yjacket

You seem to be moving a little bit so that is fine. You are right it is not positive that there is currently a flaw-but there may be. Awareness caution and potentially breaking it off over this is all perfectly fine. I would hope that when considering a potential spouse that nothing is done in reactionary/heat of the moment judgement-this goes for getting married or not getting married-whether it is this issue or another. These things should be considered seriously. If one has previously made a decision in their mind to not get married to someone who has previously broken the LoC-that is their decision and I don't make a judgement on it good or bad. For this particular instance the OP knows her, but I certainly question how well one can really get to know someone when they live in a different country. I know I'm old-fashioned but every time I think about long-distance relationships with someone over the internet I always think of:

Yeap, if they are here we should be charitable and compassionate to them (the Good Samaritan). We should hope for a solution that ends their desire to leave their homeland. And IMO we should hope for a solution that restricts their ability to be in this country and remove them if possible . . .but if they are our neighbors we should still be charitable. Even if things like this drive me bonkers: http://www.idahostatesman.com/news/state/article142759434.html After the Fawnbrook case, the Refugee Center partnered with a behavioral agency to hold therapy groups with school-aged refugee children who’d recently arrived in Twin Falls “so they understand that type of behavior isn’t acceptable,” Rwasama said. Yeah . . .good luck with that. 14,10,7 year old sexually assault a 5-year old. No amount of "therapy groups" is going to fix that behavior-that behavior is learned in the home. SMH . . .we are idiots.

??? Still not what you said https://www.lds.org/prophets-and-apostles/unto-all-the-world/prepare-to-be-a-missionary?lang=eng “First, to young men of the Aaronic Priesthood and to you young men who are becoming elders: I repeat what prophets have long taught—that every worthy, able young man should prepare to serve a mission. Missionary service is a priesthood duty—an obligation the Lord expects of us who have been given so very much." No recession. All worthy able young men are to serve missions. If they aren't worthy-they are to get worthy. Able-means those who are physically, mentally and emotionally able. No difference now vs. 20 years ago-only a little more strict now on what "able" means.

Yeap. I'd like to know where the obligation for YM to serve missions has ever been rescinded. My point is not so much that one should expect to marry a virgin-if someone wants to set that expectation that is fine, I don't think it is a wrong expectation or a right one. It is probably generally a good thing for a young man to not marry someone who has been divorced. Different ages have different stages and expectations out of marriage. Someone who is 40 isn't probably going to marry a virgin-they are probably going to marry a widow or a divorcee (I'd still recommend against a divorcee). For someone who is youngish (20s), it is perfectly reasonable for them to want to marry someone who is a virgin. Making that desire out to be an unChristlike attribute is IMO wrong. This isn't someone who was raped, or molested or who was divorced or a widow. Those are all different cases then what is being discussed here. This young lady was endowed, served a mission, knew full well the Law of Chastity, it's importance etc. She knew full well what she was doing when she broke the LoC. I understand that she has fully repented and that she has been forgiven. But choosing a spouse isn't about choosing the person who has repented the most or who has been forgiven the most. Choosing a spouse goes beyond the prettiest, the most spiritual, the most perfect, or whatever other "requirement". Choosing a spouse is about selecting an individual who is a good fit, who's character and the sum total of who they currently and of who they potentially may become is a good fit for that individual. And by the same token, is that true for each party. Breaking the LoC after being endowed can potentially reveal a significant character flaw. It's not about forgiveness, it's about understanding who the person is. There is already a documented instance where this person did not live up to a commitment and covenant. Is there a pattern of that (not in the big things-but in the small things in life). If there is, is that the type of person you want to be marriage to? Someone who has a hard time living up to hard commitments? Are there other things that this individual has done that lead to questions of judgement? Certainly breaking the LoC after being endowed is a severe lapse in judgment? Are there other severe lapses in judgement? And do you want to live with that. I don't blame anyone or think they are less worthy or less righteous if they just have a simple rule that they won't marry anyone who has broken the LoC. Because quite frankly, knowing that your potential spouse broke the LoC after attending the temple and after going on a mission-it should cause you to question if they are the right person-b/c it is deeply revealing about the person. Now, one might have all these questions answered, maybe it was 10 years ago, maybe there is no larger issue about judgement or commitment or anything else and everything is answered satisfactorily. Everyone can move on and all is good. Or maybe they aren't answered well and other issues about judgement or character come up and things need to be broken off. Again it's not about forgiveness, it's about understanding the other person's character and breaking the LoC after a mission and after the temple is deeply revealing about one's character. Regardless about whether this sister felt lonely or felt she was never going to get married or whatever other reason as to why. Plenty of other women live their whole lives in complete chastity never able to marry-it is not an unreasonable expectation. I'm not advocating for or against marrying someone who broke the LoC-only that a re-evaluation of whether one wants to marry someone who previously broke the LoC is not an unChristlike thing, it's not a moral sin, it's not a "you're so horrible b/c you are doing that", it's a very natural thing that quite frankly probably should happen. The answer as to whether the marriage should happen or not happen we decide and then take it to the Lord for Him to confirm or deny.

LDMarriage and I have had plenty of disagreements, but on this we agree 110%. Last year you posted on a similar topic. In that you posted the following "46 percent of mothers in the U.S. feel more stressed out by their husbands than their children, according to a new survey.A poll of over 7,000 mothers across the country, conducted by Today Moms, found that because of different parenting views, a lack of help with household duties, and the typical pressures of marriage, many mothers feel that their husbands are just another child to take care of. What's more, the average mother reported her stress level overall at a whopping 8.5 out of ten." and mentioned that your husband is looking at inappropriate videos (pornography, if not outright nudity-close to it). What you husband is doing using pornography is wrong. No ifs, ands, or buts. At the same time, there is a huge difference between what the world teaches a family should look like and the way God wants the family to be. And your quote above illustrates a significant portion of the problem. For some reason in today's society women are told and society emphasizes that as soon as a woman becomes a mother that all her focus, energy, desires, hopes, dreams, wishes, etc. should be put towards being a "good mom" . . .and at the same time she should also be working and at the same time she should be "mother-hen" to her husband. If you look, my guess is that a significant portion of your troubles either started or significantly increased after having children. There is a reason for this. Except for the period of time where a baby needs their mother on a consistent basis (approx 1st year). The most important person in the family is your spouse; if that is not the case-you are doing it wrong. Also recognize that your husband is a fully formed adult able to make his own personal decisions. If you are trying to control the personal decisions he is making-you are doing it wrong. You can counsel, give guidance (like honey, I'd love for you to be at church today, but I understand if you don't come), but when you try to control-you are doing it wrong. Your husband needs your understanding and your compassion, not someone who picks on him and tells him everything he is doing wrong. Giving understanding to you husband isn't conceding to the least bit you agree with his decisions-but just that you recognize that he has different factors, stressors, life experiences that has brought him to this point and that he his choosing this path. You do't have to like it, you don't have to agree with it-but you do need to support him as the priesthood head of the family. You have great concern for your children and that is good. One of the secrets I've learned in my life is that the best thing I can do for my children to raise them right is to show them that I love my spouse. That she is more important than they are, that they (my children) are appendages to my marriage-it existed before they were here and will exist after they leave. That no matter the trials and struggles (and yes marriage is probably one of the hardest things a person will do), it will survive and thrive. This teaching provides children the best stable foundation for them to develop and grow into adults. Divorce is absolutely devastating on society-it is a scourge and a blight. It is my opinion that everything we are dealing with now as a society directly comes from the acceptance and commonality of divorce. Children of divorce will have more mental health issues, more confidence issues, more problems in life than those that do not come from divorce. Sometimes divorce is necessary (adultery or abuse) simply because the action causes such damage that it is very hard to repair. Otherwise Christ and the prophets have taught we are to endure and make it work. We don't get a mulligan or a do-over b/c when the going gets tough we murmur, complain, or wonder if we'd made a mistake. What God asks us to do in those instance where our marriage becomes very tough is to become more Christlike. He challenges us to learn how to emulate our Savior more, how to be more compassionate, more understanding, more willing to forgive our spouse's fault. For your marriage to work, you have to eliminate all the outs-completely banish from your mind any thoughts of divorce or separation. Only consider those options if your husband either commits adultery or abuse. Then work to love him as Christ loves him; do not force him to repent or go to church, set the example, honor your husband and eventually things will get better. And yes, things will get better.

Great article.

The fact that we are having this discussion shows just how much people do not think sexual purity is that big of a deal. Whoops so she screwed around, she's clean now-no big deal. No it is a big deal-especially when choosing a mate. It shows one's character, one's commitment to principles, all the intangible things that go into a marriage decision.

I'm more in line with this. Remember this lady who broke the LoC was a missionary, i.e. she's been endowed, she served the Lord for 18 months (presumably honorably) and then after she had further light and knowledge broke the LoC. That is vastly different than someone who was a porn star found God and changed completely. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a man (who has never broken the LoC) to say I will only marry someone who also hasn't broken the LoC. People make all sorts of requirements upon their future spouse. I want to be attracted to her, I want her to be a member of the Church, etc. etc. etc. If someone has a requirement that is "she needs to be pretty" (i.e. I need to be attracted to her), how is that requirement more important and more worthy than "I want her to be a virgin"? One is superficial (beauty fades over time, but is important) and one is of spiritual importance. Except you can't take the sin by itself-it doesn't work that way.

You are wrong. There is nothing wrong with making that a requirement, just like I don't want to marry someone who has done drugs in the past. I don't want to marry someone who went to jail in the past. Absolutely nothing wrong with making it a requirement. Really?? (one the 2nd bold) Please give me a break. He suitable for her, he worthy of her?? Talk about turning things completely upside down. It's the reverse. She is the one who demonstrated by actions that at one point in her life she was not faithful to her covenants, not him.

?? No. I said actions have consequences. This isn't hard. According to your logic every time a spouse commits adultery and repents the offended spouse has no choice but to continue in the marriage. I mean the adulterer is fully clean, so why should it bother the spouse at all!!! Please, the logic does not compute. Yes, it is a sick society. The two, adultery and fornication outside of marriage are very, very similar-especially for one who has served a mission and been to the temple. An adulterer previously made a covenant with their spouse (and if married in the temple a covenant with God) to not engage in sexual relations outside the marriage. They broke their covenant. A fornicator (who is baptized and been to the temple) previously made a covenant with God to not engage in sexual relations outside of marriage. They broke their covenant. An adultery usually causes the re-evaluation of whether the marriage is viable. Prior fornication usually causes a re-evaluation of whether a potential marriage is viable. In our society, people normally say the aggrieved party should get a divorce in adultery. In our society, people normally say the aggrieved party in fornication should completely ignore it and get married. Those two ideas combined together are hypocritical and are evidence of a sick society. It should be the reverse. The consequences of a divorce (effects on society, children, etc.) are much greater, then the consequences of leaving a potential spouse. Yet at the first drop of adultery, it's DIVORCE HIM. At the first drop of fornication, it's IGNORE IT or you are a scumball and not righteous enough. Now, I do make an exception to individuals who have not been taught the truth or made covenants with God. An individual raised in a non-Christian or non strong moral background household might not be taught fornication is wrong. Then they get baptized, learn of the truth and keep their covenants-their is a difference. Still caution but not as much as one who is raised or converted LDS goes to the temple and then fornicates.

I do love this Jane-very well said.

Oh I missed that, my fault. Still . . .Skype?? Different countries? Unless its a very similar country, another cautionary signal. Clashes of different cultures can easily lead to being unequally yolked.

This would give me great, great pause. Fornicating after a mission . . .

The only way she will truly know she is forgiven is to feel the peace from God. You can say it, the Bishop can say it, but only God can give it to her-only He can heal her-not you. You can certainly help-but only God can give it. If you go into the marriage thinking only you can save her-you are setting yourself up to be unequally yolked. You cannot save your spouse-they have to save themselves through Christ's atoning blood. Salvation is an individual matter, no one can do it for you. If you try to do it for her-it will fail.

One of the Apostles once taught STTE of prior to marriage have your eyes wide open and then after marriage half shut. This is the time to have your eyes wide open. @Gazing at essence Personally, I think it is crap that she told you this over the phone, it is the cowards way out-it's better than text, but not by much. Some things in life are things that must be done in person. But then again, the older I get the more old-fashioned I get, probably b/c the older I get the more wisdom I find in how people thought 60+ years ago. Breaking up using text messages is just an anethma to me-why? I don't understand. I don't know what you should do, only God knows that-but please my young friend do not beat yourself up thinking you need to be a better man over this, or that you are prideful or immature in having these concerns. The world would have you think that you are, but you aren't. Part of my directness, is the fact that as a father, I have learned many, many important lessons. Part of that learning is that there is a balance that must be struck between justice, mercy, love, discipline. It is my opinion that the world has gone too far in the direction of what the world would term "love and mercy". In other words, everything is just a big "oops", I'm sorry it's no big deal I won't do it again-with very little remorse, or with the idea that all I need to do is say sorry and everything can be as it was. It is a hard lesson to learn in life, but sometimes there is no going back-sometimes the feathers get ripped out of the pillows and no matter how hard you try to put them back in-you will always miss a feather. Actions have consequences and sometimes very serious ones-the can cost us a potential spouse, a job, a career, etc. The amazing thing about the Atonement is that even if a sin causes us to miss an opportunity in life due to our actions and consequences, God will provide a way to make a miracle in our life. Jesus Christ came through the lineage of Bethsheba, how much more proof do we need than that to understand that for the truly penitent, another path opens up, and God is able to work through us to accomplish something very, very good.

Completely 100%. I have said previously we are required to forgive and forget. But that forgetting, might just mean we don't have that person in our lives-i.e. we move on from them. There is the modern idea in church culture that with sex outside of marriage is bad, but that as long as one repents it shouldn't be a factor in a marriage decision-hogwash. I can come up with plenty of scenarios like that. What about a guy who did marijuana and cocaine, and who has now fully repented? Should those prior actions not be taken into account in a marriage decision. What if the girl had an abortion? Should that not be factored into the marriage decision? We can play this game all day long, but the truth is that yes actions have consequences and one is choosing an eternal companion to stick by and through thick and thin for the rest of your life and eternity. One is not expecting a spouse to be perfect (no one is), but there better be a long gap between serious sins. If it is like well I screwed around with my previous boyfriend a year ago, but I've been to my Bishop I have repented, I'm truly sorry-watch out. If it was well, you know when I was 16 I was really dumb and messed around with only one guy, I'm now 22 I'm a totally different person now . . .okay maybe. Actions have consequences. And if I'm looking for an eternal companion one of the biggest factors is going to be their judgement. Screwing around with multiple boyfriends shows a severe lack of judgement. Sure they can repent and be fully forgiven-but that still doesn't negate the fact that they have a severe lack of judgement. So yeah, I'm going to start having some serious questions about whether this is the right thing to do given their lack of judgement.

Gazing, Look man, you are choosing an eternal companion, a mate for the rest of your life. Maybe you should break it off, maybe not. Only God knows the answer to that question. Don't beat yourself up in the least bit b/c you feel saddened, heartbroken, etc. by what this young woman has done previously. Sexual relationships outside of marriage is a big deal. It is quite despicable that in today's society more people can't seem to realize fornication and the seriousness of that sin. Popular culture, media, etc. all makes it seem like it is no big deal and that is rubbish. It is a big deal-certainly a big enough deal that yes it can cause the re-evaluation of marriage prospects. Besides the obvious problems, if this young lady has had multiple sexual encounters, then does she have any STDs? As someone said in another thread, actions have consequences. If I can give you any advice in marriage, it is this and the #1 thing I will tell my children-under no circumstance be unequally yolked with your spouse. It is up to you to determine what unequally yolked means.

She is clean in God's eyes, but let's not kid ourselves, having sexual relations changes an individual. Call it "used chewing gum" (I don't like the analogy) call it whatever you want but there is a reason why God commanded men and women to remain pure and chaste prior to marriage. I find it despicable that members of the Church would do what they can do make a young man who has lived his life worthily (something to be commended for and honored) feel bad b/c he his having second thoughts b/c his potential spouse did not live like that. What a sick society we live in.

This is total hogwash. Are you worthy of her? Give me a break. What is wrong with this world? In today's society we castigate the individual who desires for, wants a pure, virtuous wife, who has lived her life as such and is heartbroken when he finds out that his potential mate fornicated prior to marriage. And he is the one who is unworthy? Please, what utter complete rubbish, garbage and hogwash.

Negative to the bold. https://www.lds.org/topics/repentance?lang=eng The main point of repentance is not about restoring the relationship. It may (and frequently is) a component of repentance-but it is not the point of it. We repent not to restore the relationship between another individual-we repent to restore the our relationship with God. And that is a huge difference. And there is no such thing as repentance between individuals, there is only repentance between us and God. You are right the offender doesn't get to decide the feelings of the victim, but at the same time the victim doesn't get to decide when the offender has repented. If they did, it would lead to vengeance and "Vengeance is mine saith the Lord". And in addition, our mortal forgiveness of others trespasses is not contingent upon whether they have repented. As I've said this is why adultery very often leads to divorce and IMO why the Lord allows adultery to be an acceptable reason for divorce. It is very, very difficult for spouses to truly repent, forgive, and forget from such a grievous sin. It can be both a consequence of the sin itself and a protection to the offended party. As the saying goes "out of sight, out of mind", it is much easier to forgive and forget such a sin when that individual's presence is significantly reduced.

Sort-of. I agree with the first sentence, but we should still forgive and forget. If the spouse doesn't take steps towards repentance than that means the marriage should end as it will be the only way to truly be able to forgive and forget-even if the consequences are still there. But who is the arbitrator of repentance? Who gets to declare that the offending spouse has repented? It certainly isn't the role of the offended spouse to have the privilege of declaring when the adulterer has repented. That's like giving the offended spouse the Sword of Damocles hanging over their head . . . "do this, do that, I am the arbitrator of whether you have truly repented". The Gospel doesn't work like that. Repentance is an individual not group or family thing. Only God can declare when someone has repented and is forgiven. That is done 1st through prayer and 2nd through the Bishop who is the Judge in Israel. The wife nor the husband has the authority to judge when their spouse has repented. What they can do is ask God to help them understand if the spouse has repented, but they are not there to declare it. No, I firmly believe the forgetting is very much literal. Just because you put a file in the trash bin and empty it doesn't mean it can't be recovered. Just because you forget about an offense doesn't mean access to the memory can't be retrieved. Forgetting means we don't think about it.

This hearkens to a lesson that is a must-learn if an individual wants any measure of happiness in life. "Life isn't fair". It's never going to be fair and any attempts to make life "fair" will simply result in more misery as someone will be inconvenienced in the attempt to make life fair for another individual. Yeah, it's certainly not fair that those with money have better access to health care than those who don't. It's not fair that some are born in more "priveleged" places than others, be it country, race, family etc. Life just quite simple isn't fair and the sooner one understands that concept, the easier life will be. The beautiful thing about the Gospel is that it teaches us that life isn't fair and that that is okay. The Prodigal Son, or even the vineyard workers who showed up to work in the evening and only worked 2 hours and got paid the same amount as those who worked the entire day. The beauty of the Gospel is that in the end, God will make it right and no one will claim "that's not fair".

I completely agree with what you said. My only point is that if 5 years later after adultery one spouse is still looking over their spouses shoulder think "maybe he is...." then it's not conducive to a strong marriage. Not that this needs to happen immediately-but that given time it is what needs to happen. It is why adultery in marriage is so hard to overcome-it leaves a lot of bad residue that takes a long time to dissipate. I guess where I'm going with is that say when a couple is in their 20s one commits adultery and they stick together work things out, by the time their are in their 60s, the offended spouse should literally be able to completely forget the adultery. If the couple has 40 years of working together and building a life together and have become as one, then the offended spouse will be able to forget completely this gross sin. If the offended individual cannot imagine themselves forgetting at some point in the future this sin while being married, then I'm not sure the marriage will work out in the long run. Maybe the sin and the way it was committed is so gross and horrific that the consequences necessitate a divorce, but that is for God to say not us.

It's only going to get much, much worse. When the outgoing Chair of the California Democratic party stands on stage and says "**** Trump", you know we've got a serious problem. The level of hatred and civil discourse is pretty bad. While politics has always been dirty and nasty, there was also an understanding of civil decorum and that has degenerated quite rapidly.

I will say the articles on mormonhub are getting much better. I am liking more of the insights provided---give me something to think about.