The saga of South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford keeps getting stranger. Today we learned that when Sanford ostensibly came clean at his tearful press conference last week that he was, in fact, still lying.
In another tearful talk with the media, Sanford said Maria Belen Chapur wasn’t the only woman he’d “crossed lines” with, though, he claims, she is the only one he had sex with. Sanford also admitted he saw Chapur, whom he called his soul mate, more than he previously claimed.
“This was a whole lot more than a simple affair, this was a love story,” Sanford said. “A forbidden one, a tragic one, but a love story at the end of the day.”
But that’s not what makes today’s Sanford installment so strange. It’s the conclusion to the Associated Press’ story:
In early 2009, after Jenny Sanford discovered the affair, the couple went into counseling. She has told The Associated Press that he asked her several times to visit the mistress and she refused.
But the governor claims he wanted to end the affair in person and, with his wife’s permission, went to New York with a “trusted spiritual adviser” serving as chaperone. The three went to church and dinner together and parted ways the same night.
But he visited Chapur again in Argentina on June 18, the trip that brought the whole affair to light.
Now, I’ve never had an affair, so I don’t know how these things are supposed to work. (To my wife: I never will.) But I’m pretty sure the way these things end is a bit different than dating. Just because Sanford and Chapur had had five romantic rendezvouses instead of four doesn’t mean he is obligated to call it quits in person. Frankly, I think St. Paul would direct Sanford to man up, make a clean break and not be such a fool as to spend one more dinner with temptation.
These latest revelations will no doubt make for good fodder for the late night talk shows. That’s Sanford’s problem.
But what really irked me about the AP story is how casually the reporter mentions that Sanford traveled to New York with a “trusted spiritual adviser” and how the three — counselor and adulterers — went to church together. And that’s all the reader gets.
We’re not told why they went to church together or where or, most importantly, whether this is a common thing for Christians to do when they are repenting of past sin and, in this case, ending an adulterous affair.
Let me answer that last question: It’s not.
 | Posted at 5:52 pm |  Print
| Permalink | Trackback |
Comments (8) |
June 30, 2009, at 6:11 pm
The phrase in quotes, “trusted spiritual adviser”, did cause me to wonder a bit. I’m not a reporter, but it strikes me
that asking about that person would be a natural follow-up question.
I can also think of reasons why they would have gone to church together even if it is not a common thing to do but it also struck me as a bit unusual and thus worthy of some follow-up.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
June 30, 2009, at 7:12 pm
“By the grace of God, I never will.”
Don’t set yourself up, dude.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
June 30, 2009, at 7:37 pm
Just why did the Governor talk to AP today, anyway? Simple: he’s paving the way for his next job.
He told reporters that he counseled Ms. Chapur on her failing marriage.
Look out Dr. Phil!
See:
http://notionscapital.wordpress.com/2009/06/30/mark-sanford-hes-back/
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
June 30, 2009, at 9:28 pm
“By the grace of God, I never will.”
If Brad’s Christian, he knows everything he does (or doesn’t do) is by the grace of God.
I have heard of close friends bringing other close friends (“spiritual adviser” is rather vague) to end illicit or undesired romantic relationships. The third person helps ensure accountability, that necessary things will be said and (ideally) closure will come. But the whole dinner-then-church thing does sound a bit like an awkward “one-last-goodbye” date, “sanctified” by a third person and a church service. Better to meet in a neutral spot, have the agonizing closure-talk, and then split. For good.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
June 30, 2009, at 9:39 pm
That’s ironic. Were I counseling the governor (politically) I’d tell him to stop talking, and stop digging.
Personally, I’ve never heard of the cheating man having “one more visit” with his paramour with a preacher in tow, and then having him try to patch up the woman’s marriage. Curiouser an curiouser, as they say.
I won’t go off-topic here but I’ll just note that I don’t even think Calvinists (topic of a previous post) go so far as to blame God for what they DON’T do. Or do they these days? I’ll take the answer in the cafe.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
June 30, 2009, at 10:32 pm
Stephen A., I’ll copy this to the cafe, but it’s important enough to clarify here. No need to play the “blame”-game, and one needn’t be Calvinist to understand the simple Biblical principle:
Titus 2:11-12 “For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. It teaches us to say ‘No’ to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age”
So God’s grace not only empowers us to do good (by His standards and for His glory), but to shun evil (likewise). The two go hand in hand.
Much more could be said, but in the cafe.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
July 1, 2009, at 5:01 am
[…] This post was Twitted by russhamel […]
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
July 1, 2009, at 8:01 am
Note “trusted spiritual advisor” — direct quote from Gov S himself? So the one with the problem is defining, though not identifying, the company. But I agree: this would have been a good place to quote an expert in the particular denomination’s practices regarding this rather unusual situation.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0