Jump to content
Seriously No Politics ×

Baptism Questions


Recommended Posts

Posted

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHdw10y8ABM

Why is this allowed? Eight year old children shouldn't have to be quizzed like this. I don't recall these questions when I was eight, it's all a blur. 

Does anyone know exactly what is going on? I wish I had gone in the bishop's office when each of my children had that interview now. I had no idea these questions were given to an eight year old.

Posted (edited)

I listened to the first few minutes.  Do they actually get to the specific questions?  Is there any indication that the bishop knows he is being recorded?  And the bishop was willing to have the question read, if it wasn't read so it could be heard on the recording or if the father who was recording it resisted it being read, that makes me wonder what is going on.  If he simply continued as he was doing, sharing his concerns, then I have no problem with that.

I can't get through that right now, too much static is driving me insane.  Anyone know what the questions are that are required by headquarters of bishops for the interviews?

If there is a way to ask kids if someone is touching them inappropriately without causing curiosity or fear, I sure don't know it (the only paraphrase of a question I heard was a kid being touched by others inappropriately, iow if he was being abused).  If no one asks, then how can kids be protected?  If they ask, then how can kids be protected?  Not a place I want to be in, the one making decisions about this topic.  Sounds like the bishop isn't too happy about it either.

We need Bluedreams. :)

 

Edited by Calm
Posted

I guess the questions have changed, I just listened to most of it until my computer had issues. 

The questions are more specific. The bishop mentioned how children are masturbating much younger. He also mentions that this is a way to become aware if a child is being sexually abused. 

The father said when he's asked his friends about their bishop's interviews, they haven't been as explicit. 

But this bishop said that they weren't doing their job then. 

 

Posted

 My daughter had a rough interview just before she went to Beehives..She was only 12...I just can't comprehend or wrap my head around discussion like this for one who is even younger.  Frankly, this makes me ill.  I certainly hope this is not the norm.  When my husband found out about my daughter's interview..I had to restrain him.

Posted (edited)

I was baptized at age 9 and I don't remember any interview, but that was many years ago now

Edited by Duncan
Posted
4 minutes ago, Duncan said:

No offense but that is a fairly old sounding 8 year old, I say nay nay on this

What do you mean Duncan?

Posted
Just now, Tacenda said:

What do you mean Duncan?

oh, I misread it, I though the 8 year old was being interviewed

Posted
17 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I guess the questions have changed, I just listened to most of it until my computer had issues. 

The questions are more specific. The bishop mentioned how children are masturbating much younger. He also mentions that this is a way to become aware if a child is being sexually abused. 

The father said when he's asked his friends about their bishop's interviews, they haven't been as explicit. 

But this bishop said that they weren't doing their job then. 

 

I think this bishop needs to be released.

Posted
29 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

 My daughter had a rough interview just before she went to Beehives..She was only 12...I just can't comprehend or wrap my head around discussion like this for one who is even younger.  Frankly, this makes me ill.  I certainly hope this is not the norm.  When my husband found out about my daughter's interview..I had to restrain him.

http://zelophehadsdaughters.com/2013/06/01/lions-and-tigers-and-bears-oh-my/

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHdw10y8ABM

Why is this allowed? Eight year old children shouldn't have to be quizzed like this. I don't recall these questions when I was eight, it's all a blur. 

Does anyone know exactly what is going on? I wish I had gone in the bishop's office when each of my children had that interview now. I had no idea these questions were given to an eight year old.

Did you listen to everything the bishop said, or only the first two minutes.  The Bishop even gave the parents the questions that would be asked, and there was the Dad asking questions.  The bishop explained how he would approach the subject, and this had been approved by the Stake President.

Did you listen to the entire conversation?  What exactly did he say that you find offfensive where even the father agreed with him?  Got the Dad's permission.

Edited by cdowis
Posted
25 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

I think this bishop needs to be released.

On what basis and for what reason?

 

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHdw10y8ABM

Why is this allowed? Eight year old children shouldn't have to be quizzed like this. I don't recall these questions when I was eight, it's all a blur. 

Does anyone know exactly what is going on? I wish I had gone in the bishop's office when each of my children had that interview now. I had no idea these questions were given to an eight year old.

The more important question might be Who made this recording?  The caption says it was made "sub rosa."  Is this a breach of the expected confidentiality of the cleric - penitent interview?  Is it actionable at law?  Should the person secretly recording in that sacrosanct circumstance be tried by the Stake Pres and High Council?  Do we have to have everyone entering a bishop's office sign an ironclad non-disclosure agreement prior to the interview -- a full guarantee that no recordings will be made, etc.?  Should that be done at LDS temples?

You are no doubt aware that surreptitious recordings have been made and released of the Brethren having private discussions.  Is this alright?  Or is it open season on anyone anywhere?  Is nothing private and confidential?

Posted
40 minutes ago, sunstoned said:

I think this bishop needs to be released.

Why don't you actually listen to the recording.  Obviously you didn't, except for the first couple of minutes.

Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, cdowis said:

Why don't you actually listen to the recording.  Obviously you didn't, except for the first couple of minutes.

I did listen, then my computer closed it. I had too many windows open. I can go back and listen to the rest but got pretty far with it. I doubt you listened to all of it. ETA: I listened for 25 minutes, just went back to it and it was still at the mark I was at.

Edited by Tacenda
Posted
9 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

On what basis and for what reason?

 

The more important question might be Who made this recording?  The caption says it was made "sub rosa."  Is this a breach of the expected confidentiality of the cleric - penitent interview?  Is it actionable at law?  Should the person secretly recording in that sacrosanct circumstance be tried by the Stake Pres and High Council?  Do we have to have everyone entering a bishop's office sign an ironclad non-disclosure agreement prior to the interview -- a full guarantee that no recordings will be made, etc.?  Should that be done at LDS temples?

You are no doubt aware that surreptitious recordings have been made and released of the Brethren having private discussions.  Is this alright?  Or is it open season on anyone anywhere?  Is nothing private and confidential?

I think there needs to be a rule that parents be in the room with a seven or eight year old. 

Posted
1 hour ago, Calm said:

I listened to the first few minutes.  Do they actually get to the specific questions?  Is there any indication that the bishop knows he is being recorded?  And the bishop was willing to have the question read, if it wasn't read so it could be heard on the recording or if the father who was recording it resisted it being read, that makes me wonder what is going on.  If he simply continued as he was doing, sharing his concerns, then I have no problem with that.

I can't get through that right now, too much static is driving me insane.  Anyone know what the questions are that are required by headquarters of bishops for the interviews?

If there is a way to ask kids if someone is touching them inappropriately without causing curiosity or fear, I sure don't know it (the only paraphrase of a question I heard was a kid being touched by others inappropriately, iow if he was being abused).  If no one asks, then how can kids be protected?  If they ask, then how can kids be protected?  Not a place I want to be in, the one making decisions about this topic.  Sounds like the bishop isn't too happy about it either.

We need Bluedreams. :)

 

I would love Bluedreams answer if she cares to give input. 

Posted (edited)
29 minutes ago, cdowis said:

Did you listen to everything the bishop said, or only the first two minutes.  The Bishop even gave the parents the questions that would be asked, and there was the Dad asking questions.  The bishop explained how he would approach the subject, and this had been approved by the Stake President.

Did you listen to the entire conversation?  What exactly did he say that you find offfensive where even the father agreed with him?  Got the Dad's permission.

This bishop got it from the top down, I can't fault him because he is doing what he is told I guess. 

Edited by Tacenda
Posted

Just fallowing orders. Is not right.

 

as a bishop they need to be talking with the parents before and after the interview this is a team effort.

Posted
1 minute ago, Doctrine 612 said:

Just fallowing orders. Is not right.

 

as a bishop they need to be talking with the parents before and after the interview this is a team effort.

IF that is possible

Suppose the parents are non-members but give permission for the child to be baptized because they think the child needs a "good influence" in their lives and a friend will bring them to church?

Posted
14 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I think there needs to be a rule that parents be in the room with a seven or eight year old. 

Yes, in most jurisdictions a minor who is a suspect cannot be interviewed by police without a parent present.  And adults cannot be interviewed by police without an attorney present, if they request a lawyer.

The problem for a bishop might be that the presence of parents could lead to the child clamming up and remaining silent about items which he might otherwise confess if they were not present -- including molestation by a parent or relative, something a bishop definitely needs to know.  How do you propose to deal with that difficulty?

Posted
32 minutes ago, Robert F. Smith said:

On what basis and for what reason?

 

The more important question might be Who made this recording?  The caption says it was made "sub rosa."  Is this a breach of the expected confidentiality of the cleric - penitent interview?  Is it actionable at law?  Should the person secretly recording in that sacrosanct circumstance be tried by the Stake Pres and High Council?  Do we have to have everyone entering a bishop's office sign an ironclad non-disclosure agreement prior to the interview -- a full guarantee that no recordings will be made, etc.?  Should that be done at LDS temples?

You are no doubt aware that surreptitious recordings have been made and released of the Brethren having private discussions.  Is this alright?  Or is it open season on anyone anywhere?  Is nothing private and confidential?

When it's our underage children, especially children are under 8. Yes, by all means record the conversation, if we think it will help stop the wrongdoing. 

Posted
28 minutes ago, cdowis said:

Why don't you actually listen to the recording.  Obviously you didn't, except for the first couple of minutes.

 

22 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

I did listen, then my computer closed it. I had too many windows open. I can go back and listen to the rest but got pretty far with it. I doubt you listened to all of it. ETA: I listened for 25 minutes, just went back to it and it was still at the mark I was at.

I listened to the whole thing and it was very repetitious, with the parent probably the one doing the recording -- which was why he was so cagey and grandstanding.  The bishop sent him to see the stake president, explaining that he (the bishop) might then be called in to receive direction from the stake pres on how to proceed.  The bishop sounded very low key and honest to me.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...