In July's Ensign there is an article about how to stay in your marriage when your husband no longer believes.

While I am very skeptical about prognostications that the church will end, I am coming to the belief that it will be the MySpace of American religions. Lots of hoopla big growth and then hardcore tiny user base.

http://www.lds.org/ensign/2012/07/when-he-stopped-believing?lang=eng

Here is the link to the story

With men leaving this religion.....WHY do the spouses even want to stay in the mormon religion???


Both here and in heaven...it's the women who get the short end of the stick

to procreate forever, of course.

Somehow I can't bring myself to start a dialogue with my TBM wife. I guess I'm reluctant to cause her the pain associated with changing.

Where are you and your wife at with the church? What kind of dialog are you hoping to have?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/23/2012 11:09AM by robertb.

I hope we can get to the point suggested by the Ensign article, at least. I'd be willing to accept that she still wants to go with being a TBM, but accept and respect my beliefs.

The trouble is, the article is condesending. It doesn't validate opposing views, it just comes on as a way for a TBM spouse to "put up" with her wayward, satan-influenced partner.

Uh-oh. Her husband no longer wanted to pay tithing. Indeed, the situation is grim.

My tendancy is to believe that a lot of these kinds of articles are written by staff personnel, or are highly edited to give them that smooth, Mormon-like "edification" that we've all come to expect so much from the Ensign.

Even as a TBM I lost interest in reading the Ensign that came to the mail every month because it always seemed to have the same vibe in every story. Somewhere I read that there was a belief that these were staff written or ghost writers posing as regulars members.

On the other hand, a recent email post reminded me how everyone acts and talks the same, gives the same regurgitated counsel or disapproval, even to the point of sounding rehearsed. Heck, it doesn't even have to be any one particular topic, nor does it have to be in print. Even verbal conversations are like a pre-recorded public announcement. Everyone simply parrots what they heard or read from Dear Leader, Inc.

I don't doubt that the Ensign articles are not genuine, but I also wouldn't be surprised if people had to use certain lingo and catch phrases to get their submission accepted.

I agree that the articles are likely embellished and even made up.

"On a day when the heartache was nearly unbearable, I started to wonder: what had I done wrong?"

How sad it is to think that this person put all of the blame on herself because her husband saw the truth and she was too blind to look too. Just another showing of how the TSCC never takes the blame for anything, its always the memberships issue.

It's also pretty typical for women to take on primary responsibility for the relationship (hence the self-blame). The church also makes them martyrs and victims to the wicked, unspiritual man. It's like a freaking Lifetime movie.

It really is strange that most women are a lot more invested in the church than most men. They have no power in the church and they have the most restrictions on their lives but other than a few feminists it seems like most women don't mind it. I want to think that they church is really changing and encouraging people to accept their non-believing spouses but I feel like this might just be cover. If they really want to make sure people follow this advice they will give specific instructions to local leadership on how they counsel members in these situations. If things get better in that area I will believe they are really trying. Just an article seems like it might be cover. That way 20 years down the road they can pull out this article and say, "See we told people not to divorce their spouse." Kind of like the president of FAIR did in his presentation at UVU where he tries to claim the church is completely open about it's history because it has published like 6 Ensign articles about difficult history topics most of which were in the 70's.

It's a nice change from Bishop Jackwagon and the first minion, who both told DH he could keep me as long as I wasn't participating in any anti-Mormon activities.

Whoops!

My take on this is that they realize they are losing members and it's better to keep inactives spouses around where the church can "rehabilitate" them some day than to alienate them completely. Or put them in a position to get more of their family out of the church. If someone MUST go inactive, the next best scenario for the church is to keep the rest of the family active, keep at least half the tithing money flowing in and keep the children where they can brainwash them ... and maybe someday the inactive spouse will "come to their senses" and return.

This article surprised me as well. I'm not exactly sure what they're trying to do.

My interest in this posting lies in the fact that though her husband has no belief in the Mormon church, that seems to mean that he does not believe in Jesus Christ and in God. I do not believe "the church" to be true, but I believe in Jesus Christ and that he loves me. God, as well. I just don't believe in all the hoops one has to go through as a member of "the church". Especially buying one's way into the celestial kingdom (or whatever).

Pathetic attempts at subtle manipulation and mind-f*** by a cult. Case en pointe’ – just take one paragraph for instance:
“Yet there I was, facing one of the most dreaded scenarios of my life. The heartbreak was beyond description.”
Really, your husband wants to leave a cult that bases it’s belief system on a con artist, and that is the most dread scenario in your life? Really, what about a child with a terminal illness? What about losing most of your family in a house fire, like a woman I saw on TV this week? What about a myriad of other dreaded things that top this in much more significant ways. Pathetic.
“ Despite the abundance of spiritual experiences that we had shared since our courtship, the daily personal and couple prayers, the faithful fulfillment of every calling, full tithes, generous fast offerings, scripture study, and family home evenings, it was gone.”
Oh nice…notice how they use “full tithes..generous fast offerings…it was gone” OMG how laughable. So dramatic. Pathetic.
“ My husband admitted that he no longer believed. He had no desire to attend church beyond helping me with the kids.”
Really, “beyond helping me with the kids.” I doubt that. The article is inconsistent here, because she also describes him as loving, etc. TSCC loves to demonize the unbelieving male in situations like this. Pathetic.
“ And he no longer wanted to pay tithing, a difficult situation I thought I would never be asked to face.’
Really? Yes, a very difficult situation indeed. Pathethic TSCC. All they think about is money, for gawds sake give it a break.
“On a day when the heartache was nearly unbearable, I started to wonder: what had I done wrong?”
I’m sure you did think about that because your in a frickin’ cult who treats women as second class, and manipulates your mind into believing that if anything ever goes wrong, it’s because you did something wrong. This is always the Mormons first reaction because the indoctrination subtly teaches you to perceive it this way. Shame on the writer for reinforcing this again. Pathethic. No wonder the corridor leads the world in Prozac.

Pathetic, pathetic, pathetic…

"full tithes" = on GROSS

"Generous fast offerings" = equivalent of breakfast, lunch and dinner at Morton's Steakhouse + a huge tip

This is my first posting, I'm a little nervous, please bear with me. Anyway, I am glad this article came out just in time, as after 18 years of being a convert to TSCC and marrried for just as long, I finally let my wife know my doubts last weekend. She is having a very hard time right now with it, hopefully this will help her through this difficult time as she is TBM. I threw a few things her direction she didn't know about the church history when she asked what I was questioning, (Ole Joe's many wives, stone in the hat, etc). She said you've been reading anti-mormon stuff. I said I didn't know the churchs true history was anti-. Thanks for the support you guys give to everybody here. I'll post my story sometime later.

Making Marriage Work for Ex-Mormon/Mormon Couples
by Robert Baumgardner, M.A., MFT

I have been a casual observer of mixed religious marriages of former or unbelieving Mormons through an e-mail list and discussion board for former and unbelieving Mormons. It appears to me that unrecognized couples development issues underlie these religious struggles. In fact, from this perspective, mixed marriage couples have two tasks, each related to the other: individuating within the couple relationship while individuating from Mormonism.

In Quest of the Mythical Mate, by psychotherapists Ellyn Bader and Peter T. Pearson, provides a developmental model for couple relationships based on the concept that, like individuals, develop from a state of symbiosis toward a fully developed state of interdependence. The process may take years, and if successful, its culmination is characterized by partners who are able to participate fully as themselves in the world while relating intimately with one another.

Summary of Bader and Pearson’s Developmental Model

Symbiotic Stage

According to Bader and Pearson’s model couple relationships begin with Symbiosis. The purpose of this stage is to bond, creating a couple relationship based on the feeling and perception of “oneness.” It is characterized by “falling in love,” the merging of personalities, and intense bonding. As anyone who has fallen in love knows this stage feels wonderfully good and exciting. The lovers magnify similarities and overlook differences and are capable of deep passion and mutual giving. If all goes well, the individuals become a couple. (Bader and Pearson p. 9.) Challenges at this stage may include loss of identity, fear of abandonment, and fear of engulfment. Recognition and expression of differences may arouse anxiety and interactions may focus on masking them. (Bader and Pearson pp. 244-245)

Within Mormonism, “oneness” is highly valued, with oneness meaning observant Mormons are ideally in complete agreement and compliance with LDS teaching and practice. Dissonance is discouraged and sometimes punished with expulsion from the group. Because the Mormon ideal is to live as family units in the afterlife, failure to fulfill Mormon ideals is serious issue for believers. LDS psychotherapist Marybeth Raynes insightfully describes this expectation of similarity and some of its consequences:

"With a strong emphasis in the Church on finding a right and wrong way for everything, identical religious thought and action between marriage partners is encouraged. Where there are differences, one spouse must be wrong. Ironically, any church that has many criteria for goodness sets up as many points for conflict as for congruency. (This is true generally: the more areas two or more people want to share, the more areas for potential disagreement emerge. This is why friendships often work better than marriages; we sharply limit the number of concerns which overlap with our friends and often become really close to only those with whom we agree.) We may be unwittingly sharpening a double-edged sword as we increase the number of rituals and programs a couple must share as a condition for a happy marriage." (Raynes, Marybeth. Issues of Intimacy: A Mixed Religious Marriage, Sunstone Magazine, March 1985, p. 40.)

Differentiation

Once the ecstasy of the Symbiotic Stage begins to diminish, the partners begin to see the relationship more objectively and they enter the Differentiation Stage. In the Differentiation Stage, the partners begin to reassert individual boundaries. Partners notice differences and may want to have time alone. At this point, if differentiation happens suddenly or cannot be tolerated by one or both partners, the relationship may end. (Bader and Pearson p. 10) Often one partner begins to differentiate before the other. Challenges at this stage may include the symbiotic partner feeling betrayed and threatened as the other partner begins to differentiate. The differentiating partner may feel guilty for the perceived betrayal and anger at the lack of recognition and acceptance of difference. (Bader and Pearson pp. 246-247)

For Mormon couples, conflicts can arise when a partner individuates from the Mormon faith as well as from the partner. Depending on the degree and kind of change, as well as the believing partner’s own views and needs, he or she may feel loss and threat on several levels: personal, familial, social, and existential. Some believing partners may feel betrayed, having entered into the marriage with the understanding that the integrity of the marriage is guaranteed by a shared belief and commitment to Mormonism. The questioning of that belief and commitment may call the marriage into question as well as the integrity of the less-believing or non-believing partner.

Practicing

As differentiation proceeds, the couple enters the Practicing Stage. At this point, partners turn energy away from the relationship and toward their own needs and toward their own interests in the outside world. The defining characteristic of this stage is “I want to be me!” The partners are busy discovering themselves as individuals. They are less attuned to their partner and the relationship. Partners may become self-centered and concerned with their personal power. This stage is marked by conflict. Successful conflict resolution and negotiation skills are needed to maintain the relationship. (Bader and Pearson p. 11) Challenges at this stage are successful conflict management and maintaining empathy and emotional connection. The danger at this stage is irreparable damage to the relationship or its loss. (Bader and Pearson pp. 248-249)

For the questioning or former Mormon, this phase not only entails turning energy to other interests but can and often does entail a transformation of identity, world view, and changes in affiliation and social status. The believing partner may at this time feel frightened and betrayed and also experience an unwelcome change in status within his or her ward due to the partner’s changes. The non-believing partner may also feel afraid of losing his or her family and friends and may treat the process of change as a battle that has to be won against the partner and social community. He or she may forget that being himself or herself also entails a commitment to allow the partner to also be himself or herself, however the partner defines that, if the relationship is to survive. Because differentiation is hard-won, sometimes at great personal and social cost, a partner who is or appears to be opposing change may be quickly defined as “the enemy.”

Each partner may also seek and find sources of personal support in increased church activity or in affiliation with groups critical of Mormonism. While this move is natural and may be helpful for the individual partner, the danger is the couple will feel not only that they have little in common, but they become proxies for conflicting ideologies. Battling over ideological issues can quickly obscure and destroy the deeply personal and vital elements of friendship that underlie and support intimacy and commitment to the relationship.

To prevent or lessen the tendency to define the believing partner as “the enemy” it may be helpful for the couple to set aside or “bracket” religious issues for an agreed-upon time while working on the conflict management skills and to build their “marital friendship.”
Two sets of conflict management skills are essential: The couple needs avoid behavior destructive to the relationship, especially contempt, criticism (as opposed to complaint), defensiveness, and stonewalling (“the silent treatment”). At the same time, the couple needs to recognize, develop, and use repair skills during and after conflicts to reaffirm commitment to the partner and the relationship.

Rapprochement

If things have gone well and the couple has maintained their friendship and each has developed a secure sense of identity, there is a shift again in the relationship towards intimacy and vulnerability while at the same time each partner maintains an independent identity. The relationship holds a balance between "I" and "We." Partners nurture one another consistently and are able to negotiate changes with little threat to the relationship. They can give to one another when it is inconvenient without feeling put upon. (Bader and Pearson pp. 11, 250) Challenges in this stage include finding the right balance between the needs of the individuals and the needs of the relationship. Over-compromise is the main temptation, as the cessation of conflict is pleasant. However, stress comes mainly from outside the relationship rather than from within it. (Bader and Pearson p. 250)

An issue faced by many ex-Mormons is having established a separate identity, sometimes at great cost in personal relationships and social standing, how much can be compromised for the beliefs of the partner and still maintain a sense of identity and integrity? The believing partner, of course, has the same issue. Ideally, in day-to-day practice, the couple develops mutually acceptable ways of addressing the issues presented to them by both the Mormon and non-Mormon world. The challenge is not only to avoid over-compromise but to avoid becoming engaged in ideological battles when new issues arise.

The couple will also need to recognize that every long-term, intimate relationship includes intractable problems that can be managed but not resolved. John Gottman’s work, again, provides practical research-based information and exercises for doing this, such as postponing problem-solving, taking turns talking about one another’s dreams within conflicts, looking for areas of flexibility where couples can work together, and supporting spouses’ dreams to the degree possible. (Gottman, Ten Lessons to Transform Your Marriage, chapter 5)

Mutual Interdependence

At this stage, the relationship each partner relates more fully to both the outside world and to one another, secure in the knowledge and experienced of being loved and accepted for themselves. The partners are able to reconcile the ideal and perfect with the real. They reach a stage of mutual interdependence in which two mature people relate from the basis of growth, shared interest, vulnerability, and love rather than need. (Bader and Pearson pp. 11-12.)

At this point the couple will have consciously determined how and how much of a role Mormonism will play in their relationship as a couple and for each of them as individuals. They will have largely reconciled the ideal and perfect with the real and the possible. The enjoyment of particular individuals committed to one another will take precedence over commitments to ideologies and fantasies of what “should be.”

A Few Recommendations

Realize that couples relationships evolve and change, and some conflict is expected in the process. Often one partner will be in the position of changing and the other in the position of trying to “catch up.” Conflict does not mean one partner is bad and the other is good or that one is necessarily right and the other wrong.

Find and focus on areas of agreement and mutual interest. Keep communication open and as much as is honestly possible, emphasize what is working, what is positive, and what you appreciate. Satisfying marriages have a positive to negative communication ratio of 5:1.

Articulate disagreement as complaints rather than criticisms. Criticisms attack character, whether of your partner or of your partner’s belief system. Complaints focus on behaviors and actions rather than character. Ideally, a complaint could (and would) be presented as a request for positive action (a request to do a different behavior rather than a request to stop a behavior).

Focus on working through differences and creating situations that work for the both of you rather than fighting about “who is right.” Beware of becoming a proxy for ideological positions, whether “Mormon” or “Ex-Mormon.”

When you recognize you are stuck or gridlocked as a couple on an issue, set aside the question of who is right and look at how you are communicating rather than what you are communicating. It can be helpful to agree to set aside a particular issue for a mutually agreed upon amount of time to work on aspects of the relationship that are working.

When you do return to a difficult issue, listen closely and ask your partner about the underlying dream the issue represents. You may find you can support aspects of your partner’s dream while at the same time recognizing you do not share the entire dream or your partner’s methods of fulfilling it.

I highly recommend obtaining a copy of Ten Lessons to Transform Your Marriage, by John Gottman, Ph.D. It is very readable and practical, and it is based on empirical research with thousands of couples. Dr. Gottman addresses the issue of what to do with intractable issues, such as those ex-Mormon/Mormon couples face (although he does not address Mormonism itself).

If you and your partner are talking about divorce or splitting up, seriously consider making an appointment with a relationship counselor you both can agree upon. Get recommendations from other people who have had good experiences working with a counselor on similar issues. The most important quality of a counselor is you both feel comfortable with the counselor and he or she is interested in helping work through your problems on your own terms.

Conclusion

Viewing relationship through a developmental lens provides a perspective that change and conflict are inherent in couple relationships is not fault of either partner. When one partner is committed to Mormonism and the other is the process of questioning and rejecting it to a greater or a lesser degree, the issues of individuation and the possibility for break-up may be acute. By becoming educated about how relationships develop, about conflict management, and about specific issues presented by the Mormon belief and lifestyle, I hope ex-Mormons and their partners will divorce less often and experience greater satisfaction in their relationships.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/23/2012 12:37PM by robertb.

Like you, I was in TSCC for many years. It's funny you mention the rock and the hat and joe's many wives' because it was exactly those two things that got the ball rolling. I was in the bishopric at the time. My wife said the same thing, "you're just looking at anti stuff...stop reading that stuff." I wasn't looking at anti stuff, I was looking a gems like the BOA, JOD, POGP, etc.. There is a talk by Nelson on the magical rock and hat. See mormonthink.com as a really great site. Good luck.

From a post yesterday on this same article:




What this wife is really saying:

"Which one of the following has the greatest importance in my life: My spouse or my religion? Which one do I truly love the most? Obviously, the church must always come first, then I will tolerate my husband out of respect for my church.

Even my Temple vows say that I am only to obey (respect?) my husband as he obeys the church. Therefore, I am the charitable one here. I don't really need to love him anymore, but graciously I will love him anyway -- out of love for my church!"

_______________________________________________________________

In the words of the Mormon Temple ceremony the couple do not marry each other, they both marry the church. It is their mutual commitment to the church that unites them, not their commitment to each other. If the church gets subtracted from the arrangement all bets are off, unless the offended person decides to put up with matters for the sake of the church.

In the same ensign there is another article about staying with a spouse for 35 years led to their conversion. They are desperate and damage control I think is the right answer.

They could have spun it into a confirmation that the Morg doctrine of immortal polygamy and eternal breeding must be correct because there will be more women than men in the CK, but they are so scared of negative PR that they won't own possibly the only thing happening that remotely comes close to a fulfilled "prophecy".

Unfortunately, it sounds like this article will only reinforce my wife's annoyance at my disbelief. "See? It's in the Ensign!" I can't remember if our subscription is up to date (unfortunately, our tithing is), and I'm hoping she misses this one. She actually has mirrored some of the same sentiments: "I never thought I'd be in a situation where my spouse questioned the idea of paying tithing..."

Really? You feel bad about me not wanting to give up our hard-earned money? You feel bad that we can't have nice things, but you give 10% of our GROSS earnings each month and insist on paying tithing on monetary gifts you receive? How has financial contribution become the priority of your religion?

I've often wondered about the brainwashing of Seminary and its effectiveness--but I can see the whole worry about "Fire insurance" coming through.

"the only thing Worse than being blind is being sighted but without vision."

election continues to bring up issues with the church. Now the members can hear about the shunning that goes on and say 'look, this is what we believe, not shunning'.

Again, it's the timing of this softer gentler approach that gets my attention.

A recent post brought this piece of marketing to my attention. I'm pretty sure they honed their skills on the Ensign...

http://www.bonneville.com/?nid=32

The church is circling the vaginas.

It has always tried to control people through their sexuality. Since Mormonism has nothing to offer spiritually, they use the sex/guilt/fear triangle to keep people paying.

The church will portray themselves as the secure anchor the women need in order to have "help" raising their children in a moral environment. They don't even have to speak to the men. They can just teach the women that paying more tithing will help bring an anti-porn blessing on the house, and most of the women will do it.

The women think that the power of the priesthood is the power to keep their men on the straight and narrow. They don't realize that the power of the priesthood takes their husbands out of their home and gives them an unpaid second job, leaving them to raise their children alone.

Please notice that the article is aimed at the women who are left behind. My question is, why aren't more women leaving?

Anagrammy

anagrammy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The church is circling the vaginas.
>

ROFL

The husband leaving the church is the worst thing that can happen in the mind of the TBM wife. It's worse than anyone dying or any other challenge or tragedy in life because in the mind of the TBM wife, now that the Husband is out of the church, she won't attain the highest degree of glory in the celestial kingdom because your spouse has to be there with you for you to attain the highest. You've broken the "sealing" and your family will no longer be together forever. In their mind there's nothing worse. Everything they work for in life is to attain the highest degree of glory. Hell, who wants to be a servant in heaven to those who have attained that highest glory? You don't marry in the temple and get sealed you die and get to minister to those who do get married in the temple and die and get to create their own earths. It's almost as bad as being black, since mormons believe dark skinned people only get to be servants in heaven...

Is it really the men -- more than the women -- who are dropping out of the church?


Or is TSCC just framing the situation in that way for their own benefit?


Anybody know for sure?


(One theory if it really IS more the men dropping out: Most missionaries are MEN. Are missions driving the young men out of the church? I sure have read enough personal accounts here of how missions have planted the seeds of doubt and cynicism in the young men who have served.)

seems Fair; the men have given up on the church, haven't we?