Non-RM stigma

[checkerboy]

Originally Posted by Bookmeister

Things you have to have to serve in any of the "important" callings (bishop, counselors, stake leadership, relief society (for women, of course)):

Served a mission
married in the temple (not married first and then sealed later, you have to do it all at once)
have more than two children
have a really good professional job where your wife doesn't have to work outside the home

Things that will prevent you from holding any of those callings:

no mission
no children (for whatever reason)
being single, or
being divorced
being married to a non-member

I am gonna call hogwash on this.

[guitarwizard]

Originally Posted by checkerboy

I am gonna call hogwash on this.

seconded. I am pretty sure my bishop joined the church after he and his wife were married. That takes out the "married in the temple" and "served a mission" requirements. But he is my bishop.

Also, the second counselor to my bishop in my college ward never went on a mission and was only sealed in the temple. Not the bishop, but still a respectable position.

[Jenamarie]

Pres. Monson served in the military during WW2, and didn't serve a mission. I guess they made a mistake when they called him.

Please read:

Ezra Taft Benson: "The Lord needs every young man between the ages of nineteen and twenty-six worthy, prepared, and excited about serving in the mission field."

Thomas S. Monson: "Youth of the Church, the world is in need of your help. There are feet to steady, hands to grasp, minds to encourage, hearts to inspire, and souls to save. The harvest truly is great. Let there be no mistake about it; the missionary opportunity of a lifetime is yours. The blessings of eternity await you. Yours is the privilege to be, not spectators, but participants on the stage of service to others."

Richard G. Scott:
"Now may I speak from my heart of what an honorable full-time mission has meant to me personally. I grew up in a home with very good parents, but my father was not a member and my mother was less active. After my mission that changed. They became strong members and served devotedly in the temple—he a sealer, she an ordinance worker. But as a young man, like many of you today, I had no way to judge personally the importance of a mission. I fell in love with an exceptional young woman. At a critical point in our courtship, she made it very clear that she would only be married in the temple to a returned missionary. Duly motivated, I served a mission in Uruguay.

It was not easy. The Lord gave me many challenges that became stepping-stones to personal growth. There I gained my testimony that God the Father and His Beloved Son, Jesus Christ, did in fact visit Joseph Smith to begin a restoration of truth, priesthood authority, and the true Church on earth. I gained a witness that Joseph Smith is a singular prophet. I learned essential doctrines. I discovered what it meant to be led by the Spirit. Many a night I got up as my companion slept to pour my heart out to the Lord for guidance and direction. I pled for the ability to express effectively in Spanish my testimony and the truth I was learning to a people I had come to love. Those prayers were abundantly answered. At the same time, my future eternal companion, Jeanene, was being molded to become an exceptional wife and mother by her own mission.

Most important, all that I now hold dear in life began to mature in the mission field. Had I not been encouraged to be a missionary, I would not have the eternal companion or precious family I dearly love. I am confident that I would not have had the exceptional professional opportunities that stretched my every capacity. I am certain that I would not have received the sacred callings with opportunities to serve for which I will be eternally grateful. My life has been richly blessed beyond measure because I served a mission.

Now can you understand why I am so anxious to motivate every one of you young men to be a worthy missionary?
If you are a young man wondering whether you ought to fulfill a full-time mission, don’t approach that vital decision with your own wisdom alone. Seek the counsel of your parents, your bishop, or stake president. In your prayers ask to have the will of the Lord made known to you. I know that a mission will provide extraordinary blessings for you now and throughout your life. I urge you not to pray to know whether you should go; rather, ask the Lord to guide you in whatever may be necessary to become a worthy, empowered full-time missionary. You will never regret serving a mission, but you most probably will regret not serving if that is your choice."

LDS.org - Liahona Article - Now Is the Time to Serve a Mission!

[Vort]

Originally Posted by Bookmeister

Things you have to have to serve in any of the "important" callings (bishop, counselors, stake leadership, relief society (for women, of course)):

Served a mission
married in the temple (not married first and then sealed later, you have to do it all at once)
have more than two children
have a really good professional job where your wife doesn't have to work outside the home

Things that will prevent you from holding any of those callings:

no mission
no children (for whatever reason)
being single, or
being divorced
being married to a non-member

In my own ward:

• Neither of our last two Relief Society presidents served a mission.
• Our previous elder's quorum president never served a mission.
• Neither did the one before him. This one also had been divorced, with three children from his first marriage.
• The one before him didn't have any children and had only been a member for a few years.
• Our current RS president was divorced and has three children from her first marriage.

On the other hand, I personally:

• Served an honorable full-time mission
• Married in the temple
• Have a bunch of kids
• Have not divorced
• Am the sole wage-earner in my home, as has been the case for almost two decades
• Work as a professional (not especially highly paid, but we make enough to get by)
• Have always payed a full tithe since childhood
• Have always held a temple recommend since adolescence
• Have always been active at Church
• Have never declined a calling of any sort at any time
• Am significantly more polite in person than on a discussion list (just wanted to clarify that )

By your logic, I should be the stake president! So after a lifetime (I'm on the far side of my mid-40s) of faithful service in the Church, what mighty positions have I held and do I now hold?

• I am an elder, not a high priest
• I have served as a counselor in a few quorum presidencies, but never as president
• I am currently an assistant adviser in the young men's program

Positions in the Church are not "earned". God calls whom he wants to serve in a position, for whatever reasons he has. True, they should meet minimum qualifications of worthiness and ability; but this idea that only people that have some certain laundry list of "accomplishments" are considered for "leadership advancement" is simply false, on many levels.

[guitarwizard]

i would also like to reply (again) to the "important" calling comment...


All callings are "important" callings. All callings that are set in the church are a delegation of power of things that ultimately the prophet would have to do himself if he did not set up a system in which members could become stewards over certain responsibilities. These callings insure that every bit of the church runs smoothly and is just another sign that it is the true church. There are not unimportant callings, and all members who are worthy can serve in these callings. Just because someone may have not had the capability of going on a mission does not affect their worthiness to that calling. The stake president or bishop calling said member is the only person that can deem the member unworthy to participate in that calling.

Originally Posted by guitarwizard

seconded. I am pretty sure my bishop joined the church after he and his wife were married. That takes out the "married in the temple" and "served a mission" requirements. But he is my bishop.

Also, the second counselor to my bishop in my college ward never went on a mission and was only sealed in the temple. Not the bishop, but still a respectable position.

Do you see what you're saying? This is exactly why many LDS women want to marry RMs. They anticipate having sons someday. They don't want their son to say, "Dad never served a mission and he's OK."

Many don't serve for valid reasons, due to health, etc. But if you don't go, and your reason is simply justification for not wanting to, don't complain when a girl doesn't want to marry you. She's staking a lot on her choice of a husband. She has every right to want for her children someday, a man who did his duty and served the Lord.

I sent off one boyfriend (who I later married) and three sons on missions. None of them regrets the decision to go. The experience and the personal growth they gained, was beyond what I can say here. Our family has been blessed becauses of those missions. I was blessed because I did not stand in the way of my boyfriend's mission, even though it was REALLY HARD to see him go. I am convinced our marriage is better than it would have been had he not gone.

It IS a sacrifice. But to choose not to, is a HUGE loss.

Originally Posted by Bookmeister

Things you have to have to serve in any of the "important" callings (bishop, counselors, stake leadership, relief society (for women, of course)):

Served a mission
married in the temple (not married first and then sealed later, you have to do it all at once)
have more than two children
have a really good professional job where your wife doesn't have to work outside the home

Things that will prevent you from holding any of those callings:

no mission
no children (for whatever reason)
being single, or
being divorced
being married to a non-member

Sorry, but much of this is not true.

[guitarwizard]

Originally Posted by bren1975

Do you see what you're saying? This is exactly why many LDS women want to marry RMs. They anticipate having sons someday. They don't want their son to say, "Dad never served a mission and he's OK."

Many don't serve for valid reasons, due to health, etc. But if you don't go, and your reason is simply justification for not wanting to, don't complain when a girl doesn't want to marry you. She's staking a lot on her choice of a husband. She has every right to want for her children someday, a man who did his duty and served the Lord.

I sent off one boyfriend (who I later married) and three sons on missions. None of them regrets the decision to go. The experience and the personal growth they gained, was beyond what I can say here. Our family has been blessed becauses of those missions. I was blessed because I did not stand in the way of my boyfriend's mission, even though it was REALLY HARD to see him go. I am convinced our marriage is better than it would have been had he not gone.

It IS a sacrifice. But to choose not to, is a HUGE loss.

I am not doubting that at all! my comment was not saying that you would be fine without a mission, i think every young man in the church should prepare to serve on a mission, go, honorably return and start a family, worthily raising his children in the church to do the same. It doesn't always happen. That second counselor? He was a late convert. He also didn't have the ability. But you are right, he turned out great. There are negative things about not going, but there are even worse things for going and not wanting to. I just had a heated debate yesterday with an RM who didn't want to go. He left the church for feeling forced to go on a mission, among many other things. This stigma sucks though. If you force someone to do something, they will hate it. Like i hated reading in high school! I hated 1984 and Shakespeare, now i love them because i am not forced to do something i don't want to.

Young men should be prepared to serve a mission. If something happens and they are found incapable of going (be it a life predicament or that they do not have a firm grasp of the gospel, OR the only reason to go is that there parents will buy them a car) they should not be looked down upon. That is like looking at someone who judged themselves not worthy to take the sacrament and coming up to them after church, in the middle of their repentance process, and bullying them about their lack of reverence for the Saviour.

That is my opinion.

Originally Posted by guitarwizard

i would also like to reply (again) to the "important" calling comment...


All callings are "important" callings. All callings that are set in the church are a delegation of power of things that ultimately the prophet would have to do himself if he did not set up a system in which members could become stewards over certain responsibilities. These callings insure that every bit of the church runs smoothly and is just another sign that it is the true church. There are not unimportant callings, and all members who are worthy can serve in these callings. Just because someone may have not had the capability of going on a mission does not affect their worthiness to that calling. The stake president or bishop calling said member is the only person that can deem the member unworthy to participate in that calling.

I completely agree.