He still comes to church and many of our friends have gently corrected him about his behavior.

The way I understand Plan A, it's based on two premises that must be accepted for “garden variety” affairs:

1. The BS (betrayed spouse) cannot end the affair.

2. The affair developed, to some extent great or small, due to a poor marital environment which the BS, also to some extent great or small, contributed to.

If a BS cannot accept these two statements as givens, they will not be able to implement Plan A.

With these facts established, there is only one constructive thing a BS can do to influence the course of an affair: change the affair-friendly marital environment by eliminating the BS contributions to it.

To this end, the BS must perform an introspective search for all the things they were doing or not doing that contributed to the WS's (wayward spouse) decision to have an affair - and then eliminate those negative contributions. These may include failure to meet emotional needs or disbursing too many love busters - but is usually some combination of both.

This DOES NOT mean that the BS "caused" the affair. This DOES NOT mean that the BS can or should try to change failings of the WS.

It simply means that the BS needs to change and improve the only thing they have control over - themselves - to eliminate love busters and begin meeting as many emotional needs of the WS as they can.

Central in this is stopping all disrespectful judgements, angry outbursts, and selfish demands. This is agonizingly difficult in the face of an affair. A BS has to counter the common knee jerk reactions of demanding the WS "straighten up" and delivering ultimatums and threats. Acting in this fashion simply reinforces the WS's rationalizations to conduct the affair in the first place - because the marriage "is over" or expendable and the spouse is unreasonable, therefore the affair is justifiable.

Invariably, this course leads BSs to feel like doormats and [censored] kissers. It also conjures up thoughts of enabling the affair by not resisting it. But the better logic to apply is that the BS isn't a doormat or enabling because they're doing the only things in their power to stop the affair - it's just counterintuitive to the initial reactions. This doesn't mean that boundaries shouldn't be set and protective measures shouldn't be taken.

Let me add that Plan A is all about the BS. You do not "Plan A" your WS. It is not intended to change ANYTHING but the BS.

Remember, despite outward appearances, the WS is very likely torn between the excitement of the OP vs leaving the BS and family. They invariably wonder, “Can I have both?” When they realize the answer is no, they next wonder how long can I stall before choosing? It’s during this “stall” that demonstrating Plan A improvements is vital. Why make it easy for the WS to choose the OP by providing a less than competitive choice?

I'll end this by offering that there is one additional thing a BS can do to alter the course of the affair - but I call it "destructive" rather than "constructive" (to separate it from the one and only constructive thing, discussed above). It's to expose the affair to the light of day. But this deserves its own discussion.

OK, one more thing. The affair is very, very likely to end DESPITE what the BS does or does not do. Until it ends, there is NO chance for reconciliation. Ideally, Plan A improvements can encourage the WS to end the affair sooner because the spouse's "causes" of it are eliminated. But regardless, following Plan A prepares the BS for a successful reconciliation whenever and for whatever reason the affair ends by jump starting the process - their share of pre-existing marital problems are already confronted.

My marriage counselor said it was right to ask him to leave because he wasn't willing to work on the marriage and unwilling to give up the affair.