Who the hell am I?
36,
You are the same decent, supportive man that you always were. You have just been treated in an appalling fashion by the one person on Earth who should most have had your back, and kept you safe and secure. It has traumatised you. You have done incredibly well to reach the point you are at today, but I understand completely why you may now feel like to follow the process recommended here means detaching yourself from any vestige of spirituality. I do not think that is the case, and I will add my two cents here if it will help.
For a start, I do not think that a spiritual person only operates on a spiritual level. To use a very basic example, priests have to eat and drink; if they rely on their spirituality to sustain them, they will be thin and dehydrated before too long, and dead soon after that. So in that sense, the spiritual and the physical are forever entwined, because we are creatures of both spirituality and physicality.
However, what that example illustrates is that physicality can exist without spirituality, but spirituality cannot exist without physicality. The physical is literally the life-support of the spiritual, and I am talking there about far more than just food and drink, particularly as we are focusing on the devastating effect that a loved one being physical with another person has on our mental and spiritual well-being.
Again, that is another link between the two worlds, isn't it? Physical betrayal impacts on the soul of the betrayed person. It does not bruise them, it does not cut them, it does not break the skin. What it damages is spiritual, emotional, and psychological; the capacity to trust, to be vulnerable, to love. In the state of matrimony, the physical, the emotional, and the spiritual are all inextricably and very explicitly linked. When you married, two human beings (physical), through being in love (emotional), were joined together in a binding ceremony before God (spiritual). Vows were made which, I imagine, covered forsaking all others and remaining faithful to one another, which was a spiritual promise that was supposed to prohibit physical and spiritual infidelity. Thus, the state of matrimony combines the human trinity of the physical, the emotional, and the spiritual.
The commission of adultery is explicitly prohibited in the Ten Commandments ("Thou shalt not commit adultery", is found at Exodus 20:14 of the Tanakh and Old Testament). It would logically follow that if a person goes through a ceremony based in a religion for which the Ten Commandments are a foundation, and then betrays the seventh commandment and the vows they made before God by committing adultery, they have effectively detached themselves from the spiritual, to operate in the realms of the physical and the emotional. When that happens, it becomes difficult to apply spirituality to a scenario from which the key player has excluded it, and so we tend to deal with infidelity in the dimensions where it 'lives', which are the emotional and the physical.
There is sense in dealing with problems in the realm, or realms, in which they exist. An emotional problem cannot be healed with a good meal (physical). A broken leg (physical) cannot be healed by sympathy (emotion). Hunger (physical) cannot be assuaged by faith (spiritual).
In trying to come to grips with the situation that your wife plunged you into, you have had to cope with a lot of unpleasant physical and emotional aspects, which have had a profound impact on your physical and emotional well-being, as you have documented in your thread. So those are the main areas that you have been focused on, and they are the areas that the bulk of advice and counselling about how to cope with infidelity deal with.
In terms of Christian spirituality, adultery is a straightforward breach of a fundamental tenet of the religion, as well as the vows made during the marriage ceremony. Which means that infidelity leaves an adherent of the religion, its fundamental tenets, and the marriage vows, with something of a conundrum when they try to reconcile all the elements. Is it any wonder, then, that you feel conflicted, 36?
However, I get the feeling that what you are really struggling with is not so much a purely spiritual issue, but rather, how you reconcile actions taken to protect yourself with the ideals you have about being a protector of others. In particular, if you tell your children the truth about the affair, are you protecting yourself at the expense of removing your protection from your wife, and if you are, does that make you a bad person?
My view of it is that you are unquestionably a good person, and a good person who has been treated horribly. In relation to protection, I think you need to step back from focusing purely on yourself, and take a wider view that includes all of the key players; you, your wife, your children, the OM, and the crew at the office where your wife worked.
Out of that large group of people, 36, who among them has protected you?
If you feel you owe any of them a duty of protection, can you really say that none of them owed you a similar duty?
And if you cannot name a single person in that group who has done anything to protect you, should you really feel any guilt or self-doubt because having been essentially abandoned, you had no choice but to protect yourself?
Why, my friend, are you being so hard on yourself when it is those around you who should be questioning themselves about why they have done so little to return the massive debt they owe you in your hour of need after all of the years you provided your protection to them?
Is it really a one-way street, in which only you have a duty of protection, and they can stand back and watch you sink or swim, with no obligations on them to support and protect you in this one time when you really need their help and support?
And if you are not getting the protection and support you need from those around you, and you stop protecting and supporting yourself, then where does that leave you, 36? Why would it be a virtue for you to deny yourself your own protection when you have lavished it on those around you for almost four decades? 36, this is a time when more than ever, you have to be your own best friend and ally, and your own protector.
You struggle with the notion that you are somehow failing your wife if you do not protect or support her, but in what ways did she protect and support you and herself by indulging in the affair, having sex without condoms, and getting involved with a man as dubious as the OM?
Effectively, you are seeing yourself as a bad guy if you do not step in and protect your wife in a scenario in which she betrayed you, risked exposing you to STDs, and conspired against you with a criminal (including the false DV charges). Why did she have no duty to protect you from those things, and beyond that, if she did not protect herself from those obviously bad things, why is it your duty to offer her more protection than she provided for herself?
The reality of your situation is that far from protecting you, your wife has repeatedly attacked you and your values, exposed you to threats to your health, and that has left you no choice but to protect yourself. That does not make you a bad person, it makes you a person who has been failed by others who benefited from your protection and support for decades, but did not provide that same protection and support for you when you need it the most. Why and how are you the bad guy in that situation, 36?
Seriously, my friend, if there is one person in this entire saga who should not be beating themselves up, it is you. You stand like a beacon of decency and solid values, while others have really let you and themselves down badly. The OM feels no guilt. Your wife feels no guilt. You? You are wracked with guilt! How can that be right? I know that you might say that you feel guilt because you stand by your values, but please, 36, do not turn your values and principles into a rack on which you torture yourself. After everything else you have been put through, you really, truly do not deserve that.
36, you do not have to protect wrongdoers to be a good man. You are unquestionably a good man, and you should have been treated much better because of that. That you have not been is cause for those who have done you wrong to question themselves, not for you to doubt yourself.
You have done no wrong, my friend.