Sign in to follow this  
Guest mysticmorini

Only marry return missionaries!

Recommended Posts

there are A LOT of people who reject the church or go inactive at some point in time and return to be strong and faithful LDS.

Do you have statistics on what proportion of all inactives will come back? I

if what we did in our past was important the savior wouldn't have instituted the atonement. it doesn't matter where a person has been, what's important is where they are going.

Amen. The Atonement was given us on condition of repentance, which is pretty much what I've been advocating all along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest mysticmorini

Do you have statistics on what proportion of all inactives will come back? I

Amen. The Atonement was given us on condition of repentance, which is pretty much what I've been advocating all along.

I dont have any numbers to give you but i do know the people in my ward and a large majority of them have been inactive at one point in time

yes, you have been advocating repentance, i guess the disagreement i have with you is that you say one must prove their repentance to you, i believe one only needs to prove repentance to the lord and the proper priesthood authority.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yes, you have been advocating repentance, i guess the disagreement i have with you is that you say one must prove their repentance to you, i believe one only needs to prove repentance to the lord and the proper priesthood authority.

Incorrect. The only ones I expect to show repentance to me are those who wish to become intimately associated with my family, through marriage.

I also stand by a young woman's right to expect that sort of repentance from a prospective husband who is not an RM and was not honorably excused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brilliant. This made me think for a while and I think it's an answer to a question I've had for some time. I think you are 100% correct.

There are always people that are miserable...BUT why are they miserable? A good bet is that they aren't fully committed to what there doing or the life they have chosen. Not saying that they are unworthy...just not committed. Being a true disciple is not always easy......faith takes time and desire. Sometimes people put in the time but the desire just isn't there.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Incorrect. The only ones I expect to show repentance to me are those who wish to become intimately associated with my family, through marriage.

I don't think it's your right to demand that. My problem with your viewpoint on this whole issue is that you say (hypothetically) that it's okay for a young man to not serve a mission, and still later date/marry your date, if he has received a "bona fide revelation" stating that he did not have to serve. That's fine and dandy, but what is good enough for you? How can he prove that to you? He shouldn't have to. If he tells you that he felt strongly that he wasn't supposed to serve a mission, that doesn't seem to be adequate, according to everything I've read from you in this and other threads on the issue. That includes things you've written, but also what's been between the lines. How far does a young man have to go to be good enough for you? Sign a blood confession that it was revealed to him to not go?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's your right to demand that. My problem with your viewpoint on this whole issue is that you say (hypothetically) that it's okay for a young man to not serve a mission, and still later date/marry your date, if he has received a "bona fide revelation" stating that he did not have to serve. That's fine and dandy, but what is good enough for you? How can he prove that to you? He shouldn't have to. If he tells you that he felt strongly that he wasn't supposed to serve a mission, that doesn't seem to be adequate, according to everything I've read from you in this and other threads on the issue. That includes things you've written, but also what's been between the lines. How far does a young man have to go to be good enough for you? Sign a blood confession that it was revealed to him to not go?

My position on that is here. I think it boils down to attitude. "I didn't have to serve" versus "I didn't get to serve".

There's a reason I use the term "bona fide revelation", and it's because (as I've already mentioned here) most of the "revelations" of this nature that affected people of my acquaintance were extremely self-serving, and subsequent history strongly indicated that they were false from the get-go. I would strongly disagree with any notion that I'm just supposed to tune out the Spirit and shut down my critical thinking skills every time someone else purports to have received a revelation.

But, again--none of this comes into play, unless it begins to seriously affect myself or my family.

Edited by Just_A_Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the disconnect I see with this conversation: When a young man, for whatever reason, decides to not go on a mission, repents and decides to get his life together and find a righteous woman to marry, he should expect to answer certain questions. Not only to the future wife, but to his prospective new family. As a father of girls, I want my daughters to marry a man who will honor her and his priesthood, and raise my grandsons in the gospel with the expectation that they will grow up strong in the gospel. I raise my daughters with those goals clearly outlined, and try to teach them what to look for in a husband worthy of them and God. A young man who has grown up in a strong gospel-centric home, gained a testimony and not strayed too seriously from that upbringing and teaching in the home is preferable. A young man who prepared himself from an early age to serve an honorable mission and holds a current temple recommend is a plus in that search. A young man who has always stayed true to the gospel and continues to conduct himself that way is the ideal. Serving an honorable mission is part of that. We expect our young men to serve missions, and if they don't then they need to account for that.

When a young man comes to court my daughters and they don't reflect those things, then as a protective father who wants only the best for them, I have to ask questions about his worthiness. My daughter, whom I taught the gospel to the best of my ability, is very precious to me, and I want her husband to be as strong in the gospel and in his testimony as I can ensure. If a young man grew up a member of the church yet chose not to go on a mission, I feel as her parent and the man who raised her, that I have a right to know why. I want to know if he has changed his life to the point where he is now strong in the gospel and will raise my grandchildren righteously enough to serve honorable missions. I think as a father I deserve to know what kind of man he has become. He can show me by being the kind of man God would want him to be, and that he has repented of his past failings.

I realize that those things don't mean that the marriage will be long-lasting and result in the desired ends, but to aim high and miss is preferable to aiming low and hitting. People with low standards rarely rise above those low standards, people with higher standards generally have a better chance of success.

Some might say this is snobbish, but it comes down to a father teaching and protecting his offspring and future generations as best he can. This is about doing what God wants, not what the natural man wants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest mysticmorini

If the young man is worthy you shouldn't have to question his reasons for not going on a mission, it should be obvious if he honors his priesthood or not by his actions. i.e. does he attend sacrament and other meetings regularly, does he do his home teaching, does he live the gospel, etc. I don't think he needs an interview with the young woman's father to dig up his regret or lack thereof. I dont think there are many young men who remain active in the church without going on missions or repenting for not going. I don't see any reason for a father demanding that his daughters fiance account for his actions to him, provided it is obvious he has repented. If and only if a father questions a potential SIL's standards should his concern be brought up, but even this can be done tactfully without saying that the young man is not worthy because he has neither gone on a mission nor repented for not going.

bottom line: a scum bags a scum bag whether or not he's been on a mission. missions don't turn scum bags into peterpriesthood's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...I realize that those things don't mean that the marriage will be long-lasting and result in the desired ends, but to aim high and miss is preferable to aiming low and hitting. People with low standards rarely rise above those low standards, people with higher standards generally have a better chance of success...

John, are you saying that you would prefer your daughter to marry an RM and if the marriage fails that's fine than to marry a non-RM and have a successful and happy marriage?

M.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest mysticmorini

John, are you saying that you would prefer your daughter to marry an RM and if the marriage fails that's fine than to marry a non-RM and have a successful and happy marriage?

M.

no but he is saying to choose a non rm is aiming low, but i don't think thats what he meant to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with much of what you say, MysticMoroni; but I don't think the topic should be taboo. Frankly, I expect to have several nice long chats with each of my daughters' fiancees that will probably cover a variety of issues--home teaching and meeting attendance among them--but I don't see why RM status must be excluded. In fact, even if the young man did serve a mission, I anticipate asking what kind of missionary he was.

You are right that plenty of scumbags have gone on missions; but there are also plenty of scumbags who do their home teaching and go to meetings.

That's why my future sons-in-law will be filling out this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm amazed that some of you guys plan on sitting down with potential fiances of your children and basically have a priesthood worthiness interview with them. In my opinion the only person that has the right to do that is their priesthood leader. If my father-in-law had done such a thing I would have been horrified, not because I had anything to hide but because I don't think it's any of his business. His daugher chose me, I chose her, end of story.

As a father of three I try to teach my kids good principles, I try to be a good example, and I will try to steer them toward good, worthy, potential mates. But I have to have faith that I have taught them well, and I have to have faith in my kids that they'll make good decisions, but I cannot pick their spouses for them. Do I want them dating drug dealers? Of course not. But if my daugher finds a good man that loves her, will take care of her, lives his life the best he can, but didn't serve a mission, I won't hold it against him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saguaro has a point. What if your daughteer decides to marry a non member--like mine did.

I've found that once your kids reach a certain age, they are really beyond certain "controls". Ideally I would have arranged marraiges for each of them. I would only have picked one spouse out of four so far. Unfortunately we live in a "free" country, and each child is free to make their own mistakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone's seriously suggesting that parents lock their kids in a tower.

Different families, though, will have different dynamics and cultures. Some will tend to involve each other in their personal decisions--seek and expect to be sought for advice on major life decisions. Others will follow a more live-and-let live philosophy.

As for me, I'm hoping to strike a happy medium. I do hope that my kids will at least want to know what I think about their prospective mates, and give honest consideration to counsel I might give them; and in return I think they have a right to expect me to graciously accept their ultimate decision and treat the new spouse as a member of the family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

My husband is born and raised LDS, left the church at 17 searching for "truth". Things were happening in his family that shook his testimony. He went to every church he can get to, including the Catholic church that I was a member of. When he turned 21, he decided he wants to marry me - a Catholic. On our very first date he took me to his church. It was his first time back since he was 17 and it was my first time inside an LDS church.

I was sure he was gonna turn Catholic. But, you know what he told me? He says there is no running away from the truth. His testimony got solidified when he realized it is TRUE after trying to search for truth. So, if I was LDS then, I would take him over any RM on the planet.

And, by the way, we had to elope because my father would have tried to stop the marriage if he had the opportunity because he wasn't Catholic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm amazed that some of you guys plan on sitting down with potential fiances of your children and basically have a priesthood worthiness interview with them. In my opinion the only person that has the right to do that is their priesthood leader. If my father-in-law had done such a thing I would have been horrified, not because I had anything to hide but because I don't think it's any of his business. His daugher chose me, I chose her, end of story.

I agree with this. I love my father dearly but if he had asked for a sit down "interview" with my husband, I would have told him to buzz off. He's marrying me, not my father. Of course they talked and got to know each other before the wedding, but there was none of this sit down, "man to man" discussion where my father deemed him worthy or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John, are you saying that you would prefer your daughter to marry an RM and if the marriage fails that's fine than to marry a non-RM and have a successful and happy marriage?

M.

Nope. And I knew when I posted it that it would probably be taken wrong. But if a young woman sets her standards low for a potential husband, then she is more likely to find a guy who fits those low standards. If she sets her standards high, then it is more likely that she will not settle for the lower-standard guys. If the best men are found in the stars and the worst on the ground, I would prefer she aimed for the stars than the ground. Who doesn't want their children to go for the best thing possible?

Edited by john doe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. And I knew when I posted it that it would probably be taken wrong. But if a young woman sets her standards low for a potential husband, then she is more likely to find a guy who fits those low standards. If she sets her standards high, then it is more likely that she will not settle for the lower-standard guys. If the best men are found in the stars and the worst on the ground, I would prefer she aimed for the stars than the ground. Who doesn't want their children to go for the best thing possible?

Aim for the moon, and then if you miss, you'll land among the stars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I read about some of the guys on here wanting to have "several nice long chats" with their future SIL's about various things connected with the church and their worthiness, I was thinking how this reminds me so much of the movie "Meet The Fockers" where Robert DeNiro is trying to get so much information out of his future SIL (Ben Stiller) that at one point he injects him with truth serum and when Ben Stiller gets up to the mic at a family party, his whole family ends up getting more truth than what they bargained for. Definitely check out this movie if you haven't seen it. It's hilarious.

Edited by Carl62

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many RM's change or go inactive after their missions? See what Marlin K. Jensen, a member of the Quorum of the Seventy, has to say about the high percentage of RM's who go inactive after their missions: The Mormons . Themes . The Massive Missionary Program | PBS

Interesting link, Carl62. Read the various views and then read the full interview of D. Michael Quinn. He makes some pretty pointed observations--the content of which probably merits its own thread(s).

Curious what other people think of Quinn. Do faithful LDS just dismiss him as an "anti"--or is there any actual concern about what he says?

--Erik

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A mixture. Some of his concerns about the pressures on missionaries, and about the function of LDS history are on-point (though the latter would be more believable if he himself didn't have a bit of a record of utilizing cherry-picked "history" as a tool to grind ideological axes--Same Sex Dynamics Among 19th Century Americans, anyone?).

As a gay male Quinn has a vested interest in embarrassing the LDS leaders he sees as responsible for taking the Church in a conservative direction on that score. So I don't put much stock in his rantings against Elder Packer; and I view his portrayal of the Twelve at various points of history as being little more than a squabbling pack of children, as pretty unreliable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the original topic...

I was taught by amazing YW leaders to date only young men who were good, honest, worthy and treated you with respect. I also had some not-so-hot YW leaders that told us to only date RMs. I say not-so-hot NOT because they were horrible or we didn't get along. I say it because to me it seemed like they were generalistic in their views of what an RM is. Just because he/she is a returned missionary, doesn't mean he/she is a returned missionary. To me, if I want to marry a worthy RM, I have to be a worthier RM in actions, deeds and thoughts, especially if I wasn't able to serve an offical mission for the Church.

My mom married my dad who was a non-member and 16 years later my dad joined the Church. If anyone deserves the Celestial Kingdom, it's my dad (and this is a completely un-biased on my part) because he is the most caring, sweet, and happy man. He went through a lot of hardships in his life and still turned into the wonderful man he is today. My mom received the impression to marry him even though he wasn't a member, and my grandma said that when she first met my dad at a family gathering, she knew that he would be her son-in-law, and she didn't even know he WASN'T a member!

My dad was a good, honest, worthy and respectful man even thought he wasn't a member.

I guess I have sort of a unique view of 'dating within the church'. I say if possible, date those who are in the Church. I also say date people who share the same beliefs and goals that you do. My mom did the latter and married the wonderful man that is my dad today.

The Lord knows more about you than you do. He knows what you can become and how far you can go in the eternities. If I was a young womens leader and was asked to tell my girls what to look for in a man, it would be just like what my amazing young women leaders told me: date only young men who are good, honest, worthy and treat you with respect. If this includes RM status, it's a bonus. If not, then when you two grow old, wrinkly and shriveled, turn both of yourselves into RMs :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back to the original topic...

I was taught by amazing YW leaders to date only young men who were good, honest, worthy and treated you with respect. I also had some not-so-hot YW leaders that told us to only date RMs. I say not-so-hot NOT because they were horrible or we didn't get along. I say it because to me it seemed like they were generalistic in their views of what an RM is. Just because he/she is a returned missionary, doesn't mean he/she is a returned missionary. To me, if I want to marry a worthy RM, I have to be a worthier RM in actions, deeds and thoughts, especially if I wasn't able to serve an offical mission for the Church.

My mom married my dad who was a non-member and 16 years later my dad joined the Church. If anyone deserves the Celestial Kingdom, it's my dad (and this is a completely un-biased on my part) because he is the most caring, sweet, and happy man. He went through a lot of hardships in his life and still turned into the wonderful man he is today. My mom received the impression to marry him even though he wasn't a member, and my grandma said that when she first met my dad at a family gathering, she knew that he would be her son-in-law, and she didn't even know he WASN'T a member!

My dad was a good, honest, worthy and respectful man even thought he wasn't a member.

I guess I have sort of a unique view of 'dating within the church'. I say if possible, date those who are in the Church. I also say date people who share the same beliefs and goals that you do. My mom did the latter and married the wonderful man that is my dad today.

The Lord knows more about you than you do. He knows what you can become and how far you can go in the eternities. If I was a young womens leader and was asked to tell my girls what to look for in a man, it would be just like what my amazing young women leaders told me: date only young men who are good, honest, worthy and treat you with respect. If this includes RM status, it's a bonus. If not, then when you two grow old, wrinkly and shriveled, turn both of yourselves into RMs :)

I think this is a wonderful response to the OP's question. You really illustrate for them and us, how important it is stress the right principle in the right way. The way you honor your dad and mom is very touching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this