Temple Sealing Cancellations

[SteelerFan]

Your thoughts on the following letter, 

Thank you, look forward to your views.

 

[person0]

My thoughts (in brief):
 

• If the first wife desires to remain sealed, I believe it is generally the right thing to allow her to do so and to not seek to strip away that sealing.
• The second wife is very much in the wrong here.  She is acting pridefully.  Though her desires are understandable, she is not willing to trust the Lord to make everything work out perfectly as it should in the eternities.
• The second wife is also completely wrong about the morality of a man being sealed to more than one woman for eternity and is expressing and enforcing her opinions over and above those of the Lord and the doctrines and teachings of His Gospel.

I wish the couple in question the best and pray for the spirit to meaningfully influence their lives to help lead them to all the blessings the Lord desires for them.

Edited July 7, 2023 by person0

[zil2]

I see a need for humility, faith, repentance, and forgiveness all around.

IMO, a sealing is only a sealing if one chooses to make it so.  Both you and your ex have chosen to make it not so.  Your second wife is failing to trust you or the Lord. She is giving up the blessings of the temple (for herself, for you, for the two of you as a couple, and delaying blessings by proxy to others) because she thinks they aren't exclusively hers. Guess who else wanted exclusive blessings.

That's not to say the situation isn't difficult or her feelings aren't natural, but we're meant to rise above the natural. I see a need to work on humility, faith, repentance, and forgiveness all around.

Don't know if this will help, but here's a quote from the article "An Act of Religious Conviction: Mormon Women and Nineteenth-Century Polygamy":

Quote

And then the 1890 Manifesto was announced. At the time, Lorena was traveling with her husband to yet another home for their family. When she heard the news, she recalled,

My husband came to our tent and told me about it, and my feelings were past description. I had gone into that order of marriage solely . . . because I believed God had commanded his people to do so, and it had been such a sacrifice to enter it, and live it as I thought God wanted me to. And as I thought about it, it seemed impossible that the Lord would go back on a principal which had caused so much sacrifice, heartache, and trial before one could conquer one’s carnal self, and live on that higher plane, and love one’s neighbor as one’s self. My husband walked out without saying a word, and as he walked away I thought, Oh yes, it is easy for you, you can go home to your other family and be happy with her, while I must be like Hagar, sent away.

My anguish was inexpressible, and a dense darkness took hold of my mind. I thot that if the Lord and the church athorities had gone back on that principle, there was nothing to any part of the gospel. I fancied I could see my self and my children, and many other splendid women and their families turned adrift, and our only purpose in entering it, had been to more fully serve the Lord. I sank down on our bedding and wished in my anguish that the earth would open and take me and my children in. The darkness seemed impenetrable.

All at once I heard a voice and felt a most powerful presence. The voice said, “Why this is no more unreasonable than the requirement the Lord made of Abraham when he commanded him to offer up his son Isaac, and when the Lord sees that you are willing to obey in all things the trial shall be removed.”

There was a light whose brightness cannot be described which filled my soul, and I was so filled with joy, peace, and happiness that I felt that no matter whatever should come to me in all my future life, I could never feel sad again. If the people of the whole world had been gathered together trying with all their power to comfort me, they could not compare with the powerful unseen Presence which came to me on that occasion.

And as soon as my husband came back I told him what a glorious presence had been there, and what I had heard. He said, “I knew that I could not say a word to comfort you, so I went to a patch of willows, and asked the Lord to send a comforter.[”][7]

 

[zil2]

PS: Welcome to ThirdHour, @SteelerFan!

[person0]

BTW, if you get the sealing broken, it will just be re-done after the man and his wife are both deceased anyway.  When we do work for the dead, men are sealed to every spouse they had in mortality, especially when children are in the mix.  Ultimately, it cannot be avoided at this point, however, we do have the opportunity to trust in the Lord and in His plans for us.

[SteelerFan]

The reason I copied and pasted this letter is that the situation I am in is very similar to the couples above. However, I feel more empathy and understanding for the husband and his new wife's view for the following reasons:

1. The current wife is a fairly new convert to the church and polygamy must sound pretty crazy to her. Just go ask 20 random women on the street for their thoughts and I'm sure you would get 20 out of 20 agreeing with the convert. Possibly the same result with women in the church as well?

2. IF the ex wife IS using the sealing as a control mechanism over the couple, then this is simply wrong and twisted. Rewarded for her bad behaviour.

3. What of the free agency of the man? He desires not to stay sealed to a woman who asked for the divorce in the first place, but is forced to stay 'on the books' so to speak with her anyway? I think the first wife is at a minimum being controlling and selfish. If she is doing this for manipulative purposes, very prideful as well. Why should she be 'rewarded' for this type of behaviour?

4. I agree with his statement that he wouldn't be sealed to a woman who is still sealed to another man. So why should she be told to forgo her feelings, be humble and do something most men would not agree to do? All the while the initiator of the divorce is rewarded for possibly playing a very manipulative game with the new couple. Why should the new couple have to be dealing with the situation anyway? The first wife initiated and wanted the divorce in the first place. 

5. Why not grant the cancellation and let the new couple start with a fresh clean slate as the ex wife doesn't want to be married to the man anyway?

[askandanswer]

I suspect, with no doctrine or teaching that I know of to support my suspicion, that the Lord will not impose a sealing on anyone who does not want it, even if that means denying a sealing to someone who does want it. I think that in the end, what will matter most, and what you will receive, is what you want and have lived worthy to receive. I think that if you and your second wife wish to be sealed, and have lived worthy of that blessing, it will not be denied you in the next life if someone does the proxy work for you after you have left this life. Just my own thoughts. 

[Just_A_Guy]

10 hours ago, SteelerFan said:

2. IF the ex wife IS using the sealing as a control mechanism over the couple, then this is simply wrong and twisted. Rewarded for her bad behaviour.

3. What of the free agency of the man? He desires not to stay sealed to a woman who asked for the divorce in the first place, but is forced to stay 'on the books' so to speak with her anyway? I think the first wife is at a minimum being controlling and selfish. If she is doing this for manipulative purposes, very prideful as well. Why should she be 'rewarded' for this type of behaviour?

4. I agree with his statement that he wouldn't be sealed to a woman who is still sealed to another man. So why should she be told to forgo her feelings, be humble and do something most men would not agree to do? All the while the initiator of the divorce is rewarded for possibly playing a very manipulative game with the new couple. Why should the new couple have to be dealing with the situation anyway? The first wife initiated and wanted the divorce in the first place. 

5. Why not grant the cancellation and let the new couple start with a fresh clean slate as the ex wife doesn't want to be married to the man anyway?

Welcome aboard!  A few thoughts:

2.  Wife #1 is only able to control Husband and Wife #2 because Wife #2 is willing to be controlled. 

3-5:  Two thoughts here that tie into all of these:

a) The sealing covenant establishes/ enhances three specialized relationships, not just one.  There is the relationship between husband and wife; but there is also the relationship between the husband  and God; and the relationship between the wife and God.  While the vicissitudes of human relationships may cause the husband-wife bond to decay or evaporate over time (both in terms of the shared emotional attachment, and the sealing ratification of the Holy Spirit of Promise), the relationships between each covenant-keeping party and God Himself can remain intact and the covenant-keeping party has the assurance that, at an appropriate time, they can receive all the temporal and eternal blessings of the New and Everlasting Covenant of Marriage with a worthy partner.

The Church’s policies decree that generally speaking, while a divorced man can get a “clearance” to move on and be sealed to a new wife, he simply does not get to unilaterally shut his ex-wife out of that covenant with her Heavenly Father by going to the First Presidency and accusing her of covenant-breaking in order to subject her to a full “cancellation”.  (Women, by contrast, generally *do* get to do this to their ex-husbands if or when they wish to be sealed again; probably a vestige of plural marriage and a recognition that eternal polyandry is not a thing in our doctrine.)

b)  Why do women get a privilege that men don’t?  I surmise that the following considerations play a role:

—Men hold priesthood.  Where much is given, much is expected.

—Due to western economic and social norms, single men are i) typically expected to take the lead in courtship and ii) often, and unlike women, are considered *more* desirable marriage partners as they enter midlife and become more established in their careers and general living situation.

—LDS prophets and apostles from at least Brigham Young onwards have recognized the terrible risk a young woman takes when she hitches her fortunes to a young man who is, at that stage of his life, something of an unknown quantity.  From Turner’s biography of Brigham Young, p 242:  “[Young informed a man requesting a divorce] ‘that when a man married a wife he took her for better or for worse, and had no right to ill use her, and if she [pooped] in bed and laid in it until noon, he must bare it.’ . . . Similarly, Young told another man that ‘if you have drawn a red hot iron between your legs and scorched yourself bear it without grunting.’”

Under the circumstances, we elders (and the women foolish enough to love us) should probably just be grateful that the Church permits men to divorce and remarry at all. 

Edited July 8, 2023 by Just_A_Guy

[Vort]

On 7/7/2023 at 10:14 PM, Just_A_Guy said:

Under the circumstances, we elders (and the women foolish enough to love us) should probably just be grateful that the Church permits men to divorce and remarry at all. 

I agree with all of your response except for the above. I realize you're probably engaging in self-deprecating humor, but to be serious for a moment, in my lifetime and experiences I have not often observed a woman I thought to be much above her husband's spiritual station. Not that I have any special gift of discerning people's spiritual abilities, but couples seem to me most often pretty well-matched for each other in ability or level. The old, humorously intended saw about "my better half" seem increasingly inapplicable in today's society, where 70+% of divorces are initiated by the wife (mostly not due to adultery or abuse) and young women openly and quite proudly refer to themselves as "whores". We should teach our sons to be worthy of their future wives, and then we should teach them to expect virtue from those they date and to reject as unfit those women who do not meet basic standards of decency and morality.

Edited July 9, 2023 by Vort

[zil2]

19 hours ago, SteelerFan said:

The reason I copied and pasted this letter is that the situation I am in is very similar to the couples above. However, I feel more empathy and understanding for the husband and his new wife's view for the following reasons:

1. The current wife is a fairly new convert to the church and polygamy must sound pretty crazy to her. Just go ask 20 random women on the street for their thoughts and I'm sure you would get 20 out of 20 agreeing with the convert. Possibly the same result with women in the church as well?

2. IF the ex wife IS using the sealing as a control mechanism over the couple, then this is simply wrong and twisted. Rewarded for her bad behaviour.

3. What of the free agency of the man? He desires not to stay sealed to a woman who asked for the divorce in the first place, but is forced to stay 'on the books' so to speak with her anyway? I think the first wife is at a minimum being controlling and selfish. If she is doing this for manipulative purposes, very prideful as well. Why should she be 'rewarded' for this type of behaviour?

4. I agree with his statement that he wouldn't be sealed to a woman who is still sealed to another man. So why should she be told to forgo her feelings, be humble and do something most men would not agree to do? All the while the initiator of the divorce is rewarded for possibly playing a very manipulative game with the new couple. Why should the new couple have to be dealing with the situation anyway? The first wife initiated and wanted the divorce in the first place. 

5. Why not grant the cancellation and let the new couple start with a fresh clean slate as the ex wife doesn't want to be married to the man anyway?

1. a. And yet she married into a Church that believes in plural marriage (and never stopped believing in it, even if it stopped [concurrent while all parties are mortal plural marriage]).  (One cannot make things better by denying the truth.  Ever.  It's not possible.  So confront the truth, or consciously decide to set it on the shelf and move forward trusting that one day you will understand and be able to confront it, but don't try to deny it.)

1. b. If you're going to go out and ask random women on the street, you'll probably find that while they object to polygamy, they've still had sex with multiple partners and it wouldn't be terribly surprising if the men they're sleeping with have too and if there was little time between partners, so let's just call this nonsense and hypocrisy.  (And, as mentioned earlier, we're meant to be better than random people on the street.)

1. c. While I understand the desire to have your husband all to yourself, I fall back on the following thoughts: (for this situation) in effect, if not technically, they have exclusivity by choice, so trust that; (generally) by the time you become an exalted being (if you do), you'll be a completely different person who's over such things; the current American view of marriage is likely all wrong, even among members of the Church (this is my opinion based on what I can determine from scripture and the temple); eternity is a really long time - does she really want to be the sole woman her husband has to turn to through all eternity, or would she like someone else to share that burden?

2-3, 5. What @Just_A_Guy said.

4. Specifically, "So why should she be told to forgo her feelings, be humble..."  Seriously?  Why should she be humble?  All of us are required to come down into the depths of humility:

Quote

Mosiah 2:25 And now I ask, can ye say aught of yourselves? I answer you, Nay. Ye cannot say that ye are even as much as the dust of the earth; yet ye were created of the dust of the earth; but behold, it belongeth to him who created you.

Quote

Helaman 12:7 O how great is the nothingness of the children of men; yea, even they are less than the dust of the earth.

Quote

Ether 12:39 And then shall ye know that I have seen Jesus, and that he hath talked with me face to face, and that he told me in plain humility, even as a man telleth another in mine own language, concerning these things;

(Note that Moroni is here saying it was Christ who humbled himself to talk with Moroni face to face, in Moroni's language and to his understanding.)

Quote

D&C 122:8 The Son of Man hath descended below them all. Art thou greater than he?

And finally:

Quote

Isaiah 55:8 ¶ For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord.

9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

Sure, it's easy to say all this from the sidelines, and hard to live it, but in my experience, everyone is going (or has gone or will go) through things you don't want to imagine going through.  The point is to turn to Christ to overcome our sins, weakness, and trials.  So turn to Christ, not away from him.

PS: We're all just a bunch of idiots on the internet, so turn to Christ...

Edited July 8, 2023 by zil2

[Vort]

Carthago delenda est!

Edited July 9, 2023 by Vort

[Carborendum]

On 7/7/2023 at 1:26 PM, SteelerFan said:

1. The current wife is a fairly new convert to the church and polygamy must sound pretty crazy to her. Just go ask 20 random women on the street for their thoughts and I'm sure you would get 20 out of 20 agreeing with the convert. Possibly the same result with women in the church as well?

There is a bit of a paradox here that ends up in a feedback loop here.

1) If the Church is really God's Church, then this doctrine of plural marriage is true.  So, she needs to accept it.
2) If the Church is not God's Church, then this ceremony is meaningless.  We're just arranging electrons on a computer and placing toner on paper.  It has completely zero effect in real life. 

So, why is this a big deal?

In eternity, we're all supposed to be perfect.  There is no such thing as envy or strife or "playing favorites" or anything.

[Vort]

10 hours ago, Carborendum said:

There is a bit of a paradox here that ends up in a feedback loop here.

1) If the Church is really God's Church, then this doctrine of plural marriage is true.  So, she needs to accept it.
2) If the Church is not God's Church, then this ceremony is meaningless.  We're just arranging electrons on a computer and placing toner on paper.  It has completely zero effect in real life. 

So, why is this a big deal?

In eternity, we're all supposed to be perfect.  There is no such thing as envy or strife or "playing favorites" or anything.

I have made the same argument vis-à-vis the kerfuffle in years past about vicarious baptism for Holocaust victims. The action is either meaningful or it is not. If it's meaningful, then it should be done, and there can be no rational argument that it ought not be done. If it's not meaningful, then why raise a cry of persecution about something that literally affects no one? Sadly, only a minority see the obviousness of the argument. Most of the rest stare in appalled astonishment that anyone would actually utter such words.

Edited July 11, 2023 by Vort

[classylady]

On 7/7/2023 at 1:09 AM, SteelerFan said:

Your thoughts on the following letter, 

Thank you, look forward to your views.

 

Plural marriage can be a hard concept to emotionally understand. I believe that most of us, men and women, prefer exclusivity with their spouse. 

I can understand the second wife’s hesitation. When I married my husband, who had been previously sealed to his ex-wife, I too had questions and doubts whether to be sealed to him. I had to push my pride aside and humble myself. I absolutely believe in the ordinance of marriage sealing. I wanted an eternal marriage, and I wanted my children to have the blessings of the sealing covenant. My testimony of this being the Lord’s church is what helped me with my decision to be sealed to my husband. He did try to have his sealing cancelled to his ex-wife, but it was denied at that time.  He was told it wasn’t necessary.  So, even though I chose to be sealed to him, I still had questions and insecurities that would surface from time to time.

Fast forward about twenty-five years. We had heard that it was easier for men (and women) to receive sealing cancellations. In the past, sealing cancellations were almost never granted unless the ex-wife was getting remarried and wanted to be sealed to her new husband. But, because of the information we had received about it being easier, my husband went to our bishop to ask about a sealing cancellation and the bishop asked him, “Why have you waited so long?” Once the letter to the First Presidency was sent in, it took about two to three weeks to get the reply back. The sealing cancellation was approved. My husband’s ex-wife has remarried, but not in the temple. She is no longer in the church, so maybe, that was why it was approved? I’m actually surprised that the request from the man in the letter was not approved, for I have heard of many sealing cancellations being granted where the ex-wife has not remarried. We don’t know the complete circumstances in this instance.

[SteelerFan]

Do any of the women that have commented if favour of the first wife have any actual personal experience with their husband being sealed to two or more women at the same time? And for the men, would you be ok with your wife being sealed to another man while still being sealed to you? It seems as if the second wife has been demonised as someone who needs repentance, humility, understanding, is selfish, etc., all the while, the first wife is laughing her guts out all innocent and in her element. Please answer the question with a yes or no. Please. Conjecture absolutely not necessary for these particular questions. Thank you.

[Carborendum]

17 hours ago, classylady said:

Fast forward about twenty-five years. We had heard that it was easier for men (and women) to receive sealing cancellations.

This reminds me of my BIL.  He was married to a sociopath (or possibly a narcissist).  They're divorced.

He found a wonderful woman to marry.  They still needed to get the ex-wife's permission (or something like that -- I'm getting all this info third-hand) for him to marry a second wife.

Come to think of it, I'm not sure if the earlier sealing was actually cancelled.  I'll have to ask about that.

[SteelerFan]

I notice another post has been approved in this discussion just a few minutes ago. I posted my two replies around 8 hours and they have not been added yet? Any reason? I mean, Zil2 compared wife two to the adversary above and it was approved and posted? Confused.

[SteelerFan]

Carborendum hit the nail on the head, "He was married to a sociopath (or possibly a narcissist". Describes my first wife to a tee and still she continues to get the full benefit of the doubt as wife two gets demonised for not wanting to share her husband in any way with an ex wife who asked for the divorce in the first place??? Sounds like a bit of alternate reality in the Twilight Zone to me.

[NeuroTypical]

On 7/7/2023 at 1:09 AM, SteelerFan said:

Your thoughts on the following letter, 

8 hours ago, SteelerFan said:

Conjecture absolutely not necessary for these particular questions.

Sorry, are you asking for our thoughts or aren't you?  

 

8 hours ago, SteelerFan said:

And for the men, would you be ok with your wife being sealed to another man while still being sealed to you?

It doesn't work that way.  Men can be sealed to multiple women, but women can not be sealed to multiple men.

 

Also, it's sometimes a good time to remind folks of the site rules, to which everyone has agreed in order to get an account and post here.   Especially rules 3 and 4:

Quote

3. Personal attacks, name calling, flaming, and judgments against other members will not be tolerated.

4. No bickering and nit-picking toward others. Realize that sometimes it is very difficult to be able to express how one feels through written words. Please be courteous and ask for a further explanation, rather then trying to attack and find holes in someone else's post.

 

[SteelerFan]

Fair enough in regards to the rules, I get it. Hopefully your post is also aimed at Zil2 as well? I mean a little not so well hidden comparison of wife two to the adversary? Sounds just a bit like a personal attack, don't you think? (Repent, humble yourself, selfish, etc) Also, the reason I asked for people to answer yes or no in regards to the question about women having more than one husband was to try and get a bit of understanding and comparison for the poor women in the church that have to put up with sharing their husbands. It seems that nobody is willing to address this, just misdirection and avoiding the premise. The first wife seems to have gotten off scott free in this discussion. Very curious and telling.

[LDSGator]

5 minutes ago, SteelerFan said:

Fair enough in regards to the rules, I get it. Hopefully your post is also aimed at Zil2 as well? I mean a little not so well hidden comparison of wife two to the adversary? Sounds just a bit like a personal attack, don't you think? (Repent, humble yourself, selfish, etc) Also, the reason I asked for people to answer yes or no in regards to the question about women having more than one husband was to try and get a bit of understanding and comparison for the poor women in the church that have to put up with sharing their husbands. It seems that nobody is willing to address this, just misdirection and avoiding the premise. The first wife seems to have gotten off scott free in this discussion. Very curious and telling.

I can offer you no advice, but please know I’m praying for you bro. 

[zil2]

8 hours ago, SteelerFan said:

Do any of the women that have commented if favour of the first wife ...

Interesting.  Only two women have replied to this thread: me and @classylady.  Neither of us has commented "in favor of the first wife".  Why do you think we have?

8 hours ago, SteelerFan said:

It seems as if the second wife has been demonised as someone who needs repentance, humility, understanding, is selfish, etc., all the while, the first wife is laughing her guts out all innocent and in her element.

Pointing out where someone needs to change - which is what you asked, isn't demonizing, it's just pointing out what needs to change.  I didn't figure there was any point in talking about the first wife - she's not part of the group asking for advice (presumably, it's husband, and through him, the second wife who are asking for advice).  The only thing we know enough about to comment is that the first wife has abandoned all her covenants, by leaving the Church, so unless she repents, holding onto the sealing technically won't do her any good.  Beyond that, I know nothing (except that my comment about "a need for humility, faith, repentance, and forgiveness" applies to her as well - technically, it applies to all of us everywhere all the time...).

@classylady already answered your question.  My answer is, "no."

17 minutes ago, SteelerFan said:

Hopefully your post is also aimed at Zil2 as well? I mean a little not so well hidden comparison of wife two to the adversary?

I was comparing behaviors and didn't intend to hide anything, well or poorly.  It was more of a blunt, "hey, open your eyes and look at what you're doing" sort of thing.  Sorry the bluntness offended.

20 minutes ago, SteelerFan said:

the poor women in the church that have to put up with sharing their husbands

That's your assessment.  It doesn't necessarily mean that every woman in the Church sees it the same way.  Rationally, this should be a non-issue, but I know that most people aren't going to see it that way, especially in the situations you've described.

25 minutes ago, SteelerFan said:

The first wife seems to have gotten off scott free in this discussion.

Again, it didn't seem like there was any point - she's not asking for advice.  And there really isn't any advice we can give to husband and second wife that will impact first wife.  If it helps, I'll say it looks like she too needs humility, faith, repentance, and forgiveness, and to turn to Christ.

I'll just end by saying that it seems to me all of us were approaching this from the perspective of "how do husband and second wife move forward" - first wife has no part in that, only they do, so they're the ones all the comments were directed to.  And it still seems that it's the second wife who needs to be the one to change before any forward motion can happen.  (I suppose technically, you could say that if first wife would just agree to the sealing cancellation, then husband and second wife can have what they want, but I was approaching this from the perspective of "none of us can change first wife, so let's ignore her and look elsewhere".)

[SteelerFan]

Good discussion Zil2, and point(s) taken. I just thought the jump all the way to the comparison in regards to the 2nd wife's behaviour, feelings, understanding, etc acting in some way like the adversary was a bit too out there, extreme and overkill. Not appropriate or necessary, in my humble opinion. Also, the question in regards to husbands being ok with their spouse being sealed to another living man at the same time to them was for context, comparison and understanding. I feel it is a valid question and needs to be addressed. Thanks for answering directly. Whether it's two or twenty women discussing a subject, be careful, the Lord has a funny way of putting us in situations we once thought we had all figured out. You may change your opinion and perspective if you are given the opportunity or misfortune someday, possibly in this life, to find yourself in the same situation as wife 2. Experience is the great humbler. 

Edited July 11, 2023 by SteelerFan
forgot to add 'misfortune' for more perspective and scope

[Carborendum]

50 minutes ago, zil2 said:

Again, it didn't seem like there was any point - she's not asking for advice.

@SteelerFan,

I have to admit that zil's point above is a good one.  We can only answer the question that was asked (which had nothing to do with what the first wife did right or wrong).  Your question was about you and your second wife.  So, we addressed that.

You were the one asking for advice.  So, we gave advice on you what YOU could do or change your thoughts on.  And hopefully, we have said something that may help.

[estradling75]

There is some understandable sensitivity about the comments made toward the second wife.. so I am not going to talk about her... I'm going to talk about me and a process many members find themselves.  Hopefully the issue is easier to see when looking at others.

There have been many cases when I through my studies, experiences, feelings etc.  That I Think I know what is right.

Then the Lord either through some personal revelation or through an inspired church leader, challenges that.   That is the dilemma.  Before that happens I am happily moving along doing the "Right thing" the best I know how.  But once I am told (in one way or another) I have the dilemma. 

Either I am right and God is wrong and I do not have to change or God is right and I am wrong and I need to change something.  Now writing that out the correct answer is a 'No duh' God is right and I am wrong.. but it is never that easy to see when I am in the middle of it, even more so when I do not understand how it makes sense. 

In this dilemma I either need to humble myself and faithfully follow the council given.  If I don't, then my pride will kick in and I will rebel.  And we know the ultimate destination of both those choices should they continue.

It does not matter what the subject is... It could be Sealings,  It could be Politics, it could be Money, etc. etc.  because there is more then enough of them for each and every one of us to get tested in this way multiple times.