Comments on: Mission Restructuring

By: queuno

queuno — Tue, 06 Apr 2010 16:30:18 +0000

(Several non-LDS friends/family members have expressed dismay over the apparent practice of disallowing young men who have transgressed to serve missions, even if they are repentant. Such a practice seems to suggest that once sins are scarlet, they are always scarlet, snowstorms be damned.)

Agreed, but on the other hand, sometimes certain problems take a very long time to fully recover from, and do we want those kids out in the mission field?

By: Antonio Parr

Antonio Parr — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 21:13:38 +0000

(Nothing in my prior post is intended to be unsupportive of LDS Missions. My life has been blessed immeasurably as both a recipient of missionary work and as a missionary.)

By: Antonio Parr

Antonio Parr — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 21:05:05 +0000

Perhaps a way to resolve the issue is by removing the social stigma associated with not serving a proselytizing mission. Let “worthy” young men who genuinely feel called to be preachers of the word go on proselytizing missions, and offer/allow other valid service opportunities for those who do not feel inclined to be preachers of the word (or who are refused mission calls because of past transgressions), but who nevertheless love and wish to serve the Church. It just seems a shame to stigmatize a 19 year old, whose life has barely started, and who is still trying to learn how to stand.

By: 152

152 — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 19:58:24 +0000

144 - and perhaps those lost boys will be able to find a nice mate among the many 30yr old single women who are forced to look for a match among the non-LDS but would rather love to marry in the temple. Change can be a painful process, and I'm not trying to minimize the struggles of those that you refer to, but you can't really dictate policy for a (insert number that you feel is real here)-million member organization based on the possible consequences of a minority of the members. Those are downsides, but possibly the upsides outweigh and more time is needed IMO to tell.

By: Antonio Parr

Antonio Parr — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 19:50:00 +0000

I am not wise enough to know the nuances behind “raising the bar.” I assume that there is inspiration behind the decision. That being said, one of the sad byproducts of this policy is a growing generation of LDS “lost boys”, i.e., 19+ year olds who were barred from serving LDS missions and who, as a result, become socially ostracized, declared off-limits to LDS young women, and who lose meaningful fellowship with the Saints. I have personally witnessed this on several occasions, and have grave concerns about the social stigma that accompanies the failure of a young man to be called to serve a mission.

By: Latter-day Guy

Latter-day Guy — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 19:07:58 +0000

“The facts, as I see them, are simple to understand.”

Besides which, understanding them is not really necessary, is it? Ours is “not to reason why,” and all that.

“I do not have a need to see something else beyond what was reported in the news and in the Church News on the issue.”

Scientology Rule = FAIL

By: 152

152 — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 18:29:43 +0000

I would like to respond specifically to the comments that “raising the bar” may have been a failure, or a misconceived idea.
One issue I have with the stock-holder ownership style economy that we live in is that if things don’t pan out in 2-3 quarters – they must be a bad idea. I feel a bit of this is going on here. Raising the bar might have painful short-term consequences: decreased missionary calls and service, decreased baptisms, etc. But it is a bit soon to judge possible long-term effects. Hopefully in light of the bar being higher, it might encourage the younger youth to live to the higher needs: chastity, temperance, and even health/weight issues. Perhaps we should give this program more than 5 years before we judge it to be a failure, since it hopefully inspires a paradigm shift in missionary preparation – and that type of thing takes time.

All of that in addition to Cynthia’s comments in 131 which I whole-heartedly agree with. Its amazing the amount of spiritual damage a wayward missionary can do in a ward/area.

I’m not saying I have a testimony of “raising the bar”, perhaps it was a mistake. But give it some time to pan out before we start stating figures as cold-hard facts and proof of failure.

By: Antonio Parr

Antonio Parr — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 17:22:42 +0000

Well, now that we have 138, I guess Steve can now close this and all other threads on bycommonconsent.com . . .

It was a good run while it lasted . . .

By: Steve Evans

Steve Evans — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 17:12:32 +0000

Facts are always simple to understand when we refuse to analyze them out of a misguided sense of devotion.

By: CTRGuy

CTRGuy — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 17:02:14 +0000

@David Bresnahan – Well said.