Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Marriage to adultery partner


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
37 replies to this topic

#1 GoForIt

GoForIt

    Junior Member

  • Inactive with Posts
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 22 June 2010 - 04:23 PM

Ok forgive me if this has been answered elsewhere on this forum. I knew a couple in my previous ward whose marriage started with adultery. They had kids together at the point I knew them and seemed to be working on their lives. They were active. I was aware of the situation because I was in the elder's quorum presidency. At the point I knew them they couldn't hold callings if I remember correctly. Can they ever be sealed some day or do they have to live and raise their current family without a sealing? Do any of you know of situations like this recently where the couple was able to be sealed after enough time and repentance had passed?

#2 Moksha

Moksha

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 9321 posts

Posted 22 June 2010 - 04:26 PM

That raises the interesting question of how God's capacity too forgive varies from that of Man.
Jesus said, "The first in importance is, love the Lord God.'
And here is the second: 'Love others as well as you love yourself.'
There is no other commandment that ranks with these."


Cry Heaven and let loose the Penguins of Peace


#3 bytor2112

bytor2112

    Senior Member

  • Ask Gramps Team
  • 6072 posts

Posted 22 June 2010 - 04:42 PM

Given that the Atonement is Infinite and Eternal....I would say that they can repent and be forgiven and receive all the blessings available to each of us.
We've got nothing to fear...but fear itself?
Not pain, not failure, not fatal tragedy?
Not the faulty units in this mad machinery?
Not the broken contacts in emotional chemistry?

#4 mnn727

mnn727

    Senior Member

  • Inactive 1+ months.
  • 2234 posts
  • LocationNorth of Dallas

Posted 23 June 2010 - 06:37 AM

They can repent and then be sealed

#5 Guest_Alana_*

Guest_Alana_*
  • Guests

Posted 23 June 2010 - 07:18 AM

Of course they can. If they repent. It won't be easy but if they do, it's the same as if they hadn't been adulterous. Isn't that the point of repentance?

#6 GoForIt

GoForIt

    Junior Member

  • Inactive with Posts
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 23 June 2010 - 12:02 PM

yeah I hear what you guys are saying but I was thinking there was some kind of church policy that didn't allow them to ever be sealed. I was wondering if anyone has personal knowledge of a specific case where they were adulterous partners were able to be sealed to each other eventually.

#7 Dove

Dove

    Senior Member

  • Inactive 1+ year
  • 718 posts

Posted 23 June 2010 - 12:05 PM

Wow, this is a sensitive topic to me.
I have a childhood friend whose former husband worked at the same place I did~He and a coworker of mine began dating at The Lion House while he was still married to my childhood friend.

I remember this coworker began telling me all these things he had told her about my childhood friend so that they could justify the "dating relationship" they had began while he was still married to my friend. Of course, I talked to my friend about it and found out her side of the story, which made a lot more sense to me then the hearsay and what I believe are lies now, that he told this coworker, who was well endowed along with being thin and beautiful. However, my friend was, in her own right, quite beautiful as well.

Of course, my childhood friend was devastated as their "eternal" marriage in the temple began to unravel before her eyes, as her husband divorced her and married this coworker in the temple. Ever since then my friend has not been active in the gospel anymore. I can tell this event has deeply hurt her and has held her back from her own progression and happiness. She seldom talks about it and does not blame them, but the effect of it does show in her life.

So, I have rather a different opinion about couples who marry out of an adulterous relationship. I totally believe that if one is married, dating and seeking out another person is totally inappropriate, no matter how much the other partner is at "fault." I believe that dating should absolutely not begin until after the marriage is terminated by both parties. This is only fair, honest and straightforward.

As for this couple being forgiven, I find that rather convenient and an easy, let them of the hook, take on the whole situation. I really question how honest they were in marrying in the temple after their adulterous start. While I can't dispute people's agency and that one can't force them to stay with someone they have chosen to no longer "love," I believe there is much more honest integrity in not pursuing someone else while still being married. Even in cases where the opposing spouse is being abusive, while I believe that distance is necessary, it doesn't mean a sexual relationship has to be sought out with someone else in the process!

I can only say how glad I am for my own husband, who chooses to love me wholeheartedly, loyally, with the pure love of Christ. We both agree that love is a choice and a commitment. I believe marriage is about the pure love of Christ for your partner, with sacrifice and service mixed in.

#8 Tarnished

Tarnished

    Senior Member

  • Inactive 2+ Years
  • 934 posts

Posted 23 June 2010 - 12:31 PM

I am sure that repentance can be obtained and forgiveness given sufficent to result in the couple getting permission to be sealed in the temple. But what a terrible way to start a marriage. Not only have they destroyed one or two marriages (depending on the situation), but they never really got away from the adulterous situation as they left their former spouse to marry the person they cheated with. I do wonder what the repentance process would be like for a couple like this. There is a refusal to let go of the affair, it makes me wonder what would be needed to obtain forgiveness sufficent to obtain a temple recommend again. In the end the final judgement comes down to God and we have to trust in him. I just know I would not want to have a marriage that was initially based on the destruction of my previous marriage.

#9 GoForIt

GoForIt

    Junior Member

  • Inactive with Posts
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 23 June 2010 - 12:33 PM

That is an interesting story dove. Thanks for sharing it. I assume that in order for this couple to marry in the temple he had to have a sealing clearance. I also assume that required a letter from the former spouse, who was your friend, as that is the policy for a sealing clearance. Surely your friend must have written in that letter the nature of this couples adulterous relationship, so it must have been known, right? And they were still able to be married in the temple? How long ago did this take place?

#10 Dove

Dove

    Senior Member

  • Inactive 1+ year
  • 718 posts

Posted 23 June 2010 - 01:17 PM

Hello, Go For It, I don't remember my friend mentioning that she had to write a letter in order for them to get the clearance. I will try to sensitively ask her what specifically happened in order for the divorce to go through.....It seems to me that men can be married to more than one spouse in the temple, and that maybe this is what occurred (the original sealing between my childhood friend and him not being canceled, but him taking on his new wife as an additional wife). This happened back in the '90s, so it's been quite awhile ago. Best of Wishes in your search~ Dove

#11 GoForIt

GoForIt

    Junior Member

  • Inactive with Posts
  • Pip
  • 4 posts

Posted 23 June 2010 - 03:21 PM

I appreciate you looking into it dove. I do know that in order to get a sealing clearance to be sealed to a 2nd wife after a divorce, they write a letter to the former spouse and the former spouse has the opportunity to write back and voice any feelings or thoughts about the matter. So if you can ask your friend it would be interesting to know if she wrote such a letter and what happened. Thanks.

#12 Dove

Dove

    Senior Member

  • Inactive 1+ year
  • 718 posts

Posted 25 June 2010 - 12:32 PM

Hello, GoForIt; I spoke to my friend about it the other day~ She said to me that not only did they not contact her for a letter about the divorce and subsequent temple marriage; but, that her former husband and his new wife were married a month after their marriage was dissolved. I believe there was quite a lack of honesty on their part as to how they were able to marry so soon in the temple after! I really don't know how they were able to have this happen in such a manner. When my sister was divorced from her husband (it was a civil marriage) she was told she would not be able to attend the temple for a year after the divorce was final. There was nothing involving adultery that resulted in their divorce. I'm sorry, I don't know much more about it other than that. Just scatterings, much like you. Perhaps the couple you are advocating for is working with their bishop and the attendant guidelines in trying to have a temple marriage. I'm sure it is in the bishop's/stake president's handbooks what the churches guidelines are in handling situations like this. Again, best of luck in your search... Dove

#13 antinephilehis

antinephilehis

    Junior Member

  • Inactive 2+ Years
  • PipPip
  • 17 posts

Posted 25 June 2010 - 12:57 PM

I'm going to leave that one for the Lord to judge. :patriot:

#14 Snow

Snow

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 10624 posts

Posted 25 June 2010 - 10:58 PM

The most important thing to remember that it's up to fine folks like us to talk about this and discuss other's personal intimate lives and whenever possible to pass judgement on others. Let's keep up the strong work.
There is nothing more pathetic than the anti anti-mormon Colonel Louis/Lewis Tucker

#15 Dove

Dove

    Senior Member

  • Inactive 1+ year
  • 718 posts

Posted 26 June 2010 - 02:48 PM

The most important thing to remember that it's up to fine folks like us to talk about this and discuss other's personal intimate lives and whenever possible to pass judgement on others. Let's keep up the strong work.




Snow~
I understand your point; although, I don't feel it was necessary to use sarcasm in conveying it...

Like it or not, this happened to a close friend of mine, whose suffering leaves me suffering for her when awful things have happened in her life. I care about her and it hurts me to see her hurt. As I said, this is a sensitve topic to me.

I also understand your point about talking about others' personal lives; even though one day our sins will be "shouted from the rooftops," it's really not mine to divulge other people's doings. Even though I feel I wrote nothing incriminating about my friend or sister; yet, it's not quite fair to tell of what the other people involved did without them hearing it or being able to defend themselves.

I will never back down from supporting direct honesty, ethics and morality in any relationship, especially in a marital relationship. While judging others wrongly in their actions is never appropriate, and we are so often fallible in our judgments of others, leaving it better not to be done much of the time, I still feel at times judgments are necessary in determining right from wrong, good from evil.

Your sarcasm was hurtful. I know that I do judge others, and it is something I am working on. It's ironic how judgmental you sounded yourself in writing this, while accusing us of the same.

Dove

#16 Snow

Snow

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 10624 posts

Posted 26 June 2010 - 05:10 PM

Snow~
I understand your point; although, I don't feel it was necessary to use sarcasm in conveying it...


Oh, agreed. It's not necessary, it's just a bonus.

Like it or not, this happened to a close friend of mine, whose suffering leaves me suffering for her when awful things have happened in her life. I care about her and it hurts me to see her hurt. As I said, this is a sensitve topic to me.

I also understand your point about talking about others' personal lives; even though one day our sins will be "shouted from the rooftops," it's really not mine to divulge other people's doings. Even though I feel I wrote nothing incriminating about my friend or sister; yet, it's not quite fair to tell of what the other people involved did without them hearing it or being able to defend themselves.

I will never back down from supporting direct honesty, ethics and morality in any relationship, especially in a marital relationship. While judging others wrongly in their actions is never appropriate, and we are so often fallible in our judgments of others, leaving it better not to be done much of the time, I still feel at times judgments are necessary in determining right from wrong, good from evil.

Your sarcasm was hurtful. I know that I do judge others, and it is something I am working on. It's ironic how judgmental you sounded yourself in writing this, while accusing us of the same.

Dove


That's laying it on a little thick. The only way you could have been hurt from what I said is if you felt guilt about it. That's not really anything I can help you with. I wonder what percentage of posts here deal with what other people do with their genitals? I higher percentage than I like it seems to me.
There is nothing more pathetic than the anti anti-mormon Colonel Louis/Lewis Tucker

#17 Boris_natasha

Boris_natasha

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 125 posts

Posted 26 June 2010 - 06:44 PM

I can not even begin to convey the pain and utter confusion of my personal experience with this issue. Even now, 15 years after the fact I can not forgive the betrayal. I still collapse in tears.

#18 Obolus

Obolus

    Senior Member

  • Inactive 1+ year
  • 132 posts

Posted 27 June 2010 - 05:21 PM

That's laying it on a little thick.


It seems you led the way.

OED: Sarcasm: A sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt.

The etymology is even better. Greek meaning "to tear flesh" or "gnash teeth". Or to speak in a way as if to do so.

The only way you could have been hurt from what I said is if you felt guilt about it. That's not really anything I can help you with.


If the body is a temple, then all action is temple work. Ultimately sewing the seeds of the Covenant, or sewing death and hell. Which is why it makes perfect sense when Jesus states that "...those things which proceed out of the mouth come forth from the heart; and they defile the man" in Matt 15.

Sarcasm has no other intent than harm. It's like fight club culture, only with words. There are words of power in the temple, and the world's counterparts to them are words that serve and give sensation to the ego. The inference is to invite listeners into a world where community & belonging are gained by allowing pleasure, pain, abuse and moral decay to meet in the flesh by degrees as a result of sarcasm in the spoken/typed word. It is a tool of desensitization. For you to suggest that Dove needs to "thicken her skin" is really just trying to say that something is "wrong" with her when she's not as calloused as you and all other partakers of profane speech.

We feel words in our flesh, and their intent cuts straight to the heart. So when Dove stated that your sarcasm was hurtful, that's what she meant. She has nothing to feel guilty about. She simply addressed the topic at hand, and in my opinion she did so in a tasteful manner.

I wonder what percentage of posts here deal with what other people do with their genitals? I higher percentage than I like it seems to me.


This place is either a discussion forum, or it isn't. It seems like you'd prefer it to be a safe haven for your particular foibles. If you don't want to read or discuss certain topics, then why click on the link in the first place? Is it just to wield your obvious intellect around like a sledgehammer? It seems so.

#19 Snow

Snow

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 10624 posts

Posted 27 June 2010 - 08:04 PM

It seems you led the way.

OED: Sarcasm: A sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt.

The etymology is even better. Greek meaning "to tear flesh" or "gnash teeth". Or to speak in a way as if to do so.


Gee, thanks Teach... from all of us who don't speak English.


If the body is a temple, then all action is temple work.



Can you say non-sequitar? Come on now, I think you can.


Sarcasm has no other intent than harm. It's like fight club culture, only with words. There are words of power in the temple, and the world's counterparts to them are words that serve and give sensation to the ego. The inference is to invite listeners into a world where community & belonging are gained by allowing pleasure, pain, abuse and moral decay to meet in the flesh by degrees as a result of sarcasm in the spoken/typed word. It is a tool of desensitization. For you to suggest that Dove needs to "thicken her skin" is really just trying to say that something is "wrong" with her when she's not as calloused as you and all other partakers of profane speech.


Oh, the drama of it all. Could you come over to my house and lecture my wife, castigate the kids and maybe slap the cat around?

We feel words in our flesh, and their intent cuts straight to the heart.


Is that like smelling colors or seeing noises?

This place is either a discussion forum, or it isn't. It seems like you'd prefer it to be a safe haven for your particular foibles. If you don't want to read or discuss certain topics, then why click on the link in the first place? Is it just to wield your obvious intellect around like a sledgehammer? It seems so.


Are those my only two choices dad? To an adult, word have no power unless the hearer or read gives credibility to the speaker and thinks the words have merit. If someone like you comes on and self-righteously harangues me, do I care? Take a guess. If I make a post, directed to NO ONE in particular, and someone read it and decides that they are guilty of that which I describe, that's their gig.

Edited by Snow, 27 June 2010 - 08:21 PM.

There is nothing more pathetic than the anti anti-mormon Colonel Louis/Lewis Tucker

#20 MisterT

MisterT

    Banned

  • Banned
  • 373 posts

Posted 27 June 2010 - 08:23 PM

...Oh, the drama of it all. Could you come over to my house and lecture my wife, castigate the kids and maybe slap the cat around?


Roger, slap the wife, lecture the cat, and beat the kids.. I'm enroute.
"I pity the foo who doesn't listen to MrT." - Hordak

"There comes a time when diplomacy fails, when all discussion is fruitless. You will then face me under a different and final circumstance." - Col. Michael "Mad Mike" Hoare

"God is on the side with the best artillery." Napoleon Bonaparte




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

IPB Skin By Virteq