Gazelam wrote:Again I would say if the spouse is passive regarding beliefs, that's one thing, but if the apostate is preaching against the church to the children. Then its time to separate.
Then you are wrong, Gaz. And the prophets do not support your position.
I look at this situation and the first thing I ask is: do you love your spouse?
The first question is never: is your spouse a worthy TBM?
The first question is always: do you love your spouse? For better or for worse? In sickness or in health? In good times and bad? Now and forever?
Because if you don't love your spouse, your marriage is in bad shape, even if you're both active and TR carrying. And if you do love your spouse, then you can work through anything this world can throw at you.
Gazelam wrote:Again I would say if the spouse is passive regarding beliefs, that's one thing, but if the apostate is preaching against the church to the children. Then its time to separate.
How would that solve the problem Gazelam? It just adds another set of issues into the pot. Children will make up their own mind at the end of the day surely, whether the parents are active or not?
liz3564 wrote:Bsix has started an interesting thread on MAD. He used the term "spiritual infidelity" when referring to an apostate spouse. It's an interesting choice of terms.
Here are his comments from the thread. I thought I would throw it out here for some insights as well:
In the case of a sincere temple marriage in which one partner chooses to stop believing and practicing Mormonism...does the still faithful Latter Day Saint spouse have the moral right to end the marriage if they want?
Is that a terrible thing?
Is it insensitive?
Is it placing a love of God and heaven over a love of an apostate spouse?
Is the desire to have an eternal family justification to end a marriage and break up a family?
Is ending such a marriage justified because to continue puts the faith and eternal welfare of children at risk?
Is divorce for such a reason an act of bigotry?
Is spiritual infidelity as justifiable reason for divorce as adultery, failure to support, abandonment, abuse?
Are views on this subject tainted by the believing (or unbelief) of the beholder?
I would not automatically advocate divorce in the case of an apostate spouse. Each situation is different. However, in cases where a temple marriage was entered into with sincerity and eternal promises made, I can see where apostacy is a form of infidelity as cruel and betraying as sexual infidelity. I can see a believing spouse desiring to move on in their desire to find a spiritual spouse.
*sigh*
What about the teaching of the unbelieving spouse being sanctified by the believing one? Is that one of those things that are incorrectly translated? How can someone press towards the destruction of a family based on a theological difference? My BF doesn't go to church, and if I were to marry him, I'd never pressure him to. Ethics is more important to me than religion.
We agree again and I pointed out Paul's comments already which LDS do believe. I think that bsix is off the wall on this.
Gazelam wrote:Again I would say if the spouse is passive regarding beliefs, that's one thing, but if the apostate is preaching against the church to the children. Then its time to separate.
Again, I think there are too many variables. If a spouse is not being respectful of the other's beliefs, and is being antagonistic in his/her approach, then more problems than just a difference of beliefs exist.
If I came to a point where I absolutely didn't believe in the Church anymore, I certainly wouldn't want to leave my husband....nor would I be antagonistic toward the Church or my children attending Church, if they chose to.
My approach would be more of one where I would lay out what I believed, but would give my children the option to believe what they chose to believe.
Out of respect for my husband, I wouldn't denigrate something that he still holds dear.
We agree again and I pointed out Paul's comments already which LDS do believe. I think that bsix is off the wall on this.
Hey, Jason, have you checked out the thread over there yet to see bsix's convoluted attempt to defend his position against Paul's scripture? Pretty funny. ;)
liz3564 wrote:Bsix has started an interesting thread on MAD. He used the term "spiritual infidelity" when referring to an apostate spouse. It's an interesting choice of terms.
Here are his comments from the thread. I thought I would throw it out here for some insights as well:
In the case of a sincere temple marriage in which one partner chooses to stop believing and practicing Mormonism...does the still faithful Latter Day Saint spouse have the moral right to end the marriage if they want?
Is that a terrible thing?
Is it insensitive?
Is it placing a love of God and heaven over a love of an apostate spouse?
Is the desire to have an eternal family justification to end a marriage and break up a family?
Is ending such a marriage justified because to continue puts the faith and eternal welfare of children at risk?
Is divorce for such a reason an act of bigotry?
Is spiritual infidelity as justifiable reason for divorce as adultery, failure to support, abandonment, abuse?
Are views on this subject tainted by the believing (or unbelief) of the beholder?
I would not automatically advocate divorce in the case of an apostate spouse. Each situation is different. However, in cases where a temple marriage was entered into with sincerity and eternal promises made, I can see where apostacy is a form of infidelity as cruel and betraying as sexual infidelity. I can see a believing spouse desiring to move on in their desire to find a spiritual spouse.
*sigh*
What about the teaching of the unbelieving spouse being sanctified by the believing one? Is that one of those things that are incorrectly translated? How can someone press towards the destruction of a family based on a theological difference? My BF doesn't go to church, and if I were to marry him, I'd never pressure him to. Ethics is more important to me than religion.
We agree again and I pointed out Paul's comments already which LDS do believe. I think that bsix is off the wall on this.
I wasn't even aware that you had posted. It is noble of you to point out common ground.
Each one has to find his peace from within. And peace to be real must be unaffected by outside circumstances. -Ghandi
My parents were both agnostic when they married. Ten years into their marriage my mother joined the church. So, what my father should have divorced my mother? WHAT *&%$! I can't really believe this is even in the consciousness of some people. I truly don't get it.
I suppose if one doesn't love their spouse and is looking for a reason to get rid of her/him then disbelief is as good as an excuse as any but my goodness what nonsense. (I kind of wonder if this is at the core of those supporting this ridiculous idea).
What I see is often, as each individual grows and finds a belief more in keeping with their own "truth" they are happier and the marriage becomes even stronger. The intimacy and trust and authenticity only serves to make the marriage more real, more powerful, and more beautiful.
It is utter nonsense to think that if a couple divorces because of difference of belief the children will benefit. Even from a TBM standpoint, does anyone think the children are going to praise and support the TBM parent for breaking up a family? If anything in my opinion, it would cause more anger toward the church and the believing spouse. And as I mentioned, the non-believing spouse doesn't just magically go away and is never to be seen again by his/her children. I mean seriously, what world are these folks living in? :-)
But regardless... how anyone can think that a marriage should be terminated if couples change their thoughts, expand their beliefs, or come to a new awarenss is completely beyond me.
Can you tell this flabergasts me? LOL! ~dancer~
truth dancer wrote:My parents were both agnostic when they married. Ten years into their marriage my mother joined the church. So, what my father should have divorced my mother? WHAT *&%$! I can't really believe this is even in the consciousness of some people. I truly don't get it.
I suppose if one doesn't love their spouse and is looking for a reason to get rid of her/him then disbelief is as good as an excuse as any but my goodness what nonsense. (I kind of wonder if this is at the core of those supporting this ridiculous idea).
What I see is often, as each individual grows and finds a belief more in keeping with their own "truth" they are happier and the marriage becomes even stronger. The intimacy and trust and authenticity only serves to make the marriage more real, more powerful, and more beautiful.
It is utter nonsense to think that if a couple divorces because of difference of belief the children will benefit. Even from a TBM standpoint, does anyone think the children are going to praise and support the TBM parent for breaking up a family? If anything in my opinion, it would cause more anger toward the church and the believing spouse. And as I mentioned, the non-believing spouse doesn't just magically go away and is never to be seen again by his/her children. I mean seriously, what world are these folks living in? :-)
But regardless... how anyone can think that a marriage should be terminated if couples change their thoughts, expand their beliefs, or come to a new awarenss is completely beyond me. Can you tell this flabergasts me? LOL! ~dancer~
It flabergasted me, too, which is why I brought up the topic. I will say, though, it's the first interesting topic I've seen proposed on the MAD board in weeks! LOL ;)
I agree with your point 1000% in regards to the children resenting the Church. I'm sorry, but blood is thicker than water...or anything else. Your Mom is always your Mom. Your Dad is always your Dad. If Mom has always loved you and been good to you, but Dad divorces her because she no longer believes in the Church, who or what do you think the kids are going to resent? Dad for leaving...and the Church for driving a wedge against Mom and Dad in the first place.
Gazelam wrote:Again I would say if the spouse is passive regarding beliefs, that's one thing, but if the apostate is preaching against the church to the children. Then its time to separate.
You still ignore the fact that the parent that is vocal about their unbelief will still be in the child's life and will be more likely to be more vocal about their unbelief due to the desertion my their spouse.
I can see it now. Dad does not believe. Mom dumps dad. Dad has kids for the weekend. Dad does not allow them to go to Church and Dad spends a lot of time putting the Church down and maybe mom as well for dumping him over the Church.
Gazelam wrote:Again I would say if the spouse is passive regarding beliefs, that's one thing, but if the apostate is preaching against the church to the children. Then its time to separate.
Your logic does not follow. If the spouse were to preach Mormonism then there would be reason to separate. So ANY spouse preaching any religion, for or against falls into the logical categorization you portray.
You can't have it both ways, the only choice given your scenario is one in which Mormonism is the only thing able to be preached to the children. This possibility is frightening.
And crawling on the planet's face Some insects called the human race Lost in time And lost in space...and meaning