The dude ex'd 6 months before Priesthood ban was lifted

[LadyofRadiantJoy]

Hi all,

I was wondering if anyone knew where I could find the news article that talked about a man being excommunicated for advocating for the priesthood ban. It was dated about 6 months before the the ban was lifted.

I saved it so I could have proof but I lost some data when a hard drive failed and I can't seem to locate it via Google search.

Blessings,
Ruth

[nibbler]

This may not be what you're looking for, but it could provide a lead or two:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_peo ... d_policies

This claims to be a newspaper clipping from The Daily Reporter, 15 Oct 1977, Page 5:
https://www.newspapers.com/clip/4237266 ... _marchant/

And another article:
The Wilmington Star-News, 15 Oct 1977, Page 7A

They aren't your New York Post or the Washington Post, but they appear to be articles that were in a paper.

[nibbler]

Here's a blog entry by mormonheretic that includes comments from Byron Marchant and Doug Wallace, the actual people involved.

https://mormonheretic.org/2011/07/10/ev ... evelation/

[LadyofRadiantJoy]

That newspaper clipping is exactly what I was looking for! Thank you so much. I greatly appreciate it. <3

[SilentDawning]

I have a question about this. What would have been the right thing for the church to do with the ex'd member who was only advocating what would become revelation 6 months later? Leave the guy ex'd? Go softer if he makes the first move back to church? Cancel the excommunication and restore full blessings immediately? It's fairness and kindness issues like these that get my goat sometimes. Again, we are divinely led organization, and the scripture says that not a sparrow falls without God knowing it and caring about. The key to the 99 sheep is your attitude toward the one that got lost, etcetera.

[On Own Now]

Another (long-ago) thread you might find interesting:

viewtopic.php?f=9&t=5475

[SilentDawning]

Thanks OON -- the thread was about a mormon (I think, an Academic) who questioned the apparent state where you can't speak out openly about vexing issues without being construed negatively. It doesn't really debate what is the right thing to do with a member who spoke out about a particular policy, was excommunicated, only to find the very thing for which they advocated become revelation shortly thereafter.

I would argue that proponents of the excommunication would say the penalty was for "kicking against the pricks" rather than the doctrinal position specifically. The person may have been rebellious in attitude or disposition, for example, and THAT is what the penalty was for.

Personally, I don't buy it....but interested in what others have to say.