The wife has control over MM

[datura_noir]

Am I controlling? I'll have to put on my best pair of Mom jeans and go down to the basement and ask hubby, who is (naturally) shackled to the boiler. Right after I finish hacking into his emails.....

[bentnotbroken]

Am I controlling? I'll have to put on my best pair of Mom jeans and go down to the basement and ask hubby, who is (naturally) shackled to the boiler. Right after I finish hacking into his emails.....

 

 

:lmao::lmao:I spit my soda....again. I will not drink while I read LS every again. Now excuse me while I go roll on the floor. :lmao:

[Ellin]

No, you're only doing what you have to do with a hubby who lacks self-control.

[datura_noir]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOzwItHfOJ4

[bentnotbroken]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOzwItHfOJ4

:lmao: *still rolling on the floor*:lmao:

[alexandria35]

Gosh. It's really hard to follow your "logic".

 

Where did I mentioned in my post justifying cheating and especially justifying it by saying that the other person did something wrong first????:confused:

 

I doubt that usually OP would use marriage vows to help MP justify their cheating, saying that it's ok to cheat as long as they stay with their spouse. AFAIK most OP want the opposite - they want their MP to leave the spouse!

 

And anyway, my post had nothing to do with justifying anything. I am genuinely surprised by the ease with which so many people here encourage divorces as a remedy for everything but in the same sentence they mention the importance of the marriage vows.

 

In Christianity marriage is for life and it can only be dissolved in a few very specific and exceptional circumstances, for example mental illness at the time of marriage, not consummating the marriage or being infertile but keeping it secret and maybe a couple more things like that. Infidelity definitely isn't one.

 

So if you are M in church and then get a civil D, from the Christian POV you are still M and if you get together with someone else, you're committing adultery.

 

Even in civil M ceremony you promise to stay together for life, not until you get a D. If D erases the validity of this, then what is the point promising it in the first place? This sort of thinking makes a mockery of it. The vows mean nothing. This sort of marriage is just a piece of paper. And if it's so, then using the importance of the vows selectively, the way it suits, is rather pointless.

 

And that doesn't mean - if you haven't realised it yet - that cheating is ok or something.[/quote

 

In the above bolded I believe the situations you mention are grounds for annulment, not divorce. Secondly I was raised by Christians and I was always told that adultery is grounds for divorce in a Christian marriage. Now I don't know if you are wrong or if all the Christians I have spoken with are wrong. I will have to look into this.

[alexandria35]

Ahhh...here it is:

 

Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery. Matthew 19,9

 

In the above passage Jesus seems to be saying that if a man divorces his wife and marries another it is adultery unless his wife was unfaithful to him. This is the king james version, there are other versions that say infidelity instead of fornication. So my Christian parents were correct, according to the bible God does allow divorce when infidelity has taken place.

 

 

 

[OpenBook]

When I was in the thick of it, I would read and read and read forums like this that show you over and over the dynamics are all the same. And how damaging it can be to your self esteem, yet I stayed. Even though I was reading it over and over, I still wasn't *seeing* it until I began to distance myself from the affair. The hardest part of being in an affair and trying to end it, is that little piece of "hope" you hold onto...it might be little, but IT'S powerful. And many times these MM's dangle those *little* carrots to keep the affair going. It isn't until you are completely out of it that you actually see it for what it was...a painful mistake, a very painful mistake.

 

Quoted for truth. I've never seen it described so accurately. This was exactly my experience as well.

[Ellin]

 

In the above bolded I believe the situations you mention are grounds for annulment, not divorce. Secondly I was raised by Christians and I was always told that adultery is grounds for divorce in a Christian marriage. Now I don't know if you are wrong or if all the Christians I have spoken with are wrong. I will have to look into this.

The Christian doctrine I grew up with does not accept divorce and the only way to dissolve a M is the annulment on the specific grounds.

 

There are quite a few different interpretation of Christian scriptures and this is what I found:

 

Current Perspectives

 

Sadly, divorce and remarriage are widespread realities in the body of Christ today. Many Christians have questions about divorce and remarriage. Generally speaking, Christians tend to fall into one of four positions on this controversial issue:

 

• Position 1: No Divorce - No Remarriage
  Marriage is a covenant agreement, meant for life, therefore it must not be broken under any circumstance; remarriage further violates the covenant and therefore is not permissible. Position 2: Divorce - But No Remarriage
  Divorce, though not God's desire, is sometimes the only alternative when all else has failed. The divorced person must remain unmarried for life thereafter.
  Position 3: Divorce - But Remarriage Only In Certain Situations
  Divorce, though not God's desire, is sometimes unavoidable. If the grounds for the divorce are biblical, the divorced person can remarry, but only to a believer.
  Position 4: Divorce - Remarriage
  Divorce, though not God's desire, is also not the unforgivable sin. Regardless of the circumstances, all divorced persons who have repented, should be forgiven and allowed to remarry.
  

 
 
 
 

[Ellin]

When I was in the thick of it, I would read and read and read forums like this that show you over and over the dynamics are all the same. And how damaging it can be to your self esteem, yet I stayed. Even though I was reading it over and over, I still wasn't *seeing* it until I began to distance myself from the affair. The hardest part of being in an affair and trying to end it, is that little piece of "hope" you hold onto...it might be little, but IT'S powerful. And many times these MM's dangle those *little* carrots to keep the affair going. It isn't until you are completely out of it that you actually see it for what it was...a painful mistake, a very painful mistake.

 

Sometimes I felt this way about my painful experiences, that seemed to come from bad decisions, but ultimately I only made myself feel worse by thinking like that and it wasn't wise.

 

I believe there are no mistakes, there are only lessons. I "chose" the painful experiences because there were things I needed to learn, things I'd had no opportunity to learn earlier in life. If I hadn't had these experiences I still wouldn't know those things.

 

If I'm happier now, it's because I used my life experiences in a good way. They have made me who I am.

[Ellin]

In the above bolded I believe the situations you mention are grounds for annulment, not divorce. Secondly I was raised by Christians and I was always told that adultery is grounds for divorce in a Christian marriage. Now I don't know if you are wrong or if all the Christians I have spoken with are wrong. I will have to look into this.

So how does it work in the place where you are?

 

Does your church recognise civil divorces or can you get some kind of "church divorce"?

 

Or do people not get M in church at all?

[herenow]

I'm a true believer that the only person I can control is myself. I had and have no control over ny H. Problem is, during his affair, he didn't have any control over himself either.

 

I read many stories on LS abut BW's who tell their WS's they are free to go be with the OW. My question is, if so many BW's have so much control over their H's, why didn't said H's run to be with the OW when their BW's insisted on it?

[herenow]

The Christian doctrine I grew up with does not accept divorce and the only way to dissolve a M is the annulment on the specific grounds.

 

 

OK, so I admit I'm not very educated when it comes to religion, but I did see the 10 commandments many times and I do know that adultery is a violation.

 

Assuming one is so religious that they would have an affair to avoid going against the church by getting a divorce, makes no sense if that same person goes against the 10 commandments by having an affair?

[White Flower]

I'm a true believer that the only person I can control is myself. I had and have no control over ny H. Problem is, during his affair, he didn't have any control over himself either.

 

I read many stories on LS abut BW's who tell their WS's they are free to go be with the OW. My question is, if so many BW's have so much control over their H's, why didn't said H's run to be with the OW when their BW's insisted on it?

First of all, those whose BS are controlling were controlling first, first in line of control.

 

I know I could have the same control over MM today. I could make him leave today, but as I have shared with him, I REFUSE. He has been in IC for a year now learning how to live for himself and to NOT be controlled by others. If he leaves, he will leave on his own accord.

[herenow]

First of all, those whose BS are controlling were controlling first, first in line of control.

 

I know I could have the same control over MM today. I could make him leave today, but as I have shared with him, I REFUSE. He has been in IC for a year now learning how to live for himself and to NOT be controlled by others. If he leaves, he will leave on his own accord.

 

In the end, IMO, most people make the choices they do because it's what they want. Again, because I believe that the only person who can control a MM is himself, then he stays because he wants to. IMO.

 

So, I guess we agree?

[White Flower]

The Christian doctrine I grew up with does not accept divorce and the only way to dissolve a M is the annulment on the specific grounds.

 

 

OK, so I admit I'm not very educated when it comes to religion, but I did see the 10 commandments many times and I do know that adultery is a violation.

 

Assuming one is so religious that they would have an affair to avoid going against the church by getting a divorce, makes no sense if that same person goes against the 10 commandments by having an affair?

I must agree with you here. I brought this contradiction in MM's lifestyle many times. I think, with Catholics in particular, if one can confess then it is all washed away in their minds.

 

I don't get it, but that is how many think.

[HappyAgain]

The Christian doctrine I grew up with does not accept divorce and the only way to dissolve a M is the annulment on the specific grounds.

 

 

OK, so I admit I'm not very educated when it comes to religion, but I did see the 10 commandments many times and I do know that adultery is a violation.

 

Assuming one is so religious that they would have an affair to avoid going against the church by getting a divorce, makes no sense if that same person goes against the 10 commandments by having an affair?

 

So true! I don't want to get any OW upset but honestly - how can you believe this crap? All of us are our own person and unless someone is holding a gun to your head, you can choose the course of your life within reason. Staying in a M is within reason.

 

I told my xH with each affair (3 times if I remember correctly) to leave if he wanted to be with the OW; instead, he came back with "I don't want to leave", "I love you not her", "I want to make the M work", etc. During those years, I believed him and gave our M another chance. He always was telling the OW that I was controlling and bossy - how could I have been so bossy if he had the time and freedom to keep having an affair??

 

It was only when I told him to leave and cut off all communication that our M finally ended. In fact, this was a man who called MY mother asking for help on the divorce!

 

Then he went and found the first and only woman who had furniture (he was crying about not having anything because he destroyed everything to me until I cut off contact) and wanted to keep him company (he was also crying about having to sleep alone!) He was so scared of being alone for the rest of his life (and was telling everyone who would listen.)

 

I still wonder what the heck that was - how could you be so scared your whole life to go and live on your own rather than stay in a M that you were so unhappy with?!? For me, I know that I was always hopeful that this time he would get his act together - that never happened and I left finally. To me, I see men like this as nothing more than very weak and immature, and not someone I find attractive at all today, once I removed myself from the situation.

 

My question to OW, why would you find a man who has so little "control" over his own life attractive? And why would you wait, sometimes years from some of the OW's stories on LS, for a man like that? There are so many men out there that are real men and can accept responsibility for the course of their lives so why settle for some BS' scraps? Because that is how I view my xH. Regarding the woman who is with my xH today, I'm not jealous of her, never have been, as I see her settling for a guy I found lacking in many ways.

[alexandria35]

So how does it work in the place where you are?

 

Does your church recognise civil divorces or can you get some kind of "church divorce"?

 

Or do people not get M in church at all?

 

 

eh? Of course people get married in church and of course there is no church divorce. Are you having a poke at me? ...lol.

 

Look I was just pointing out that biblicaly speaking, infidelity is the only cause for divorce. Your church doctrine may have taught you differently, but if one were to go strictly by the bible, divorce is allowable if adultery has taken place. On the other hand I don't recall mental illness or infertility being mentioned as just cause for divorce. Of course I agree that they may be reasons for annulment in a legal sense but I don't think it's biblical. And I'm certain you must realize that there are many just reasons for divorce. What about physical abuse? Or an alcoholic who stays out all the time spending the rent and food budget? What if one parent is abusing the children?

[White Flower]

In the end, IMO, most people make the choices they do because it's what they want. Again, because I believe that the only person who can control a MM is himself, then he stays because he wants to. IMO.

 

So, I guess we agree?

Many stay based on what they want, many stay based on what they believe, or are programmed to believe, is the right thing to do.

 

We sort of agree;). I just don't believe all MM stay based on what they want. Some do, sure.

[Ellin]

 

So true! I don't want to get any OW upset but honestly - how can you believe this crap? All of us are our own person and unless someone is holding a gun to your head, you can choose the course of your life within reason. Staying in a M is within reason.

 

I wish people would actually read what I wrote before replying to it.

 

I never said any OW believes any crap. I even said the opposite - that from a typical OW's POV the fact that her MM is staying M is not desirable at all. I don't understand how some posters read it the other way.

 

I only asked why some people on here seem to treat D so lightly in the name of protecting the M vows. IMO there is a contradiction there. That's all!!

 

Thank you for your replies and sorry for contributing to the t/j.

[White Flower]

 

My question to OW, why would you find a man who has so little "control" over his own life attractive? And why would you wait, sometimes years from some of the OW's stories on LS, for a man like that? There are so many men out there that are real men and can accept responsibility for the course of their lives so why settle for some BS' scraps? Because that is how I view my xH. Regarding the woman who is with my xH today, I'm not jealous of her, never have been, as I see her settling for a guy I found lacking in many ways.

I saw a side of MM yesterday that showed a little more control. We had our first real (nasty) fight.

 

He apologized immediately and I said don't! I told him I actually respected that he had the b**** to say what he did and stand by what he meant. Not sure that happens much at home. I told him a long time ago that I don't want a wimp; I want a man who knows who he is, what he wants, and knows how to get it. The man he made me think he was when I fell in love with him.

 

He's getting there.

[fooled once]

From my understanding, and being Catholic, it is only the Catholic church that has issues with divorce. In some Catholic churches, a divorced person cannot be remarried Catholic unless an annulment has taken place. This even applies to the death of a spouse, as my uncle (who lost my aunt years prior) had to get an annulment for his marriage to his 2nd wife (who also lost her husband to death) to be recognized in their church.

 

I was married to my first husband in the Catholic church.

 

When I married my current H, we were married by a JP and wrote our own vows and it was much more meaningful than the church wedding I had had years prior.

 

Back to controlling....

 

I believe each of us 'controls' our spouse / boyfriend in some ways. We expect fidelity, we expect honesty, we expect trust.

 

I do not love my spouse unconditionally - nor he me. That love can be broken by drug abuse, physical abuse, betrayal, infidelity...to name a few.

 

The only unconditional love I believe in is the love for a child. I do not believe spouses love each other unconditionally.

 

Divorce is hard, but it is better to live honestly and with open communication, IMHO, than to live a life of lies and betrayal.

 

Some people work through infidelity. Some don't. Some OW believe all the stories from the MM - he doesn't sleep with his wife, he doesn't love his wife, he can't divorce because of kids, he can't leave because .....

 

Some OW don't want a FULL time relationship and prefer MM because of various reasons.

 

Some OW want a FULL time relationship with the MM and will accept the excuses and delays.

 

Some OW want a FULL time relationship with the MM and will NOT accept the excuses and delays.

 

Each person is different and each person has their own "acceptable" lines.

 

In my view, if a person loves someone besides their spouse, they own it to themselves to be honest and forthright with their spouse and speak the truth and let the spouse get on with their life - either with their partner or without. I believe if a person loves someone, they will want to be with them and do whatever is necessary to be with them - open and honestly.

[NoIDidn't]

Gosh. It's really hard to follow your "logic".

 

Where did I mentioned in my post justifying cheating and especially justifying it by saying that the other person did something wrong first????:confused:

 

I doubt that usually OP would use marriage vows to help MP justify their cheating, saying that it's ok to cheat as long as they stay with their spouse. AFAIK most OP want the opposite - they want their MP to leave the spouse!

 

And anyway, my post had nothing to do with justifying anything. I am genuinely surprised by the ease with which so many people here encourage divorces as a remedy for everything but in the same sentence they mention the importance of the marriage vows.

 

In Christianity marriage is for life and it can only be dissolved in a few very specific and exceptional circumstances, for example mental illness at the time of marriage, not consummating the marriage or being infertile but keeping it secret and maybe a couple more things like that. Infidelity definitely isn't one.

 

So if you are M in church and then get a civil D, from the Christian POV you are still M and if you get together with someone else, you're committing adultery.

 

Even in civil M ceremony you promise to stay together for life, not until you get a D. If D erases the validity of this, then what is the point promising it in the first place? This sort of thinking makes a mockery of it. The vows mean nothing. This sort of marriage is just a piece of paper. And if it's so, then using the importance of the vows selectively, the way it suits, is rather pointless.

 

And that doesn't mean - if you haven't realised it yet - that cheating is ok or something.

 

There is a reason that your name wasn't on the "quote" as my response was to the message communicated, not to you.

 

I understand what you are saying, and you are correct, so many on these forums are so quick to push divorce. It almost seems like they are attempting to live vicariously through those that they advise to divorce.

 

I'm not one of those people. I believe the decision to stay or leave is very personal and almost NEVER limited to the stuff communicated on the boards. Even for the pregnant BW whose husband refused to stop his A, I advised her to go back to her parents home where she could be safe to have her baby. Her marriage was still her decision to consider.

 

But marriage is never just a piece of paper. The only people that ever say that, IMO, are those who aren't married, had marriages that truly just didn't work out, were married to jerks that they didn't respect and that didn't respect them, or don't believe in making intimate Rs "legal". The longer I'm married, the more I think those that arrange marriages are on to something. Too many people expecting "feelings" to last forever, when that doesn't make the marriage any more than the fabled "piece of paper" does.

 

When we submit to a spouse to marry, we submit to the expected rules of that marriage - whether vocalized or assumed. And submission automatically means that someone is giving up a little of their own control to someone or something else.

[fooled once]

This is completely false. First off, all Catholic churches are governed by the vatican and they don't deviate from the church's teachings. Catholocism is one religion unlike prostestant religions which have various sects and varying beliefs/practices. So there is no such thing as "in some Catholic churches" when it comes to things like remarriage - it is the same in all Catholic churches.

 

If your spouse dies, no annulment is needed to get remarried in the Catholic church.

 

Sorry, but you are false. My Uncle had to and my SIL did the same thing 2 years ago when she remarried.

 

And MANY Catholic churches deviate. I have been to several and many of the "rules" are different in various ones.

 

You don't have to believe it. I have seen it and watched it happen. I have spoken with BOTH of them about this at the time because I thought it was disgusting that they had to do that.

 

But this has nothing to do with the original post...

[Ellin]

Sorry, but you are false. My Uncle had to and my SIL did the same thing 2 years ago when she remarried.

 

And MANY Catholic churches deviate. I have been to several and many of the "rules" are different in various ones.

 

You don't have to believe it. I have seen it and watched it happen. I have spoken with BOTH of them about this at the time because I thought it was disgusting that they had to do that.

 

...

 

I'm sorry to put it that way but it sounds rather ridiculous to me that someone would need an annulment of M AFTER the death of the spouse. I have never come across such thing in any set of rules governing M, including all religions and their variations I've ever heard of.

 

Death of a spouse means the end of M in all religions, including Catholic.

 

From what I know, and I know pretty much about Catholics, Penney2's post is completely correct.

 

Could you please give some more details about these "deviations" and which alleged deviation abide by such rules? Thanks!