Wife Informs Pastor of Preacher Husband's Television?
 

A pastor has a prohibition against tv in his church.

Knowing this, a lay minister's wife turned him in to that pastor for having a television.

Did she have a moral obligation to do so?

Did she "turn him in" voluntarily? Or was she asked about it and told the truth? Big difference between the two. I wouldn't "tattle" on my spouse, but neither would I lie if asked a direct question.

If he was deliberately deceiving the pastor after having agreed to not have TV...I wouldn't say that she had a "moral obligation" to do so, but I can understand that she might have been annoyed enough with him to do so. Nothing wrong with holding him accountable for his actions. ...it does trample on the marital relationship a bit, but then...again, if he was being dishonest, he was doing that himself.

Funny.... Hilarious...

but hey...Now the Divorce can be justified....:)

No, but if the pastor asked her bluntly she had a moral obligation to either tell the pastor to mind his own business or to tell the truth and not lie about it :saycheese

LOL!

there are LOTS of issues going on in this situation.

nuts.

If I were the wife and the pastor asked me a question, I would send him to my husband for the answer.

Is that one of the biblical excuses for divorce? :runhills:runhills

Exactly

If she volunteered the information...then I would say she wasn't being a very wise wife. At the very least, she should have said something along the lines of, "Pastor, I am not available for ministry right now, because we have a TV in our home." Instead of throwing her husband under the bus, it would have been a bit more (or a lot more) discreet for her to take the blame. At the same time, her husband would have probably been asked why he was "allowing" this, and then he would've had to be truthful.

If she is in leadership in some capacity, then she would've had an obligation to tell on herself, don't you think? Regardless of who purchased the TV? And unless she never watched it herself, then she would be equally guilty of violating the rules.

Good answer.