Mission service: Culture, or canon?

[priesthoodpower]

I have no problem with the choice he made, but it is funny how now it is absolutely the wrong thing to do.

 

 

 

It all comes down to the method/tone/style of how the commandment of serving a mission (or any commandment) is being delivered to us members.

 

The prophets and apostles deliver the message at general conference where millions of members are listening, if any guilt is felt it is done through the spirit directly to your heart while sitting in your living room listening to the prophet. no public shaming or personal attacks involved.

 

The local bishop, EQ/RS president or sunday school teacher relays those same messages in a more intimate setting in front of a smaller audience and the chances for offense increases. That is why we need to be more sensitive and mindful as leaders, teachers and participating members about how, what, and when we say things.

 

 

--------------------

 

On sundays Im able to attend church but leave to work right after. Been doing this for 5 years.

In a recent interview with bishop we were on the subject of my work schedule and he said "I think it would be good for you to be off on sundays"

 

Such a simple way of proclaiming one of the ten commandments to (Keep the sabbath day holy). His words to this day still echo in my head as the spirit confirms that what he said was inspired.

 

Thats a big difference from saying  "It is one of the ten commandments to keep the sabbath day holy and since you are not following the Lords commandment you are following Satan!". Had he said it this way Im pretty sure disappointment would occupy my mind and there would be no room for the spirit. 

 

-----------------

[Vort]

It all comes down to the method/tone/style of how the commandment of serving a mission (or any commandment) is being delivered to us members.

 

The prophets and apostles deliver the message at general conference where millions of members are listening, if any guilt is felt it is done through the spirit directly to your heart while sitting in your living room listening to the prophet. no public shaming or personal attacks involved.

 

The local bishop, EQ/RS president or sunday school teacher relays those same messages in a more intimate setting in front of a smaller audience and the chances for offense increases. That is why we need to be more sensitive and mindful as leaders, teachers and participating members about how, what, and when we say things.

 

 

--------------------

 

On sundays Im able to attend church but leave to work right after. Been doing this for 5 years.

In a recent interview with bishop we were on the subject of my work schedule and he said "I think it would be good for you to be off on sundays"

 

Such a simple way of proclaiming one of the ten commandments to (Keep the sabbath day holy). His words to this day still echo in my head as the spirit confirms that what he said was inspired.

 

Thats a big difference from saying  "It is one of the ten commandments to keep the sabbath day holy and since you are not following the Lords commandment you are following Satan!". Had he said it this way Im pretty sure disappointment would occupy my mind and there would be no room for the spirit. 

 

-----------------

 

Again, I don't disagree. I'm happy your bishop found a way to tell you that allowed the Spirit to testify to your heart in a situation where you might otherwise not have felt it.

 

But the fact that you and your bishop communicated in a certain way does not that everyone else will -- in specific, it does not mean that this particular stake president was wrong in how he spoke. Perhaps the Spirit moved him in a different manner, and the young man (and his mother) were simply of a rebellious spirit and unwilling to listen to God's voice. The fact is, we do not know.

 

One other thought: If we are not supposed to pass adverse judgment against a young man who chooses not to fulfill his Priesthood duty to serve a mission, then we most certainly are not supposed to pass adverse judgment against a servant of God fulfilling his difficult calling as best he knows how.

[Guest]

You said yes to service because you had/have a testimony of the prophets.

While it is a priesthood duty would anyone advise a young man to go if he didn't have this testimony?

No. Which basically means that from the time you got ordained with the priesthood to the time you're 25... You are expected to have diligently, honestly, and humbly sought and found one.

Kinda skeevy to be an ordained priesthood and not have the minimum testimony of the authority and keys of the prophet from which the authority of such priesthood falls under.

[omegaseamaster75]

No. Which basically means that from the time you got ordained with the priesthood to the time you're 25... You are expected to have diligently, honestly, and humbly sought and found one.

I agree plenty of time, but if you don't go when Your first eligible with every year that passes it becomes less and less likely that you will go

 

 

Kinda skeevy to be an ordained priesthood and not have the minimum testimony of the authority and keys of the prophet from which the authority of such priesthood falls under.

Is it? Take a look at your ward stats and tell me peer pressure is not at play in these ordinations. In my ward there are 14 single men between the ages of 18-25 who have not served a mission, all but one have some sort of priesthood.....and several are Elders....

[Just_A_Guy]

I agree plenty of time, but if you don't go when Your first eligible with every year that passes it becomes less and less likely that you will go

 

Well, and once you're 26, it's water under the bridge and all one can do is repent . . . just like any other missed opportunity, and there's no sense getting worked up about it.  My issue would come (in theory, at least--in practice, of course, real-life cases are going to be generally outside of my stewardship and none of my business) where either a) a 26-year-old says "yeah, I didn't wanna, and I didn't haveta, so I didn't, and I don't regret a darned thing about it"; or b) someone under 26 who is otherwise physically and mentally capable of serving, decides they want to take upon themselves further priesthood obligations/covenants in the form of a temple marriage when they don't seem to be living up to the priesthood obligations they've already undertaken.

 

 

Is it? Take a look at your ward stats and tell me peer pressure is not at play in these ordinations. In my ward there are 14 single men between the ages of 18-25 who have not served a mission, all but one have some sort of priesthood.....and several are Elders....

 

Frankly, I wouldn't be sorry to see the Church tighten up in this regard, and I'll certainly be raising my own son a little differently.  I think we might be ordaining a lot of boys to the priesthood before they are ready. 

 

On the other hand--I would reject any argument that it's just because these boys are "too young".  Remember, under Jewish law--which coincides with, if not deriving from, thousands of years of non-Jewish human tradition--a boy basically becomes a "son of the law" (essentially, for legal purposes, a grown man) at the age of thirteen.  Our modern idea of "childhood" generally--and especially "childhood" that persists well into adolescence--is something of an aberration in recorded human history.  And, the scriptural injunction for male church members to seek and receive their priesthood ordinations is at least as strong as--if not stronger than--the injunction for priesthood holders to actively proclaim the gospel.

 

And at any rate, the efforts the Church does make in conveying the gravity of priesthood covenants to its young men, are sort of undermined to some extent by the do-gooders who run around telling these young men that ministry to others and proclaiming the gospel generally--and missionary service in particular--is at its core a cultural, not a doctrinal expectation; and that young men can opt out with no adverse spiritual consequences. 

Edited June 11, 2015 by Just_A_Guy

[Traveler]

I wanted to say a little more about callings - because a mission is a call.  I know some have quoted different words of various prophets concerning the call to a mission.  As with all callings - a person does not decide if they will be called.  The 5th article of faith clearly indicates how someone is called:

 

 

We believe that a man must be called of God, by prophecy, and by the laying on of hands by those who are in authority, to preach the Gospel and administer in the ordinances thereof.

 

Should an individual aspire to any particular calling?  There is a spiritual conundrum in aspiring - but the truth is that we all should be anxious and willing to be called.  But at the same time we must be careful - especially in condemning or thinking less of someone or anyone that does not have a calling - yes - I believe this also plays in to a young man of the proper age that does not have a missionary call.

 

I also do not believe that in general, members need to command any individual to accept a call - especially if a call is not extended by G-d according to prophesy.  We may encourage someone to be worthy - but beyond that - I honestly believe that we do not serve G-d in telling someone to accept or not accept a call.  Now there are individuals that are called to so act (as a common judge) but the assumption that any Latter-day Saint has right to even in part extend a call or tell someone or imply to someone that they are called - is an act of apostasy.

 

Whenever I hear someone say that someone other than those called should have been called - I personally do not believe that they have any right to say such a thing (we may think it but to make such thought known is in my mind a sin and an act of apostasy).

 

Also in accepting a call - I believe that we can council with those in authority about things that may apply to the call before we accept or not accept a call.  I know this may be opining a can of worms but I do not believe some understand what it means to be called by prophesy - in part I believe it means that G-d will revile to you by revelation through the Holy Ghost if indeed you are being called according to the order established in G-d's kingdom.  If you do not receive the revelation as promised according to covenant to a call - I do not believe that you should accept any such call and so council with those in authority.  And if someone is married - I do not believe they should ever accept a call without counseling with their spouse. 

[Guest]

Is it? Take a look at your ward stats and tell me peer pressure is not at play in these ordinations.

I don't understand how peer pressure is at play in ordinations. You don't get ordained unless you're of age and the bishop deems you worthy. You can peer pressure a kid as much as you want, but if he's not worthy he's not gonna get ordained.

In my ward there are 14 single men between the ages of 18-25 who have not served a mission, all but one have some sort of priesthood.....and several are Elders....

In my ward, there are 5 who aren't serving a mission (maybe they will maybe they won't, 3 are sons of previous bishops in our ward, all 5 are ordained but none of them are endowed), 2 who served and came home early, 4 currently serving.

I'm not sure what this and your ward's situation say about peer pressure.

[omegaseamaster75]

I don't understand how peer pressure is at play in ordinations. You don't get ordained unless you're of age and the bishop deems you worthy. You can peer pressure a kid as much as you want, but if he's not worthy he's not gonna get ordained.

 

No one has ever lied their way through an interview? well maybe not in your part of Zion

 

 

In my ward, there are 5 who aren't serving a mission (maybe they will maybe they won't, 3 are sons of previous bishops in our ward, all 5 are ordained but none of them are endowed), 2 who served and came home early, 4 currently serving.

I'm not sure what this and your ward's situation say about peer pressure.

 3 sons of prior bishops? plus 2 more.....and 2 who returned early....I think that says it all

 

Like it or not there is a huge cultural pressure to serve and those who do not serve are looked down upon. I don't agree with it but that's just the way it is.

 

Lest anyone get the wrong idea I think that all worthy males should serve a mission.

 

By the way of the 5 and the 2 who returned early how many are active?

[Guest]

No one has ever lied their way through an interview? well maybe not in your part of Zion

 

 

Maybe they did, maybe they didn't. I'm not going to assume they did. My husband has been the 11-year-old Scout Leader for a long time. If I was a betting man, I would go to Las Vegas and bet money they didn't, see how much money I make.

 

3 sons of prior bishops? plus 2 more.....and 2 who returned early....I think that says it all

 

Like it or not there is a huge cultural pressure to serve and those who do not serve are looked down upon. I don't agree with it but that's just the way it is.

 

Lest anyone get the wrong idea I think that all worthy males should serve a mission.

 

By the way of the 5 and the 2 who returned early how many are active?

Only 2 are inactive... both sons of one of the previous bishops... both are on meds for ADHD or some mental thing since they were in middle school. The parents are still very active in Church and both kids still get together with the youth - one of them picks up people from seminary, the other one works at the movie theater so there are times when he's closing, people from the ward would go see a last show and wait for him to finish closing and they all go to the 24-hr food place next-door. They're inactive because for some reason, they don't think God exists. All the others are active and serve some kind of calling either in the family ward or the singles ward (who also meet in our building).

The 2 that left their mission early are very active and one remained in the family ward, the other moved to the singles ward and is in the bishopric.

I'm not really sure what it says about it all.

Is there a negative stigma? Yes. Only because... aside from those 2 with mental issues, the rest are expected to go and time is running out. Is that the problem of the young men? No. They should go when they are ready. They should only worry about getting ready to go instead of worrying about what other people think.

I forgot, there is another one of our youth who is inactive and didn't serve - he's in jail. And there's another one who has cerebral palsy who applied for a mission but was told he couldn't (he is 21 and just finished special ed high school last week). They're looking for a special mission locally for him I think - not sure what's the latest on that.

Edited June 11, 2015 by anatess

[The Folk Prophet]

No one has ever lied their way through an interview? well maybe not in your part of Zion

 

Where there's yer problem.

[Vort]

No one has ever lied their way through an interview? well maybe not in your part of Zion

 

 

 3 sons of prior bishops? plus 2 more.....and 2 who returned early....I think that says it all

 

Like it or not there is a huge cultural pressure to serve and those who do not serve are looked down upon. I don't agree with it but that's just the way it is.

 

Lest anyone get the wrong idea I think that all worthy males should serve a mission.

 

By the way of the 5 and the 2 who returned early how many are active?

 

Omega, I doubt you will find any Latter-day Saint on this list who thinks that peer pressure is a good thing. I'm guessing we are approaching 100% agreement on that issue.

 

But it is the duty of Every Young LDS Man to prepare himself to serve a mission. Period. Black and white. All the talk in the world of peer pressure and immaturity and lack of spiritual confirmations and whatever does not change that central fact.

[estradling75]

 

But it is the duty of Every Young LDS Man to prepare himself to serve a mission. Period. Black and white. All the talk in the world of peer pressure and immaturity and lack of spiritual confirmations and whatever does not change that central fact.

 

 

And if you have a young LDS man who take makes serious effort to do their duty to prepare... Things like immaturity, lack of spiritual witness, start to fix themselves... And once that happens then Peer pressure points them in the way they are headed anyways.

[The Folk Prophet]

Omega, I doubt you will find any Latter-day Saint on this list who thinks that peer pressure is a good thing. I'm guessing we are approaching 100% agreement on that issue.

 

But it is the duty of Every Young LDS Man to prepare himself to serve a mission. Period. Black and white. All the talk in the world of peer pressure and immaturity and lack of spiritual confirmations and whatever does not change that central fact.

 

Except he's not actually talking about "peer pressure". He's talking about the natural pressure from parents, fellow Saints, leaders, etc., that is part of being in an organization that believes in morality, choice, obedience, etc.

 

Really, it's like saying, "If you weren't going to arrest me, officer, then I wouldn't have lied about stealing. So it's your fault, Mr. policeman, that I lied."

 

Or, more literally, "If parents didn't hold their children to such high expectations then their children wouldn't lie  -- so it's the parents fault." Etc.

 

Is our conclusion to be then that we should not hold people to high expectations in the gospel? That seems to be the point that so many are trying to make. I've essentially been labeled a monster for having any expectation that people actually, you know, keep the commandments. How dare I?!?

[Just_A_Guy]

Omega, I doubt you will find any Latter-day Saint on this list who thinks that peer pressure is a good thing. I'm guessing we are approaching 100% agreement on that issue.

 

 

Except he's not actually talking about "peer pressure". He's talking about the natural pressure from parents, fellow Saints, leaders, etc., that is part of being in an organization that believes in morality, choice, obedience, etc.

 

Well . . . I would disagree, at least in part.  I think some peer pressure (or "natural pressure", as TFP dubs it) can be a very good thing, insofar as it a) bolsters our pre-determined resolve in that which is correct, and/or b) challenges us to put off our incorrect beliefs, misplaced priorities, or phony revelations. 

 

The trouble comes when you get too much of a good thing (deliberate humiliation/stigmatizing/shunning), or when that good thing is misdirected (pressuring someone to abandon a correct belief, appropriate priority, or true revelation).

Edited June 11, 2015 by Just_A_Guy

[Traveler]

No one has ever lied their way through an interview? well maybe not in your part of Zion

 

 

 3 sons of prior bishops? plus 2 more.....and 2 who returned early....I think that says it all

 

Like it or not there is a huge cultural pressure to serve and those who do not serve are looked down upon. I don't agree with it but that's just the way it is.

 

Lest anyone get the wrong idea I think that all worthy males should serve a mission.

 

By the way of the 5 and the 2 who returned early how many are active?

 

Not sure to the extent of all worthy males that I agree with completely.  When I served I spent far too much time with elders and sisters serving that were problems - I finally asked to be released from leadership so I could considerate on teaching telling my mission president that I did not save all my money by then life so I could be a baby sitter for missionaries that were not fulfilling their callings. 

 

Perhaps I was too extreme because I had one son that did not serve, that said, he would have served if I had told him to do so.  My attitude has always been that those that desire should be called to the work (see D&C 4).  It is not a matter of my desire or anyone else except for the individual that will serve.  It was my observation a missionary serving improperly will take at least 2 other missionaries with them as to time wasted.  And that it is better to work out whatever problem that disrupt serving while they are still at home surrounded with those that know them and understand better.

 

I know some have - but I do not believe in waiting until a mission to seriously seek out a testimony.  there are things that need to be taken care before a missionary leaves home - but the engineer in me says - take what ever there is and work the best possible with it.

Edited June 11, 2015 by Traveler

[omegaseamaster75]

Except he's not actually talking about "peer pressure". He's talking about the natural pressure from parents, fellow Saints, leaders, etc., that is part of being in an organization that believes in morality, choice, obedience, etc.

 

Yes I am talking about natural pressure, the pressure to not disappoint your leaders, your parents and your peers. It is natural that this pressure will be felt. The individual however needs to look inwards and decide for themselves If they believe or are they riding on the testimonies of others

Or, more literally, "If parents didn't hold their children to such high expectations then their children wouldn't lie  -- so it's the parents fault." Etc.

 

 

Nope not the parents fault for setting a good example and having expectations not at all I have expectations of my children. there will be a time however when they will have to foster their own testimonies and choose for themselves which path they want to follow

Is our conclusion to be then that we should not hold people to high expectations in the gospel? That seems to be the point that so many are trying to make. I've essentially been labeled a monster for having any expectation that people actually, you know, keep the commandments. How dare I?!?

 The expectations should be high very high. our YM "should" prepare for mission service and they "should" grow their own testimony We should however be realistic in our expectations. Everyone has their own path to choose.

 

I read Travelers post and like him I spent time in Leadership on my mission.....lots of baby sitting, phone calls in the middle of the night from the president to pick up elders so that they could be sent home, lots of elders that just went through the motions.......

[Windseeker]

Some people don't respond well to social pressure period. This trait honestly is what helped keep me on the straight and narrow thru my High School years, but when it came time for my mission I experinced the same visceral reaction to pressure but this time to well-meaning Church members who felt inspired to provoke the heck out of me.  So for me I served a mission despite allot of members prodding and a matter of fact I told a few I had no plans to ever serve a mission because I didn't feel it was their place to pry into a choice that ought to be between me and my Heavenly Father. 

 

In the end people like me have to develop a thicker skin along with humility and learn to endure the occasional sanctimonious niggling from some members and not allow it to drive us to rebel against what we know is right.

 

Some of you have probably experienced when you are doing something you think is good and someone comes by and suggests you do that good thing, for me my initial thought is to stop doing it. Because of my experience I tend to be sensitive to this and feel we should all make an effort not to let our good intentions become a stumbling block for others. 

[The Folk Prophet]

Well . . . I would disagree, at least in part.  I think some peer pressure (or "natural pressure", as TFP dubs it) can be a very good thing, insofar as it a) bolsters our pre-determined resolve in that which is correct, and/or b) challenges us to put off our incorrect beliefs, misplaced priorities, or phony revelations. 

 

The trouble comes when you get too much of a good thing (deliberate humiliation/stigmatizing/shunning), or when that good thing is misdirected (pressuring someone to abandon a correct belief, appropriate priority, or true revelation).

 

For the record, I do not believe pressure from others is a good or a bad thing in and of itself. Good pressure is good. Bad is bad. When I feel pressured to to the right thing by anything, it is good. If I feel pressured to do the wrong thing it's not good. The term "peer pressure" is generally understood to mean friends pressuring each other to do wrong. When I was a teenager my friends and I never cussed. If any of us had, the others would have taken them to task for it. Was that "peer pressure"? I suppose it could be termed that. But I have a hard time seeing that as a bad thing. My friends helped keep me in line and I helped keep them in line. We are all the better for it.

 

Edit: I should clarify for the sake of this thread that what I'm saying is not that all pressure to do right is good. There is a time and a place where such pressure can be a bad thing. I, clearly, do not share the same opinion with everyone here as to when that line is crossed. But...there it is.

Edited June 11, 2015 by The Folk Prophet

[classylady]

Those of us who have served missions most likely knew who the problem Elders or Sisters were.  I certainly did.  My Mission President was a died-in-the-wool strict German and many of the Elders had a hard time with his dictatorial attitude.  I loved my Mission President.  I didn't mind the extra rules he gave us.  He was fulfilling his calling and serving the Lord the way he saw fit.  Anyway, I digress a bit, back to the problem Elders or Sisters.  IMO, when we accepted our mission calls, we were called to serve the Lord by serving the people in the mission field.  I believe that included our companions.  If we serve our companion and help them to become a better person, have we not served the Lord?  What if they don't change, yet they remain in the mission field?  Was their time on a mission completely wasted?  Again, my opinion, no.

 

I remember receiving a letter from a a couple of elders after I had returned home from my mission.  Both of these elders were rather goof-offs.  I knew them well.  We had gone through the LTM (now MTC) together and I was in the same district  with one of the elders for several months in my last city of Essen, Germany.  So, I feel I knew them.  They were put together as companions the last two months of their mission.  Maybe, the mission president didn't know what else to do with them?  But, they had at least one baptism together.  And one of the elder's told me how he finally was able to give up listening to rock music.  It took almost his whole mission to get there, but he finally did it.

 

Were their missions failures?  I don't believe so.  I believe the Lord knew the personalities of these elders before they were called.  I believe HE knew how these elders would be during their missions, but, they were still called to the work.  And, these two elders still saw some success.--both, while they were companions together, and when they were with other companions.  Perhaps, some of their companions had a hard time while serving with them.  (In fact, I know they did).  But, I still believe that those goof-off elders were where they should have been--in the mission field, serving the Lord, although, they probably didn't fulfill their callings with the commitment they should have had.

 

Out side of the mission, I know many who don't fulfill their callings in the ward as they should, but they are still called.  I believe mission service to be the same.  We are given the opportunity to serve, and hopefully, no matter where we are in life, full-time missionary, home teacher, visiting teacher, in the primary, relief society, or elders quorum, etc. we will serve with our whole heart and soul, not just going through the motions.  I, myself, see where I can improve in my Primary calling.  But, even when we serve without truly seeing the vision and knowing that this is the Lord's work, we are still doing good.  We are still furthering the Lord's work.  Just think how much the Lord's work would prosper if we all worked with the knowledge and commitment because we understood that this is the Lord's work.  The Gospel would really go forward.

 

I guess what I'm trying to say in all this, is that we do need committed and strong young men and women to be missionaries. But, even those who aren't as strong as they should be, can still be an asset in the Lord's Kingdom, and still further His work.    

[Traveler]

Those of us who have served missions most likely knew who the problem Elders or Sisters were.  I certainly did.  My Mission President was a died-in-the-wool strict German and many of the Elders had a hard time with his dictatorial attitude.  I loved my Mission President.  I didn't mind the extra rules he gave us.  He was fulfilling his calling and serving the Lord the way he saw fit.  Anyway, I digress a bit, back to the problem Elders or Sisters.  IMO, when we accepted our mission calls, we were called to serve the Lord by serving the people in the mission field.  I believe that included our companions.  If we serve our companion and help them to become a better person, have we not served the Lord?  What if they don't change, yet they remain in the mission field?  Was their time on a mission completely wasted?  Again, my opinion, no.

 

I remember receiving a letter from a a couple of elders after I had returned home from my mission.  Both of these elders were rather goof-offs.  I knew them well.  We had gone through the LTM (now MTC) together and I was in the same district  with one of the elders for several months in my last city of Essen, Germany.  So, I feel I knew them.  They were put together as companions the last two months of their mission.  Maybe, the mission president didn't know what else to do with them?  But, they had at least one baptism together.  And one of the elder's told me how he finally was able to give up listening to rock music.  It took almost his whole mission to get there, but he finally did it.

 

Were their missions failures?  I don't believe so.  I believe the Lord knew the personalities of these elders before they were called.  I believe HE knew how these elders would be during their missions, but, they were still called to the work.  And, these two elders still saw some success.--both, while they were companions together, and when they were with other companions.  Perhaps, some of their companions had a hard time while serving with them.  (In fact, I know they did).  But, I still believe that those goof-off elders were where they should have been--in the mission field, serving the Lord, although, they probably didn't fulfill their callings with the commitment they should have had.

 

Out side of the mission, I know many who don't fulfill their callings in the ward as they should, but they are still called.  I believe mission service to be the same.  We are given the opportunity to serve, and hopefully, no matter where we are in life, full-time missionary, home teacher, visiting teacher, in the primary, relief society, or elders quorum, etc. we will serve with our whole heart and soul, not just going through the motions.  I, myself, see where I can improve in my Primary calling.  But, even when we serve without truly seeing the vision and knowing that this is the Lord's work, we are still doing good.  We are still furthering the Lord's work.  Just think how much the Lord's work would prosper if we all worked with the knowledge and commitment because we understood that this is the Lord's work.  The Gospel would really go forward.

 

I guess what I'm trying to say in all this, is that we do need committed and strong young men and women to be missionaries. But, even those who aren't as strong as they should be, can still be an asset in the Lord's Kingdom, and still further His work.    

 

No one is ever a complete 100% failure -- They can always be used as a bad example.  (A quote from my first mission President - Ivan J Barrett

Edited June 12, 2015 by Traveler