OK you potential Bishops out there

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by BYU71

Young lady in your ward at age 17 has intercourse. She repents and does all the things necessary to receive forgiveness.

At age 22 she has fallen in love with a very charming young man. However, his P blessing says someday he will be amongst the leaders of the church and sit in council with them. He doesn't want anything coming out of the wordwork when that day arises.

He shows the fiance's Bishop the P Blessing and asks, Bishop has my fiance ever confessed having pre-marital sex. What do you tell the young man.

This is a hypothetical, but I guarantee you there are members out there who could fit into this scenario. Have you ever heard a young lady say she will marry no one who isn't a return missionary. That is her right, but certainly a young man has the right to want to marry a virgin.

True, if he feels this way he should confront her, but what if she states she has had no previous experience. That marriage is headed for some issues. I think the Bishop is in a tough position.

By the way, I think if it is fair for the church to ferret out anything that might be of future embarassment, so would an individual.

Bottom line, if I were Bishop I would say, as a future leader of the church, you know any conversations I have had with your fiance are confidential.

[JohnnyLingo]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Tex- if you ever become prophet, the spirit will have totally withdrawn from the world, making such a revocation impossible.

Mullah. Who are you decide how spiritual someone is? Stop judging others and love them as Jesus does.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by BYU71

This is a hypothetical, but I guarantee you there are members out there who could fit into this scenario. Have you ever heard a young lady say she will marry no one who isn't a return missionary. That is her right, but certainly a young man has the right to want to marry a virgin.

True, if he feels this way he should confront her, but what if she states she has had no previous experience. That marriage is headed for some issues. I think the Bishop is in a tough position.

By the way, I think if it is fair for the church to ferret out anything that might be of future embarassment, so would an individual.

Bottom line, if I were Bishop I would say, as a future leader of the church, you know any conversations I have had with your fiance are confidential.

I don't know much, but 71 has really gotten into the spirit of good avatars.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Tex- if you ever become prophet, the spirit will have totally withdrawn from the world, making such a revocation impossible.

Blasphemy!

[RockyBalboa]

Originally Posted by Black Diamond Bay

I'm sure that's a possible scenario, but would you rather have that happen after the wedding? Might as well be beforehand so you both know what you're getting into. Although if you've dated a guy that does have that past, and a guy that doesn't, there really shouldn't be any need to ask.

Yes, I see your point and I agree with it to an extent.

However at my age,,,,even in the LDS Culture, it's just not realistic to expect anyone I date to not have any baggage of some kind.

I think anyone going in expecting a person to not have any mistakes in their past is setting ones self up for constant and repeated disapointment.

[Chapel-Hill-Coug]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

So then why wouldn't you just ask her? Why in the world would you go to a bishop and ask him (and actually assume he would answer even though he promised her confidentiality)? Aren't you: 1) assuming she will lie to you (not a good basis for a relationship), and then assuming that that lie is sufficient to break things off; and 2) hoping the bishop will break his promise to her to keep things confidential (thereby making him a liar)?

How in the world does that make any sense? The guy is a nutcase. Oh, and he thinks he is going to be a GA someday, so he is even crazier than that. He will be one of those guys in 30 years that starts calling himself the prophet and picks up a bunker next to Tex's.

I think what BDB is saying is very wise. IMO there is a high level of naivete involved in those who are ONLY making this about "sin" and therefore would ignore the situation altogother. Having said that, you are right: him asking the bishop illustrates that this couple will have much bigger problems in their marriage than her past history!

[Black Diamond Bay]

Originally Posted by DrumNFeather

I think it is fairly obvious that if a transgression includes a child, or a disease, that the person would want to disclose that information to a potential spouse because it is a tangible part of that person's life. (Which actually happened in the case I mentioned on forgiveness).

Perhaps I'm not giving "people" enough credit, and maybe there should be some disclosure, but I just don't see what the point of doing that would be, other than "digging up bones."

If someone has repented and moved on from a serious sin, why make them relive it and face new consequences for a sin he or she has already repented for, and been through that very difficult yet rewarding process. Seems excessive to me.

I think you're just refusing to acknowledge that there can be far-reaching consequences that exist even after repentance, other than a child or disease, that will impact a marriage.

[Black Diamond Bay]

Originally Posted by RockyBalboa

Yes, I see your point and I agree with it to an extent.

However at my age,,,,even in the LDS Culture, it's just not realistic to expect anyone I date to not have any baggage of some kind.

I think anyone going in expecting a person to not have any mistakes in their past is setting ones self up for constant and repeated disapointment.

I still don't think it's your place to decide what that person can and can't deal with when it comes to baggage, without consulting them about it first.

[DrumNFeather]

Originally Posted by Black Diamond Bay

I think you're just refusing to acknowledge that there can be far-reaching consequences that exist even after repentance, other than a child or disease, that will impact a marriage.

I'm well aware that there are far reaching consequences that exist beyond what has been mentioned.

Here's my question to you.

What difference would it make if you knew?

It sounds to me as though you've already made a determination that said sinner is incapable of getting past a past transgression. If that's the case, and you've already convinced yourself that he mentally couldn't get passed it, then how would you not hold it against him? How would it not impact every tough time that you faced in your marraige?

I think you are refusing to aknowledge the impact of forgiveness and the atonement in people's lives...and how truly wonderful it is when someone comes out of a bad situation (such as past sexual sin) and is able to forgive themselves and move on.

Why in the world would you want to make them relive that?

[Chapel-Hill-Coug]

Originally Posted by DrumNFeather

Here's my question to you.

What difference would it make if you knew?

That's for each individual to decide, isn't it? You can't decide that for them. Simple as that. And if you choose to decide that for a future spouse by being dishonest in any way, then you are denying the most precious thing you will have in a marriage...honesty and true intimacy. What idiot is going to hold a past history against their girlfriend? Just talk about it, make sure it won't affect the relationship negatively, and move on. It's not that hard. Every couple should do it, IMO. There doesn't have to be guilt or judgment involved. If there is, THEN you have a problem.