Eternal Marriage: Celibacy Divorce & Homosexuality

[prisonchaplain]

Concerning Justaguy's willingness to consider the "exceptions" I mentioned. If the soundest polls are accurate, perhaps 2-3% of us are homosexual in orientation. The % of Christians called to difficult religious service is even lower, I would guess. So, if God ordains a select group of 3-5%, who are to remain celibate, do to personal or geographic distress, and those few are empowered to dedicate themselves unfettered to quality and quantity church service, perhaps the rest of us could buck up and make up the difference by producing 5% more children each. :-)

[FunkyTown]

Concerning Justaguy's willingness to consider the "exceptions" I mentioned. If the soundest polls are accurate, perhaps 2-3% of us are homosexual in orientation. The % of Christians called to difficult religious service is even lower, I would guess. So, if God ordains a select group of 3-5%, who are to remain celibate, do to personal or geographic distress, and those few are empowered to dedicate themselves unfettered to quality and quantity church service, perhaps the rest of us could buck up and make up the difference by producing 5% more children each. :-)

I volunteer my services to this noble cause, PC!

[Misshalfway]

I believe that Eternal marriage.....or more accurately the concept of sealing is an amazing doctrine. It isn't just about marriage even if marriage is one of the basic building blocks. It is about sealing the children of Abraham to the promises of Abraham. It is about making those eternal blessing available to all who are worthy of such promises and capacities. Being together forever with our sweethearts is a nice benefit and certainly part of that big picture but not necessarily the main goal. The seal ordinance is all about family relationships not just marriage partners. It is about fathers being sealed to children and even other ancestors and descendants. It is literally sealing together the entire family of Adam IF the children of men would choose it.

Now lets consider your two exceptions. I am not convinced that there is a "gift" of celibacy. I understand that as many have tried to understand the writings of Paul and understand sexuality itself, celibacy has been prized over other behaviors. I won't argue that for those who choose it, it provides a wonderful discipline to ones passions, but I don't believe that God intended such for everyone or even for an elite. I am not sure why Paul was celibate. I think there are more questions than answers on this subject specific to Paul and his choices and his reasons for those choices. In my reading of Paul, I don't find any allusion to a "gift" of celibacy and don't find any commandment to engage in such. Only confirmation that sexual appetites must be held in check and only expressed in the bounds of marriage which the Lord has set. In my mind, someone who isn't married or who didn't have opportunity for such blessing or couldn't for some reason is under the same command as everyone of us to discipline the sexual desire. For some, that may mean celibacy. It may be a strict teacher for some. It may be a happy cross to bear for others. It really is though about the law of chastity and understanding it completely. There is no "law of celibacy" in the gospel of Jesus Christ. Only a circumstance that comes with certain situations. It seems to me with the incredible rise of infidelity and other such indulgences (such as porn etc etc) that many of us humans need to learn a little of what it means to discipline ones sexual desires. I speak to those inside of marriage as well.

I think homosexuality falls into this same category. Just because one feels sexual feelings differently than another does not give them license to break the law of chastity. Having SSA or other sexual crosses to bear doesn't give one justification to indulge. It is a strict perspective. Not a popular one in our modern let it all hang out, fuzzy moral culture. But one that none the less has been outlined by the Lord. A person who practices chastity inside or outside of marriage is equally righteous. One behavior is not MORE righteous than another. Being chaste in any circumstance we find ourselves is the eternal principle.

[Iggy]

Not once has the Law of Chastity been explained. It is not just those who are unmarried to refrain from sexual intimacy.

Here is an explanation of it taken from Chapter 25: The Law of Chastity,” Gospel Fundamentals, 142 LDS.org - Family Chapter Detail - The Law of Chastity

The power to have children is very sacred. Our Father in Heaven has given us a law that tells us how to use this power. This law is called the law of chastity. It says we should have sexual relations only with the person to whom we are legally married. This means we must not have sexual relations before we are married, and after we are married we should have sexual relations only with our husband or wife

As a married/sealed woman, I obey the law of chastity as does my husband. I obey it physically, mentally and emotionally.

[Old Tex]

Isn't the strait gate baptism? The scripture actually says life, not eternal life, unless there is another scripture I have forgotten about.

13 Enter ye in at the strait gate; for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, which leadeth to destruction, and many there be who go in thereat;

14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

Yes, you are right. The gate is baptism. By passing through it one is on the way to eternal life, if they continue to stay in the narrow way. I think that anytime Christ spoke of "life" in the hereafter, He was speaking of eternal life. That was the purpose for His coming, to show the way to Eternal Life.

[Dove]

Concerning Justaguy's willingness to consider the "exceptions" I mentioned. If the soundest polls are accurate, perhaps 2-3% of us are homosexual in orientation. The % of Christians called to difficult religious service is even lower, I would guess. So, if God ordains a select group of 3-5%, who are to remain celibate, do to personal or geographic distress, and those few are empowered to dedicate themselves unfettered to quality and quantity church service, perhaps the rest of us could buck up and make up the difference by producing 5% more children each. :-)

LOL!! Where's that laugh button when I need it, PC?!

I'm thankful to you for this thread. What I'm learning from this isn't so much the laws of chastity/celibacy, etc. It's more that we each have our individual circumstances/backgrounds that we come from and are judged by, and that Christ is the perfect, all merciful, just, and loving judge. The words to a Mormon hymn come to mind, "Lord, I would follow Thee,"...."Who am I to judge another, when I walk imperfectly? In the quiet heart is hidden sorrow that the eye can't see. Who am I to judge another? Lord, I would follow thee~"

I quote these lyrics because I feel this hymn applies here. I don't think we know the dragons other's fight in their heart to practice chastity, or in what form they choose to practice it or understand it. We don't know their history or background, therefore who are we to judge? I feel it is in order to proffer tolerance and love to anybody striving to become better, or more Christlike, as they understand Him. I tip my hat to those who dedicate their lives to serving Him, as they understand Him. We have young men who do that two years of their lives in the LDS church.

I would be remiss to dress anyone down in the name of defending my doctrine. It's just not right. While I believe as I do, and I am a member of the LDS church, I do believe the doctrine of the church for the most part, and am working on the rest. However, it's not mine to tell anybody they're wrong, or going to hell, or anywhere less than heaven, for believing something different. That's between them and their Creator. I would say it is mine to show by example how happy I am to believe in Christ as I do, and to be Christlike. That's all....I think of Doctrine and Covenants 121:41; "No power or influence can or ought to be maintained by virtue of the priesthood, only by persuasion, by long suffering, by gentleness and meekness, and by love unfeigned....." How beautiful!

Life is sooo hard! The Saviour knows this, and judges us according to the knowledge and the experiences and choices that we have. All of us, at some point in time, will receive a fullness of the truth, in radiant, beaming, truthful perspective. I believe that everyone one of us will agree in that moment that He is just, and that we are being given exactly what we wanted and have chosen..........Until then, why don't we do all we can to help each other, gay or straight, mormon, or a member of another faith (or even non-faith), married, divorced, or just single, whatever defining title we fall under, let's help each other make this life a little sweeter, brighter, kinder, more hopeful, loving, happier. For everyone. Isn't this what the Saviour would have us do?

[prisonchaplain]

I want to thank everyone for very thoughtful posts. However, I'm still not sure I've gotten consensus on the one point that concerns me, so I will ask this directly. Does the Law of Chasity command that LDS who have attraction to the same sex, and not to the opposite gender, must nevertheless seek marriage, so they can procreate? My own sense is that this is highly unfair--more to the partner than to the homosexual. Mechanically, I suppose anyone can do their duty, if this is indeed it. But, is it really?

[MormonMema]

To my understanding, no that commandment would not necessarily apply to that situation, and I agree it would be very unfair to the partner. One thing I like about our understanding of the afterlife is that if we, for whatever reason, are not able to find a marriage partner in this life, we trust that it will all be worked out to everyone's joy and satisfaction in the next life. We believe that we will continue to grow and develop, and will continue to have the right to choose, beyond this life. We also believe that earth life is a testing ground, and that some of us volunteered for some very difficult tests. IMHO, perhaps homosexuality is one of those tests. I have much respect for those Latter-day Saints who have SSA, but who have chosen celibacy so they can keep sacred covenants.

[Iggy]

There is a couple in my Stake who are unique. She is lesbian and he is gay. They are sealed to each other. They married rather late in life thus there are no children.

Personally I see nothing wrong with this union. They care deeply for each other, and by being married/sealed to each other, they find it is easier to keep the law of chastity.

[japacific]

I will phrase this towards the gentlemen, but is applicable to the women here too.

How would you like it if you were straight, and God's rule was that you could only get married and have sexual relationship with other males?

[FunkyTown]

I will phrase this towards the gentlemen, but is applicable to the women here too.

How would you like it if you were straight, and God's rule was that you could only get married and have sexual relationship with other males?

Absolutely, one hundred percent correct. I don't know if I'd have the strength to live that, which is why I can't judge anyone who falls away.

But I can still judge people for wearing ultra-tight clothes when they're chubby, right?

[japacific]

I have no problem with that at least

[Traveler]

I want to thank everyone for very thoughtful posts. However, I'm still not sure I've gotten consensus on the one point that concerns me, so I will ask this directly. Does the Law of Chasity command that LDS who have attraction to the same sex, and not to the opposite gender, must nevertheless seek marriage, so they can procreate? My own sense is that this is highly unfair--more to the partner than to the homosexual. Mechanically, I suppose anyone can do their duty, if this is indeed it. But, is it really?

The law of chastity and the covenant of chastity is a covenant with G-d that all appetites, desires and passions of a sexual nature are to be exercised only within the guidelines given by and specified by G-d. Specifically, this means that anything of a sexual nature must be limited to marriage as G-d has defined marriage.

The Traveler

[Traveler]

I will phrase this towards the gentlemen, but is applicable to the women here too.

How would you like it if you were straight, and God's rule was that you could only get married and have sexual relationship with other males?

About as much as I would be excited about giving up a percentage of the money I earn by my labors. Making covenants with G-d is not about what I want or desire. It is not about my passions or even needs -- it is about sacrificing my will for the greatest good which is the will of G-d.

The Traveler

[FunkyTown]

About as much as I would be excited about giving up a percentage of the money I earn by my labors. Making covenants with G-d is not about what I want or desire. It is not about my passions or even needs -- it is about sacrificing my will for the greatest good which is the will of G-d.

The Traveler

Ouch... Oooh... Uh... Hrm...

I believe, Traveler, that you have completely owned me.

[ruthiechan]

I want to thank everyone for very thoughtful posts. However, I'm still not sure I've gotten consensus on the one point that concerns me, so I will ask this directly. Does the Law of Chasity command that LDS who have attraction to the same sex, and not to the opposite gender, must nevertheless seek marriage, so they can procreate? My own sense is that this is highly unfair--more to the partner than to the homosexual. Mechanically, I suppose anyone can do their duty, if this is indeed it. But, is it really?

I believe once upon a time it was suggested that those in the church dealing with SSA should simply marry and that would "solve" the problem.

This, of course, does not work. For most people.

There is a fellow on these boards who IS gay, and married to a woman whom he cares deeply for, and they have children together. He is not physically attracted to her, but he is emotionally attracted to her and that made all the difference.

So it depends on the capabilities of the person involved, but in general homosexuals are not actively encouraged to marry anyway.

[Old Tex]

"God rejected the fig leaf aprons which Adam and Eve made." (Gen. 3:21)

Evidently you are responding to something by your statement above. Can you give us some indication to what it is?

A statement like that out of the blue does not give one much of a clue to what you are talking about.

[Traveler]

Ouch... Oooh... Uh... Hrm...

I believe, Traveler, that you have completely owned me.

The truth be known my friend - I would hope we could all avoid the Ouch. And I believe you are owned but not by me. I do enjoy our "walk" together and hope above all that for you it is meaningful.

Thank you for you input.

The Traveler

[Prodigal_Son]

I will phrase this towards the gentlemen, but is applicable to the women here too.

How would you like it if you were straight, and God's rule was that you could only get married and have sexual relationship with other males?

So you get a roommate and adopt some kids!!!

[Just_A_Guy]

Does the Law of Chasity command that LDS who have attraction to the same sex, and not to the opposite gender, must nevertheless seek marriage, so they can procreate?

I would say that there is a "rebuttable presumption in favor of such a duty" (sorry to get all lawyerly on you). But that presumption does not arise out of the Law of Chastity. It arises out of the New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage, which is a different (but related) law.

[Traveler]

I would say that there is a "rebuttable presumption in favor of such a duty" (sorry to get all lawyerly on you). But that presumption does not arise out of the Law of Chastity. It arises out of the New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage, which is a different (but related) law.

I think I agree except I believe the New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage must be preceded by fulfilling the law of chastity. Some thought that are also missing concerns the idea of:

1. Holy

2. Whole

3. Born of G-d

4. One – as Jesus and the Father are one.

One last thought is that we live by faith and somewhat incomplete in mortal flesh. Though we strive to be “perfect” I am not sure that takes place until the resurrection. We all struggle over different temptations of the flesh, but I believe we error when we define ourselves by our temptations. It may be that what troubles us as we come to know Good from Evil will not trouble us with G-d beside us.

The Traveler

[Lyle]

it's odd i came to this topic expecting a few things to be said and have read everything that remains up till this moment and still have not seen the answers i have found on the subject. Before i entered into the medical field i didnt believe in multiple personalities.

i had studied psychologist that debated it and that the only believers of the disorder are those who have experienced it by witnessing it first hand. those who debated are those who believed that the mind was not capable of it.

forgive me please for comparing everything that is not norm to this example, i fall in the category of not norm, the first time i met a man who had this disorder i didn't really believe that his diagnosis was legit. since, i have ever changed my view on all things that the lord allowed to come into this world.

all things that i do not understand have a purpose. this mans gift was grace. the sins that he may have committed in one hour, can you say he was guilty of as the man i met while walking him through the hall?

it is said that little children have complete protection from satan (i'm pretty sure this is an LDS belief hopefully its not exclusively an lds belief) anything that we call a sin they can not have committed by the influence of satan. that Christs atonement protects them from his influence until they come of age. all sins they commit before then are by influence of man or nature.

if i am making no sense i am sorry i only am trying to say: what makes a developmentally handicapped adult whose mind matured not past the age of three capable of sin. what makes a homosexual person capable of wrongful lusts? What sin has a man with no natural affection due to a birth defect committed if he could not truthfully tell his wife or children that he loved them? what makes a child born with no genitals sinful for not reproducing? what force grants mother Teresa the celestial gift of heavenly life?

GRACE (yes Mormons believe in it, we also believe in doing all that we can to fulfill the Lords commands as we are capable, we can not be held accountable above that which we can control)

[Traveler]

it's odd i came to this topic expecting a few things to be said and have read everything that remains up till this moment and still have not seen the answers i have found on the subject. Before i entered into the medical field i didnt believe in multiple personalities.

i had studied psychologist that debated it and that the only believers of the disorder are those who have experienced it by witnessing it first hand. those who debated are those who believed that the mind was not capable of it.

forgive me please for comparing everything that is not norm to this example, i fall in the category of not norm, the first time i met a man who had this disorder i didn't really believe that his diagnosis was legit. since, i have ever changed my view on all things that the lord allowed to come into this world.

all things that i do not understand have a purpose. this mans gift was grace. the sins that he may have committed in one hour, can you say he was guilty of as the man i met while walking him through the hall?

it is said that little children have complete protection from satan (i'm pretty sure this is an LDS belief hopefully its not exclusively an lds belief) anything that we call a sin they can not have committed by the influence of satan. that Christs atonement protects them from his influence until they come of age. all sins they commit before then are by influence of man or nature.

if i am making no sense i am sorry i only am trying to say: what makes a developmentally handicapped adult whose mind matured not past the age of three capable of sin. what makes a homosexual person capable of wrongful lusts? What sin has a man with no natural affection due to a birth defect committed if he could not truthfully tell his wife or children that he loved them? what makes a child born with no genitals sinful for not reproducing? what force grants mother Teresa the celestial gift of heavenly life?

GRACE (yes Mormons believe in it, we also believe in doing all that we can to fulfill the Lords commands as we are capable, we can not be held accountable above that which we can control)

Interesting post – have you considered that a multiple personality may be a reflection of multiple spirits?

As to children having complete protection from Satan and his angles; I think you have misinterpreted the doctrine. The doctrine is that children are not held accountable until they reach the age of 8 – that is not the same as saying there is no influence. Jesus once cast an unclean spirit out of a child (with palsy). When Jesus asked the parents how long the child had suffered the parents responded with a saying that if it is translated correctly means since infancy.

Can we consider the possibility that parents may expose their small children to a contentious spirit by much bickering or a spirit of violence by the videos and programs they invite into their homes by the entertainment they bring into their homes? Could the music we play have a part in the spirits that find place in our homes?

I wonder – by time we observe various disorders in an individual – perhaps we are becoming aware of just a tip of an iceberg of the spiritual influences active in our lives.

The Traveler

[Lyle]

Interesting post – have you considered that a multiple personality may be a reflection of multiple spirits?

I dont believe that multiple spirits can inhabit a man and he still function as one in all my experince with and all of th things ihave read and ben taught about possesion the body comes to a place very near death. but i may be ertainly wrong.

As to children having complete protection from Satan and his angles; I think you have misinterpreted the doctrine. The doctrine is that children are not held accountable until they reach the age of 8 – that is not the same as saying there is no influence. Jesus once cast an unclean spirit out of a child (with palsy). When Jesus asked the parents how long the child had suffered the parents responded with a saying that if it is translated correctly means since infancy.

I hate to disagree and i hope you bear with me for doing so, you are part right,

“But behold, I say unto you that little children are redeemed from the foundation of the world through mine Only Begotten; Wherefore they cannot sin, for power is not given unto Satan to tempt little children, until they begin to become accountable before me; For it is given unto them even as I will, according to mine own pleasure, that great things may be required at the hand of their fathers.”(D&C 29:46-48)

Can we consider the possibility that parents may expose their small children to a contentious spirit by much bickering or a spirit of violence by the videos and programs they invite into their homes by the entertainment they bring into their homes? Could the music we play have a part in the spirits that find place in our homesI wonder – by time we observe various disorders in an individual – perhaps we are becoming aware of just a tip of an iceberg of the spiritual influences active in our lives.The Traveler

I had a vision regarding this; you are absolutely right

one night just after my initial recovery from an illness this last year i went to bed and the moment i put my head on the pillow i woke up. i sprang to a sitting position. i was laying in my dads bed alone at his house. i was immediately was well freaked out. i stared out the window wondering why the Lord had done this to me. i questioned Why would you have shown me what i was going to do for the next 15 years? i was a boy ho knew exactly every detail of his life for the next 15 years because i had experienced it.

this was no dream either, i swear that if time travel could be "RATIONALIZED" i might possible believe in it. i woke up and prayed and prayed then i showered i went in to my dads kitchen to get breakfast. my mind was buzzing with the things of science camp giant bugs scorpions and bats, i got breakfast, then, it hit me! while my brothers were all watching TV!

i only committed the sins i had committed because i allowed a chain of small things turn into something very heavy much like Charles Dicken's tale of Marley. i saw every little detail from the cartons i allowed myself to watch the music i listened to , the language i tolerated and the company i kept. all these little tiny details were little tiny acceptable links in the chain i carried around and the huge mistakes i made were because of the unrecognizable small ones i bore silently and unknowingly until it was so heavy and the the sin so bad i could tolerate no more.

i continued through the day but i chose not to watch the TV shows, i sat in the room i enjoyed the company of my brother a children watching my dad cook for me hearing him speak in fatherly ways.

my dad pulled me aside because the day before i had hit my brother and fought with him. he said to me that my influence affects all those around me and that influence that others see they also carry and others see that and are influenced by that. i went through the entire day admiring and enjoying the day as a child.

i had the most marvelous day i could imagine. that night i laid on my poor little bed at my moms house looked up at the stars and thanked the lord for showing me everything that i could do wrong if i stayed on the same path, i thanked him because now i was going to be absolutely perfect the best i possible could i couldn't wait to impress Him. i looked out at the stars till i could no longer stay awake then i fell to sleep so gently on the pillow and the moment i was asleep i woke up in my bed confused and worried....

why would the Lord convince me that i was going to be OK why would he let me think that i could choose to be perfect? why did he get me excited about being a child, because he wanted me to know that i am. and can be. the man i was before this event was not the same man after. one night i did not sleep. one night of my life i was a man no different from any other man when i went to bed i woke up and was a child but knew life as a man knows life. i did not sleep like i had every day before and everyday after. I did not live my life the way i did before this happened to me, i listened to the radio differently i couldn't stand much tv anymore let alone the same and even some of my favorite company, language literature and media.

i saw the influences of God being only a few things and his whisperings being hard to recognize between the bright flashing billboards and barring words of politicians. god whispered and i could hear it. his small works i could see. i soon learned that satan did not know what i was thinking, he certainly could tell by my body language and sources of the like "REASONING" that i was interested or that the things he tempted with got to me but i also saw that the lord was there influencing me too. neither of these two were raging in my head and i had a choice to listen to or to be interested in either of their messages.

for the first time in my life i felt s though i took responsibility for every thought i entertained every notion in my head and every temptation that came my way.

Wouldnt it be something spectacular if we all carried honest truthful and loving happy influences where ever we go?

Edited January 8, 2009 by Lyle
minor spelling miss apropriated grammar and invisible text present minor aditions to my opinions

[Prodigal_Son]

Lyle, I appreciate the reminder. I struggle sooooo much with the little justifications...