Reasons to delay a mission

[Backroads]

So, someone I know decided to serve a mission. Had a decent-paying job beforehand, lived at home, and promised her parents upwards of 10,000$ that would be going on a mission.

2 weeks before leaving, announced that money had been frittered away over the months and was now actually in debt (nothing severe, but still a bit of debt)

Had disappointment expressed to her. She offered not to go on a mission. Was told her parents would figure something out. Went on mission.

Now, with the age change, lots of missionaries hardly have money upfront, but in some cases should financial irresponsibility be a reason to delay a mission?

[Dravin]

I knew more than one missionary on my mission that arrived older than the youngest age because they were saving up the funds to go. There is nothing wrong in doing that. Many don't take the opportunity to do so because they have others willing to make the sacrifice on their behalf.

[Backroads]

I knew more than one missionary on my mission that arrived older than the youngest age because they were saving up the funds to go. There is nothing wrong in doing that. Many don't take the opportunity to do so because they have others willing to make the sacrifice on their behalf.

And I think both methods are fine, but this situation eats at me because this missionary left her parents completely unprepared for the financial cost of the mission, and they were in no position to paying so much extra money. I know the Church can help pick up the costs, but it almost seems like a sin to promise money.

[Dravin]

I think I'm a little confused in what you were asking. I was responding to the idea about delaying missions to get finances in order. I take it then you are asking rather if what she did is something for which her priesthood leaders should delay her entry into the mission field so she can repent concerning it and make sure she is truly spiritually prepared?

[Backroads]

I think it's somewhere in the middle, what I'm asking. Allow me to try again:

If a person promises X funds, allowing all parties to think such-n-such portion of a mission is financed, and then at the last moment drops the ball, whose responsibility does it become to pay for the mission, besides, obviously, the Church. While I realize there are no rules on this sort of incident, would it be better for a prospective missionary to hang back a month or so in order to be in a better place financially, i.e., not in debt? Could you imagine a bishop being impressed to advise this?

I learned all this from her brother, who does in fact think that what she did was on the level of drinking the night before your mission.

And, Dravin, your first thought was appreciated and did answer a portion of my question.

[Dravin]

If a person promises X funds, allowing all parties to think such-n-such portion of a mission is financed, and then at the last moment drops the ball, whose responsibility does it become to pay for the mission, besides, obviously, the Church.

The ultimate responsibility for paying a mission rests upon the person whose mission it is. People, including the Church and its members, generously offer to help individuals pay, sometimes the full amount, but that doesn't shift the ultimate responsibility. If the ultimate responsibility wasn't with the missionary then when a missionary paid 50% that would mean he is generously paying half of the Church's/His Family's/Ward Member's share of the mission. That idea just doesn't compute for me.

Could you imagine a bishop being impressed to advise this?

I vaguely recall the question of debt coming up during my preparation for a mission. Namely if my financial obligations would be met in some manner (paid from savings, paid off prior to the mission, or deferred).

Could you imagine a bishop being impressed to advise this?

I can most certainly image a bishop being impressed to say, "You need to make sure your debts are taken care of, either payed off, deferred, or have enough money stockpiled to make payments for 18/24 months."

Edited October 25, 2013 by Dravin

[pam]

The thing is..18 is the new 19 and it shouldn't be thought of that way. Young men do NOT have to go at 18. They have the option. If they aren't ready, there is nothing wrong with waiting a year or two to go.

[skippy740]

» FYI: 18 is NOT the New 19

[pam]

That article by MMM is exactly where I got the idea from. He had posted even a few months ago that he thought 18 would be the new 19. Or at least that's what people would think.

[rayhale]

When I went on a mission, my parents were very concerned about being able to pay for both my , and my younger brother’s, mission, so much so, that I was 20 before my bishop said to them not to worry about the money and that there were several people in the ward that had our missions covered. I helped pay for all the pre-mission stuff, clothes, luggage, etc… after that we put money into a banking CD savings account. On my mission there was several times that instead of using the missionary credit card, I used my personal credit card.

My question is how much are you expected to sacrifice for your mission. As a couple of you asked, are you expected to go into debt, or pay the lion’s-share of the cost, do what something like I did, pay what you could, but also think about yourself, and put some money away so you won’t have nothing when you come back?

Edited October 26, 2013 by rayhale

[Lakumi]

The thing is..18 is the new 19 and it shouldn't be thought of that way. Young men do NOT have to go at 18. They have the option. If they aren't ready, there is nothing wrong with waiting a year or two to go.

If was raised Mormon I know I wouldn't have gone at 18, or 19- knowing what I was like at that age (and the health problems I had)

Truth be told I still don't feel my age and I am nearing 25, I still feel 17

[Quin]

I'm on the fence on this one.

Meaning I can think of 2.5 different kids, where the best answer is the opposite for each of them.

For some kids... Well, sorry, love. Guess you'll need to delay a year & save up would REALLY teach them some responsibility, and be a great platform to really get into finances, budgeting, etc.

For other kids... They're NEVER going to learn personal responsibility & accountability until the parental safety net is gone and they actually HAVE to be on their own.

::blushes:: I was in the second group. My parents are/were extremely authoritarian (and super loving!!! My parents are amaaaaazing people). Which translated into all of our teen years being, instead of a platform into adulthood... A super extended childhood. Total infantilization. Even coming home to my folks to visit -which I do often, they really are great people- I go a little nuts at the total lack of trust. NONE of us (30s & 40s) are trusted to do laundry, cook, drive, handle our own affairs. Sigh. Seriously. They want to know what time we're going to get up... So they can wake us. They want a blow by blow itinerary, and tell us we'll be too tired to drive, or shouldn't do this, that, or the other. I got a 10 minute lecture on how I need to talk to my son's teachers, what I should say and how, how important it is... Eyes crossing. This is for parent teacher conferemces! of COURSE Im going. Yes, mum. I know. Mum. Mum. This isn't my first rodeo. Mum. Mum!!! I got this. Really, they're great, but they have us all stuck at age 12 sometimes. My sister has been a diplomat for 10+ years, and they won't trust her to talk to the neighbors (she might not be diplomatic enough. Really.)

Meanwhile a third group would be the kids who need to be gotten away from a bad situation. Either at home, or with friends/bad influences. I was originally going to lump this group in with the second group (since both root problems are environmental, and won't change until the environment is changed)... But then I thought about my own folks, and many many other families & kids who just need to get nudged out of the nest, and how different that is from a bad situation.

Q

[Magen_Avot]

A young man (complicated story) has been with us for a couple of years. His mom remarried after the death of his father (just months later) and the mother promised ten grand for his mission. In the end she forced him to quit his job and while he was with my family, she spent the money on a vacation to Hawaii for the new husbands kids (who were grown). It looked like he wouldn't go but I and a few others enlisted to get him out there. It was close.

I get the need for fiduciary responsibility.

There are other concerns too... desire to serve our God, worthiness and the capacity (mental or otherwise).

We are all going to take all our lives to come to Christ, why judge a young woman harshly when a way was found. The opportunity for blessings was seized by someone and lost to another. If a way had not been found then she would have had to wait... another opportunity for blessings.

I'm certain the Lord was aware of things, and I can only hope that He was consulted and His will carried out. Regardless of a bumpy start, the lives of some of Gods children may rest on her service.

I'd say... let it rest with the Lord and pray for all concerned.

[Maureen]

So, someone I know decided to serve a mission. Had a decent-paying job beforehand, lived at home, and promised her parents upwards of 10,000$ that would be going on a mission.

2 weeks before leaving, announced that money had been frittered away over the months and was now actually in debt (nothing severe, but still a bit of debt)

Had disappointment expressed to her. She offered not to go on a mission. Was told her parents would figure something out. Went on mission.

Now, with the age change, lots of missionaries hardly have money upfront, but in some cases should financial irresponsibility be a reason to delay a mission?

I must admit that at first I was confused by this OP but I think I get it now.

So this young lady decides to go on a mission and finance it herself. All arrangements are made, announcements are made that she is going and a farewell is scheduled. But at the last minute she has no money. So to avoid embarrassment, the parents say they will pay for her to go even though they really can't afford it.

In a case like this, it would probably have been best to live with the embarrassment and let the young woman learn a lesson the hard way. She would have a choice to either save up the money again and fulfill her promise to go or make the decision and announce that she really is not prepared for missionary life.

M.

[pam]

Meaning I can think of 2.5 different kids, where the best answer is the opposite for each of them.

Now just how do you think of 2.5 different kids?