Actually, I don't care if you ever were an elder if you can find the appropriate reference in the WT for the following situation:
With all the discussion lately about the need for "two witnesses" to make an accusation valid, I've been thinking about divorce (and ultimately, remarriage) on the grounds of adultery. In most cases, an adulterous mate does not commit the deed in public. Either they are caught in the act, or admit to it later. Wasn't there something written (within the past 10 years) about an admission of adultery by one mate being as good as "from the mouth of two witnesses"?? I recall there was something about a mate being completely convinced that the act had taken place, even where there was no conclusive evidence. The same article also speculated about an erring mate who admitted adultery to the innocent mate, and later refused to confess to the elders.
Is my memory foggy, or was this ever put in writing? Can anyone give me the reference? I have a good friend who is in this exact situation and may be able to avoid being disfellowshipped if she can find the publication and quote it to the elders.
Thanks in advance for your help.