Confessing Adultry to Your Spouse

[Sillara]

Actually, catharina, no one said anything about divorce. Separation is another matter, and it is a right given to the injured spouse in the catechism. It is laudable to stay with the adulterous spouse, but it is NOT required. And it is not the adulterous spouse’s choice to make.

There are many reasons why I have reached my belief concerning telling or keeping secrets: the adulterer keeps something (the fact that the adultery occurred) between him and his partner in adultery, keeps a secret shared with his lover and from his spouse. He keeps a HUGE aspect of his future life (having to deal with, one hopes, the guilt, having to deal with the lifestyle alterations necessary to prevent it from happening again, and so forth) from his spouse. He who has already wronged his spouse with the original adultery now adds the further wrongs of continued deceit and of robbing the injured spouse of his right to make the decision about the continuation of the conjugal life. By not telling, the adulterous spouse is making that decision on behalf of the spouse whom he has already injured. I just don’t get how that is better.

 

[catharina]

Actually, catharina, no one said anything about divorce. Separation is another matter, and it is a right given to the injured spouse in the catechism. It is laudable to stay with the adulterous spouse, but it is NOT required. And it is not the adulterous spouse’s choice to make.

There are many reasons why I have reached my belief concerning telling or keeping secrets: the adulterer keeps something (the fact that the adultery occurred) between him and his partner in adultery, keeps a secret shared with his lover and from his spouse. He keeps a HUGE aspect of his future life (having to deal with, one hopes, the guilt, having to deal with the lifestyle alterations necessary to prevent it from happening again, and so forth) from his spouse. He who has already wronged his spouse with the original adultery now adds the further wrongs of continued deceit and of robbing the injured spouse of his right to make the decision about the continuation of the conjugal life. By not telling, the adulterous spouse is making that decision on behalf of the spouse whom he has already injured. I just don’t get how that is better.

Actually, sillara, I’m referring to many
comments in many other threads - and
all such comments were made very recently.

 

[Sillara]

Actually, sillara, I’m referring to many
comments in many other threads - and
all such comments were made very recently.

Perhaps such threads concerned a male adulterer? I have found that when the guilty party is the husband, the first reaction of nearly every poster is “divorce right now; then seek annulment”.

When the guilty party is the wife, nearly every poster seeks to find a “reason” (read “excuse”) for her behavior, and no one believes that her husband ought to leave her.

 

[catharina]

Perhaps such threads concerned a male adulterer? I have found that when the guilty party is the husband, the first reaction of nearly every poster is “divorce right now; then seek annulment”.

When the guilty party is the wife, nearly every poster seeks to find a “reason” (read “excuse”) for her behavior, and no one believes that her husband ought to leave her.

Interesting that is your impression.
It is NOT my impression.

I’ve seen the same regarding either partner, husband or wife.
I could name several men who demand the “right to divorce such a wife”
but if I did so, that would be a post toally lacking in charity.

 

[larkin31]

Yes but, you would have done all those things BEFORE you meet your wife. I agree that one would not need to mention all of their sexual past unless it would concern their significant other now. I have said before that you don’t need to share personal sins but infidelity doesn’t just involve you. It involves the spouse whose vows you just broke.

You mention that love and commitment do not require total fidelity and that this is not a reason not to marry…this is a perfect reason not to marry. Why would I want to be with someone who doesn’t respect me enough not to honor our vows or me? :nope:

One cannot have relations with anyone if one is not willing, in all likelihood, to encounter deceit and face it. What other choice does one have? Perpetual isolation? We commit to each other despite the likelihood of these failures: the significant other is worth the effort and risk.

 

[larkin31]

The poll results are beginning to even up for both genders.

 

[Musician]

I know for a fact that my DH would never in a million years cheat on me. He is just not that person. I am blessed!
I am not sure that telling one’s spouse is appropriate unless there is an STD involved. Sure I believe in honesty, but this sin has such cataclysmic effects that if there is no STD involved, it may be better to confess this sin to a priest and never breathe a word to the spouse.
Just my two cents.

 

[runwaymodel]

Actually, catharina, no one said anything about divorce. Separation is another matter, and it is a right given to the injured spouse in the catechism. It is laudable to stay with the adulterous spouse, but it is NOT required. And it is not the adulterous spouse’s choice to make.

There are many reasons why I have reached my belief concerning telling or keeping secrets: the adulterer keeps something (the fact that the adultery occurred) between him and his partner in adultery, keeps a secret shared with his lover and from his spouse. He keeps a HUGE aspect of his future life (having to deal with, one hopes, the guilt, having to deal with the lifestyle alterations necessary to prevent it from happening again, and so forth) from his spouse. He who has already wronged his spouse with the original adultery now adds the further wrongs of continued deceit and of robbing the injured spouse of his right to make the decision about the continuation of the conjugal life. By not telling, the adulterous spouse is making that decision on behalf of the spouse whom he has already injured. I just don’t get how that is better.

:clapping::clapping::clapping:

Worded more eloquently than I could ever say.

 

[Nec5]

Man, with so many people preferring being lied/betrayed to by their spouse, it’s no wonder people tolerate their political leaders lying to them on a daily basis.

 

[freerf]

I think one of the unfortunate consequences of advising people they don’t have to tell their spouse is the probable reoccurance of the infidelity. They basically got away with it. So, why not?

Also, it seems to me that once an infidelity has occured the marital vow is broken. period. God has seen fit to clearly state in the bible that once an infidelity occurs, the marriage can be broken. If God allows this, what gives the unfaithful spouse the right to withhold the information?

Of course, for those of you who don’t want to know, more power to you. I can certainly understand that. I, however, wouldn’t want a priest or anyone else advising my spouse not to confess, especially under the guise “for their own good”. yuck.

 

[freerf]

Actually, catharina, no one said anything about divorce. Separation is another matter, and it is a right given to the injured spouse in the catechism. It is laudable to stay with the adulterous spouse, but it is NOT required. And it is not the adulterous spouse’s choice to make.

There are many reasons why I have reached my belief concerning telling or keeping secrets: the adulterer keeps something (the fact that the adultery occurred) between him and his partner in adultery, keeps a secret shared with his lover and from his spouse. He keeps a HUGE aspect of his future life (having to deal with, one hopes, the guilt, having to deal with the lifestyle alterations necessary to prevent it from happening again, and so forth) from his spouse. He who has already wronged his spouse with the original adultery now adds the further wrongs of continued deceit and of robbing the injured spouse of his right to make the decision about the continuation of the conjugal life. By not telling, the adulterous spouse is making that decision on behalf of the spouse whom he has already injured. I just don’t get how that is better.

Well said.

 

[freerf]

Man, with so many people preferring being lied/betrayed to by their spouse, it’s no wonder people tolerate their political leaders lying to them on a daily basis.

Funny. It certainly is in the same vein, “for their own good”.

The Church also teaches that it is never ok to lie. So how is it acceptable to continue living with your spouse as if nothing ever happened, in effect, living a lie? What is the lie? That the marital vow made before God is still valid. A vow broken is no longer valid.

I suppose the caveat is that were you ever directly asked, you’d have to tell the truth. How could someone live with that hanging over their head?

 

[catharina]

Funny. It certainly is in the same vein, “for their own good”.

The Church also teaches that it is never ok to lie. So how is it acceptable to continue living with your spouse as if nothing ever happened, in effect, living a lie? What is the lie? That the marital vow made before God is still valid. A vow broken is no longer valid.

I suppose the caveat is that were you ever directly asked, you’d have to tell the truth. How could someone live with that hanging over their head?

A vow broken is no longer valid?

 

[Sillara]

A vow broken is no longer valid?

Even in a valid marriage, if the oath of fidelity is broken, the injured spouse has the RIGHT to sever conjugal life. This is not meant to imply a right to remarry; the couple remain married for life. However, the catechism teaches that one is NOT required to share bed and board with an adulterous spouse.

Why does the adulterous spouse get to make that decision instead of the spouse to whom the catechism assigns the right?

 

[TheRealJuliane]

**I think one of the unfortunate consequences of advising people they don’t have to tell their spouse is the probable reoccurance of the infidelity. They basically got away with it. So, why not?
**
Also, it seems to me that once an infidelity has occured the marital vow is broken. period. God has seen fit to clearly state in the bible that once an infidelity occurs, the marriage can be broken. If God allows this, what gives the unfaithful spouse the right to withhold the information?

Of course, for those of you who don’t want to know, more power to you. I can certainly understand that. I, however, wouldn’t want a priest or anyone else advising my spouse not to confess, especially under the guise “for their own good”. yuck.

No, no, no. For this question, we are presuming that the spouse is truly repentant, has made a good confession, been absolved and resolved not to repeat the sin.

As Catholics we don’t treat the vow as being broken permanently by infidelity. It doesn’t have to be. The injured spouse can choose to stay and work on the marriage. Now days, people leave marriages for all sorts of frivolous reasons, and they are basically taught by society that if it stops feeling good for them, they are free to leave. Let alone something as serious as infidelity.

There are quite a few things in my life that I wish I didn’t know. One involves the bad character of an ancestor, that I didn’t know I would discover as I worked on my family tree. I had to pursue the information to its end, but I was disgusted when I reached the end. And my husband’s “near-miss” temptation while traveling…that nearly split us up, and it’s been one of the most difficult things to forgive. It’s hard to let go of that, to fully trust him in the same way. This happened around 15 years ago, and it’s as fresh in my mind as if it were yesterday, if I choose to dredge it up. I don’t, but the scar is there.

We have a big need to be “honest” right now in society, to tell everything, even if it hurts the people involved forever. I’m just not sure everything has to be brought out so that the knife has more blood on it, you know?

 

[catharina]

Even in a valid marriage, if the oath of fidelity is broken, the injured spouse has the RIGHT to sever conjugal life. This is not meant to imply a right to remarry; the couple remain married for life. However, the catechism teaches that one is NOT required to share bed and board with an adulterous spouse.

Why does the adulterous spouse get to make that decision instead of the spouse to whom the catechism assigns the right?

You have misunderstood my question.
I’m questioning the statement
“a broken vow is no longer valid.”

 

[Sillara]

You have misunderstood my question.
I’m questioning the statement
“a broken vow is no longer valid.”

I think freerf might be Protestant, hence his view.

Oh, and TheRealJulianne. Though the assumption is of a truly penitent spouse, it is human nature to fall back into our old ways unless there is some consequence to our actions. It is courting disaster to think that keeping the secret is keeping things “safe”.

 

[catharina]

I think freerf might be Protestant, hence his view.
Ah - that could be it. Thanks.
Oh, and TheRealJulianne. Though the assumption is of a truly penitent spouse, it is human nature to fall back into our old ways unless there is some consequence to our actions. It is courting disaster to think that keeping the secret is keeping things “safe”.

 

[freerf]

Yes, Protestant.

I’m surprised though. Is it true that the Catholic Church position is that the spouse doesn’t have the right to a divorce if cheated on? They can “sever ties” but not remarry?

Please explain. . .

 

[freerf]

Though the assumption is of a truly penitent spouse, it is human nature to fall back into our old ways unless there is some consequence to our actions. It is courting disaster to think that keeping the secret is keeping things “safe”.

exactly.