I ran across this archived thread on the Recovery from Mormonism short topics page.
It seems that this man and his wife went to see the movie Chicago and had to confess to the bishop about it. Chicago is only rated PG-13, and since the movie isn't rated R, there shouldn't have been a problem about the flick, right? Wrong.
The bishop had asked everyone in the ward to NOT see this movie. Why? Well, the bishop thought that the movies that are rated "PG-13" today would have been rated "R" not too long ago. What gets me is the fact that he felt he had the right to make a decision like this. Who is he to tell people what they should see in the movie theater? If the movie isn't against the rules people follow as good Mormons, what difference should it make? Well, it seems this guy thought he knew what was best for everyone, and wasn't shy about telling them.
So I met with the Bishop. He was rather forthright in his purpose. He spoke at me for about ten minutes regarding how easily it is to slip into to moral problems, how standards are slipping with respect to media and what is rated PG13 would have been an X rating 20 years ago; etc.
He said he knew his talk on not seeing Chicago bothered some people and that was his intent. Those that were bothered would either respond with sincere repentance or anger. (Now I see the double-bind I was warned about!) He complimented my wife for unburdening her soul. He just wants to be sure that "wife" and I are progressing together.
It was clear that "wife" did not tell him that I was ticked and for that I am grateful. But then he went into the silent routine after asking me if there was anything that I would like to tell him. I tell you I was so uncomfortable. I felt like a deacon again. So I slipped and told him that I know "wife" confessed about liking the movie Chicago but that since I did not feel guilty, I saw no reason to see him.
He then told me that this is how Satan deceives us and that I should be grateful to have such a spiritually aware wife. He then chided me for not having the reversed role, that is, I should have been the one to see the evil and lead my family more effectively.
He then asked me if there were other issues that I did not feel guilty about. I could not believe that! I was so upset that I did not answer. He looked at me and said my name with deep sincerity. I answered, "No" but with a lot of emotion. Then he says, that my spirit is crying out for the truth and that I need to search my soul (what is the difference between my spirit and soul?) for the inequities in my life and resolve them with the proper priesthood authorities.
Dang it! I fell right into the trap! I thought this would go well and then go away. Now I am supposed to fast and pray about my life and schedule an appointment with him next month. I feel stuck. If I confess then I am guilty. If I don't then I am hiding something and I am guilty.
I got home and "wife" cheerily asked how it went. I did not snap at her, but she could tell I was upset. This morning she probed at breakfast but I still didn't talk. Why the heck did I go to the meeting? I can't focus at work. I can't talk to my wife. I don't want to talk to the Bishop again, but if I don't, I will still be in trouble.
I thought the truth was my greatest ally. Seems like honesty just ...ah forget it.
Just venting. sorry for bothering you all
Another example of how the church guilts you into explaining everything you do to the bishop and other priesthood leaders. This guy did nothing wrong, yet his wife felt guilty about seeing a movie and "tattled."
How arrogant of this bishop to call this man into the office and say, "Do you have anything you want to tell me?" Who is this guy? A parent? Isn't that something you would say to a little kid after you catch them in the cookie jar?
A grown man and woman should not have to answer to someone else like this. They are not children! They should be allowed to see any movie they want to! Who is this guy to do this? Sorry, the whole thing just pissed me off.
June 7, 2008 at 10:35 AM
If I remember correctly, it was Hinkley who came out first and said not to watch it durring a conference talk. He would not use the movie's name but by the way he described it, there was not doubt which one he was talking about. How stupid is it to go through all of this for a movie. Don't Bishops have more important things to do like spend time with their families or feeding the poor?
June 7, 2008 at 4:08 PM
I am so over leaders pulling crap like that on members. I always want to plug my ears and go "lalalalalala" when my family starts piping up with this stuff.
June 7, 2008 at 11:54 PM
Recently we had a Relief Society President declare that children should not be allowed to eat during sacrament meeting because it was against the Lord's law of cleaniless in the chapel. Was she right? Hardly...and I must admit, my wife and I did turn around like that guy in the story and say 'wait a minute..'
Essentially my point is, sometimes leaders do some dumb things...because in the end, we are human...WOMEN included.
I'm so lucky I feel to have a liberally minded and caring Bishop who even after I confessed some past sins to him said to me, 'I want you to know I don't think of you any less now than I did before you walked through that door...'
I guess maybe the church is a little less authoritarian away from SLC. But I confess, I've heard some rather nasty stories of men and women in high positions doing dumb/stupid/arrogant things.
Its just who we are sometimes. Doesn't it happen at work too?? It certainly does in my work life. My boss in my previous job (another woman) once chastised me for bringing my baby to the workplace (during Lunch and during my time off) to show the other co-workers. She was a complete power tripper and an idiot who didn't like things being done against her wishes.
I freely admit, the Church leaders shouldn't be like that, but unfortunately...sometimes they are. I just hope that I am never ever ever like that....