I don't believe you pay a full tithe.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

So a Bishop should simply serve as a symbolic rubber stamp for getting your temple recommend?

It's a good question. If his job is just to ask the question ... might as well put it online and automate the blasted thing. It'd sure save the bishoprics and stake presidencies a lot of time.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by Tex

It's a good question. If his job is just to ask the question ... might as well put it online and automate the blasted thing. It'd sure save the bishoprics and stake presidencies a lot of time.

Maybe he lives in a place where the bishopric and stake presidency all live within a 2 block radius.

[marsupial]

Originally Posted by Tex

It's a good question. If his job is just to ask the question ... might as well put it online and automate the blasted thing. It'd sure save the bishoprics and stake presidencies a lot of time.

It's not rubber stamp automation. The bishop asks straightforward questions and it is up to the interviewee to answer them honestly. It is an opportunity to come clean, if necessary, and seek help to become worthy to hold a recommend again. Sure people lie. But it is not the bishop's job to be a lie detector. I am sure there are times when a bishop may feel a strong prompting from the spirit that the person is lying, but I don't think additional questions are necessary. More appropriate would be to say, "are you being completely honest with your answer?"

[Tex]

Originally Posted by marsupial

It's not rubber stamp automation. The bishop asks straightforward questions and it is up to the interviewee to answer them honestly. It is an opportunity to come clean, if necessary, and seek help to become worthy to hold a recommend again. Sure people lie. But it is not the bishop's job to be a lie detector. I am sure there are times when a bishop may feel a strong prompting from the spirit that the person is lying, but I don't think additional questions are necessary. More appropriate would be to say, "are you being completely honest with your answer?"

I disagree. I don't think it ought to be an inquisition, with intrusive personal questioning. Nor do I think it ought to be a personal preference interview, like dispensing criticism on when or how often someone pays tithing (or net/gross).

But it's one of a bishop's 5 hats to be a judge in Israel, both as it regards church membership (bishop's disciplinary councils) and worthiness. This is why when you have an expired recommend you don't go see a counselor, you see the bishop. This is why when you are a member of a ward for less than a year and want a new temple recommend, you don't go see a counselor, you see the bishop. Sometimes the new bishop is even directed to contact the old.

You certainly can lie, and I'm sure there are those who have. You are also only required to return once every 2 years now, so there's plenty of time to make mischief between interviews. But if the bishop has legitimate reason to suspect you are unworthy, I see nothing wrong with some gentle probing.

[Brian]

Originally Posted by Tex

It's a good question. If his job is just to ask the question ... might as well put it online and automate the blasted thing. It'd sure save the bishoprics and stake presidencies a lot of time.

Or we could have a special "room", with a single chair, a single bright light, the bishop pacing in front of you, and Brother Swenson, arms crossed, biceps bulging leaning against the wall.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Tex

I disagree. I don't think it ought to be an inquisition, with intrusive personal questioning. Nor do I think it ought to be a personal preference interview, like dispensing criticism on when or how often someone pays tithing (or net/gross).

But it's one of a bishop's 5 hats to be a judge in Israel, both as it regards church membership (bishop's disciplinary councils) and worthiness. This is why when you have an expired recommend you don't go see a counselor, you see the bishop. This is why when you are a member of a ward for less than a year and want a new temple recommend, you don't go see a counselor, you see the bishop. Sometimes the new bishop is even directed to contact the old.

You certainly can lie, and I'm sure there are those who have. You are also only required to return once every 2 years now, so there's plenty of time to make mischief between interviews. But if the bishop has legitimate reason to suspect you are unworthy, I see nothing wrong with some gentle probing.

Comments like this prove to me you're a hard ass, works-loving Pharisee.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by jay santos

Comments like this prove to me you're a hard ass, works-loving Pharisee.

You got all that from "gentle probing"?

[Goatnapper'96]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

You got all that from "gentle probing"?

You would be amazed where they check when your little swimmers don't get upstream, I am probably the only below 50 member of this site who can say that not all probing is alike........

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by Goatnapper'96

You would be amazed where they check when your little swimmers don't get upstream, I am probably the only below 50 member of this site who can say that not all probing is alike........

I set 'em up, you knock 'em down.

[Ace Tomato Co.]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

So a Bishop should simply serve as a symbolic rubber stamp for getting your temple recommend?

You and I both know that the person asking the questions is instructed to ask the questions exactly as they are written and not to pry. Read your handbook - the honesty of the answers is between the member and god.

I personally have never had anyone pry into answers I've given, nor have I ever heard of a bishop doing so (independent of this board).

Imagine the pandora's box that would be opened if bishops felt like it was their duty to ascertain the honesty of the answers being given.