Quote:
Originally Posted by ADKing  The elders of a church can try to convince the members of the serious definciency of the ecclesiology of New Church. Completely aside from whether or not it is actually a church, its structure may have serious problems that would not be to the well being of this body or the members associating with it. Besides, independency, lack of membership makes discipline difficult if not impossible and lack of proper oversight would be harmful to any christian.
If a family persisted and left for New Church, a session could erase them from the roles (unless some form of discipline was deemed necessary). This is not a statement of whether or not New Church is actually a church or not, but it is a statement that a family left to go somewhere which the session could not endorse (say by way of a letter of transfer).
This seems to be a more practical way of operating that doesn't involve individual sessions in the messy task of judging whether numerous independent groups should be considered visible churches. There are some cases such as if someone wanted to join a Mormon "church" (for example) that a session clearly should tell them that it would be removing themselves from the visible church.  |
Erasure is a form of discipline without process. It is to be applied only when one willfully neglects coming to church for more than a year or affiliates oneself with a false body (eg. Mormons). The BCO does not allow erasure when one moves to another branch of the visible church. It is to be accompanied by a warning as well and they are to be viewed as being outside the Church. If New Church is a branch of the visible church, then pursuant to the BCO the proper course is to simply note the irregularity on the rolls and let them go on their way in peace. They are still to be viewed as being in the Church.