Only marry return missionaries!


Guest mysticmorini
 Share

Recommended Posts

Alright, so what about a young man who was not officially honourably excused, because he didn't meet the textbook criteria in order to be honourably excused. But he also felt that going on a mission might have a very negative effect on him. So he decides not to go, because that he feels is the right thing for him. Of those who meet the textbook criteria of being able to go on a mission, not everyone in that group will still be able to deal with it - it's down to each individual to decide.

Would you say that young man has committed a sin, and expect him to repent?

Did he get a bona fide revelation not to go? Or was it just an "I lack the requisite Christlike attributes"?

If the former, then--as I already said--he's excused. If the latter, then no soap. His duty was to develop those attributes, and then go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 146
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Did he get a bona fide revelation not to go? Or was it just an "I lack the requisite Christlike attributes"?

If the former, then--as I already said--he's excused. If the latter, then no soap. His duty was to develop those attributes, and then go.

I'm not referring to Christ like attributes. I'm referring to a persons mental and emotional stability, and being able to deal with the stresses that a mission entails at that point in their life. The church has textbook cases listed where a person can be honourably excused because the church doesn't believe that those people would be able to deal with the stresses of a mission. Autistic people I believe are listed, as an example. But this does not mean that those who don't meet this criteria of being honourably excused are able to go. Every person is different, and each individual knows for themselves whether it is the right thing for them or not. Maybe a person is autistic, but hasn't been diagnosed before he reaches 19? That's just one example. He may feel he is not able to go because he doesn't feel he can cope with going on a mission, but does this mean he needs to repent?

Edited by Mahone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think going on a mission is a personal decision. One that should be made after much prayer and soul searching. Personally I don't find that a person that doesn't go on a mission any less righteous, any less moral, any less of a good person than one that does go on one. I've met many return missionaries who are far from that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RM status I think is very over rated these days. Any Nansy Pansy young man can serve a mission pretty much, you have a car, you hardly are encouraged to tract in most cases, member meals, cell phones. Not as difficult as they used to be walking 1000s of miles, not knowing where your next meal was. Relying 100% on the Lord for your well being. I have seen missionaries so disobedient their entire mission I think they gained less of a testimony while here on a mission.

So I think it should be Marry someone who's life reflects aspects of Christlike attributes has a strong testimony and is motivated to provide and Serve. And Love of course

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been a YW Adviser for many years and have taught that the YW should actively encourage YM to go on missions and that they should do this because they should marry an RM. I think "should" carries quite a bit of weight when it is taught to you in this way.

As I think about it I need to consider what else could the church do? We need missionaries to spread the gospel and we know what kind of persuasion females have upon males since the beginning of man, so it is needed. As I think about it a bit more, many of the youth of 1974 (With the "should talk" from Pres. Kimball) are now parents and they believe their children "should" be held by the same standard.

Then fast forward to Oct 2002 with the "Raising of The Bar" Talk of 2002... LDS.org - Ensign Article - The Greatest Generation of Missionaries

Things changed and was even more laid out in a letter to the bishops and stake presidents. As I have written here before (in previous posts) the course of my family was changed with that new policy. I have been quite angry about it in the past, but for this post I will chose a more gentle approach. How I see it now, or at least today, what is done is done. One of my sons was not sure about about going, he had a sweet gf (who is now the mother of my grandchild) and didn't know if he could leave her. When they stressed the BOM and testimony of it, he saw that as his open window and he leapt. He married his gf a year or so later in the Temple. My second son was almost killed when he was injured at work when a tire and rim exploded and did a dance on his face and head before traveling up another 12 feet destroying the lighting and heating in the garage. He was just 17 when that happened and he still wanted to go on a mission when he turned 19. He was told he could not go. I had always been told that it is not the person who testifies the truth, it is "the spirit". I don't know many who holds a stronger spirit than my second son. Just in case anyone is wondering, he had the capability of fulfilling a mission but it was bc of what he had been through (the accident) that he could not go. Of course, there are more stronger feelings I am not sharing here right now. But the truth be known, we know my family wasn't, or will not be, the only family affected as shown here (this thread and others like it) and here.... Unintended consequence of church's 'raising the bar' - Salt Lake Tribune

Shortly after my second son was told he could not go for "medical reasons" we have seen many young men who we know t of their "past" go on missions and I am struck.... I wonder if there has been another "new policy" come out? The last policy I head of was the raising of the bar in 2002. There must be a new policy because according the the 2002 policy and letter that followed (very specific) they would not quality. I guess here is another example that these things will be left for The Lord to figure out.

I know with the way things have been laid out for the YM in the church there has been a clear division line and it happens at 19. The way I see it is a case of the "elite" being called on missions and those who don't measure up in one form or another being left behind. That division line might as well be posted on your forehead because it carries over in YSA or until you are married. Maybe a better way to put it is a crown of glory being bestowed on your head as a RM. It's not only the YW (who have been conditioned), but the YM themselves who wear the crown; they carry a certain air about them. I have personally witnessed other YM being oust because they had not served a two year mission for the church. It even passes onto the mother's of missionaries, and it's a "class" that some will never fit into.... well I guess that's life.

I do feel for these young men who have not gone on missions and the struggles they feel within the church and dating. I know these are real situations and that going on missions doesn't necessarily make better husbands or fathers. I think if the truth be known most 19 year old YM don't souly go out to convert people to the gospel. They go for various reasons that I think might warrant a new thread. Many of the newly returned missionaries I see come home do so with a spirit of entitlement. Last week one of my good friends was telling me about her son's "Homecoming" (yes, they still do have the open houses here in Utah afterward) and how many YW were there. She mentioned how the YW lingered longer than the YM did and how she was excited to watch him fall in love bc he had so many to choose from.

In the end mysticmorini, and those who also find yourself in this situation, I believe the we have a Loving and Just Heavenly Father and is Him whom we serve. Pray that you find a woman who will love YOU unconditionally. That is what is more important here than just the credentials of two years of your life. Also remember that the division line I mentioned earlier in this post will not hold from just serving a mission. Some of those "elite" at 19 will be on the other end of the division at 25. Life is ever changing just like new policies change things. This is such a difficult period of time in our lives (18-30) and this only ads to the pain that can be caused within the church. As it has been said, there are many righteous men and women who have NOT served two year young adult missions of the church. I hope to be able to serve my Heavenly Father every day of my life in one form or another. I know that the church is very concerned about the member of the church who are YSA and in this age group. I have been called to serve with them in my ward and I am excited to do so. I have began to rally some of the people I served when they were in YM and YW and as we meet I want it to be more on the end of fellowshipping these kids, so many get lost for the reasons mentioned here. The church is very concerned about what has happened to these kids and is now doing something about it. I pray things will change and by the time my grandchildren will be at this difficult age and involved in the church there will be a kinder, more gentile take on things. Try to to happy where you are right now and trust in The Lord to make things right in His time.

Edited by StrawberryFields
Link to comment
Share on other sites

you hardly are encouraged to tract in most cases

Well, the purpose of missionary work is to bring souls unto Christ, or in other words, to baptize people into the Church. Statistically, tracting is a very ineffective method of doing this.

I was wondering if you typed all that or had her do it for you.....:D:D

Posted Image

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RM status I think is very over rated these days.

why don't you try it (again?).

Any Nansy Pansy young man can serve a mission pretty much,

But how many can see it through?

you have a car,

I didn't.

you hardly are encouraged to tract in most cases,

My first mission president, a native, encouraged other methods. The second one, from utah, pushed tracting. It wasn't a terribly efficient or effective method.

member meals,

For about 2/3rds of my mission the rule was no eating with members, period.

cell phones.

Not for my first year I didn't. Cell phones on a mission are a godsend.

Not as difficult as they used to be walking 1000s of miles,

There are plusses and minuses. You are right though that it isn't as physically demanding, but spiritually, it is no easier today than in the past.

not knowing where your next meal was.

Socio-cultural thing in the main. It was a test of the people more than of the missionaries.

Relying 100% on the Lord for your well being.

One still does. He just happens to have a more efficient system in place now.

I have seen missionaries so disobedient their entire mission I think they gained less of a testimony while here on a mission.

Of course, which is why having served a mission shouldn't be the sole criterion.

So I think it should be Marry someone who's life reflects aspects of Christlike attributes has a strong testimony and is motivated to provide and Serve. And Love of course

And a good portion of RMs tend to be that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

RM status I think is very over rated these days. Any Nansy Pansy young man can serve a mission pretty much, you have a car, you hardly are encouraged to tract in most cases, member meals, cell phones. Not as difficult as they used to be walking 1000s of miles, not knowing where your next meal was. Relying 100% on the Lord for your well being. I have seen missionaries so disobedient their entire mission I think they gained less of a testimony while here on a mission.

So I think it should be Marry someone who's life reflects aspects of Christlike attributes has a strong testimony and is motivated to provide and Serve. And Love of course

I had the missionaries every week for a meal and have to say the vast majority of the young men we have been blessed with in my area are amazing, and having them in our home I feel helps the next generation of young men and women decide what kind of missionary they are going to be, have I seen poor examples of missionaries sure but to dis our missionaries like that is unwarranted and unfair to the ones that come out of it having grown

My husband is an RM and for me it informs part of his spirit and I am greatful for what he learned out in the missionfield. It was an example I wanted for my children as my illness prevented me then I wanted a husband who had been, if I had been then I would have been less fussy. However a good man and a good missionary is what I was looking for

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not referring to Christ like attributes. I'm referring to a persons mental and emotional stability, and being able to deal with the stresses that a mission entails at that point in their life. The church has textbook cases listed where a person can be honourably excused because the church doesn't believe that those people would be able to deal with the stresses of a mission. Autistic people I believe are listed, as an example. But this does not mean that those who don't meet this criteria of being honourably excused are able to go. Every person is different, and each individual knows for themselves whether it is the right thing for them or not. Maybe a person is autistic, but hasn't been diagnosed before he reaches 19? That's just one example. He may feel he is not able to go because he doesn't feel he can cope with going on a mission, but does this mean he needs to repent?

There may be "textbook cases", but otherwise the rule I've always heard cited is quite broad--e.g:

“There are worthy individuals who desire to serve but do not qualify for the physical, mental, or emotional challenges of a mission. We ask stake presidents and bishops to express love and appreciation to these individuals and to honorably excuse them from full-time missionary labors."

So I think there's an argument there that the Church's policy does cover such an individual.

Even if not: Well, what if for whatever reason I consider myself unable to cope with the stresses of--say--home teaching? Do I just unilaterally refuse to go? Or should I sit down confidentially with a priesthood leader and discuss the situation?

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if not: Well, what if for whatever reason I consider myself unable to cope with the stresses of--say--home teaching? Do I just unilaterally refuse to go? Or should I sit down confidentially with a priesthood leader and discuss the situation?

By all means. But having a "discussion" doesn't miraculously make them able to go. They can be encouraged to go on a mission (which is the most likely outcome of such a meeting), but it doesn't mean they will be able to cope with it any more than before this meeting. Besides, I'm pretty sure a meeting of this nature would occur anyway, usually a bishop will speak to all active young men of mission-sending age to find out what it is they plan to do.

Edited by Mahone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are there enough returned missionaries to go round?

Also, more than half the LDS missionaries I've ever spoken to have been female. According to my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) girls usually only go on missions when they reach their early/mid 20's with no prospect of marriage. Could a lack of male RM's be to blame for this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) girls usually only go on missions when they reach their early/mid 20's with no prospect of marriage. Could a lack of male RM's be to blame for this?

It's only an anecdote, however...

There was this sister on my mission, who was telling her boyfriend that if he didn't ask her to marry him, she was going to go on a Mission. Kept telling him that for months, he kept not asking her to marry him. She went through the MTC, and was in the field for 3 months before her boyfriend sent her a letter asking her to come home and marry him.

She sent him a Dear John, she was having too much fun to want to stop her Mission just to come home to marry some guy that didn't know what a good thing he had.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are there enough returned missionaries to go round?

Also, more than half the LDS missionaries I've ever spoken to have been female. According to my understanding (correct me if I'm wrong) girls usually only go on missions when they reach their early/mid 20's with no prospect of marriage. Could a lack of male RM's be to blame for this?

I'm not an RM and I'm doing just fine on the dating end.

Maybe, instead of concentrating on something they can't change, they can concentrate on issues like self-esteem, fashion sense, talking to women and other things.

Surprisingly enough, I have never heard the 'We need to stop dating because you aren't an RM' line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not an RM and I'm doing just fine on the dating end.

Maybe, instead of concentrating on something they can't change, they can concentrate on issues like self-esteem, fashion sense, talking to women and other things.

Surprisingly enough, I have never heard the 'We need to stop dating because you aren't an RM' line.

It is many years since I've had anything to do with the LDS (except here online) so with the rise of a new generation things in the UK may have changed. Back in the early 90's nearly all the adult members I ever met were converts, so telling an unmarried woman she could only date RM's would have been tantamount to telling her to become a nun.

But I'm interested though: In parts of the world where there is a rooted tradition of Mormonism, are there always enough unmarried RM's around for every girl to have a prospect of marrying one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mysticmorini

It is many years since I've had anything to do with the LDS (except here online) so with the rise of a new generation things in the UK may have changed. Back in the early 90's nearly all the adult members I ever met were converts, so telling an unmarried woman she could only date RM's would have been tantamount to telling her to become a nun.

But I'm interested though: In parts of the world where there is a rooted tradition of Mormonism, are there always enough unmarried RM's around for every girl to have a prospect of marrying one?

that may be why there are so many single adult women and women missionaries, just speculation i have no way of justifying that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By all means. But having a "discussion" doesn't miraculously make them able to go. They can be encouraged to go on a mission (which is the most likely outcome of such a meeting), but it doesn't mean they will be able to cope with it any more than before this meeting. Besides, I'm pretty sure a meeting of this nature would occur anyway, usually a bishop will speak to all active young men of mission-sending age to find out what it is they plan to do.

Everytime I see it mentioned about a "young man who *knows* he wouldn't be able to handle the rigors of a full-time mission" or words to that effect, I keep thinking "Does the young man trust in the Lord?" I mean, how can he KNOW, without any shadow of a doubt, that he wouldn't be able to handle a full-time mission, based only on second-hand information? (because of course he's never been on one personally) Is there something in the CHI that says such a young man couldn't ask the Bishop to have him called only to a service mission? Is he going out with the Elders in his ward often so that he can get a taste of what missionary work entails and contribute to the spreading of the gospel in a more comfortable way for him?

Perhaps he's selling himself short on what could potentially be an ingredible growth experience for him.

I say all this because I know of two RM's (a sibling and my husband) who both experienced extreme challenges on their missions. My brother developed Type 1 diabetes his first year out. Spent his first mission Christmas in the hospital learning how to test his blood sugar levels and give himself insulin shots. He'd only been out 4 months. He initially called my parents wanting so badly to come home, but they told him to wait, and take some time to really think about it before he made his final decision. He ended up finishing out his mission. He said it was the hardest, but also the most rewarding thing he ever did in his life.

My husband also faced a major personal challenge while on his mission, and ended up coming home after 10 months out with an honorable release because the help the mission tried to offer him wasn't adequately addressing the issue (not ragging on them, he knows they tried their best to help him). He also doesn't regret serving, even though his time as an active, full-time, knocking on doors missionary was fairly brief compared to other's time spent. He still grew. He still learned. His testimony was still strengthened, and his love of the Lord increased.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was this sister on my mission, who was telling her boyfriend that if he didn't ask her to marry him, she was going to go on a Mission. Kept telling him that for months, he kept not asking her to marry him. She went through the MTC, and was in the field for 3 months before her boyfriend sent her a letter asking her to come home and marry him.

She sent him a Dear John, she was having too much fun to want to stop her Mission just to come home to marry some guy that didn't know what a good thing he had.

Good for her. I wish the age for serving a mission was the same for both sexes. Really never understood why the difference for the women. My family encourages both our boys and our girls to serve. I want my granddaughter to serve a mission as much as I wish my grandson to. There is plenty of time, after her return, to date...to meet someone...and have manymany years of married life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest mysticmorini

Everytime I see it mentioned about a "young man who *knows* he wouldn't be able to handle the rigors of a full-time mission" or words to that effect, I keep thinking "Does the young man trust in the Lord?" I mean, how can he KNOW, without any shadow of a doubt, that he wouldn't be able to handle a full-time mission, based only on second-hand information? (because of course he's never been on one personally) Is there something in the CHI that says such a young man couldn't ask the Bishop to have him called only to a service mission? Is he going out with the Elders in his ward often so that he can get a taste of what missionary work entails and contribute to the spreading of the gospel in a more comfortable way for him?

Perhaps he's selling himself short on what could potentially be an ingredible growth experience for him.

I say all this because I know of two RM's (a sibling and my husband) who both experienced extreme challenges on their missions. My brother developed Type 1 diabetes his first year out. Spent his first mission Christmas in the hospital learning how to test his blood sugar levels and give himself insulin shots. He'd only been out 4 months. He initially called my parents wanting so badly to come home, but they told him to wait, and take some time to really think about it before he made his final decision. He ended up finishing out his mission. He said it was the hardest, but also the most rewarding thing he ever did in his life.

My husband also faced a major personal challenge while on his mission, and ended up coming home after 10 months out with an honorable release because the help the mission tried to offer him wasn't adequately addressing the issue (not ragging on them, he knows they tried their best to help him). He also doesn't regret serving, even though his time as an active, full-time, knocking on doors missionary was fairly brief compared to other's time spent. He still grew. He still learned. His testimony was still strengthened, and his love of the Lord increased.

i'd imagine very few YM don't go on missions because the "don't think they can handle it" I'd imagine 90% of young men who don't go, don't go because they are inactive or less than active and it's not their 1st priority. according to the raising of the bar inactive men should be disqualified anyway.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

that may be why there are so many single adult women and women missionaries, just speculation i have no way of justifying that.

Do you have any idea how offensive that idea would sound to a woman who has a testimony of the truthfulness of the gospel and wishes to share the good news of the gospel to the world?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share