Repentance and confession - What would you do?

[SeattleUte]

Did I?

I don't know. I'm just wondering if you are fit to cast the first stone.

[creekster]

A. parents are authority figures like church leaders.

B. One of the flaws of the LDS church is it regards its adult member as children and treats them that way in almost ever sense.

13 ¶ Then were there brought unto him little children, that he should put his ahands on them, and pray: and the disciples rebuked bthem.
14 But Jesus said, aSuffer little bchildren, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.

You are willfully ignoring the point of my post.

[CardiacCoug]

No. It is absolutely not a vicious circle. Have you not seen this with your children? ONe of them does something wrong and they come to you to discuss ti and as you listen and discuss and express your love you can see the burden lift, the feeling of relief is palpable. Many confessors see the priesthood authority as a representative of God. I realize you don't, and many here don't, but many beleivers do. For them, it is not a guilt laced affair that leaves them bitter. To the contrarym, it is a guilt-lifting and enervating excperience that leaves them much happier and feeling like they are pointed in the correct direction.

Yeah, I knew some LDS girls in high school who told me about confessing sexual sins (not about anything they did with me) and they really felt a huge sense of relief about making things right with the Bishop and with God (in their mind).

If you truly believe in your heart that you are going to hell until you make things right with the Bishop, then you should probably confess.

But the guilt in the beginning was conferred by the Church and then subsequently absolved by the Church. I always thought the girls would be better off just not feeling so guilty about this stuff in the first place.

[TripletDaddy]

I don't know. I'm just wondering if you are fit to cast the first stone.

I'm not casting any stones. I am opposed to cheating on a spouse. I have also previously voiced my disdain for secrets outside of a marital bond. And an affair is basically the mother of all secrets.

If you are going to have an affair, fine. But don't come back searching for moral high ground and claim that the cover-up is done out of love and concern for the wife and kids.

I agree that it could be damaging to tell the truth. But when people ask, "what can be gained by telling the truth?".....well, how about integrity? How about honesty? how about trust? those are pretty nice things to gain.

[SeattleUte]

I'm not casting any stones. I am opposed to cheating on a spouse. I have also previously voiced my disdain for secrets outside of a marital bond. And an affair is basically the mother of all secrets.

If you are going to have an affair, fine. But don't come back searching for moral high ground and claim that the cover-up is done out of love and concern for the wife and kids.

I agree that it could be damaging to tell the truth. But when people ask, "what can be gained by telling the truth?".....well, how about integrity? How about honesty? how about trust? those are pretty nice things to gain.

I don't see anyone taking the moral high ground by saying don't tell.

I think it's a personal matter. I object to the automatic requirement to tell the biship. It's just a way to deliver yourself to their authority and control. There's a practical reason for this, by the way. If an affair goes on for very long the marriage is at high risk of ending. This is a way for the LDS Church to have a say in life choices that confront someone when they fall in love with someone outside of marriage. That has certain salutory effects, no doubt, but I think it's no way for grown ups to solve their problems. I think unhappy marriages are harder on kids than divorce, even some of the most quarrelsom divorces. Also, most marriages that continue in such conditions aren't happy ones. See Oblonsky. In the end adults need to solve such dilemmas on their own and accept the consequences.

Integrity and honesty are arguably about giving the confessor satisfaction; about the confessor more than the recipient of the confession. Confessing will arguably destroy trust whereas not telling would not. Tell your wife you slept with another woman, especially if you did it lots of times, and things will never ever be the same. Probably neither you nor I can comprehend the suffering. I actually think the most compelling time to do it is when you tell her you're leaving and she wants to know why. Then I think she has more of a right to know than if it's been over for ten years and you're happy.

[SeattleUte]

But the guilt in the beginning was conferred by the Church and then subsequently absolved by the Church. I always thought the girls would be better off just not feeling so guilty about this stuff in the first place.

Exactly. Of course. It's a circle. A circle of hell, poor kids.

[tooblue]

That's awfully simplistic, don't you think? I may have long-ago forgiven the kid in the sixth grade who tripped me in the hallway, sending me careening into the metal lockers and leaving a gash over my left eye. I may have forgiven him, yet the scar is still there, interfering with the line of my otherwise perfectly arched brow. And when the climate is just right, it even still hurts a little.

So sure, there are women strong enough to forgive, but that's not to say the marriage won't be permanently altered.

But your comment hints at something I was thinking: this is really the kind of decision that has to be made on a case-by-case basis. Church dictum aside, there is probably no one right answer. The husband of a terribly insecure wife is probably not going to want to exacerbate her insecurities by telling her of an age-old indiscretion. The husband of a wife who values honesty above all, whose affair may be revealed through mutual acquaintances, he might want to confess.

There would always be a scar -- and all of us have scars. As for being awfully simplistic I think that's the point: Mark 10:15 Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little achild, he shall not enter therein.

The situation will not be handled in a broad strokes manner as a few of the agenda wielding individuals here might suggest. Our lay priesthood is often much more adept than they are given credit. Between the husband and the Bishop I am certain they will be able to discern what is appropriate.

[tooblue]

Well I think Joseph eventually told Emma that he was having sex with other women. I'm not sure if he confessed to his Bishop, though. I'll have to look into that.

There's a good deal of irony in this statement

[tooblue]

Exactly. Of course. It's a circle. A circle of hell, poor kids.

Society at large plays no role in the guilt? Self worth and self-esteem is not at issue here? So, this is purely a religious issue ... have you really thought this through or does your bitterness blind you so effectively that your stupidity knows no bounds.

[tooblue]

I think that's right. And it's not an easily answered question in the case of infidelity. I bet most professionals would say don't confess if it's ten years old, etc., and/or there's no reason to, such as it's over.

For confession to have any effect you have to regard the person to whom you're confessing as in some kind of a position to have been wronged by your sin or in a position to make it good for you. It think to put a clergy in that position is just plain childish. I understand there are psychic reasons why telling the person you harmed my be a relief.

Again, your ignorance is unfathomable.

[tooblue]

Definitely a vicious cycle. I agree.

Kind of like the vicious cycle that occurs with some gay people in the Church: A devout LDS teenager decides he's gay and confesses this to his Bishop and parents. He then is told by his Bishop and his parents that his sexual orientation is immoral and that God would never make somebody that way -- it's the result of sin. The kid feels so guilty and unable to reconcile his gayness to his religion that he spirals downhill and eventually kills himself.

The Bishop and parents conclude: Homosexuality is terrible. It destroy individuals and families. They can't step back to see their own role in the tragedy because they can't release themselves from the Church's dominion.

If everybody involved had just ignored the Church dogma, the vicious cycle could have been exited.

And can you step back and see your role in the tragedy that is this thread? Or, are you just right -- and you have all the answers.

[tooblue]

Society at large plays no role in the guilt? Self worth and self-esteem is not at issue here? So, this is purely a religious issue ... have you really thought this through or does your bitterness blind you so effectively that your stupidity knows no bounds.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/05/health/05baka.html

First sex was associated with a decrease in self-esteem, but only among girls who were younger than the average age and not in a romantic relationship. Girls who had sex at the average age or later had no increased risk for depressive symptoms compared with those who had not had sex.

[tooblue]

I don't see anyone taking the moral high ground by saying don't tell.

I think it's a personal matter. I object to the automatic requirement to tell the biship. It's just a way to deliver yourself to their authority and control. There's a practical reason for this, by the way. If an affair goes on for very long the marriage is at high risk of ending. This is a way for the LDS Church to have a say in life choices that confront someone when they fall in love with someone outside of marriage. That has certain salutory effects, no doubt, but I think it's no way for grown ups to solve their problems. I think unhappy marriages are harder on kids than divorce, even some of the most quarrelsom divorces. Also, most marriages that continue in such conditions aren't happy ones. See Oblonsky. In the end adults need to solve such dilemmas on their own and accept the consequences.

Integrity and honesty are arguably about giving the confessor satisfaction; about the confessor more than the recipient of the confession. Confessing will arguably destroy trust whereas not telling would not. Tell your wife you slept with another woman, especially if you did it lots of times, and things will never ever be the same. Probably neither you nor I can comprehend the suffering. I actually think the most compelling time to do it is when you tell her you're leaving and she wants to know why. Then I think she has more of a right to know than if it's been over for ten years and you're happy.

Do you not recognize the contradictions in your above statement ...

I think unhappy marriages are harder on kids than divorce, even some of the most quarrelsom divorces. Also, most marriages that continue in such conditions aren't happy ones.

Integrity and honesty are arguably about giving the confessor satisfaction; about the confessor more than the recipient of the confession. Confessing will arguably destroy trust whereas not telling would not.

Integrity and honesty are paramount to any relationship. Honesty is always the best policy. That is a HUMAN ideal. Arguably there is no trust here to destroy because the man has not been trustworthy for more than 10 years.

Do you truly believe he is happy -- why then is he even considering confession? And if he is not happy, his marriage is not happy and we can be certain that more than one quarrel has been started because of his unhappiness due to this terrible secret he is harboring.

[Tim]

I hope he also has that attitude...."hey, don't worry about it...it was 10 years ago. Let's live in the present"

Time out, though. Don't we believe that God will judge us on progress? That it's about how far we've made it, and that the Atonement will take up the rest of our progress? Truly, whether or not he confessed his previous sin to his wife, the man has progressed since then. He's overcome his sin and developed a deep relationship with his wife. In that sense, he has repented of it. He has turned from it and changed his behavior.

At this point, with him already having changed, telling his wife seems more like an arbitrary point of order than a critical piece of the process?

[tooblue]

Time out, though. Don't we believe that God will judge us on progress? That it's about how far we've made it, and that the Atonement will take up the rest of our progress? Truly, whether or not he confessed his previous sin to his wife, the man has progressed since then. He's overcome his sin and developed a deep relationship with his wife. In that sense, he has repented of it. He has turned from it and changed his behavior.

At this point, with him already having changed, telling his wife seems more like an arbitrary point of order than a critical piece of the process?

That is assuming that he has made progress. Time does not heal all wounds. And perhaps the only way the man can measure whether or not he has progressed is by counseling with his Bishop to determine what is the best course of action ... in fact could that be, in part, the impetus for returning to religion?