Accused of Affair


AboutToLeave
 Share

Recommended Posts

On Sunday, the Bishop called me into his office, and (in delicate words) accused me of having an affair with my boss. (My boss is also LDS, but attends a different ward.) I denied this false accusation, but I have a distinct feeling that my Bishop believes that I am lying.

I figured that I'd talk to my boss at work on Monday, and let him know the situation.

About an hour after I get home from church, my boss's wife calls me. "We need to talk"

It turns out that her husband was called into his bishop's office at the same time, for the same reason.

Neither my nor his bishop would say who had made these claims.

On Sunday My husband and I, along with my boss and his wife are going to demand the Bishops tell us who has made these false accusations, and hold this person accountable. (I'm 99% sure I know who it is, but am waiting for them to come forward before pointing fingers).

Don't I have the right to know who is accusing me??!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Out of the mouths of two or three witnesses".

If one person is saying you're having an affair, it should probably be taken as gossip. It would probably take multiple people to get two Bishops involved.

And no, you don't have the right to know who's making the accusations. If you didn't do it, you didn't do it and it doesn't matter what anyone said. As annoying as it is, simply tell everyone the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you have a right to know who said these things, unfortunately the bishop does not have to tell you who said anything to him. He keeps everything confidential unless feels he need to involve others.

I would hope that as long as you all can agree that nothing is going on, you would have no need to defend yourself and can just go about your everyday life and leave that person out of it.

Good luck!

Edited by Hayky3126
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Sunday, the Bishop called me into his office, and (in delicate words) accused me of having an affair with my boss. (My boss is also LDS, but attends a different ward.) I denied this false accusation, but I have a distinct feeling that my Bishop believes that I am lying.

I figured that I'd talk to my boss at work on Monday, and let him know the situation.

About an hour after I get home from church, my boss's wife calls me. "We need to talk"

It turns out that her husband was called into his bishop's office at the same time, for the same reason.

Neither my nor his bishop would say who had made these claims.

On Sunday My husband and I, along with my boss and his wife are going to demand the Bishops tell us who has made these false accusations, and hold this person accountable. (I'm 99% sure I know who it is, but am waiting for them to come forward before pointing fingers).

Don't I have the right to know who is accusing me??!!!!

Yes you do have a right to know you're accusers. I would find it highly offensive if they called me in and accused me of something and then would not tell me where they even heard it from. They have no right to accuse you of something without giving any reason as to why they are. It's one thing to ask questions to try and find out if you had an affair. It's another to flat out accuse you of it without giving a reason as to why. I don't think you're in the wrong at all for wanting to face your accuser.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clarification

My bishop *****-footed around it saying stuff like 'have you had any inappropriate relationships?'....when I said "No."

He then said how about 'so-and-so'.

Again "No."

Bishop then says, "So you think that your relationship with him is appropriate?"

However, my boss was straight out accused of having an affair with some one in "Ward X". He didn't know what ward I'm in, so he asked who he is supposedly having an affair with. His Bishop would not tell him. When he told his wife (who I have known for years) she knew exactly who they meant, and she gave me a call.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clarification

My bishop *****-footed around it saying stuff like 'have you had any inappropriate relationships?'....when I said "No."

He then said how about 'so-and-so'.

Again "No."

Bishop then says, "So you think that your relationship with him is appropriate?"

However, my boss was straight out accused of having an affair with some one in "Ward X". He didn't know what ward I'm in, so he asked who he is supposedly having an affair with. His Bishop would not tell him. When he told his wife (who I have known for years) she knew exactly who they meant, and she gave me a call.

There's a difference between having an affair and having an inappropriate relationship. You must be pretty close if his wife knew exactly who was meant when she was told the husband was having an affair.

Could be that a few people came forward and said "So and so has been spending a lot of time with (Insert guy's name here). I saw them at dinner together, laughing and flirting with no spouses in sight."

That would be an inappropriate relationship. And if your natural instinct is to get angry at that and say "No, it's not. We work together!" then you've answered your very own question as to why it was brought to a Bishop's attention. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funky,

Nope. I have never been alone with him.

His wife and my husband used to work together, and there were rumors of them back then.

That's very strange. Most bishops aren't supposed to act unless there's more than one witness.

Honestly, I'd just chalk it up to some crazy busy-body with too much time on their hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Sunday My husband and I, along with my boss and his wife are going to demand the Bishops tell us who has made these false accusations, and hold this person accountable. (I'm 99% sure I know who it is, but am waiting for them to come forward before pointing fingers).

Don't I have the right to know who is accusing me??!!!!

I think you have a right to know who said these things,...

Yes you do have a right to know you're accusers.

Church discipline does not follow the same model of the Constitution. You don't have a right to know who your accuser(s) is(are). It would be nice, but it probably won't happen.

The bishops probably could have been more gentle in approaching the subject, especially if they didn't have much evidence to support the claim. At such times, their role is supposed to be gathering information, not making accusations. Accusations have a formal part in the church disciplinary process.

Sorry you're going through this. My best advice is to cooperate and provide plenty of evidence about the true nature of your relationship. The bishops should then act accordingly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. Someone must have nothing better to do if they are going around tatteling.

My guess, and this is only a guess, is someone saw something that could have been taken as inappropriate, (Out of context) and let it turn into something worse in thier mind, jumped to conclusions and told.

Sorry you have to go thru this. Keep talking to your bishop and spouse as much as possible. and they will see your honesty. Most people can tell sincerity.

Hopefully the bishops and everyone involved will soon see the accusor as a busybody and everything will amend itself. Good Luck!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i would think the fact that both spouses are aware of the working relationship and have no concerns, are as upset as you are about this it would cause the "investigation" to end. if the accuser has no evidence there is nothing left to investigate. if the person has evidence then i don't think it's unreasonable to request they step forward and present it.

when the accusation is temple recommend related they have to ask about it. we have run into that more than once with my husband's ex. fortunately ppl like that develop a reputation and the leadership stops taking claims seriously but they do still have to ask.

you say you think you know who it is.... what would be their motive if it is them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If someone came to me and told me of some knowledge they had about another member having an affair, I would have to ask several questions....the main one being to this person.....how do you know this happened and what proof do you have this happened.

I do not as a Bishop have to disclose who told me said information. As a Bishop you do not take a side...you have to be impartial. I can call someone and interview them ....I would not have asked such a direct question. I am curious as to how long this person has been serving as a Bishop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunately in this case, I believe, the ministerial shield laws prohibit him from disclosing names.

Not necessarily. But you'd need to consider how far you're willing to take this.

Hypothetically, one could sue "John/Jane Doe" for slander, and then subpoena the bishop and require him to name his source under oath. I think the slander-er would have a hard time asserting clerical privilege when he/she knew--nay, intended--that his/her statements would be disseminated to third parties. The law allows you to confess to your clergyman; but it does not allow you to hijack your church's infrastructure in order to start a whispering campaign against someone you don't like. And I believe there are some states that still enhance penalties for slander where a woman's chastity is impugned.

Talk to a lawyer in your jurisdiction. But I'd suggest that, if you're planning to subpoena your bishop, you should also start thinking about going to church in a different congregation. And be warned that slander cases are just a rat's nest in general.

Personally, I think MOE's suggestion is a better course of action.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know in California, there are only two reasons for a minister to break confidence:

1) A person is going to harm themselves.

2) Child abuse and/or molestation.

They could have killed a person and confessed and there's no way they can get the minister to talk. They share the same protections and confidentiality as psychiatrists and therapists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On Sunday, the Bishop called me into his office, and (in delicate words) accused me of having an affair with my boss. (My boss is also LDS, but attends a different ward.) I denied this false accusation, but I have a distinct feeling that my Bishop believes that I am lying.

I figured that I'd talk to my boss at work on Monday, and let him know the situation.

About an hour after I get home from church, my boss's wife calls me. "We need to talk"

It turns out that her husband was called into his bishop's office at the same time, for the same reason.

Neither my nor his bishop would say who had made these claims.

On Sunday My husband and I, along with my boss and his wife are going to demand the Bishops tell us who has made these false accusations, and hold this person accountable. (I'm 99% sure I know who it is, but am waiting for them to come forward before pointing fingers).

Don't I have the right to know who is accusing me??!!!!

I believe so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The law allows you to confess to your clergyman; but it does not allow you to hijack your church's infrastructure in order to start a whispering campaign against someone you don't like.

i have seen the law allow one to hijack the church's infrastructure to hurt an ex they didn't like. though i don't hold the law entirely responsible because there were so many "loop holes" that if the church wanted to stop it they could have. but they took the easier route for them, not the right one for the ppl involved. where the line between the law and the church is can be quite fuzzy and open to interpretation at times.

i still think when the spouses have your back that should be more than enough for the bishop to drop the issue. maybe the 4 of you could talk to each bishop together? if you have valid reason to think you know who and why (or if this isn't the first campaign to hurt you from this person) then let them be aware of that as well. if it's not enough for the bishop to drop it the accuser better have some kind of proof (though the bishop may not name the person i don't see why they can't present the proof that was presented to them). i don't suggest involving lawyers at this point but it does contain a certain power with the church.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The sad thing in all this is bishops are people and have the same failings or short comings that all people have. Some bishops are better than others. The length of time as a bishop and also the stake President they serve under make a big difference sometimes. I know in my own divorce that I am enjoying that the bishop and stake president are working to do everything they can for my soon to be "ex" and not much for me and whether you like it or not it is up to them to help one or both parties in a divorce. I maybe should be upset but really don't care much as it is not my right to judge them and it ends right there. I know it will be a longer harder road for me, but maybe it is supposed to be so I read my patriarchal blessings and wonder how on earth they are supposed to happen and leave the rest to my savior as he knows me better than I know myself.

We can all get upset with the way things are done by our bishops, but the bottom line is every action he does as bishop will have to be explained one day to one who already knows the answer to the question.

Hang in there and just make sure you are not doing something that could be considered inappropriate and let the tongues wag. If it ever went to the point of a church court and all of you come in and deny the accusations and it didn't stop there then you have reason to seek out the General Authority of the Church in your area.

Remember this one fact the Church and its teachings are true it is man/woman who pervert the truth. All of us members are just that individuals with the faults an goodness of all people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know in California, there are only two reasons for a minister to break confidence:

1) A person is going to harm themselves.

2) Child abuse and/or molestation.

They could have killed a person and confessed and there's no way they can get the minister to talk. They share the same protections and confidentiality as psychiatrists and therapists.

Sure; if I walk into my bishop's office and tell him I about something I already did--that's privileged in most states. But if I walk into the church and shoot the first counselor, I can't invoke clerical privilege to keep the bishop from talking about what he saw.

I can't speak for a court; but it seems to me that asking a bishop to not disclose a confession of past misconduct is a very different thing from demanding a bishop not disclose misconduct he saw with his own two eyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should have a right to know of someone making unsubstantiated rumors or claims. However, the bishop may consider confidentiality in this instance. Which if the charges are found false, he should then be turning towards the accuser and checking their reasons for making such statements. If they are solely to stir up problems, then that person could merit church discipline for false accusations and gossip.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share