In comparing scriptural discipline to that found in the Church Handbook of Instructions vol. 1 (CHI-1), I will use the church's current procedure as the baseline, and note the red flags and scriptural conflicts along the way. I will also note the location within CHI-1 where you may find any specific instructions I am referencing (e.g. 6.10.1).
INITIATING DISCIPLINE
The LDS disciplinary process is initiated when leadership receives information about serious transgression (6.3), by:
- While the scriptures refer to confession as evidence that repentance has already taken place (D&C 58:43), CHI-1 sees it as only a beginning of the church’s “repentance process.” This repentance process is an unscriptural checklist and procedural mandate by which the leadership inserts themselves (also unscripturally) into the process of the penitent obtaining God’s forgiveness.
- The scriptures require it come from church members (Moroni 6:7).
- This creates difficulty if the leader who receives this is also to act as judge, as they cannot scripturally act as accuser and judge simultaneously. Therefore this prompting could only lead to counseling and possible confession, or the leader would need to act as accuser while another serves as judge in a formal disciplinary setting.
- Not mentioned, but practiced, is a member of leadership discovering for themselves grounds for possible accusation, and then proceeding to initiate the disciplinary process in the role of judge, rather than accuser or witness. This conflicts with D&C 102:20’s requirement of impartial examination of the case. Assurances of impartiality do not qualify as impartiality.
Witnesses and victims can deliver their complaints to directly to church authorities in private confidence, with no requirement to first approach the offender.
"And if thy brother or sister offend thee, thou shalt take him or her between him or her and thee alone; and if he or she confess thou shalt be reconciled." -- D&C 42:88- If the offense is neither public nor broad, then the offender should be approached privately, not the church authorities.
"If any shall offend in secret, he or she shall be rebuked in secret, that he or she may have opportunity to confess in secret to him or her whom he or she has offended, and to God, that the church [Brethren] may not speak reproachfully of him or her." -- D&C 42:92- If the offense is broad or open, it should be handled accordingly.
"And if thy brother or sister offend many, he or she shall be chastened before many. And if any one offend openly, he or she shall be rebuked openly, that he or she may be ashamed…" -- D&C 42:90-91
- For a detailed look at the importance of this instruction, look at the Canonizing 14 Fundamentals post.
"And it shall be done in a meeting, and that not before the world. And if any one offend openly, he or she shall be rebuked openly, that he or she may be ashamed. And if he or she confess not, he or she shall be delivered up unto the law of God." -- D&C 42:91
"And if he or she confess not thou shalt deliver him or her up unto the church, not to the members, but to the elders. " -- D&C 42:89- Prior to the 1835 D&C, early transcripts of this revelation held an additional requirement: If reconciliation wasn’t made with the first approach, get someone else to join you on a second attempt at reconciliation. Then go to the church if reconciliation is still not made.
If church membership or standing is in jeopardy, then prior to the actual council taking place, there is to be a lengthy period of discussion and counseling between the accused and the leadership.
“Actions to address a person’s membership and standing in their congregation are convened after lengthy periods of counseling and encouragement to reconsider behavior.” - Official Church Press Release, June 11, 2014.
- This above quote is not true, or not followed in many cases, for example the fast and loose initiation of “informal probation,” a non-scriptural punitive measure that is generally preceded by no counseling or discussion whatsoever. There are also actual recent cases where a member went from being initially confronted with an accusation by leadership to discipline—even excommunication—in as little as three days.
The need for a disciplinary council is based on the seriousness of the sin, as interpreted by leadership (6.4).
- Sincere repentance is not necessarily accounted for, but if one simply lets enough time pass before confession, they can avoid discipline (6.7).
- This obviously creates a notion that if you hide your sins for long enough, you can pass a statute of limitations and no longer be accused. It has nothing to do with the sincerity or actuality of repentance.
- Some of the listed “transgressions” meriting a disciplinary council—while perhaps unsavory—are debatable as “sins” (e.g. transsexual operation), having no scriptural commandment against them, therefore requiring a chain of additional philosophies of men to connect them to actual scriptural sins. Others are outright dubious or dangerously vague (For example, the CHI-1 definitions for "Apostasy").
- Worth noting, tithing is considered a “standard,” (6.7.1) as opposed to its scriptural status as a law or commandment, sidestepping the need for formal discipline when there is non-compliance.
"Verily I say unto you, it shall come to pass that all those who gather unto the land of Zion shall be tithed of their surplus properties, and shall observe this law, or they shall not be found worthy to abide among you." -- D&C 119:5
"It is contrary to the will and commandment of God that those who receive not their inheritance by consecration, agreeable to his law, which he has given, that he may tithe his people, to prepare them against the day of vengeance and burning, should have their names enrolled with the people of God." -- D&C 85:3
- Perhaps holding onto the offenders as members increases the potential for tithing revenues down the line, whereas excommunication risks losing that source of tithing revenue permanently.
Once incriminating evidence or testimony is brought to a church authority, he interviews the accused to grant them an opportunity to confess (6.4).
- Should they confess, this can provide grounds for convening a disciplinary council, and evidence against the offender within that council (6.3).
If there is no confession, the church authority “gathers further evidence.” He is even allowed to “conduct the investigation himself” (6.4).
- Leaders aren’t allowed to use spy equipment or stalk the accused (6.4).
- However, they can evidently data mine, gossip, use false internet personas and engage in entrapment, delegate others to do the same, or rely on those who already are, for example the Strengthening the Church Members Committee and its delegates.
A disciplinary authority gets the privilege of “determin[ing] the relevant facts” of a case before even convening the council where he then hears the case based on the facts he deemed relevant (6.10.2).
Once sufficient grounds are uncovered for convening a disciplinary council, the accused is notified of said impending council (6.10.2).
