Sealing Cancellation Request


Recommended Posts

If your wife was committing emotional adultery with him even before the divorce that is double reason that any remarriage would not be valid. Pres. Kimball believed that those couples who had an inappropriate (emotional or physical) relationship before divorce are not worthy of ever remarrying in the temple.

Even I cannot find this statement Pam...Foreverafter? I do know President Kimball was very emotional over the issue of adultery but never heard this statement before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's why I'd like her to provide the reference. This would not be the first time that someone has questioned or asked for a reference and has been ignored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not believe Pres Kimball ever stated that before. Both my wife and I were previously sealed in the temple to people who ended up not being true to their covenant. There is no way my wife will go back to her former spouse, nor would I to my former spouse. The First Presidency canceled both sealings, which means those sealings were loosed on earth and in heaven.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both my wife and I were previously sealed in the temple to people who ended up not being true to their covenant. There is no way my wife will go back to her former spouse, nor would I to my former spouse. The First Presidency canceled both sealings, which means those sealings were loosed on earth and in heaven.

As long as you both were truely justified & innocent in the divorce, you have no reason to worry about ever having to be with your former spouse again, even in heaven. Only those who had a part in the breakdown of the marriage may not be justified in remarrying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as you both were truely justified & innocent in the divorce, you have no reason to worry about ever having to be with your former spouse again, even in heaven. Only those who had a part in the breakdown of the marriage may not be justified in remarrying.

But if they have truly repented and have gone through the repentence process would they not then be able to remarry and in the temple?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's why I'd like her to provide the reference. This would not be the first time that someone has questioned or asked for a reference and has been ignored.

You can't get blood from a stone... or a reference out of Foreverafter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't claim to have the answers, but I've got hunches, and that's where my own answers usually start.

I can't imagine how it could be possible that your ex-wife could have repented if she's trying to marry the guy she left you for. The mess she made obviously has not been cleaned up yet, and I can't understand how anyone could believe her repentance is complete until that happens. Granted, I suppose it's possible she might apologize to you, somehow convince you to let her go (not that anyone ought to expect such a thing from you), and then her repentance would be complete. If she could pull all that off, I could see it.

If you steal something and your repentance is incomplete until you have returned it or provided compensation, how could you leave someone for another person, have your sealing revoked, and then be sealed to the one you left your first spouse for? She didn't just steal something from a store. She inflicted tremendous suffering on a child of God, and there's a price to be paid for that. This may be my own interpretation, but when I read in the book of Revelation about people who "loveth and maketh a lie", to me it's talking about people who convince someone that they love them and then break that person’s heart by making it as if it were all a lie. If my interpretation is incorrect, I'm sure my basic premise is valid.

I'd take physical abuse over emotional abuse any day. Being betrayed straight through to the core of your being is pretty serious business. That's pain you don't walk away from very easily.

BenRaines has a point though. You may want to consider the likelihood that you're dodging a bullet. You've been divorced for 10 years. How can you be confident that she has matured? How can you be confident that she respects the sanctity of marriage? She hasn't respected yours. She's betrayed you. I know it's not easy to let someone you love go, even after they hurt you. But you may want to consider the possibility (and this is only a possibility) that she is unknowingly attempting to set you free to find someone who will treat you the way she should have. Ultimately, this is a decision you'll have to make for yourself, whether you're willing to let her singlehandedly destroy a marriage that was approved by God, rob you of your wife (in the Celestial sense as well as the mortal sense), and replace you with some guy who didn't have the courtesy to find an unmarried woman to court instead.

Regardless, you don't deserve what's been done to you. I don't understand how the Church could allow her to dissolve your Temple Sealing against your wishes, but promise yourself that if for some reason that's what happens, you will not, under any circumstances, lose your testimony.

No matter what happens, remember what happened to Job. He lost his whole family, but after his trials were over, he ended up with more of everything that he lost than he had before the trials began. Like you, he didn't deserve the bad things that happened to him. But if we lived in a just world, the Savior would have been crowned with gold and jewels instead of thorns, and lifted up on a throne instead of a cross.

If you continue righteously as you are and have been, you will end up better off than when you started. We can't always predict how that will play out, but the end result is certain. Just remember that no matter how much pain you have to go through, it's not God's fault, it's not His Gospel's fault (even if it is sometimes administered by imperfect people), and even if it were to cost you your life, you must never sever your ties to Him, but rather increase and strengthen them. The Savior will get you through this, one way or the other.

Do what you think is right, and call on the Lord to help you the rest of the way. I know from personal experience in slightly similar circumstances that He can heal your heart, numb the pain, and give you the wisdom necessary to navigate through the storm safely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't imagine how it could be possible that your ex-wife could have repented if she's trying to marry the guy she left you for. The mess she made obviously has not been cleaned up yet, and I can't understand how anyone could believe her repentance is complete until that happens. Granted, I suppose it's possible she might apologize to you, somehow convince you to let her go (not that anyone ought to expect such a thing from you), and then her repentance would be complete. If she could pull all that off, I could see it.

If you steal something and your repentance is incomplete until you have returned it or provided compensation, how could you leave someone for another person, have your sealing revoked, and then be sealed to the one you left your first spouse for? She didn't just steal something from a store. She inflicted tremendous suffering on a child of God, and there's a price to be paid for that. This may be my own interpretation, but when I read in the book of Revelation about people who "loveth and maketh a lie", to me it's talking about people who convince someone that they love them and then break that person’s heart by making it as if it were all a lie. If my interpretation is incorrect, I'm sure my basic premise is valid.

I'd take physical abuse over emotional abuse any day. Being betrayed straight through to the core of your being is pretty serious business. That's pain you don't walk away from very easily.

Awesome post Chet! I totally agree. If a person has truely repented of their adultery they would be so devastated & sorry for the pain they have caused their spouse & children & they would want to do anything to make restitution to their former spouse & come back to the marriage if the spouse wanted them back & make it up to them for the rest of their life. They would not want to inflict further pain on the former spouse & children & go on to marry their adulterous lover. They would completely forsake & give up the sin & the person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But if they have truly repented and have gone through the repentance process would they not then be able to remarry and in the temple?

To answer this is YES!!!

It is stated in the D&C 42 by the Savior Himself, when a person "repents" of his/her adulterous ways, He will forgive them and there sealing remains intact. Even those who had their election made sure, are forgive through trials of fire - this is where I would disagree with Elder Bruce R. McConkie statement stating they cannot be forgiven. Even President Spencer W. Kimball corrected this erroneous statement.

In adding to this, if a person had his/her sealing removed and through the process of proper repentance, can remarry in the temple. Questions like this is answered in the Church Handbook of Instructions [see 2008 version].

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't claim to have the answers, but I've got hunches, and that's where my own answers usually start.

I can't imagine how it could be possible that your ex-wife could have repented if she's trying to marry the guy she left you for. The mess she made obviously has not been cleaned up yet, and I can't understand how anyone could believe her repentance is complete until that happens. Granted, I suppose it's possible she might apologize to you, somehow convince you to let her go (not that anyone ought to expect such a thing from you), and then her repentance would be complete. If she could pull all that off, I could see it.

If you steal something and your repentance is incomplete until you have returned it or provided compensation, how could you leave someone for another person, have your sealing revoked, and then be sealed to the one you left your first spouse for? She didn't just steal something from a store. She inflicted tremendous suffering on a child of God, and there's a price to be paid for that. This may be my own interpretation, but when I read in the book of Revelation about people who "loveth and maketh a lie", to me it's talking about people who convince someone that they love them and then break that person’s heart by making it as if it were all a lie. If my interpretation is incorrect, I'm sure my basic premise is valid.

I'd take physical abuse over emotional abuse any day. Being betrayed straight through to the core of your being is pretty serious business. That's pain you don't walk away from very easily.

BenRaines has a point though. You may want to consider the likelihood that you're dodging a bullet. You've been divorced for 10 years. How can you be confident that she has matured? How can you be confident that she respects the sanctity of marriage? She hasn't respected yours. She's betrayed you. I know it's not easy to let someone you love go, even after they hurt you. But you may want to consider the possibility (and this is only a possibility) that she is unknowingly attempting to set you free to find someone who will treat you the way she should have. Ultimately, this is a decision you'll have to make for yourself, whether you're willing to let her singlehandedly destroy a marriage that was approved by God, rob you of your wife (in the Celestial sense as well as the mortal sense), and replace you with some guy who didn't have the courtesy to find an unmarried woman to court instead.

Regardless, you don't deserve what's been done to you. I don't understand how the Church could allow her to dissolve your Temple Sealing against your wishes, but promise yourself that if for some reason that's what happens, you will not, under any circumstances, lose your testimony.

No matter what happens, remember what happened to Job. He lost his whole family, but after his trials were over, he ended up with more of everything that he lost than he had before the trials began. Like you, he didn't deserve the bad things that happened to him. But if we lived in a just world, the Savior would have been crowned with gold and jewels instead of thorns, and lifted up on a throne instead of a cross.

If you continue righteously as you are and have been, you will end up better off than when you started. We can't always predict how that will play out, but the end result is certain. Just remember that no matter how much pain you have to go through, it's not God's fault, it's not His Gospel's fault (even if it is sometimes administered by imperfect people), and even if it were to cost you your life, you must never sever your ties to Him, but rather increase and strengthen them. The Savior will get you through this, one way or the other.

Do what you think is right, and call on the Lord to help you the rest of the way. I know from personal experience in slightly similar circumstances that He can heal your heart, numb the pain, and give you the wisdom necessary to navigate through the storm safely.

Now you know why there is a Savior and this is why I would leave this particular judgment in His hand when it comes to passing judgment for her and not mine own. I been in cases where the book should of been thrown at an individual and the Spirit confide to me to forgive the person. What we think is the right may not be what the Savior thinks is the correct method to use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, you're absolutely right, but I can't seem to wrap my head around how a person can leave their spouse for someone else and singlehandedly get the sealing revoked, even though the spouse they left still wants to be married to that person. It's like punishing the abandoned spouse for the sins of the one who walked out on them. It's completely backwards to me.

RealDeseret says he never abused his wife or failed to honor his Priesthood, yet she bailed on him. She left him for another man. Even if she didn't commit adultery with the other man during the 10 years since she divorced RealDeseret, she might as well have, for all the pain she's caused him. And now she wants to completely finish off what's left of their marriage so she can be free to marry another man? I cannot understand who in their right mind would allow such a thing. I'm sure if you ask the runaway bride she'll tell you she's repented, but how is that possible when RealDeseret still lives alone? Where's his restitution? Shouldn't that be part of the repentance process? If I stole something, I'd fully expect to have to restore it before my repentance was complete. Am I missing something here?

I just saw a post like this last week in which the poster admitted that there was more to the story than he let on at first, though it didn't really affect how I believe the story should end. I'd venture to say that the same would apply here, if everything I've heard so far is true.

So far you've impressed me, Hemidakota. So don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to be testy or trying to argue. But can you explain to me how it could be the will of God for RealDeseret's ex-wife to be granted her request to have their sealing dissolved? Can you explain to me how it's possible she could have repented while RealDeseret's home remains broken? I know repentance is possible, and I know judgment belongs to God, but I am unable to imagine our Heavenly Father rubber stamping the hurt that has been inflicted upon RealDeseret.

The only explanation that makes any sense to me is that there's a LOT more to the story than we've heard so far.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if she didn't commit adultery with the other man during the 10 years since she divorced RealDeseret,

Wouldn't that then be fornication and not adultery since they were lawfully divorced?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a problem with the claim that repentance cannot be complete without full restitution. The problem is that some sins and transgressions have irreversible consequences for which no restitution is possible. When we talk about the "steps of repentance" we often name restitution as a step, but many times forget to say that restitution should be made to the best of our ability (as stated by President Lee).

Let's consider some other examples where restitution can never be full or complete. Take a young adult woman who decides to engage in sexual activity. How can she make restitution? She cannot reclaim her virginity. Something was lost that cannot be restored. To require full and complete restitution would mean that this woman could never fully repent.

Now let's extend the hypothetical situation. Suppose the woman becomes pregnant. How is she supposed to make restitution now? What can she possibly return to herself and her partner and her child that will make a full and complete restitution?

And if we extend yet further. Suppose the woman chooses to keep the child and raise it as a single mother. Let's also suppose she chose to do this before joining the Church. As she joins the Church, she now has to repent of the sin that brought her beloved child into the world. How is a single mother, who loves and adores her child, supposed to utter the words "the action that brought my child into the world was a tragic and terrible mistake" without feeling some cognitive dissonance? Do we really comprehend how hard it is to separate the tragedy of the sexual act for the joy and elation of raising a child?

That single mother simply cannot make full restitution. But we do know that she can repent and be forgiven. She must only make restitution to the best of her ability. That may mean, in her case, being the best mom she can be, providing the best opportunities for her child, and above all, ceasing further unchaste activity. If that's the best she can do for restitution, then I promise you, the Savior will consider it enough.

Now, enough with hypotheticals. Let's discuss a real situation. I know a woman who married a man when she was 19. She and her husband had a child together. But those first couple of years didn't go as wonderfully as planned, and before long, she found herself drowning in despair. She was losing herself and miserable--no matter what she tried, she could not seem to make her marriage with this man work. Finally, she broke, and she divorced her husband.

About a year later, she met another man, grew to love him, and married him. She had a child with her second husband. After the birth of her second child, she learned that her first husband had been manic depressive. They simply didn't know during their marriage. Without that knowledge, they couldn't possibly have taken the proper steps to repair their relationship. But here's the question now--whereas there was no adultery to justify their divorce, with the new information she had, how is she supposed to make restitution? Does she leave her second husband and son to return to her first husband because now she knows what she can do to repair their relationship? Doesn't that put her in a situation where making restitution requires her to make an entirely different mess?

It gets a little crazier too...the woman's first husband, while having learned to manage his illness through behavior and medication, has finally become stable, but has been known to bounce in and out of activity in the Church. Her second husband, on the other hand, has served as a bishop and on multiple high councils. Without question, she has been greatly blessed because of her decision to marry and stay with her second husband? How is that consistent with not having repented nor made restitution for her first divorce?

My point in saying all this is that we're dealing with very complex issues that have no simple answers. Trying to boil these issues down to a seven step model of repentance that we teach children with shop lifting and arguing as examples is a grotesque injustice to the people suffering from these situations.

I will also add this point, with the warning that it will come off as very harsh. Some have said to the original poster that if he remains faithful to his covenants, if he chooses, he may still have his wife for eternity if he chooses to have her. But what if she doesn't want him? To force her to be with him against her will is contrary to the fundamental principles of the plan of happiness. Besides, the sealing covenant is sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise when we accept and keep the covenant by our own free will and choice. Can we really be so certain that it remains in effect when people choose, by their own free will and choice, not to keep it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It gets a little crazier too...the woman's first husband, while having learned to manage his illness through behavior and medication, has finally become stable, but has been known to bounce in and out of activity in the Church. Her second husband, on the other hand, has served as a bishop and on multiple high councils.

Why is serving in leadership positions the shibboleth of faithful Sainthood for men? I have never understood this. Illustrating a man's faithfulness in the Church invariably is done by naming off his leadership callings. What if he never serves in a leadership calling in his life? What if he faithfully attends his meetings, pays his tithing, goes to the temple, and at 60 is still "just" an elder? Ought his wife decide that she married the wrong guy, since he's clearly a loser? After all, he never held a leadership position.

I'm using MoE's post to illustrate this, but it certainly is not just him. In fact, I can find any number of general conference talks where General Authorities do the same thing. Are we to understand that the leaders of the Church are actually the very best of men in the Church, and that leadership callings are indeed a legitimate way of gauging male faithfulness? If so, does the inverse apply -- those men who never hold leadership callings are the weak and faithless of the Saints? If not, what are we to make of the constant use of leadership callings as examples of faithfulness?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But here's the question now--whereas there was no adultery to justify their divorce, with the new information she had, how is she supposed to make restitution? Does she leave her second husband and son to return to her first husband because now she knows what she can do to repair their relationship?

I believe she should return to her 1st husband, for that is where her real obligation is. The 2nd husband knew what he was getting into & that divorce is usually a huge sin (even children know this) & that he might be marrying a woman who might not be justified to be divorced from her husband. Depression is not always a sin & if she had been keeping her covenants to her 1st husband she never could have broken her sacred covenants to him, for she would have been too in love with him, even in a difficult marriage. The 2nd husband knew this but didn't want to think about it probably, thus as Dr. Laura says, "he knew before hand" & just didn't want to deal with reality, so now the consequences are now even bigger to deal with. And the one who would be hurt the most is the child from the 2nd marriage but still the 1st marriage takes precidence & restitution must be made as far as possible & the children will be better off in the end if the mother does whats right.

Even Dr. Laura, who isn't even a Christian, understands the importance of the 1st marriage & often recommends leaving a 2nd marriage & going back to the former spouse if they want them back. It's usually the only way to heal the wounds of the former spouse & children. Which must come 1st before her feelings & desires or any 2nd husband's feelings. I have known couples who have done just that. And yes, it is hard but what a tangeled web divorce weaves & 2nd spouses would beware of this if they are wise.

Some have said to the original poster that if he remains faithful to his covenants, if he chooses, he may still have his wife for eternity if he chooses to have her. But what if she doesn't want him?

A Prophet, Brigham Young, said, "If he honors his Priesthood & you are to blame & come short of doing your duty & prove yourself unworthy of Celestial Glory, it will be left to him to do what he pleases with you. You will be very glad to get to him." (BY, JD, Vol. 17, June 28, 1874) Repentance will change errant spouse's desires & feelings completely.

Edited by foreverafter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe she should return to her 1st husband, for that is where her real obligation is. The 2nd husband knew what he was getting into & that he might be marrying a woman who might not be justified to be divorced from her husband. Depression is not always a sin & if she had been keeping her covenants to her 1st husband she never could have broken her sacred covenants to him, for she would have been too in love with him, even in a difficult marriage. The 2nd husband knew this but didn't want to think about it probably, thus as Dr. Laura says, "he knew before hand" & just didn't want to deal with reality, so now the consequences are now even bigger to deal with. And the one who would be hurt the most is the child from the 2nd marriage but still the 1st marriage takes precidence & restitution must be made as far as possible & the children will be better off in the end if the mother does whats right.

Even Dr. Laura, who isn't even a Christian, understands the importance of & often recommends leaving a 2nd marriage & going back to the former spouse if they want them back. It's usually the only way to heal the wounds of the former spouse & children. Which must come 1st before her feelings & desires or any 2nd husband's feelings. I have known couples who have done just that. And yes, it is hard but what a tangeled web divorce weaves & 2nd spouses would beware of this if they are wise.

Oh my..this is getting even more bizarre.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh my..this is getting even more bizarre.

But if Dr. Laura condones it....

I just don't understand this belief. So this woman should now disrupt a man's life and a child's life to return to the 1st husband. Does this mean that the 2nd husband would commit adultery if he married another woman? Afterall, his 1st marriage was dissolved, but if he marries another, isn't that adultery according to forever? What if the 1st husband had died? Should the woman just leave her 2nd husband and remain faithful to the 1st to show true repentance?

I think it's pretty presumptuous to assume that the Lord doesn't know more than we do...He can judge this woman and her actions and intents. If He allows the bishops and prophets to allow (and not advise to stay or go in marriage situations) 2nd marriages, then shouldn't we bow to His greater knowledge?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But yes..let's listen to Dr. Laura before we listen to our Church leaders or before we allow Heavenly Father to have his hand in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok I'm sorry I've just got to say this. I am a convert to the church, one of the huge draws for me was the doctrine of eternal marriage, I love the idea of eternal marriage but I'll be honest, if I as an investigator had eternal marriage explained to me the way foreverafter views it, I wouldn't have joined the church. Because it takes what I've always viewed as a joyous doctrine that brings hope to people and twists it into something ugly. It makes marriage into a trap that you can never escape from no matter how bad things get or if you do get manage to get away you have to put your life on hold on the off chance that your ex gets their act together. And it doesn’t matter how much pain it causes or how many lives you disrupt you must preserve that sacred first marriage at all costs.

But what makes me saddest is it takes people, individuals that have different situations and make different mistakes and are at different points in their journey, and turns them into nothing more than pieces on some sort of eternal board game. It doesn’t take individual situations into account, it doesn’t take their desires or wishes or the pain they are going through into account, it just pairs people off and then tells them, too bad, you’re stuck with each other for ever. It takes away free will and to me it devalues (not sure if this is the right word for it) the atonement. It says that the atonement isn’t powerful enough, that Jesus’ grace isn’t enough.

And really if you think a woman should leave a faithful father and husband and break up her household and hurt her children to go back to a partially active spouse who may or may not have his act together just because he was her first marriage, well then you’ve got a lot more problems than just skewed doctrinal views. Sorry this all sounds very melodramatic, I really didn’t intend for it too, this just really was bugging for some reason. It flies in the face of everything I’ve been taught about eternal marriage and free will and the atonement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share