Repentance and confession - What would you do?

[Babs]

Babes already went this route. My position stands regardless of whether you are LDS, atheist, or a Scientologist (gasp!). You should tell your wife if you want to have any integrity.

Integrity is already destroyed. This is more a matter of damage control, and the decision to divulge the infidelity has to be made on a case-by-case basis, having weighed the costs and benefits of a confession.

[SeattleUte]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but you are simply pointing out that some marriages are not going to work out because one partner harbors resentment, is incapable of forgiveness or because some trust is not repairable. This is likely one of the reasons the man cheated to begin with. Unfulfilled needs, poor communication, etc. Why "protect" a potentially unfulfilling relationship through lies and deceit?

Now you are making your most pragmatic argument, with which I cannot argue. Unhappy marriages should just be brought to a swift end in many instances, and perferably before it's too hard on children or it gets too expensive.

But now we are afield of cowboy's hypothetical unless tooblue is correctly reading the subtext.

[SeattleUte]

Wouldn't it be awful to be out of bounds and violate trusts even if is merely a message board.

Why is it that you always come back and get yourself all in a lather for the sex threads?

[RobinFinderson]

It's not controversial because you are wrong. The Bishops express responsibility is to look after the body of the saints which make up the church. He is explicitly answerable to God for every individuals well being.

One of the main reasons the church 'requires' confession of serious sins is so the church can avoid making embarrassing callings, like calling a known adulterer to be bishop.

Along the same lines, the church also 'requires' confession so that it can excommunicate/distance itself from egregious sinners (possibly criminals).

For example, lets say a Bishop is helping a man to deal with a problem with pornography. During the course of a discussion, the man confesses that on a recent trip to Tijuana, he was sold a DVR full of pornographic images. Expecting 'normal' pornography, the confessor is shocked to discover that he DVR contains child pornography.

What is the bishop to do in this situation? If he is looking out for the church's interests, he needs to report this to the police. If he is looking out for the individual's interests, he might tell the person to destroy the DVR, and continue working with him on his pornography addiction.

Tooblue, how would you feel if the bishop chose the second choice, and it later came to light that the man had not thrown away the DVR, but made copies, and that his children discovered the copies, and the wife found out that the man had confessed this to the bishop, and chose to sue the church for protecting her criminal husband?

Generally speaking, the church's interests and the individual/couple's interests are not going to be mutually exclusive, but there may be times when they are, and when that happens a Bishop will rightfully protect the church's interests first.

[TripletDaddy]

Integrity is already destroyed. This is more a matter of damage control, and the decision to divulge the infidelity has to be made on a case-by-case basis, having weighed the costs and benefits of a confession.

I agree. And unless I miss the mark entirely, what you are saying is basically a more concise take on what Rocky was initially saying. Retaining the secret at this stage is really about damage control, not love and respect for the wife and kids.

[RockyBalboa]

Another theme I'm getting out this thread: You should be allowed to control the consequences of your actions, and if that control is taken away, then it's not fair and vindictive.

I've also learned that having to live with the withholding of dark secrets, actions and choices is a sufficient price paid.

I've learned a lot today.

[tooblue]

One of the main reasons the church 'requires' confession of serious sins is so the church can avoid making embarrassing callings, like calling a known adulterer to be bishop.

Along the same lines, the church also 'requires' confession so that it can excommunicate/distance itself from egregious sinners (possibly criminals).

For example, lets say a Bishop is helping a man to deal with a problem with pornography. During the course of a discussion, the man confesses that on a recent trip to Tijuana, he was sold a DVR full of pornographic images. Expecting 'normal' pornography, the confessor is shocked to discover that he DVR contains child pornography.

What is the bishop to do in this situation? If he is looking out for the church's interests, he needs to report this to the police. If he is looking out for the individual's interests, he might tell the person to destroy the DVR, and continue working with him on his pornography addiction.

Tooblue, how would you feel if the bishop chose the second choice, and it later came to light that the man had not thrown away the DVR, but made copies, and that his children discovered the copies, and the wife found out that the man had confessed this to the bishop, and chose to sue the church for protecting her criminal husband?

Generally speaking, the church's interests and the individual/couple's interests are not going to be mutually exclusive, but there may be times when they are, and when that happens a Bishop will rightfully protect the church's interests first.

The body of the church and the church are one and the same. In regards to your child porn hypothetical the Bishop is beholden to the law of the land -- the state -- first, and the individual second FYI. By law he must report it.

[Babs]

I agree. And unless I miss the mark entirely, what you are saying is basically a more concise take on what Rocky was initially saying. Retaining the secret at this stage is really about damage control, not love and respect for the wife and kids.

No. The damage control is the wife and kids. How much pain do you really wish to inflict on the blameless?

[tooblue]

Why is it that you always come back and get yourself all in a lather for the sex threads?

I luuuv sex.

[RobinFinderson]

The body of the church and the church are one and the same. In regards to your child porn hypothetical the Bishop is beholden to the law of the land -- the state -- first, and the individual second FYI. By law he must report it.

I am talking about the church as a corporation. You are talking about the church as a poetic body. Your conclusion that the bishop is first beholden to the law of the land suggests to me that if we were using the same definition of church, we would probably agree.

[SeattleUte]

Another theme I'm getting out this thread: You should be allowed to control the consequences of your actions, and if that control is taken away, then it's not fair and vindictive.

I've also learned that having to live with the withholding of dark secrets, actions and choices is a sufficient price paid.

I've learned a lot today.

Good! So something good has come of this "nauseating" thread.

[RobinFinderson]

No. The damage control is the wife and kids. How much pain do you really wish to inflict on the blameless?

Babs, in a Temple Marriage, the ETERNAL outcome of the marriage is at stake, and depends on the integrity of the partners. If the couple believes literally what the church teaches about the covenant of eternal marriage, there is really no wiggle room. The eternal consequences far outweigh the temporal pain to the blameless. The wronged partner needs to know so that s/he can make an informed choice about whether or not the eternal relationship is still in the cards.

[tooblue]

I am talking about the church as a corporation. You are talking about the church as a poetic body. Your conclusion that the bishop is first beholden to the law of the land suggests to me that if we were using the same definition of church, we would probably agree.

We don't agree. The church is not a corporation. The church is a body of saints. The Bishop has the unique role of sheppard over the body -- the language is more than poetic it is his role. He will look after the members first but in the instance you mention by law in the US and Canada he must report the incident.

[RobinFinderson]

We don't agree. The church is not a corporation. The church is a body of saints. The Bishop has the unique role of sheppard over the body -- the language is more than poetic it is his role. He will look after the members first but in the instance you mention by law in the US and Canada he must report the incident.

The church is also a corporation, or more accurately, several corporations. You know this, or if you don't, you have been asleep.

[Jeff Lebowski]

The Bishop is looking out for the interests of the church first, before the interests of the couple.

That's a blanket statement that I don't think is warranted. Depends on the bishop.