Chapter 8
Should I Keep Trying to Work It Out?
Sacred and Secular Perspectives on the Crossroads of Divorce
Alan J. Hawkins and Tamara A. Fackrell
Virtually everyone desires a healthy, stable marriage, but when a person’s marriage does not fit that description, he or she may consider divorce. Researchers have estimated that 40 to 50 percent of first marriages—and about 60 percent of remarriages—are ending in divorce in the United States (Bramlett & Mosher, 2002; Popenoe & Whitehead, 2007). And although the United States unfortunately has one of the highest divorce rates in the world, it is common in many other countries, as well (Popenoe, 2008). Faithful Latter-day Saints are hardly immune to divorce. Precise estimates of the Latter-day Saint divorce rate are difficult to obtain. One estimate is that 25 to 30 percent of Latter-day Saint couples who regularly attend Church experience a divorce (Heaton, Bahr, & Jacobson, 2004). Other researchers estimate that the lifetime divorce rate for returned missionary men was about 12 percent and for women about 16 percent (McClendon & Chadwick, 2005). While it is heartening to know that the divorce rate for faithful Latter-day Saints is much lower than the national average, still many Latter-day Saints face difficult decisions regarding serious problems in their marriages at one time or another. Some will find themselves at a crossroads, pondering whether their marriages can be repaired or would best be ended.
Marriage is ordained of God and central to our spiritual and temporal well-being. Accordingly, ancient and modern prophets have provided important counsel on marriage and divorce. Though our actions often fall short, the celestial law treats the bonds of marriage as permanent. The Lord taught:
But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife.. . . What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder (Mark 10:6–9).
That God intended from the beginning for us to cleave to our spouse and not separate is evident in Adam’s response to God’s inquiry of whether he had partaken of the fruit of knowledge of good and evil:
“The woman thou gavest me, and commandest that she should remain with me, she gave me of the fruit of the tree and I did eat” (Moses 4:18).
In the celestial law of marriage, God has commanded us to remain together and keep our marriages strong, even when that means we must partake of some of the bitter fruits of life together. In our day, latter-day prophets and apostles have provided valuable clarifications and counsel regarding divorce. First, President Gordon B. Hinckley (2000, p. 134) said: “There is now and again a legitimate cause for divorce. I am not one to say that it is never justified. But I say without hesitation that this plague among us. . . is not of God.” Referring directly to the doctrine of marriage, Elder Dallin H. Oaks (2007, p. 70) explained: “Because ‘of the hardness of [our] hearts’ (Matthew 19:8–9), the Lord does not currently enforce the consequences of the celestial standard [of marriage]. He permits divorced persons to marry again.”
Like the ancient Israelites whom Moses suffered to divorce (see Deuteronomy 24:1), Latter-day Saints too struggle to live the higher law. Thus, a loving God gives us a law more aligned with mortal capabilities and circumstances. In addition, Elder Oaks (2007, p. 71) taught that “when a marriage is dead and beyond hope of resuscitation, it is needful to have a means to end it.” For Latter-day Saint couples, it would be wise to make this determination in consultation with a bishop. Elder Oaks also explained that when one spouse abandons the other, the option of divorce allows an innocent spouse to remarry.
Although the Lord permits divorce and remarriage, the standard for divorce is still high. President James E. Faust addressed this issue directly (2004, p. 6; italics added):
"In my opinion, any promise between a man and a woman incident to a marriage ceremony rises to the dignity of a covenant. . . . Over a lifetime of dealing with human problems, I have struggled to understand what might be considered “just cause” for breaking of covenants. I confess I do not claim the wisdom nor authority to definitely state what is “just cause.” Only the parties to the marriage can determine this. They must bear the responsibility for the train of consequences which inevitably follow if these covenants are not honored. In my opinion, “just cause” should be nothing less serious than a prolonged and apparently irredeemable relationship which is destructive of a person’s dignity as a human being. At the same time, I have strong feelings about what is not provocation for breaking the sacred covenants of marriage. Surely it is not simply “mental distress” nor “personality differences,” nor “having grown apart,” nor “having fallen out of love.” This is especially so where there are children."
President Faust’s humble statement is striking in that he does not claim to possess “the wisdom [or] authority to definitively state what is ‘just cause.’” His statement underlies an important principle—circumstances surrounding each marital breakdown are unique and perhaps cannot be fully understood by others. Thus only the individuals involved—and an omniscient and all-loving God—can determine “just cause.” President Faust provides some counsel, however, on the decision to divorce. He gives a three-part “test” for those seeking to determine if ending a marriage is justified: “just cause” should be nothing less serious than “a prolonged and apparently irredeemable relationship which is destructive of a person’s dignity as a human being.”
The first part of President Faust’s test is that only prolonged marital difficulties should lead a couple to contemplate divorce. By this we believe President Faust counsels that spouses should not seek a divorce without a lengthy period of time to attempt to repair or reduce serious problems. The standard does not require that couples spend the decision-making time living together, and in cases where a spouse’s or child’s personal safety is at stake, a separation likely is necessary while determining whether repentance, forgiveness, and change are possible. For obvious reasons, President Faust does not specify how long is long enough to meet the “prolonged” standard, and indeed behavior that places family members at risk may require immediate separation from the perpetrating spouse. But the principle President Faust sustains is that a determination of just cause for divorce requires a substantial period of problems, time for potential change to occur, and an unrushed, careful decision.
Elder Oaks (2007, p. 73) counseled: “Even those who think their spouse is entirely to blame should not act hastily,” noting that most unhappy marriages become happy again if couples hang on and work to resolve their problems. As professionals, we strive to promote this counsel not to be hasty about a divorce decision. We encourage people at the crossroads of divorce to do everything possible to correct the problem: get rid of the computer (if Internet pornography is an issue), go to counseling, move (if needed)—whatever it takes. At the end of this process, a person can look her or his children—and God—in the eyes and honestly say, “I tried everything possible.” The process of trying everything to keep the marriage covenant is as important as the outcome of staying married.
The second part of the test is directly related to the first. The marital relationship must reach the point where it is apparently irredeemable. By this we believe President Faust means that there appears to be little hope for repairing the marital relationship. This determination requires that sincere and sustained efforts have been made to understand and fix the problems. If one spouse is unwilling or unable to make such an effort, this does not excuse the other spouse from determining his or her part in any problems and making needed change. Elder Oaks (2007, p. 73) reassures us that the Lord will “consecrate [our] afflictions for [our] gain” (2 Nephi 2:1–2) in difficult circumstances such as these, and promises, “I am sure the Lord loves and blesses husbands and wives who lovingly try to help spouses struggling with such deep problems as pornography or other addictive behavior or with the long-term consequences of childhood abuse.” While a member of the Seventy, Elder Bruce C. Hafen (2005) taught that we have a shepherd’s covenant in our marriages, not a hireling’s contract: “The good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep; but he that is an hireling . . . seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep and fleeth” ( John 10:11–12). Even in the face of serious problems, Elder Hafen urges us to do all that we can to protect the marriage.
The third part of the test is that the relationship has deteriorated to the point that it threatens to destroy the dignity of one or both spouses. By this we believe President Faust means that the marital problems have become serious enough over a period of time that an individual begins to lose his or her sense of worth. Although this may be a difficult standard to discern, certainly abuse or repeated infidelity can threaten a victim’s sense of worth. President Faust’s counsel suggests that feeling unhappy or unfilfilled in the marriage does not meet this standard. Nor do feelings of emotional or psychological distance or growing apart. Irritations or conflicts brought on by personality differences and other personal preferences rarely rise to the level of threatening our sense of worth. Indeed, these kinds of problems motivate us to pursue changes and improvements that affirm our agency, good desires, and skills that, in turn, reinforce our personal dignity. If this appears to be the hardest course, we can take strength in knowing that we are on the right path. Elder Bruce C. Hafen (2005, p. 86), again referring to the parable of the shepherd, the sheep, and the wolf, taught that “life is hard and full of problems—wolves.
Dealing with the wolves is central to life’s purpose. For a husband and wife to deal with the wolves together is central to the purpose of marriage.” In a case of a couple confronting the serious challenge of adultery, the husband also was insulting to his wife and belittled her often in front of friends and family. Not surprisingly, the wife’s sense of worth eventually hit rock bottom. Nevertheless, the couple was able to work through this difficult time through tears and counseling. Many years later, however, the husband again had multiple affairs. At this point, the wife knew that the marriage needed to end. Later the wife remarried a good man. She was confident she made the right choice to divorce. Another couple began the divorce process because of a pornography addiction, but with the aid of professional counseling, the couple overcame the problem and eventually reconciled. The three-part test that President Faust offers to determine just cause for ending our marital covenants is a high standard by contemporary secular ethics. Such a high standard is best understood in light of God’s eternal plan for His children. In “The Family: A Proclamation to the World,” the Lord’s anointed proclaim that marriage is “ordained of God,” it is “essential to His eternal plan,” and it is “central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children” (¶¶ 1, 7). In this context we can fully understand the spiritual significance of marriage and God’s commandment not to “put asunder” (Mark 10:6–9) the marital bonds that God ordains for his purposes.
Personal Thoughts
It may be that your spouse is not willing or emotionally able to show you the "poop". I had an experience at work a few months back where I was yelled at and had my arm grabbed by the angry man. I did not feel like I could share the experience with my husband, knowing how agitated it would make him. But the memory caused me distress and I found I had trouble being happy and talkative. My sweet husband realized something was wrong but couldn't figure out how to get me to talk about it. One night during our evening prayers he asked that the Lord sooth whatever it was that was troubling me. His "prayer" had a double purpose in helping me realize that, not only did I need to talk about my troubled mind, but that he was in need of my honesty and confidence. We had a long talk that night that helped me overcome my anxiety. Through love and compassion I was able to rid myself of the "poop" that had been infesting my life. And through that same compassion others can implement their own "poop detector" in their marriages. If you hold all things things in resentment can grow because you are growing through your challenges alone. And with that growing resentment will come other problems that will separate you even further in your marriage. This is an important thing to overcome in order to have open communication and emotional support in your marriage.
This Week's Goals
It's time to talk about your "poop" together. To start this exercise, take turns discussing things you feel your spouse has a hard time sharing with you. Discuss your feelings on this and why this communication is so important. Make sure to write down your feelings in your journal.
No comments:
Post a Comment