My first "sexual-oriented" interview took place 53 years ago, when I was 12 and was about to be ordained a Deacon in the Aaronic Priesthood. This was taking place in Northern France, where there were very few members at the time. The Branch President only asked me, "are you pure"? and I asked, "what does it mean?" and he told me, "you come from a good family and I don't think we need to go any further in this", then hugged me and I was ordained a Deacon. I know times have changed since, but there is always more good than bad in whatevever the Church does to bless its members, regardless of the mistakes some Leaders make. The problem with members such as Brother Young, is that they turn it around, and make the bad look worse than the good, thus "throwing the baby along with the bath-water." We can't let those people do that, because they have fallen under influence from the "Father of Deceit", who makes good look bad and vice-versa.
IM GRATEFUL FOR GOOD CHURCH LEADERS. ONE OF MY SONS AND I HAVE FOUR AND A DAUGHTER...BUT THIS ONE SON DURING HIS INTERVIEW WHEN HE WAS 15 AND 16YRS OLD DECIDED TO SPEAK TO THE BISHOP ABOUT A PROBLEM HE WAS HAVING WHILE STARTING DATING. HE NEVER SPOKE ABOUT IT TO ME UNTIL WAY LATER. I WAS SO GLAD HE HAD SOMEONE TO SPEAK TO AND BE COMFORTABLE SPEAKING ABOUT A SITUATION THAT WAS IMPORTANT TO HIM BUT DIDNT WANT TO SPEAK TO HIS PARENTS ABOUT. HE WAS GIVEN GOOD ADVICE AND IT HELPED HIM A GREAT DEAL. IM GRATEFUL AS A PARENT FOR THE GUIDANCE OF HIS BISHOP AT THE TIME.
I think Brother Young needs to learn that HOW you go about doing something is sometimes just as important as WHAT you are doing.
Imagine being a child and feeling like your parents are being unfair in the choice they made to make you attend school. You can lobby the neighbor kids and find some expert saying that children shouldn't be forced to do anything and then call a news conference to say what a crummy job your parents are doing; and then wonder why you get grounded for life.
His cause may be just, but his method is all wrong.
Why do the articles about this topic not explain that the interviews are not sexually explicit? Have the interviews changed dramatically from 30 years ago? I was never asked anything more than if I lived the law of chastity. That is not sexually explicit!
A friend of mine went to the bishop to confess, and he said the bishop didn't even want to know details. These are not pornographers, they are dads who volunteer their time to help people. Sure, there may be a few bad eggs, and they need to be stopped, but the vast majority are good men doing their best.
A man commenting on the Deseret News article said he dreaded his yearly interview. I loved mine! I appreciated the genuine concern my bishops showed. For someone who battled depression, it was reassuring to know someone else cared personally about me. Perhaps I was blessed with good leaders. However, I'd be very surprised if very many bishops asked explicit questions. What bothers me is that, as concerned nonmembers comment on the article, they believe that these "sexually explicit interviews" actually happen, and no one is telling them different.
Email (will not be published)
Daily news, articles, videos and podcasts sent straight to your inbox.