Temple recommend question about interviews

[bsjkki]

If you have repented of past sins with your Bishop, is it appropriate for the stake president to ask about past sins and how you repented? Can't you just say "no."  to that question.

A question like, "what sins have you repented of in this process" and then want the details. I thought they were not supposed to do that.

Edited May 8, 2017 by bsjkki

[JAHS]

Just say no. The only reason I can imagine that a stake president would ask such a question is if he already knows of a past sin and wants to make sure you have fully repented. 

[bsjkki]

22 minutes ago, JAHS said:

Just say no. The only reason I can imagine that a stake president would ask such a question is if he already knows of a past sin and wants to make sure you have fully repented. 

Yeah, not the case. I counseled the just say "no" and don't fall into the leading question trap. Answer the q's honestly and truthfully but your entire past sin history is not relevant if taken care of by proper authorities. I have already warned them it will be a terrible month because they are trying to get to the temple and everything that can go wrong will. I just didn't think they would be completely demoralized by priesthood leaders but you know, I've been down this road before and should not have been surprised. 

[Duncan]

You don't need to bring it up with the Stake

[Storm Rider]

Your counsel was accurate and to the point.  In the context of a temple recommend interview there is no opportunity for reflection on past sins between the individual and the priesthood leader.  There are proscribed questions a member should answer truthfully and there should not be additional questions.  There is always a caveat for the priesthood leader when led by the Holy Spirit.  If the member is uncomfortable with a question or perplexed I can easily see where a leader may attempt to ascertain the discomfort and assist the member to clarify their position.   Individuals are their own worst judges and often, if not always, the very last to forgive their own sins.  

That type of question may have validity if the interview was requested by the member seeking forgiveness and having personal problems, etc.  It is a rare situation where this may be acceptable in other words.  

When seeking forgiveness the bishop may, depending upon the sin, ask a member to also talk to a stake president.  In this situation the member should follow the direction.  

 

[bsjkki]

So...what is the difference between a worthiness interview to attend the temple and be sealed and a temple recommend interviews. In a worthiness interview is it okay to have to go through your entire sin history and how each Bishop dealt with your repentance and then okay for the Stake President to decide if they did a good enough job punishing you? Maybe he needs to add a few more provisions? I just don't get it. The questions for the temple recommend questions were asked and answered the right way. It has been a long process--in no way rushed. The amount of stress this is causing is immense. He refused to even conduct an interview with the spouse. I guess because he deemed one partner needed to wait another week, the other ones worthiness doesn't matter? Sorry...I'm very disheartened. I just don't understand leaders sometimes. It seems they would rather turn people away and send them out into the dreary world again. All I hear is extreme hopelessness which is the exact opposite of what Christ's atonement provides. Please help me understand all this because it is really hard to see a leader inflict so much pain and suffering. The spouse felt completely dismissed and as if she didn't even matter. I'm just really sad today.

[JAHS]

This is one stake president out of more than 3000 who is doing this and I am assuming we don't know all the details nor can we know what is going on in the minds of the stake president and the members in question. A man and woman are supposed to be one. Perhaps he just wants them to get their recommends together at the same time as one. Not sure what harm a little extra waiting is going to do? These interviews are supposed to be held in strict confidence. How do you know so much about what is going on? And do you really know for sure what is going on?

[bsjkki]

11 minutes ago, JAHS said:

This is one stake president out of more than 3000 who is doing this and I am assuming we don't know all the details nor can we know what is going on in the minds of the stake president and the members in question. A man and woman are supposed to be one. Perhaps he just wants them to get their recommends together at the same time as one. Not sure what harm a little extra waiting is going to do? These interviews are supposed to be held in strict confidence. How do you know so much about what is going on? And do you really know for sure what is going on?

The harm is the despair. I'm praying feverishly for a positive outcome but as many women would tell you, being in limbo is extreme torture. When your Bishop says your good, I thought you were good. Sorry, I'm dealing without a lot of despair, crying and deep hurt and a sense of betrayal from 2 people I deeply care about. This is a very weak area for me and I had almost healed over so this is hard. 

[bsjkki]

20 minutes ago, JAHS said:

This is one stake president out of more than 3000 who is doing this and I am assuming we don't know all the details nor can we know what is going on in the minds of the stake president and the members in question. A man and woman are supposed to be one. Perhaps he just wants them to get their recommends together at the same time as one. Not sure what harm a little extra waiting is going to do? These interviews are supposed to be held in strict confidence. How do you know so much about what is going on? And do you really know for sure what is going on?

...and the leaders always get the benefit of the doubt. There is no recourse.

[The Nehor]

45 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

...and the leaders always get the benefit of the doubt. There is no recourse.

You can complain to God.

[Calm]

45 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

The harm is the despair. I'm praying feverishly for a positive outcome but as many women would tell you, being in limbo is extreme torture. When your Bishop says your good, I thought you were good. Sorry, I'm dealing without a lot of despair, crying and deep hurt and a sense of betrayal from 2 people I deeply care about. This is a very weak area for me and I had almost healed over so this is hard. 

I hope this is resolved quickly and gently for your friends.  It is hard when trying to do the right thing to feel blindsided as they probably do.

I have a friend who is a bishop suggest if recourse is eventually needed (the SP refuses to give the recommend or whatever), going to the area presidency is the appropriate response.

Of course, that would be major stress in itself wondering if there might be blowback, so if they get the recommend, I wouldn't do it unless they believe they can handle whatever might come.

There needs to be another way of sharing concerns without it being blown out of proportion from any side because it is not a common procedure.  With this way, it seems like everything gets turned massive just by the process being difficult.

[Calm]

Area presidency listed here:

https://www.lds.org/bc/content/ldsorg/church/news/2017/05/04/first-presidency-announces-changes-in-area-leadership-assign_1.pdf

How to contact them is another thing.  You can PM me if you need help with that.

[bsjkki]

38 minutes ago, Calm said:

I hope this is resolved quickly and gently for your friends.  It is hard when trying to do the right thing to feel blindsided as they probably do.

I have a friend who is a bishop suggest if recourse is eventually needed (the SP refuses to give the recommend or whatever), going to the area presidency is the appropriate response.

Of course, that would be major stress in itself wondering if there might be blowback, so if they get the recommend, I wouldn't do it unless they believe they can handle whatever might come.

There needs to be another way of sharing concerns without it being blown out of proportion from any side because it is not a common procedure.  With this way, it seems like everything gets turned massive just by the process being difficult.

Thanks...I have just learned there is no good way to deal with these issues but have had so many incredible Bishops that got them where they are today. It's truly been a miracle and this was so unexpected. I am praying and will be fasting for when they meet again in 9 days. This stake president did not meet alone with the sister involved and I do not trust him with her now. They are afraid of blowback because I suggested their Bishop go with them. They like their Bishop but don't trust how the stake president would react. It's just sad. They can hardly handle what is happening let alone what might come. I personally know 2 members of our area seventies and still hesitate to ever involve them. One is a kind soul but the other no--he's more crime and punishment than love and mercy. 

Edited May 9, 2017 by bsjkki
not area presidency-area seventies

[JAHS]

2 hours ago, bsjkki said:

The harm is the despair. I'm praying feverishly for a positive outcome but as many women would tell you, being in limbo is extreme torture. When your Bishop says your good, I thought you were good. Sorry, I'm dealing without a lot of despair, crying and deep hurt and a sense of betrayal from 2 people I deeply care about. This is a very weak area for me and I had almost healed over so this is hard. 

Sorry it has been so hard. The only thing I can say after having lived quite a few years now is that time has a tendency to smooth things out for what is best for us. But of course it takes some patience and faith, receiving strength from God and through the Holy Ghost. What your friends want is a good thing that God wants them to have. I am sure they will eventually get it.  

[Rain]

Without knowing the details and not having thought about this or prayed about this I would encourage them to contact their bishop over it rather than go the other way at this point. It's possible the bishop has some insight he could give either them or the SP.

I hope things end up well. *hugs*

[strappinglad]

It may have something to do with which of these leaders has been lied to boldly in the past. Once bit twice shy is real. Perhaps the SP has knowledge the Bishop doesn't. In my town there is a sweet lady , widowed, that is being courted by a man well known to our family. His reputation is sketchy. He is very smooth and puts on a very charismatic front. He wants to get married in the temple ( as he did his other 2 wives,  both still living ). We are torn about what to say and to whom. This man is quite capable of telling a Bishop exactly what he wants to hear. Who will stand up for the widow? I'm not saying the situation in the OP is anywhere like this. What I am saying is that past experience can definitely affect the way  SP approaches an interview. Then again, maybe he is just a ......

[mfbukowski]

On 5/8/2017 at 3:19 PM, bsjkki said:

So...what is the difference between a worthiness interview to attend the temple and be sealed and a temple recommend interviews. In a worthiness interview is it okay to have to go through your entire sin history and how each Bishop dealt with your repentance and then okay for the Stake President to decide if they did a good enough job punishing you? Maybe he needs to add a few more provisions? I just don't get it. The questions for the temple recommend questions were asked and answered the right way. It has been a long process--in no way rushed. The amount of stress this is causing is immense. He refused to even conduct an interview with the spouse. I guess because he deemed one partner needed to wait another week, the other ones worthiness doesn't matter? Sorry...I'm very disheartened. I just don't understand leaders sometimes. It seems they would rather turn people away and send them out into the dreary world again. All I hear is extreme hopelessness which is the exact opposite of what Christ's atonement provides. Please help me understand all this because it is really hard to see a leader inflict so much pain and suffering. The spouse felt completely dismissed and as if she didn't even matter. I'm just really sad today.

That is inappropriate behavior for the leader, and the member should speak up and tell them so in a nice way, asking if repentance actually removes sin, why is she being asked?

I would suddenly get very stupid and ask the to explain the doctrine of repentance to me in monosyllables and have him explain why it only works sometimes, and why the scriptures say that God forgives and forgets our sins, and if and if the scriptures are lying about that. I would ask him to explain that passage and say that I am confused about it.

Ask directly how many times one has to confess and repent just so one knows how many more times to expect this to come up.

 

[mfbukowski]

There is only one kind of interview a, Temple worthiness interview. There is not another special interview for receiving ordinances. They are all the same.

[Guest]

On May 7, 2017 at 11:12 PM, bsjkki said:

If you have repented of past sins with your Bishop, is it appropriate for the stake president to ask about past sins and how you repented? Can't you just say "no."  to that question.

A question like, "what sins have you repented of in this process" and then want the details. I thought they were not supposed to do that.

Actually, it a question to determine if there are any sins (very serious ones) that have not been addressed by Priesthood leaders. He is not looking for a laundry list, but to ask "do you feel worthy". Having done many of these interviews, if someone started confessing to a bunch of things to which there we no need, he (I) would tell the person to stop. 

[Rain]

6 hours ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

Actually, it a question to determine if there are any sins (very serious ones) that have not been addressed by Priesthood leaders. He is not looking for a laundry list, but to ask "do you feel worthy". Having done many of these interviews, if someone started confessing to a bunch of things to which there we no need, he (I) would tell the person to stop. 

I understood this to be different than the one you are talking about, but now I wonder if the bishop just not word it correctly or if it was not understood correctly.

 

Edit: when I said bishop I meant SP.

Edited May 15, 2017 by Rain

[Guest]

20 minutes ago, Rain said:

I understood this to be different than the one you are talking about, but now I wonder if the bishop just not word it correctly or if it was not understood correctly.

That was my thought, the Bishop would know if there were any serious sin that needed to be addressed. The last question is to ask if the recommend holder felt they were worthy. Any personal sins, those that are not serious enough to be addressed by the pulpit and is between the individual and God, to be forgiven. Thus any repentant persons who believes him/herself to be worthy should just say yes, provided they are telling the truth. 

[Rain]

23 minutes ago, Bill "Papa" Lee said:

That was my thought, the Bishop would know if there were any serious sin that needed to be addressed. The last question is to ask if the recommend holder felt they were worthy. Any personal sins, those that are not serious enough to be addressed by the pulpit and is between the individual and God, to be forgiven. Thus any repentant persons who believes him/herself to be worthy should just say yes, provided they are telling the truth. 

I made a mistake. When I said bishop, I meant SP as the person the OP is talking about. .

[Anijen]

I would answer in this manner: President anything I have done in the past I have fully repented of. I am before you worthy of a temple recommend.

[bsjkki]

After a tortuous week of worry, stress, anxiety plus much prayer and fasting...I am happy to report the very happy family will be sealed in the temple in June. 😀

[bluebell]

Yay for good news!