By now nearly everyone reading this must have heard of the excommunication of Elder James J. Hamula, a (now former) member of the Seventy (Salt Lake Tribune coverage; Deseret News coverage). If you’ve been in contact with any other Mormons on social media, you also must have heard and read some conversations that I hope distressed you.
One of my Facebook friends posted a newspaper link early in the day, and everyone who has commented on his thread has expressed love and support for Elder Hamula and his family, recognizing the pain that they must be going through on several levels. That has been a lovely thread to read.
It has also been one of a kind, in my personal experience.
Everything else has been negative. On threads catering to a mixed Mormon and not- audience, the comments have been speculative at best and libelous at worst, toward both Elder Hamula and the Church in general. Even among Mormons, the discussions have been harsh, going well beyond the facts now known, assuming the worst about Elder Hamula, or condemning the Church for “hiding the truth” because no explicit account of events or words or deeds has been made public (the Church announcement does rule out apostasy as a contributing factor, but that’s all it says), or faulting the Church for what they say is the barbaric practice of excommunication.
My thoughts:
Everyone is entitled to privacy to some degree. Undoubtedly this excommunication had to be announced because of Elder Hamula’s public role as a general authority. But we are not entitled to – we do not need – our morbid curiosity need not be indulged by – the revelation of details that can affect only the man himself and not the Church or its members as a whole. This is a time for mercy and charity from all of us – for treating the man and his name and his dignity with the same consideration we would hope for ourselves in the same situation.
There is no need for idle speculation, and no excuse for vicious speculation. Yes, we might need a refresher course in the whos and whats and whys of excommunication, and we might need to answer questions from children or from non- or less-informed-Mormons. But that should always be done with charity, with general principles, and without malice or glee or patronizing assumptions that we know or suspect or need to be told the details in any specific case. Don’t bear false witness, even with the supposed disclaimer that you don’t really know, but that you’re merely stating the obvious when you talk about what must have happened in this case. You don’t know. Maybe you will know at some point, and maybe you will even be right. But you’ll be right by accident, not because you have any superior knowledge about how these things work.
The Church deserves some compassion, too. Before I condemned the Church for the practice of excommunication, I’d want to be sure I knew what I was talking about. I’d want to know the scriptural and doctrinal basis for excommunication, and I’d want to be sure that what I knew was in fact correct. I’d want to know that I wasn’t just responding to the currently fashionable online condemnation of excommunications. I’d want to know that while I may not have understood excommunications at some point in my youth, I had grown as an adult and that my current understanding was deeper and wiser than my understanding as a child. I’d want to be sure my default position was in line with the gospel, and that my opposition to the Church was not my own stiff-neckedness and arrogance.
I don’t know Elder Hamula; I met him twice at the Church History Library and surprised him with a bit of relevant personal Church history, but I do not know him. I know nothing about the facts of his case beyond what I’ve read in the newspapers. I wish him well. I wish him comfort. I wish for his speedy return to the fold. I don’t condemn him, and I don’t condemn the Church or those leaders who felt this action was necessary. This is a time for charity and hope and good will and patience, not for condemnation of something we are not privy to.
Ardis, you always have such a gentle but firm way with words. Thank you for these at this time.
Amen. Well said, Ardis.
Love this. Soothing balm for the distressing news of the day.
Spot on, Ardis. Thank you for saying so well what, unfortunately, must be said.
Thank you for this.
Everybody knows it’s a waste of your life to read the comments, and yet I sometimes can’t stop myself. It’s all some version of “He must have done [whatever (hopefully salacious) offense fits my preferred narrative].” “People shouldn’t be excommunicated for the thing I say he was excommunicated for.” “I’m offended on Elder Camula’s behalf because…” “The church released too much/too little information.” “My opinion of the Mormon Church is [whatever tired characterization I think sounds clever and is completely unrelated to the question at hand, but I read on the internet and decided to use as my (incredibly informed and nuanced) understanding of Mormonism].
I couldn’t sum things up any better than you did in your closing sentences.
Amen.
I attended one meeting in which Elder Hamula spoke (a stake conference), but I could tell from that experience that he was a good man. He is also a human. I have been praying for him and his family.
Reflecting on this has also brought to mind the words of “How Great the Wisdom and the Love.” Not sure why. We all need the Atonement, no matter what calling we have.
Hamula.
Sorry; I don’t know where the C came from.
I should have fixed that for you earlier, Left Field. Typos come out of nowhere.
Exactly right. I’d have preferred the Church said nothing at all, but I guess due to his calling and assignment, it had to. He was over Correlation, I believe, and it’s important to know he wasn’t ousted for false doctrine-preaching, which would make suspect a lot of books.
I know excommunication is no light matter, and I hope his family can heal. It’s not easy!
It seems to me that there would also be harm if rumors of his excommunication spread without any church comment. Basically, the official comment was enough to say that the church is not retracting any of his conference addresses, and they can still be considered doctrine.
I felt very sad to read the news. My first thought was that he might be guilty of defalcation–mostly because I’ve never had a chance to use that word in a sentence before.
In some places, countries, and cultures, any attempt to change one’s religion resulted in death, or at least banishment. Excommunication seems like a much milder action, especially since it is completely reversible.
But the more disturbing thought is that there, but for the grace of God, go I. How could such a clearly good man fall into any such error? How can I avoid doing so? May God have mercy on us all.
Good thoughts, Ardis.
Apostasy is one cause for excommunication of a leader that the Church cannot remain silent about, because of the obligation to correct errors that could lead members astray. I suppose it follows that specifying that the case was not apostasy may also be necessary.
From the Trib article: “Mormons can and do, in LDS lingo, get “exed.””
I have, on rare occasions, heard LDS use that lingo. But not LDS I look up to. The Trib is taking liberties in defining what is and is not LDS lingo, in my opinion. (Quelle surprise!)
@8: I’m tempted to joke that typos come out of left field, but that would be just too punny.
I also found myself bending to the Trib’s obviously superior knowledge of LDS lingo with the heretofore unheard term, “exed.”
Okay. I’m pulling the plug on the Tribune aspect of discussion. While absolutely informal, “exed” is a term I hear *all*the*time* in Mormon discussion, from friends as well as less loved sources. I find it too informal for such a serious topic, but think it is no more disrespectful than “GAs” or “g’s” or “the mish.”
And the Tribune and its religion reporter are not the enemy. They often publish a better, more nuanced, more respectful, and certainly more complete report on us than most other coverage, particularly Mormon sources so eager to present a plastic face to the world that we end up looking foolish, or worse.
No more, please.
It feels like speculating about a divorce. Clearly something went wrong, but I really don’t want to think less of either party by knowing what.