Church responds to man on hunger strike

[Guest MormonGator]

1 minute ago, Grunt said:

I may or may not, depending on the circumstance.  I would also want to give my son the freedom to talk openly about things that affect his eternal happiness.  

Grunt, did your kids convert as well? Just asking, nothing more. 

[Grunt]

4 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Grunt, did your kids convert as well? Just asking, nothing more. 

They are young enough for it to be easy.  It only helped that our values were pretty consistent with the Church before I converted.  

Lots of questions, but they both turn 8 this fall and talk about baptism.  

[Guest MormonGator]

1 minute ago, Grunt said:

They are young enough for it to be easy.  It only helped that our values were pretty consistent with the Church before I converted.  

Lots of questions, but they both turn 8 this fall and talk about baptism.  

Thanks bud. I knew you had kids, but I didn't know their ages/genders, etc. 

[Grunt]

7 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

Thanks bud. I knew you had kids, but I didn't know their ages/genders, etc. 

No worries.  Converting with kids is interesting.  I don't mean this negatively, but it seems like the church does a great job instructing its youth.  They spend a decent amount of time teaching me.  

[anatess2]

20 hours ago, NeuroTypical said:

So, here's a thing: The 16-17 yr old kid who confesses to his bishop of sinning with a boyfriend/girlfriend.  Kid works through the repentance process with bishop.  Kid is anxious to the point of passing out at the prospect of people finding out details, worried about what people will think, etc.  

No laws have been broken.  No abuse or anything close to it.  No reason to call any hotline.  Bishop has discussed case with Stake President without using names.  All the parents know of the relationship, and have been worried things got too serious.  Bishop and kid reach an agreement on what to tell parents/peers/others, agreeing on statements like "Bishop is helping kid work through some things."  Both kids' bishops compare notes.  Basically, parents are kept in the dark on the details.   Kid emerges from repentance process with a clean soul and lighter shoulders that have shed the burden of the sin, and life is good again.

Anyone want to call foul here?

(I know this is a thing, because I was executive secretary and watched part of this process fly by.  I am changing some of the details, and probably misremembering others.)

Me.  I call foul.

A bishop who is okay with a child going through the repentance process without the knowledge of their parents is usurping the Presiding Priesthood Authority over my children - which is held by their father.

[NeuroTypical]

Understandable.  As I watched this go by, and watched the Bishop and counselors agonize about how much or how little to share with the parents, I was struck by how much I didn't envy them.

[NeuroTypical]

And I want to make sure something is understood - I was a minor player who witnessed a small part of the overall process.  Plus, my memory of such things is notoriously bad, to the point that I am certain I am missing things and misremembering other things.  So it's entirely possible the bishop did indeed share "your son is repenting" details with the parents, and I just wasn't there to see it, or forgot it.

I do pretty clearly remember being glad I wasn't bishop and this case wasn't my call.

[anatess2]

4 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

And I want to make sure something is understood - I was a minor player who witnessed a small part of the overall process.  Plus, my memory of such things is notoriously bad, to the point that I am certain I am missing things and misremembering other things.  So it's entirely possible the bishop did indeed share "your son is repenting" details with the parents, and I just wasn't there to see it, or forgot it.

I do pretty clearly remember being glad I wasn't bishop and this case wasn't my call.

If I was bishop - and I'm glad I'm a woman and not have to worry about this stuff - I would encourage the child to confess to his father and assure the child that he will support him and help him through the entire process.

[NeuroTypical]

9 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

If I was bishop - and I'm glad I'm a woman and not have to worry about this stuff - I would encourage the child to confess to his father and assure the child that he will support him and help him through the entire process.

It's always fun when dad is immature in the gospel/a non-member/not involved in the picture.  Or when a marriage is teetering on the edge of destruction, and a bishop knows something like this could very well send it over the edge.  Or if the kid's rapidly fading testimony hangs in the balance, and the bishop must walk the line between parental rights, and a trust built on everyone telling the kid "repentance is between you, the Lord, and your bishop".  Or...

Yeah.  I'm big on sustaining bishops in general.  We don't know a tenth of what they handle. 

[BJ64]

I think I’m especially thankful that I’m not the bishop of a youth single adult ward. 

[anatess2]

12 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

It's always fun when dad is immature in the gospel/a non-member/not involved in the picture.  Or when a marriage is teetering on the edge of destruction, and a bishop knows something like this could very well send it over the edge.  Or if the kid's rapidly fading testimony hangs in the balance, and the bishop must walk the line between parental rights, and a trust built on everyone telling the kid "repentance is between you, the Lord, and your bishop".  Or...

Yeah.  I'm big on sustaining bishops in general.  We don't know a tenth of what they handle. 

Then the bishop should be working with the parents or whoever is the parental figure of the child, not usurp their authority.  Doesn't matter if non-member or not involved in the picture.  Somebody is that child's adult authority in the home - if the father doesn't hold the priesthood, the responsibility lands on the mother, the grandfather, etc..

Edited July 31, 2018 by anatess2

[NeuroTypical]

I think we both agree that repentance is between the sinner, the Lord, and the bishop.  And we agree, that when minors are involved, it's the parent's stewardship and responsibility to help the kid get that done.   We're discussing the area where it is getting done without (or in spite of) a parent's involvement. 

Anatess casts a vote for grounded practical reality of black and white-ness - parent/legal guardian is always involved, all the time, no exceptions.  Otherwise there's unjust ursurping of parental stewardship going on.

I can certainly appreciate that notion.  I'm not wise or experienced enough to know if it's always the most correct notion. 

 

Edited July 31, 2018 by NeuroTypical

[estradling75]

On 7/30/2018 at 4:30 PM, NeuroTypical said:

So, here's a thing: The 16-17 yr old kid who confesses to his bishop of sinning with a boyfriend/girlfriend.  Kid works through the repentance process with bishop.  Kid is anxious to the point of passing out at the prospect of people finding out details, worried about what people will think, etc.  

No laws have been broken.  No abuse or anything close to it.  No reason to call any hotline.  Bishop has discussed case with Stake President without using names.  All the parents know of the relationship, and have been worried things got too serious.  Bishop and kid reach an agreement on what to tell parents/peers/others, agreeing on statements like "Bishop is helping kid work through some things."  Both kids' bishops compare notes.  Basically, parents are kept in the dark on the details.   Kid emerges from repentance process with a clean soul and lighter shoulders that have shed the burden of the sin, and life is good again.

Anyone want to call foul here?

(I know this is a thing, because I was executive secretary and watched part of this process fly by.  I am changing some of the details, and probably misremembering others.)

I am going to say no...

As the presiding priesthood authority in my home... I do not need the details from the bishop.  All I need to know is that the bishop is talking to him.

If I am doing my job I will know or quickly learn that my son meeting with the bishop... and a comment along the lines of "He is working some things through with the bishop" is all I need to know.  It all I need to know for one simple reason.

I can ask my son.  That is my authority.  Not in getting the bishop to talk.

If I can not get my son to trust me enough to open up and share... Then I have failed as a parent and per section 121 in the Doctrine and Covenants.  I have lost my authority. It then become my responsibly to regain that and I do not do that by browbeating the bishop (or anyone else for that matter).  I do that by regaining my son's trust and faith.

Nothing in this requires a bishop to violate a trust.  A whole lot requires me to have a good relationship with my son(s).

 

[SpiritDragon]

8 hours ago, anatess2 said:

Then the bishop should be working with the parents or whoever is the parental figure of the child, not usurp their authority.  Doesn't matter if non-member or not involved in the picture.  Somebody is that child's adult authority in the home - if the father doesn't hold the priesthood, the responsibility lands on the mother, the grandfather, etc..

I don't believe the bishop is usurping any power whatsoever. He is performing his duty as a common judge in Israel and asking questions of worthiness. A father can ask these same questions in a father's interview/council. The bishop has a terrible job of keeping a sacred trust when I'm sure sometimes telling others would ease his burdens a great deal. Let's not blame the bishop for knowing things that the parents haven't developed the relationship with their child to find out for themselves.

[SpiritDragon]

I find the two adults thing perfectly reasonable from the standpoint of protecting children from being alone with an adult and protecting adults from allegations. I do have a concern though that an extra adult in the room is going to make it that much harder to open up and talk about stuff that is embarrassing. i really struggled to bring up issues i had with my bishop as a teenager and didn't trust my mom not to blab and didn't want my dad to know because it would crush him. I sure wouldn't have wanted some other adult I know even less than my parents involved as I would likely have lied to keep secrets at that point and just try to go it alone and put it behind me.

As far as the idea of having a member of each of the sexes in the room, I would be extra scared to confess anything with a female in the room because in my experience that sex is typically less capable of keeping secrets. Whether that's actually true or not doesn't matter if the perception is there to deter sharing confidential information when the sharing is important to the repentance process.

[anatess2]

7 hours ago, SpiritDragon said:

I don't believe the bishop is usurping any power whatsoever. He is performing his duty as a common judge in Israel and asking questions of worthiness. A father can ask these same questions in a father's interview/council. The bishop has a terrible job of keeping a sacred trust when I'm sure sometimes telling others would ease his burdens a great deal. Let's not blame the bishop for knowing things that the parents haven't developed the relationship with their child to find out for themselves.

That's not the case presented.  The case presented is that the bishop is going through the repentance process with the child (repentance requires action - so the bishop is giving actionable instructions) without the involvement of the child's adult authority.  This is not just about developing a relationship and knowing things the parents do not.  This is about a bishop who is giving the child instructions without parental knowledge.

As a parent, I don't allow anybody to tell my children to do something without my knowledge.  Parental authority is sacred.  When the time comes that my child and I face the Lord, it is not the bishop that will account for my parenting or lack thereof.  It is I, member or not.  Therefore, the bishop, or anybody else for that matter, cannot tell my child to do something that I don't know anything about.  Therefore, before he tells my child to do something beyond the faith instructions of Sunday School, his first instruction should be - talk to your parents.

[NeedleinA]

5 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Therefore, before he tells my child to do something beyond the faith instructions of Sunday School, his first instruction should be - talk to your parents.

Do you have an example of something the Bishop would tell a "child" to do that was beyond the faith instructions of Sunday School?

[anatess2]

7 minutes ago, NeedleinA said:

Do you have an example of something the Bishop would tell a "child" to do that was beyond the faith instructions of Sunday School?

Don't wear a bowtie.

[NeedleinA]

28 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

Don't wear a bowtie.

A bowtie? Is that the kind of thing that requires two adults in an interview or to become worried about accounting for ourselves before the Lord someday?
I was hoping there was some kind of heavy example we were talking about.

Edited August 1, 2018 by NeedleinA

[anatess2]

45 minutes ago, NeedleinA said:

A bowtie? Is that the kind of thing that requires two adults in an interview or to become worried about accounting for ourselves before the Lord someday?
I was hoping there was some kind of heavy example we were talking about.

You can't possibly be serious in your question.  If you can't come up with anything the bishop can say to your child outside of Sunday School yourself then there's no reason for bishops to meet with any child outside of Sunday School.

Edit:  Ok, I decided to help you out.  You want a heavy example, here it is - "Abort/don't abort that child".

Edited August 1, 2018 by anatess2

[SpiritDragon]

1 hour ago, anatess2 said:

That's not the case presented.  The case presented is that the bishop is going through the repentance process with the child (repentance requires action - so the bishop is giving actionable instructions) without the involvement of the child's adult authority.  This is not just about developing a relationship and knowing things the parents do not.  This is about a bishop who is giving the child instructions without parental knowledge.

As a parent, I don't allow anybody to tell my children to do something without my knowledge.  Parental authority is sacred.  When the time comes that my child and I face the Lord, it is not the bishop that will account for my parenting or lack thereof.  It is I, member or not.  Therefore, the bishop, or anybody else for that matter, cannot tell my child to do something that I don't know anything about.  Therefore, before he tells my child to do something beyond the faith instructions of Sunday School, his first instruction should be - talk to your parents.

It is not only the Bishop's right, but his responsibility as part of the calling to help people repent. As the common judge in Israel he has authority that even the parents don't when it comes to matters of repentance.

Quote

Myth #6: I’ve stopped committing a serious sin, so I don’t need to see the bishop. I can just pray and be fine, or just tell my parents.

“The Lord has declared that the bishop is a common judge in Israel (see D&C 107:72, 74). He has the responsibility to determine the worthiness of the members of his ward. By ordination and righteous living, the bishop is entitled to revelation from the Holy Ghost regarding the members of his ward, including you.

“The bishop can help you through the repentance process in ways your parents or other leaders are unable to provide. If the sin is serious enough, he may determine that your privileges in the Church should be restricted. For example, as part of your repentance process, he may ask you to refrain from partaking of the sacrament or exercising the priesthood for a period of time. He will work with you and determine when you are worthy again to resume those sacred activities.”⁶ —Elder C. Scott Grow of the Seventy

 

[NeedleinA]

11 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

"Abort/don't abort that child".

And have you or your child been on the receiving end of such a direct black and white "do it" command by your actual bishop when it comes to a heavy subject? or is this an example of a story from a story and then another story?

Offering counsel, inspired suggestions, examples from the scriptures about options that a pregnant woman should consider as she tries to figure her situation out is a far cry from some kind of mandatory command: "Abort/don't abort that child"

[NeuroTypical]

13 minutes ago, SpiritDragon said:

It is not only the Bishop's right, but his responsibility as part of the calling to help people repent.

Anatess' point revolves around Minor Child not equaling Person.  There's a difference legally, and stewardship-wise as well.  

We're also discussing the principle of the thing, using hypotheticals.  (And ultimately, none of us are bishops here)

Edited August 1, 2018 by NeuroTypical

[anatess2]

12 minutes ago, SpiritDragon said:

It is not only the Bishop's right, but his responsibility as part of the calling to help people repent. As the common judge in Israel he has authority that even the parents don't when it comes to matters of repentance.

 

Being the common judge in Israel puts him as the judge of the parents as well.  The children cannot be separated from the parents.  Hence the decision not to baptize children of gay parents.

[anatess2]

3 minutes ago, NeedleinA said:

And have you or your child been on the receiving end of such a direct black and white "do it" command by your actual bishop when it comes to a heavy subject? or is this an example of a story from a story and then another story?

Offering counsel, inspired suggestions, examples from the scriptures about options that a pregnant woman should consider as she tries to figure her situation out is a far cry from some kind of mandatory command: "Abort/don't abort that child"

The bowtie is the direct example.

The abortion is what is possible.  A pregnant child not telling her parents she's pregnant should be adviced by the bishop to to tell their parents instead of going through with the advice on what to do with the pregnancy (as it is his job as the judge of Israel to give advice on the morality of an abortion for each specific case) without her parents' knowledge.

Edited August 1, 2018 by anatess2