| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 444.1 | an opinion | BALMER::MUDGETT | A lean mean fixin' machine | Wed Feb 02 1994 17:51 | 17 |
| Greetings,
In a word... no. In fact the difficult part of any type of disipline in
the church is that we need to embrace the sinner. We need to (if you honestly
believe in the Christianity stuff) help someone get out of a spiritual mess
and not turn it into a thing that keeps the effort from appearing like we
condone the bad thing. In our ward, as I mentioned in a note earlier, we had a
guy who was/is a child molestor. Well to make a long story short the guy is
in jail for some amount of years. I am repulsed by the guy (and I really never
like the guy anyway) I think we in our Ward should be visiting the guy in jail
and help him repent and figure out a way to correct evil that he has done to
others.
However in actuality we do shun people who've really blown it church-wise.
Everything seems to work against those relationships.
Fred Mudgett
|
| 444.2 | | NACAD::SHERMAN | Steve NETCAD::Sherman DTN 226-6992, LKG2-A/R05 pole AA2 | Fri Feb 04 1994 15:28 | 21 |
| The only situation I'm aware of that resembles "shunning" is when
someone REQUESTS (in writing) that there be no contact between them
and the Church. This usually involves excommunication. Even
in excommunication there is often some form of continued association
established so that the individual can get help and eventually have
membership restored. My experience has been that excommunication is
a last resort and is relatively seldom used.
The term "shun" implies to me a situation where members are encouraged
to abhor someone. I have always been taught in the church to love
neighbors, love enemies and to love the sinner, not the sin. I have
never been encouraged at any time to "shun" (i.e. abhor) anyone by
the church.
On the other hand, I have experienced being "shunned" by individual
members of the church, but that's their concern. I figure it's
their choice as to whether or not they want to follow Gospel
teachings. The Gospel is perfect but members are not. That's
why we're here ... ;^)
Steve
|
| 444.3 | " no shunning,let the light be your guide" | CSLALL::MWEBSTER | | Fri Feb 11 1994 16:24 | 34 |
| Hi !
No one has to associate with anyone whom they don't feel comfortable with,
in or out of the Church, but there is NO policy from the church to
shun people at all.
As Steven mentioned, the Gospel is a labor of love and to shun someone
would be to allow ourselves to be accusers and judges and executionners
which we have no basis of authority for, this attitude in my view would
be against the principles of the Gospel that we love so dearly. It
clearly would show a lack of christian attitude toward the specific
individual ... again we can of course reject the sins ...not the sinner
Yes, some people are "ex-communicated" from the church at times for
various offenses, but not without a hearing, some wish to be taken
off the rolls of the church and ask to not be contacted again (but
it's not shunning, it's at their request ...but if we see them on the
street we would continue to be friendly and polite as we would be
with anyone). The Ex-communication process is supposed to help the
individual by releasing him of covenants he made with the church and
helping him to repent and come back if he so wishes ...but the
most important thing is that we do not reject this person.
However, we are entitled to not liking anyone, like the brother who
refers to the child molester, those are legitimate feelings and
we would not want to place our family members in a situation of peril
as this is also our great responsibility. Let each one be guided by
the Spirit that helps him see the light for himself/herself.
This is of course .... my opinion only.
Mathilde
|
| 444.4 | It happens...Not offically | ANGLIN::AYLWORTH | It's okay...I don't know either!! | Mon Mar 28 1994 15:12 | 17 |
| I know the church has no "offical policy" regarding "shunning" but I
personally know that one can easily loose contact. I know of a couple
were the husband reqested excommunication and the wife became inactive.
The couple never wrote or never verbally requested church members not
to visit. In nearly ten years, the local ward has never sent any home
teachers to this couple. Virtually, all contact with the church has
stopped yet the wife is still a member.
It does not surpise me that the local ward does not visit the couple.
They were always cordial but not receptive to various messages. They
were never hostile like some inactive families. I just chocked it up
something political or I just am unable to understand the workings of
the lord or whoever is in charge. I was always under the impression
that worth of a soul was great. I suppose like a lot of things in
life, it is just talk.
regards
|
| 444.5 | Many reasons ... | BSS::RONEY | Charles Roney | Mon Mar 28 1994 16:08 | 41 |
| RE: <<< Note 444.4 by ANGLIN::AYLWORTH "It's okay...I don't know either!!" >>>
-< It happens...Not offically >-
> I know the church has no "offical policy" regarding "shunning" but I
> personally know that one can easily loose contact. I know of a couple
> were the husband reqested excommunication and the wife became inactive.
It may be that when the husband's records were removed, the wife was
not changed to "head of household." If this happened years ago, and/or
a computer system was not in use, I could see this. They just "fell
through the cracks."
> The couple never wrote or never verbally requested church members not
> to visit. In nearly ten years, the local ward has never sent any home
> teachers to this couple. Virtually, all contact with the church has
> stopped yet the wife is still a member.
Sounds like there is a "lack of communications" somewhere.
> It does not surpise me that the local ward does not visit the couple.
Why is that?
> They were always cordial but not receptive to various messages. They
> were never hostile like some inactive families. I just chocked it up
> something political or I just am unable to understand the workings of
> the lord or whoever is in charge. I was always under the impression
> that worth of a soul was great. I suppose like a lot of things in
> life, it is just talk.
I can bet you the Lord has not forgotten them. Just because the
members of the church are not carrying out their responsibilities
does not mean they won't be held accountable for them.
Have you tried to contact these people? I don't really think I would
consider this situation shunning; more of not carrying out priesthood
duties. It also could have been dropped with a change in leadership.
I am appalled be the lack of continuity with leadership changes.
Regards,
Charles
|