by

The first time I heard the word “masturbation,” I was 12 years old and sitting in my bishop’s office.

I believe we were discussing a limited use recommend for an upcoming temple trip. I remember the bishop walking through the 1990 version of For the Strength of Youth, which used a lot of large, sexual words I did not know — like “petting” and “perversion” and “pornography.”

My bishop defined them for me. When he realized I had no idea what he was talking about, he apologized. He explained how due to the evils of the world, children were getting exposed to sex and having their innocence corrupted by Satan younger and younger. As much as he hated the topic, he felt like it was his pastoral duty to make sure the youth knew what constituted sin.

For the next 13 years, I don’t remember any other interview sex question except “Do you keep the law of chastity?” “Yes.”

Until, at age 25, I met with my Single’s Ward Bishop for an endowment / sealing recommend. My wedding had been scheduled for almost a year; it was now a month away. I was graduating, leaving town, getting married in another state, moving across the country, and starting my career. All my future plans hinged upon “passing” the interview. But I wasn’t worried — I’d never had any temple recommend problems before. Until the interview veered off course.

* * *

BISHOP: Do you keep the law of chastity?

ME: Yes.

BISHOP: *leading* You know, you’ve been engaged for a very long time…

ME: …and I have kept the law of chastity.

BISHOP: Are you sure? I’m just really surprised you’ve never confessed anything to me, given your long engagement. Most couples in your circumstances struggle.

ME: We’re in a long-distance relationship! We have kept the law of chastity.

BISHOP: Carolyn, this is serious. Failure to confess is grounds to deny you a temple recommend.

ME: *trying to diffuse situation* Look, there was once nine months ago I felt like we went a little too far while making out, and we promptly discussed it with my boyfriend’s bishop, who laughed at us it was so minor. As a couple we adjusted a boundary, and it hasn’t happened again.

BISHOP: We’ll I’m your bishop. Confessing to your boyfriend’s bishop doesn’t count. You have to confess the same thing to me.

ME: *flustered* But it was nine months ago, it hasn’t recurred, and I feel at peace with God.

BISHOP: I am the Priesthood leader with stewardship over you. You need to confess it to me.

ME: Seriously, it wasn’t that big of a deal. *Provides high level description.*

BISHOP: That’s not good enough. Were you in a bedroom? Were you laying down? Was it late at night? Were you in a dress, or pants? Were your clothes on, or off? Where were his hands? Under or over your shirt? Below or above the waist?

ME: *Getting increasingly agitated with line of questions, but answering them out of deference.*

BISHOP: That’s it? Ok, I agree with your boyfriend’s bishop, that was minor. Here’s your temple recommend.

* * *

In retrospect, both interactions were abjectly horrifying. No 50-year old man should be privately teaching a 12-year-old girl sexual terms, or questioning a 25-year-old woman about the exact positioning of her shirt when she kissed her fiance. From conversations with others, I know my experiences are not uncommon; many friends have sat through far worse interrogations.

Yet at the time, I assumed the problem was me. I felt uncomfortable, but I was sitting before a Priesthood leader — a “Judge in Israel.” I knew the Church cared deeply about standards of moral behavior, so I assumed these were normal pastoral discussions of weighty spiritual matters. The For the Strength of Youth pamphlet discusses sexual purity at length, including the necessity for confession to a Bishop — in my mind these awkward confession-prompting questions logically followed. I even felt a little bad for my Bishops, that they had to assume such an uncomfortable burden of asking and listening.

I didn’t realize the problem was inherent to the entire structure of worthiness interviews until well after I was married, when I started reading the Bloggernacle. Someone, somewhere, in a post circa 2013, mentioned the impropriety of sexually explicit youth interviews. I don’t remember the post — maybe Neylan McBaine? — but I remember the reality of it hitting me like a ton of bricks. In any other setting — school, work, retail — my Bishop’s questions would have constituted sexual harassment.

These lines of questioning must stop. The power dynamic is inherently coercive; the topic of discussion inherently ripe for abuse, damaging counsel, and re-traumatization. I’m pleased the Church recently changed its policy in order to invite second adults into Bishop interviews. But more needs to be done to eradicate all of the terrible ideas that lay, untrained clergy exhibit surrounding chastity, sex, worthiness, and confession.

The first toxic idea to raze? The crazy notion so many Bishops (and members) have, that detailed sexual discussion is spiritually necessary to repentance or healing.