Why does the church teach us not to share past indiscretions?

[MikeWaters]

we are taught this very clearly on our missions.

Yet doesn't it say in D&C that sins should be confessed in front of the whole church?

People that are struggling can feel like they are the only ones really struggling, that no one else that is active have had these problems.

I mentioned this to a Bishopric member the other day, and he said he was in EQ meeting, and a member mentioned that he had been previously disfellowshipped for adultery. Took everyone by surprise, because this is not the thing that people admit or talk about or bring up. The Bishopric member said there must have been some spiritual purpose for him to say that at the time.

The Mormon mindset of not admitting sin is so very different than many other Christian faiths, where the mentality is "I am a sinner."

[All-American]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

we are taught this very clearly on our missions.

Yet doesn't it say in D&C that sins should be confessed in front of the whole church?

People that are struggling can feel like they are the only ones really struggling, that no one else that is active have had these problems.

I mentioned this to a Bishopric member the other day, and he said he was in EQ meeting, and a member mentioned that he had been previously disfellowshipped for adultery. Took everyone by surprise, because this is not the thing that people admit or talk about or bring up. The Bishopric member said there must have been some spiritual purpose for him to say that at the time.

The Mormon mindset of not admitting sin is so very different than many other Christian faiths, where the mentality is "I am a sinner."

Cicero comes to mind . . .

Originally Posted by M. Tullius Cicero

Therefore, it may be understood by many circumstances that our ancestors surpassed other nations not only in arms, but also in wisdom and prudence; and also most especially by this, that they devise a singular punishment for the impious. And in this matter consider how far they surpassed in prudence those who are said to have been the wisest of all nations. The state of the Athenians is said to have been the wisest while it enjoyed the supremacy. Moreover of that state they say that Solon was the wisest man, he who made the laws which they use even to this day. When he was asked why he had appointed no punishment for him who killed his father, he answered that he had not supposed that anyone would do so. He is said to have done wisely in establishing nothing about a crime which had up to that time never been committed, lest he should seem not so much to forbid it as to put people in mind of it. How much more wisely did our ancestors act! for as they understood that there was nothing so holy that audacity did not sometimes violate it, they devised a singular punishment for parricides in order that they whom nature herself had not been able to retain in their duty, might be kept from crime by the enormity of the punishment.

[FMCoug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

we are taught this very clearly on our missions.

Yet doesn't it say in D&C that sins should be confessed in front of the whole church?

People that are struggling can feel like they are the only ones really struggling, that no one else that is active have had these problems.

I mentioned this to a Bishopric member the other day, and he said he was in EQ meeting, and a member mentioned that he had been previously disfellowshipped for adultery. Took everyone by surprise, because this is not the thing that people admit or talk about or bring up. The Bishopric member said there must have been some spiritual purpose for him to say that at the time.

The Mormon mindset of not admitting sin is so very different than many other Christian faiths, where the mentality is "I am a sinner."

I agree with you on this one. I think the idea behind is that once you have repented and moved on from the sin, the Lord remembers it no more and neither should you (or at least not dwell on it, talk about it, etc.)

But I do agree that the above has been twisted into never talking about anything and putting on an air of perfection. Some of the best lessons I have been in have been where either the instructor and/or class members have shared experiences where they struggled with the principle being taught (sin or otherwise).

[MikeWaters]

I've known people who have said that because they repented of the sin, the sin actually never occurred.

In this case, you could never talk about it or admit to it, because it never happened.

[FMCoug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I've known people who have said that because they repented of the sin, the sin actually never occurred.

In this case, you could never talk about it or admit to it, because it never happened.

This brings to mind the practice among Evangelicals who will consider themselves a "born-again virgin" after they have been saved. An interesting concept.

How many LDS believe that a fornicator who has repented is just as virtuous as someone who is literally a virgin? If not, why not?

[Indy Coug]

I think the practice of confessing your sins before the whole church was part of the process to gain forgiveness for recent sins and not a repetitive chronicling of past misdeeds for which you had already repented and gained forgiveness.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Adam

I think Indy is correct. The church never allowed or encouraged people to stand up a regular intervals and recite the litany of their sins from puberty onward (imagine how entertaining that would be!).

It is true in the early church a sinner coming back would stand and confess their sin before the congregation and then be announced as back in good standing by the Joseph or Oliver or Sidney. They didn't do this again and again. Mostly this was because the sins were sins of apostasy and evil speaking of the Lord's anointed and it was important for those sinners to publicly state their being wrong and sorry for what they said/printed about Joseph and that they would submit to his authority going forward.

After moving to Utah anyone who rebelled against Brigham would leave Utah and very few would come back. Martin and Oliver's prostrations before Brigham in the temple square tabernacle being exceptions. But as apostasy towards the Prophet became less and less common and as the church became larger and larger (only a small percentage actually knew the individual apostate), public confession was gradually discontinued.

I agree that today the church has gone too far the other way and we all prance around like ballerinas on point avoiding any show of personal weakness and this is not healthy.

On my mission I attended other churches regularly and once in Paducah Ky a very distinguished looking guy in his 60 stood up and confessed that he had been arrested during the last week for shoplifting. He looked like he had money and this wasn't a poor congregation. He cried and asked people to forgive him and please not to hold it against his wife who was too horrified to even come to church with him today. When he finished the pastor hugged him as he sobbed and there were few dry eyes in the congregation. There was no feeling of judgment or condemnation--just love and heartache. It was frankly beautiful.

Does this mean that you are going to publicly make up with FMCoug?

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Does this mean that you are going to publicly make up with FMCoug?

Nice. LOL!

[JohnnyLingo]

Wow, I'd love to attend a singles-ward fast and testimony meeting where sin confession is encouraged.

They may have to charge admission.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

we are taught this very clearly on our missions.

Yet doesn't it say in D&C that sins should be confessed in front of the whole church?

People that are struggling can feel like they are the only ones really struggling, that no one else that is active have had these problems.

I mentioned this to a Bishopric member the other day, and he said he was in EQ meeting, and a member mentioned that he had been previously disfellowshipped for adultery. Took everyone by surprise, because this is not the thing that people admit or talk about or bring up. The Bishopric member said there must have been some spiritual purpose for him to say that at the time.

The Mormon mindset of not admitting sin is so very different than many other Christian faiths, where the mentality is "I am a sinner."

The primary reason missionaries are taught this (and by extension, I suppose, the membership) is that it can have unintended consequences. Talking about sin and repentance to someone who is spiritually immature may lead them to believe that because of repentance, they can sin whenever they wish. "Why not? I can always repent! After all, didn't you?"

That doesn't mean we need to make pretenses to perfection. All of us ought to acknowledge our fallen state. And there may be times when a story of repentance, especially when fresh, can spur multitudes to action. But it seems to me that when that water has flown under the bridge, it's best not to go chasing after it time and again.