Do You Tell Other's Secrets to Your Spouse?

[thewanderer]

But the person could justifiably say, “I said not to tell anyone. Why did you tell someone? Was I unclear in some way? Do you speak English?”

There is no legitimate response; the person agreed to something that was literally clear and then disregarded the agreement.

Yes the one could legitimitely be upset, because they thought the other person understood what they meant, however, if the other person truly did not understand what was meant then there is absolutely no malice involved and it is not something that should continue to be held against them. It is a very unfortunate situation, but not one caused by malice, simply by a misunderstanding. Trying to vilify one party of that misunderstanding is wrong. Just because you can relate to one side and not the other doesn’t mean that the side you cannot relate to is somehow more guilty. If its an honest mistake then thats all there is to it.

 

[7armyrugrats]

Emotions do run deeply it seems!!! Look, what’s being “discussed” shouldn’t be that big of deal. A couple is made of two people, not one. Therefore no one’s spouse is privey to things confided in the other spouse.

During marriage prep, the priest explained to my husband and me that in marriage two halves don’t make a whole. You need two wholly, functioning, independent people to actively decide to commit to come together as one whole couple. Never are you to give up your independent self or the couple will never be whole and functional. Two wholes equal a one flesh union, not two halves.

As long as a marriage is based on trust there should be no reason for anyone to be offended by another couple’s decision to keep confidences. I just assume whatever I tell someone will be shared with their spouse which is why I choose not to share with people. I talk to my priest. I know he’s not talking! But everyone I know realizes I tell my husband only need based info, therefore many, many people confide in me.

 

[PatriceA]

Now I’m confused. There’s a fine line between NEED and WANT and I’ve only lived with my wife 42 years so I’m not all the way through the manual yet. Come to think of it, I hope never to make it to the final page.

BTW, I do see opinions from you going both ways

I don’t see my opinion going both ways, I’ve always maintained I don’t want to keep secrets from my husband, period, and I tell my friends that upfront. Don’t tell me something if you don’t want me ever to disclose it to my husband. Most of the time he isn’t bothered to ask me many details about a conversation I’ve had with one of friends. But he will notice sometimes that one of our friends seems to be troubled by something and will ask me, I am upfront with my friends that when my husband asks me I am not going to tell him I can’t say anything, that I have to keep their secret. If what he asks is “everything” then I share “everything”. I don’t think that’s so hard to understand.

 

[PatriceA]

Emotions do run deeply it seems!!! Look, what’s being “discussed” shouldn’t be that big of deal. A couple is made of two people, not one. Therefore no one’s spouse is privey to things confided in the other spouse.

During marriage prep, the priest explained to my husband and me that in marriage two halves don’t make a whole. You need two wholly, functioning, independent people to actively decide to commit to come together as one whole couple. Never are you to give up your independent self or the couple will never be whole and functional. Two wholes equal a one flesh union, not two halves.

As long as a marriage is based on trust there should be no reason for anyone to be offended by another couple’s decision to keep confidences. I just assume whatever I tell someone will be shared with their spouse which is why I choose not to share with people. I talk to my priest. I know he’s not talking! But everyone I know realizes I tell my husband only need based info, therefore many, many people confide in me.

I don’t think anyone is offended that a couple has made the decision to keep confidences, it seems to be the other way around that some are insisting that the ones that share confidences are in the wrong.

 

[PatriceA]

Some have expressed in one way or another a desire to not keep any secrets from ones spouse. (And I can understand wanting to share so much with ones spouse)

Well that is possible in some cases --such as for example where one is asked “will you keep what I am going to tell you a secret?” and one responds either no. And thus hears no more. Or one say – I would like to be able to tell my spouse is that ok? and if the person agrees then that may be a case where one can tell the secret.

But there are going to be other things in life that I would say one simply cannot tell ones spouse about (outside some particular exceptions in some cases --except the last one)

1. Natural Secrets --ie. if you find out that your coworker has say an embarrising problem with pornography.
2. Professional secrets (or other kinds of entrusted secrets)
3. Secrets already promised. (assuming the above that one will not promise more…)
4. Overhearing someone’s confession. Or being the translator of such. Or a Priest who is married – they of course are bound too by the seal of confession.

Persons have a right to have secrets to various extents -and we are bound in conscience to various degrees to respect such (see above for details: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=10473754&postcount=340 )

I can think of a particular reason why violating a natural secret would be the right thing to do…if the coworker works around children, especially YOUR children. You better believe I’m telling my spouse.

 

[Kensho]

This thread is getting to be as bad as one of those “Can women wear pants?” threads on the Fisheaters forum!

I don’t understand where people are getting the idea that to say one share everything with their spouse means one tells them every detail about every conversation they have with every friend or loved one they talk to every single day. Its not what is meant by “sharing everything”, but that there is nothing that can not be talked about if the need or topic comes up in a conversation with a spouse. It means I’m not going to say to my husband if he asks specifically about a friend or situation, sorry honey I’ve got to keep secrets from you. It doesn’t mean we’re practically foaming at the mouths to disclose all the details about our friends lives as soon as he opens his mouth to start a conversation. It just means for me at least, I don’t want to say I have to keep a secret from him.

I have learned a lot from reading this thread. I am glad to get insight into how other women deal with this issue. It has helped me clarify my own beliefs about what is acceptable.

I think what PatriceA says above shows a radically different approach to sharing than what the OP has described. BlueEyedLady says she wants the freedom to say “whatever pops into [her] head” and has said that nothing is off limits, she will talk about whatever she finds interesting. She has also said that she considers it rude and disrespectful for anyone to ask her ahead of time if they can share something without her telling her fiance, and that she thinks it is acceptable to lie about whether or not she will or has done so, and acceptable for her fiance to do the same. She has furthermore said (I think) that she thinks the spouses of doctors, lawyers, etc. should be legally entitled to the information they are privy to because of their work.

This is very different from what posters like PatriceA and Litcrit have described. I, a very private person, would be happy to be friends with women like this. I would not worry that my personal information would be frivolously shared or that I would be talked about in a cruel way. I would also know ahead of time not to say anything that I would absolutely hate for their husbands to know, which is at least fair even if it is not what I consider ideal.

In my own life, when I am friends with a married woman, I am usually friends with her husband as well and 99.9% of what I say to those women I wouldn’t mind the husbands knowing about. I can think of a few instances where we have had conversations in which no one said “this is a secret” but where I would consider it inappropriate to share with husbands. For example, I was at a lady’s Catholic book club and one of the women shared that she had realized she needed to go off the Pill and start practicing NFP in accordance with Catholic teaching, and those who were experienced in this gave her advice. It would have been inappropriate to share that kind of information with men, and very embarrassing for most women.

 

[Kensho]

I’ve also been thinking about the quote from the priest that there is no gossip between spouses. If you look, you can find a priest who will say just about anything.

Gossip can happen anywhere. In a way it can even happen in one’s own mind. When I will to think unkind thoughts about someone, to speculate about his character and motives in an uncharitable way, just to fondle and enjoy smugly and smarmily my dislike of someone, my irritation with him, and my own feeling of superiority, that is like gossip. Gossip is not just what is said or to who, but how and why.

 

[thewanderer]

I can think of a particular reason why violating a natural secret would be the right thing to do…if the coworker works around children, especially YOUR children. You better believe I’m telling my spouse.

Yup. :sad_yes:

I think pretty much everyone is agreed that a promised or entrusted secret should be kept and all the disagreement here is stemming from the idea of a natural secret.

The way I see it, natural secrets are essentially just things that should not be shared without a reason, however, what kind of reason is required depends on the specifics of everything involved, basically, don’t be a busybody or a gossip. Don’t tell someone, even your spouse, about others faults without a reason. I absolutely agree with that, what I think I disagree about is what kind of reason is required to allow the telling of natural secrets. And thats ok that people disagree here, we are allowed to make our own judgements in this area, use prudence, follow our well formed conscience etc and it is not sinful for us to do so.

 

[Baelor]

Yes, but that poster was not thewanderer, whom you quoted when making your last post. So I am trying to figure out if you are still just hung up on that one poster, or is the general consensus that the “sharers” would in fact explicitly agree “to tell no one” and then tell their spouse.

I quoted him because he said that no poster said that. My big point in this thread is that that situation is the unacceptable scenario. I am sure others are here to say something similar. Thus, it is worth correcting someone if they have the impression that that issue is not being discussed, when in fact it is. I have no idea whether or not it is the consensus and that is irrelevant to my point, although an interesting question.

Yes the one could legitimitely be upset, because they thought the other person understood what they meant, however, if the other person truly did not understand what was meant then there is absolutely no malice involved and it is not something that should continue to be held against them.

I disagree on the last point. While there is no bad intent, I have the perfect right to hold against someone their breach of confidence in the face of an explicit agreement.

It is a very unfortunate situation, but not one caused by malice, simply by a misunderstanding. Trying to vilify one party of that misunderstanding is wrong.

I disagree.

Just because you can relate to one side and not the other doesn’t mean that the side you cannot relate to is somehow more guilty. If its an honest mistake then thats all there is to it.

That party is more guilty.

Consider the following interaction:

A: Do not do X.
B: Okay.
B does X.
A: I said do not do X.
B: Oh, I’m sorry, I thought you meant that I should do X.

The notion that B is not culpable is absurd, even if there was no intent to deceive.

“Tell no one” is unambiguous. Consider the following two interactions to see why:

A: Do not tell anyone.
B tells someone
A: I said do not tell anyone.
B: Oh, I’m sorry, I thought you meant that I could tell someone.

Again, the notion that B is not culpable is absurd.

A: Do not tell anyone.
B does not.
A: Why did you not tell your husband?
B: You said not to tell anyone?

Would anyone blame B for not telling the husband? Of course not, because B did exactly what she was asked to do, namely not tell anyone.

Again, if your interpretation of a statement that is completely unambiguous from a linguistic perspective involves a rejection of the clear meaning of the statement, the onus is on you to clarify.

 

[Bookcat]

I can think of a particular reason why violating a natural secret would be the right thing to do…if the coworker works around children, especially YOUR children. You better believe I’m telling my spouse.

Yes I noted above in another post (too many above from all of us to read…) there can be at times an objectively valid reason that is good reason to reveal such (Such as to the needful authorities…out of urgent necessity etc).

But simply being married I would say though is not one (I say this in general in terms of the thread not directed to you per se)

 

[shipwrkd]

And I see you didn’t read the entire thread…I just like have a discussion with someone that likes to share their experiences, who likes to have a one-side conversation?

I don’t see my opinion going both ways, I’ve always maintained I don’t want to keep secrets from my husband, period, and I tell my friends that upfront. Don’t tell me something if you don’t want me ever to disclose it to my husband. Most of the time he isn’t bothered to ask me many details about a conversation I’ve had with one of friends. But he will notice sometimes that one of our friends seems to be troubled by something and will ask me, I am upfront with my friends that when my husband asks me I am not going to tell him I can’t say anything, that I have to keep their secret. If what he asks is “everything” then I share “everything”. I don’t think that’s so hard to understand.

Like I said, a scorecard would be helpful for us guys but I think I’m catching on. You have your opinion and you would like others to share their experiences…as long as they parallel your’s.

Oh, and a Contract Lawyer…we could use one of those too!

 

[thewanderer]

Baelor;10474589:

B does X.

A: I said do not do X.
B: Oh, I’m sorry, I thought you meant that I should do X.

The notion that B is not culpable is absurd, even if there was no intent to deceive.

“Tell no one” is unambiguous. Consider the following two interactions to see why:

A: Do not tell anyone.
B tells someone
A: I said do not tell anyone.
B: Oh, I’m sorry, I thought you meant that I could tell someone.

Again, the notion that B is not culpable is absurd.

A: Do not tell anyone.
B does not.
A: Why did you not tell your husband?
B: You said not to tell anyone?

Would anyone blame B for not telling the husband? Of course not, because B did exactly what she was asked to do, namely not tell anyone.

Again, if your interpretation of a statement that is completely unambiguous from a linguistic perspective involves a rejection of the clear meaning of the statement, the onus is on you to clarify.

Baelor, communication and agreements rely on actual understanding, not just the literal interpretation of words used. I’m sorry that you can’t seem to recognize this, but it is true. That is why if I misspeak to my friend, I am not lying, I am not sinning, and she has no right to be upset with me once it is all clarified. Similarly here, we have a case of one person being absolutely convinced that the agreement means she can share this information with her husband while the other is absolutely convinced that the agreement does not allow for this. In other words, they both think that they have an agreement, but it turns out that they don’t. Neither party is guilty of breeching the others trust in such a scenario, it is an honest mistake from both sides. End of story.

 

[PatriceA]

Like I said, a scorecard would be helpful for us guys but I think I’m catching on. You have your opinion and you would like others to share their experiences…as long as they parallel your’s.

Now who’s putting words in someone’s mouth. Please be a bit more charitable.

 

[thewanderer]

But simply being married I would say though is not one (I say this in general in terms of the thread not directed to you per se)

Just for clarification I really don’t think many, if any, are saying that just the fact that you are married, as such, entitles you to spread all the juicy gossip you want to your spouse. Even BEL agreed with me earlier that there was always a reason for doing so, that reason being to share a part of your own personal life with your husband. Sharing extra details about a friends personal life that is not necessary for sharing something about your own life with your spouse is gossip, sure, but I really think that that is not at all what people on this thread are talking about.

 

[thewanderer]

Baelor, communication and agreements rely on actual understanding, not just the literal interpretation of words used. I’m sorry that you can’t seem to recognize this, but it is true. That is why if I misspeak to my friend, I am not lying, I am not sinning, and she has no right to be upset with me once it is all clarified. Similarly here, we have a case of one person being absolutely convinced that the agreement means she can share this information with her husband while the other is absolutely convinced that the agreement does not allow for this. In other words, they both think that they have an agreement, but it turns out that they don’t. Neither party is guilty of breeching the others trust in such a scenario, it is an honest mistake from both sides. End of story.

I guess I should add that I am assuming that the mistake is an honest mistake on both parts. If the person wanting the information hidden is aware that the person they are sharing it with normally assumes that anything told them will be shared with their husband unless they specifically agree to keep it a secret from their husband (rather than just the world at large) then the responsibility for the misunderstanding rests more on this person telling the secret. If the person hearing the secret is aware that for some people, when they say “don’t tell anyone” they mean to include a persons spouse then the responsiblity for the miscommunication lies more with them. But if neither is aware of these facts then it is simply an honest mistake and neither party is guilty.

 

[Bookcat]

for doing so, that reason being to share a part of your own personal life with your husband. Sharing extra details about a friends personal life that is not necessary for sharing something about your own life with your spouse is gossip, sure, but I really think that that is not at all what people on this thread are talking about.

Even aside from such “gossip” – there must be more than just a “reason to share part of your own personal life with ones” spouse. Such is not I would say is not a sufficient morally valid reason to reveal secret.

Secrets are secrets --not something to be part of ones “sharing” in marriage.

And if it is say a hidden sin – beyond the sin of betraying a secret --there can be the further sin of detraction

CCC:

2477 Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury.278 He becomes guilty:

• of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them.

 

[thewanderer]

Even aside from such “gossip” – there must be more than just a “reason to share part of your own personal life with ones” spouse. Such is not I would say is not a sufficient morally valid reason to reveal secret.

Secrets are secrets --not something to be part of ones “sharing” in marriage.

And if it is say a hidden sin – beyond the sin of betraying a secret --there can be the further sin of detraction

CCC:

2477 Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury.278 He becomes guilty:

• of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them.

Even the CCC says that objectively valid reasons exist. The CCC does not list what these objectively valid reasons are. I get that we disagree about what these objectively valid reasons are, but that is something that we can legitimately disagree on without sinning. We are called to read what the Church says, submit ourselves to the Church’s teachings, form our consciences according to the Churches teachings, and then, for all the applications and things not explicitly taught by the Church to use our own judgement, prudence and well formed conscience to make decisions about what we will do in any given situation. Doing the above has led me to a different conclusion than it has led you to about what constitute objectively valid reasons in this scenario, and thats totally fine, even though we obviously can’t both be right about this, neither of us are sinning in following our consciences on this matter. What is extremely important, as has been pointed out many times already on this thread, is that since there is such disagreement here and such potential for hurt feelings to arise because of misunderstandings and different ways of looking at things is for people to be aware that not everyone thinks as they do and so to clearly communicate their way of looking at things and their expectations both to those they confide in and to those who confide in them. Charity, respect, and communication.

 

[Baelor]

Baelor, communication and agreements rely on actual understanding, not just the literal interpretation of words used. I’m sorry that you can’t seem to recognize this, but it is true.

I am aware of the interpretation of language. That is not the issue.

That is why if I misspeak to my friend, I am not lying, I am not sinning, and she has no right to be upset with me once it is all clarified.

That depends. If the miscommunication occurred through her error, and the error was preventable, then she has the right to be upset. I would not say you are necessarily sinning.

Similarly here, we have a case of one person being absolutely convinced that the agreement means she can share this information with her husband while the other is absolutely convinced that the agreement does not allow for this.

Which is why both parties should err on the side of caution and assume that the parties mean what they say instead of assuming that they mean something other than what they say. If the party who shares the secret with a spouse had the opportunity to ask for clarification or permission and did not, then she is absolutely culpable and sinful by being negligent with her confidences and promises.

In other words, they both think that they have an agreement, but it turns out that they don’t. Neither party is guilty of breeching the others trust in such a scenario, it is an honest mistake from both sides. End of story.

Again, false. I understand the basis of this position, but I reject it entirely. The lack of ill intent does not excuse a clear violation of an unambiguous contract.

If I say “tell no one,” you can ask whether that includes your spouse or not. Under no circumstances can you legitimately assume without explicit clarification or precedent that “tell no one” means “tell someone.”

The issue is not intent but negligence.

 

[thewanderer]

I am aware of the interpretation of language. That is not the issue.

That depends. If the miscommunication occurred through her error, and the error was preventable, then she has the right to be upset. I would not say you are necessarily sinning.

Which is why both parties should err on the side of caution and assume that the parties mean what they say instead of assuming that they mean something other than what they say. If the party who shares the secret with a spouse had the opportunity to ask for clarification or permission and did not, then she is absolutely culpable and sinful by being negligent with her confidences and promises.

Again, false. I understand the basis of this position, but I reject it entirely. The lack of ill intent does not excuse a clear violation of an unambiguous contract.

If I say “tell no one,” you can ask whether that includes your spouse or not. Under no circumstances can you legitimately assume without explicit clarification or precedent that “tell no one” means “tell someone.”

The issue is not intent but negligence.

did you read my last post? I tried to clarify how the negligence could be on either side, or on neither side. My above post was written specifically with those for whom no negligence was invloved in mind, which is why I said that in such a case neither party is guilty nor does one party have any right to feel offended at the others actions.

 

[shipwrkd]

Such a simple question. I thought “how could I get in trouble posting an opinion”. Then things turned ugly and we’re throwing all these assumptions around to the point of needing a Contract Lawyer. As long as everyone knows the rules of the game the strategy of each player really doesn’t matter. The problem arises when the rule book is lost or misinterpreted and different players start playing by rules others don’t like or are unaware of. As long as no one gets hurt, does the strategy really matter? One player wants to share, one wants to keep secrets and one wants to be selective. I can’t see the big deal.

But then I thought I couldn’t get in trouble
Sorry if I’ve offended or confused you Pat :flowers: