posted
As the world continues to “progress” in its thinking, the line between marriage and merely dating is continually blurred. When it’s perfectly normal for a couple to live together before marriage (often amid promises of fidelity) the difference between being married and not are hard to pin down. In the Church, we have some pretty clear boundaries and the importance of marriage, even as just a temporal institution remains paramount. The difference between a LDS couple dating and married remains large and distinct, so that there can be no question from the inside or outside if the two are married or merely together.
So first off: what do you think those boundaries are? No sex prior to marriage is the most demonstrable one. The level of physical intimacy a person feels is warranted prior to marriage varies from individual to individual, but any active, Latter Day Saint knows there’s a limit. I don’t know how important that limit is to pin down here: the limit exists and for certain includes sex, and many forms of physical intimacy. Some level of physical intimacy is not only “allowed” but necessary. Hugging, hand-holding, etc… a successful couple is comfortable with each other on a physical level.
But the physical aspect is only part of an overall relationship. Is there any other aspect you think should be limited prior to marriage? Emotional intimacy, mental connection, spirituality: should these have some boundaries prior to tying the knot so to speak? If the limit on the pre-marital physical was merely as protection against unwed pregnancy one would assume there would be no need for any restrictions other than on activities that could actually cause pregnancy. But there are other restrictions which have to do with inciting lust in one another, which suggests that certain things simply aren’t appropriate before marriage from an intimacy (sorry I’m using that word so much, but I can’t think of a workable synonym) standpoint. If that’s the case, why doesn’t it apply to other aspects of the relationship?
The only other limiters I’ve ever felt necessary are long-term planning. i.e. I wouldn’t base career decisions on the plans of my significant other prior to marriage, at least not completely. But that has more to do with good engineering practice (don’t count on what’s not guaranteed) than developing or not developing closeness with my partner. What do you think: are there non-physical aspects you would purposefully limit prior to marriage (not counting those things that are limited by fiat, i.e. can’t happen outside of an LDS marriage even if you wanted them to happen)? If not, why is it just the physical, what makes that special? In particular, what makes that aspect special when we often claim that it is only one small component of a healthy relationship, no more critical than any other aspect?
posted
I'm tempted to say "past repented-of sins", but then I figure a potential spouse has a right to know of criminal history, STD's, even prior sexual activity (barest level of detail the potential spouse would be comfortable with.)
Posts: 2111 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I wouldn't tie myself financially to someone I wasn't married to (sharing bank accounts or loans), or share a pet, or co-habitate of course.
I wouldn't share the deepest things in my heart unless and until we were getting close to the point of marriage, but that's more because of social impropriety (I don't tell every Tom, Dick, and Harry about my baggage. . . but I did share with my husband as we got serious, in the normal course of our advancing relationship.) I actually think it's important to discuss those things. For instance, I knew I'd have fertility issues, and I thought it was only fair to disclose that to my husband so he'd know what he might be getting into. That was before engagement but after marriage was on the table as a possibility. I wouldn't talk about sex too much, either. At least not in detail or flippantly. That falls under the category of arousing passions, for me.
I really can't think of anything else, or any reason why I should withhold emotional intimacy with someone I am getting very close to. It's a scary but necessary part of a progressing relationship, I think.
Posts: 4325 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
And to answer your other question, chastity is a law given to us by Heavenly Father. I think He gave it to us for more reasons than preventing procreation in a less-than-ideal circumstance. The longer I'm married, and now that I'm done having kids, the more I come to understand the sacredness, power, and importance of marital sex. That's as far as I'll go with that.
There are no spiritual laws against mental or spiritual closeness.
Posts: 4325 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
So then the question is: why? I agree with you on basic philosophy of dating to marriage. The run-up from “don’t know them from Adam/Eve” to being sealed in the Temple comes with a continually increasing degree of closeness. On a first date/meeting we’re likely to cover such topics as occupation, interests, and some random conversation as it develops. As the relationship continues we begin to share thoughts on life goals, personal hang-ups, and long term problems or flaws. I’ve never had a schedule in mind for this, but it happens organically anyway. At the beginning I’d hesitate to share much about my thoughts on how good or bad the state we live in is. As marriage approaches I would (or at least should) be comfortable discussing my biggest fears and my greatest aspirations. It’s a continuum.
I started this thread because I’ve been thinking about the contrast between all the other aspects of a relationship in this sense, and the physical. Everything else progresses slowly but continuously (well slowly for me ): the physical aspect just jumps. Sure there’s some change at the beginning; you start with a light hug goodbye, but once you hit some level of kissing/making-out/whatever you come to a full stop. Then one day you go from smooching to sex (that’s the best alliteration I could come up with FYI). Why is there such a hard break in that aspect but no other? Is it telling us that there should be a break in other aspects as well?
[I hope no one thinks otherwise, but just to be clear: I’m not trying to justify breaking the law of chastity, or modify it in anyway. I know exactly what I feel comfortable doing prior to marriage and will go no further, so don’t worry that this is some way to push-back mine or others’ morality. ]
posted
For me there was a natural break emotionally, because of the physical part. At that point I really couldn't share my complete heart emotionally without having the physical tied with it. I'd always thought it silly that people who were engaged made rules like curfews etc. Suddenly as soon as we became engaged we needed to do that ourselves. That emotional part was coming on so strong that we needed to hold both it and the physical part back through rules.
Posts: 4947 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: In particular, what makes that aspect special when we often claim that it is only one small component of a healthy relationship, no more critical than any other aspect?
Just one point to this: Sex/intimacy is a very big and fundamental component of a healthy relationship and in many regards is more critical than many other aspects. That's exactly why it is protected by the law of chastity. Sure, in a successful marriage all or most components need to be in balance and if there are physical restrictions on sex, you can't "do it all", but that doesn't mean that it still doesn't play a big role or that you wouldn't find ways to make physical intimacy meaningful.
In a survey made in this country they identified causes fro divorces. Among the 15 first reasons you could pretty much categorize them in two. (number 6 or so was addictions, 12 or so was money). The top two categories were things to do with sex and communication, in that order.
Other than that I agree with others, you usually wouldn't share the income or a pet. Why do you think hobbes that everythings should go the same way in a relationship? Why can't those things be different?
I think there's also a continuum after marriage. In the beginning you wouldn't think about borrowing your husbands sweats or a toothbrush. After some years it just doesn't matter anymore. Posts: 801 | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Other than that I agree with others, you usually wouldn't share the income or a pet. Why do you think hobbes that everythings should go the same way in a relationship? Why can't those things be different?
To be clear, I wasn't advocating a position, just asking a question. Income was an aspect I hadn't considered. That's an interesting thought, I guess I file that under "things that are not physically feasible prior to marriage" like (as you say) having a pet together, or keeping a garden. It is within the realm of physical possibility but outside the realm of actual practicality for the majority of couples.
quote:For me there was a natural break emotionally, because of the physical part. At that point I really couldn't share my complete heart emotionally without having the physical tied with it.
quote:Exactly. Sexual intimacy is intended and should be the physical expression of emotional and spiritual intimacy. I imagine that if you polled most married people, they would tell you that the times when the physical expression of intimacy is the most fulfilling are the times when they feel the most intimately connected to their spouse in other areas.
I'm not sure these two statements line-up. Yungmom is saying (as I read it) that the physical isn't just an expression of what exists emotionally, but that the reverse is true as well. i.e. The emotional connection (and I'm assuming mental and spiritual is tied up in your definition of 'emotional') can not progress without the physical aspect. So a jump in emotional connection is necessitated by a jump in the physical. Certainly physical acts are much more prone to sudden jumps (one moment you haven’t kissed, the next moment you have: easily defined and recognized unlike levels of emotional intimacy) but I’m curious: did you find that there was a sudden change in your mental/emotional/spiritual relationship on par with your physical? Or did the inclusion of greater physical intimacy merely open the door for your connection to increase again in other arenas (and thus not cause a precipitous jump)?
quote: Dude Hobbes, sometimes you totally overthink things.
Yah, maybe but in my opinion the vast majority of people greatly underthink everything.
posted
Money is something I kept completely separate prior to marriage. Of course I paid for all the dates and activities, but I resisted the urge to start paying her student loans and other bills, even though she wasn't very affluent at the time. This was difficult to do. But Judge Judy and others taught me well.
Posts: 3493 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That reminds me. Rex paid my rent one of the months we were engaged. My expenses changed significantly when we got married. Not as much housing and food, but because I could be covered for prescriptions through his work where I couldn't be through mine.
quote: The emotional connection (and I'm assuming mental and spiritual is tied up in your definition of 'emotional') can not progress without the physical aspect.
I've been thinking about this for some time and I haven't figured yet if I am included mental in in this yet. Mostly because I'm not sure I am mentally connected to my husband. There is definitely something to be said about being on somewhat similar mental levels. I think that relationships will work better if people are closer on those levels than farther.
It's just Rex thinks so differently than I do. It never ceases to amaze me how differently we approach a task. That's one of the reasons communication is so important to us, because if we don't it sometimes seems the other person is on a whole other task.
And yet we agree on things that are important to us. Paying off the mortgage. Having me stay at home with the kids and still staying at home after they are grown, but changing focus to service. Not going into debt for nearly everything. FHE. More of a mindset that goes with spiritual goals probably.
So I'll have to do some more thinking on that some more.
quote:did you find that there was a sudden change in your mental/emotional/spiritual relationship on par with your physical? Or did the inclusion of greater physical intimacy merely open the door for your connection to increase again in other arenas (and thus not cause a precipitous jump)?
Spiritually - Both. Many things were like opening a door. Other things that applied to us as a couple were kind of a jump - I think because we had made that covenant and were now ready for things as a couple. Not that you can't have that while you are engaged, but until you have made the covenants then you are not promised the blessings of the covenant.
Emotionally - this was like the door. Long story short I couldn't have married him without being right at that door. Until your question I didn't realize that emotionally I had that natural break. It's a good thing that I had a wedding to plan for or I would probably wondered what was wrong in our relationship. There are some good things about having short engagements!
Posts: 4947 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Huh. I think I mighta had it backwards (and I second that "overthinking" statement).
We got married more than 26 years ago. By the time knelt at the altar, our checking accounts had already been merged (we got a joint account using my to-be-married name a couple of months before the wedding... mainly because it was more convenient to use his bank which had national branches, than mine, which existed only in a wee village of 250 people some 1200 miles away... neither of us had debt or savings so it was only petty cash anyway and our attitudes about money were very copacetic), our conversations merged, our hearts had merged, and our souls had very much merged. The only thing left that morning was the priesthood ordinance of sealing and the physical merging of body.
That's not to say that the relationship didn't grow or strengthen after the change of status from two to one, but we were so very united already that all honesty the only thing that changed the day we married was whether we could partake in sexual relations or not.
What is different now, looking back over more than a quarter century is the increased strength of the bond. Only time (and commitment to covenant... and a steadfast resolve that past dysfunctional family traits will. stop. here.) can do that.
posted
Thank-you both for sharing your thoughts; I found that to be both interesting and helpful.
quote:So I'll have to do some more thinking on that some more.
Please do!
quote:I second that "overthinking" statement
People say this to me from time to time, and honestly I never really know what they mean. Is something worse because you thought about it? Am I giving the impression that these thoughts are getting in the way of something else in my life? It could be it means they think it's more simpler than I'm making it; but I rarely think that's true. The world is almost always more complex than we believe it is, and we simply write off the complexities as being unimportant when we can't understand them.
posted
I think roper said it best. Sometimes when we're overthinking it can also mean we're trying too hard and thus, shooting ourselves in the foot. With relationships you need to balance analyzing compatibility with just letting the natural course of the relationship flow. You just have to kind of let go and see what happens. You can't force things to go this way or that. Part of the fun and excitement of it is in the kind of mystery, too. If you're constantly worried about "we should be taking this step, and then this one, and we should be getting this emotionally connected but not too close. . .", I think you're missing out on some of the joy of just discovering each other.
edit: I could have sworn roper chimed in on this, but now I don't see his comment. I'm either losing my mind or he erased something. Probably the former.
posted
Hobbes, please don't stop over-thinking things. Just because you don't do things the way some other people do, doesn't mean you do it the wrong way, or even an inferior way. It just means you do it your way, and they don't agree with you. Don't let that be a major factor in how you do things, because you can't please everyone, and even if you could, it wouldn't be right. I suggest you do things the way you like, and the way you're good at. If other people call that over-thinking, that's fine for them. If thinking about stuff takes out all the mystery and fun and excitement for them, that's fine as well. Doesn't mean they're wrong, either. Or inferior.
The world needs men who think things through. Simon and Garfunkle are both thinkers, and they put out some mighty fine music. Alton Brown is a thinker, and he puts out some excellent recipes that result in some serious grub. Hugh Nibley was a thinker, and he did plenty of what God wanted him to do without ever being called as an apostle. God needs ward financial clerks as well as nursery leaders. Aarons as well as Moseses, Hyrums as well as Josephs.
Edited to add: Orson Scott Card is a thinker as well. It's one of the things I love about his books--he thinks about things before he writes about them. It would be interesting to know if he over-thinks things, and how he deals with it.
I've also been accused in the past of overthinking things, and of being "too sensitive," so I can relate; although I admit you are considering things I never have.
When I was pondering marrying my DH, I made a pros and cons list, because I wanted to make sure it made as much sense to my brain as well as my heart. When my father heard about the lists (and he wasn't thrilled at all about the fact I was marrying young) his retort was, "People in love don't make lists." Ironically, part of the reason I was working it out in my head was because my father was a divorce lawyer, and I was keenly aware of the fact that love alone isn't a guarantee of a good marriage. Working it out in my mind made a lot of sense to me.
I've got plenty more stories like that, but it all boils down to recognizing your own personality, and the strengths and weaknesses of approaching life a certain way; being grateful for the advantages and being aware of and guarding against the downside of a thinking life.
And one last story, because I'm chatty: I've never forgotten the lesson a friend gave years ago in RS about the different ways we receive revelation. She related the story of her college roomate who was a math major, and a conversation the two had had, where the roomate said she had no experience with the Spirit as a warm feeling, that for the math major feeling the Holy Ghost meant things became clear and obvious, that she felt a flow of intelligence.
Later on my friend's roomate became engaged, and when my friend asked her about how she knew she was making a good choice, the roomate responded, "Because whenever I think about marrying him, I feel really, really smart."
quote: God needs ward financial clerks as well as nursery leaders
I won't overthink or say that the context of the above quote implied in anyway that nursery leaders aren't thinking as much as financial clerks!
I think nusery leaders must often do much thinking/planning ahead of time. Plust they have to think well on the spot, in nurturing the children.
Our current nursery leader is a lawyer, when she went on vacation she left one of the most detailed planning emails about nursery coverage I've ever seen to those who volunteered in her absence.
Posts: 8577 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The most difficult part of leading nursery is learning how to manage 15 little kids at one time. How do you talk with little children? The ones at 18 months are quite different than the 3 year olds. How do you get them to learn? How do you encourage them? If you can figure that out then the rest of nursery is having enough energy to endure to the end.
The lessons in nursery are very easy to prepare, since they are so basic and only last 5 minutes at the most. My lesson yesterday involved a picture of Jesus. Question, "who is this?" Answered the children, "Jesus". "Does Jesus want us to love everyone?" "Yes". "Does Jesus want us to love our mommy and daddies?" "Yes". "Does Jesus want us to share our food with people that are hungry?" "Yes". "Does Jesus want us to be nice to those that are mean to us?" "No". "Actually, Jesus wants us to be nice to everyone, even those that are mean to us." "Oh".
Posts: 3493 | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
So this topic has been dead for a few weeks now, and I don't really have much to add, but I would like to hear more about people's experiences! Especially those who said they'd think more about it and get back to us.
In the interim, here's a little story: Many moons ago when I was dating a girl who is now married to someone else (with two kids), we walked around a little secluded space one night. We were both looking up and enjoying the stars when I foolishly decided to start talking about the awe I had for the universe. “Just think, all those points of light represent intense, nuclear furnaces; each one losing two or more tons of matter every second just to create light that makes it across the vast expanses to our eyes!”
“Why can’t you just enjoy the stars?” She asks, and much to my surprise is clearly very annoyed. I was surprised because for one she didn’t normally get annoyed that easily, and two, I was enjoying them! It took me a while to realize that for some, thinking too much about the pleasant aspects of life ruin them. It’s the analysis that kills the parts they love (be it the mystery, or the simplicity, or just the fact they didn’t have to think in the first place!) For others of us, it’s the thinking that makes it enjoyable.
I have the same experience with the back and forth in this thread.
quote: You just have to kind of let go and see what happens. You can't force things to go this way or that. Part of the fun and excitement of it is in the kind of mystery, too. If you're constantly worried about "we should be taking this step, and then this one, and we should be getting this emotionally connected but not too close. . .", I think you're missing out on some of the joy of just discovering each other.
I like mystery, I do. A lot. And the best part about mystery is solving it. I realize that the mystery you’re referring to isn’t the same mystery I solve when I break out my calculator and my reference books, but the same principles apply. Analyzing anything doesn’t take away its fun, it’s part of the fun. And it’s how I approach the world. I grant you it’s different from some, but I disagree that it’s worse and it’s certainly not unique to me.
posted
Based on your last post I have a mental image of you asking a girl to marry you. You give her a diamond ring. She oohs and ahhs over the ring. At that time you launch into a description of the power required to convert carbon into a diamond.
posted
Whereas if I'd been presented with a diamond, I would have gone on and on about how the diamond engagement ring market was created by DeBeers in the early to mid 1900s and that diamonds themselves had little actual intrinsic value. Give me a downpayment on a house instead of a diamond, I would have said... Gold at least holds its value, but diamonds don't.
Thing is, I like Hobbes' approach to the stars and the theoretical approach to diamonds and physics. And I'm not the only woman who's like that. Hobbes isn't freakishly weird in that respect (not that anyone suggested that). He just needs to find a woman who appreciates the way he looks at things. Posts: 4284 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: “Why can’t you just enjoy the stars?” She asks, and much to my surprise is clearly very annoyed. I was surprised because for one she didn’t normally get annoyed that easily, and two, I was enjoying them! It took me a while to realize that for some, thinking too much about the pleasant aspects of life ruin them. It’s the analysis that kills the parts they love (be it the mystery, or the simplicity, or just the fact they didn’t have to think in the first place!) For others of us, it’s the thinking that makes it enjoyable.
This is fine, different strokes, and all that. I'd think that was a pretty clear sign, though, that you weren't compatible. The "overthinking/underthinking" view comes into play in all you do and say, so unless you want to be continually annoyed/annoying, you need to find someone who has the same outlook on that. IMO, you're not overthinking things. I like a man who will contemplate.
On one part of your question, I think you need to discuss your respective philosophies on everything that you'll encounter post-marriage, at some point pre-marriage. That includes, money, God, children, sex. Yes, I realize that talking about sex can inflame the passions, etc. But I think the risk of NOT talking about it, only to discover after marriage that you have 2 totally different views of its importance and proper, um, procedure is far greater than the risk of falling into sin. This is particularly true if you arrange to have the talk in circumstances of safety.
As for timing, if I were advising my son or daughter, I'd tell them after they got engaged, but before they felt the pressure of "oh-snap-I'm-getting-married-tomorrow-I-can't-call-it-off-what-will-people-say". It's too important to go in blind, hoping for the best.
On another note, I had a bishop at BYU tell the ward that he didn't think engaged couples should pray together, because it was too intimate and led to sexual sin. I don't know if that's true or not, but it sounded weird to me—my natural inclinations do not lie that way.FWIW.
Posts: 2970 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:On another note, I had a bishop at BYU tell the ward that he didn't think engaged couples should pray together, because it was too intimate and led to sexual sin. I don't know if that's true or not, but it sounded weird to me—my natural inclinations do not lie that way.FWIW.
Whew. I counsel couples just the opposite. A prayer before a date asking for help to resist temptation and a prayer at the end of the date after the good night kiss offering thanks. Posts: 11540 | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: On one part of your question, I think you need to discuss your respective philosophies on everything that you'll encounter post-marriage, at some point pre-marriage. That includes, money, God, children, sex. Yes, I realize that talking about sex can inflame the passions, etc. But I think the risk of NOT talking about it, only to discover after marriage that you have 2 totally different views of its importance and proper, um, procedure is far greater than the risk of falling into sin. This is particularly true if you arrange to have the talk in circumstances of safety.
Sometimes these talks prior to marriage are what we think we will want. for instance children. I've known couples prior to having any wanted a dozen or so, only to find out that kids take a whole lot more patience then they actually have. Or some women think prior to marriage they want to be sahm but when life hits, find that they also want careers or vis a versa. Some think that sexually they will have a sizzling marriage but. While the desire is there, exhaustion means more sleep, less sizzle. Sometimes we don't really know what our wants and desires will be after marriage because we just don't know enough. then again, because of PB career field, he probably has a greater understanding of the situation and need for these conversations than I do.
Posts: 5046 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree palmon. For example. When I married the second Mrs Pink, I came with two children. When we were discussing marriage, she informed me that she wanted 12 children. I smiled to myself, and said, "okay, we will see." After two more children came to us, she said "enough." I think it is great to talk about all those things PB said. God, children, money and so on. Some things like religion and money you both have a lot of experience with. So it is easier to set common goals. But other things, like sex for example, are more like Space Mountain. You can see the track to that first door, but until you go through the door, you cannot imagine what is beyond. No matter how much others have told you, no matter how much you have read about it. It is yours to discover together. And isn't that what makes riding Space Mountain so much fun?
Posts: 11540 | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: I think it is great to talk about all those things PB said. God, children, money and so on. Some things like religion and money you both have a lot of experience with. So it is easier to set common goals. But other things, like sex for example, are more like Space Mountain. You can see the track to that first door, but until you go through the door, you cannot imagine what is beyond. No matter how much others have told you, no matter how much you have read about it. It is yours to discover together. And isn't that what makes riding Space Mountain so much fun?
Oh, I agree. I don't think two 21-year-olds who are innocent are going to know much of what they speak, whether it's sex or even money, frankly. But I still think it's foolish to deliberately NOT discuss it, and just kind of vaguely hope that it will all work out (I know that none of you are advising this approach).
Posts: 2970 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:On another note, I had a bishop at BYU tell the ward that he didn't think engaged couples should pray together, because it was too intimate and led to sexual sin. I don't know if that's true or not, but it sounded weird to me—my natural inclinations do not lie that way.FWIW.
Whew. I counsel couples just the opposite. A prayer before a date asking for help to resist temptation and a prayer at the end of the date after the good night kiss offering thanks.
I've heard both extremes; I recall, shortly after joining the Church, being advised not to study scriptures with a girl because I'll get confused about the two different activities (being with a girl and studying scriptures) and read the Spirit wrong. It sounded really dumb to me. I've also gotten advice that you should be having daily prayers and scripture study prior to marriage so you know for sure; which didn't exactly sound dumb in the same way but I wasn't 100% on board either. My conclusion is that no one knows what they're talking about and everyone should just do what they think is right.
quote:I'd think that was a pretty clear sign, though, that you weren't compatible.
It was. That conversation was hardly the turning point but the difference is why we eventually parted ways.
quote:My conclusion is that no one knows what they're talking about and everyone should just do what they think is right.
Or... maybe they're reporting their own experience, and naively expecting that everyone will be like they are.
Compatibility is a nebulous concept. A lot of times we tend to mistakenly re-translate it as "similar" or "the same". Don't automatically dismiss a girl just because she doesn't look at the stars the same way you do. I admit it might be harder to do, but if you can get past thinking that others are wrong or inferior when they do things differently, having complementary differences can be powerful.
Of course the "Why can't you just..." is a red flag. She's not OK with how you do things. If she had said something like "I love the way you..." that would have been better. I have seen this sort of thing a lot. An example is from the life of my brother. His ex-wife always got on his case when he left his dirty socks on the bedroom floor. She didn't like that he wasn't like she was, and didn't pick up his own socks. His current wife cheerfully picks them up and tosses them into the hamper, sometimes with a comment like, "You're SUCH a GUY!" She actually likes it that he's not like she is. He's off slaying dragons and inventing stuff and supporting his family and bonding with his children. She is happy to serve him in this way.
So yeah, you take it seriously when the Bishop gives you advice. But you also realize that the couple who got too intimate while praying is not you. And then you make sure that you get the spiritual experience when praying with your girlfriend, and not the intimate one.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
]![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Kiss]](graemlins/kiss.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
