What to do when they deny?

[mattrose]

Hey everyone. I have a question about how to deal with a specific difficult situation that seems to come up from time to time in a church.

A husband or wife comes to the pastor(s) to alert us to the fact that their spouse has been unfaithful.
When asked, however, the spouse denies any unfaithfulness ("that person is just a friend")

I know how, biblically, to deal with repentant sinners
I know how, biblically, to deal with un-repentant sinners
But I don't know how to deal with un-confirmed sinners

Usually, in these cases, it is quite likely that the accusing spouse is correct. But if there is no proof, what can the church leadership do? Should the church leadership do something? I know enough to bring up the "avoid even the appearance of evil" stuff... but where do you go after that? Especially if you are somewhat convinced that the person is lying.

[jwbp]

seems to me that you would just focus your attention on counseling the faithful one on what to do until it is obvious.

jwbp

[Murf]

This question hits home for me as the situation exists between my Sister and her husband. I recommend lots of prayer and would take any advise.

tim

[TK]

is it not possibly improper to have a "friend" of the opposite sex who is not also a friend of your spouse? i can only see that leading to trouble. perhaps the accused spouse should be counseled along these lines.

TK

[RND]

I would question why anything so private would be addressed to anyone outside of the Pastor(s) of the church. I just don't see how such a difficult and private a matter can be rectified when it becomes a matter for anyone one other than those involved and the council of the Pastor(s).

[mattrose]

You can address the 'friend of the opposite sex' issue and the problem is still there

Let's say, for example, that a wife is accused of having an affair
She denies it, but agrees to cut off the suspicious relationship
If the husband really believes there was an affair that isn't being repented of, then he can't really 'forgive' b/c there's no repentance

Now, from the church's standpoint...
you have a husband wanting the church to discipline an unrepentant member
you have a wife wondering why the church doesn't believe her at her word
you have a community that sees broken relationships not being addressed by the church

Does the husband just have to live with the fact that unless he has stone cold evidence there's nothing the church can do? Does the church have to treat the wife as a member in good standing even if it's considered likely, despite the lack of proof, that the affair really did occur and she's unrepentant?

As to RND's question, sometimes these issues are public matters. Like if the wife works in a highly public place, for example. This makes the church's response even more significant.

[RND]

You can address the 'friend of the opposite sex' issue and the problem is still there

Let's say, for example, that a wife is accused of having an affair
She denies it, but agrees to cut off the suspicious relationship
If the husband really believes there was an affair that isn't being repented of, then he can't really 'forgive' b/c there's no repentance

No repentance to whom? If a wife denies an affair, why would a wife have to repent for something she denied doing? Sounds like we are dealing here with a very insecure husband frankly.

Does the husband just have to live with the fact that unless he has stone cold evidence there's nothing the church can do?

Would the husband still be required to love his wife even if she committed adultery? If Jesus can forgive adultery why can't we?

Does the church have to treat the wife as a member in good standing even if it's considered likely, despite the lack of proof, that the affair really did occur and she's unrepentant?

I would question a church that didn't take any member at their word in a case such as this Mattrose. Why would someone repentant of an affair that they insist they weren't a part of?

As to RND's question, sometimes these issues are public matters. Like if the wife works in a highly public place, for example. This makes the church's response even more significant.

Not in my mind it doesn't. Where the person works or what they do for a living has nothing to do with the responsibility of the Pastor to handle such a situation with delicacy, decorum and mutual respect for the parties concerned. An entire church divided over an issue of gossip? Oh my.

[Michelle]

Maybe you could try that dusty water thing that Paidion hates so much?

[steve]

Maybe you could try that dusty water thing that Paidion hates so much?

That thought had come to my mind also. Even though it cannot be done today, one can see how God's giving that expedient would solve some real prickly problems.

Perhaps the lesson to be taken from the ritual in Numbers 5 is that God does have an interest in exposing the innocence or the guilt of an adulterous partner. As He would miraculously bring such matters to light through the tabernacle ritual, we may assume that, in due time, He will providentially bring the suspected person's innocence or guilt to light. (In the case of my adulterous wife, God revealed to me in a dream both the fact of the affair and the identity of the partner—at a time when I had no suspicion whatsoever—which led her to confess, but not to repent.)

[steve]

RND wrote:

No repentance to whom? If a wife denies an affair, why would a wife have to repent for something she denied doing? Sounds like we are dealing here with a very insecure husband frankly.

There are sometimes good reasons for a husband to be insecure about his wife's faithfulness. It is possible that her whole course of behavior—especially with a particular male friend—may declare unmistakably that she is being unfaithful, and yet she verbally denies it. If she is (perhaps flagrantly) involved in a relationship that appears to be adulterous, but is verbally denying it and unrepentant, then her husband can hardly be expected to feel secure in his relationship with her. In fact, in such a case, neither her husband nor any other person can safely trust her. This damages not only her marriage, but all of her relationships in the body of Christ as well. There may be no way to persuade her to confess, but if she is guilty, or living in such a way as to advertise to all that she is guilty, there certainly would be reason for the church to seek her restoration. The husband's insecurity has nothing to do with it.

Would the husband still be required to love his wife even if she committed adultery? If Jesus can forgive adultery why can't we?

Of course we should forgive adultery—on the same basis as God does—when there is repentance. Also, even if we forgive unilaterally, without requiring the person's repentance, the loss of trust created by the actions of the unrepentant adulteress can hardly be viewed as a small matter. To forgive and to trust are two separate things.

I would question a church that didn't take any member at their word in a case such as this Mattrose. Why would someone repentant of an affair that they insist they weren't a part of?

They would not, of course. The question is not "Should she repent of an affair that she insists does not exist?" but "Should she admit that an affair exists, when it actually does—and then be brought to repent for it?" As for the church taking the woman's word for it—sometimes they may have no other recourse, but the matter may never be resolved if she is lying and everybody strongly suspects that she is lying. And why should they not suspect that she is lying, if there is much evidence pointing in that direction. There is not biblical mandate, nor moral obligation, for Christians to believe liars.

Matt wrote:

As to RND's question, sometimes these issues are public matters. Like if the wife works in a highly public place, for example. This makes the church's response even more significant.

To which RND replied:

Not in my mind it doesn't. Where the person works or what they do for a living has nothing to do with the responsibility of the Pastor to handle such a situation with delicacy, decorum and mutual respect for the parties concerned. An entire church divided over an issue of gossip? Oh my.

Why are you assuming that Matt would oppose "delicacy" in the pastor's handling of the case? No one has suggested making the matter more public than the case would require. However, if the woman is very visible in the church, and, by her behavior is openly arousing suspicions of her chastity, it becomes a church scandal—not because of the pastor, but because of her actions. Sometimes the church's response must be as public as is the sin they are addressing. Of course, Matt is not suggesting that any action should be taken against an innocent party. The problem would seem to be how guilt of an affair can be determined without a verbal confession.