Sexual abstinence before marriage...

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Lost Boy said:

Yeah.  men and women both have difficulty changing.   It takes a concerted effort to do so.  And often it takes the help of loved ones as well. 

There are many good fish in the sea.  In time you will go fishing again and catch a better fish....  Or he'll catch you...

Personally i have a goal now to never date a man who has anything I would require him to change in order to be marriage suitable. I.agree others can help our walk with Christ but I don't think a dating partner is a person to rely heavily on with big problems as narcissits tend to do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, dddd said:

That's honestly surprising they're not divorced or subject to Church discipline . As someone who considers herself worthwhile i would never permit a man to do that. It's honestly one of the most selfish things I've heard. And not much better in my mind than the Mormon "megadate" where couples go get civilly married for a day or a week just to have sex then divorce. If they wanted to be financially dependant on their parents, it was straight up dishonest not to tell them. And that IS NOT enjoying all the privileges of matrimony FYI!!! I have a lot more to offer as a marriage partner than just sex. Hopefully they do too. Sick some people think that's all there is too it. Trying to find a loophole around sin is sin itself. To me I would compare that scenario to someone who doesn't wanna confess to smoking but decides to hotbox with their friends. Still sin.

Wow. Just wow. I dearly hope you weren't intending to proffer that story as a SUGGESTION to ME because that's offensive. Any man I marry is gonna man up and be a man and act like one.

The couple do not live in the US. The culture is different in their country. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
On 6/4/2018 at 6:40 PM, Latter-Day Marriage said:

What the handbook says about church discipline is that the purpose is:

1) save the soul of the transgressor

2) protect the innocent

3) safeguard the integrity of the church

Fornication is listed as something that may or may not need a Disciplinary Council to resolve.  A lot depends on the details of the individual case.  A one time mistake made in a moment of weakness or pressure, or out of ignorance,  is not the same thing as a long term pattern of deliberate rebellion.  He needs to go talk with his Bishop, and he doesn't need fear condemnation and judgment.  He will find compassion and help.  He will feel so much better even after the first talk.  God and his Bishop ache for his return to the fold and are there to help him, but he has to take the first step.  Satan will work to make him fear doing that but he has to find the courage to come back.His privacy will be respected, he won't be humiliated and shamed. 

A disciplinary council has the options of no action, an informal probation which would be restrictions like not being allowed to take the sacrament / exercise his priesthood / hold a calling until repentance is complete ,  a formal probation (further restrictions than an informal probation), disfellowshipment or excommunication. 

Given what you have said (which is all I know about it) I would think that excommunication is unlikely.  He has not made and broken temple covenants and was young at the time (I'm assuming that since he only had AP at the time), stopped it and feels bad about it, and all that works in his favor.  However I don't know the whole story and I'm not his Bishop so don't come back at me if things turn out differently. If he got a girl pregnant and helped her get an abortion that would not help for example.  If it was something that happened a long time ago and his life since then demonstrates he has changed that works in his favor as well.

The intention is not to punish somebody, it is to help them.  Sometimes a person reaches a point where the best thing for them is to start over from scratch, and that is where excommunication comes in.  Excommunicated members are not tossed aside, they are shepherded along the path back into the church if they are willing. 

Now if the situation is so bad that he is excommunicated, he would need to be re-baptized and he would have to wait a year after his re-baptism before he could go for his endowment same as any other convert.  He would be restored to his priesthood office right after his re-baptism.   If he is not excommunicated, then it will depend on how long it takes him to work out his repentance with the Bishop.  As it is right now there is no way he can get a temple recommend without out and out lying to the Lord's anointed and that is a pretty serous thing too.

Something you need to do is ask yourself what you are going to do if he refuses to confess.  Would you stand quite and let him get a temple recommend without saying anything knowing what you know?  What if he bails on the whole concept of a temple marriage to avoid confessing?  I know you don't want to think about those things, but you need to.


A Church court is instructed to do what is spiritually best or bishop

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.

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.