Adultery...with whom? Be patient with me on this (spoilers)

Is it ever made abundantly clear in the film what Pastor Reinke's "transgression" was? I haven't read all the news article associated with this documentary, so I am not sure if the "allegations" were truly made public.

Throughout the film we get brief mentions from Reinke about

We get the following sequence of events towards the end of the film:

- Reinke is exploring an abandoned church, and in the voiceover he says "This is a hard thing for me to say, but in my life I have struggled with same-sex attraction, and I've acted on that."
- Reinke meets his wife at the public food court, wherein he says "Terry Forke is going to come...and aske me if certain allegations are true. And they are." Terry Forke is the district president, possibly like a local bishop. Mrs. Reinke says "Who?" but that question is never answered directly on film. All Reinke says is "There is a man who has been blackmailing me, and..." whereupon his wife begins to cry. He then says "I've put you in a horrible, horrible spot."
- Reinke cleans out his office and says he "knowingly violated the sixth commandment: thou shalt not commit adultery." Beyond that he doesn't clarify exactly with whom he committed adultery.

I realize that in all likelihood, the "allegations" are in regard to Reinke succumbing to same-sex attraction with another man. The sequence of events in the film point directly to that, and that's what I've assumed since I first saw the film.

But what bugs me about the documentary is how vague the filmmaker is in depicting this. Nobody ever comes out and says "Reinke was alleged to have had a sexual relationship with [name]," where [name] is one of the boarders at the church. We don't have anybody overtly saying what the allegations are. We can assume, and we do, but it's not spelled out clearly.

Maybe that's the point...going along with the theme of "lack of disclosure." Reinke is failing to fully disclose his transgressions in the same way that Keith (sex offender who lived in his house) failed to fully disclose his own transgressions.

I don't believe that to be the case - I think that based on the way the scenes were presented, it is safe to assume he had a same-sex relationship with one of the disgruntled boarders - but why doesn't this "documentary" simply come out and state it? Does it matter?