Interview with Bishop

[Misshalfway]

Well, if the questions make her uncomfortable, what says she has to answer? Why couldn't she just say "I am living the law of chastity, bishop, you don't need to worry."

[Tarnished]

Funny you should mention someone told you he'd had revelation that you were supposed to marry him. Big problem at BYU, I know, and it seems that a GA mentioned that in a talk not too long ago.

I, personally, ascribe to the time tested way of getting someone to marry you. 'You can't make someone love you, you can only stalk them until they give in'...

Yea it wasn't at college it was actually right before I left for college, the guy told his mom and his sister and they were all making wedding plans and I was like, "Whoa, whoa, he is not the guy for me, I might be the one for him but he is not the one for me."

He also ascribed to the stalker method, stalked me from when we were about 5 years old to about age 19, didn't work, but I do hope it works well for you.

[sixpacktr]

Yea it wasn't at college it was actually right before I left for college, the guy told his mom and his sister and they were all making wedding plans and I was like, "Whoa, whoa, he is not the guy for me, I might be the one for him but he is not the one for me."

He also ascribed to the stalker method, stalked me from when we were about 5 years old to about age 19, didn't work, but I do hope it works well for you.

Worked, Tarnished, worked....

There is absolutely no other way I marry my wife otherwise. Had to get her tired first, and then feeling pity....

[will227457]

with out a doubt the bishop was out of line....the law of chastity is spelled out pretty well and if your response to were you obeying it was yes...end of conversation....I may have even responded by asking the bishop a personal qurestion and reaffirm to him that I anwsered his question honestly and that should be good enough....

now there are some knuckle heads that like to push the envelope (with the LoC)...I would say this is the exception and not the rule.....

[FlaviusHambonius]

I personally think your Bishop crossed way over the line -- when asked if you were living the law of chastity and you responded that indeed you were, that should have been good enough.

I would have been offended that that answer should not have sufficed.

His asking for details is way accross the boundry lines -- sounds a little spooky. Perhaps he has a little voyurism in him that even he is not aware of.

As for these Single Adults that presumably can't distinguish what is and is not a sexual act or can't determine for themselves when they have crossed the line in the chastity department is really quite laughable.

[FlaviusHambonius]

Without knowing the Bishop personally, he was simply probing to ensure the Law of Chasity is maintain.

Give me a break.....The Bishop was sticking his nose where he had no buisness sticking it.

What didn't he understand about 'yes' I am abiding by the law of chastity.

[mnn727]

The only answer required when questions start going that way is "Bishop, I understand the law of chastity and am keeping it" If he continues probing you get up and leave, maiking an appointment with or sending a letter to the Stake President complaining about the probing questions.

Funny story, about 6 months after we got married my wife had a TR interview with the 1st counselor in the bishopric a younger man who had recently been called. Anyway he gets to the queston "Do you keep the Law of Chastity" and my wife says "No" he stops, gets the look on his face like 'oh, oh, what do I do now' when my wife continues and says "I'm married now brother xxxx, did you forget?" So maybe she didn't quite understand the complete law, but when she told me what happened I was ROTFLMBO

Edited October 21, 2009 by mnn727

[Misshalfway]

Yeah. I think we need to feel empowered when we are interviewed by authority figures. We don't have to answer every question. We don't need to leave our boundaries outside the door of the bishops office. I think if we feel uncomfortable we have every right to stop the conversation.

[Moksha]

... he started asking me about the Law of Chastity (dum dum DUMMM). He asked me if we were keeping that law, which of course is an affirmative, but then he went into great detail about asking what we were and were not doing, and asking me to describe what all we do physically (which is not much).

This signals the start of the K-Mart red light special, with lots of red lights and perhaps even a siren. Sort of makes that old saying about the devil being in the details, take on new meaning.

[Guest Alana]

I see nothing wrong with a bishop asking everything they are doing if she said she was following the law of chastity. There should be nothing embarrassing to say. As far as describing what we're not doing, that should be explained as in "anything other than what I said we were doing." It's not appropriate to be saying "well, I'm not doing *this* particular scandalous act, nor do we do *this* naughty little thing..."

Was this a case of the bishop probing a little farther to make sure a convert understood what the law of chastity involved and was being honest or more? Too many think anything other than sex is ok, when it's not.

[Traveler]

So Bytor, do you think the bishop was out of line?

When I served my mission the missionary leadership did most of the baptismal interviews. My very first interview was with a beautiful young lady my same age. When I got to the questions concerning chastity – I explained the law as best I could and ask her bluntly if she lived the law of chastity. She began to cry and said she did not fill worthy to be baptized because she had kissed her boyfriend. I apologized for not representing the law of chastity correctly – told her she was worthy and recommended she talk with the Relief Society President if she had any question.

I have been told that the youth today has a great deal of confusion about what the law of chastity involves. I can understand that but it is my personal belief that interviews with a priesthood authority are not the time and place for “probing” unless a repentance issue is directly involved.

Personally I do not know if the bishop was out of line or not – but I do not think that it would be out of line for the stake president to check. I also do not think it would be out of line for a member to ask the Stake President to check.

The Traveler

[Saguaro]

I think this bishop went way over the line. Asking if you keep the law of chastity is OK, confirming your understanding of the law of chastity is OK, but asking probing questions and asking to describe your physically interactions with your boyfreind is not OK.

I know some people who are so uncomfortable with this type of questioning that they won't let their teenage children have interivews with bishopric members alone, they insist on being in the room with them.

[AmyKate88]

Wow, I got so many great responses! Thank you so much everyone for all of your perspectives, it has really helped.

I think the issue is mainly just that, as a convert, I am not used to the whole 'bishop interview' process. I understand the Law of Chastity quite well, but I'm sure that he just wanted to confirm that I wasn't violating it without knowing I was doing so. He is a great bishop and I trust him, I just am a pretty private person, so discussing anything sexual in nature with my bishop is uncharted territory for me.

Thank you so much to everyone again, I really appreciate the input, and I'm very interested to see how this thread is developing.

[candyprpl]

Wow, I got so many great responses! Thank you so much everyone for all of your perspectives, it has really helped.

I think the issue is mainly just that, as a convert, I am not used to the whole 'bishop interview' process. I understand the Law of Chastity quite well, but I'm sure that he just wanted to confirm that I wasn't violating it without knowing I was doing so. He is a great bishop and I trust him, I just am a pretty private person, so discussing anything sexual in nature with my bishop is uncharted territory for me.

Thank you so much to everyone again, I really appreciate the input, and I'm very interested to see how this thread is developing.

I'm glad you could read everyone's responses and still trust your Bishop! No offense anyone, but with very little info you sure went after that poor bishop. It's a very hard, uncomfortable conversation for everyone involved!!!

[Guest Alana]

So if he'd left it 'do you follow the law of chastity....are you SURE???' it still would have been awkward? Heh, poor bishops:P

[YoungMormonRoyalist]

Wow, I got so many great responses! Thank you so much everyone for all of your perspectives, it has really helped.

I think the issue is mainly just that, as a convert, I am not used to the whole 'bishop interview' process. I understand the Law of Chastity quite well, but I'm sure that he just wanted to confirm that I wasn't violating it without knowing I was doing so. He is a great bishop and I trust him, I just am a pretty private person, so discussing anything sexual in nature with my bishop is uncharted territory for me.

Thank you so much to everyone again, I really appreciate the input, and I'm very interested to see how this thread is developing.

For sure! I know that with my experience in YSA that a lot of people in my ward knew a general overview of the law of chastity, but sometimes were surprised when activities they thought innocent were against it!

I think that sometimes, especially when a couple just starts dating, the Bishope just likes to check and make sure that we know the lines. :)

[MarginOfError]

It's pretty cut and dry--the bishop crossed over the line that divides appropriate from inappropriate.

Handling these situations isn't all that difficult, really. You ask the person if they abide the law of chastity, and then you ask them to explain how they interpret the law of chastity. It even states in the handbooks that bishops shouldn't ask detailed questions because that runs the risk of giving them ideas, or sparking curiosity. Next time any of you are in this kind of situation, you should politely explain that you're happy to describe your interpretation of the law of chastity, but unless he has reason to believe that you've violated it, he has no business asking those kinds of questions.

[MsQwerty]

I'm glad there are differing views in response to this thread.

It's always been my understanding that bishops are not supposed to ask for sexual details during an interview. Anything outside of 'are you living the law of chastity?' is simply intrusive. As a matter of fact I've been through many such interviews and never once had a bishop ask for any details concerning my sexual behaviour.

If it were me I'd simply tell the bishop I understand the Law of Chastity and that his asking for details makes me feel uncomfortable not because of any wrong-doing on my part, but because I feel the questioning is inappropriate and intrusive.

If he continues, I would most definitely complain to my stake president.

The majority of bishops are good, sensible, honorable men. My current bishop is one of the most amazing people I have ever had the honor to know.

But there are always the few who have a creepy side - don't even get me started. I know one who had a restraining order put out against him by a girl in a supermarket he became obsessed with and began writing love letters to. Another approached me in the ward library with the door closed, to tell me that he understood what it was like to be in love with more than one person at a time - and proceeded to tell me he loved me and wanted to have a relationship with me. Another I know was bishop and then stake president for over a decade - all the while he was beating up his stepsons, treating his wife like dirt and keeping his entire family living in poverty while he earned good money and spent it on buying cars and motorbikes for himself. I also know of one who made advances at a teenage boy who was boarding in his home. And none of this is hearsay or gossip - I've been involved either personally or closely with the families of these bishops in each instance.

I'm completely over thinking my bishops can say and do whatever they want without question - they can't. I will sustain and support them in their leadership in any way I can, but if they cross any boundaries like asking for sexual details - I will let them know and take it further if necessary.

This sort of thing should not be protected or excused or kept behind closed doors.

[ryanh]

I'm a bit surprised at all the judgmental posts. It's just so easy to be an armchair quarterback when we have absoutely no idea what was going on. I hope none of us is judged without consideration of conditions and circumstances in a similar manner at the final judgement.

I was with my stake pres about a month ago, and after asking about keeping LoC, he asked more detailed questions - masterbation, friendships with other women, etc. Although they were a little uncomfortable topics to discuss, they were all appropriate questions IMO. No big deal.

Why is it that this Bishop "absoutely crossed the line"? What makes it so impossible that there were not promptings to ask in certian ways? Or even just promptings to review things that are not appropriate, but being a faliable man, he didn't choose 'the perfect' way to discuss it?

[candyprpl]

The majority of bishops are good, sensible, honorable men. My current bishop is one of the most amazing people I have ever had the honor to know.

But there are always the few who have a creepy side - don't even get me started. QUOTE]

But you did get started! I don't think it was important to know the intimate details of these bishops you say you know/knew. Everyone is entitled to their opinion but we don't have to have proof that our opinion is valid.

[Saguaro]

I'm a bit surprised at all the judgmental posts. It's just so easy to be an armchair quarterback when we have absoutely no idea what was going on.

I think we know exactly what was going on, go back a re-read the first post.

He asked me if we were keeping that law, which of course is an affirmative, but then he went into great detail about asking what we were and were not doing, and asking me to describe what all we do physically (which is not much).

While I know he had the best intentions, I couldn't help but feel extremely uncomfortable. I do not share that kind of info regularly, and I definitely did not want to share it with my new bishop.

This detailed line of questioning was inappropriate and intrusive. They could have easily had a discussion about what was appropriate or not under the law of chastity without asking her to describe what she does with her boyfriend. If anyone ever feels that uncomfortable in an interview and has done nothing wrong, they have every right to ask the bishop to stop the line of questioning.

[Vort]

This detailed line of questioning was inappropriate and intrusive. They could have easily had a discussion about what was appropriate or not under the law of chastity without asking her to describe what she does with her boyfriend. If anyone ever feels that uncomfortable in an interview and has done nothing wrong, they have every right to ask the bishop to stop the line of questioning.

I disagree. Specifically, I don't think you have any basis for your claim that the bishop was out of line. I admit that I would be taken aback if the bishop started quizzing me about my intimate marital practices. But then, I'm married, so that really is a different matter.

I have a close relative who is an adult single (man) and who has told me hair-raising stories about the LDS dating scene after the age of 30. According to him, almost all of the women he dates (many of whom have children and most of whom are significantly younger than he is) will, on the second or third date, try to bed him. When he refuses, they profess profound respect for his moral uprightness and then try to get him to propose to them.

What's more, after a few more dates, most will propose some sort of "modified" sex, usually something involving one or both ends of the gastrointestinal tract. According to this relative, these women believe that such sexual activity "doesn't count".

Now, it's easy, and probably true, to say that such people are simply fooling themselves. Nevertheless, if such attitudes are prevalent among adult LDS singles in some areas, I think it's perfectly appropriate and even necessary for the bishop to make very sure of the state of worthiness of the people he's talking with.

[ryanh]

I have a close relative who is an adult single (man) and who has told me hair-raising stories about the LDS dating scene after the age of 30. According to him, almost all of the women he dates (many of whom have children and most of whom are significantly younger than he is) will, on the second or third date, try to bed him. When he refuses, they profess profound respect for his moral uprightness and then try to get him to propose to them.

Oh great, not really sure I really wanted to read those thoughts. The next couple years aren't going to be fun. No wonder my Stake Pres was warning so strongly that I'd certianly face temptation.

[BenRaines]

I did not read all the posts but let me share what I have experienced both as interviewer and interviewee.

A convert of two years may not have a full understanding of what the Law of Chastity entails. If you have not heard it yet there are many misunderstandings about what is ok and what is not between two non married people.

I have been asked questions as a youth about what I thought living the Law of Chastity meant and then had some other things added on by Bishop that I had not covered.

I believe that it is too easy of a question to just ask, "Are you living the Law of Chastity?". Better question is "What do you understand the Law of Chastity to mean? If a very brief answer then ask them to further explain, as a Bishop teach, help them to understand it fully. Then ask "Are you living the Law of Chastity?".

How can you answer yes or no to a law you do not fully understand?

With morality being challenged every day and good kids failing to live the Law of Chastity I think there is a long way to go to instructing what is ok and what isn't and then making sure it is understood.

Ben Raines

[Generally_Me]

I sincerely hope this isn't so.

But I had an impression that maybe the boyfriend admitted to some sexual deviance but didn't go into detail on "who", and he was concerned you were party to it. That or maybe some story is floating around the ward, something started by some jealous person.