To the question of tenure in marriage: the primary source of my ethical foundation that looks to the essence of things and not technicalities was my maternal grandmother who was married to the same man (the father of her two daughters) for about 60 years, from the time when he was 21 and she was 19 and they got married (without formally registering the marriage - they did register the marriage only after having the second daughter, many years later, and, the fact that they did not register the marriage illustrates the difference between the essence of things and the formal side of things, once again) and till he died, first, at age 80 (she survived and died at 94).

So the ethical foundation that I received from her has the benefit of being highly extensible. For instance, she, I am sure, did not know anything about threesomes or other less common sexual practices, and yet, the ethical foundation I received from her allows me to see that you are being in the moral wrong when you fail to rank the fact that your wife is (per you) a good mother to your children above the history with a threesome, and, even the lie that led to the marriage.

Extensibility is an enormously important feature that ethical systems should possess, because it is impossible to predict every possible scenario that life would throw at you. With your narrow and rigid system, you will be forever mired in technicalities and unable to rise above the level of detail and see the big picture. Also, I suspect that you did not grasp the fact that I was not religious and was using terms such as "serendipity" in their metaphoric/symbolic sense as another manifestation of the rigidity of your thought process (I do not mean it in a negative sense but just as an observation) - your thought process is too concrete and you are unable to grasp abstract notions. I would engage an individual therapist to explore those issues with thinking, as well as the issue with seeing mentions of threesomes broadly in popular media because the issue of seeing mentions of threesomes everywhere in popular media signals potential troubles with your individual thinking process, so it is not an issue for couples therapy.

Finally, the enormous amount of compartmentalizing that Rose noticed, above, is also highly unusual - most people would be able to see that it is impossible to expect your wife to open up and express her needs and the whole host of good things that you hope her to develop on your other thread AND hold her accountable for lying over a decade ago. You are unable to see it, and it is not some sort of an accidental omission - you continue to believe that it is possible and reiterate that your compartmentalization makes a whole lot of logical sense in your mind. This is, again, rigid and totally lacks normal intuition - most people would be able to avoid this sort of extreme compartmentalization simply by applying intuition, without much cognitive analysis.

All of it is not by way of criticizing you - I am just pointing out that your thought process is rigid and highly unusual, and individual therapy would be recommended to you for that reason.