General Handbook: Apostasy

For discussing the Church, Gospel of Jesus Christ, Mormonism, etc.
User avatar
Reluctant Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 15309
Location: “if thine eye offend thee, pluck him out.”
Contact:

General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by Reluctant Watchman »

In light of the recent thread that highlighted the glorification of the General Handbook (and while finessing a letter I'm writing to the church), I searched for the term Apostasy in the general handbook. Some of you are probably quite familiar with this. If you are a student of church history, I hope you'll find some concerning language here. The one thing I find quite absent is the denying of one's faith in Jesus Christ. Apostasy, as constituted by the church, is defined as the opposition to an organization, and not a lack of faith in the teachings of the Savior. Unless you believe the church teaches ALL of Christ's teachings in purity and perfection.

And by the very definition of the word, they are correct: apostasy
1 : an act of refusing to continue to follow, obey, or recognize a religious faith
2 : abandonment of a previous loyalty

———
32.6.3.2
Apostasy

Issues of apostasy often have an impact beyond the boundaries of a ward or stake. They need to be addressed promptly to protect others.

The bishop counsels with the stake president if he feels that a member’s action may constitute apostasy. The bishop or stake president may place informal membership restrictions on the member (see 32.8.3). The stake president promptly counsels with the Area Presidency. However, only the stake president decides whether a membership council or other action is necessary.

As used here, apostasy refers to a member engaging in any of the following:
  • Repeatedly acting in clear and deliberate public opposition to the Church, its doctrine, its policies, or its leaders
  • Persisting in teaching as Church doctrine what is not Church doctrine after being corrected by the bishop or stake president
  • Showing a pattern of intentionally working to weaken the faith and activity of Church members
  • Continuing to follow the teachings of apostate sects after being corrected by the bishop or stake president
  • Formally joining another church and promoting its teachings (Total inactivity in the Church or attending another church does not by itself constitute apostasy. However, if a member formally joins another church and advocates its teachings, withdrawing his or her membership may be necessary.)
The Savior taught the Nephites that they should continue to minister to a person who has sinned. “But if he repent not he shall not be numbered among my people, that he may not destroy my people” (3 Nephi 18:31).
———

Indeed, there are many things I am striving to repent of in order to follow the teachings of the Savior.

User avatar
Robin Hood
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13110
Location: England

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by Robin Hood »

Reluctant Watchman wrote: February 5th, 2023, 7:36 am In light of the recent thread that highlighted the glorification of the General Handbook (and while finessing a letter I'm writing to the church), I searched for the term Apostasy in the general handbook. Some of you are probably quite familiar with this. If you are a student of church history, I hope you'll find some concerning language here. The one thing I find quite absent is the denying of one's faith in Jesus Christ. Apostasy, as constituted by the church, is defined as the opposition to an organization, and not a lack of faith in the teachings of the Savior. Unless you believe the church teaches ALL of Christ's teachings in purity and perfection.

And by the very definition of the word, they are correct: apostasy
1 : an act of refusing to continue to follow, obey, or recognize a religious faith
2 : abandonment of a previous loyalty

———
32.6.3.2
Apostasy

Issues of apostasy often have an impact beyond the boundaries of a ward or stake. They need to be addressed promptly to protect others.

The bishop counsels with the stake president if he feels that a member’s action may constitute apostasy. The bishop or stake president may place informal membership restrictions on the member (see 32.8.3). The stake president promptly counsels with the Area Presidency. However, only the stake president decides whether a membership council or other action is necessary.

As used here, apostasy refers to a member engaging in any of the following:
  • Repeatedly acting in clear and deliberate public opposition to the Church, its doctrine, its policies, or its leaders
  • Persisting in teaching as Church doctrine what is not Church doctrine after being corrected by the bishop or stake president
  • Showing a pattern of intentionally working to weaken the faith and activity of Church members
  • Continuing to follow the teachings of apostate sects after being corrected by the bishop or stake president
  • Formally joining another church and promoting its teachings (Total inactivity in the Church or attending another church does not by itself constitute apostasy. However, if a member formally joins another church and advocates its teachings, withdrawing his or her membership may be necessary.)
The Savior taught the Nephites that they should continue to minister to a person who has sinned. “But if he repent not he shall not be numbered among my people, that he may not destroy my people” (3 Nephi 18:31).
———

Indeed, there are many things I am striving to repent of in order to follow the teachings of the Savior.
Reviewing what you have quoted here from the General Handbook, I think the position of the church appears reasonable.

User avatar
Reluctant Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 15309
Location: “if thine eye offend thee, pluck him out.”
Contact:

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by Reluctant Watchman »

Robin Hood wrote: February 5th, 2023, 8:35 am Reviewing what you have quoted here from the General Handbook, I think the position of the church appears reasonable.
From the standpoint of the self-preservation of a corporation, I completely agree.

User avatar
Luke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10785
Location: England

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by Luke »

I also agree with Robin Hood that it’s fair enough, whether or not I think it’s correct or not. What’s definitely not fair though, is excommunicating and/or punishing members for their private opinions and beliefs.

User avatar
Reluctant Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 15309
Location: “if thine eye offend thee, pluck him out.”
Contact:

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by Reluctant Watchman »

Luke wrote: February 5th, 2023, 10:25 am I also agree with Robin Hood that it’s fair enough, whether or not I think it’s correct or not. What’s definitely not fair though, is excommunicating and/or punishing members for their private opinions and beliefs.
If you want to be part of their club, you play by their rules. Seems fair to me.

Atrasado
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1768

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by Atrasado »

The problem, of course, arises when the leaders are apostate themselves. Then they persecute the righteous and cast them out of their congregations.

They think it's their farm or their vineyard when really they are only the watchmen. However, watchmen that are blind or seers who don't see are like fig trees with no fruit. I hope the Lord will have mercy on them for I am striving to love my enemies and I know just how much mercy I have need of.

User avatar
TheDuke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5862
Location: Eastern Sodom Suburbs

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by TheDuke »

So, I have a question about what the church teaches happens when some one is ex'ed. I would like to discuss several scenarios and see what folks think the church believes (I'm not interested in what non-LDS believe) happens.

1. we can see for sure that their records are removed. So, what does that step mean? Alone, it just seems to mean paperwork? but, I don't think that is what the church means?
2. since the person must be rebaptized and get HG again, it seems to mean to the church that the baptismal covenant and gift of HG have been annulled? When rebaptized a new membership record is created but with the original baptism dates? Is this right, I mean is rebaptism considered required (doctrine for meeting Jesus' requirement) or policy?
3. Later a person can have "restoration of blessings". Seems like a single ordinance (blessing?) to restore everything else? For single, unendowed women this doesn't seem like anything. For unendowed PH holding men, it means recovering the PH and original line of authority but no new PH is given. If endowed the then endowments come back. If sealed in marriage then the marriage come back? Is this how the church sees this step?
4. I can see the rebaptism, and even restoring PH and endowment, but the marriage is a problem to me if the reason the person was ex'ed was moral and caused a divorce. What exactly does it mean to restore a marriage covenant if the person broke the marriage? Seems the covenant was between two people and the Lord and unlike all other covenants which are between the person and the Lord, a third party must be involved for this to be meaningful?

Just my understanding of how things are handled on the recovery end and some questions?

User avatar
Obrien
Up, up and away.
Posts: 4951

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by Obrien »

Duke - What do you by "recovery end"? I'm presuming you mean when / if a person chooses to be yoked with the iron yoke of LDSCo priestcraft again, but wanted a clarification...

Forever
captain of 50
Posts: 78

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by Forever »

I've chosen to follow Jesus Christ into membership of His Terrestrial church...the Church of The Firstborn. Can we arrive there without membership in a corporation? Yes.

User avatar
Reluctant Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 15309
Location: “if thine eye offend thee, pluck him out.”
Contact:

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by Reluctant Watchman »

TheDuke wrote: February 5th, 2023, 6:59 pm So, I have a question about what the church teaches happens when some one is ex'ed. I would like to discuss several scenarios and see what folks think the church believes (I'm not interested in what non-LDS believe) happens.

1. we can see for sure that their records are removed. So, what does that step mean? Alone, it just seems to mean paperwork? but, I don't think that is what the church means?
2. since the person must be rebaptized and get HG again, it seems to mean to the church that the baptismal covenant and gift of HG have been annulled? When rebaptized a new membership record is created but with the original baptism dates? Is this right, I mean is rebaptism considered required (doctrine for meeting Jesus' requirement) or policy?
3. Later a person can have "restoration of blessings". Seems like a single ordinance (blessing?) to restore everything else? For single, unendowed women this doesn't seem like anything. For unendowed PH holding men, it means recovering the PH and original line of authority but no new PH is given. If endowed the then endowments come back. If sealed in marriage then the marriage come back? Is this how the church sees this step?
4. I can see the rebaptism, and even restoring PH and endowment, but the marriage is a problem to me if the reason the person was ex'ed was moral and caused a divorce. What exactly does it mean to restore a marriage covenant if the person broke the marriage? Seems the covenant was between two people and the Lord and unlike all other covenants which are between the person and the Lord, a third party must be involved for this to be meaningful?

Just my understanding of how things are handled on the recovery end and some questions?
I’m sorry that you aren’t interested in my opinion on these matters.

User avatar
TheDuke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5862
Location: Eastern Sodom Suburbs

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by TheDuke »

Obrien wrote: February 5th, 2023, 7:27 pm Duke - What do you by "recovery end"? I'm presuming you mean when / if a person chooses to be yoked with the iron yoke of LDSCo priestcraft again, but wanted a clarification...
thank you for wasting my time and providing a perfect example of what I asked specifically not to receive. You remind me of a bible story. About a man asking for a fish and getting a rock.... thanks but I already have found enough rocks here to keep me busy. I'll wait for perhaps a fish.

User avatar
Rumpelstiltskin
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1085
Location: A galaxy far, far away

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by Rumpelstiltskin »

What I find interesting is that Isaiah refers to apostasy as idolatry. He primarily decries the worshipping of the things of man's hands and people.

User avatar
BenMcCrea
captain of 100
Posts: 224

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by BenMcCrea »

Luke wrote: February 5th, 2023, 10:25 am I also agree with Robin Hood that it’s fair enough, whether or not I think it’s correct or not. What’s definitely not fair though, is excommunicating and/or punishing members for their private opinions and beliefs.
How can they excommunicate anyone for their private beliefs? If your beliefs are private it means that either nobody else knows about them or you share them with a select group of similar minded people - in private.

They excommunicate people when they publicly express those beliefs and try to teach and influence others in the Church. That isn’t private beliefs. That’s public beliefs.

User avatar
Luke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10785
Location: England

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by Luke »

BenMcCrea wrote: February 5th, 2023, 10:53 pm
Luke wrote: February 5th, 2023, 10:25 am I also agree with Robin Hood that it’s fair enough, whether or not I think it’s correct or not. What’s definitely not fair though, is excommunicating and/or punishing members for their private opinions and beliefs.
How can they excommunicate anyone for their private beliefs? If your beliefs are private it means that either nobody else knows about them or you share them with a select group of similar minded people - in private.

They excommunicate people when they publicly express those beliefs and try to teach and influence others in the Church. That isn’t private beliefs. That’s public beliefs.
You know what I’m talking about. Sharing a few things with a few people is very different to declaring something over the pulpit.

User avatar
TheDuke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5862
Location: Eastern Sodom Suburbs

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by TheDuke »

Reluctant Watchman wrote: February 5th, 2023, 8:57 pm I'm not interested in what non-LDS believe happens.

I’m sorry that you aren’t interested in my opinion on these matters.
[/quote]

Ok, I see you're point. I misspoke in that sentence. Perhaps I should have been more clear. I guess I don't care if someone is LDS or not. I was just trying to avoid comments (like O'Brien's) that put down LDS policies or doctrine. I just want to understand what it is, not judge it. If that makes sense. And, not really interested in discussing Catholic ex'ing, etc...

User avatar
Reluctant Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 15309
Location: “if thine eye offend thee, pluck him out.”
Contact:

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by Reluctant Watchman »

TheDuke wrote: February 6th, 2023, 10:21 am
Ok, I see you're point. I misspoke in that sentence. Perhaps I should have been more clear. I guess I don't care if someone is LDS or not. I was just trying to avoid comments (like O'Brien's) that put down LDS policies or doctrine. I just want to understand what it is, not judge it. If that makes sense. And, not really interested in discussing Catholic ex'ing, etc...
The difficulty here is that you can NEVER vocally judge a policy or doctrine from the church without risking some form of disciplinary action or retribution.

jdt
captain of 100
Posts: 354

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by jdt »

As an interesting idea to also consider, here is what is said about the Great Apostasy. From https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... y?lang=eng
Following the death of Jesus Christ, wicked people persecuted and killed many Church members. Other Church members drifted from the principles taught by Jesus Christ and His Apostles. The Apostles were killed, and priesthood authority—including the keys to direct and receive revelation for the Church—was taken from the earth. Because the Church was no longer led by priesthood authority, error crept into Church teachings. Good people and much truth remained, but the gospel as established by Jesus Christ was lost. This period is called the Great Apostasy.
The definition for Apostasy given in the OP, covers Church members drifting from the principles taught by Apostles.
But the real heart of apostasy, as used in the Great Apostasy, is more about the loss of priesthood or revelation at an organizational level, rather than something at an individual level.

User avatar
Reluctant Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 15309
Location: “if thine eye offend thee, pluck him out.”
Contact:

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by Reluctant Watchman »

jdt wrote: February 6th, 2023, 10:43 am As an interesting idea to also consider, here is what is said about the Great Apostasy. From https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/stu ... y?lang=eng
Following the death of Jesus Christ, wicked people persecuted and killed many Church members. Other Church members drifted from the principles taught by Jesus Christ and His Apostles. The Apostles were killed, and priesthood authority—including the keys to direct and receive revelation for the Church—was taken from the earth. Because the Church was no longer led by priesthood authority, error crept into Church teachings. Good people and much truth remained, but the gospel as established by Jesus Christ was lost. This period is called the Great Apostasy.
The definition for Apostasy given in the OP, covers Church members drifting from the principles taught by Apostles.
But the real heart of apostasy, as used in the Great Apostasy, is more about the loss of priesthood or revelation at an organizational level, rather than something at an individual level.
I've come to believe that the Great Apostasy referenced in the NT is happening now. And it was focused on a more collective sense, rather than individually, as you noted. Of course, this can happen to any individual at any time as well.

User avatar
TheDuke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5862
Location: Eastern Sodom Suburbs

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by TheDuke »

Reluctant Watchman wrote: February 6th, 2023, 10:35 am
TheDuke wrote: February 6th, 2023, 10:21 am
Ok, I see you're point. I misspoke in that sentence. Perhaps I should have been more clear. I guess I don't care if someone is LDS or not. I was just trying to avoid comments (like O'Brien's) that put down LDS policies or doctrine. I just want to understand what it is, not judge it. If that makes sense. And, not really interested in discussing Catholic ex'ing, etc...
The difficulty here is that you can NEVER vocally judge a policy or doctrine from the church without risking some form of disciplinary action or retribution.
Been doing it 37 years w/o repercussions.

User avatar
Mindfields
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1867
Location: Utah

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by Mindfields »

BenMcCrea wrote: February 5th, 2023, 10:53 pm
Luke wrote: February 5th, 2023, 10:25 am I also agree with Robin Hood that it’s fair enough, whether or not I think it’s correct or not. What’s definitely not fair though, is excommunicating and/or punishing members for their private opinions and beliefs.
How can they excommunicate anyone for their private beliefs? If your beliefs are private it means that either nobody else knows about them or you share them with a select group of similar minded people - in private.

They excommunicate people when they publicly express those beliefs and try to teach and influence others in the Church. That isn’t private beliefs. That’s public beliefs.
I imagine that King Noah excommunicated that apostate Abinadi.

User avatar
Gadianton Slayer
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6551
Location: A Sound Mind

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by Gadianton Slayer »

TheDuke wrote: February 6th, 2023, 11:55 am Been doing it 37 years w/o repercussions.
Didn't take me long.

User avatar
Gadianton Slayer
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 6551
Location: A Sound Mind

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by Gadianton Slayer »

BenMcCrea wrote: February 5th, 2023, 10:53 pm They excommunicate people when they publicly express those beliefs and try to teach and influence others in the Church.
Oh no! God forbid we share our opinions and what we think is right! Shame on us for opening the door to the echo chamber.

User avatar
Reluctant Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 15309
Location: “if thine eye offend thee, pluck him out.”
Contact:

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by Reluctant Watchman »

TheDuke wrote: February 6th, 2023, 11:55 am
Reluctant Watchman wrote: February 6th, 2023, 10:35 am
TheDuke wrote: February 6th, 2023, 10:21 am
Ok, I see you're point. I misspoke in that sentence. Perhaps I should have been more clear. I guess I don't care if someone is LDS or not. I was just trying to avoid comments (like O'Brien's) that put down LDS policies or doctrine. I just want to understand what it is, not judge it. If that makes sense. And, not really interested in discussing Catholic ex'ing, etc...
The difficulty here is that you can NEVER vocally judge a policy or doctrine from the church without risking some form of disciplinary action or retribution.
Been doing it 37 years w/o repercussions.
I honestly have to wonder what your form of opposition or vocal pronouncements must be.

Maybe we do a little test. Go and tell your bishop and stake president that President Nelson is teaching false doctrine to the church. That he is teaching precepts that directly contradict the words of Christ. Oh, and add that his counsel is killing the members and the whacky-jab is neither safe nor effective.

Let me know how that goes for you.

User avatar
TheDuke
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 5862
Location: Eastern Sodom Suburbs

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by TheDuke »

Gadianton Slayer wrote: February 6th, 2023, 12:02 pm
TheDuke wrote: February 6th, 2023, 11:55 am Been doing it 37 years w/o repercussions.
Didn't take me long.
I should have said 37 years and counting then. as your response doesn't make sense to me given the initial put by Reluctant: but perhaps it is just too short of a sentence? Did you mean it didn't take you that long to get a council (if so, then I understand your statement,) but the outcome of which the outcome was your choice not the leadership?

User avatar
Reluctant Watchman
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 15309
Location: “if thine eye offend thee, pluck him out.”
Contact:

Re: General Handbook: Apostasy

Post by Reluctant Watchman »

I think it took about 1 hr w/ his YSA stake president... :)

Post Reply