Who would the Savior Excommunicate?

 In the past couple of months I have been given reason to ponder the question of excommunication, I mean, "removal of membership" as it pertains to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. For a bit of history, I recommend reading my post "A Court of Love... it may not be what you think..." From September 29, 2024, as a prerequisite to this blog post. In it, I briefly highlight the process of the church disciplinary councils for people that it deems as somehow not living up to the standards of the Church in such a manner as to make them worthy of no longer being welcome to participate in full membership in the Church or its activities. Since that time, I have wondered, just who exactly would Jesus Christ excommunicate IF He were really at the head of the Church as the leaders claim.

We should, of course, begin with an overview of Jesus, Yeshua's roots as a member of Judaism. Yes, Yeshua was an Israelite, a Jew (if you will). As such, he would have been familiar with all the laws of Torah, as well as the teachings of the Prophets and the Sanhedrin of the day. He would have studied with Rabbi's to be able to participate in his own Bar Mitzvah and, at the very least, been quite well acquainted with the ways in which they, as a people, dealt with apostates and others who questioned their faith.

A quick look at the Historical Background:

In ancient times, when Jewish communities were tightly knit, the practice of cherem or nidui was a way to preserve communal norms and to discipline individuals whose behavior or beliefs deviated from the accepted standards. The purpose of this, was not necessarily punitive but often aimed at repentance and rehabilitation of the individual.

Let us take a quick look at each of these forms of ancient "excommunication" and their implications:

Nidui (נִדּוּי): A temporary form of excommunication, often lasting up to 30 days. The individual could remain part of the community, but there were restrictions on social interaction, such as reduced participation in prayer, learning, or social gatherings. During this time, the individual was encouraged to reflect on their actions and seek atonement.

Cherem (חֵרֶם): A more severe and even permanent form of excommunication. When someone is placed in cherem, they were completely cut off from the community. Forbidden from participation in any communal rituals, including prayer, study, or even basic social interactions. Cherem was often reserved for people who posed a severe threat to the community’s religious or moral integrity, such as heresy or other grave offenses.

The idea of cherem has its roots in the Torah, especially in the context of warfare, where certain cities or people were placed under cherem as part of divine punishment (e.g., the city of Jericho in Joshua 6:17). In rabbinic literature, cherem evolved to become a social sanction rather than just a divine decree. In Deuteronomy 13:13–18, we see the idea of cherem applied to a city that has turned to idolatry, where everything must be destroyed, and the city must be isolated.

The Talmud in Moed Katan (16a–17a) discusses nidui and cherem in the context of halachic (Jewish legal) enforcement, explaining how a person under nidui could eventually be readmitted after showing repentance.

The purpose of excommunication was twofold First to protect the community: By removing a harmful influence, the community could maintain its moral and spiritual health.

Second, to encourage repentance: Ideally, the person would recognize the gravity of their actions, repent, and be readmitted into the community.

However, excommunication in Jewish thought comes with ethical dilemmas. Cutting someone off from the community can lead to their spiritual and social isolation, potentially driving them further from repentance. Moreover, as Jewish law places a high value on peace (shalom), the decision to excommunicate was not taken lightly.

I would like to interject here for a moment that much of Latter-day Saint (Mormon) culture mirrors Jewish culture in that one is not just "religiously" a Mormon, they identify socially as one also. There is something about "Mormonishness" that is akin to "Jewishness," we tend to marry people of our own faith, hang out with people of our faith and even avoid the things and places that we find uncomfortable. You won't find many Mormons in Starbucks or at the local tavern, any more than you might find Jews in a non-Kosher restaurant or generally hanging out with the goyim (non Jews), especially on Shabbat. So there is a similar ethical dilemma when considering excommunication of members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints... Social and Spiritual isolation.

So, that still is not really answering the question you say. You are right, I am just laying some foundation at this point, and trying to help bring everyone up to speed with understanding this information. I will, however, say that I find the question of whom Jesus might excommunicate challenging, especially since the concept of excommunication in Jewish tradition (as discussed earlier) is not directly mirrored in the New Testament. 

However, with this understanding of the life and times of Jesus, as well as how he interacted with those considered outsiders or sinners by the religious authorities of his day might help shed some light on this question.

-----------------------------------

Jesus and His Approach to Authority and Exclusion

In many ways, Jesus was revolutionary in his approach to religious authority and exclusion. His ministry, as depicted in the Gospels, repeatedly emphasizes inclusion, compassion, and the breaking down of barriers between the holy and the profane, the righteous and the sinner. In Matthew 9:12-13, Jesus famously says:

"It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick... For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners."

Throughout the Gospels, Jesus frequently associates with those whom Jewish society had marginalized or "excommunicated" in a social sense: tax collectors, prostitutes, lepers, Samaritans, and even Roman officials. This seems to suggest that Jesus was more interested in bringing people into a transformed relationship with God than in casting them out for their sins.

Examples of Individuals Jesus Reached Out To:

Tax collectors like Matthew (Levi) and Zacchaeus were seen as traitors to the Jewish people for collaborating with Roman authorities, yet Jesus dined with them and invited them to follow him.

The Samaritan woman (John 4:1–26), who was from a group considered heretical and outside the Jewish covenant, received one of Jesus' most profound theological teachings on worship.

The woman caught in adultery (John 8:1-11), whom the religious authorities wanted to stone, was met by Jesus with mercy rather than condemnation: "Let him who is without sin cast the first stone."

Groups Jesus Criticized Harshly

While Jesus showed mercy and inclusion to individuals seen as sinful or outside the religious fold, he did direct harsh rebukes toward certain groups. If we were to consider "excommunication" in the sense of someone Jesus might disassociate from or criticize, these groups would be the most likely:

The Pharisees and Religious Hypocrites: Jesus’ sharpest criticisms were often reserved for the religious leaders of his time, particularly the Pharisees and scribes, whom he accused of hypocrisy and self-righteousness. In Matthew 23, Jesus pronounces a series of "woes" against the Pharisees, accusing them of focusing on the letter of the law while neglecting justice, mercy, and faithfulness. He describes them as "whitewashed tombs" (v. 27), appearing righteous but inwardly full of hypocrisy and wickedness.

Jesus condemned religious leaders who, in his view, made the law burdensome for others while failing to practice the spirit of the law themselves. This suggests that those who used religious authority to oppress, exclude, or harm others might be the very ones Jesus would excommunicate, or at least rebuke strongly.

Moneychangers and the Corrupt in the Temple: In Matthew 21:12-13 (and in parallel accounts in the other Gospels), Jesus famously drives out the moneychangers from the Temple, accusing them of turning God’s house into a "den of robbers." This action demonstrates his intolerance for those who exploited religious spaces for personal gain. While this wasn't excommunication in a formal sense, it was a dramatic act of cleansing and removing those who profaned sacred space.

The Unrepentant Rich: Jesus often warned of the spiritual dangers of wealth and greed, particularly when it hardened the hearts of the rich against the needs of the poor. In Luke 16, the parable of the rich man and Lazarus suggests that those who ignore the plight of the poor may find themselves excluded from God’s kingdom. This doesn’t mean all wealthy people were condemned, but those whose wealth led to indifference and injustice were warned of spiritual peril.

The Paradox of Jesus' Exclusion and Inclusion

Though Jesus confronted the powerful and hypocritical, he didn't necessarily "excommunicate" them in the sense of permanently cutting them off. His interactions with the Pharisees, for example, were filled with strong rebukes, yet there were Pharisees like Nicodemus (John 3) who came to him in secret and sought to learn more about his teachings. Even in his rebukes, there was often a call to repentance and transformation.

Jesus’ mission was one of radical inclusion for those whom society, especially the religious elite, might have excommunicated. Instead of pushing them further away, he invited them to a new way of living in alignment with God’s will. His excommunication, if it existed, seemed to be directed at hardened hearts, especially among those who used religion to justify exclusion, injustice, or exploitation.

Conclusion: Who Would Jesus Excommunicate?

Jesus’ teachings and actions suggest that he would "excommunicate" — or at least harshly rebuke — those who used their authority to oppress, those who corrupted sacred spaces for personal gain, and those who hypocritically followed the law while neglecting love, mercy, and justice. However, his overall approach was one of inclusion and transformation, offering even the most sinful or marginalized individuals the opportunity for repentance and reconciliation with God.

In the end, Jesus was far more likely to extend mercy to sinners than to excommunicate them, saving his harshest words for those who, through hypocrisy and self-righteousness, prevented others from entering the kingdom of God.