NOM

I've noticed that the church seems to be reacting to issues brought up on forums such as this one. If they issue a statement on a touchy subject, I think it means they're starting to get blowback from members. Hence this statement from the church regarding bishop interviews with the youth.

http://www.ldsliving.com/Church-Release ... dium=email

It seems to be an effort at clarification followed by retrenchment. With the exception of this minor but interesting addition:

"When a Church leader meets with a child, youth or woman, they are encouraged to ask a parent or another adult to be in an adjoining room, foyer or hall, and to avoid circumstances that may be misunderstood."

I don't remember this being advised in days past. Maybe if we keep complaining they'll actually have the parent in the room where they belong or, better yet, let the parent do their job of being a good mother or father and do away with the interview altogether.

Amazing! It's not every day you see someone attempt to address concern and completely miss the point of it all in the same sentence.

It was a policy in the past, at least in my understanding, for another member of the bishopric to be in an adjoining room while the bishop was in his office with the youth. I always thought this was ridiculous because there were white-noise speakers that were put up to muffle any chance of conversations being overheard. At least I seem to remember that being the case...

Yep, I remember this as well but it seemed that the counselor was only there for interviews with adult women and not all buildings were equipped with those speakers. I wonder how comforting it would seem to a woman having another man nearly within earshot of the conversation?

This entire concept of a man measuring another person's righteousness has no place in the Church of Christ.

I understand that most churches will weed out chronic offenders but I think this is different from establishing an early pattern of priesthood dependency and unrighteous authority.

Looks like Sam actually got their attention, at least!

I sometimes wish I knew all the isssues when my children were young. I would love to tell the bishop under no circumstances can they grill my children on anything thathas to do with sex even if I am in the room. It simple is not their place to do so.

My Bishop didn’t ask me about masturbation until I was 16, but I’ve heard of kids as young as 12 being asked about it. It’s wrong.

deacon blues wrote: ↑Tue Dec 19, 2017 12:23 pm My Bishop didn’t ask me about masturbation until I was 16, but I’ve heard of kids as young as 12 being asked about it. It’s wrong.

My bishop taught me what masturbation was when I was 12...

wtfluff wrote:

deacon blues wrote: My Bishop didn’t ask me about masturbation until I was 16, but I’ve heard of kids as young as 12 being asked about it. It’s wrong.

My bishop taught me what masturbation was when I was 12...

My bishop merely put a label to something I figured out how to naturally do in the womb!

Which begs the question: did spirits masturbate in the pre-existence? I don't recall the doctrine that clarifies this quandary. Does anyone know?

Was anyone taught,by their bishop, that masterbation and things about that level were sins next to murder?

When I was growing up, the horrible sins were associated with breaking the Word of Wisdom. Those coffee drinkers are GOING TO HELL!!!!!

Rob4Hope wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:39 pm Was anyone taught,by their bishop, that masterbation and things about that level were sins next to murder?

When I was growing up, the horrible sins were associated with breaking the Word of Wisdom. Those coffee drinkers are GOING TO HELL!!!!!

You must be about my age. I also grew up with a lot of emphasis on smoking, coffee, drugs, alcohol, drugs, drugs and more drugs. Coffee was right up there with heroin and cocain. It was way way over board.

In 1970 a survey was taken of BYU students and they were asked to "rate these sins in order of seriousness". On the list were things like murder, rape, embezzling, stealing, assault, Smoking, coffee.

So, the BYU students did get murder as the most serious, but next in seriousness were breaking the WOW. Then things like rape, assault came after drinking coffee. I think this survey was a wake up call that the church was teaching WOW too seriously, because they backed off and started the emphasis on sexual sin being next to murder.

alas wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:55 pm

Rob4Hope wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2017 12:39 pm Was anyone taught,by their bishop, that masterbation and things about that level were sins next to murder?

When I was growing up, the horrible sins were associated with breaking the Word of Wisdom. Those coffee drinkers are GOING TO HELL!!!!!

You must be about my age. I also grew up with a lot of emphasis on smoking, coffee, drugs, alcohol, drugs, drugs and more drugs. Coffee was right up there with heroin and cocain. It was way way over board.

In 1970 a survey was taken of BYU students and they were asked to "rate these sins in order of seriousness". On the list were things like murder, rape, embezzling, stealing, assault, Smoking, coffee.

So, the BYU students did get murder as the most serious, but next in seriousness were breaking the WOW. Then things like rape, assault came after drinking coffee. I think this survey was a wake up call that the church was teaching WOW too seriously, because they backed off and started the emphasis on sexual sin being next to murder.

In the LDS.org site (at least last time I checked) they still have sections where sexual sins are next to murder.

I wonder how bishops deal with this: on one side you have tenderness that is NECESSARY, and on the other side, this crazy doctrinal basis for sex being next to murder if outside of marriage.

The culture is changing; they don't emphasis it like they use to, but this "next to murder" thing is still on the books. Its another one of those "just don't talk about it" things...

Rob4Hope wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2017 2:11 pm The culture is changing; they don't emphasis it like they use to, but this "next to murder" thing is still on the books. Its another one of those "just don't talk about it" things...

Except perhaps when they indoctrinate our children. It's taught loud and clear in For the Strength of Youth:

https://www.lds.org/youth/for-the-stren ... ual-purity

Perhaps worse, it's distressingly unclear which "sexual sins" are next to murder in seriousness, leaving anxious youth to assume all of them are.

When I was a believer, I had jettisoned this doctrine as being too harsh and unsupported by the text of the Book of Mormon. It's only taught directly in the chapter heading of Alma 39. The text itself suggests that God is much more concerned with leading people away from repentance.

So... blame Bruce R. McConkie for perpetuating this particular harmful and putrid doctrine.

Reuben wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2017 4:20 pm

Rob4Hope wrote: ↑Thu Dec 21, 2017 2:11 pm The culture is changing; they don't emphasis it like they use to, but this "next to murder" thing is still on the books. Its another one of those "just don't talk about it" things...

Except perhaps when they indoctrinate our children. It's taught loud and clear in For the Strength of Youth:

https://www.lds.org/youth/for-the-stren ... ual-purity

Perhaps worse, it's distressingly unclear which "sexual sins" are next to murder in seriousness, leaving anxious youth to assume all of them are.

When I was a believer, I had jettisoned this doctrine as being too harsh and unsupported by the text of the Book of Mormon. It's only taught directly in the chapter heading of Alma 39. The text itself suggests that God is much more concerned with leading people away from repentance.

So... blame Bruce R. McConkie for perpetuating this particular harmful and putrid doctrine.

I blame BRM for a LOT of things. Being a bully is one of the big ones.