Divorce & Remarriage

[shdwlkr]

LDS Bishops

Work very hard to keep the family unit in tack because for one thing it is a very important aspect of our religion that families stick together.

Life hands us some pretty hard situations and most with help can be met and dealt with. Some others can't and adultery is one that makes keeping the couple together hard. Abuse is something that is not accepted and neither party gets out of it without scars.

In every case we can think of why a marriage might/should end there are cases of where the couple wanted to work hard enough to rebuild the relationship that it has worked. How often I would guess maybe 1 in 1000 or maybe even 1 in 10,000.

In today's it easy to get a divorce legal world sometimes things listed for the reason of divorce are just plain silly and yet they are granted a divorce. Then there are cases where the divorce was needed to protect someone in the relationship be it kids, spouse or even sometimes a relative.

Where I see the issue is look at how many divorced individuals there are now in the world. Just how do these people find a good partner the next time around? Should they be forced to live the rest of their lives alone and lonely because a marriage failed? Should we say it you get divorced three times then you are banned from ever being a marriage again? Where did God ever write that once you divorce you are to live alone for the rest of your life? Is this a just God who punishes us for our failures in relationships? How would God answer the divorced individuals prayers for a good loving mate in this life?

Maybe buy off you had your chance and you blew it? I think not or How stupid can you be you married and let it fail how can I trust you with another? NO as he has taken our free agency away then in the end it is our choice to be alone or look for another love and yes we may even fail again in that relationship but it takes two to kill a relationship and it takes to two to make it work also so in the end the failed relationship has both parties sharing some part of the failure. No I will not say blame as that assumes one is more right than the other and that is not a true way to look at the issue.

Divorce takes from both partners, don't think because one doesn't see their part in the failure as meaning they have no ownership in the situation. It can be because of lies, unfailfulness, just falling out of love with the other and the worst just plain giving up on trying to be happy with this person. They are all failures and all have solutions and should be looked at before entering into another relationship.

If your marriage ended because of lies, why when and how did they enter into the relationship

If your marriage ended because of unfaithfulness what role did you have in this?

If your marriage ended because of love leaving the relationship what could you maybe have done to keep it alive, did you date after marriage? why or why not, give flowers for no reason, let your spouse watch the football game without interruption or maybe learn about the game or did you make his/her favorite meal once in while without being asked or maybe just take some time and go into the bedroom or family room and just be close and let the other know you still care about them and what is bothering them and even just listen sometimes.

Marriages fail because we see the faults in the other sometimes justified some times just because it can be done and then Satan has his foot in the door and nothing will change the direction of the relationship it is over. Sometimes the issues start way back at the dating and getting to know each other and things are over looked that should not have been and then one day it all hits us in the face and we are totally devastated that relationship was built on lies and now we are hurt very bad and want to lash out at everything and anything we can. Is it our fault we missed the clues maybe but that does no one any good to look at it that way. What has to be accepted is the relationship is over, we are hurt, we have been lied too, maybe even cheated on and yet life will go on so we need to take these issues to the Lord and let him help us sort them out and then to let him try to direct us in the path we have fallen off from and move forward. Will it be easy no, will it be a short time we are alone, only the Lord knows the true answer to that question and most of all we need to begin to feel good about ourselves, accept we must had some part in all of it, try to do better in the future and again look forward not backward as if we keeping backward we are going to miss all the beauty that is front of us and just maybe fall down on that huge stone, pot hole or limb that is in our path we don't see because we are looking backward.

It is not our right, role or even desire really to hurt another as this is God's right and he is the only one who has the right to judge. Even our religious leaders are counseled as to what, how and to what extent they can be the judge over those that are their responsibility. The one who will hand out the final judgement and the ever lasting judgement of each and every one of us is Jesus Christ and he alone has that right and power and ability. I for one don't want to be in that chair as even those who have harmed me the most in this life if I know all the facts might have some redeeming quality that I never saw until the book of life of this person is opened and read.

Edited March 12, 2012 by shdwlkr

[Guest]

I am not an authority, but I have never heard of an LDS bishop counseling divorce except in the case of abuse. Not saying such has never happened, only that I have never heard of it.

I have heard of an LDS bishop counsel divorce in the case of adultery. I have also heard of an LDS bishop counsel divorce in the case of incest - where the husband ended up in jail - which, I guess can be considered as abandonment.

[HEthePrimate]

I am not an authority, but I have never heard of an LDS bishop counseling divorce except in the case of abuse. Not saying such has never happened, only that I have never heard of it.

Sad to say, but I've heard of a bishop counseling a believer to get a divorce because their spouse stopped believing in the Church, even though the spouse was a good person, a good spouse, and a good parent. IMHO, that is not sufficient cause for divorce. Fortunately, I think the vast majority of bishops wouldn't do that.

[JudoMinja]

I may be wrong, but it is my understanding that a bishop- at least when acting in his official capacity- is never supposed to council a couple to divorce. Should a couple decide to divorce, he can help them through it, but the idea is not supposed to come from his lips. I'm sure not all bishops follow this, and I'm not even certain if this is really an official rule they are supposed to follow. But the bishop I was seeing while I was trying to work things out with my ex never even mentioned the word divorce or even separation. Of course, he didn't know all the details of what was going on either, so I don't really know if he might have adviced differently if he'd known.

From my experience, our leadership in general tends to teach the strict doctrinal rules, but is then also extremely open and understanding when one of those rules have been "broken". We hear what is expected of us, but when someone comes forward with a situation where they may be sinning or may be a victim, it is rare to see anything remotely like harsh judgement. Other members might be judgemental, but it is extremely rare to hear any condemning words from our leaders. They tend to steer toward leaving everyone's personal salvation to themselves- to keep it between you and God.

Joseph Smith once said: "I teach them correct principles and they govern themselves." This has been quoted by several of our other prophets since- especially when members come to them with a situation they think may be an exception to a rule. Maybe this is why our church appears more leniant than others on the subject of divorce. There are many instances where we've been addressed concerning the sacredness of marriage, families, and keeping our covenants. We are taught the "correct principle" of marriage. But when a situation leads to divorce, our leaders typically withhold judgement, leaving it up to the individuals to determine where they stand with God.

[mnn727]

However, IN GENERAL, the cheater is 100% responsible for his/her actions. He made a covenant with God and his spouse. Even if the partner is failing somehow, that would not free anyone from the covenant with God.

While the decision to cheat is almost always 100% on the cheater, what leads up to that decision is almost never 100% on the cheater.

[Vort]

Well, it is factually correct that divorce is not legal in the Philippines so you can't change your marital status. But, it is not correct that they can't "move forward with their lives". It implies that nobody can move forward unless they're living with a spouse.

I think the implication is that those in this position cannot move forward with that aspect of their lives. They are bound to a hopelessly dead marriage with no possibility of legitimately marrying another. Given the importance Latter-day Saint doctrine places on marriage, this is indeed a big deal. So I'm still not sure what it is you disagree with Elder Oaks about.

[Guest]

I think the implication is that those in this position cannot move forward with that aspect of their lives. They are bound to a hopelessly dead marriage with no possibility of legitimately marrying another. Given the importance Latter-day Saint doctrine places on marriage, this is indeed a big deal. So I'm still not sure what it is you disagree with Elder Oaks about.

Like the LDS Church, Philippine culture as reflected by its governance, do not treat marriage as disposable. This can be compared to Temple Marriages. Temple sealings is about the same as Philippine marriage in that there is a route for "cancellation" (in Philippine law, you can invalidate a marriage if you can prove that the marriage was gotten into by coercion, false pretenses, etc.), but the requirement is very strict.

It is completely not true that "you can't move forward" with your life when you treat Philippine marriages with the same reverence as Temple Marriages. It is not a requirement of celestial glory that you have to be STILL MARRIED at the time of death. The requirement, as I understand it, is that you have given marriage your best shot fulfilling all your covenants, regardless of whether your spouse fulfilled his or not. I believe that God will not say - sorry, no celestial glory for you because the person you are sealed to is in outer darkness.

Now, why I believe it is <I can't find the proper word for it - incompassionate is not quite it, double standard is not quite it either, see if you can fill in the blanks here > for Pres. McKay to say this about married Filipinos alienated from their spouse is that Pres. McKay calls it as "cannot move forward with their lives" like it is a hopeless thing to have that lot in life, yet the LDS Church has no problem with telling gay people to remain celibate and praise that as moving forward with their lives.

Another thing that bothers me about LDS culture brought about by this view of disposable secular marriage is the unintended cultural push for converts to dispose of a secular marriage so you can go get a temple marriage from another LDS. If you hold secular marriage in the same manner as Filipinos hold marriages, then the cultural push will shift from divorce to conversion of the spouse. I believe that God will look more kindly to a spouse who accepted the restored gospel after he already married and then worked his hardest to fulfill his marital vows than somebody who accepted the restored gospel and left his kind spouse to fulfill a technical requirement of temple sealing.

[Maureen]

Families can be forever, why would you want a marriage that ends at death?

So are you saying that the only good, worth while marriage is a temple marriage? Why bother with a civil marriage because it will end at death? Might as well just get a divorce? Is that what you're trying to say mnn727?

M.

[Tyler90AZ]

Another thing that bothers me about LDS culture brought about by this view of disposable secular marriage is the unintended cultural push for converts to dispose of a secular marriage so you can go get a temple marriage from another LDS.

That and if a spouse is questioning the church, the solution is divorce that spouse. As much as The Church teaches about valuing family, for members to discuss that regularly is ridiculous.

Edited March 23, 2012 by Tyler90AZ

[Vort]

I think the implication is that those in this position cannot move forward with that aspect of their lives. They are bound to a hopelessly dead marriage with no possibility of legitimately marrying another. Given the importance Latter-day Saint doctrine places on marriage, this is indeed a big deal. So I'm still not sure what it is you disagree with Elder Oaks about.

It is completely not true that "you can't move forward" with your life when you treat Philippine marriages with the same reverence as Temple Marriages.

Did you miss the bolded qualifier in my statement?

Now, why I believe it is <I can't find the proper word for it - incompassionate is not quite it, double standard is not quite it either, see if you can fill in the blanks here > for Pres. McKay to say this about married Filipinos alienated from their spouse is that Pres. McKay calls it as "cannot move forward with their lives" like it is a hopeless thing to have that lot in life, yet the LDS Church has no problem with telling gay people to remain celibate and praise that as moving forward with their lives.

• You mean Elder Oaks, I presume, not President McKay.
• Elder Oaks never said "hopeless". That is your term. Rather, he said that when a marriage is dead and beyond all hope of resuscitation, there needs to be a mechanism to sever it so the parties can continue with that aspect of their lives. That the Philippines has no such mechanism does not indicate that Elder Oaks is wrong.

It appears to me that you are "disagreeing" with Elder Oaks about something that Elder Oaks never said. Or perhaps your disagreement stems from the mere fact that Elder Oaks recognized that, in some cases, a marriage can be dead beyond all reasonable hope of resuscitation, and that in such a case, divorce is a desirable option. You are free to disagree with him, of course, but I kind of think you're unlikely to find many others on this list willing to join your dissent of the teachings of a living apostle.

Another thing that bothers me about LDS culture brought about by this view of disposable secular marriage is the unintended cultural push for converts to dispose of a secular marriage so you can go get a temple marriage from another LDS.

I have never heard of any such cultural norm. I do not believe it exists, certainly not among the Saints I know and have lived with in various places in the US (including Utah).

[jayanna]

I also, in my area, have never seen someone counseled in any way to divorce a disbelieving spouse. In fact just this Sat (yay!) my hubby will be baptizing the husband of one of the young mothers that I was driving to church quite a bit last year. He had abandoned her, getting drunk after taking her money, and hitting her....came back after the new year started, repented, changed himself inside and out, and is now getting baptized! I am so proud of him! They will be getting marriage classes, etc. for a little while, and a lot of brotherly/sisterly love from the ward, that's for sure.

The whole divorce question is on such an individual basis, I don't think there can be one hard and fast rule saying these are okay reasons, and these others aren't. It has to be completely subjective, with particular bearing on personal revelation and what the Lord has told each party to do. I for one, was told to get a divorce, and a way was made for me to do it. I later found out why it was okay for me to divorce, other than the Lord said so. It is a sin to allow abuse to continue....at some point if you are being abused, you are not following the Lord by allowing that person to continue doing it. It does not matter if you forgive them for it or not, if they are not stopping it.

For a long time I will have to live with the consequences of not getting out of my situation soon enough. While I did have my two girls at the only time of my life I was able to have children, I am sure I could have had those same two girls with my current husband rather than remaining in the nightmare I was too proud to leave. Yep, it was mostly pride. I was refusing to be a divorced woman. I refused to have a different last name than my kids, I looked upon those that had been through divorce as people who simply were not smart enough, patient enough, nice enough, determined enough, or sexy enough to be loved. Yep, I was sure self-righteous, until I converted, and then the beatings got so bad I knew he was going to kill me. He even told me he was going to kill me, even though I tried so very hard to be smart and nice and patient and sexy....none of it mattered, in fact, the better I was to him the worse he treated me. He came to visit years later to sign over his parental rights, and told me and my current hubby that I was nothing but the best wife a woman could be, and I did not deserve what I got from him in return. He is still so scary 6ft 5 while I'm 5 ft 3 and he is still violent evidently.

I waited too long to leave, I know I did. The Lord told me months before I actuallly did something about it. I was just too proud to listen. I still have physical issues from the damage. Just in the last month or so I have been really struggling with a hip that had dislocated and never been treated. It makes a horrible popping sound and hurts so bad sometimes. I've been having trouble sleeping at night trying to find a comfortable way to lay. I have a lot of trouble with ribs, too, and one foot had a broken bone in the arch ooo that one does give me trouble, not to mention the vertebrae I have to be very careful with my back. I did a lot of physical therapy for my back, and have to do stretches, etc. I have mostly had dislocations, which, I think must be worse than breaks, because those joints tend to feel a bit slippery like, and I have to be careful not to reinjure them even though it has been quite a long time. Especially that hip. I can't even cross my legs right now, or bend over with both feet on the ground, I have to lift up the foot of the leg with the problem hip, and balance with my hand on something. I slip on all my shoes and I'm currently considerig giving up on socks altogether.

The jaw that was dislocated, though, doesn't seem to bother me at all. At the time it was awful trying to bite and chew, but about a month after it went back into place and the swelling went down, no trouble since.

I move around like an old person, no offense old people, but I'm still in my 30's, ya know?

So, I guess basically what I mean to say is...it depends on the individuals and if the divorce is going to help them get better or not. You have to judge it (if you HAVE to judge it) by its fruits. Pretty much, if you aren't one of the two people involved in the marriage, don't judge it, or try to learn more about it. Learning more about the situation can make you disappointed in both parties. In some cases, ignorance really is bliss.

There is a reason Jesus didn't lay down the rules on this one, it is too individual to do that. He did shine a light on how to do it right though. Love your wife the way Jesus loves the church, wives love your husbands....that can work for everyone. Those particular cases, well, that is what the Holy Spirit is for, use it.

Edited March 16, 2012 by jayanna

[Tyler90AZ]

He had abandoned her, getting drunk after taking her money, and hitting her....

Well that is grounds for divorce.... I am talking about members making up stuff out of whole cloth to A)protect image Bspouse didn't believe in church.

I agree though it is just rogue members who use their faith to manipulate situations. They're essentially extremists....

Edited March 16, 2012 by Tyler90AZ

[mnn727]

So are you saying that the only good, worth while marriage is a temple marriage? Why bother with a civil marriage because it will end at death? Might as well just get a divorce? Is that what you're trying to say mnn727?

M.

I wouldn't have a civil marriage -- that's what I am trying to say. Civil marriages end at death, I don't want that, nor should anyone who likes their family.

[shdwlkr]

Well for me a civil marriage turned into a temple marriage a few years later when she joined the church and then I lost her just 4 years after when she was murdered I had the knowledge maybe one day again I can be with her for eternity. So for me a civil marriage was the gateway to a temple marriage.

I think we need to look long and hard at what a marriage is to us. Can a temple marriage end, of course just like any other marriage there is no guarantee in this life that temple marriage will last and a civil marriage won't. As to a civil marriage ending at death well yes that is true but what if you are divorced and fall in love with someone who is also a lone and sealed to someone else should you say to heck with this person as they can 't be sealed to me so they are just not worth having in this life?

That to me is just plain stupid, we have no idea of what tasks, challenges we are to deal with in this life in many cases. For that matter because someone we marry is sealed to another do we know for a fact in the next life this is going to be true? A civil marriage can work and even go beyond this life if it is what was the plan for us and no we don't know what it will be like in the next life as I only know of one person who has been there and returned. He did nothing to answer that question.

When looking at a civil marriage and the fact you may or may not be able to be sealed to your spouse is it not more important to ask the question can we make it together, through this life and let somethings be taken care of in the next life. We first have to make it through this life to the next before some questions can be answered don't we?

I am currently writing to someone who is not in the church, may not even know about the church as in their country it is against the law to discuss such things. If we did the person could be thrown in prison or killed just because we were talking about the church. We have a bond that is growing and some times I wonder why this individual and I have hit it off so well. Yes the person is divorced and so am I so what does that mean we can not be happy together for the rest of what is left of our lives? NO

Does it mean because she may never join the church in this life I should dump her? No

Does it mean because we have already dealt with many issues I should walk away? No it just has shown that life issues don't scare us and that we will face them together and isn't that what we are to learn here how to deal with issues?

What is more important to me is that I am walking the path that I chose in the preexistence and with the guidance of the Holy Ghost and my elder brother Jesus and Heavenly Father I am doing what they want me to do at this point in time? I think at times we look at challenges/issues with worldly eyes when we should be looking with heavenly eyes.

Some day I hope to have some real answers to some of my really challenging questions in this life and to also understand why that is the correct answer for me.

Edited March 16, 2012 by shdwlkr

[Just_A_Guy]

It is completely not true that "you can't move forward" with your life when you treat Philippine marriages with the same reverence as Temple Marriages. It is not a requirement of celestial glory that you have to be STILL MARRIED at the time of death.

In fairness to Elder Oaks, he was using a specific example of a woman whose husband abandoned her and left the country. That's an example of the persistent flouting of marital covenants that Oaks suggests justifies divorce; yet (if his interpretation of Philippine law is correct) this particular woman would have remained "married" indefinitely. The practical effect in her case would probably be her indefinite condemnation to a life of single parenthood and, in all likelihood, abject poverty.

The demands of celibacy we make of gay Mormons should not be downplayed; but nor does it compare to what this particular woman was probably facing.

(My wife's on bed rest for the next couple weeks, and I'm becoming painfully familiar with what single parenthood can entail.)

Edited March 17, 2012 by Just_A_Guy

[prisonchaplain]

Just got back from training that included Catholicism. One interesting aspect about marriage, divorce, and remarriage is that the only marriages that count are church ones. Also, while there is no Catholic divorce, annulment is possible. The Church will sometimes declare that a marriage was not valid. I did not get the sense that these are easy to get, but neither are they impossible.

[Maureen]

I wouldn't have a civil marriage -- that's what I am trying to say. Civil marriages end at death, I don't want that, nor should anyone who likes their family.

You paint civil marriages as so black and white and somewhat demeaning. Life does not work that way, there are so many grey areas when living life. The only way a sealing is possible is through marriage. Many LDS members, especially converts, are civilly married before being sealed. How welcoming would that be for potential converts, to downplay or be negative toward civil marriages when converts and some members have that type of marriage? What about members who remarry having losing their eternal companion? Should they remain single for the rest of their life on earth because civil marriages are so demeaning?

M.

[HEthePrimate]

I wouldn't have a civil marriage -- that's what I am trying to say. Civil marriages end at death, I don't want that, nor should anyone who likes their family.

You assume that civil marriage ends at death, and temple sealings don't. I'm not so sure. Yes, I am perfectly aware of what the Church teaches, but I think plenty of temple marriages end at death, too, and I can't see a loving God keeping apart couples who were "only" married civilly.

[MrShorty]

I can't see a loving God keeping apart couples who were "only" married civilly.

Since marriages can be sealed by proxy after a couple has died, and we also believe that a temple sealing is a necessary ordinance. I kind of figure that between now and the final reckoning, all marriages will be sealed, whether by the couple themselves or by proxies. Then God will step in with His perfect wisdom, justice, and mercy to figure out all the contingency situations, and everyone will concede that His judgements are just.

[Vort]

I am perfectly aware of what the Church teaches, but I think plenty of temple marriages end at death, too, and I can't see a loving God keeping apart couples who were "only" married civilly.

I assume you realize that what you can or cannot see is totally irrelevant.

[Seminarysnoozer]

As to a civil marriage ending at death well yes that is true but what if you are divorced and fall in love with someone who is also a lone and sealed to someone else should you say to heck with this person as they can 't be sealed to me so they are just not worth having in this life?

That to me is just plain stupid, we have no idea of what tasks, challenges we are to deal with in this life in many cases. For that matter because someone we marry is sealed to another do we know for a fact in the next life this is going to be true?

What is more important to me is that I am walking the path that I chose in the preexistence and with the guidance of the Holy Ghost and my elder brother Jesus and Heavenly Father I am doing what they want me to do at this point in time? I think at times we look at challenges/issues with worldly eyes when we should be looking with heavenly eyes.

Some day I hope to have some real answers to some of my really challenging questions in this life and to also understand why that is the correct answer for me.

Sorry for your loss. I mostly agree with your view.

I think "looking through heavenly eyes" should also include the perspective that all those who make it into the Celestial Kingdom will be sealed to each other. I would also pose a question to ponder, What is a stronger love, the pure love of Christ or the love a temple sealed spouse has for the other spouse?

Depending on how one answers that question I think we will find that we won't be so worked up about who is sealed to whom, if we make it into the Celestial Kingdom. We will probably want to be with the one that we shared experiences with here but a worthy partner for eternity is a worthy partner.

One other thing is to ponder is the possibility that the percentage of people within the Celestial Kingdom who died before the age of 8 or who had diseases like Down's syndrome may outnumber the people who didn't have those conditions.

We are ultimately judged by our words and the desires of our hearts. If by words we say "till death do us part" and God-be-the-judge we say in our heart, I don't plan on aspiring to anything more than an earthly joining, then that is probably what it will be.

The stewardship of "eternal marriage" is offered here so that we can have the opportunity for greater stewardship in the next life. But, if we don't take on certain stewardship that was intended for us in this life then we will not be worthy of greater things in the next life. In other words, if God commanded us to live eternal marriage lives here, if I pass that opportunity (if it is available) for something less, why would God give me a greater stewardship?

[Guest kyolive]

Check with your doctor New Jersey Escorts for specific recommendationsNew Jersey Asian Escort As for timing your injections and meals New Jersey Escort[/usl] then switch your watch New Jersey Asian Escorts and your schedule

[shdwlkr]

Interesting question,"if God commanded us to live eternal marriage lives here, if I pass that opportunity (if it is available) for something less, why would God give me a greater stewardship?"

So let me pose an even more interesting one," What if it was your challenge in this life to be alone for the whole time to be worthy for a celestial marriage when you return home to Jesus?" I don't like to think of that idea but with so many not finding someone here and also the large number of divorced individuals who may never marry again in this life. It is an interesting concept to ponder; we don't have all the answers to our lives here and sometimes that might be a good thing.

I find that as I walk each day now I find that being in a city is depressing to me; to many people in such a small area

I find that the smell of exhaust fumes instead of spring depress me.

I find that the wanton waste that goes on in a large city is depressing; go look at any large city land fill if you think I am wrong.

I find that I want to plant a garden but in the city there is little place to do such.

I find that I look for the budding of the roses that are at my rental residence as a sign that spring has returned.

I find that each Sunday and going to church is interesting because of the people who look for me to be there.

I find that my patriarch for my area is an interesting person and one who is constantly challenging me to look deeper into myself. We sit together in a few meetings and he is very in tune with what we can be and what we are. Some things he has said to me scare the heck out of me but you know he has answered some very troubling questions and also told me where I need to go to find some more answers and I am working on that.

We have clues given to us many times in our lives as to what we need to do and the direction we need to go and sometimes we even get messengers in this life to help us along the road of life. How many of us really know them when they come into our lives. I know of 3 at the moment and I am sure there are many more I just haven't figured out yet who they are.

Some things are known

We can't get into the celestial world without following the word of God

We can not get to the highest level if we are not married, notice I didn't say married here as I am not sure that is totally correct.

We can not be one with Jesus and God if we really don't believe in them and their word.

We must endure to the end and sometimes that is going to be very very hard to see the path we must travel as it just might be a trail of tears, sorrow and pain