D-News Reports 63,500 Missionaries Are Serving

[USU78]

2 hours ago, ALarson said:

Then just maybe don't read his posts or stay off the thread rather than make snarky remarks like that.  CB's posts definitely relate to this topic just as much as others who are relating their experiences on their missions and after they returned.

You think my criticism of personalization of the issue insincere? 

I could just as easily have chosen another point in the thread to make my point that personalization is almost always used in an attempt to shout down other voices.  And in the particular post I chose, there was the expected perhaps inevitable demonization of SWK, who serves as Evil Old Mormon White Guy Demon in certain circles.  This is a thread to discuss the number of missionaries.  Other than bringing in SWK's "lengthen your stride" advice to members on missionarying, I cannot imagine why he needs to figure in the discussion without it being a threadjack.

[rockpond]

18 minutes ago, USU78 said:

You think my criticism of personalization of the issue insincere? 

I could just as easily have chosen another point in the thread to make my point that personalization is almost always used in an attempt to shout down other voices.  And in the particular post I chose, there was the expected perhaps inevitable demonization of SWK, who serves as Evil Old Mormon White Guy Demon in certain circles.  This is a thread to discuss the number of missionaries.  Other than bringing in SWK's "lengthen your stride" advice to members on missionarying, I cannot imagine why he needs to figure in the discussion without it being a threadjack.

Nothing about California Boy's post "shout[ed] down other voices".  He shared his experience.  Everyone else is welcome to do the same.

[ALarson]

26 minutes ago, USU78 said:

You think my criticism of personalization of the issue insincere? 

I could just as easily have chosen another point in the thread to make my point that personalization is almost always used in an attempt to shout down other voices.  

Others were relating their personal experiences and yet you singled CB out.  Are you opposed to anyone sharing their personal missionary experiences both during or after their missions?  If so, maybe just avoid this thread because it appears that is a part of this topic.

Can you quote where CB was making "an attempt to shout down other voices"?  Did he state that his voice was the only important one or that he felt no one else should express what their personal experience was?  I see nowhere in his posts where he did this.

Edited August 24, 2018 by ALarson

[rockpond]

I feel like I am seeing many of our young men approach the mission decision in a much more mature manner than my generation.

I have a nephew who is a BYU student (attending church and living in a manner that keeps him getting his ecclesiastical endorsement) but he struggles with knowing whether his testimony is what it should be to go out on a mission.

I counseled with a gay young man who had received his mission call but in the months leading up to the day he was to report to the MTC he struggled to decide if he would really teach the plan of salvation to people when he felt it was out of reach to him, personally.

I don't know about the rest of you who are in your 40's or older, but I feel like back in the 80's and 90's it was more like:  are you worthy? have you read the Book of Mormon?  ...a "yes" to both and you were on your way.

[jkwilliams]

2 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I feel like I am seeing many of our young men approach the mission decision in a much more mature manner than my generation.

I have a nephew who is a BYU student (attending church and living in a manner that keeps him getting his ecclesiastical endorsement) but he struggles with knowing whether his testimony is what it should be to go out on a mission.

I counseled with a gay young man who had received his mission call but in the months leading up to the day he was to report to the MTC he struggled to decide if he would really teach the plan of salvation to people when he felt it was out of reach to him, personally.

I don't know about the rest of you who are in your 40's or older, but I feel like back in the 80's and 90's it was more like:  are you worthy? have you read the Book of Mormon?  ...a "yes" to both and you were on your way.

Yep. Even though I had very little family encouragement to serve a mission, there was really never any question that I would serve. The prophet said that was what we were to do. In the 90s, I was a young men's president, and one of the priests in our ward was called to New York City. This kid had extremely controlling parents, and he had pretty much done everything according to their wishes his entire life (his younger brother, on the other hand, was in and out of juvenile detention). A few days before he was to enter the MTC, he told his parents he wasn't going to go, that the only reason he had put in his papers was that he knew they wanted him to go. My bishop knew that I had a good relationship with this kid, so he asked me to talk him into going on a mission. I told him I wouldn't do it, that if anything, I would tell him I was proud of him for making his own decision for the first time. The bishop was pretty angry with me. Not surprisingly, the parents kicked him out of the house and basically disowned him. I saw him a few years later, and he was just finishing up a degree at UVU and was happy. He had not had any contact with his parents since leaving home. He had tried, but they refused to acknowledge his existence. Very sad.

[smac97]

8 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I feel like I am seeing many of our young men approach the mission decision in a much more mature manner than my generation.

I'm curious what "much more mature" means here.

8 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I have a nephew who is a BYU student (attending church and living in a manner that keeps him getting his ecclesiastical endorsement) but he struggles with knowing whether his testimony is what it should be to go out on a mission.

I'm curious what "it should be" means here.

8 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I counseled with a gay young man who had received his mission call but in the months leading up to the day he was to report to the MTC he struggled to decide if he would really teach the plan of salvation to people when he felt it was out of reach to him, personally.

I hope your counsel helped him incorrect the utterly false notion that the plan of salvation is "out of reach to him."

8 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I don't know about the rest of you who are in your 40's or older, but I feel like back in the 80's and 90's it was more like:  are you worthy? have you read the Book of Mormon?  ...a "yes" to both and you were on your way.

What metric would propose?  How do you measure faith?  How do you test the strength of a testimony?

Thanks,

-Smac

[rockpond]

7 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I'm curious what "much more mature" means here.

I'm curious what "it should be" means here.

I hope your counsel helped him incorrect the utterly false notion that the plan of salvation is "out of reach to him."

What metric would propose?  How do you measure faith?  How do you test the strength of a testimony?

Thanks,

-Smac

I have no metrics to propose.  I don't believe any exist for faith and testimony.  My point was just that I see these young men as thinking deeper than my generation did at their age.  It wasn't a judgment as to better or worse for either generation.  Just an observation.

[ALarson]

26 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I don't know about the rest of you who are in your 40's or older, but I feel like back in the 80's and 90's it was more like:  are you worthy? have you read the Book of Mormon?  ...a "yes" to both and you were on your way.

I know of many who were told they'd gain a testimony in the MTC or during their mission (who expressed concerns about a lack of belief or testimony).  I think that can happen, of course and also that testimonies are definitely strengthened.  But what I see now from the youth is they have more of a desire or concern regarding making sure they have a testimony prior to going out.  That's a positive thing too as I think many who come home early went out for the wrong reasons.

This has resulted in there being less of a stigma related to those who choose not to serve a mission.  

Edited August 24, 2018 by ALarson

[jkwilliams]

3 minutes ago, ALarson said:

I know of many who were told they'd gain a testimony in the MTC or during their mission (who expressed concerns about a lack of belief or testimony).  I think that can happen, of course and also that testimonies are definitely strengthened.  But what I see now from the youth is they have more of a desire or concern regarding making sure they have a testimony prior to going out.  That's a positive thing too as I think many who come home early went out for the wrong reasons.

This has resulted in there being less of a stigma related to those who choose not to serve a mission.  

My MTC companion is someone I would describe as fanatical about following the rules and throwing everything he had into missionary work, such that he had a reputation in our mission as so rigid and overzealous as to be really annoying and difficult to work with. In the MTC, he confided to me that he didn't know if the church was true, but he wanted a testimony. He fasted and prayed a lot to receive a witness. When we went home 2 years later, he confided to me again that he didn't know if he believed in the church. He told me that he had really thrown himself into the work in the hopes that God would reward his diligence with a testimony, but it hadn't happened. He went home and promptly dropped out of the church. Looking back on it, I'm not sure he should have been a missionary in the first place. 

[clarkgoble]

21 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

I saw him a few years later, and he was just finishing up a degree at UVU and was happy. He had not had any contact with his parents since leaving home. He had tried, but they refused to acknowledge his existence. Very sad.

I can't even conceive of how parents would act that way. Even if they were upset, surely they would recognize they'd just drive him further away. Although presumably they had their own issues they were dealing with to be like that.

30 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I don't know about the rest of you who are in your 40's or older, but I feel like back in the 80's and 90's it was more like:  are you worthy? have you read the Book of Mormon?  ...a "yes" to both and you were on your way.

Yup and that changed in 2001 with Pres. Hinkley. I think it did significantly improve the quality of missionaries and certainly made life easier for those who didn't need to suffer with a bad companion who didn't want to be there. I still recall one companion who for two months refused to leave the apartment because of his dream of driving a potato truck and missing his girlfriend.

 

[jkwilliams]

Just now, clarkgoble said:

I can't even conceive of how parents would act that way. Even if they were upset, surely they would recognize they'd just drive him further away. Although presumably they had their own issues they were dealing with to be like that.

Well, that family was part of the right-wing extremist cabal in the ward that I've spoken of before, so I certainly wouldn't say they were representative of most members of the church. I've never met two more dogmatic (religious and political) and controlling people in my life. 

[california boy]

Rongo asked if I knew I was gay before going on my mission.  I answered his question as well as giving him the reason why I decided to serve a mission.  SWK was part of the reason for that decision.  I think I was pretty clear why and in no way did I even comment on his attitudes.  I only quoted what he wrote.  

If you think I should not answer other posters questions, then perhaps you shouldn't be participating on Mormondialogue.  Or you always have the option of ignoring every single thing I post.  

[JulieM]

1 hour ago, USU78 said:

I could just as easily have chosen another point in the thread to make my point that personalization is almost always used in an attempt to shout down other voices. 

It appears you’re the only one who is attempting “to shout down” another’s voice.

California boy was answering someone else’s specific question to him and he was on topic. 

Edited August 24, 2018 by JulieM

[rockpond]

18 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

My MTC companion is someone I would describe as fanatical about following the rules and throwing everything he had into missionary work, such that he had a reputation in our mission as so rigid and overzealous as to be really annoying and difficult to work with. In the MTC, he confided to me that he didn't know if the church was true, but he wanted a testimony. He fasted and prayed a lot to receive a witness. When we went home 2 years later, he confided to me again that he didn't know if he believed in the church. He told me that he had really thrown himself into the work in the hopes that God would reward his diligence with a testimony, but it hadn't happened. He went home and promptly dropped out of the church. Looking back on it, I'm not sure he should have been a missionary in the first place. 

While serving in a bishopric (and doing recommend renewals) I became aware of a couple of men in our ward that somewhat fit this description except that they stayed in the church.  They're now middle-age, married in the temple, raising children, baptizing them in the church, etc but they still would say that they have never received a witness that the church is true.

[jkwilliams]

1 minute ago, rockpond said:

While serving in a bishopric (and doing recommend renewals) I became aware of a couple of men in our ward that somewhat fit this description except that they stayed in the church.  They're now middle-age, married in the temple, raising children, baptizing them in the church, etc but they still would say that they have never received a witness that the church is true.

My bishop in Texas told me he'd never received a witness, either. I can't imagine serving like that. 

[pogi]

3 minutes ago, jkwilliams said:

My bishop in Texas told me he'd never received a witness, either. I can't imagine serving like that. 

Are you suggesting that you did have an actual witness when you served in your church callings? 

If so, I can't imagine leaving like that.

Before I received a witness for myself, I still believed in the testimonies of others.  I totally understand why someone might participate in an organization that they believe in and that brings them happiness, peace, and fulfillment without yet having an actual spiritual confirmation.  "For some it is given to know...for others it is given to believe on their words." 

[jkwilliams]

Just now, pogi said:

Are you suggesting that you did have an actual witness when you served in your church callings? 

If so, I can't imagine leaving like that.

Before I received a witness for myself, I still believed in the testimonies of others.  I totally understand why someone might participate in an organization that they believe in and that brings them happiness, peace, and fulfillment without yet having an actual spiritual confirmation.  "For some it is given to know...for others it is given to believe on their words." 

Yes, I did, but that's a long story that is not appropriate for this forum. 

[pogi]

1 minute ago, jkwilliams said:

Yes, I did, but that's a long story that is not appropriate for this forum. 

I'd be really interested in hearing your story sometime.  

[smac97]

10 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I have no metrics to propose. 

Then it seems that "If you have a testimony and are worthy [and have the requisite physical/emotional/mental health], you should go" isn't being improved upon.

10 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I don't believe any exist for faith and testimony.  My point was just that I see these young men as thinking deeper than my generation did at their age.  It wasn't a judgment as to better or worse for either generation.  Just an observation.

Okay.  

I think the above bracket is getting a lot more attention, particularly as to people with substantial health issues.  My son is completing his mission in November.  He has a form of bipolar disorder, and also Celiac disease.  In my generation, he probably would have applied to serve.  He would have entered the MTC.  He would have run into substantial physical and emotional challenges.  He would thereafter either endured an extremely difficult and turbulent two years, or else he would have returned home early.  Instead, he has spent the last two years serving as a Church Service Missionary.  He works in the Referral Center at the MTC, and has had a tremendous, life-altering, faith-affirming experience.  I am exceedingly grateful that he could choose this option over the one that would have entailed much mental and physical pain and turmoil (or not serving at all).

Thanks,

-Smac

[rockpond]

17 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Then it seems that "If you have a testimony and are worthy [and have the requisite physical/emotional/mental health], you should go" isn't being improved upon.

I'm not sure what you are quoting above.  My point was that "testimony" didn't seem to be a factor when myself and my peers were putting in mission papers.  It was basically a matter of moral worthiness.  If you were worthy, you went.  If you weren't, you needed to address it and go.  If you had read the Book of Mormon, great!  If you hadn't, you had better read it before entering the MTC.  But this was just my experience and observation around the late 1980's.

20 minutes ago, smac97 said:

I think the above bracket is getting a lot more attention, particularly as to people with substantial health issues.  My son is completing his mission in November.  He has a form of bipolar disorder, and also Celiac disease.  In my generation, he probably would have applied to serve.  He would have entered the MTC.  He would have run into substantial physical and emotional challenges.  He would thereafter either endured an extremely difficult and turbulent two years, or else he would have returned home early.  Instead, he has spent the last two years serving as a Church Service Missionary.  He works in the Referral Center at the MTC, and has had a tremendous, life-altering, faith-affirming experience.  I am exceedingly grateful that he could choose this option over the one that would have entailed much mental and physical pain and turmoil (or not serving at all).

Thanks,

-Smac

That's great!  This summer at our stake Aaronic Priesthood camp, my wife and I invited a recently returned service missionary to speak along with two other (proselyting) RM's at one of the camp's evening firesides.  Among the three of them, the service RM stood out.  Part of that was his speaking style but it was also due to the experiences he had had as a service missionary.  I too am glad those opportunities are available.

[smac97]

2 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I'm not sure what you are quoting above.  My point was that "testimony" didn't seem to be a factor when myself and my peers were putting in mission papers. 

Oh, wow.  It certainly was a factor in my experience when applying (and in having a TR interview).

2 minutes ago, rockpond said:

It was basically a matter of moral worthiness. 

I question how widespread your experience was.

2 minutes ago, rockpond said:

If you were worthy, you went. 

That was not my experience.  At all.

2 minutes ago, rockpond said:

If you weren't, you needed to address it and go.  If you had read the Book of Mormon, great!  If you hadn't, you had better read it before entering the MTC.  But this was just my experience and observation around the late 1980's.

I went from 1993-1995.  There was an elder in my district at the MTC who was sort of what you describe.  He had never read the Book of Mormon.  We encouraged him along.

Everyone else, though, seemed to have a pretty solid grasp of the Gospel and a testimony of it.  

I hope things have changed since your experience in the 80s.  I think they have.

2 minutes ago, rockpond said:

That's great!  This summer at our stake Aaronic Priesthood camp, my wife and I invited a recently returned service missionary to speak along with two other (proselyting) RM's at one of the camp's evening firesides.  Among the three of them, the service RM stood out.  Part of that was his speaking style but it was also due to the experiences he had had as a service missionary.  I too am glad those opportunities are available.

My son has had a great experience.  He's taught far, far more people than I ever did.

Thanks,

-Smac

[jkwilliams]

Just now, smac97 said:

Oh, wow.  It certainly was a factor in my experience when applying (and in having a TR interview).

I question how widespread your experience was.

That was not my experience.  At all.

I went from 1993-1995.  There was an elder in my district at the MTC who was sort of what you describe.  He had never read the Book of Mormon.  We encouraged him along.

Everyone else, though, seemed to have a pretty solid grasp of the Gospel and a testimony of it.  

I hope things have changed since your experience in the 80s.  I think they have.

My son has had a great experience.  He's taught far, far more people than I ever did.

Back in my day, there was the attitude, voiced by President Monson (IIRC), that "missionaries go out for many reasons; they stay because they are converted." Similarly my mission president said his first priority was to convert the missionaries to the gospel (of course, that didn't last long before numbers became the focus). I would say that probably 40% of the missionaries in my mission didn't really want to be there but had received pressure from families or girlfriends. I met more than a few who were told their parents would pay their college tuition or buy them a car if they served a mission. When I was district leader and zone leader, I remember meeting a lot of missionaries who were shocked that I expected them to work and follow the mission rules. I did a split once to do a baptismal interview, when I was zone leader, and the missionary took me to his apartment, where he stretched out on the bed. I asked him why we weren't going to the interview. "Oh," he said. "That's not until this afternoon." He then suggested that we watch one of the movies they had rented from the local video store (I didn't even know they had such stores in La Paz). When I told him that wasn't appropriate, he told me to "mellow out" and "stop acting like a ****."

In short, when I was a missionary, it was simply an expectation that you would serve. If you weren't worthy, then you needed to make yourself worthy. The results were predictable.

[Scott Lloyd]

24 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Oh, wow.  It certainly was a factor in my experience when applying (and in having a TR interview).

I question how widespread your experience was.

That was not my experience.  At all.

I went from 1993-1995.  There was an elder in my district at the MTC who was sort of what you describe.  He had never read the Book of Mormon.  We encouraged him along.

Everyone else, though, seemed to have a pretty solid grasp of the Gospel and a testimony of it.  

 

I went from 1974-76, and my experience parallels Smac's, not rockpond's in this regard. Being able to express a testimony was an indispensable element. One of the first things we learned how to do in the language training mission (forerunner to the MTC) was to bear our testimonies in the language of the mission.

Edited August 24, 2018 by Scott Lloyd

[jkwilliams]

2 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I went from 1974-76, and my experience parallels Smacs, not rockpond's in this regard. Being able to express a testimony was an indispensable element. One of the first things we learned how to do in the language training mission (forerunner to the MTC) was to bear our testimonies in the language of the mission.

Maybe all the crappy missionaries got sent to my mission and rockpond's mission. 

[smac97]

1 minute ago, jkwilliams said:

Back in my day, there was the attitude, voiced by President Monson (IIRC), that "missionaries go out for many reasons; they stay because they are converted." Similarly my mission president said his first priority was to convert the missionaries to the gospel (of course, that didn't last long before numbers became the focus).

I'd like to better understand the context.

Jesus once admonished Simon Peter: "Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat.  But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren."

I don't think the meaning here is that Simon was devoid of faith, of a "testimony," but rather than he still had a long, long way to go.  I wonder if Pres. Monson and your MP had a similar sentiment in mind.

1 minute ago, jkwilliams said:

I would say that probably 40% of the missionaries in my mission didn't really want to be there but had received pressure from families or girlfriends. I met more than a few who were told their parents would pay their college tuition or buy them a car if they served a mission. When I was district leader and zone leader, I remember meeting a lot of missionaries who were shocked that I expected them to work and follow the mission rules.

Hmm.  I did not have an experience like that at all.  The missionaries I worked with had varying degrees of maturity and work ethic, and I did encounter some who pretty clearly did not want to be there.  But I did not observe any systemic problem in terms of cynicism, ulterior motives, faithlessness, etc.  The predominent sentiment was a sincere desire to do the work.

1 minute ago, jkwilliams said:

I did a split once to do a baptismal interview, when I was zone leader, and the missionary took me to his apartment, where he stretched out on the bed. I asked him why we weren't going to the interview. "Oh," he said. "That's not until this afternoon." He then suggested that we watch one of the movies they had rented from the local video store (I didn't even know they had such stores in La Paz). When I told him that wasn't appropriate, he told me to "mellow out" and "stop acting like a ****."

In short, when I was a missionary, it was simply an expectation that you would serve. If you weren't worthy, then you needed to make yourself worthy. The results were predictable.

I am sorry you had that experience.

Thanks,

-Smac