Mormon Stories #1261: Major Changes to the LDS General Handbook of Instructions - 2020 Edition Pt. 2

Major Changes to the LDS General Handbook: What Do They Mean?

The 2020 changes to the LDS General Handbook of Instructions, particularly in the realm of church discipline, have sparked significant discussion. Such shifts may seem like a bureaucratic reshuffle to some, but they carry profound implications for the lives of many Latter-day Saints. The language used and the outlined procedures can deeply influence the church experience for both ordained leaders and members wrestling with church teachings, especially those involving sensitive topics like LGBTQ issues. Understanding these changes is crucial for anyone invested in the intersection of faith, personal identity, and community.

Context and Historical Background

The General Handbook, a vital document shaping the procedural and doctrinal nexus of the LDS Church, was revised in February 2020. Historically, the Handbook has served as a guideline for local leaders, providing directives on a plethora of church-related issues, including membership discipline. The recent changes have shifted some disciplinary responsibilities from Stake Presidents to local bishops and introduced the term "membership council" in place of the older "disciplinary council" or "excommunication". This linguistic shift is not merely cosmetic; it reflects an evolving approach to governance and personal accountability within the church.

Key Claims and Documented Evidence

One significant aspect of the revised Handbook is the renaming of "disciplinary council" to "membership council". This change is critical because it affects not only the internal perception but also external narratives about the church's disciplinary actions. Membership removal no longer carries the label of excommunication, a term that has historically been laden with stigma. According to Mormon Stories Podcast #1261, this shift may serve to mitigate negative perceptions associated with church discipline. Furthermore, the changes grant bishops more autonomy in handling cases locally, subject to the concurrence of the Stake President if removal of membership is likely. This decentralization could lead to inconsistencies across congregations as local leaders interpret guidance differently.