Repentance and confession - What would you do?

[Jeff Lebowski]

On the other hand (as opposed to procrastination), I can remember my father telling me that time is often a significant element of repentance - I took it to mean that the passage of time without repeat of the same sin. In other words, the significance of a sin (and associated church punishment) may be reduced the farther back in time it occurred.

In other words, if the guy goes to his bishop and confesses the adultery now, he likely would not face the same consequences.

My father was a bishop back in the 70's. Years later he told me that lots of members came in and confessed affairs, premarital sex, etc. that had happened 10-20 years or more prior. He smiled and told them all that they were forgiven and to stop carrying around the guilt. On hearing this, my thoughts were:

a) my old man was a pretty cool bishop
b) in terms of "consequences" from the church, these people clearly benefited by waiting to confess.
c) perhaps the reason that there were so many confessions of this type is that people perceived that he was a gentle soul.

[tooblue]

Obviously, I don't consider that an inspired part of our current church. It's not scriptural, unless you're relying on some later interpretations of scripture (interpretations that could just as easily be seen the other way). I've already made my opinions known on this, so I'm not really dying to get into another discussion. I feel pretty strongly about, you likely do too, so we're not going to convince each other of much.

To clarify -- what I posted elsewhere:

It is not policy it is doctrine given to us by the Lord himself:

D&C 19:20 Wherefore, I command you again to repent, lest I ahumble you with my almighty power; and that you bconfess your sins, lest you suffer these cpunishments of which I have spoken, of which in the smallest, yea, even in the least degree you have dtasted at the time I withdrew my Spirit.

D&C 58:43 By this ye may know if a man repenteth of his sins—behold, he will aconfess them and bforsake them.

Marion D. Hanks stated: "Those sins which injure others we are to confess to those whom we have hurt, and seek forgiveness and reconciliation:"

D&C 42:88 And if thy abrother or sister boffend thee, thou shalt take him or her between him or her and thee alone; and if he or she cconfess thou shalt be dreconciled.

"Sins that by their nature put in jeopardy our membership or good standing in the Church must also be confessed to the Lord’s agent, the bishop or other appropriate Church officer. The bishop as common judge has stewardship of the flock and its members. He is responsible for safeguarding the “body of the Church” and its various members in his appointed jurisdiction, even to the point of “cutting off the right hand” or “plucking out the right eye” if it offends."

It is scripturally based and the interpretation is by apostles not me.

[ERCougar]

Another interesting thing I've pulled out of this thread is this: That if enough time passes and he/she progresses and becomes a good person, but yet has tortured himself internally with the knowledge and bad feelings of his adulterous indiscretion and that he'll have to live with that for the rest of his life keeping it inside, combined with the fact that if God knows he's become a better person for it and knowing that it has eaten him inside.....that well.....that's the only Music he should really have to face.

That those are "consequences" enough.

'Nuf said.

[ERCougar]

I agree with what you posted. Why the stupid attempt to be clever in the initial post? Like I said, skip the exUte crap next time. Or at least be accurate. You know full well that confession to local leaders is part of the repentance process in our culture, so I have no idea where you were going with that post.

Actually, come to think of it, I don't agree with everything. You exaggerated at the end and attributed a bunch of stuff to me that I didn't say (disgusted, getting off scot free, etc). I have also said numerous times that this is a horrible situation, etc, so I am not oblivious to that.

Once again, we are discussing your reading comprehension skills.

I said your post "and others", right?

[RockyBalboa]

Another interesting thing I've pulled out of this thread is this: That if enough time passes and he/she progresses and becomes a good person, but yet has tortured himself internally with the knowledge and bad feelings of his adulterous indiscretion and that he'll have to live with that for the rest of his life keeping it inside, combined with the fact that if God knows he's become a better person for it and knowing that it has eaten him inside.....that well.....that's the only Music he should really have to face.

That those are "consequences" enough. To me, this is a cowardly act.

I guess I'm not that famaliar with the concept of making such a serious indiscretion, but yet insisting on controlling the consequences to fit their conveinence of conscience.

You (that person) committed that act, so then clearly they should be able to control what happens afterwards? It takes a special kind of hubris to pull that off.

[TripletDaddy]

I'm not really dying to participate in this thread, because reading it honestly nauseates me.

Your post (and others on here) perfectly illustrates the problem with the confession process in my view--we start to confuse God's consequences with human ones. I don't have a problem with you advocating honesty between spouses--if that's your reason for him talking, fine. But this crap about a "friendly forum" and the right Bishop and how disgusted you are that once enough time passes, he gets off scot free--all this makes me think that we've somehow ingrained in our collective consciousness that the real penalty for adultery isn't the deep spiritual wound it cuts but disfellowshipping/excommunication. This guy has hardly gotten off scot free, whether or not he tells his wife.

I agree with what you posted. Why the stupid attempt to be clever in the initial post? Like I said, skip the exUte crap next time. Or at least be accurate. You know full well that confession to local leaders is part of the repentance process in our culture, so I have no idea where you were going with that post.

Actually, come to think of it, I don't agree with everything. You exaggerated at the end and attributed a bunch of stuff to me that I didn't say (disgusted, getting off scot free, etc). I have also said numerous times that this is a horrible situation, etc, so I am not oblivious to that.

Once again, we are discussing your reading comprehension skills.

[ERCougar]

The problem is the process as you call it is given to us by God (at least that's what we believe) and therefore is a part of God's consequences!

Maybe it is the best process, especially if we are willing humble ourselves and submit to it.

Obviously, I don't consider that an inspired part of our current church. It's not scriptural, unless you're relying on some later interpretations of scripture (interpretations that could just as easily be seen the other way). I've already made my opinions known on this, so I'm not really dying to get into another discussion. I feel pretty strongly about, you likely do too, so we're not going to convince each other of much.

[tooblue]

I'm not really dying to participate in this thread, because reading it honestly nauseates me.

Your post (and others on here) perfectly illustrates the problem with the confession process in my view--we start to confuse God's consequences with human ones. I don't have a problem with you advocating honesty between spouses--if that's your reason for him talking, fine. But this crap about a "friendly forum" and the right Bishop and how disgusted you are that once enough time passes, he gets off scot free--all this makes me think that we've somehow ingrained in our collective consciousness that the real penalty for adultery isn't the deep spiritual wound it cuts but disfellowshipping/excommunication. This guy has hardly gotten off scot free, whether or not he tells his wife.

The problem is the process as you call it is given to us by God (at least that's what we believe) and therefore is a part of God's consequences!

Maybe it is the best process, especially if we are willing humble ourselves and submit to it.

[Surfah]

It seems that the preferred policy here is

A. keep lying to your spouse and kids because the truth may result in divorce, which may result in something worse....the woman re-marries a faithful spouse who is also honest
B. Don't worry about seeking out a priesthood leader (despite violating major covenants)
C. If you do seek out a Priesthood leader, bounce around until you find one that will allow you to navigate on your own terms
D. Continue to allow time to pass

This new repentance process is sweet. Much more user friendly than the tired old one we have employed for so many years.

Maybe some of us are able to mete out the terms of our salvation on our own. I simply haven't reached that point in my life. I guess that means I am an orthodox Mormon.

[ERCougar]

Yes, silly you. Have you ever met with God in his office to discuss transgressions? And if so, why does everyone else have to meet with a Bishop or Stake President?

Contribute to the thread, fine, but skip the exUte crap and get straight to your point.

I'm not really dying to participate in this thread, because reading it honestly nauseates me.

Your post (and others on here) perfectly illustrates the problem with the confession process in my view--we start to confuse God's consequences with human ones. I don't have a problem with you advocating honesty between spouses--if that's your reason for him talking, fine. But this crap about a "friendly forum" and the right Bishop and how disgusted you are that once enough time passes, he gets off scot free--all this makes me think that we've somehow ingrained in our collective consciousness that the real penalty for adultery isn't the deep spiritual wound it cuts but disfellowshipping/excommunication. This guy has hardly gotten off scot free, whether or not he tells his wife.

[TripletDaddy]

Silly me. I always thought our forum for repentance was God. And that He was a pretty friendly guy.

Yes, silly you. Have you ever met with God in his office to discuss transgressions? And if so, why does everyone else have to meet with a Bishop or Stake President?

Contribute to the thread, fine, but skip the exUte crap and get straight to your point.

[TripletDaddy]

Is it safe to assume that those in the camp of he shouldn't tell his wife also believe that he shouldn't tell his current Bishop?

I ask, because what if he doesn't tell his wife but meets with his Bishop and he tells him he needs to tell his wife? What then? Does he wait another 10 years or until another Bishop may advise him otherwise?

Or another hypothetical, lets say he returns to church and makes no confession to anyone but the Bishop discovers that he's not currently in good standing with the Church (disfellowshipped by his previous Bishop)? What then?

It seems that the preferred policy here is

A. keep lying to your spouse and kids because the truth may result in divorce, which may result in something worse....the woman re-marries a faithful spouse who is also honest
B. Don't worry about seeking out a priesthood leader (despite violating major covenants)
C. If you do seek out a Priesthood leader, bounce around until you find one that will allow you to navigate on your own terms
D. Continue to allow time to pass

This new repentance process is sweet. Much more user friendly than the tired old one we have employed for so many years.

[ERCougar]

The concept of forum shopping to find a friendly venue is somewhat troublesome to me.

Silly me. I always thought our forum for repentance was God. And that He was a pretty friendly guy.

[Solon]

After reading through this thread it is clearer to me that it ever has been why the institution of marriage is under such a vicious assault.

I'm all for fidelity and honesty in marriage and in life, but I think it's overboard to claim that this is part of how "the institution of marriage" is under attack. There is no golden age of yesteryear where people didn't cheat and lie to one another. People have always been that way.

Divorce is more common now, sure, but maybe that's a good thing. It helps people get out of horrible situations.

[RockyBalboa]

After reading through this thread it is clearer to me than it ever has been why the institution of marriage is under such a vicious assault.

Sad.

It's amazing the degrees of a wedge that The Adversary can drive into a marriage. One that breeds distrust and a weak foundation based in false trust and lies, all under the guise of fake protection.

Using infidelity, lies and untrustworthy behavioral actions and then someone over the years may have genuinely become a better person is all the reason why they should "not be selfish" and protect their spouse.....aka....cover their ass.... have been used as the battle cry to remain in ignorance of a long uncovered egregrious act on ones behalf.

It's little wonder why the divorce rate is where it's at and why couples have little left anymore.

It's true, I've been divorced (because I can see the potshots coming from a mile away, so I'll just acknowledge that now), but I will never again be apart of a union where someone thinks that dishonesty, infidelity, a fake fantasy world, selfishishness and a deliberately carried out pattern of mis-trust are translated into being things of protection, love and selflessness.

What a noble person the spouse who carries this out is!