John Dehlin Attempting To Change Bishop's Interviews

[Bikeemikey]

I know that Pahoran has been asked for a reference for this, but do you know of one?

If this is true, why haven't the leaders enforced it?

The lack of enforcement is a worry, assuming such a policy as Pahoran has outlined was even adopted church wide.

I cannot find any sources for Pahorans assertion... I was simply outlining what he had been saying.

[Tacenda]

I would say pull out the FSOY pamphlet and go over the actual law of chastity then talk about behaviors which can make the sexual drive stronger and more difficult to control. I'd be really clear about where the line is and that some activities which may not prohibit holding a TR or impact membership can still pose problems in our lives if our passions are not bridled. I think I would approach this as teaching, not asking questions, and then let the child say whatever he or she wanted to say. If a YM/YW says they have a problem with masturbation, are they denied a TR?

 

Do you ask adults if they masturbate or do you just assume they don't? Or do you assume they'd tell you if they did? Or do you leave the specifics up to their discretion? I'm just thinking aloud here but I think we kind of assume that adults know where the lines are or are in charge of defining them for themselves right up until a clear violation. 

 

I don't mean to barrage you with a lot of questions, ERMD, I've never been in the position of having a teenager interviewed by a bishop who 'gives me pause' before now so I've stepped from a theoretical examination of the topic to 'this just got real'. We're trying to navigate this with as much respect for the bishop and dignity for our children as possible. 

I've had 5 children go in for these interviews and never even gave it a second thought until I had my faith crisis.  I guess that's what a FC does, makes one question everything.  Who knows what an interview may have done to hurt my children?  A lot of youth go inactive later on.  Could these interviews have played a part? 

 

But on the positive side, I do remember a great interview my husband and I had with a bishop before we were to be married in the temple.  He brought up that there were rumors and lies about the temple, people were saying there were orgies going on in them.  Of course that was a first to me, but what he said after I was grateful for.  He told a story about a member fellow who expected his wife to drop everything and have sex with him.  He would come home in the middle of the day and expect it, the bishop did me a great favor here.  My husband was warned against these actions of this terrible behavior.  Not that my husband would have done such a thing.  But needless to say, I liked the advice given, haha.  

 

Personal story, after HS I went inactive for a time, and visited with a Single's Ward bishop and after taking his advice, it became a stepping stone to my becoming active again.  So there are great reasons to talk with a bishop, I need to say. 

 

Halconero, I'm out of posts, sorry to comment this way, anyway, there are times to go to the bishop and your reply to me about the Bible saying to go to the church and confess and repent, is correct.  I guess interviews can be a good way to open the door for this.   

Edited May 1, 2014 by Tacenda

[cursor]

Almost without exception, those dreadful instances occurred long BEFORE Al Gore invented the Internet.

 Al Gore did NOT invent the Internet. Sheesh.

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp

[SeekingUnderstanding]

The more I think about it, the more curious I am as to why the focus on masturbation in particular in interviews. How many youth I wonder have been asked, "When was the last time you raised your voice at your siblings / parents?" Or how about "When was the last time you insulted someone?" If someone answers that they have done this recently, I wonder if they would be counseled not to take the sacrament or be forbidden from going on a mission.
 
I think we should be clear on the level of sin we are talking about here. In LDS parlance, sins have varying severity. At the top of the list is denying the holy ghost. Second is murder. Adultery / fornication is third and I would hope that we could agree that committing adultery is much less of a sin than committing murder, and that adultery is more serious than fornication. So here is the order:
Deny the Holy Ghost > Murder >> Adultery>Fornication.
 
So what about the seriousness of masturbation?

In the sermon on the mount Jesus said

"You have heard that it was said to those of ancient times, ‘You shall not murder’; and ‘whoever murders shall be liable to judgment.’ But I say to you that if you are angry with a brother or sister, you will be liable to judgment; and if you insult a brother or sister,[g]you will be liable to the council; and if you say, ‘You fool,’ you will be liable to the hell of fire."

 

So here we establish that anger, insults, and simply labeling someone a fool is like murdering. We then read
 

"You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ 28 But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart."

 

So looking on a woman with lust is like committing adultery with her. Note to commit adultery you have to be married, so Jesus is specifically talking to married men here.

Okay so lets arrange the sins in order here:

Deny Holy Ghost > Murder >> Adultery>Fornication

Being Angry / insulting someone >> married man lusting after another woman > unmarried man lusting after another woman

Okay now lets talk about masturbation which Jesus didn't talk about here (and to my knowledge the scriptures are completely silent on this matter). If a married man masturbates, thinks about his wife how is this adultery? Can this even be considered a sin?

 

For the unmarried, we have definitely been taught it is a sin, but isn't it less of a sin than anger, insults and the like?

What about the guilt that many young men and young women feel with regard to masturbation? It is my opinion that it is totally out of proportion with the level of sin that it is. This sin would have to be considered far less problematic than being angry at their brother or sister.

 

So again, when was the last time that we encouraged young men and women to confess to their bishop every time they had an argument? What about abstaining from blessing / partaking the sacrament if they got mad during the week?

[Scott Lloyd]

 Al Gore did NOT invent the Internet. Sheesh.

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp

mormonweb was joking. Even I understood that. Sheesh.

[toon]

Lessons are good, but worthiness interviews must be held.  Especially when it comes to attending the temple or serving missions, bishops and stake presidents are instructed to conduct "thorough, searching" interviews.

 

If youth of either sex are going to do either of the above, then it is going to happen, whether you find it appropriate or not.  Taking into account the age and gender of the youth is critical, and any bishop who does not do that needs to be counseled by his stake president; nevertheless, the responsibility is there and cannot be ignored or delegated.

 

 

As I posted, I understang the need to determine worthiness before attending the temple, going on a mission, or even requesting other ordinances and blessings.  The person seeking the ordinance/blessing knows or should know they will be asked about worthiness.  It's prior to that particular interview that the member should be taught what the questions are, what they mean, etc.  And even then, I think certain questions should still be limited to generalities, as in the temple recommend interview.

 

But this is not the same as an annual or semi-annual interview with youth.  I think those interviews would be better served if they focused on getting to know the youth, setting goals, reviewing goals, etc., and not on worthiness issues.

[ERMD]

I will exit the thread with this:

 

I love my kids.  I lose sleep at night over them.  This past Sunday, two of my girls came to me with issues.  That night I was contemplating how incomprehensible the Savior's suffering in Gethsemane and on the cross must have been.  My heart was so heavy for them.  To help them carry and then unload their burdens is a wonderful privilege, but it is at the same time a palpable weight.  When I sit in council with the other bishops of the stake twice a year, i see the same thing in them. They are good men doing their best to serve in a call they did not seek and trying to uphold standards they did not set.  The mantle is real, and it is a great and terrible calling.  Some questions and points in this thread are genuine, and you should address them with your own bishops.  There are others who are looking to put someone's head on a pike.  I feel sorry for you, and I hope you never have to sit on the other side of the desk.

[Anijen]

I want to do a Mormon Stories podcast specifically targeting this practice (i.e., grown men asking young girls about masturbation and other sexual topics alone, in a room, behind a closed door). I'm also very interested in discussing ward and stake disciplinary counsels wherein a group of men discuss explicit sexual details with/about a woman in a way that is shaming.

 

Does anyone else see the irony in this statement?

 

 

Sorry if this was previously posted, I haven't read through the entire thread.

[mercyngrace]

Tacenda,

 

I think many people share your experience in that they don't think twice about how things are done until they have a crisis of faith. The questions that I've grappled with over the years have been less about a specific crisis and more a result of the particulars of a situation confronting me with the reality that the way we've always done things isn't necessarily the only way we can do things. 

[Scott Lloyd]

I will exit the thread with this:

 

I love my kids.  I lose sleep at night over them.  This past Sunday, two of my girls came to me with issues.  That night I was contemplating how incomprehensible the Savior's suffering in Gethsemane and on the cross must have been.  My heart was so heavy for them.  To help them carry and then unload their burdens is a wonderful privilege, but it is at the same time a palpable weight.  When I sit in council with the other bishops of the stake twice a year, i see the same thing in them. They are good men doing their best to serve in a call they did not seek and trying to uphold standards they did not set.  The mantle is real, and it is a great and terrible calling.  Some questions and points in this thread are genuine, and you should address them with your own bishops.  There are others who are looking to put someone's head on a pike.  I feel sorry for you, and I hope you never have to sit on the other side of the desk.

Well said.

 

And I wish you wouldn't exit the thread. You have provided some illuminating insights here.

[cursor]

mormonweb was joking. Even I understood that. Sheesh.

 

Well, then good for you, Scott.

[why me]

The more I think about it, the more curious I am as to why the focus on masturbation in particular in interviews.

I don't think that it should be a focus at all. I think that it should be a given that the youth are doing it. And it is really no big deal unless it is an addiction. I think that most churches have made it a big deal because it is a sexual act. These days it is called solitary sex. But many churches are now also overlooking it because of the ways of the world more or less demand thatt they do.

[mercyngrace]

Well said.

 

And I wish you wouldn't exit the thread. You have provided some illuminating insights here.

 

Agreed. One thing that occurred to me reading ERMD's last post is that, I have had complete trust in other bishops and generally didn't hesitate to assume they were handling things just as they ought. For others, it may take time to build a trusting relationship with a bishop or rebuild it. Maybe that's why bishops are serving longer (I heard that was a recent policy change - can anyone confirm?). 

 

That was a derail - but still - something that occurred to me because of ERMD's contributions to the thread. 

[why me]

I will exit the thread with this:

 

I love my kids.  I lose sleep at night over them.  This past Sunday, two of my girls came to me with issues.  That night I was contemplating how incomprehensible the Savior's suffering in Gethsemane and on the cross must have been.  My heart was so heavy for them.  To help them carry and then unload their burdens is a wonderful privilege, but it is at the same time a palpable weight.  When I sit in council with the other bishops of the stake twice a year, i see the same thing in them. They are good men doing their best to serve in a call they did not seek and trying to uphold standards they did not set.  The mantle is real, and it is a great and terrible calling.  Some questions and points in this thread are genuine, and you should address them with your own bishops.  There are others who are looking to put someone's head on a pike.  I feel sorry for you, and I hope you never have to sit on the other side of the desk.

I also feel sorry for you. I know that it has been hard having people more or less question the role of the bishop when he gives personal worthiness interviews. It is not easy to read such posts that question a bishop's integrity. I think that you are a wonderful dad and bishop. A good example for others to follow.

[ALarson]

ERMD, I believe there are many (most) great Bishops like you who are doing their best.  I hope you won't leave this discussion because your perspective is important here.

 

It's good to open up discussions and get different perspectives.  If some are still having bad experiences in interviews with their Bishops, it should be addressed.  This is for the protection of the leaders just as much as it is for the youth or member.  

 

Do you feel that more detailed instructions on this would be a good idea (coming from the leaders in Salt Lake)?

 

It seems that many Bishops don't seem to know that they are not to bring up the topic of masturbation or ask probing explicit questions in interviews unless they're approached or specifically asked by the person being interviewed.  Otherwise, just keeping it to the Law of Chastity question seems the appropriate thing to do.  Do you agree?

[MichelleD]

Are Bishops instructed to ask the youth about masturbation or not? Does this just seem to vary from stake to stake or ward to ward? If so, I agree that there needs to be very specific directives and training given to newly called Bishops. There should be consistency on this and not have different Bishops doing their own thing here (even though they believe it's the right way to interview the youth).

Can anyone quote the instructions given to the Bishops regarding this?

[mormonnewb]

Of course it has been around for a long time. However, it has only been recent that people have lost trust in other human beings. The bishop used to be a trusted person. No longer. The assumption now is that the bishop is a pervert. Likewise for the scout leader, the teacher etc. So, parents do not want the bishop to ask any kind of sexual questions because such questions and their answers just may turn him on. So, we have all become perverts: the bishop and the parents because it is as if we have nothing else on our minds but perversion.

The internet has allowed child abusers to connect around the world and many people love to watch other people having sex on the internet. Think about it...By the way, it may not be prevalent now. It is just assumed that it is which is why some people on this thread don't want the bishop to ask morality questions.

That "lost trust" was misplaced in the first place. The reason that we trust bishops, scout leaders, priests, etc. less today is because we now know that SOME of them abused that trust in the past (even before the Internet turned everyone into raging "perverts").

Even if we had never "invented" porn in the 1990s (it might go back a LITTLE before then), that abuse would have occurred. Would it have been better if we just didn't know about it? Or is it better that we now take steps to protect our children, such as, say, keeping them from being in a room with an adult talking about how they touch their "naughty places"?

Even more, why wouldn't we protect our beloved bishops from being put in this situation?

[Bikeemikey]

Al Gore did NOT invent the Internet. Sheesh.

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp

But he did invent global warming.

[canard78]

I never had a Bishop ask me about "masturbation" specifically".

But as long as such an act violates the Lord's standard of morality, I can't imagine why it would be improper for a Bishop to ask about it. That's his job. I can understand some Bishops might be over-zealous and tactless, but Dehlin isn't ever going to be able to fix that.

I wonder whether Elder Callister would answer a CFR.

I'd be interested a scriptural statement against "self-abuse"

Self-Abuse

The Lord condemns self-abuse. Self-abuse is the act of stimulating the procreative power of one’s own body. President Boyd K. Packer, President of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, said:

“Do not be guilty of tampering or playing with this sacred power of creation. …

“… It is not pleasing to the Lord, nor is it pleasing to you. It does not make you feel worthy or clean.”

[canard78]

Are Bishops instructed to ask the youth about masturbation or not? Does this just seem to vary from stake to stake or ward to ward? If so, I agree that there needs to be very specific directives and training given to newly called Bishops. There should be consistency on this and not have different Bishops doing their own thing here (even though they believe it's the right way to interview the youth).

Can anyone quote the instructions given to the Bishops regarding this?

I was taught to give worthiness interviews to the youth as a branch pres. I don't remember being trained to ask about masturbation nor taught to not do so.

[Scott Lloyd]

I wonder whether Elder Callister would answer a CFR.

I'd be interested a scriptural statement against "self-abuse"

 

Increasingly, I see a de facto sola scriptura mindset creeping into the membership of the Church in some quarters.

 

We have never accepted the dogma that the Bible -- or even the Standard Works of the Church -- contain all of God's word on any given subject. The doctrine of ongoing revelation precludes that notion.

 

Yet more and more, I see some individuals challenging accepted doctrines, practices and beliefs of the Church on the pretext that they can't find what they would view as explicit support for them written into the scriptural record.

 

This is essentially false doctrine, and I see it as a rather alarming trend.

[canard78]

Increasingly, I see a de facto sola scriptura mindset creeping into the membership of the Church in some quarters.

We have never accepted the dogma that the Bible -- or even the Standard Works of the Church -- contain all of God's word on any given subject. The doctrine of ongoing revelation precludes that notion.

Yet more and more, I see some individuals challenging accepted doctrines, practices and beliefs of the Church on the pretext that they can't find what they would view as explicit support for them written into the scriptural record.

This is essentially false doctrine, and I see it as a rather alarming trend.

I don't doubt that it's a doctrine of the church Scott. I had a very compassionate and tactful Bishop who taught chastity in a very positive and uplifting way. I'm very aware of the teachings.

But there's no need to jump down my throat. I was simply interested if there was a scriptural basis for this teaching on masturbation being wrong. If not, perhaps it's a "word of wisdom" equivalent. A modern day protection for the times we're in given the connection masturbation can potentially have with pornography.

Perhaps it was not in the scriptures because it was simply not an issue "back then."

Or perhaps it's a product of post-Victorian attitudes to masturbation (it will make you blind/mad) which have filtered through to the values and ideas of our leaders.

Did Joseph teach against it? If it's a "modern" revelation, who was the first to warn against it.

[Calm]

He's the only one who dares speak against church policy. And has such a following, that the church might be susceptible to it. Who else would be able to come out against? Someone that cares about his/her standing in the church? I don't think so.

Are you kidding, there have been people criticising the Church on this as long as I can remember, including someone who was making an effort to collect stories of ecclesiastical abuse iirc.

[canard78]

Increasingly, I see a de facto sola scriptura mindset creeping into the membership of the Church in some quarters.

We have never accepted the dogma that the Bible -- or even the Standard Works of the Church -- contain all of God's word on any given subject. The doctrine of ongoing revelation precludes that notion.

Yet more and more, I see some individuals challenging accepted doctrines, practices and beliefs of the Church on the pretext that they can't find what they would view as explicit support for them written into the scriptural record.

This is essentially false doctrine, and I see it as a rather alarming trend.

On the the hand...

Doesn't this statement support going to the scriptures and proclamations to identify what is doctrine and what is "personal, though well-considered, opinion"?

Not every statement made by a Church leader, past or present, necessarily constitutes doctrine. A single statement made by a single leader on a single occasion often represents a personal, though well-considered, opinion, but is not meant to be officially binding for the whole Church. With divine inspiration, the First Presidency (the prophet and his two counselors) and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles (the second-highest governing body of the Church) counsel together to establish doctrine that is consistently proclaimed in official Church publications. This doctrine resides in the four “standard works” of scripture (the Holy Bible, the Book of Mormon, the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price), official declarations and proclamations, and the Articles of Faith.

Are the Elder Callister/President Packer quotes opinion or doctrine?

[cursor]

... 

Edited May 1, 2014 by cursor