Question regarding church discipline
 

There was a post on cougaboard about qualifications for a bishop and one of the qualifications was to have not been disciplined. Does the church keep on your record whether you have been disciplined or not? And if they do does that mean that you cannot receive forgiveness from the church?

I know that certain things are noted in ones membership records despite forgiveness. A sexual offense with a minor, for example. I'm not sure about official disfellowship or excommunication, but I believe that answer is yes, it is noted in ones records. (others will know more).

My understanding is that once blessings are restored, official records do not indicate anything about past discipline. I have been told that Salt Lake may keep records of disciplinary action that nobody on the local level would see but I have no idea whether or not that's true. Such a policy would make some sense to me, especially concerning certain actions such as the instance Waters mentioned.

The official record of church discipline is always stored in Salt Lake. For example, a stake president can request a list of all members formerly excommunicated in his stake. I'm pretty sure that is wrong about a bishop qualification, though.

I think records are marked, and a bishop has to call in to get the information.

There is nothing in the local record that says "cheated on wife" or gives any explanation.

So if a person with an asterix is called for some position, it goes through a complicated approval (or disapproval) process. This is my peanut-gallery take on it.

This is correct, to avoid accidental invasion of privacy on the part of the person in question.

I'm not aware of any official (ie, "handbook") stipulation on former church discipline for bishops. But as I've said before, in my youth I had a bishop who years earlier (early on in his marriage, if you can believe it) was unfaithful. He was disciplined (not sure how severely), repented, and was re-instated.

One of the questions commonly asked of people called to visible positions is, "Is there anything in your past that, were it brought to light, could hurt the church?" I think that is the key more than anything. These are very subjective decisions.

I'm aware of another case like this.

Is there anything in my past that might show that I'm a sinner, that Jesus loves sinners and has redeemed me? Wouldn't want that to hurt the church.

Hmmm, did someone not have their coffee this morning?

I could use a Diet Coke.

I know a high school basketball coach who exposed his genitals to our basketball team on the court, and said something extremely vulgar and sexual, and now he's a stake president.

But I don't think he got disciplined, so I guess that doesn't count.

I guess my point is this: The problem with Church discipline is that only the people who confess (or get tattled on) end up getting disciplined.

So ultimately, you end up with dishonest scoundrels in charge sometimes, when honest, "confessing scoundrels" might actually be more "worthy."

I thought Majerus wasn't a member.

This guy was also bald, but not quite so fat. He was a great guitar player, too. He played the guitar for my 10 year reunion, which I missed, because of traumatic memories.

But the same concept applies to the missionary work force. Since masturbation is so strictly forbidden, you end up with a legion of dishonest missionaries who claim to have never masturbated in their lives.

My parents always told me to lie on the masturbation questions anyway.

Also, I was getting those questions 3 years before my first pubic hair sprouted.

Serious question. Do you feel like your parents telling you to lie on those questions and you lying on those questions (if you did) hurt your outlook on the church or your spirituality in general? This is something I'm facing as my kids get older and I am leaning towards an approach like your parents.

What? You're an MD/PhD and you skipped your reunion?

You missed all the fun...you get to see how many of the old BMOCs are now balding car salesmen.

I guess it depends on one's definition of "spirituality."

Personally, I think the guilt that teenagers feel when they aren't taught to be philosophical is much more spiritually damaging than my family's approach to these issues.

My dad always said: "It's normal for adolescent males to masturbate. But it can become a problem as well, if it's taken to an extreme. You shouldn't feel guilty about it, and if you ever have any kind of problem, I'd want you to feel comfortable enough to come talk to me about it first."

And I'm also one of the very last heterosexuals who has yet to reproduce.

Maybe I'll go to the 15 year or 20 year reunion, once I have some offspring.

I had a professor at BYU say masturbating was not a sin, but rather us allowing telestial bodies control our celestial spirits. I am not quite sure what that meant. But it makes me feel better. :D

My favorite question was posed by my stake president just before my mission:

"Have you masturbated WITHIN THE LAST THREE MONTHS?"

I said: "That's a new one."

Also, you have to teach them to rationalize their lies.

For instance, if the question is posed as such: "Do you have a PROBLEM with masturbation?" then all they need to say is: "No. No problem whatsoever."

The only time in my life I have been asked if I masterbated by a priesthood authority was by my bishop when I was a 16 year old priest being interviewed to be able to baptize my friend and his younger sister who were taking the discussions.

You should have said, "I've been peer reviewed several times and they all agree I'm doing it right."

I may have to alter Corollary 1 to simply say, "All Cougarguard discussions will eventually end up discussing masturbation."

Or add corollary 3: "Tex has never masturbated."

That's one of the dumbest things I've heard. I have such a problem with LDS culture refusal to acknowledge sin and being scared to death of it.

I was just thinking that. It is kind of odd. Y'all can blame this one on me.

It speaks to a greater need within our Mormon society to have an open and honest discussion about masturbation.

... or a greater need on Cougarguard to have a locker room atmosphere.

You misunderstood - the correct statement was "Majerus doesn't have a member."

Spirituality was a broad word for what I meant. I mean did it hurt...

your innocence
make you feel guilty like you weren't square with God for lying to priesthood leaders
hurt your testimony or concept of priesthood leaders
make you feel susceptible to other lies

I guess you gave your answer. That for you it was better. But I wonder if there is a way to teach kids to keep their mouth shut in the bishop's office about "minor" sins, and not damage them in any of the ways I list.

Tex: Why don't you make your own message board, and you could be the El Jefe?

You could call it "TexGuard."

Tex, I'm starting to agree with you on this one.

Where did he get the 6" defense from then?

And if Barbara and Tex agree on something, you know it's right.

It is a little odd the frequency of this topic lately, but it is a big deal in the church for young men, and there's not really a forum to discuss it.

My bro-in-law had a full on nervous breakdown because he masturbated in the MTC and the guilt that came crushing on him and fear that he'd never be able to overcome it. There's no doubt priesthood leaders and LDS teachings had contributed to this needless situation. And I don't think his case is that rare.

One evening I looked out my window, and the moon was looking sort of red, and suddenly my sunday school lessons came to mind...the "moon was turning to blood." At that point I was pretty much sure that I was toast. Years later, I realized that it was probably just dust in the atmosphere. :)

Me too. That's ok, I guess... confession is good for the soul.

I think Cougarguard needs it own "master of one's domain" contest.

Why is this a problem?