Repentance and confession - What would you do?

[wuapinmon]

Well his bishop is his judge in Israel, and the Church handbook of instruction spells out rather clearly how things work when it comes to a confession that puts your membership in jeopardy. He may find that his old bishop or high council disfellowshipped him. I know that different bishops react differently to sins, but this is the big, second-only-to-murder, deal that we all think it is.

The covenant of marriage demands fidelity, even in an extra-religious sense.

He violated the covenant, the wife has a right to know. Is that right at this point an odious horrible burden to shoulder? Hell yes! But, does her right to know overwhelm his need to tell her, her comfort, her ability to enter the Gospel and accept it. If he gets sealed to her in the temple without telling her, that's as much a betrayal as anything because he would be lying, and the ceremony reminds us, in plain language, that God will not be mocked. He would be mocking her and mocking God by entering into the greatest of all covenants unworthily.

He has to tell her. No matter how much it sucks for both of them, if she continues in the Gospel, he has to tell her.

Sometimes we have to forgive ourselves, but this one violated a covenant he made her, even if it was before the law, it was still a promise he broke.

This is just dreadful; I think by not telling her he is continuing his infidelity because he fears worldly consequences more than spiritual consequences.

If my wife had had an affair, I would be crushed, but I would forgive her. I love her no matter what or who she does. If she didn't tell me about the affair, I would be crushed. I would want to know.

If I were him, I'd go talk to my current bishop. Even though he's just someone who lives in his ward, he holds the keys.

[SoCalCoug]

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.

[TripletDaddy]

This is a tough predicament. Much of the advice here centers around the notion that with the passage of time, just forgot about stuff and move on.

However, this doesn't change the fact that the guy was a huge liar and cheated on his spouse....one of the worst possible things you can do in a marriage.

This isn't like drinking from the milk carton or peeing on the toilet seat.

This is a major breach of trust.

Sometimes the catharsis comes in being honest and having integrity, regardless of whether it makes anyone feel better. In fact, in the case of an extra-marital affair, there is no time frame within which either party will be made to feel better for having revealed the indiscretion.

I have no idea what this guy should do. I do know that I am really happy to not be in that awful situation.

Sooner or later the wife will find out. And she will be crushed. Nobody finds out about an extramarital affair and says, "oh, well...that is ancient history."

It is clear that this guy purposely avoided telling his wife all those years ago because he knew he would be screwed. So his motives were selfish. Sounds like his motives remain selfish.

[UtahDan]

Procrastination is the thief of eternal life. My guess that if this is eating at this guy now, after 10 years, how bad will it be in another 10. I think that they both would be better off, in the end, if he reveals to her what has happened. I have witnesssed what an affair does to a family. It is not good. But there is an opportunity to grow from that experience, together. It is a case by case scenario.

I have two comments about this. The first is that if I had done this and it was not coming out otherwise, I would keep my mouth shut. I would not unburden my conscience at the expense of destroying my wife's world. I just wouldn't and if that means I get eaten inside for the rest of my life, so be it. I would jump in front of a train to protect her so sucking up a little (or a lot) of personal angst would be something I would accept.

Second, I'm not so sure that another bishop or stake president (maybe even this guy's current one) would have the same take on that issue. I know for a fact that this is not universally required that a confession be made to a spouse. I think it depends a lot of the circumstances, but here I am with Cardiac that doing it now would be selfish.

I don't think that you or I are in a position to predict what the fall out would be.

[TripletDaddy]

I have two comments about this. The first is that if I had done this and it was not coming out otherwise, I would keep my mouth shut. I would not unburden my conscience at the expense of destroying my wife's world. I just wouldn't and if that means I get eaten inside for the rest of my life, so be it. I would jump in front of a train to protect her so sucking up a little (or a lot) of personal angst would be something I would accept.

Second, I'm not so sure that another bishop or stake president (maybe even this guy's current one) would have the same take on that issue. I know for a fact that this is not universally required that a confession be made to a spouse. I think it depends a lot of the circumstances, but here I am with Cardiac that doing it now would be selfish.

I don't think that you or I are in a position to predict what the fall out would be.

While I agree with your general point, it is hard to take a guy seriously when he says he would jump in front of a train to protect his wife, except for the case in which he destroys her by having sex with another woman.

"Hey, baby, I love you. I just can't stop beating you up!"

[RockyBalboa]

I'm a little befuddled by the whole..."I'm protecting my wife by not telling her (cough, cough, bullshit), and if I still don't say anything then I'm still (cough, cough, bullshit) protecting her.

The truth is you're still just covering your own ass.

[UtahDan]

While I agree with your general point, it is hard to take a guy seriously when he says he would jump in front of a train to protect his wife, except for the case in which he destroys her by having sex with another woman.

"Hey, baby, I love you. I just can't stop beating you up!"

Well, you are right, that is the irony of that position. Still, I just don't know what good it does. This is not black and white for me, the other side of the argument has a lot of merit here. There is force to the argument that she should get to choose. I still don't think I would tell, but since that is not something I have done, would do or (lets be real) am going to get the opportunity to do, it is hard for me to judge.

[UtahDan]

I'm a little befuddled by the whole..."I'm protecting my wife by not telling her (cough, cough, bullshit), and if I still don't say anything then I'm still (cough, cough, bullshit) protecting her.

The truth is you're still just covering your own ass.

I think clearly that is a big component of it. I'm not trying to say otherwise.

[TripletDaddy]

Well, you are right, that is the irony of that position. Still, I just don't know what good it does. This is not black and white for me, the other side of the argument has a lot of merit here. There is force to the argument that she should get to choose. I still don't think I would tell, but since that is not something I have done, would do or (lets be real) am going to get the opportunity to do, it is hard for me to judge.

UD, Agreed 100%. a horrible situation all around.

I think the most honest approach is thus: "I cheated on my wife, didn't want to get busted, hoped that it would all go away. Now, all these years later, I don't see what good it would do to tell my wife, but what I mean by this mostly is that I am further entrenched in my lie and why bring it up now? I got away with it and what my wife doesn't know won't hurt her. Also, I don't have to go through the embarrassment of telling my kids, who are now older and will understand that I was a loser. My current friends in the ward won't have to find out that I was loser. And my family and in-laws won't have to find out that I am a loser. Really, I am protecting everyone by keeping this secret! It is all about protecting everyone else!"

Rocky is right. Guys that claim to be refraining from admitting the truth to their wife out of "concern" for their wife......oh, brother.

[ERCougar]

I can honestly say that if my wife cheated on me, that the affair was over, and she had turned her life around, I would not want to know.

[Surfah]

I have two comments about this. The first is that if I had done this and it was not coming out otherwise, I would keep my mouth shut. I would not unburden my conscience at the expense of destroying my wife's world. I just wouldn't and if that means I get eaten inside for the rest of my life, so be it. I would jump in front of a train to protect her so sucking up a little (or a lot) of personal angst would be something I would accept.

Second, I'm not so sure that another bishop or stake president (maybe even this guy's current one) would have the same take on that issue. I know for a fact that this is not universally required that a confession be made to a spouse. I think it depends a lot of the circumstances, but here I am with Cardiac that doing it now would be selfish.

I don't think that you or I are in a position to predict what the fall out would be.

I have two comments about this. The first, so you see no benefit/need to confession because it is merely the unburdening of your conscience? Is confession not necessary for forgiveness?

Second, I agree with you in that another Bishop/SP could have handled the entire matter differently. Which is more selfish at this point though? Telling his wife because of his guilt? Or telling his wife because his priesthood leader told him it was necessary as part of his repentance process? Do the ten years absolve him of that requirement set forth by his Bishop?

[wuapinmon]

I have two comments about this. The first, so you see no benefit/need to confession because it unburdening your conscience? Is confession not necessary for forgiveness?

Second, I agree with you in that another Bishop/SP could have handled the entire matter differently. Which is more selfish at this point though? Telling his wife because of his guilt? Or telling his wife because his priesthood leader told him it was necessary as part of his repentance process? Do the ten years absolve him of that requirement set forth by his Bishop?

In the hands of a competent author, this would make an excellent short story.

[TripletDaddy]

I have two comments about this. The first, so you see no benefit/need to confession because it is merely the unburdening of your conscience? Is confession not necessary for forgiveness?

Second, I agree with you in that another Bishop/SP could have handled the entire matter differently. Which is more selfish at this point though? Telling his wife because of his guilt? Or telling his wife because his priesthood leader told him it was necessary as part of his repentance process? Do the ten years absolve him of that requirement set forth by his Bishop?

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

It isn't like the first Bishop asked him to do something crazy by admitting the sin of adultery to his spouse.

[cougarobgon]

He shouldn't tell his wife or anybody else at this point. That would be a very selfish thing to do, in my opinion. He should keep it to himself and let his wife live without that horrible burden of knowing he cheated.

If he's gone ten years without cheating again and his relationship with his wife is good, that's enough repentance in my book. Leave the Church leaders out of it. God will understand.

Does it really make sense that unless Church leaders and his wife hear about his affair, God will not extend his marriage beyond death? Only if you believe in a totally lame, stupid God.

It comes down an individual's self evaluation. I assume Cowboy's friend believes in God, believes the Church is true, etc...If 10 years later his conscience is clean and he has made proper restitution, as far as it is possible, ie, faithful, loving and devoted husband, and has not cheated again on his wife...my recommendation would be for him to visit with his new bishop. The new bishop may look at the situation just as Cardiac Coug has and may determine that for the family's eternal well being, that a confession to the wife is not necessary. On the other hand, if he is confident that he is clean before the Lord due to the passage of time and his conduct the last 10 years, then he can proceed with life as if he has made proper restitution/confession. His old bishop will never know if he ever confessed the sin to his wife. And unless there was a disciplinary council held following the original confession and subsequent action taken, no one but him and the Lord will ever know. Again, it is all about self evaluation and confidence in determining one's own "cleanliness" before the Lord.

I have found that the passage of time and an individual's change in attitude and conduct during that time goes a long ways when a leader is considering disciplinary action and/or counsel in helping someone return to full fellowship in the Church. Personally, I would rather confess my sin upfront and heed the counsel of the bishop, rather than to attempt to reason out my "cleanliness" before the Lord on my own.

[Babs]

He shouldn't tell his wife or anybody else at this point. That would be a very selfish thing to do, in my opinion. He should keep it to himself and let his wife live without that horrible burden of knowing he cheated.

If he's gone ten years without cheating again and his relationship with his wife is good, that's enough repentance in my book. Leave the Church leaders out of it. God will understand.

Cardiac is wise.

For there is but one God, and but one mediator between God and man.