Temple Marriage

[foreverafter]

Exactly. And it is current Presidents who are allowing divorce and temple sealing cancellations in divorce issues and allowing others to be married and sealed in the temples who have been divorced.

So I gather that you don't believe that people can get into the temple unworthily & deceive their leaders.

[Connie]

When an Apostle's opinion differs from what the Presidents of the Church teach, we are told to go with what the Presidents teach to be sure of current doctrine. Apostles cannot declare new doctrine, only Presidents can do that.

Could i get a reference for this please?

[Vort]

Could i get a reference for this please?

Good luck with that, Connie.

[beefche]

So I gather that you don't believe that people can get into the temple unworthily & deceive their leaders.

So, you are postulating that every single person who has been divorced for reasons other than adultery and then sealed in the temple to a different spouse has lied to every priesthood authority in order to do so.

This is a ridiculous statement. Of course there are people who lie to priesthood authority to get into the temple. But, if the First Presidency truly felt that it was ADULTERY that is committed by individuals who divorce and remarry another, then they would make it impossible for them to be sealed in the temple.

[foreverafter]

Absolutely not, and I have not made enough posts for anyone to make that inference in soundness. This is the first time I have ever mentioned it on this forum. I have tried hard to reconcile with her, and that is what I believe would be best for both our sakes, but she won't have it. I can understand though why you would lash back like that. My post was not an easy one to read, I'm sure.

On the other hand, you have made numerous posts that make it very easy to see what happened in your situation. I understand how much you are hurting over all this, but what you are doing is not right. It is false healing. It is justification perpetuated by the one who would seek your destruction. You are falling prey to the very deceptions that you have warned others to watch out for!!!

I don't know if your husband has yet remarried and sought a cancellation of the sealing promise, but if he hasn't yet, it likely will happen. By clinging to false doctrine, and to your ex, you are not taking your opportunity in this life to work out your salvation, and ensure that you are part in the highest ordinance. That's not to be taken lightly. You really need to move on. And that is a position taken by the church in many words, and in deed.

Ryan, I am so sorry to hear that you feel this way. But this sentiment is not new, for nearly the whole world believes this way. But, just for information sake, if a divorced husband were to remarry in the temple, the Church would not dissolve his sealing to his 1st wife. It is kept in tact, just in case, he was not justified or until the abandoned wife wants to remarry. This can appear like he is sealed to 2 living women, but that is not the case in reality, for he must remain faithful to the 1st to have her in the eternities & his dating & remarriage to the 2nd wife, automatically breaks his rights & claim to the 1st wife.

If you really love your wife Ryan & still want her, I would suggest an in depth study of the teachings of the Presidents of the Church on divorce & true love & marriage & keeping our covenants. Their teachings are not hard to find. I would start with reading everything Pres. Joseph Fielding Smith said on the subject, he knew quite alot about it all.

We can only come to truely understand that which we are willing to live.

Edited September 11, 2009 by foreverafter

[foreverafter]

So, you are postulating that every single person who has been divorced for reasons other than adultery and then sealed in the temple to a different spouse has lied to every priesthood authority in order to do so.

This is a ridiculous statement. Of course there are people who lie to priesthood authority to get into the temple. But, if the First Presidency truly felt that it was ADULTERY that is committed by individuals who divorce and remarry another, then they would make it impossible for them to be sealed in the temple.

I did not postulate that. There may be other justifications for divorce than adultery.

So if you agree that people can get into the temple unworthily, then why do you think they are allowed to be remarried, if they aren't worthy?

Edited September 11, 2009 by foreverafter

[foreverafter]

Could i get a reference for this please?

Yes, I will try to find it for you. But it may take me til later today, for I must get my house finished & ready to show to a prospective buyer today.

[Gatorman]

foreverafter - I have been reading what you have posted and find it interesting. I have not found a reference to a question I keep having. If the church believes that adultery or something in a list like that is the only reason divorce is allowable and being resealed is acceptable, why does the First Presidency of the church grant a temple cancellation or clearance in any case where it is not clear that adultery, etc, took place? Why would the leaders of our church risk the sacred sanctity of temple marriage simply to give someone agency to screw up for themselves?

[beefche]

I did not postulate that. There may be other justifications for divorce than adultery.

But you are postulating that people who, in your opinion, are committing adultery by remarrying are lying to their priesthood authority in order to get remarried.

You still haven't answered my assertion--the prophet today, namely Thomas Monson, approves temple cancellations and sealings for divorced people. How can that be if they are committing adultery according to you?

So if you agree that people can get into the temple unworthily, then why do you think they are allowed to be remarried, if they aren't worthy?

What? If someone lied to their priesthood authority, then they will enter the temple. Period. Your question doesn't make sense.

[foreverafter]

Why would the leaders of our church risk the sacred sanctity of temple marriage simply to give someone agency to screw up for themselves?

Heavenly Father seems to allow us all to enter his sacred temples & perform ordinances on the basis of our own declarations of worthiness, even though he knows some may not be truthful. Church leaders have said that just because something is performed in the temple does not automatically make it eternal. One must have been worthy to enter the temple in the 1st place & stay worthy of those blessings afterwards. That unworthy people may enter the temple, does not usually seem to have an effect on those who are there worthily.

[pam]

Foreverafter, no one is disputing that marriage covenants in the temple or even civally shouldn't be made lightly. Also no one is disputing that when considering divorce that all options should be entertained. Anything to do with marriage or divorce is a huge decision.

But there are many that are disagreeing with your understanding and thought process on the whole divorce makes you an adulterer etc etc etc. How could it be that so many of us are wrong in our understanding and knowledge on the subject? Yet in being wrong we agree with each other?

Edited September 11, 2009 by pam

[Gatorman]

Why would the First Presidency allow us to believe that our marriages are cancelled and grant us permission to be sealed again. Remember, that is what they are doing. They are stating it is okay for us to do so. So, is the First Presidency lying to us? Are they setting us up to sin? Why would the First Presidency take such an action? Why would they spend upwards of a year or more, in some cases, investigating the requests before granting them? Why not just sign off on each one as soon as they receive it?

[foreverafter]

You still haven't answered my assertion--the prophet today, namely Thomas Monson, approves temple cancellations and sealings for divorced people. How can that be if they are committing adultery according to you?

What? If someone lied to their priesthood authority, then they will enter the temple. Period. Your question doesn't make sense.

Let me rephrase. If someone is unworthy or unjustified in a divorce, why are they allowed to remarry?

[foreverafter]

But there are many that are disagreeing with your understanding and thought process on the whole divorce makes you an adulterer etc etc etc. How could it be that so many of us are wrong in our understanding and knowledge on the subject? Yet in being wrong we agree with each other?

It is not my idea that unjustified divorce is Adultery, it is a Prophet of God's & Christ's. Did anyone read the quotes I put up, especially what Pres. JFSmith said? I am just going by what he said. From all that I have studied, all the other Presidents of the Church have agreed with him & said similar things about divorce. I have to side with them.

[beefche]

It is not my idea that unjustified divorce is Adultery, it is a Prophet of God's & Christ's. Did anyone read the quotes I put up, especially what Pres. JFSmith said? I am just going by what he said. From all that I have studied, all the other Presidents of the Church have agreed with him & said similar things about divorce. I have to side with them.

Give me a quote from Presidend Hinckley or Monson. I'll settle for Presidents Hunter, Benson, Kimball.

[beefche]

Let me rephrase. If someone is unworthy or unjustified in a divorce, why are they allowed to remarry?

Who judged them unworthy? You may have the opinion they are unworthy. Their bishop or stake president deemed them unworthy? Then they won't get a temple recommend.

[foreverafter]

Why would the First Presidency allow us to believe that our marriages are cancelled and grant us permission to be sealed again. Remember, that is what they are doing. They are stating it is okay for us to do so. So, is the First Presidency lying to us? Are they setting us up to sin? Why would the First Presidency take such an action? Why would they spend upwards of a year or more, in some cases, investigating the requests before granting them? Why not just sign off on each one as soon as they receive it?

It appears the same happens with getting a recommend, but on a lower level. When the Stake President hands you your recommend, do you assume 'he' has just given permission & 'made you worthy' for you to enter the temple? I believe we basically let ourselves in the temple, on our own accountability, unless there is some grave thing that the Church Leaders have been told about that would keep us out.

[Gatorman]

I went to LDS.org and looked up Divorce. Came across this article. Which, would seem to suggest both sides are right, though, with a twist. :)

LDS.org - Ensign Article - Divorce

In ancient times and even under tribal laws in some countries where we now have members, men have power to divorce their wives for any trivial thing. Such unrighteous oppression of women was rejected by the Savior, who declared:

“Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.

“And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery” (Matthew 19:8–9).

The kind of marriage required for exaltation—eternal in duration and godlike in quality—does not contemplate divorce. In the temples of the Lord, couples are married for all eternity. But some marriages do not progress toward that ideal. Because “of the hardness of [our] hearts,” the Lord does not currently enforce the consequences of the celestial standard. He permits divorced persons to marry again without the stain of immorality specified in the higher law. Unless a divorced member has committed serious transgressions, he or she can become eligible for a temple recommend under the same worthiness standards that apply to other members.

====================================================================

So, if I read this correctly, foreverafter is right in the 'perfect' sense, but, we are not being held to that perfect law at this time. Similar to the law of consecration, I believe it is. We KNOW it, but, it is not for us to follow at this time.

[foreverafter]

Who judged them unworthy? You may have the opinion they are unworthy. Their bishop or stake president deemed them unworthy? Then they won't get a temple recommend.

If they are secretly unworthy or are secretly unjustified in a divorce, why are they allowed to remarry? Very few unworthy people feel or declare they are really unworthy.

[pam]

It is not my idea that unjustified divorce is Adultery, it is a Prophet of God's & Christ's. Did anyone read the quotes I put up, especially what Pres. JFSmith said? I am just going by what he said. From all that I have studied, all the other Presidents of the Church have agreed with him & said similar things about divorce. I have to side with them.

Yes I did read the quotes you put up. I also responded to you to show how you took one quote out of context.

[BenRaines]

I want to say to foreverafter please don't think that you are being teamed up on. The things you say are hard for many who have had various reasons to divorce or perhaps even be divorced and have a sealing cancelled and remarried in the temple.

I believe most are looking at current counsel given by prophets regarding the matter.

I remember often President Hinkley saying that a man who abuses his wife in any form, physical, emotional, etc is not worthy of his priesthood. Not worthy of the priesthood is pretty damning.

I saw a quote the other day of President Hinkley's. Someone had it on their wall.

"We are here to find joy in life, not to endure to the end? That is not exact but the essence of what I remember.

Ben Raines

[pam]

I went to LDS.org and looked up Divorce. Came across this article. Which, would seem to suggest both sides are right, though, with a twist. :)

LDS.org - Ensign Article - Divorce

In ancient times and even under tribal laws in some countries where we now have members, men have power to divorce their wives for any trivial thing. Such unrighteous oppression of women was rejected by the Savior, who declared:

“Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so.

“And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery” (Matthew 19:8–9).

The kind of marriage required for exaltation—eternal in duration and godlike in quality—does not contemplate divorce. In the temples of the Lord, couples are married for all eternity. But some marriages do not progress toward that ideal. Because “of the hardness of [our] hearts,” the Lord does not currently enforce the consequences of the celestial standard. He permits divorced persons to marry again without the stain of immorality specified in the higher law. Unless a divorced member has committed serious transgressions, he or she can become eligible for a temple recommend under the same worthiness standards that apply to other members.

====================================================================

So, if I read this correctly, foreverafter is right in the 'perfect' sense, but, we are not being held to that perfect law at this time. Similar to the law of consecration, I believe it is. We KNOW it, but, it is not for us to follow at this time.

Which is the point I posted earlier in this thread.

[Connie]

Yes, I will try to find it for you. But it may take me til later today, for I must get my house finished & ready to show to a prospective buyer today.

Thanks, i'd appreciate it, because it almost seems you are blatantly dismissing the words of Apostles and that implies (at least to me) that you don't believe or sustain them as prophets, seers, and revelators. I'm sure you'll correct me if i'm off on that. And the further clarification of a reference would really help as well.

[beefche]

If they are secretly unworthy or are secretly unjustified in a divorce, why are they allowed to remarry? Very few unworthy people feel or declare they are really unworthy.

They are allowed to marry because they kept it a secret. I can lie to my bishop/stake president and they can give me a recommend. That doesn't mean that what I do in the temple is efficacious to my salvation.

If people who are secretly unworthy are married/sealed in the temple, then they are married in the eyes of the law and the church. Until they are sealed by the Holy Spirit of Promise, they are not sealed according to God's word.

[foreverafter]

They are allowed to marry because they kept it a secret. I can lie to my bishop/stake president and they can give me a recommend. That doesn't mean that what I do in the temple is efficacious to my salvation.

Exactly, thank you.