I met my husband through church and we got married years later after re-meeting. During those years apart I became an exmo (nonbeliever) and my husband went inactive (still believes). My famliy is still all TBMs and he has many TBM friends.

Long story short I mentioned a child mormon I saw and he made a comment about her and I asked him to elaborate and he said he couldn't because he knew through confidential mormon ways and it set a fuse off in me.

We had a little argument about it and he hasn't dared to make any off handed comments again. I hardly even know this little girl and could less about knowing some gossip about her. It irkes me that we put so much emphasis on honestly and trust in our relationship and he has a "get out of jail free" card.

Anyway, that was a few months ago and I haven't thought about it again until today really. I'm sure it also just has to do with my thinking his justification is stupid because TSCC is stupid and bishop interviews are ridiculous.

In the moment it just made more sense to tell me something about a stranger instead of making it some big secret deal since he brought up the info to begin with and then, in the future, he just not mention things he knows about people and doesn't morally want to tell me. Instead it started a fight and thinking back on it bugs me.

Anyone else that can relate?

I think it shows he is a good guy.

He may be a good guy (or not), but why did he bring it up at all? It could be a power play or a way to puff up his own importance about being in-the-know, but by saying anything about it AT ALL, he broke confidentiality, and that's not a "good guy" characteristic, imo. Patting him on the back for "only" kind of telling is BS. It was a sh!t move on his part.

Bluebonnet Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I think it shows he is a good guy.

I will agree. This is someone who keeps a confidence and that is, in my view, something to admire in him!

Generally, the Confidentiality Loop in the LDS Church is huge and nobody keeps anything confidential.

I'd be proud of him! Good for him! Finally, someone who knows how to keep things confidential!

The standard around here for keeping a confidence appears to be pretty low. If he divulged *anything* that led his wife to know he had confidential information about the girl that he obtained from his time in the bishopric, he broke the confidence. He should have said absolutely nothing that led to a follow-up question.

Frankly, you should be proud of him and delighted that he has enough sense, class, and integrity to keep things he learned in the bishopric confidential as they should be. There's a terrible lack of guys like that in the church and you got a good one. Respect that he is respecting the privacy of other people and try not to be jealous that he has "intimacies" with other people that aren't you. I have never believed that spouse should tell each other every single little thing, but apparently, you do. You might consider doing some reflection on that.

It certainly wasn't my idea to tell each other "every single little thing" but I don't think I need to reflect on being less honest with my husband either, thank you.

Being honest is entirely different from telling your spouse something that was told to you in confidence. No, he should not have made a comment, but he had the integrity to not gossip.

How would you feel if your former bishop told his wife something that you had told him in confidence?

I knew my former bishop extremely well and I am 100% certain he tells his wife anything he wants. When you tell a married person something you are telling both parties because they are partners and their marriage and communication and reliance and trust will always come before you.

therapist, counselor, doctor, your husband should come home and tell you about everything he heard that day from his patients?

Of course, a bishopric is a voluntary job, BUT there are many times a spouse should keep confidences.

Yes, if specifically asked. And Awwww. You think those people don't talk about you around the dinner table?

Wow really?

Remind me never to tell anything to you in confidence.

Wow. This is absolutely amazing.

If they are professionals and do that, they could lose their license if it gets out, so yes they would be incredibly stupid to break HIPAA laws or professional confidence around the dinner table. One offhand remark from wife or kids could shatter their career and turn into a huge lawsuit.

Yeah, he probably shouldn't have said anything or given any teasers. That said, it shows that he has more integrity than 90% of most mormon bishops. No matter that his calling and the church itself is a total fraud, those people confided in him in confidence and he has the integrity to keep that confidence.

Soon after my idiot brother was made bishop, my mother was up in Utah at my nephew's mission farewell, telling all kinds of people she didn't even know or who had no connection to her ward, about a kid who had his interview with his bishop for his mission and then walked out, turned around and walked back in and had another interview where he made some confessions that got him disfellowshipped and not allowed to go on the mission. And my mother is telling some of the things he told the bishop. Well, guess who her bishop is? Yep, my brother. Gee, I'm not saying my brother spilled the beans to my mom. I'm sure he went home immediately and spilled the beans to his wife, who spilled them to my mom.

I actually called him and confronted him with the fact that Mom was in Utah telling what went on in the bishop's office and I told him that if I ever again heard her talking about something that should have been confidential with the bishop, I would get their ward list and send a letter to every person on it telling them not to speak to the bishop in confidence and why. And trust me, I would have. I think he knew it. But his reply was that the kid (who confessed and didn't go on the mission) must have told my mom. Right. I'm sure he would call some old lady in the ward who he wasn't close to and say, "Hey, I want to tell you what I old the bishop."

I know you feel a little betrayed, but I envy you for having such a good partner.

All-in-all he sounds like he did the right thing but he should have restrained himself and not made any comment at all.

As a former branch pres., I have firsthand experience with this situation and now I try to make a concerted effort to mentally block out all the garbage that I know about the branch's members from my period of "service".

I hope that you'll get over this and cut him some slack. It sounds like he's trying to do the right thing.

Two can keep a secret, if one of them is dead.

It sounds like he brought it up without thinking and when asked for more info, realized he'd inadvertently came close to betraying a confidence. If he learned about it as part of a priesthood calling and promised not to discuss it, it shows integrity that he refused. It would be infinitely worse, IMO if he'd given you the information you asked for.

However, you know him better than I do. Is he in the habit of showing off, acting holier than thou, being secretive or acting like Mormonism makes him special? If so, I see your point but if this is an aberration, I'd let it go. I usually over-analyze things but even I would just figure he has a right to honor his promises of confidentiality if there is no obvious pattern of passive aggressive agendas in his life.

CA girl Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It sounds like he brought it up without thinking
> and when asked for more info, realized he'd
> inadvertently came close to betraying a
> confidence.



I agree with that. I also never ask him for or try to get the gossip about any mormon because I don't care but when he makes a point to have me tell him everything he wants to know even if it doesn't have to do with him, I don't think this reason should be an excuse and it shouldn't have been made a big deal. I am his wife and I think he should feel fine telling me especially when I also agree with Ragnar. I just don't want to have one sided conversations about church while he is thinking of all the things he can't tell me about the temple or bishopbrick or people. Luckily, we don't talk about church hardly ever anyway because why would we. So it really never is a problem although I know he thinks it is all important information I am not privy to. Silly boy.

No, you're not privy to it. And he's not silly for holding confidences, even to a wife who thinks she's entitled to it. Yes, I agree he shouldn't have brought it up.

The fact this is a mormon church issue shouldn't lessen the confidentiality.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 06/13/2014 12:15PM by jpt.

As part of LDS Corp, your husband has NO RIGHT to have confidential information about ANYONE. He's showing off his supposed (fake) 'power and authority' by pretending to be a confidential counselor.

I agree. It is not a legal confidence. It's nothing more than whispering in the hallway and expecting them not to tell. I understand he thinks it is important (without realizes he's acting all mighty) and it does show he is good but we have very loose ties to that life so he should move on.

Dear Cards, shut up. You are a woman and as such not allowed to raise questions and challenges of your Priesthood holder. Hasn't the Kate Kelly incident taught you to hush up?

I've got a different take on this thread. My concern with Cards take on the situation is that her contempt for the church and it's methods and dealings seem to be projected onto her husband. Words used such as "he hasn't dared," "he has a "get out of jail free" card," and lastly, "I know he thinks it is all important information I am not privy to. Silly boy."


I think you might have found your answer in this sentence. . ."it has to do with my thinking his justification is stupid because TSCC is stupid and bishop interviews are ridiculous."

I think you're right, the church is stupid, but I doubt your husband is all the bad things the church is.