President Spencer W. Kimball, counseling priesthood leaders, said:
“We are concerned that too many times the interviewing leader in his personal sympathies for the transgressor, and in his love perhaps for the family of the transgressor, is inclined to waive the discipline which that transgressor demands.
“Too often a transgressor is forgiven and all penalties waived when that person should have been disfellowshipped or excommunicated. Too often a sinner is disfellowshipped when he or she should have been excommunicated. …
“Do you remember what was said by the prophet Alma? ‘Now,’ he said, ‘repentance could not come unto men except there were a punishment.’ [Alma 42:16.]
“Ponder on that for a moment. Have you realized that? There can be no forgiveness without real and total repentance, and there can be no repentance without punishment. This is as eternal as is the soul. …
“Please remember these things when somebody comes before you who has broken the laws of God.
“It is so easy to let our sympathies carry us out of proportion; and when a man has committed sin, he must suffer. It’s an absolute requirement—not by the bishop—but it’s a requirement by nature and by the very part of a man.” (In Conference Report, Apr. 1975, p. 116; or Ensign, May 1975, p. 78.)
Thoughts from readers?
The need, no the opportunity for repentance is too often ignored by some who consider themselves compassionate and condemn all who mention it as judgemental. The road to Nehorism is paved with good intentions.
Speaking as someone who was defrauded by a former boss, only to be told by his stake president that my former boss “was being as honest as he could be in difficult times,” Pres. Kimball’s words ring true.
There was a time, in Pres Kimball’s time that all endowed members who committed adultery required excommunication. That has changed in the last twenty years. Now we seek to save the sinner. While on stake high council, I’ve seen a former bishop Siegel low shipped for six months, because that is what the Spirit showed. I no longer use Miracle of Forgiveness much, because it makes forgiveness too hard to achieve.
Thankful for koderrn prophets to fine tune the teachings.
ram,
Are you alright, bro? Just waking up? Or are you texting your comments?
I’ve sat in on disciplinary councils as a member of a Bishopric. It wasnt comfortable for the transgressor or any other member of the council, but the spirit of love and compassion were abundant. Most members of the Church who fall into serious transgression are already feeling the pains of hell. I see no need to be punitive. That being said, I have seen 3 cases of excommunication for non endowed single adults where the council felt it was the only means to snap people out of a non-repentant apathy. Alma 36 is a good source for the punitive effects of sin and Christ’s remedial mercy.
Yeah, mercy cannot rob justice. On the other hand we need continuous revelation to guide us through an ever changing world. Some punishments don’t work like they used to.
I think what Pres. Kimball is really driving at is a concern that some leaders in the Church are more lenient than what the situation calls for, regardless of the what that is. Frankly, I think the Church as a whole has gotten a bit lax about these things of late. I have seen recent examples of situations in which councils were lenient in order to “help” those people stay in the church, only to have them leave anyway.
Just to be clear: I posted this because I found it interesting. I don’t have strong opinions about this subject, and here is why: I believe in revelation in the councils where discipline takes place. I served on a stake high council, and I participated in Church discipline. I felt that revelation was taking place and directing my thoughts and feelings in unexpected ways. Most of my thoughts were on charity and mercy. But it was also clear to me that the people who received Church discipline benefitted from the discipline, especially because it was administered in such an atmosphere of love and forgiveness. President Kimball could have been thinking about cases that took place in his day that are not relevant to today. I don’t know.
Geoff, I think Pres. Kimball is saying the same thing. He is admonishing against letting considerations of loyalty and friendship trump the inspiration of the spirit. I have been in councils where I think that absolutely happened.
Ram, there isn’t a disconnect between trying to save the sinner and excommunication (where it is warranted). To state otherwise is to deny the continued relevance of every place in the scriptures where excommunication is discussed.
Disciplinary council stuff is difficult for all involved. I’m not sure what was coming across President Kimball’s desk in 1975, but obviously he was concerned that priesthood leaders were erring on the side of mercy as opposed to justice. I have sat in on councils at both the ward and stake levels, and each time I felt everyone involved in the process had good intentions and were trying to follow the Spirit. In the few instances where my personal feelings differed from that of the Bishop/SP, I still felt the calming influence of the Spirit that if I sustained the decision and did my part to help the member repent, then all would be well.
My thought is this was probably good counsel to the targeted audience in 1975 but the world and the church have changed since then. I’ve seen a definite shift in the disciplinary councils I’ve participated in from more of a punitive focus to more of an emphasis on mercy. I think that is a good thing.
Miracle of Forgiveness has all but been abandoned except for some very old school types that haven’t followed the changes. It has been replaced with The Infinite Atonement.
I think Mormon theology has seen a subtle shift in understanding the Atonement that started with Elder Bednar focusing on the enabling power of the Atonement. More recently I have seen repentance taught as “a principle of happiness” rather than something negative.
I’m very much opposed to anyone assuming that “they” didn’t understand or teach repentance and the atonement properly and now we have a better understanding.
I always just assume that when I learn something new… you know it’s ME that’s learning something new without having to project my ignorance on to someone else to make my former lack of understanding better.
It’s probably better to assume, they knew exactly what they were talking about and teaching and you completely misjudged or missed the scope of their teaching and focused on one part will ignoring the other.
The Lord will honor those who honor his servants and assume the best of them.
To the matter at hand, I agree with the quotes in the main post, and I agree that love and forgiveness is necessary. It’s good to be reminded from time to time of both points. Thanks.
It would be a mistake to think that our errors can only be on the side of being too harsh or judgmental. President Kimball led the Church in a day of rapidly decaying societal norms; I am inclined to believe he was addressing a real problem of erring on the side of being too lenient as bishops and stake presidents, perhaps without even being conscious of it, picked up some of the atmosphere in society at that time.
I’m very much opposed to anyone assuming that “they” didn’t understand or teach repentance and the atonement properly and now we have a better understanding.
Because they ran out of lines and precepts somewhere during the Lorenzo Snow administration.
I think it is important to remember the *Church* forgives only for itself, not for God and Christ. Hopefully through revelation to the presiding authority(ies) the judgment meted out by any given Church Council matches what God and Christ would have done. But in the end one’s cleanliness before the Bar of Judgment rests solely on whether the individual has sought and received forgiveness from God through Christ.
I think the Church leaders tend to try to figure what will most likely result in the highest probability the repentant member’s behavior *and* spirit are brought back into harmony with God. Typically after figuring that out they then ask God through prayer if they got it right – and then (hopefully) they act in a manner that is consistent with whatever the answer was.
Standards for membership (both in joining and in discipline) change often and seem to go in cycles – sometimes getting more stern sometimes less so, as long as the Church leaders are checking in with God and Christ during the cycles I’m not going to worry about it.
I wasn’t trying to say that “they” didn’t understand or properly teach the atonement or repentance properly in the 1970’s. I think it was appropriate at the time. But absolutely we can grow by lines and precepts both individually and collectively all the time. That’s kind of the point of a living prophet and ongoing and continuing revelation.
Try searching for the phrase “enabling power of the atonement”. I find this first used by Elder Bednar about 2001. I hear it all the time now. I submit this is the church as an institution gradually recognizing and placing greater emphasis on this teaching. This may be more needful in our day than it was in the past.
Last Lemming, so the Lord revealed to you what someone else in the past didn’t know?
Unless he did, best not to push others in the past down while building yourself up. That just doesn’t seem fair to someone who can’t defend themselves.
Having served on a Stake High Council in a new foreign stake, I saw a number of cases where the member being examined was told to “go and sin no more!” Jesus said the same words to an early sinner.
When reading that quote from Pres Kimball, I couldn’t help but thinking about Dietrich Bonhoeffer and his comments about cheap grace in his book, “The Cost of Discipleship”.
Two quotes: ““Cheap grace is the grace we bestow on ourselves. Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance, baptism without church discipline, Communion without confession…Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ, living and incarnate.”
“costly grace confronts us as a gracious call to follow Jesus, it comes as a word of forgiveness to the broken spirit and the contrite heart. It is costly because it compels a man to submit to the yoke of Christ and follow him; it is grace because Jesus says: ‘My yoke is easy and my burden is light.'”
Maybe Pres Kimball is encouraging leaders to avoid “cheap grace”.
Years ago, when serving as Bishop in a new and growing ward, I had a recently divorced younger woman move into the ward, living with her parents. As she struggled with herself and her situation, I could see spiritual growth. After a while, she started to struggle again, and she began rehashing what we had been over. I prayed for guidance in how to help her. A couple of one-on-one session later, it came to me that what this sister needed was a disciplinary council. Not that what she had done would ordinarily require one, but she was “beating herself up” over the past. So, we held a council, and she came out of it with an appropriate (and fairly light) result. She was then able to get on with her life. My councilors and I learned a great lesson. There are no set requirements for a situation, and that sometimes, what might seem drastic for one are a blessing for another.
I have participated in many disciplinary councils over the years, at Ward and Stake level and in 2 languages (cultural issues also vary). Very rarely were they not loving, kind, and compassionate, even when they ended in excommunication.
As a person that has sat on the receiving end of Disciplinary Council, I am in agreement with the sentiments that President Kimball expressed there and in the Miracle of Forgiveness. It actually was that Book that helped me get through the process. Excommunication is not a punishment, but it is part of the repentance process for some things. As President Kimball pointed out in the “Miracle” it is better never to have sinned, but the Miracle of Forgiveness gives everyone hope for redemption. I learned a lot during my time out of the Church. Things that I had never learned or understood before. I also went through a period of hell, emotionally and spiritually that I never, ever, want to experience again. I do not believe that I could have accomplished a true repentance with just a “slap on the wrist.”
There must be guidance of those who stand as authorized judges of LDS members. There is a bishop I know that talked about how he gave entirely different judgement to two people who had done similar things.
Here’s a link to the Ensign:
https://www.lds.org/ensign/1975/05/to-bear-the-priesthood-worthily?lang=eng
And here is the video along with text:
https://www.lds.org/general-conference/1975/04/to-bear-the-priesthood-worthily?lang=eng
This is sort of meta-analysis, but…
Part of his preface included this: ‘I should like to address a few words to our executive officers, particularly the bishops and stake presidents, who are the “common judges” in Israel.’
But… he spoke those words to the entire priesthood body at priesthood session of general confernce, and knowing they would be printed in the Ensign where they could be read by all.
If that talk had been _just_ for bishops and stake presidents, it would have been restricted to leadership training through priesthood leadership channels (assistants to the 12 and regional representatives) , and/or among the myriad of written communications sent weekly to bishops and SPs.
In other words, he apparently wanted everyone to know what he was saying to bishops and stake presidents. So you might say it was a word of warning, without directly accusing his listeners, or members in general.
In this manner, Pres Kimball was being very diplomatic in his words of warning. I can remember a priesthood session talk or two by Pres Hinckley that was more blunt.