I think Pat and President Kimball were trying to counter the weak rationalization that some people try to give: "It doesn't matter if I sin, because I can repent and the Lord will just wipe it all away." It *does* matter: sin changes the course of our lives, and most likely the lives of those around us who are affected by it. Sin caused our Savior, "the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore" (D&C 19:18) as He overcame in His body the terrible effects of all sin.
If anything should motivate us not to sin, surely it would be the price He paid!
That being said, I think we have to be careful not to swing the pendulum too far the other direction. To the humble and truly penitent, the atonement *does* repair the damage done by sin. That is its power! The repentant sinner is as pure as if he or she had not sinned. Broken lives are put back together. I have seen this in my own life and the lives of those I love, even in extreme situations such as childhood abuse and out-of-wedlock pregnancy. It may take time, or it may be surprisingly fast. But it does happen.
The scriptures speak truly when they say "*All things* work together for good to them that walk uprightly" (D&C 100:15). Without excusing sin, we need to be careful not to set our own mortal limits on the efficacy of the atonement, particularly for those who so desperately need its redeeming power... and who of us doesn't fall in this category?
GregJune 4, 2013
It is people like Pat above and comments like theirs that make young women not want to come back to the church after they have made mistakes. Pat, you are completely and utterly wrong and you are the one who needs to repent of your words. I hope you have not shared this with young women before and ruined their idea of what the true gospel of Jesus Christ is. Luke 8:46 And Jesus said, Somebody hath touched me: for I perceive that virtue is gone out of me.
Did Christ lose his chastity? Simple preposterous Pat.
BrandonMay 23, 2013
Pat, what is this mystical "virtue" you speak of?
I agree that repentance doesn't make children or sexually transmitted diseases disappear, but not all premarital sex results in pregnancy or transmission of a disease. In such cases, what meaningful non-moral consequence remains?
If by "virtue" you mean "moral standing," then what effect remains after the Atonement has been applied fully? I don't believe there is any. People who have repented of their sins are morally the same as those who have never sinned.
It seems to me that this "loss of virtue" you speak of is precisely what the author of the article was speaking against. Teaching that sexual sin will forever make you some kind of second class citizen in the kingdom of God, no matter how sincere your repentance, is both destructive and incorrect.
Of course we want to deter youth from thinking that "sin now and repent later" is an acceptable course of action. But the difficulty of the process is a sufficient deterrent. There is no need to add untrue myths to our warnings about spiritually painful repentance, emotional damage, and possibly irrevocable physical consequences. Indeed, such myths detract from the power of the warning.
MossMay 23, 2013
Pat- are you equating 'virture' with 'virginity'? Elaine Dalton and other authorities make it clear that virtue does not equal virginity. Virtue is about high moral character, which is absolutely restored by the atonement! Other consequences still exist, but telling a young woman that her virtue is gone and can never be regained is toxic and is analogous to the 'chewed gum' teachings listed above.
lizaMay 23, 2013
I was surprised to find a link to this article from realclearpolitics. I agree with you Sharee! While we don't want people to think it is okay to sin now and repent later, those analogies are harmful. (also the nail in the boards, is one I remember) There are more survivors of sexual abuse than people realize. While the consequences of sin cannot be taken away (the baby, the STD, etc) Virtue can be restored through the atonement. If that were not the case, imagine all those who have made mistakes that would never be able to have their blessings restored. The power of the atonement is in looking ahead, beyond the mistake and allowing Christ to transform and cleanse so that the shadows fall behind. Its power should not be diminished by guilt over the past that cannot be changed. While cautionary tales have their place, they do nothing to help those who have fallen either by choice or by the choices of others. Only those who have experienced such darkness will appreciate the atonement's power. Using the repentance process and atonement does not make one better or worse than one who did not make the same mistakes. We all experience life differently and grow stronger and more mature in our own way. In the end, it is the relationship with Christ and the love we share that make the difference.
Gerald G FullerMay 22, 2013
Pat said, "Your virtue cannot be taken from you but once you give your virtue away, it is gone." I totally disagree, based simply on the meaning of the word "virtue". The on-line Merriam-Webster dictionary lists seven definitions of the word "virtue", and it is finally the seventh that says virtue is "chastity especially in a woman". Aside from the fact that there are many virtues, it is still a sexist idea to say that chastity is a virtue especaially in women. But I cite Proverbs 31 as evidence that the Lord seems to understand that chastity is not the only virtuous quality of a woman (or a man).
I agree that even with the forgiveness that is available with true repentance because of the Atonement of Jesus Christ, the opportunities of the repentant one may not be the same as they were before he sin, whatever it may be. But the virtue of the person may be as great as ever, in the full meaning of virtue.
PacumeniMay 22, 2013
Pat is right to suggest that there is a difference between one who had not committed sexual sin and one who has committed it and repented, though her seeming equation of virginity and virtue is certainly fraught with potential harm. It is better to be one who has not committed the sin and not been abused. A person who has committed a serious sin and truly repented will be marked by regret and know that they lost something when they sinned. If they have truly come to know the Savior and have fully repented, they will also know that the sin they sincerely regret may have set them back for a time but does not preclude them from claiming any blessing God offers in the eternities. A righteous future spouse, whether male or female, will prefer that their partner be unmarked by past sexual sin. But that righteous partner will not be blinded by the sin, will not overlook other virtues their prospective or current partner has because of the past error. They will understand that they, too, have sinned and are marked by their own past errors but, insofar as they have repented, are not stopped in their progress. Sin always has consequences in this life, though not in the eternities if one repents and forgives.
This article rightly suggests that those who have been abused have not committed any sin. But they, too, will be marked by their experience. Victims like Elizabeth Smart are sinless but will inevitably experience some difficulties that they would have avoided had they not been abused. All of us are marked by the sins of others in one way or another and have problems in our lives we would not have had but for those sins. If one either willfully sins or is abused, one's own repentance or the repentance of the abuser does not leave one unmarked by the sin. So there is a kind of paradox in sin and repentance. Sin always imposes a burden on the sinner and the victim, but it never (with the possible exception of denying the Holy Ghost) permanently blocks them from progressing and attaining salvation.
What true repentance is for the sinner
PatMay 22, 2013
While the atonement does wash away sin, we must still deal with the consequences of sin. An individual who commits sexual sin and repents is not the same as one who makes the correct choices along the way. They have the same opportunities, Heavenly Father still loves you and you can enter into your exaltation, but pretending that the past has not happened and affected the course of your life is fanciful. There are many who think that their wandering ways have somehow made them stronger than those who have remained innocent, but President Kimball demolished that argument in "The Miracle of Forgiveness". If you have premarital sex and get pregnant, repentance does not make the child vanish. If you contract herpes, it does not disappear. By the same token, your virtue does not reappear.
As far as analogies go, you cannot have your cake and eat it too. Your virtue cannot be taken from you, but once you give your virtue away it is gone.
ShareeMay 22, 2013
I agree that we still must teach abstinence, and yo are right that we must also teach that those who are abused are still innocent, that those who have made a mistake can still be forgiven. But the object lessons of the chewed gum, the crumbled rose, the cupcake with the icing licked off are still used. Something must be done in the church to get YW teachers to stop using those analogies. They are very harmful.
debbieMay 22, 2013
I'm a little sad not to see anything here about young men and the law of chastity. They are also included and need to understand how abuse relates to them and how promiscuity isn't just a problem that relates to girls.
LeahMay 22, 2013
When there has been sexual abuse in the home, that is how the child has been taught to relate to the opposite sex. Sexuality is what they see as how to express affection and receive attention. They are acting out what was done to them. I doubt that sexual abuse victims give themselves a free pass to promiscuity thinking since they are victims, they will be innocent in later violations of the law of chastity. Still, this was a good treatment of a difficult subject.
I tell my daughters that sexual expression in marriage bonds man and wife (like tape) and that sharing that before marriage will weaken it's bonding power like reusing tape. I don't know if that's any better than the other "object" lessons. It's a tough topic!
Bob SiskMay 22, 2013
Although the focus of this article was on young women, the same rules apply to men. A woman forcing herself on a man is rare, but it does happen. He is then innocent. And men are equally guilty, and in need of repentance with consensual sex.
Abstinence teaching in church is usually well done. But at a certain age young adults (or nearly adults) should have the added teaching that they are still chaste when they have sex within the marriage covenant, and that sex is to be enjoyed by both spouses.
Comments | Return to Story
KathrynJuly 2, 2013
I think Pat and President Kimball were trying to counter the weak rationalization that some people try to give: "It doesn't matter if I sin, because I can repent and the Lord will just wipe it all away." It *does* matter: sin changes the course of our lives, and most likely the lives of those around us who are affected by it. Sin caused our Savior, "the greatest of all, to tremble because of pain, and to bleed at every pore" (D&C 19:18) as He overcame in His body the terrible effects of all sin. If anything should motivate us not to sin, surely it would be the price He paid! That being said, I think we have to be careful not to swing the pendulum too far the other direction. To the humble and truly penitent, the atonement *does* repair the damage done by sin. That is its power! The repentant sinner is as pure as if he or she had not sinned. Broken lives are put back together. I have seen this in my own life and the lives of those I love, even in extreme situations such as childhood abuse and out-of-wedlock pregnancy. It may take time, or it may be surprisingly fast. But it does happen. The scriptures speak truly when they say "*All things* work together for good to them that walk uprightly" (D&C 100:15). Without excusing sin, we need to be careful not to set our own mortal limits on the efficacy of the atonement, particularly for those who so desperately need its redeeming power... and who of us doesn't fall in this category?
GregJune 4, 2013
It is people like Pat above and comments like theirs that make young women not want to come back to the church after they have made mistakes. Pat, you are completely and utterly wrong and you are the one who needs to repent of your words. I hope you have not shared this with young women before and ruined their idea of what the true gospel of Jesus Christ is. Luke 8:46 And Jesus said, Somebody hath touched me: for I perceive that virtue is gone out of me. Did Christ lose his chastity? Simple preposterous Pat.
BrandonMay 23, 2013
Pat, what is this mystical "virtue" you speak of? I agree that repentance doesn't make children or sexually transmitted diseases disappear, but not all premarital sex results in pregnancy or transmission of a disease. In such cases, what meaningful non-moral consequence remains? If by "virtue" you mean "moral standing," then what effect remains after the Atonement has been applied fully? I don't believe there is any. People who have repented of their sins are morally the same as those who have never sinned. It seems to me that this "loss of virtue" you speak of is precisely what the author of the article was speaking against. Teaching that sexual sin will forever make you some kind of second class citizen in the kingdom of God, no matter how sincere your repentance, is both destructive and incorrect. Of course we want to deter youth from thinking that "sin now and repent later" is an acceptable course of action. But the difficulty of the process is a sufficient deterrent. There is no need to add untrue myths to our warnings about spiritually painful repentance, emotional damage, and possibly irrevocable physical consequences. Indeed, such myths detract from the power of the warning.
MossMay 23, 2013
Pat- are you equating 'virture' with 'virginity'? Elaine Dalton and other authorities make it clear that virtue does not equal virginity. Virtue is about high moral character, which is absolutely restored by the atonement! Other consequences still exist, but telling a young woman that her virtue is gone and can never be regained is toxic and is analogous to the 'chewed gum' teachings listed above.
lizaMay 23, 2013
I was surprised to find a link to this article from realclearpolitics. I agree with you Sharee! While we don't want people to think it is okay to sin now and repent later, those analogies are harmful. (also the nail in the boards, is one I remember) There are more survivors of sexual abuse than people realize. While the consequences of sin cannot be taken away (the baby, the STD, etc) Virtue can be restored through the atonement. If that were not the case, imagine all those who have made mistakes that would never be able to have their blessings restored. The power of the atonement is in looking ahead, beyond the mistake and allowing Christ to transform and cleanse so that the shadows fall behind. Its power should not be diminished by guilt over the past that cannot be changed. While cautionary tales have their place, they do nothing to help those who have fallen either by choice or by the choices of others. Only those who have experienced such darkness will appreciate the atonement's power. Using the repentance process and atonement does not make one better or worse than one who did not make the same mistakes. We all experience life differently and grow stronger and more mature in our own way. In the end, it is the relationship with Christ and the love we share that make the difference.
Gerald G FullerMay 22, 2013
Pat said, "Your virtue cannot be taken from you but once you give your virtue away, it is gone." I totally disagree, based simply on the meaning of the word "virtue". The on-line Merriam-Webster dictionary lists seven definitions of the word "virtue", and it is finally the seventh that says virtue is "chastity especially in a woman". Aside from the fact that there are many virtues, it is still a sexist idea to say that chastity is a virtue especaially in women. But I cite Proverbs 31 as evidence that the Lord seems to understand that chastity is not the only virtuous quality of a woman (or a man). I agree that even with the forgiveness that is available with true repentance because of the Atonement of Jesus Christ, the opportunities of the repentant one may not be the same as they were before he sin, whatever it may be. But the virtue of the person may be as great as ever, in the full meaning of virtue.
PacumeniMay 22, 2013
Pat is right to suggest that there is a difference between one who had not committed sexual sin and one who has committed it and repented, though her seeming equation of virginity and virtue is certainly fraught with potential harm. It is better to be one who has not committed the sin and not been abused. A person who has committed a serious sin and truly repented will be marked by regret and know that they lost something when they sinned. If they have truly come to know the Savior and have fully repented, they will also know that the sin they sincerely regret may have set them back for a time but does not preclude them from claiming any blessing God offers in the eternities. A righteous future spouse, whether male or female, will prefer that their partner be unmarked by past sexual sin. But that righteous partner will not be blinded by the sin, will not overlook other virtues their prospective or current partner has because of the past error. They will understand that they, too, have sinned and are marked by their own past errors but, insofar as they have repented, are not stopped in their progress. Sin always has consequences in this life, though not in the eternities if one repents and forgives. This article rightly suggests that those who have been abused have not committed any sin. But they, too, will be marked by their experience. Victims like Elizabeth Smart are sinless but will inevitably experience some difficulties that they would have avoided had they not been abused. All of us are marked by the sins of others in one way or another and have problems in our lives we would not have had but for those sins. If one either willfully sins or is abused, one's own repentance or the repentance of the abuser does not leave one unmarked by the sin. So there is a kind of paradox in sin and repentance. Sin always imposes a burden on the sinner and the victim, but it never (with the possible exception of denying the Holy Ghost) permanently blocks them from progressing and attaining salvation. What true repentance is for the sinner
PatMay 22, 2013
While the atonement does wash away sin, we must still deal with the consequences of sin. An individual who commits sexual sin and repents is not the same as one who makes the correct choices along the way. They have the same opportunities, Heavenly Father still loves you and you can enter into your exaltation, but pretending that the past has not happened and affected the course of your life is fanciful. There are many who think that their wandering ways have somehow made them stronger than those who have remained innocent, but President Kimball demolished that argument in "The Miracle of Forgiveness". If you have premarital sex and get pregnant, repentance does not make the child vanish. If you contract herpes, it does not disappear. By the same token, your virtue does not reappear. As far as analogies go, you cannot have your cake and eat it too. Your virtue cannot be taken from you, but once you give your virtue away it is gone.
ShareeMay 22, 2013
I agree that we still must teach abstinence, and yo are right that we must also teach that those who are abused are still innocent, that those who have made a mistake can still be forgiven. But the object lessons of the chewed gum, the crumbled rose, the cupcake with the icing licked off are still used. Something must be done in the church to get YW teachers to stop using those analogies. They are very harmful.
debbieMay 22, 2013
I'm a little sad not to see anything here about young men and the law of chastity. They are also included and need to understand how abuse relates to them and how promiscuity isn't just a problem that relates to girls.
LeahMay 22, 2013
When there has been sexual abuse in the home, that is how the child has been taught to relate to the opposite sex. Sexuality is what they see as how to express affection and receive attention. They are acting out what was done to them. I doubt that sexual abuse victims give themselves a free pass to promiscuity thinking since they are victims, they will be innocent in later violations of the law of chastity. Still, this was a good treatment of a difficult subject. I tell my daughters that sexual expression in marriage bonds man and wife (like tape) and that sharing that before marriage will weaken it's bonding power like reusing tape. I don't know if that's any better than the other "object" lessons. It's a tough topic!
Bob SiskMay 22, 2013
Although the focus of this article was on young women, the same rules apply to men. A woman forcing herself on a man is rare, but it does happen. He is then innocent. And men are equally guilty, and in need of repentance with consensual sex. Abstinence teaching in church is usually well done. But at a certain age young adults (or nearly adults) should have the added teaching that they are still chaste when they have sex within the marriage covenant, and that sex is to be enjoyed by both spouses.
ADD A COMMENT