Comments on: Is There Any Value to Excommunication?

By: Steve Evans

Steve Evans — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Some very tough issues in this post. The cheap answer is to say that we can’t judge situations where we are outsiders, but of course that’s a cop-out.

Whether there is spiritual value in excommunication is a difficult question, and one not often discussed.

By: D. Fletcher

D. Fletcher — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Oh, I’ve got a lot of words on this one, but no answers. I think excommunication is a mistake, in every case.

By: J. Stapley

J. Stapley — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Having known and loved people that have been excommunicated as part of the repentance process, I would argue that it is extremely valuable. In these cases they have worked through the excommunication and returned to full fellowship and even leadership in the church. In all of these cases, there was a sincere recognition for the need for repentance, a desire to do so and church leaders that loved them and worked with them through the process.

While I would consider the aforementioned a positive example of excommunication, there are examples where someone is actively in open rebellion and is excommunicated with a less humble heart. While this may not be a success it is arguably necessary.

For everything else in between, I have no idea.

By: CB

CB — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

No, I think there is some value in excommunication, sometimes. Letâ€™s avoid this specific case as John asked, and consider some of the creepy mutations of Mormonism that can be found, like the Laffertys. In those cases, I think the church is absolutely justified in making a public rejection. There are also times when a serial abuser or adulterer will take his continuing membership as tacit approval of his actions. I think excommunication is also warranted in those cases.

But overall, especially when a person is repentant, I think it is best not to throw people out.

By: D. Fletcher

D. Fletcher — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I think repentence, for the penitent, could certainly happen without excommunication. For the unrepentent, let them remove their name from the record if they wish.

Excommunication is just so ugly, and the word “disfellowship” is hardly better.

I don’t know what Grant Palmer is in for, but if it’s for writing that book, well, shame on the Church.

By: Steve Evans

Steve Evans — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

CB, for the rest of the group there are plenty of reasons why excommunication can we worthwhile — but what are the reasons in relation to the individual being excommunicated? I think that’s the question John’s really asking.

As for Grant Palmer, I really don’t think we should be discussing his case.

By: CB

CB — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

John, there is no need to apologize for posting a lot. I enjoy what you post, and wish you did more.

D., I mostly agree with you. But there are some very unrepentant people who want to continue their association with the church so they can victimize it’s members, and hence will not go willingly.

By: D. Fletcher

D. Fletcher — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

CB,

The real question is, how to you get people out? If somebody wants to create a fuss, do you really think that exing them will be enough so that they never return?

I think excommunication is too harsh for the people who really love the Church, and for the reckless heathens who don’t, there should be something else, maybe prison.

By: John H

John H — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I should clarify, that I believe there are extreme cases when excommunication is warranted, such as in a very public case such as a serial killer.

But Steve’s right, the question is, what value is excommunication to the member? We’re told that Church courts are “Courts of Love.” Is that really true, or is it just a way for us to make ourselves feel better by trimming the flock when we don’t like something someone’s done? It seems like in the cases J. Stapley mentions above, that a truly repentant person could’ve gotten the same results through a probation, rather than full excommunication.

And if excommunication is really about cleansing the Church or helping the member, why is it that when a story hits the press (Tom Murphy, Judith Freeman, Elbert Peck, Linda Newell, etc.) the Church is suddenly willing to work with the member and not punish them?

By: Anon

Anon — Wed, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

“Grant’s Stake President received a packet from the Strengthening Church Members Committee one year ago, but otherwise there’s no evidence that this action comes from higher up.”

Does there need to be more?

The reason to excommuncate here is simple. He is to be an example to anyone else who wishes to speak out.

Better watch what you type, or they will get you, too!