Is going inactive a marriage breaker?

[Drpepper]

Now I'm really curious about the original title. :)

M.

That's now one of those mysteries. The original title is in my first post if you really want to know.

[john doe]

OK, good to know. The title still does not give an idea about the subject matter, IMO.

M.

Well, when you become moderator we'll let you change the title to whatever you want.

[Backroads]

Now I'm curious to just how many times this thread title has been changed before I"ve noticed it. I mean, I've counted the reported changes, but what if mods have changed the title without announcing it?!

Anywho...

I agree with Anddenex that this is a situation in which a lot of variables can be at play. I used to think that it would be downright horrible to end a marriage over inactivity, but now I'm not as harsh in my thinking. For me, inactivity in and of itself would be upsetting, but probably not a deal-breaker. But I can see others having a different value system and, at the risk of sounding awful myself, place more value on church attendance than I do. For some people, it could be a legitimate deal-breaker.

I'd also like to draw a line between going inactive and leaving the church. My husband has said leaving the church would be a deal-breaker. I used to place this in the same category as going inactive: "really? does that really wreck the whole better-or-worse thing?" but some comments in what I believe was the inspiring thread here have changed my mind. If leaving the Church is affecting an eternal covenant, that's a very big deal.

As for simply going inactive (as if it's so simple), I believe the family may have a better chance of still working together. I imagine it would be tough, upsetting, wreck that dream of the perfect LDS family, but doable and still mean plenty of love.

[NeuroTypical]

I'll admit to a certain apathy when it comes to married people with no kids. Go do whatever dumb things you want to do to yourselves or each other - stay married or get divorced - I don't really care.

But once you've brought an innocent child into the mix, then no, a change in faith isn't a good enough reason to get divorced. After kids come, you do what's best for them, even if that means a lifetime full of bemoaning your sad life married to someone who changed their mind about God. Actually, it means learning how to live a good life without wasting it bemoaning your sad life.

Edited December 30, 2012 by Loudmouth_Mormon

[kevieb]

I learned an interesting thing from one of my bishops concerning this very thing--although I was not considering leaving my husband (at least not seriously), we were having a lot of struggles and needed some help.

My husband was not treating me the best and wasn't exactly the kind of priesthood leader in our home that would inspire our family to live right--but I knew what he was capable of and i loved him.

My bishop told me that when I was sealed in the temple, I was given the promise that my hubby and I would be together, and as long as i tried to live my life the best I could--and i know the atonement takes care of our imperfections if we repent, anyway, my bishop told me that the Lord would keep his promise to me, and that my husband and i would be together--he said that my husband would have to pay for his mistakes, but we would be together---and without the strife.

After he told me this, I remembered a scripture from the bible that talks about a believing spouse staying with an unbelieving spouse if they chose to because we don't know that the believer might not sanctify the unbeliever---or something to that effect.

so----I guess going inactive would have to not be a deal breaker for me--although I worry that at my present time and state of mind that i am not strong enough to do what I need to on my own---and it makes me really disappointed in myself.

[AnthonyB]

Is there modern LDS revelations that trump (or alter) Jesus statements on divorce?

Whilst I attempt to be gracious to others, my reading of Jesus in the Gospels would be that divorce except for very specific exceptions (eg marital unfaithfulness / adultery) is sin. So divorce is out of the question for me, no matter how tough things got.

I partly see it that God sticks by his covenant with us, so in the same way we should stick by our convenants with others.

[olytitan]

It doesn't have to be a marriage breaker. Many people go through their own trials when it's hard for them to feel that they belong at church, should go, want to go, for whatever reason. Then the less they go, the less their spirit feels like being there. It's a struggle for many people. It definitely can make the marriage harder especially with children involved. If it's someone you genuinely care about it's not worth giving up a marriage over being less active for a while. Not quite the same as if they cheated on the spouse. Spouses even overcome that. It all depends on where the person's heart is and what they truly want out of life. I'd work on the marriage and more active church status unless there was a lot more going on than just that, which were signs the marriage was crumbling.

[Blocky]

My husband went inactive about two years after we were married. There are struggles and differences but he is still a good father and husband. He supports my activity in the church and my raising the kids in the church.

If I was to leave him I think Heavenly Father would be very disappointed and my children much worse off.

[Dravin]

Is there modern LDS revelations that trump (or alter) Jesus statements on divorce?

There is nothing that repudiates the Saviors statement of the higher law, however to my understanding the Celestial standard is not actively enforced across the Church because collectively we've hard hearts on the matter:

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.

Link: Divorce - general-conference

Note, I don't read that as a statement that divorce is just hunky dory. I think Elder James E. Faust had a good comment on when divorce is acceptable (even if an unjustified divorce and remarriage won't bar you from the temple):

Divorce can be justified only in the rarest of circumstances. In my opinion, “just cause” for divorce should be nothing less serious than a prolonged and apparently irredeemable relationship that destroys a person’s dignity as a human being. Divorce often tears people’s lives apart and shears family happiness. Frequently in a divorce the parties lose much more than they gain.

Link: Enriching Your Marriage - Liahona Apr. 2007 - liahona

Edited December 31, 2012 by Dravin

[AnthonyB]

Dravin,

Thanks for your response.

Originally Posted by Elder James E. Faust

Divorce can be justified only in the rarest of circumstances. In my opinion, “just cause” for divorce should be nothing less serious than a prolonged and apparently irredeemable relationship that destroys a person’s dignity as a human being.[/unQuote]

[AnthonyB]

Dravin,

Thanks for your response.

Originally Posted by Elder James E. Faust

Divorce can be justified only in the rarest of circumstances. In my opinion, “just cause” for divorce should be nothing less serious than a prolonged and apparently irredeemable relationship that destroys a person’s dignity as a human being.

The above quote seems some way from permitting divorce just because of inactivity.

Not being LDS, the impression I get from some posters is that an inactive partner will stop you getting into the Celestial kingdom, so you need to "move on" to find a partner that will get you there. I suppose I see covenant keeping, no matter how hard the road, as a key aspect of what God wants to develope in his children.

[Anddenex]

Is there modern LDS revelations that trump (or alter) Jesus statements on divorce?

Whilst I attempt to be gracious to others, my reading of Jesus in the Gospels would be that divorce except for very specific exceptions (eg marital unfaithfulness / adultery) is sin. So divorce is out of the question for me, no matter how tough things got.

I partly see it that God sticks by his covenant with us, so in the same way we should stick by our convenants with others.

Yes, there actually has been clarification to our understanding regarding the Lord's words.

I believe it was President James E. Faust who declared the words provided by the Lord regarding divorce were Celestial laws.

We are currently living, I think, Terrestial laws. Once it is established by the Lord that this Celestial law is again in place then it will be lived.

President Benson also said once that although the Lord is not pleased with divorce he recognizes there are times when divorce is necessary.

He then provided, if I am remembering correctly, evidence of a physically abusive spouse. A physically abusive spouse which nearly puts his wife on the death bed, or even seriously injured.

EDIT: Well shoot, wouldn't have responded if I read Dravin's response.

Edited January 2, 2013 by Anddenex

[Guest Thinker]

Is going less active a marriage deal breaker?

It could be, almost was for us, but we're finding a way to compromise.

I think many people get married not just to their spouse, but to the church.

Basically, the church is the basis of their marriage, so when that is no longer a commonality, the marriage is through. Sad, especially when children are involved.

It may have something to do with holding off to have sex until marriage - which makes sense, except people (esp. guys) are horny & eager, so they marry too quickly without really investing in learning how to relate with their potential spouse & then expect the church affiliation to ensure marital bliss. (To laugh or cry... that is the question.)

[Dravin]

The above quote seems some way from permitting divorce just because of inactivity.

I concur.

[Guest]

Dravin,

Thanks for your response.

The above quote seems some way from permitting divorce just because of inactivity.

Not being LDS, the impression I get from some posters is that an inactive partner will stop you getting into the Celestial kingdom, so you need to "move on" to find a partner that will get you there. I suppose I see covenant keeping, no matter how hard the road, as a key aspect of what God wants to develope in his children.

An inactive partner will not prevent you from Celestial glory. The 2nd article of the LDS faith states that we are punished for our own sins. The sins of an inactive partner is not my own sin. As long as I remain faithful to my covenants, I still qualify for the promise of Celestial glory.