Bishops Asking This in Temple Recommend Interview?

[Rain]

Trying to word this in a way that I don't get it blocked.  Is there a thing since 2015 that bishops are supposed to ask anyone, but specifically YSA, if they touch themselves? Or some such similar thing...

Edit: I am asking about adults in a singles ward, not youth.

Edited September 17, 2020 by Rain

[rpn]

Pretty sure not.  The TR questions are the same for everyone. 

[Rain]

23 minutes ago, rpn said:

Pretty sure not.  The TR questions are the same for everyone. 

That's what I was thinking.  Just trying to figure out where the idea came from.

[Calm]

I was under the impression they were warned not to go there unless asked.

We have several current bishops iirc on FM I can ask.  I don't think we have any here now, right?

Edited September 17, 2020 by Calm

[Rain]

1 hour ago, Calm said:

I was under the impression they were warned not to go there unless asked.

My thinking that is for youth, but only in the last couple of years, but I could be wrong.    This is for YSA and earlier than that.

Edited September 17, 2020 by Rain

[JAHS]

Do you keep the law of chastity? That's all they should be asking.

Back in the early 70' my Stake president ask about it in my missionary interview.

[Tacenda]

I think it's referring to those that are getting a missionary temple interview, if I'm remembering right.

[Amulek]

3 hours ago, Rain said:

Trying to word this in a way that I don't get it blocked.  Is there a thing since 2015 that bishops are supposed to ask anyone, but specifically YSA, if they touch themselves? Or some such similar thing...

The interview questions are, by design, all publicly available. You can find the First Presidency letter regarding (and including) the current temple questions on the church's website, here:

        https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/multimedia/file/first-presidency-temple-recommend-letter.pdf

The instructions for conducting interviews specifically state that, "As leaders conduct temple recommend interviews, they should not omit, add to, or modify any of the temple recommend questions."

My understanding is that this has long been the instruction.

That being said, I have - on a couple of occasions - had priesthood leaders add a follow-up question after asking about the law of chastity. The follow-up question was either about pornography or self gratification.

The first time someone asked, I believe it was one of the stake presidency counselors when I was at BYU, I was kind of taken off guard. I had never had a priesthood leader go 'off script' in a temple recommend interview before. I remember looking at him with a rather confused look and asking, "Isn't that part of the law of chastity?" 

However, I believe such is the exception rather than the norm, and I'm not aware of there being any sort of special guidance / instruction encouraging such questions to be asked.

The only 'sanctioned' deviation in questions is provided in the instructions / questions themselves - namely, that there is no need to ask youth the questions about garments and obligations to former spouses / children (for obvious reasons).

 

Edited September 17, 2020 by Amulek

[Ginger Snaps]

My DH is currently serving as bishop. I’m pretty sure they aren’t supposed to go off-script for TR interviews. That being said, after our stake had a couple of missionaries come home early to address some morality issues, our stake president at the time told all the bishops to be a little more direct in their pre-mission interviews. I have no idea if that came from higher up or not. 

[bsjkki]

Here are the guidelines. https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/multimedia/file/guidelines-interviewing-youth-2018.pdf

Short answer is no. Personally I don’t like this section. 

“When discussing obedience to the commandments, the bishop and his counselors make appropriate use of the limited-use temple recommend interview questions and the standards and explanations in For the Strength of Youth. Leaders adapt the discussion to the understanding and questions of the youth. They ensure that discussions about moral cleanliness do not encourage curiosity or experimentation.”

I don’t like some of the wording in The Strength of Youth. Using it as a guideline allows Bishops a big green light to discuss highly sexual matters with the youth. Who knows if this will happen or won’t or how well trained your Bishop is. 

Attend with your kids. I would not trust them with my kids...even well intentioned Bishops screw this up.

Edited September 17, 2020 by bsjkki

[bsjkki]

1 hour ago, Ginger Snaps said:

My DH is currently serving as bishop. I’m pretty sure they aren’t supposed to go off-script for TR interviews. That being said, after our stake had a couple of missionaries come home early to address some morality issues, our stake president at the time told all the bishops to be a little more direct in their pre-mission interviews. I have no idea if that came from higher up or not. 

My husbands mission president would let missionaries repent in the field. He always said his first priority was to save the missionaries.

After preaching to Corianton and calling him to repentance, what did Alma tell him to do? 

30 O my son, I desire that ye should deny the justice of God no more. Do not endeavor to excuse yourself in the least point because of your sins, by denying the justice of God; but do you let the justice of God, and his mercy, and his long-suffering have full sway in your heart; and let it bring you down to the dust in humility.
31 And now, O my son, ye are called of God to preach the word unto this people. And now, my son, go thy way, declare the word with truth and soberness, that thou mayest bring souls unto repentance, that the great plan of mercy may have claim upon them. And may God grant unto you even according to my words. Amen.

Edited September 17, 2020 by bsjkki

[Rain]

Thank you. Someone I know really felt uncomfortable with this question.  A friend told them that since 2015 bishops were supposed to ask this question.

[Tacenda]

41 minutes ago, bsjkki said:

Here are the guidelines. https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/multimedia/file/guidelines-interviewing-youth-2018.pdf

Short answer is no. Personally I don’t like this section. 

“When discussing obedience to the commandments, the bishop and his counselors make appropriate use of the limited-use temple recommend interview questions and the standards and explanations in For the Strength of Youth. Leaders adapt the discussion to the understanding and questions of the youth. They ensure that discussions about moral cleanliness do not encourage curiosity or experimentation.”

I don’t like some of the wording in The Strength of Youth. Using it as a guideline allows Bishops a big green light to discuss highly sexual matters with the youth. Who knows if this will happen or won’t or how well trained your Bishop is. 

Attend with your kids. I would not trust them with my kids...even well intentioned Bishops screw this up.

There is a link for the missionary temple recommend interview that is only for those authorized to get in and read it, it may be that on another board I saw something that someone c/p'd not sure, that did ask about what the OP is talking about. 

[Rain]

1 minute ago, Tacenda said:

There is a link for the missionary temple recommend interview that is only for those authorized to get in and read it, it may be that on another board I saw something that someone c/p'd not sure, that did ask about what the OP is talking about. 

The person who told us about this 2015 was not talking about missionaries, but perhaps had mixed up memories concerning it.

[bsjkki]

Here are the newish missionary q’s. Much more probing...but serving is a privilege. Good to review these with your child. 

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/liahona/2018/08/youth/before-you-are-called-to-serve/interview-questions?lang=eng

Edited September 17, 2020 by bsjkki

[The Nehor]

My stake for a few years added a bit to the law of chastity question asking it and following with something like “......the law of chastity including not consuming pornography” but they stopped in the last year.

I agree with what was said above that missionary interviews should be more searching and they are not temple recommend interviews. It is better to not go then to deal with the (real or perceived) humiliation of going home due to preexisting sins.

[Meadowchik]

7 hours ago, Ginger Snaps said:

My DH is currently serving as bishop. I’m pretty sure they aren’t supposed to go off-script for TR interviews. That being said, after our stake had a couple of missionaries come home early to address some morality issues, our stake president at the time told all the bishops to be a little more direct in their pre-mission interviews. I have no idea if that came from higher up or not. 

When my BYU classmates were leaving on missions in the late 90s, they talked about there being extra, moredirect interviewing at the MTC to ensure worthiness and to prevent early returns for worthiness reasons.

[The Nehor]

Just now, Meadowchik said:

When my BYU classmates were leaving on missions in the late 90s, they talked about there being extra, moredirect interviewing at the MTC to ensure worthiness and to prevent early returns for worthiness reasons.

This is still generally the case. Stake Presidents tend to be especially keen on this as most of them get experience early in the calling having to navigate someone coming home. It is not fun.

[Duncan]

Our MP talked to us about this at a zone conference once, he told us that it didn't affect your standing in the church so don't be calling him at 4am telling him about it. I don't know the whats and the wherefore's about it

[bsjkki]

8 minutes ago, Duncan said:

Our MP talked to us about this at a zone conference once, he told us that it didn't affect your standing in the church so don't be calling him at 4am telling him about it. I don't know the whats and the wherefore's about it

Personally, I think we are messing up a generation overly emphasizing this. When growing up, I had not had heard of this being defined as ‘breaking the law of chastity’ and while it should be discouraged, I did not think it made one ‘unworthy.’ Sometimes you can talk about things too much. Some view they will never be ‘good enough’ for the church so they just leave. Or don’t serve, or don’t go to the temple. Cycle of doom.

 

[HappyJackWagon]

12 hours ago, Amulek said:

The interview questions are, by design, all publicly available. You can find the First Presidency letter regarding (and including) the current temple questions on the church's website, here:

        https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/multimedia/file/first-presidency-temple-recommend-letter.pdf

The instructions for conducting interviews specifically state that, "As leaders conduct temple recommend interviews, they should not omit, add to, or modify any of the temple recommend questions."

My understanding is that this has long been the instruction.

That being said, I have - on a couple of occasions - had priesthood leaders add a follow-up question after asking about the law of chastity. The follow-up question was either about pornography or self gratification.

The first time someone asked, I believe it was one of the stake presidency counselors when I was at BYU, I was kind of taken off guard. I had never had a priesthood leader go 'off script' in a temple recommend interview before. I remember looking at him with a rather confused look and asking, "Isn't that part of the law of chastity?" 

However, I believe such is the exception rather than the norm, and I'm not aware of there being any sort of special guidance / instruction encouraging such questions to be asked.

The only 'sanctioned' deviation in questions is provided in the instructions / questions themselves - namely, that there is no need to ask youth the questions about garments and obligations to former spouses / children (for obvious reasons).

 

I was released as bishop 5 years ago. Time flies

While there are definitely instructions that a bishop should NOT add to or omit questions there is also direction sometimes from area authorities/Stake Presidents given in training or PPI's to  ask more "probing" questions in certain situations. The situations I recall being told I should be more probing were

- individuals receiving their own endowment or sealing

- mission worthiness interviews

-Young adults and youth in general (to ensure they understood the questions) 

-More generally, I was taught to ask follow up questions if I thought the person wasn't being truthful or didn't seem to understand.  For example, if someone answered "yes" about attending their meetings but I hadn't seen them at church in 3 months I would ask a follow up. Something like "what does attending your meetings regularly mean to you?"  Or if someone said yes to being a full tithe payer but I knew we hadn't received any donations from them during the year (and they weren't a 1 time payer at the end of the year) I would follow up with that.

It was amazing how many youth and young adults got a blank look on their face when asked about the "word of Wisdom" or "law of chastity" like they'd never heard the phrase before. So I would ask follow up question with the intention of teaching and making sure they understood what was being asked.  This was the approach from years ago. There is some good to that approach but also some bad so I'm glad to see that things have changed, especially relating to the law of chastity questions.

[Derl Sanderson]

11 hours ago, bsjkki said:

Attend with your kids. I would not trust them with my kids...even well intentioned Bishops screw this up.

Then conversely be prepared for your kids to seek no counsel, express no deep-rooted feelings, ask no questions that trouble them, or engage the highest-ranking priesthood leader in their lives in any other meaningful way. I'll bet my house that a teen with three other adults in the room will respond minimally and absolutely "correctly" to every question and topic broached -- especially when two of the three are his/her parents. This topic was extensively (and masterfully) addressed in the most recent FairMormon Conference by Jennifer Roach in a paper titled "Private Bishop Interviews as Protective Factor: Why LDS Teens Benefit From a Few Moments Alone With Their Bishop." It's not yet available on FairMormon's website, but when it is, Sister Roach's arguments are well worth considering. 

[bsjkki]

18 minutes ago, Derl Sanderson said:

Then conversely be prepared for your kids to seek no counsel, express no deep-rooted feelings, ask no questions that trouble them, or engage the highest-ranking priesthood leader in their lives in any other meaningful way. I'll bet my house that a teen with three other adults in the room will respond minimally and absolutely "correctly" to every question and topic broached -- especially when two of the three are his/her parents. This topic was extensively (and masterfully) addressed in the most recent FairMormon Conference by Jennifer Roach in a paper titled "Private Bishop Interviews as Protective Factor: Why LDS Teens Benefit From a Few Moments Alone With Their Bishop." It's not yet available on FairMormon's website, but when it is, Sister Roach's arguments are well worth considering. 

Yeah, but you never know where those conversations go. While this is why I don't feel one on one conversations should be banned, I also don't particularly believe many Bishop's handle these things well or understand how things are internalized. Just, my opinion based on my experience. Looking back, this is something I would have done differently. I keep witnessing the carnage in the YA sector. It's not pretty. Church should not make the youth feel they will never be 'good enough' or measure up. The youth are really struggling. I'm not sure probing, intrusive interviews are really healthy for anyone...even adults. I've had a lot of friends mention the way the Bishop talked to them made them feel guilty over things they had not even done...they felt interrogated, like the Bishop was not believing what they were saying. Imagine how that effects a teenager.

*The guildelines state it is the child decision whether a parent attends. I think following the child's lead is a good way to go here. But, it won't protect them if the advice from a Bishop or counsel goes south. You won't be aware to redirect. Not until the damage is done. (Years too late)

Edited September 17, 2020 by bsjkki

[Derl Sanderson]

Sorry for your obviously bad experience with bishops over what appears to have been a very extended period of time. My own experience is that "probing, intrusive interviews" have no part in the training they are given and that, in fact, just the opposite is true. Every bishop I have had anything to do with in terms of interviews for myself, my wife, and my children was always kind and encouraging, consistently pointing my family to the power of redemption and forgiveness available through Christ's Atonement. How one can "feel guilty over things they had not even done" is a concept I guess I don't grasp. Interviews being what they are -- a conversation between two people -- does make me wonder if all of the problems you cite may not lie exclusively with the bishop.

Edited September 17, 2020 by Derl Sanderson
spelling

[bsjkki]

3 minutes ago, Derl Sanderson said:

Sorry for your obviously bad experience with bishops over what appears to have been a very extended period of time. My own experience is that "probing, intrusive interviews" have no part in the training they are given and that, in fact, just the opposite is true. Every bishop I have had anything to do with in terms of interviews for myself, my wife, and my children was always kind and encouraging, consistently pointing my family to the power of redemption and forgiveness available through Christ's Atonement. How one can "feel guilty over things they had not even done" is a concept I guess I don't grasp. Interviews being what they are -- a conversation between two people -- does make me wonder if all of the problems you cite may not lie exclusively with the bishop.

I am grateful and happy you have had such great experiences over the years. That was me...until it wasn't. As the saying goes, 'trust once broken is hard to regain' and I am still trying to regain confidence in this system. It's a struggle.