SP is instructed to discuss the instructions from the FP with you, but again I believe they are told to NOT share that letter with your directly.
For those individuals who were excommunicated for moral transgressions, my understanding from speaking with many in this process, is they are usually told no: they are NOT given permission to have their blessings restored as they are to wait another year to see how they do. If the person continues in activity (and because they are re-baptised, they can often hold many different callings) they are allowed to petition again the next year. During this second petition process, the odds go up to probably over 50% chance they will be readmitted.
No individuals who are recovering from a felony (for example) and are on parole are allowed to be re-baptised, and certainly not have blessings restored. Sentences must be terminated in such cases, and depending on the nature of the offense, the wait might be longer.
I know one individual personally who did time in jail, was able to recover and serve his entire sentence for a very egregious crime, went through massive (and I mean MASSIVE) repentance, who now has his full blessings restored, holds the Priesthood, and is a rock. Those who know him refer to him as superman behind his back,…and they do it in utter respect. The guy made big mistakes, but his life has transformed, and it is amazing what and where he is now.
Excommunication is trauma. Unless you have been through it, you don’t know what it is like. Some don’t care as much, but others who have been raised in LDS Circles, their is a stigma that can follow you around. From what I understand, MOST who are exed do not come back…ever.
Minyan Man wrote:I also remember a time when excommunications were announced to the Melchizedek PH on Sunday.
I don’t know exactly why. I’m not sure why it stopped.
I was aware of this happening as well. The reason it stopped was the stigma was to traumatic that the excommunicated member would often take their family with them, either a woman or a man. So, for example, suppose you have a man being exed. They make the general announcement. He feels like a total outcast,…massive shame and guilt following him around, so he isn’t coming back. Where does that leave his family?
Well, if dad isn’t going to church no more, and everyone knows why,…does mama feel all that comfortable? Nope. So, she stays away, and so much for the children.
The practice could be correlated to loosing the whole family–so it played into the policy of keeping it hushed and handling it in a confidential manner.
Ann wrote:Gerald wrote:When I was younger and learned about excommunication, my perception was that it was the worst thing that could ever happen to you. I can remember picking up a book written by a member who had been excommunicated (for adultery) who described in the detail the spiritual torment that he went through. I assumed that anyone excommunicated would have that same experience. My ideas have changed now mainly because
I actually met individuals who had been excommunicated and the reality was that it was often a messy process that did not automatically result in spiritual upheaval and misery.
We’re meeting many more these days, so I can only hope that the option to excommunicate is used judiciously.The process of church discipline varies WILDLY from stake to stake, and ward to ward. Part of the process that is frustrating to me is when the word comes from higher up to take action against someone–to purge “fringe members”…and that is a whole nother topic.
You are correct that there are social morays that differed when I was younger. I remember, for example, reading SWK’s book “Miracle of Forgiveness”…and in that book, he says flat out the worst place someone could find themselves was excommunicated. Statements by Marion Romney and others even go so far as to say you would be better off dead than loosing your virtue. There are discussions in other forums about those statements and whether they cause more damage than good. I know of many where they have caused immense damage.
It does all come down to how much power you give those folks. When I was raised, for example, I was taught that the prophet spoke for God…PERIOD! So, if he said you were going to hell, or would be better off dead than morally unclean, it was reality. But, how does that make people feel who messed up? Enter TRAUMA….the whole process of excommunication for many is anything but a “court of love”. In fact, that phrase makes many quite angry.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.