changed Posted November 11, 2018 Posted November 11, 2018 (edited) The typical marriage covenant goes something like: Would you please face each other and join hands.(Groom) ___________________do you take _________________to be your wife?Do you promise to love, honor, cherish and protect her, forsaking all othersand holding only to her forevermore?(“I do”)(Bride) ________________do you take_________________ to be your Husband?Do you promise to love, honor, cherish and protect him, forsaking all othersand holding only to him forevermore? http://www.vowsoftheheart.com/ceramonies/traditional-christian-wedding-ceremony/ I am curious about the "forsaking all others" and vows of loyalty - is there anything in the LDS marriage vow against adultery? anything about loyalty? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The "new and everlasting covenant" is a covenant of polygamy - Abraham is even mentioned in the marriage covenants....(law of Sarah) the LDS marriage covenant is not one of loyalty and fidelity, it is one involving polygamy 1886 Revelation Given to President John Taylor September 27, 1886 My son John, you have asked me concerning the New and Everlasting Covenant how far it is binding upon my people. Thus saith the Lord: All commandments that I give must be obeyed by those calling themselves by my name unless they are revoked by me or by my authority, and how can I revoke an everlasting covenant, for I the Lord am everlasting and my everlasting covenants cannot be abrogated nor done away with, but they stand forever. Have I not given my word in great plainness on this subject? Yet have not great numbers of my people been negligent in the observance of my law and the keeping of my commandments, and yet have I borne with them these many years; and this because of their weakness—because of the perilous times, and furthermore, it is more pleasing to me that men should use their free agency in regard to these matters. Nevertheless, I the Lord do not change and my word and my covenants and my law do not, and as I have heretofore said by my servant Joseph: All those who would enter into my glory must and shall obey my law. And have I not commanded men that if they were Abraham’s seed and would enter into my glory, they must do the works of Abraham. I have not revoked this law, nor will I, for it is everlasting, and those who will enter into my glory must obey the conditions thereof; even so, Amen Edited November 11, 2018 by changed
Duncan Posted November 11, 2018 Posted November 11, 2018 I think common sense indicates that when you get married you are loyal to them and if so you wouldn't commit adultery 1
changed Posted November 11, 2018 Author Posted November 11, 2018 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Duncan said: I think common sense indicates that when you get married you are loyal to them and if so you wouldn't commit adultery It is common sense, and yet, there is no vow of loyalty in the LDs covenants. ... There is room for polygammy. (I see JS and BY as being an adulterous husbands). Even today, LDS marraige is not a marriage that involves loyalty... Thinking about this, the LDS version of a marriage "covenant" is not a covenant at all - no vow of loyalty = no vow at all in my opinion. infidelity, affairs, cheating, adultery - that is not a marriage. Edited November 11, 2018 by changed
Duncan Posted November 11, 2018 Posted November 11, 2018 2 minutes ago, changed said: It is common sense, and yet, there is no vow of loyalty in the LDs covenants. ... There is room for polygammy. (I see JS and BY as being an adulterous husbands). Even today, LDS marraige is not a marriage that involves loyalty, does not involve Thinking about this, the LDS version of a marriage "covenant" is not a covenant at all - no vow of loyalty = no vow at all in my opinion. infidelity, affairs, cheating, adultery - that is not a marriage. If everything has to be spelled out, you wonder if people are ready for Marriage. When my folks got married nobody said to them, please don't rob a candy store, and they haven't! because they already knew not to do that 3
changed Posted November 11, 2018 Author Posted November 11, 2018 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Duncan said: If everything has to be spelled out, you wonder if people are ready for Marriage. When my folks got married nobody said to them, please don't rob a candy store, and they haven't! because they already knew not to do that Considering the high rates of infidelity: https://www.creditdonkey.com/infidelity-statistics.html " 74% of men say they'd step out on their partners if they knew they'd be able to get away with it." If fidelity is not part of the vow - then there is nothing wrong with it - no one is breaking any marriage vows to participate in adultery. There is a big reason that "forsaking all others" is a big part in traditional Christian wedding vows, and is very very troubling that it is not specially a part of LDS marriage vows. The vow means absolutely nothing if it does not call for fidelity. Edited November 11, 2018 by changed
Popular Post JLHPROF Posted November 11, 2018 Popular Post Posted November 11, 2018 (edited) 42 minutes ago, changed said: The typical marriage covenant goes something like: Would you please face each other and join hands.(Groom) ___________________do you take _________________to be your wife?Do you promise to love, honor, cherish and protect her, forsaking all othersand holding only to her forevermore?(“I do”)(Bride) ________________do you take_________________ to be your Husband?Do you promise to love, honor, cherish and protect him, forsaking all othersand holding only to him forevermore? http://www.vowsoftheheart.com/ceramonies/traditional-christian-wedding-ceremony/ I am curious about the "forsaking all others" and vows of loyalty - is there anything in the LDS marriage vow against adultery? anything about loyalty? There doesn't need to be because both have been placed under that covenant previously in the law of chastity. Which makes that commitment a prerequisite for even getting married. The redundancy isn't needed. And yes, the original law of chastity allowed for polygamy, although it was altered and no longer does. But the marriage covenant continues to contain a hint about polygamy. Edited November 11, 2018 by JLHPROF 8
Duncan Posted November 11, 2018 Posted November 11, 2018 12 minutes ago, changed said: Considering the high rates of infidelity: https://www.creditdonkey.com/infidelity-statistics.html " 74% of men say they'd step out on their partners if they knew they'd be able to get away with it." If fidelity is not part of the vow - then there is nothing wrong with it - no one is breaking any marriage vows to participate in adultery. There is a big reason that "forsaking all others" is a big part in traditional Christian wedding vows, and is very very troubling that it is not specially a part of LDS marriage vows. The vow means absolutely nothing if it does not call for fidelity. nothing means nothing if you aren't loyal! A couple of months ago I went to a church meeting that went on forever and I got a ride home with married female friend, whom i've known since we were teenagers. She had to get pallets for her and her husband's rabbit business and she need help loading them. I can guarantee you the furthest thing from our minds was messing around, especially with my good tie on😧 2
JLHPROF Posted November 11, 2018 Posted November 11, 2018 (edited) 45 minutes ago, changed said: It is common sense, and yet, there is no vow of loyalty in the LDs covenants. ... There is room for polygammy. (I see JS and BY as being an adulterous husbands). Well you would be wrong. But go ahead and see that. Loyalty and exclusivity aren't synonymous. It isn't a commitment or loyalty you are wanting but exclusivity. It's the same mindset that doesn't believe a commitment to God can be put ahead of a commitment to family, despite Christ's teachings. It's about being self-centred instead of God-centred. Quote Even today, LDS marraige is not a marriage that involves loyalty... Thinking about this, the LDS version of a marriage "covenant" is not a covenant at all - no vow of loyalty = no vow at all in my opinion. Except it does. An eternal commitment before God before the marriage is even allowed to proceed. Edited November 11, 2018 by JLHPROF
Popular Post JAHS Posted November 11, 2018 Popular Post Posted November 11, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, changed said: I am curious about the "forsaking all others" and vows of loyalty - is there anything in the LDS marriage vow against adultery? anything about loyalty? 48 minutes ago, changed said: It is common sense, and yet, there is no vow of loyalty in the LDs covenants. There is in the endowment ceremony which one must go through before being sealed to a spouse. Also during the sealing ceremony they are told to observe and keep all the laws pertaining to the Holy Order of Matrimony which are mentioned in the endowment. Edited November 11, 2018 by JAHS 7
smac97 Posted November 11, 2018 Posted November 11, 2018 59 minutes ago, changed said: The typical marriage covenant goes something like: Would you please face each other and join hands.(Groom) ___________________do you take _________________to be your wife?Do you promise to love, honor, cherish and protect her, forsaking all othersand holding only to her forevermore?(“I do”)(Bride) ________________do you take_________________ to be your Husband?Do you promise to love, honor, cherish and protect him, forsaking all othersand holding only to him forevermore? http://www.vowsoftheheart.com/ceramonies/traditional-christian-wedding-ceremony/ I am curious about the "forsaking all others" and vows of loyalty - is there anything in the LDS marriage vow against adultery? anything about loyalty? A "vow against adultery" is covered in the Law of Chastity. See here: Quote You can learn more about the principles behind the covenants we make in the endowment by studying the following: “Obedience,” Gospel Principles (2009), 200–206. M. Russell Ballard, “The Law of Sacrifice,” Ensign, Oct.1998, 6. On “the law of [the] gospel” (D&C 104:18), see Doctrineand Covenants 42. “The Law of Chastity,” Gospel Principles (2009), 224–32. D. Todd Christofferson, “Reflections on a ConsecratedLife,” Ensign, Nov. 2010, 16. And here: Quote “The ordinances of the endowment embody certain obligations on the part of the individual, such as covenant and promise to observe the law of strict virtue and chastity, to be charitable, benevolent, tolerant and pure..." As for a vow of "loyalty," I'm not sure what that means. Thanks, -Smac 4
Popular Post smac97 Posted November 11, 2018 Popular Post Posted November 11, 2018 1 hour ago, changed said: It is common sense, and yet, there is no vow of loyalty in the LDs covenants. ... There is room for polygammy. (I see JS and BY as being an adulterous husbands). Even today, LDS marraige is not a marriage that involves loyalty... Thinking about this, the LDS version of a marriage "covenant" is not a covenant at all - no vow of loyalty = no vow at all in my opinion. infidelity, affairs, cheating, adultery - that is not a marriage. Do you have a serious point to make? Or are you simply intending to provoke and offend? I'm sensing the latter, but hoping for the former. Thanks, -Smac 6
changed Posted November 11, 2018 Author Posted November 11, 2018 (edited) 39 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: There doesn't need to be because both have been placed under that covenant previously in the law of chastity. Which makes that commitment a prerequisite for even getting married. The redundancy isn't needed. And yes, the original law of chastity allowed for polygamy, although it was altered and no longer does. But the marriage covenant continues to contain a hint about polygamy. There is more than a hint about polygamy - the "new and everlasting covenant" is one of polygamy - DC132 has not changed. The family of Abraham is still mentioned - "the law of Sarah" etc. Edited November 11, 2018 by changed
changed Posted November 11, 2018 Author Posted November 11, 2018 5 minutes ago, smac97 said: As for a vow of "loyalty," I'm not sure what that means. Thanks, -Smac A vow of loyalty goes against a vow of polygamy. Loyalty - as from the other normal Christian vows - Do you promise to love, honor, cherish and protect her, forsaking all othersand holding only to her forevermore?
JLHPROF Posted November 11, 2018 Posted November 11, 2018 2 minutes ago, changed said: There is more than a hint about polygamy - the "new and everlasting covenant" is one of polygamy - DC132 has not changed. The family of Abraham is still mentioned - "the law of Sarah" etc. Yes, that is one of the two references still present in the ceremony. Eternal ordinances don't change because part of the eternal law is put in abeyance.
changed Posted November 11, 2018 Author Posted November 11, 2018 (edited) 13 minutes ago, smac97 said: Do you have a serious point to make? Or are you simply intending to provoke and offend? I'm sensing the latter, but hoping for the former. Thanks, -Smac I am in a mixed-faith marriage (my husband is LDS, I have left the church). Yes, it is a serious point for me - it concerns my marriage (or lack thereof). It feels as if there were no real vows made in the temple - it feels like the vows were to a church, not to a person... no "you may now kiss the bride", no "love cherish and honor one another and no one else", just a vow to the church, a vow of polygamy. I went in - not knowing what what was going to be said, not knowing what I would be required to "promise"... Real covenants, real vows - done with full free agency - include knowing what you are signing, knowing what you are promising. What makes a contract valid? If there are hidden agendas... I did not know what would be said, I did not know all the details of the "new and everlasting covenant", I was lied to. Deceit. Duress. Edited November 11, 2018 by changed
changed Posted November 11, 2018 Author Posted November 11, 2018 1 minute ago, JLHPROF said: Yes, that is one of the two references still present in the ceremony. Eternal ordinances don't change because part of the eternal law is put in abeyance. Yes - President Nelson is currently sealed to more than one wife - polygamy has not gone away.
JLHPROF Posted November 11, 2018 Posted November 11, 2018 4 minutes ago, changed said: A vow of loyalty goes against a vow of polygamy. Loyalty - as from the other normal Christian vows - Do you promise to love, honor, cherish and protect her, forsaking all othersand holding only to her forevermore? Marriage is created by God, he sets the rules. Just because men came up with their own rules that doesn't get to redefine marriage. If you don't like marriage as defined by God that's ok. But that doesn't give your version of marriage superiority over God's.
JLHPROF Posted November 11, 2018 Posted November 11, 2018 4 minutes ago, changed said: It feels as if there were no real vows made in the temple - it feels like the vows were to a church, not to a person... no "you may now kiss the bride", no "love cherish and honor one another and no one else", just a vow to the church, a vow of polygamy. Covenants are made with God. Not man or Church. 1
changed Posted November 11, 2018 Author Posted November 11, 2018 (edited) 8 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: Marriage is created by God, he sets the rules. Just because men came up with their own rules that doesn't get to redefine marriage. If you don't like marriage as defined by God that's ok. But that doesn't give your version of marriage superiority over God's. 22 Thou shalt love thy wife with all thy heart, and shalt cleave unto her and none else. so which is it? ... we can sit and debate about how God "really" defined marriage... DC 42 would be a really great marriage covenant - Do you _________ promise to take ______________ and love her with all thy heart, and cleave unto her and none else? .... that would be a nice marriage covenant... too bad 132 is used instead of 42... Edited November 11, 2018 by changed
JLHPROF Posted November 11, 2018 Posted November 11, 2018 7 minutes ago, changed said: Yes - President Nelson is currently sealed to more than one wife - polygamy has not gone away. Agreed. And in a religious belief where marriage is eternal it will always be a part of our society in one form or another.
JLHPROF Posted November 11, 2018 Posted November 11, 2018 Just now, changed said: 22 Thou shalt love thy wife with all thy heart, and shalt cleave unto her and none else. so which is it? ... we can sit and debate about how God "really" defined marriage... If you have more than one wife I don't see any contradiction.
JAHS Posted November 11, 2018 Posted November 11, 2018 7 minutes ago, changed said: it feels like the vows were to a church, not to a person... no "you may now kiss the bride", no "love cherish and honor one another and no one else", just a vow to the church, a vow of polygamy. Like I said this is covered in the law of chastity we promise to keep in the endowment ceremony. Do they have to use the exact words that you want?
changed Posted November 11, 2018 Author Posted November 11, 2018 (edited) 5 minutes ago, JAHS said: Like I said this is covered in the law of chastity we promise to keep in the endowment ceremony. Do they have to use the exact words that you want? The Mormon version of the "law of chastity" is not really a law of chastity - 132 is polygamy - being sealed to more than one person, that is not chastity. Edited November 11, 2018 by changed
smac97 Posted November 11, 2018 Posted November 11, 2018 13 minutes ago, changed said: I am in a mixed-faith marriage (my husband is LDS, I have left the church). Yes, it is a serious point for me - it concerns my marriage (or lack thereof). It feels as if there were no real vows made in the temple - it feels like the vows were to a church, not to a person... no "you may now kiss the bride", no "love cherish and honor one another and no one else", just a vow to the church, a vow of polygamy. I went in - not knowing what what was going to be said, not knowing what I would be required to "promise"... Real covenants, real vows - done with full free agency - include knowing what you are signing, knowing what you are promising. What makes a contract valid? If there are hidden agendas... I did not know what would be said, I did not know all the details of the "new and everlasting covenant", I was lied to. Deceit. Duress. Hmm. So it seems you have a serious point to make and want to provoke and offend. Is that a fair assessment? A modicum of respect and decorum for things we hold sacred - even if you do not - would be a nice starting point. As it is, you are profaning and denigrating. As a starting point. Not sure how you expect us to have a civil discussion when you've started things out this way. Thanks, -Smac 4
changed Posted November 11, 2018 Author Posted November 11, 2018 4 minutes ago, JLHPROF said: If you have more than one wife I don't see any contradiction. ?? 22 Thou shalt love thy wife with all thy heart, and shalt cleave unto her and none else. So - the second wife is not someone to "cleave" to? no one else = not cleaving to anyone else = only one person that you cleave to... it is pretty clear...
Recommended Posts