GA Excommunicated

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
Post Reply
freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by freedomforall »

Thinker wrote: August 12th, 2017, 7:25 pm
Red wrote: August 11th, 2017, 2:16 pm What do they mean by disillusionment anyway? Such funny word choice. I didn't know you could be exed for disillusionment. I can see being released for it, but... wouldn't disillusionment have to have apostasy as well to warrant exing?
It is interesting that the rule of confidentiality is broken to state that of all things.

The definition for disillusionment is "disappointed in someone or something that one discovers to be less good than one had believed."
"Dis-illusionment" also looks like "without illusion."
So, it seems, according to church statement, he was excommunicated, but not because he became without illusion. He still has illusion and has not apostacized from the church, so nobody get any idea about being dis-illusioned.

Why make such a statement, especially when confidentiality was sacrificed to say it??
There were early church leaders that got exed. This well known fact is still talked about today but not always in a good light. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think most of them came back into the fold, yet it is their awful doings that got them exed that stands out in the minds of good Mormons.
Last edited by freedomforall on August 12th, 2017, 9:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
brlenox
A sheep in wolf in sheep's clothing
Posts: 2615

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by brlenox »

Thinker wrote: August 12th, 2017, 7:25 pm
Red wrote: August 11th, 2017, 2:16 pm What do they mean by disillusionment anyway? Such funny word choice. I didn't know you could be exed for disillusionment. I can see being released for it, but... wouldn't disillusionment have to have apostasy as well to warrant exing?
It is interesting that the rule of confidentiality is broken to state that of all things.

The definition for disillusionment is "disappointed in someone or something that one discovers to be less good than one had believed."
"Dis-illusionment" also looks like "without illusion."
So, it seems, according to church statement, he was excommunicated, but not because he became without illusion. He still has illusion and has not apostacized from the church, so nobody get any idea about being dis-illusioned.

Why make such a statement, especially when confidentiality was sacrificed to say it??
Really? Please. Here is a link to Shadow's post where he clearly provides what I thought was obvious insight but it appears that some are not inclined to be in the least charitable creating offense where none should be.

viewtopic.php?p=799377#p799254

Irrelevant
captain of 100
Posts: 140

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by Irrelevant »

freedomforall wrote: August 12th, 2017, 2:04 pm
Irrelevant wrote: August 9th, 2017, 5:20 am Why speculate?
Because this is what many Mormons do. They like to find dirt and spread gossip. For this very reason the wife of this brother is paying the worst price.

Gossip

not go up and down as a talebearer, Lev. 19:16.

Keep thy tongue from evil, Ps. 34:13.

talebearer revealeth secrets, Prov. 11:13 (20:19).

words of a talebearer are as wounds, Prov. 18:8.

Whoso keepeth … his tongue keepeth his soul from troubles, Prov. 21:23.

where there is no talebearer, the strife ceaseth, Prov. 26:20.

every idle word … give account thereof, Matt. 12:36.

which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man, Matt. 15:11.

condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned, Luke 6:37.

He that is without sin … let him first cast a stone, John 8:7.

no corrupt communication … but that which is good, Eph. 4:29.

tattlers also and busybodies, speaking things which they ought not, 1 Tim. 5:13.

If any … bridleth not his tongue, James 1:26.

tongue can no man tame, James 3:8.

Speak not evil one of another, James 4:11.

refrain his tongue from evil, 1 Pet. 3:10.

did indulge themselves … in babblings, Alma 1:32.

go about spreading rumors and contentions, Hel. 16:22.

Thou shalt not speak evil of thy neighbor, D&C 42:27.

cease to find fault one with another, D&C 88:124.
Exactly.

larsenb
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10812
Location: Between here and Standing Rock

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by larsenb »

brlenox wrote: August 12th, 2017, 8:31 pm
larsenb wrote: August 12th, 2017, 3:53 pm
brlenox wrote: August 12th, 2017, 1:12 pm
larsenb wrote: August 12th, 2017, 1:06 pm

Too much self-denigration, brlenox. I can see you as a cupcake, but certainly not as a bass TURD. Come on now . . . ;) (wink emoticon)

HA!!! I just posted this with the actual 'b' word in it and it came out as 'cupcake'. What's with that?? Must be a little algorithm, BrianM instuted to keep his forum clean. Poor guy, he must have really sullied his mind by making up the table with all the swear words he wanted to monitor. :D
Hence why I had to use the auditory equivalent of bass turd. You'd think he would include turd in his list - make it twinkie or something. Like I'm a bass twinkie or something. However, as it is, I can put a turd anywhere I want. Hoping at least for a descent representative like a Bristol #4 of course. Those # 5, 6, and 7's really don't qualify. [-X
Brian definitely needs to add 'turd' to his list . . . closely followed by Bristol's, regardless of the ranking. Question I have, is why on earth do you seem to know all about Bristols? I had to look it up. /:)
Well, Mr Larsen, when one seeks perfection they need to consider everything from top to bottom - and a Bristol #4 is one measure of a bottom's perfections...just ask anyone whose pushin 1's and 2's or 6's and 7's.
I'll drink to that, but just make sure you don't make bottoms up.

MMbelieve
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5072

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by MMbelieve »

freedomforall wrote: August 12th, 2017, 2:15 pm
MMbelieve wrote: August 9th, 2017, 12:47 pm
marc wrote: August 9th, 2017, 11:52 am "...carried out in complete confidence..."

We don't share why this happened because privacy...but let us tell you why it didn't happen, because that's ok.
Good point marc.
Telling us why it didn't happen pretty much tells us why it did. And I think that once a person is in a place of authority then some rights to privacy should be denied. Much Iike the church announcing his excommunication vs just releasing him.

The only reason I would care to know the why is if it was a sin that's also against the law of the land...like abuses or theft. Only because I hate it when the church (members) keeps these sins under wraps and expects people to not press charges and just forgive.
Doctrine and Covenants 64:10
10 I, the Lord, will forgive whom I will forgive, but of you it is required to forgive all men.

There is vindictiveness and there is Christ-like love.

Did Christ likewise condemn the woman caught in adultery?

Should he have asked others to press charges? Should he have put her to shame and subject to ridicule and scoffing?

Christ says we must forgive...and that if we judge harshly we will be judged likewise.

This is our choices.
Following the law is not vindictive. Why is it considered vindictive to report a crime to officials? We should just forgive to the degree that the law doesn't apply and someone can just be above the law because they are LDS? Have you forgotten that the burden of the sin lies on the one who committed it and THEY have a responsibility through repentance to confess? And make things as right as they possibly can? So....commit a crime and expect or guilt trip people to cover it up and let him off easy? How does he grow or anyone even learn that there are consequences for actions.

It bothers me very much that crimes committed by LDS are swept under the rug by members because of some misguided self righteous belief that forgiveness means someone is not held RESPONSIBLE for what they do...example: child abuses.

If your uncle sexually abused your daughter, would you break the law and NOT report it?

Forgiveness really has nothing do with my post by the way. You can forgive whomever you chose to forgive, dont be naive to believe that that means the person then is let off the hook. Members are really misguided when it comes to things like this.

Honestly the higher road that deserves respect would be to report that uncle (mentioned above) and not cave to the pressure to keep it secret so uncle isint shamed or responsible for his actions.

User avatar
brlenox
A sheep in wolf in sheep's clothing
Posts: 2615

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by brlenox »

larsenb wrote: August 12th, 2017, 11:20 pm
brlenox wrote: August 12th, 2017, 8:31 pm
larsenb wrote: August 12th, 2017, 3:53 pm
brlenox wrote: August 12th, 2017, 1:12 pm

Hence why I had to use the auditory equivalent of bass turd. You'd think he would include turd in his list - make it twinkie or something. Like I'm a bass twinkie or something. However, as it is, I can put a turd anywhere I want. Hoping at least for a descent representative like a Bristol #4 of course. Those # 5, 6, and 7's really don't qualify. [-X
Brian definitely needs to add 'turd' to his list . . . closely followed by Bristol's, regardless of the ranking. Question I have, is why on earth do you seem to know all about Bristols? I had to look it up. /:)
Well, Mr Larsen, when one seeks perfection they need to consider everything from top to bottom - and a Bristol #4 is one measure of a bottom's perfections...just ask anyone whose pushin 1's and 2's or 6's and 7's.
I'll drink to that, but just make sure you don't make bottoms up.
I'm kinda thinkin that since you did the research if you shouldn't maybe post an image that illustrates the Bristol rating guide. It is very enlightening and something that everyone can relate to.

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by freedomforall »

MMbelieve wrote: August 12th, 2017, 11:31 pm
freedomforall wrote: August 12th, 2017, 2:15 pm
MMbelieve wrote: August 9th, 2017, 12:47 pm
marc wrote: August 9th, 2017, 11:52 am "...carried out in complete confidence..."

We don't share why this happened because privacy...but let us tell you why it didn't happen, because that's ok.
Good point marc.
Telling us why it didn't happen pretty much tells us why it did. And I think that once a person is in a place of authority then some rights to privacy should be denied. Much Iike the church announcing his excommunication vs just releasing him.

The only reason I would care to know the why is if it was a sin that's also against the law of the land...like abuses or theft. Only because I hate it when the church (members) keeps these sins under wraps and expects people to not press charges and just forgive.
Doctrine and Covenants 64:10
10 I, the Lord, will forgive whom I will forgive, but of you it is required to forgive all men.

There is vindictiveness and there is Christ-like love.

Did Christ likewise condemn the woman caught in adultery?

Should he have asked others to press charges? Should he have put her to shame and subject to ridicule and scoffing?

Christ says we must forgive...and that if we judge harshly we will be judged likewise.

This is our choices.
Following the law is not vindictive. Why is it considered vindictive to report a crime to officials? We should just forgive to the degree that the law doesn't apply and someone can just be above the law because they are LDS? Have you forgotten that the burden of the sin lies on the one who committed it and THEY have a responsibility through repentance to confess? And make things as right as they possibly can? So....commit a crime and expect or guilt trip people to cover it up and let him off easy? How does he grow or anyone even learn that there are consequences for actions.

It bothers me very much that crimes committed by LDS are swept under the rug by members because of some misguided self righteous belief that forgiveness means someone is not held RESPONSIBLE for what they do...example: child abuses.

If your uncle sexually abused your daughter, would you break the law and NOT report it?

Forgiveness really has nothing do with my post by the way. You can forgive whomever you chose to forgive, dont be naive to believe that that means the person then is let off the hook. Members are really misguided when it comes to things like this.

Honestly the higher road that deserves respect would be to report that uncle (mentioned above) and not cave to the pressure to keep it secret so uncle isint shamed or responsible for his actions.
Take it up with God. Argue with him and tell him what you think. Find peace within yourself by addressing the right person, of whom, made the law you are expected to adhere to. If you seek justice only to appease yourself then that is vindictiveness.

1 Timothy 5:13
13 And withal they learn to be idle, wandering about from house to house; and not only idle, but tattlers also and busybodies, speaking things which they ought not.
Last edited by freedomforall on August 12th, 2017, 11:46 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
brlenox
A sheep in wolf in sheep's clothing
Posts: 2615

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by brlenox »

MMbelieve wrote: August 12th, 2017, 11:31 pm
freedomforall wrote: August 12th, 2017, 2:15 pm
MMbelieve wrote: August 9th, 2017, 12:47 pm
marc wrote: August 9th, 2017, 11:52 am "...carried out in complete confidence..."

We don't share why this happened because privacy...but let us tell you why it didn't happen, because that's ok.
Good point marc.
Telling us why it didn't happen pretty much tells us why it did. And I think that once a person is in a place of authority then some rights to privacy should be denied. Much Iike the church announcing his excommunication vs just releasing him.

The only reason I would care to know the why is if it was a sin that's also against the law of the land...like abuses or theft. Only because I hate it when the church (members) keeps these sins under wraps and expects people to not press charges and just forgive.
Doctrine and Covenants 64:10
10 I, the Lord, will forgive whom I will forgive, but of you it is required to forgive all men.

There is vindictiveness and there is Christ-like love.

Did Christ likewise condemn the woman caught in adultery?

Should he have asked others to press charges? Should he have put her to shame and subject to ridicule and scoffing?

Christ says we must forgive...and that if we judge harshly we will be judged likewise.

This is our choices.
Following the law is not vindictive. Why is it considered vindictive to report a crime to officials? We should just forgive to the degree that the law doesn't apply and someone can just be above the law because they are LDS? Have you forgotten that the burden of the sin lies on the one who committed it and THEY have a responsibility through repentance to confess? And make things as right as they possibly can? So....commit a crime and expect or guilt trip people to cover it up and let him off easy? How does he grow or anyone even learn that there are consequences for actions.

It bothers me very much that crimes committed by LDS are swept under the rug by members because of some misguided self righteous belief that forgiveness means someone is not held RESPONSIBLE for what they do...example: child abuses.

If your uncle sexually abused your daughter, would you break the law and NOT report it?

Forgiveness really has nothing do with my post by the way. You can forgive whomever you chose to forgive, dont be naive to believe that that means the person then is let off the hook. Members are really misguided when it comes to things like this.

Honestly the higher road that deserves respect would be to report that uncle (mentioned above) and not cave to the pressure to keep it secret so uncle isint shamed or responsible for his actions.
Ahh MMBELIEVE this may be a very singular moment when I more or less agree with your perspective. When I was a bishop our stake president was adamant that if we took a confession from a child molester or such that we convince them that to properly repent they needed to take it to the authorities and we were to drive them over the moment they were convinced. This was back in the early 90's and under the then current laws priest–penitent privilege was the rule and the confessor was protected from being revealed to authorities. However, our stake president was keen on the fact that it did not preclude the confessor from turning themselves in and that's what we were to achieve.

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by freedomforall »

brlenox wrote: August 12th, 2017, 11:42 pmAhh MMBELIEVE this may be a very singular moment when I more or less agree with your perspective. When I was a bishop our stake president was adamant that if we took a confession from a child molester or such that we convince them that to properly repent they needed to take it to the authorities and we were to drive them over the moment they were convinced. This was back in the early 90's and under the then current laws priest–penitent privilege was the rule and the confessor was protected from being revealed to authorities. However, our stake president was keen on the fact that it did not preclude the confessor from turning themselves in and that's what we were to achieve.
And you trust that the so-called authorities are not evil crooks themselves? Look around you. Look what's happening to the Bundy's, the Hammond's, many, many people who are in jail/prison without due process, no trial, no jury, crooked judges who want to be kissed on the butt like Judge Gloria Navarro, Judge Anna Brown and a host of others that only want to dish out their own kind of justice and not according to the Constitution.
Now a person committing a small offense can get years and years in prison. Is this justice?

And a Bishop with anything less than genuine love and a heart willing to be of help can cause more grief and punishment than the offender deserves. This is why God should be the judge and jury. He is the one that is honest and just, forgives and helps a person to shed the natural man and become a saint. How can this be done from behind bars if a person convicted of something is 60 and in jail for life? Just wondering.

MMbelieve
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5072

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by MMbelieve »

freedomforall wrote: August 12th, 2017, 11:39 pm
MMbelieve wrote: August 12th, 2017, 11:31 pm
freedomforall wrote: August 12th, 2017, 2:15 pm
MMbelieve wrote: August 9th, 2017, 12:47 pm

Good point marc.
Telling us why it didn't happen pretty much tells us why it did. And I think that once a person is in a place of authority then some rights to privacy should be denied. Much Iike the church announcing his excommunication vs just releasing him.

The only reason I would care to know the why is if it was a sin that's also against the law of the land...like abuses or theft. Only because I hate it when the church (members) keeps these sins under wraps and expects people to not press charges and just forgive.
Doctrine and Covenants 64:10
10 I, the Lord, will forgive whom I will forgive, but of you it is required to forgive all men.

There is vindictiveness and there is Christ-like love.

Did Christ likewise condemn the woman caught in adultery?

Should he have asked others to press charges? Should he have put her to shame and subject to ridicule and scoffing?

Christ says we must forgive...and that if we judge harshly we will be judged likewise.

This is our choices.
Following the law is not vindictive. Why is it considered vindictive to report a crime to officials? We should just forgive to the degree that the law doesn't apply and someone can just be above the law because they are LDS? Have you forgotten that the burden of the sin lies on the one who committed it and THEY have a responsibility through repentance to confess? And make things as right as they possibly can? So....commit a crime and expect or guilt trip people to cover it up and let him off easy? How does he grow or anyone even learn that there are consequences for actions.

It bothers me very much that crimes committed by LDS are swept under the rug by members because of some misguided self righteous belief that forgiveness means someone is not held RESPONSIBLE for what they do...example: child abuses.

If your uncle sexually abused your daughter, would you break the law and NOT report it?

Forgiveness really has nothing do with my post by the way. You can forgive whomever you chose to forgive, dont be naive to believe that that means the person then is let off the hook. Members are really misguided when it comes to things like this.

Honestly the higher road that deserves respect would be to report that uncle (mentioned above) and not cave to the pressure to keep it secret so uncle isint shamed or responsible for his actions.
Take it up with God. Argue with him and tell him what you think. Find peace within yourself by addressing the right person, of whom, made the law you are expected to adhere to. If you seek justice only to appease yourself then that is vindictiveness.

1 Timothy 5:13
13 And withal they learn to be idle, wandering about from house to house; and not only idle, but tattlers also and busybodies, speaking things which they ought not.
No argument here sweetheart. I don't argue with God, and wouldn't ever need to over something like this.

Why do you believe that YOU have the power to control if someone is subjected to the law or not? Your forgiveness is so powerful it actually can erase the crime of which the person is obligated to account to? Don't confuse your forgiveness with God's forgiveness, yours does not have power over the other persons actual forgiveness from God which requires he/she make recompense for their wrongs.

The law is above you as well, perhaps you should become submissive to the laws you seem are okay to be broken as long as you have a Christlike heart for offenders.

It's not vindictiveness of which I speak. Trust me here, I dont wish for people to suffer. It's a matter of being responsible and respectfull. If you break the law and you actually let others tell you that you don't have to account to the law (ie not fully repent) then how can you be being honest with yourself?

If a man abuses your daughter you wouldn't report it? If not, why? If you were assaulted, would you not report it? Go to the hospital?

MMbelieve
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5072

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by MMbelieve »

freedomforall wrote: August 13th, 2017, 12:12 am
brlenox wrote: August 12th, 2017, 11:42 pmAhh MMBELIEVE this may be a very singular moment when I more or less agree with your perspective. When I was a bishop our stake president was adamant that if we took a confession from a child molester or such that we convince them that to properly repent they needed to take it to the authorities and we were to drive them over the moment they were convinced. This was back in the early 90's and under the then current laws priest–penitent privilege was the rule and the confessor was protected from being revealed to authorities. However, our stake president was keen on the fact that it did not preclude the confessor from turning themselves in and that's what we were to achieve.
And you trust that the so-called authorities are not evil crooks themselves? Look around you. Look what's happening to the Bundy's, the Hammond's, many, many people who are in jail/prison without due process, no trial, no jury, crooked judges who want to be kissed on the butt like Judge Gloria Navarro, Judge Anna Brown and a host of others that only want to dish out their own kind of justice and not according to the Constitution.
Now a person committing a small offense can get years and years in prison. Is this justice?

And a Bishop with anything less than genuine love and a heart willing to be of help can cause more grief and punishment than the offender deserves. This is why God should be the judge and jury. He is the one that is honest and just, forgives and helps a person to shed the natural man and become a saint. How can this be done from behind bars if a person convicted of something is 60 and in jail for life? Just wondering.

If you want a case study I can hook you up with one very unfortunate situation. Sentenced to jail for likely life because of being convicted in his 70s. Will it change him? Don't know.
Will he be given a chance to repent now? Absolutely!!

He has had his crime revealed so to speak and cannot conceal it anylonger....best part is that this happened during his mortal lifetime where he has the opportunity to repent here before he dies. What mercy God has had on this man's soul! And the man who reported him to the authorities did the right thing because he upholds the law. But the cool part of the whole thing (besides this man choice to comit a crime) is that God set it all up to happen for the benefit of this man.

And yes, he is likely behind bars till he dies but has been given mercy through a chance to repent which he wouldn't have otherwise by being arrested and publicly shamed as well as his family.

User avatar
brlenox
A sheep in wolf in sheep's clothing
Posts: 2615

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by brlenox »

freedomforall wrote: August 13th, 2017, 12:12 am
brlenox wrote: August 12th, 2017, 11:42 pmAhh MMBELIEVE this may be a very singular moment when I more or less agree with your perspective. When I was a bishop our stake president was adamant that if we took a confession from a child molester or such that we convince them that to properly repent they needed to take it to the authorities and we were to drive them over the moment they were convinced. This was back in the early 90's and under the then current laws priest–penitent privilege was the rule and the confessor was protected from being revealed to authorities. However, our stake president was keen on the fact that it did not preclude the confessor from turning themselves in and that's what we were to achieve.
And you trust that the so-called authorities are not evil crooks themselves? Look around you. Look what's happening to the Bundy's, the Hammond's, many, many people who are in jail/prison without due process, no trial, no jury, crooked judges who want to be kissed on the butt like Judge Gloria Navarro, Judge Anna Brown and a host of others that only want to dish out their own kind of justice and not according to the Constitution.
Now a person committing a small offense can get years and years in prison. Is this justice?

And a Bishop with anything less than genuine love and a heart willing to be of help can cause more grief and punishment than the offender deserves. This is why God should be the judge and jury. He is the one that is honest and just, forgives and helps a person to shed the natural man and become a saint. How can this be done from behind bars if a person convicted of something is 60 and in jail for life? Just wondering.
I'm not inclined to brook much tolerance for a one who will harm little children and if the millstone to be tied around their neck before they are cast into the deep waters is that of the legal ramifications of their egregious acts then I suspect the Savior may not be disinclined. As a Bishop, I found it was always of concern that I handled confessions with the warranted deference of the severity of their crime. As Joseph Smith mentioned to the first relief society, " "There is the need for decisions of character aside from sympathy." My tendency has always been to be a bit lenient and where ever I could leave things right with a charitable response I would do so. However, proper repentance, to be beneficial may entail a certain amount of grievous difficulty to garner the forgiveness sought. I did not want to shoulder any responsibility for failing to follow the spirit if accountability was required.

As we do honor and sustain the law, it seems only appropriate to let it have due course in these kind of situations. I'll have no children with saddened eyes meet me on the other side of the veil for any failure to seek justice in their behalf as the innocent offended.

If the authorities do wrong, as of yet I am not inclined to feel I should not still seek due course if it is appropriate. Someday it may get so bad that that is not the course but for now, it must needs be so. Interestingly, there was one that I knew nothing about during my time who was later discovered who was well into his sixties and is serving in jail. Sixty is not to young to find the grand-children as enticing as the children were in earlier years and so the obligation in my opinion is to stop the cycle of abuse.

freedomforall
Gnolaum ∞
Posts: 16479
Location: WEST OF THE NEW JERUSALEM

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by freedomforall »

MMbelieve wrote: August 13th, 2017, 12:20 amNo argument here sweetheart.
So now I am your sweetheart? This is news to me. Only my wife calls me that. I guess I should accept it as a compliment, huh?

Are you shooting the messenger, not the message?

How do you know how much justice a person needs for any one crime?

Are we talking about justice, proper punishment proportionate to a crime or vengeance?

Mormon 8:20
20 Behold what the scripture says—man shall not smite, neither shall he budge; for judgment is mine, saith the Lord, and vengeance is mine also, and I will repay.

Mormon 3:15
15 Vengeance is mine, and I will repay; and because this people repented not after I had delivered them, behold, they shall be cut off from the face of the earth.

We were talking about whether or not a bishop should turn to the authorities when a serious sin has arisen affecting people in a bad way. Now it has turned to what ifs and put this guy in prison stuff.

I depart and leave you to wonder. There is way too much contention on this forum as it is.

Ashleyyyy
captain of 100
Posts: 656

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by Ashleyyyy »

kittycat51 wrote: August 8th, 2017, 1:22 pm So sad :(

https://www.ksl.com/?sid=45338970&nid=1 ... s-j-hamula

SALT LAKE CITY — The First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles of the LDS Church on Tuesday excommunicated a member of the Quorum of the Seventy who had been serving as the executive director of the church’s Correlation Department.

"This morning, James J. Hamula was released as a General Authority Seventy of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, following church disciplinary action by the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles," said Eric Hawkins, a spokesman for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Hamula had been a general authority and member of the Seventy for nine years, since his call in April 2008. He previously had served as the church’s Pacific Area president and was the assistant executive director of the Church History Department from 2014 to 2016.

Hamula is the first LDS general authority excommunicated since George P. Lee 28 years ago. Lee was excommunicated Sept. 1, 1989, for what church leaders said was "apostasy and other conduct unbecoming a member of the church" following an hourlong meeting with President Ezra Taft Benson and his counselors, and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. Lee's excommunication had been the first in 46 years.

Such action with a church leader is extremely rare, then, but when necessary, a disciplinary council for a senior LDS leader is comprised of members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve. Church leaders have said they hold the faith's most senior leaders to the same standards of conduct as all other members, if not more so.

The church confirmed that this action was not taken because of disillusionment or apostasy.

"All church discipline is carried out in complete confidence," according to an article on the church's official Mormon Newsroom website. "Church leaders have a solemn responsibility to keep confidential all information they receive in confessions and interviews. To protect that confidence, the church will not discuss the proceedings of a disciplinary council."

"In rare cases," the article noted, "the decision of a disciplinary council may be shared publicly to prevent others from being harmed through misinformation."

Elder M. Russell Ballard, a senior member of the Quorum of the Twelve, has described the three purposes of church councils.

"Members sometimes ask why church disciplinary councils are held," he said in a 1990 article in the Ensign, the church's official magazine. "The purpose is threefold: to save the soul of the transgressor, to protect the innocent, and to safeguard the Church’s purity, integrity, and good name."

He added that church disciplinary action is not intended to be the end of the process but the beginning of an opportunity to return to full fellowship and to the full blessings of the church.

"The desired result is that the person will make whatever changes are necessary to return fully and completely to be able to receive the marvelous blessings of the church," he said.

This story will be updated.
This has been going on since the 1830/40s. About all the oringinal early church leaders were ex'd for some reason or another.

MMbelieve
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5072

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by MMbelieve »

freedomforall wrote: August 13th, 2017, 1:20 am
MMbelieve wrote: August 13th, 2017, 12:20 amNo argument here sweetheart.
So now I am your sweetheart? This is news to me. Only my wife calls me that. I guess I should accept it as a compliment, huh?

Are you shooting the messenger, not the message?

How do you know how much justice a person needs for any one crime?

Are we talking about justice, proper punishment proportionate to a crime or vengeance?

Mormon 8:20
20 Behold what the scripture says—man shall not smite, neither shall he budge; for judgment is mine, saith the Lord, and vengeance is mine also, and I will repay.

Mormon 3:15
15 Vengeance is mine, and I will repay; and because this people repented not after I had delivered them, behold, they shall be cut off from the face of the earth.

We were talking about whether or not a bishop should turn to the authorities when a serious sin has arisen affecting people in a bad way. Now it has turned to what ifs and put this guy in prison stuff.

I depart and leave you to wonder. There is way too much contention on this forum as it is.
My bad, I thought you were female.

I do not know what level of justice is required for crimes people commmit. And I'm not a judge or a cop or even a lawyer. None of that is my realm. The only opinion I have on the matter is when I hear of serious crimes getting joke sentencing. Like that college guy who raped a woman and got like 2 months in jail if that. It doesn't seem fair but you won't find me out protesting the judges ruling.

This is about following the law of the land and being accountable to it. So whatever the law mentality is is what we are talking about.

I don't wonder about anything on my end. I have seen first hand how God uses the law of the land to help some of his children a chance to return to Him and go through repentance and also allow for family or friends to use forgiveness.

I can assure you that my words and my view is not vengance.

And yes, a bishop is obligated to tell authorities if there is something that warrants it or demands action for the safety and security of others.

Anyone trying to avoid punishment or avoid being accountable is not repentant anyways. I thought this stuff was common sense

I had heard of the members avoiding the law and handling serious sins by using repentance and forgiveness quietly. I haven't ever had this conversation or seen first hand the arguments or reasons for that type of choice. I can understand that view and it seems like a noble view but to me it also can be a prideful view. For anyone to believe they are above the law is prideful. If the law must be fulfilled then it must be fullfulled. It's part of a person's repentance process. Can't you see that?

Maybe my view is different because of the example I have in my life of this exact type of thing we are discussing and having to see it play out. The guy who found out was a cop in the family and he had to go report it (he had no choice) and that resulted in an arrest of his own family member. There was no vengance here and all through the trial and sentencing, there wasn't hatred or animosity, there was sadness. But this man, for some reason, needed to experience being caught to properly being the repentance process.

Spaced_Out
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1795

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by Spaced_Out »

MMbelieve wrote: August 13th, 2017, 12:36 am
If you want a case study I can hook you up with one very unfortunate situation. Sentenced to jail for likely life because of being convicted in his 70s. Will it change him? Don't know.
Will he be given a chance to repent now? Absolutely!!

He has had his crime revealed so to speak and cannot conceal it anylonger....best part is that this happened during his mortal lifetime where he has the opportunity to repent here before he dies. What mercy God has had on this man's soul! And the man who reported him to the authorities did the right thing because he upholds the law. But the cool part of the whole thing (besides this man choice to comit a crime) is that God set it all up to happen for the benefit of this man.

And yes, he is likely behind bars till he dies but has been given mercy through a chance to repent which he wouldn't have otherwise by being arrested and publicly shamed as well as his family.
If a person is a child molester, under a just law I would just shoot him in the head and be done with it, it is then God's problem to deal with him. He gave no mercy to his victim/s. I have never heard of a child molester being re-baptised. I have had to deal with a few cases very few ever overcome their weakness and Satan take possession of them. In the US they have jails for child molesters and even after they have completed their jail sentence the are kept incarceration as it is simply too dangerous for them to be released.

My understanding is only stake presidents have confession immunity a Bishop is required to report all crime. The Catholic church has lost all credibility due to hiding crimes and allowing perpetrators to go free and continue with their crimes. Part of repentance is confession and reparation, which often means jail time, without it there is no repentance. A truly repentant person should be more than willing to go to jail as accept the consequences of his crime.

42 And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.
43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:

Lizzy60
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 8520

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by Lizzy60 »

Stake Presidents do NOT have confession immunity. They are lay ministers just like Bishops, and a lay ministry does not have any legal protection if they do not report a crime.

This is important, because sometimes the Stake President is the child molester. This man was a Stake President at the time the crime was committed. It's amazing to me that he only got 3 years in prison.

http://trib.com/news/state-and-regional ... 9339a.html

User avatar
Thinker
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 12975
Location: The Universe - wherever that is.

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by Thinker »

brlenox wrote: August 12th, 2017, 9:24 pm
Thinker wrote: August 12th, 2017, 7:25 pm
Red wrote: August 11th, 2017, 2:16 pm What do they mean by disillusionment anyway? Such funny word choice. I didn't know you could be exed for disillusionment. I can see being released for it, but... wouldn't disillusionment have to have apostasy as well to warrant exing?
It is interesting that the rule of confidentiality is broken to state that of all things.

The definition for disillusionment is "disappointed in someone or something that one discovers to be less good than one had believed."
"Dis-illusionment" also looks like "without illusion."
So, it seems, according to church statement, he was excommunicated, but not because he became without illusion. He still has illusion and has not apostacized from the church, so nobody get any idea about being dis-illusioned.

Why make such a statement, especially when confidentiality was sacrificed to say it??
Really? Please. Here is a link to Shadow's post where he clearly provides what I thought was obvious insight but it appears that some are not inclined to be in the least charitable creating offense where none should be.

viewtopic.php?p=799377#p799254
Really? Seriously, you think that becoming disillusioned is worse than murder (or other crimes) or adultery??
Do you really believe that breaking Elder James Hamula's right to confidentiality and telling everyone that he didn't become disillusioned by apostacy is really helpful to him & his family rather than the church? So, to you, it's better for Elder Hamula & his family for people to wonder about which crime or sin he committed rather than consider the possibility of him being disillusioned?

Where in the scriptures does it state that disillusionment is a worse crime than murder, so bad that any possible gossip must be proactively prevented??
And while we're at it, considering this is the church of Jesus Christ, when did Jesus ex-communicate anyone?

User avatar
brlenox
A sheep in wolf in sheep's clothing
Posts: 2615

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by brlenox »

Thinker wrote: August 13th, 2017, 9:57 am
brlenox wrote: August 12th, 2017, 9:24 pm
Thinker wrote: August 12th, 2017, 7:25 pm
Red wrote: August 11th, 2017, 2:16 pm What do they mean by disillusionment anyway? Such funny word choice. I didn't know you could be exed for disillusionment. I can see being released for it, but... wouldn't disillusionment have to have apostasy as well to warrant exing?
It is interesting that the rule of confidentiality is broken to state that of all things.

The definition for disillusionment is "disappointed in someone or something that one discovers to be less good than one had believed."
"Dis-illusionment" also looks like "without illusion."
So, it seems, according to church statement, he was excommunicated, but not because he became without illusion. He still has illusion and has not apostacized from the church, so nobody get any idea about being dis-illusioned.

Why make such a statement, especially when confidentiality was sacrificed to say it??
Really? Please. Here is a link to Shadow's post where he clearly provides what I thought was obvious insight but it appears that some are not inclined to be in the least charitable creating offense where none should be.

viewtopic.php?p=799377#p799254
Really? Seriously, you think that becoming disillusioned is worse than murder (or other crimes) or adultery??
Do you really believe that breaking Elder James Hamula's right to confidentiality and telling everyone that he didn't become disillusioned by apostacy is really helpful to him & his family rather than the church? So, to you, it's better for Elder Hamula & his family for people to wonder about which crime or sin he committed rather than consider the possibility of him being disillusioned?

Where in the scriptures does it state that disillusionment is a worse crime than murder, so bad that any possible gossip must be proactively prevented??
And while we're at it, considering this is the church of Jesus Christ, when did Jesus ex-communicate anyone?
Whoa. Hold on there cowboy. Put that gun away and let's settle this like peaceable folk. First I had to see if I could find a road map to Strawman's Idaho cause I couldn't figure where you had to leap to to get to "murder, adultery and other crimes." You are making up stuff to distract from the perspective that you are claiming breach of confidentiality and I provided a link to Shadow's post which very nicely and in a dainty sort of way very clearly illustrated no breach. No one said anything about murder etc.

Just go to the post it is very reasonable and not prone to leaps of imagination which you seem to prefer.

And as for Christ excommunicating anyone, my goodness how you love to travel. Once again another strawman, perhaps red herring point but just for fun let's think that through. So we can toss out excommunication cause from your perspective Christ never did that. Well on that line of reasoning, I don't recollect that he ever baptized anyone so I guess we can toss that one too. Wait, I don't think he ever did a baby blessing or naming of a child either better get rid of those.

Point is that you do not understand excommunication and seem to consider it a punishment when that is not its purpose. In the situations where it is merited it is a blessing unparalleled.

Anyway just get back to my original point of NO BREACH OF CONFIDENTIALITY hang there until you actually read his points and you will see we can discuss this without wandering through every disconnected landmine you can toss out.

MMbelieve
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5072

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by MMbelieve »

Spaced_Out wrote: August 13th, 2017, 6:34 am
MMbelieve wrote: August 13th, 2017, 12:36 am
If you want a case study I can hook you up with one very unfortunate situation. Sentenced to jail for likely life because of being convicted in his 70s. Will it change him? Don't know.
Will he be given a chance to repent now? Absolutely!!

He has had his crime revealed so to speak and cannot conceal it anylonger....best part is that this happened during his mortal lifetime where he has the opportunity to repent here before he dies. What mercy God has had on this man's soul! And the man who reported him to the authorities did the right thing because he upholds the law. But the cool part of the whole thing (besides this man choice to comit a crime) is that God set it all up to happen for the benefit of this man.

And yes, he is likely behind bars till he dies but has been given mercy through a chance to repent which he wouldn't have otherwise by being arrested and publicly shamed as well as his family.
If a person is a child molester, under a just law I would just shoot him in the head and be done with it, it is then God's problem to deal with him. He gave no mercy to his victim/s. I have never heard of a child molester being re-baptised. I have had to deal with a few cases very few ever overcome their weakness and Satan take possession of them. In the US they have jails for child molesters and even after they have completed their jail sentence the are kept incarceration as it is simply too dangerous for them to be released.

My understanding is only stake presidents have confession immunity a Bishop is required to report all crime. The Catholic church has lost all credibility due to hiding crimes and allowing perpetrators to go free and continue with their crimes. Part of repentance is confession and reparation, which often means jail time, without it there is no repentance. A truly repentant person should be more than willing to go to jail as accept the consequences of his crime.

42 And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.
43 And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
44 Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.
45 And if thy foot offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched:
Thank you, this is what I'm am trying to say about repentance. I just don't understand why some don't realize that jail time just might be required for the repentance process.

It bothers me to my core that some members brush abuses under the rug and deal with it within the family secretly. It's wrong and it only benefits the perpetrator and possibly his families image. It sends a horrible message that damages further the victims or victims.

I have not gone through this brushing under the rug stuff instead I have witnessed the opposite. It can be devestating to a family and extended family but it is what is right.

User avatar
AI2.0
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3917

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by AI2.0 »

Thinker wrote: August 13th, 2017, 9:57 am
brlenox wrote: August 12th, 2017, 9:24 pm
Thinker wrote: August 12th, 2017, 7:25 pm
Red wrote: August 11th, 2017, 2:16 pm What do they mean by disillusionment anyway? Such funny word choice. I didn't know you could be exed for disillusionment. I can see being released for it, but... wouldn't disillusionment have to have apostasy as well to warrant exing?
It is interesting that the rule of confidentiality is broken to state that of all things.

The definition for disillusionment is "disappointed in someone or something that one discovers to be less good than one had believed."
"Dis-illusionment" also looks like "without illusion."
So, it seems, according to church statement, he was excommunicated, but not because he became without illusion. He still has illusion and has not apostacized from the church, so nobody get any idea about being dis-illusioned.

Why make such a statement, especially when confidentiality was sacrificed to say it??
Really? Please. Here is a link to Shadow's post where he clearly provides what I thought was obvious insight but it appears that some are not inclined to be in the least charitable creating offense where none should be.

viewtopic.php?p=799377#p799254
Really? Seriously, you think that becoming disillusioned is worse than murder (or other crimes) or adultery??
Do you really believe that breaking Elder James Hamula's right to confidentiality and telling everyone that he didn't become disillusioned by apostacy is really helpful to him & his family rather than the church? So, to you, it's better for Elder Hamula & his family for people to wonder about which crime or sin he committed rather than consider the possibility of him being disillusioned?

Where in the scriptures does it state that disillusionment is a worse crime than murder, so bad that any possible gossip must be proactively prevented??
And while we're at it, considering this is the church of Jesus Christ, when did Jesus ex-communicate anyone?
Elder Hamula's right of confidentiality was never compromised. Get that straight. He clearly made some kind of mistake. I'm positive they said it was not for apostasy or disillusionment (they are NOT the same thing) because of people like you who will try to use that to harm the church. I know that if they hadn't said that people on this forum (likely you would have been one of them) would have been tsk tsking and suggesting that it was apostasy or that he was sick of money spent on malls etc or the treatment of gays etc. I'm positive that is why they had to say something, because of the ugly attacks that come at the church from those who ought to know better.

Elder Hamula accepted a high profile calling in the church. He knew the risks going in and he made some kind of mistake and now has to suffer the consequences. I don't feel sorry for him for that, but I do feel bad for him and his family that they are suffering because of choices he made. I wish him the best to work through them and return to full activity and fellowship.

User avatar
Thinker
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 12975
Location: The Universe - wherever that is.

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by Thinker »

brlenox wrote: August 13th, 2017, 10:35 am
Thinker wrote: August 13th, 2017, 9:57 am
brlenox wrote: August 12th, 2017, 9:24 pm
Thinker wrote: August 12th, 2017, 7:25 pm
It is interesting that the rule of confidentiality is broken to state that of all things.

The definition for disillusionment is "disappointed in someone or something that one discovers to be less good than one had believed."
"Dis-illusionment" also looks like "without illusion."
So, it seems, according to church statement, he was excommunicated, but not because he became without illusion. He still has illusion and has not apostacized from the church, so nobody get any idea about being dis-illusioned.

Why make such a statement, especially when confidentiality was sacrificed to say it??
Really? Please. Here is a link to Shadow's post where he clearly provides what I thought was obvious insight but it appears that some are not inclined to be in the least charitable creating offense where none should be.

viewtopic.php?p=799377#p799254
Really? Seriously, you think that becoming disillusioned is worse than murder (or other crimes) or adultery??
Do you really believe that breaking Elder James Hamula's right to confidentiality and telling everyone that he didn't become disillusioned by apostacy is really helpful to him & his family rather than the church? So, to you, it's better for Elder Hamula & his family for people to wonder about which crime or sin he committed rather than consider the possibility of him being disillusioned?

Where in the scriptures does it state that disillusionment is a worse crime than murder, so bad that any possible gossip must be proactively prevented??
And while we're at it, considering this is the church of Jesus Christ, when did Jesus ex-communicate anyone?
Whoa. Hold on there cowboy. Put that gun away and let's settle this like peaceable folk. First I had to see if I could find a road map to Strawman's Idaho cause I couldn't figure where you had to leap to to get to "murder, adultery and other crimes." You are making up stuff to distract from the perspective that you are claiming breach of confidentiality and I provided a link to Shadow's post which very nicely and in a dainty sort of way very clearly illustrated no breach. No one said anything about murder etc.

Just go to the post it is very reasonable and not prone to leaps of imagination which you seem to prefer.

And as for Christ excommunicating anyone, my goodness how you love to travel. Once again another strawman, perhaps red herring point but just for fun let's think that through. So we can toss out excommunication cause from your perspective Christ never did that. Well on that line of reasoning, I don't recollect that he ever baptized anyone so I guess we can toss that one too. Wait, I don't think he ever did a baby blessing or naming of a child either better get rid of those.

Point is that you do not understand excommunication and seem to consider it a punishment when that is not its purpose. In the situations where it is merited it is a blessing unparalleled.

Anyway just get back to my original point of NO BREACH OF CONFIDENTIALITY hang there until you actually read his points and you will see we can discuss this without wandering through every disconnected landmine you can toss out.
You & Shadow implied that it's for his own good that the church protect his reputation by breaking confidentiality and stating he was not disillusioned and somehow you reason that him being disillusioned is far worse than other possible causes for excommunication (like murder, adultery etc). If murder or adultury were more concerning than disillusionment, wouldn't the public breach of confidentiality be that he was not excommunicated for those reasons?

Me pointing your own faulty reasoning is not strawman at all. I'm just pointing out the insanity of that reasoning.

Also, it is completely appropriate to this discussion (not red herring) to ask why a church of Jesus Christ is going against what Jesus repeatedly taught. It wasn't just that he never excommunicated anyone, but he also was criticized for hanging out with "sinners." In other words, instead of pushing them away, breaking "sinners" off from him, he drew them closer.

If Jesus could sit in on one of these church courts he would tell each one, "Let he who is without sin cast the first (verbal) stone."

User avatar
brlenox
A sheep in wolf in sheep's clothing
Posts: 2615

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by brlenox »

Thinker wrote: August 13th, 2017, 11:25 am
brlenox wrote: August 13th, 2017, 10:35 am
Thinker wrote: August 13th, 2017, 9:57 am
brlenox wrote: August 12th, 2017, 9:24 pm

Really? Please. Here is a link to Shadow's post where he clearly provides what I thought was obvious insight but it appears that some are not inclined to be in the least charitable creating offense where none should be.

viewtopic.php?p=799377#p799254
Really? Seriously, you think that becoming disillusioned is worse than murder (or other crimes) or adultery??
Do you really believe that breaking Elder James Hamula's right to confidentiality and telling everyone that he didn't become disillusioned by apostacy is really helpful to him & his family rather than the church? So, to you, it's better for Elder Hamula & his family for people to wonder about which crime or sin he committed rather than consider the possibility of him being disillusioned?

Where in the scriptures does it state that disillusionment is a worse crime than murder, so bad that any possible gossip must be proactively prevented??
And while we're at it, considering this is the church of Jesus Christ, when did Jesus ex-communicate anyone?
Whoa. Hold on there cowboy. Put that gun away and let's settle this like peaceable folk. First I had to see if I could find a road map to Strawman's Idaho cause I couldn't figure where you had to leap to to get to "murder, adultery and other crimes." You are making up stuff to distract from the perspective that you are claiming breach of confidentiality and I provided a link to Shadow's post which very nicely and in a dainty sort of way very clearly illustrated no breach. No one said anything about murder etc.

Just go to the post it is very reasonable and not prone to leaps of imagination which you seem to prefer.

And as for Christ excommunicating anyone, my goodness how you love to travel. Once again another strawman, perhaps red herring point but just for fun let's think that through. So we can toss out excommunication cause from your perspective Christ never did that. Well on that line of reasoning, I don't recollect that he ever baptized anyone so I guess we can toss that one too. Wait, I don't think he ever did a baby blessing or naming of a child either better get rid of those.

Point is that you do not understand excommunication and seem to consider it a punishment when that is not its purpose. In the situations where it is merited it is a blessing unparalleled.

Anyway just get back to my original point of NO BREACH OF CONFIDENTIALITY hang there until you actually read his points and you will see we can discuss this without wandering through every disconnected landmine you can toss out.
You & Shadow implied that it's for his own good that the church protect his reputation by breaking confidentiality and stating he was not disillusioned and somehow you reason that him being disillusioned is far worse than other possible causes for excommunication (like murder, adultery etc). If murder or adultury were more concerning than disillusionment, wouldn't the public breach of confidentiality be that he was not excommunicated for those reasons?

Me pointing your own faulty reasoning is not strawman at all. I'm just pointing out the insanity of that reasoning.

Also, it is completely appropriate to this discussion (not red herring) to ask why a church of Jesus Christ is going against what Jesus repeatedly taught. It wasn't just that he never excommunicated anyone, but he also was criticized for hanging out with "sinners." In other words, instead of pushing them away, breaking "sinners" off from him, he drew them closer.

If Jesus could sit in on one of these church courts he would tell each one, "Let he who is without sin cast the first (verbal) stone."
I've got to be missing something in this conversation. Any chance you can remind me where Shadow or I made any comparisons at all where we claimed disillusionment is worse than murder or adultery. While you are at it can you tell me how much you have gleaned from the churches press releases on this subject. What did Elder Hamula do that resulted in his excommunication. Also, again, I'm sure I missed something, but obviously you'll be able to correct my error, what was the discussion points in the church hearing that was conducted. I'm sure that you will be able to explain how the church broke confidentiality because you have answers to these questions and are well informed as to the specifics of these confidential matters.

As far as Christ - Lets see. What do you suppose were his thoughts on these matters as he was instructing Joseph Smith in the order of the church. Perhaps this verse will be meaningful to you:
Doctrine and Covenants 134:10

10 We believe that all religious societies have a right to deal with their members for disorderly conduct, according to the rules and regulations of such societies; provided that such dealings be for fellowship and good standing; but we do not believe that any religious society has authority to try men on the right of property or life, to take from them this world’s goods, or to put them in jeopardy of either life or limb, or to inflict any physical punishment upon them. They can only excommunicate them from their society, and withdraw from them their fellowship.
If we tie 134:10 into Doctrine and Covenants 42:28 then I think we have even further corroboration of how Christ would like his church conducted:
Doctrine and Covenants 42:28

28 Thou knowest my laws concerning these things are given in my scriptures; he that sinneth and repenteth not shall be cast out.
Cast out is gospel speak for excommunicated. And you know what? If you look up excommunicated in the Topical Guide you can find a list as long as your arm on scriptural references to excommunication.

Here is a link if you are interested:
https://www.lds.org/scriptures/tg/excommunication

But, because I realize your online name is thinker, I realize you must have already considered this things and are already aware that excommunication is a viable and recommended option within the Church of Jesus Christ and that it has a strong scriptural support. So then I have to wonder, why would someone take a stance so opposite the obvious and put words in peoples mouths and deflect the conversation into other accusations of tangential claims and I am not sure why someone would do that when it is so easy to illustrate their thinking is not in line with gospel standards.

So you are going to have to explain it to me - you are making this too easy to rebutt and I think you know you are staring down a 1 ton bull knowing that you have no reasonable protection for your claims. So really what is your impetus for these things?

User avatar
kittycat51
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1791
Location: Looking for Zion

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by kittycat51 »

Ashleyyyy wrote: August 13th, 2017, 3:29 am
kittycat51 wrote: August 8th, 2017, 1:22 pm So sad :(

https://www.ksl.com/?sid=45338970&nid=1 ... s-j-hamula

SALT LAKE CITY — The First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles of the LDS Church on Tuesday excommunicated a member of the Quorum of the Seventy who had been serving as the executive director of the church’s Correlation Department.

"This morning, James J. Hamula was released as a General Authority Seventy of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, following church disciplinary action by the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve Apostles," said Eric Hawkins, a spokesman for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

Hamula had been a general authority and member of the Seventy for nine years, since his call in April 2008. He previously had served as the church’s Pacific Area president and was the assistant executive director of the Church History Department from 2014 to 2016.

Hamula is the first LDS general authority excommunicated since George P. Lee 28 years ago. Lee was excommunicated Sept. 1, 1989, for what church leaders said was "apostasy and other conduct unbecoming a member of the church" following an hourlong meeting with President Ezra Taft Benson and his counselors, and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles. Lee's excommunication had been the first in 46 years.

Such action with a church leader is extremely rare, then, but when necessary, a disciplinary council for a senior LDS leader is comprised of members of the First Presidency and Quorum of the Twelve. Church leaders have said they hold the faith's most senior leaders to the same standards of conduct as all other members, if not more so.

The church confirmed that this action was not taken because of disillusionment or apostasy.

"All church discipline is carried out in complete confidence," according to an article on the church's official Mormon Newsroom website. "Church leaders have a solemn responsibility to keep confidential all information they receive in confessions and interviews. To protect that confidence, the church will not discuss the proceedings of a disciplinary council."

"In rare cases," the article noted, "the decision of a disciplinary council may be shared publicly to prevent others from being harmed through misinformation."

Elder M. Russell Ballard, a senior member of the Quorum of the Twelve, has described the three purposes of church councils.

"Members sometimes ask why church disciplinary councils are held," he said in a 1990 article in the Ensign, the church's official magazine. "The purpose is threefold: to save the soul of the transgressor, to protect the innocent, and to safeguard the Church’s purity, integrity, and good name."

He added that church disciplinary action is not intended to be the end of the process but the beginning of an opportunity to return to full fellowship and to the full blessings of the church.

"The desired result is that the person will make whatever changes are necessary to return fully and completely to be able to receive the marvelous blessings of the church," he said.

This story will be updated.
This has been going on since the 1830/40s. About all the oringinal early church leaders were ex'd for some reason or another.
UMM YEAH! #-o It's still sad though especially for a high ranking Church leader. Goes to show you to watch your thoughts words and deeds because nobody is immune.

Spaced_Out
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1795

Re: GA Excommunicated

Post by Spaced_Out »

Thinker wrote: August 13th, 2017, 11:25 am
You & Shadow implied that it's for his own good that the church protect his reputation by breaking confidentiality and stating he was not disillusioned and somehow you reason that him being disillusioned is far worse than other possible causes for excommunication (like murder, adultery etc). If murder or adultury were more concerning than disillusionment, wouldn't the public breach of confidentiality be that he was not excommunicated for those reasons?

Me pointing your own faulty reasoning is not strawman at all. I'm just pointing out the insanity of that reasoning.

Also, it is completely appropriate to this discussion (not red herring) to ask why a church of Jesus Christ is going against what Jesus repeatedly taught. It wasn't just that he never excommunicated anyone, but he also was criticized for hanging out with "sinners." In other words, instead of pushing them away, breaking "sinners" off from him, he drew them closer.

If Jesus could sit in on one of these church courts he would tell each one, "Let he who is without sin cast the first (verbal) stone."
Excommunication is an act of kindness it removes the person from responsibility and burden of church membership and allows them time to repent. It is also the reputation of the Church. The purpose of the LDS church is not to simply make men better but prepare persons for the celestial kingdom. People totally misunderstand the purpose of the church. The church has high standards and if they are not kept out you go - there is no compromise

1/3 of the host of heaven were kicked out from the presence of the Father and the Son never to get a physical body but be subject to Satan throughout all eternity. We are told repeatedly the scriptures that few will make it to the celestial kingdom. Those in the telestrial kingdom will an numerous as the stars etc..... This hippy all loving God you make Jesus out to be is a very false notion. Kicking people out who cant live the standard is what God does.

109 But behold, and lo, we saw the glory and the inhabitants of the telestial world, that they were as innumerable as the stars in the firmament of heaven, or as the sand upon the seashore;
111 For they shall be judged according to their works, and every man shall receive according to his own works, his own dominion, in the mansions which are prepared;


3 Therefore whatsoever ye have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light; and that which ye have spoken in the ear in closets shall be proclaimed upon the housetops.

Post Reply