In cases of adultery...

[prisonchaplain]

In LDS circles, when there has been adultery in a marriage, is the offended partner expected to seek reconciliation? Is s/he expected to reconcile, if the adulterer repents?

I ask because in evangelical churches adultery is one offense in which the offended partner is allowed to say, "I wish you God's best, but I cannot trust you anymore." They can seek a divorce, and in most of our churches, they would be free to remarry.

In more than one string here, I have seen that the victim yearns for the adulterer to repent, and that bishops seem to urge reconciliation. Is there church standards in these regards, or am I reading too much into individual cases?

[Guest]

I think that wherever possible, keeping a family together and a sealing intact is always preferred. As I understand it, bishops rarely to never recommend divorce. . . I think they counsel and bless and pray, but one of the spouses would have to come to that on their own (I would think that in cases of abuse that would be different, but I can't say for sure). But if and when the offended spouse decides that they can't or won't continue in the marriage, the bishop's focus can change to one of support and help in that process, rather than trying to help the couple reconcile.

[Bini]

I don't know what the "Church standard" is regarding this but I was told that adultery and abuse are grounds for divorce if the offended party so chooses. In my opinion, adultery is abuse, upon your marriage and your family. It is the very worst kind of betrayal. It destroys you from the inside out, and has a penetrating sting that no lifted hand could ever deliver. My first long term relationship was physically abusive and my last marriage battled infidelity/pornography on my exes part. I don't know if these men have ever repented, at this point, I don't care and honestly, I thank God for giving me the courage to leave. If I ran into any of them now, I certainly would be civil but would I want to live a life with either - heck no! I think one can accept an apology and be civil towards an offender, without having to trust them and put their lives in their hands again.

[Misshalfway]

I think with the LDS church its more complicated because we have the temple sealing to deal with.

As you probably know, this means that when people marry in the temple they choose to stay with their partner forever. When one has made these convenants with another person and with God, it's not easy to come to terms with breaking them. And it's particularly shocking to LDS folks when someone breaks their covenants with infidelity because we expect high things from each other.

When infidelity happens (or other marital disruptions), people tend to labor agonizingly over the decision to divorce because it has so many implications in both the earthly and eternal situations. And then there is the question of the sealing itself. A person can get a divorce but remain sealed to their first spouse. They must get a letter from the church releasing them from the sealing before they can be sealed to another person.

I do want to say that I think how it person is counseled also comes from the bias/experience of the priesthood leader. Some have bias against divorce and will push for reconciliation. Others who are healthier and more wise, IMO, offer balanced counsel by helping the person make decisions out of safety and best interest and agency.

I know of one case where I felt the stake president acted poorly. A man had retained a secret affair for many years. The wife was finding it very difficult to forgive. The stake president withheld her temple recommend until she agreed to reconcile. His logic was that the inability to forgive quickly was an equal sin to infidelity. She was being told she was the cause of the breech in the marriage. IMO, this was a terrible position to take and I think the SP was in the wrong. I would have felt better had he helped the husband focus on making restitution for all the years of pain. I think that would have helped promote forgiveness more than such a painful ultimatum.

[BenRaines]

As I recall the Church Handbook of Instructions for Priesthood leaders does not allow a Bishop or Stake President to recommend divorce. That is an individual decision. They can counsel, offer support and advice but to divorce or not is not one of the things.

If they were to recommend it allows the person who decides to divorce to say "The church recommended that I divorce". Church would never recommend divorce. Counsel people to get out of abusive relationships. Seek counseling. Recommend that the offender seek counseling, etc.

Ben Raines

[Misshalfway]

Yeah. I think you are right about that Ben. I think I remember my bishop telling me once he couldn't recommend divorce, but that he could recommend that people act to keep themselves safe.

I want to check the handbook for wording just to see if there is any wiggle room in that mandate.

[prisonchaplain]

Thanks everyone. The bottom line seems to be the same. However, the decision to divorce comes completely from the offended party. I doubt very many of our pastors would directly counsel divorce. However, in cases of adultery, many of us might be quicker to support, should s/he say that they could not come to terms with the breach of covenant ('marriage covenant').

BTW, I often offer generic counsel that forgiving someone is giving the offense over to God. Should the person repent, good on them. If not, they are in God's hands. It is no longer in our jurisdiction. Forgiveness does not mean that we trust, nor that our relationships will be what they were before. It is legitimate for an offended spouse, in cases of adultery, to say to the culprit, "I love you. I forgive you. I cannot be with you anymore."

[Bini]

PC, your posts always make perfect sense to me :]

[Finrock]

Hi Bini. I hope you are doing well today. :)

PC, your posts always make perfect sense to me :]

I wish I knew what "perfect sense" was so I could recognize it.

Regards,

Finrock

[garryw]

As I recall the Church Handbook of Instructions for Priesthood leaders does not allow a Bishop or Stake President to recommend divorce

This is what my dad told me, at least back in his day as SP, it could no be recommended. However, he could send a person to professional counseling, and they can do it.

[Jennarator]

My bishop told me in cases of adultery and abuse, he would recommend it. This was a bishop I had long ago. He said it deepened on a little more than that, but those are the only cases he would recommend it. He lead me to believe he has done it, but only when safety and such was a factor, not all adultry and abuse cases.

[Scovy]

There is a degree to what the Bishop/SP will do with an individual for a sin like this. If a person comes to the Bishop and says their spouse has been sleeping with another person and that individual refuses to change their ways. It could be grounds for excommunication or disfellowshipped for that person. On the other hand if this individual realizes they royally screwed up and want to repent of their sins then the Bishop will see what type of repentance process is needed and disciplinary action also.

Since this is a serious sin to commit and the repercussions of it, it presents a sacred nature to it. That person needs to think deeply about it between God and their spouse. Trust is broken here and is very hard to overcome. Much like a Bishop judges an individual on the nature of their sins on how sincere they are to repent, so should the spouse in working to repair the marriage.

[prisonchaplain]

Trust is broken here and is very hard to overcome. Much like a Bishop judges an individual on the nature of their sins on how sincere they are to repent, so should the spouse in working to repair the marriage.

Which spouse? If the victim is willing to attempt reconciliation, then, of course both of them. However, if trust is broken by unfaithfulness, is the victim obligated to work to repair the marriage? My contention is that s/he is not.

[Misshalfway]

Which spouse? If the victim is willing to attempt reconciliation, then, of course both of them. However, if trust is broken by unfaithfulness, is the victim obligated to work to repair the marriage? My contention is that s/he is not.

Is the victim "obligated" to repair the marriage? This is a hard one to answer because each situation is so different.

I will say that in LDS circles there are times that I really think we expect too much on the victimized partner. I'm not sure exactly why. I'd like to see marriages stay together, but pressuring or guilting one party into forgiveness or into trusting when they shouldn't or before they are ready isn't right. I wish there was a lot more focus on pushing efforts of restitution on the offending party. God does command us to forgive. But he doesn't specify when we should do it, and it isn't required that we stay in the marriage in order to do it.

[Juan_P]

Which spouse? If the victim is willing to attempt reconciliation, then, of course both of them. However, if trust is broken by unfaithfulness, is the victim obligated to work to repair the marriage? My contention is that s/he is not.

Given what Jesus taught about divorce I doubt the victim is 'obligated' to work to repair the marriage imho....therefore I agree with you that s/he is not. Remember that adultery also breaks a Temple covenant even before we consider the marriage covenant and D&C speaks of 'buffetings of satan" for persons who do this and later repent fully, all of which makes full reconciliation difficult at best of times.

Also I don't think there is a mormon standard with this issue. Although the Handbook does tell leaders to not recommend divorce the Handbook itself isn't a book of commandments nor a book of standards but a guide to show leaders what they 'should' be doing. And Elder Oaks' talk on Divorce from 2004 clearly says "Bishops do not counsel members to divorce" but in the same talk, when addressing members who are already divorced said "When a marriage is dead and beyond hope of resuscitation, it is needful to have a means to end it." So a Bishop could use either statements in the same interview, ie 'I can't tell you to divorce' .... 'but if your marriage is dead it is needful to have a means to end it'....

However I think the mormon culture is to avoid divorce always because we are so reliant on marriage and especially in teaching celestial or eternal marriage. It is the culminating ordinance in mormonism so it seems that many leaders tend to go as far as possible, sometimes too far, in seeking reconciliation in all cases, even in cases of abuse. Just my impression of mormon culture though....