I've been reading lots of posts from RM's, exmos, inactives, etc. I've been seeing lots of things which reading one's thread just yesterday almost made me want to boo hoo. I understand it is expected and that you will almost be treated as a prince if you go. That you'll get that "special" girl or guy when you come back & that IF you do not carry out with it, you are basically looked down on somewhat. Also under so much pressure to go. You know, myself, I'd hate to know I had to participate in something in order to get the guy I'd wished for. It almost seems like an insult. It somewhat compares to a spouse, fiance', etc. stating to you "If I don't get that house, I'm not going through with it." And here the house is ONLY app. 3 million dollars. Not exactly the same but basically somewhat the same.

One is more than "basically looked down on somewhat." And, "It almost seems like an insult."

(Susan I/S, am I allowed to plug a movie here? I will, anyway:)

Get yourself a copy of the DVD "In the Shadow of the Temple." I'll bet the missionaries didn't show you that one. It will illustrate what people go through when they quit the church, although it is not about what happens if you don't go on a mission, and your question was specifically about failure of a boy not to go on a mission. But you'll find out in other ways how people who quit the church are "basically looked down on somewhat."

This whole mission thing all started only about one generation ago. I went on a mission, but I'm over 60, and in my day you were not so looked down upon if you chose not to go. A lot of guys didn't go. The church was a friendlier place, anyway. We had softball and basketball tournaments that included a lot of non-LDS people in town, we had bazaars, fund-raisers, dances with live bands, roadshows (plays or pantomimes), music, dance and speech competitions, even barbershop quartet competitions. I like to brag that once our ward had a big BBQ and a boxing competition (which turned out to be a bad idea because some guys got pounded badly and held grudges). In short, one made good friends and had a good time.

Something happened in the late '70s maybe, or early '80s. Most of us blame it on the Nazi-like program of "correlation," wherein all church units lost any autonomy that they had and all had to do the same thing at the same time church-wide. This is the time, too, when they declared that all events in the church, from talks given at the pulpit to dances to even funerals, had to be "missionary opportunities." this is the time when missionaries became so desperate and obnoxious, and when a love-one's funeral was hijacked so that the church could be plugged to any non-Mormons present. This was when the church declared that all young men should go on missions, and when families became desperate to get their boys on missions. Anything that used to be fun was now considered superfluous and was discontinued. Mormons have turned inward and avoid doing anything that isn't assigned to them directly.

It's funny that the Nazification of the LDS church programs over at least the last 20 years have had the opposite effect than the one the leadership desired. Missionary work is difficult, and the church is shrinking. Yet despite all that, the old guys in SLC keep making bad decisions based on achieving and maintaining absolute control, and the church just keeps going downhill.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/02/2011 09:50PM by cludgie.

Funerals????? You've got to be kidding. They don't still attempt to convert @ funerals, I hope. If I were asked to do as such, I couldn't do it or not in my clear conscience.

I attended the wedding of a BIC to a bride who half-heartedly joined the church in order to marry him, because as a dutiful Mormon he would ONLY marry in the temple.
When the required year from her baptism had passed they got married in the temple. I was TBM at the time and attended the sealing (my thoughts at the time are another story, but I thought it was unfair of him to have courted a non-member and placed this burden on her). None of her family or friends were there of course, only the TBM family and friends of the BIC groom. It must have horribly lonely for her.
Soon after, they had the customary reception, an open event that anyone is invited to. Or so the TBM side of the event thought. However, apparently to appease her family, they had made it out to be the actual wedding to her family and friends. There was an aisle, and her father walked her down the aisle. There was the traditional processional music "here comes the bride". A nevermo would have thought "wedding", whereas the Mormons presents were a bit awonder at why they were putting on a wedding when they'd already been married.
At the end of the aisle the father gives his daughter to an awaiting groom and...a Mormon bishop who had been asked to perform a "ring ceremony". Well a ring ceremony in Mormonism is considered extraneous to the actual marriage (the temple marriage ceremony does not include exchanging rings, it's considered a benign secular tradition and tolerated after the temple ritual, usually either in the temple or sometimes on the temple grounds outside, and less often elsewhere like this). The bishop does not pretend to marry them. To the dismay of the bride's side, instead of vows he openly and explicitly explains that THIS is NOT the real wedding...it had already occurred in the temple and this "ring ceremony" was not to be construed as a wedding.
Well try and imagine the aghast expression her parents wore as they tried to show dignity as they were openly humiliated without any warning.
The church is like a bull in a crystal shop. It crashes through peoples lives and leaves a litter of broken hearts, then grazes placidly is if nothing ever happened.

A perfect analogy, Amos2.

probably thinking, "What the hell did I get myself into?" going thru that creepy endowment and then sealing without her family. At least Kate Middleton was savvy enough to exclude "OBEY" from her vows - and knew what they were going to be. In the Morg temple rituals, you have no idea what you will be "coveting".

http://www.zionsbest.com/unwritten.html

Funerals could and should be the most spiritually impressive. They are becoming informal family reunions in front of ward members. Often the Spirit is repulsed by humorous experiences or jokes when the time could be devoted to teaching the things of the Spirit, even the sacred things.

When the family insists that several family members speak in a funeral, we hear about the deceased instead of about the Atonement, the Resurrection, and the comforting promises revealed in the scriptures. Now it's all right's all right to have a family member speak at a funeral, but if they do, their remarks should be in keeping with the spirit of the meeting.

I have told my Brethren in that day when my funeral is held, if any of them who speak talk about me, I will raise up and correct them. The gospel is to be preached. I know of no meeting where the congregation is in a better state of readiness to receive revelation and inspiration from a speaker than they are at a funeral. This privilege is being taken away from us because we don't understand the order of things--the unwritten order of things--that relates to the administration of the Church and the reception of the Spirit.

I wouldn't attend.

Deb, here's the relevant teaching by Apostle Boyd K Packer:

“When the family insists that several family members speak in a funeral, we hear about the deceased instead of about the Atonement, the Resurrection, and the comforting promises revealed in the scriptures. Now it's all right's all right to have a family member speak at a funeral, but if they do, their remarks should be in keeping with the spirit of the meeting.

“I have told my Brethren in that day when my funeral is held, if any of them who speak talk about me, I will raise up and correct them. The gospel is to be preached. I know of no meeting where the congregation is in a better state of readiness to receive revelation and inspiration from a speaker than they are at a funeral."

that's sad.... christianity and snubbing someone because they leave the church (Freedom of Religion) why would you treat people badly who Choose to leave. that's not being a "christian" unless I was taught, led to believe wrongly. I must have been because LDS is the TRUE religion.

Great answer CLUDGIE, I was in Europe for my teenage years and we had great Youth Conventions and Leadership Courses and Stake, Area and Regional and All Country Athletics and Swimming, and Team Sports trophies, Soccer, Basketball and Volleyball. After every Convention or Sport's Meet there was a great dance

Once they realized we were having sooo much fun and it was costing them a little bit of money, although the participants paid for most of it themselves.

It all came to a screeching halt about 1980- 1981. This was so short sighted of the church leaders, because it was at these multi-region activities that we met our spouses and started our TBM tithe paying families

JB

The fun social activities and more humanitarian social aspects of the morg cushioned most members from the dark side of the morg. That ugliness ugliness has nothing much to temper it these days. It's just pay, pray, and obey, give your life to the church and hope for a payoff in the afterlife.

The loss of a loved one is the time of emotional vulnerability, ideal for capturing converts, in the eyes of the church leaders.

Apostle Boyd K. Packer gave a well-known speech in which he sharply upbraided members who expected funerals to focus on their deceased loved one rather than using it as a missionary opportunity! He called them "selfish," as I recall.

Shocking? Yes...to anyone except a Mormon.

(I can't find the source for this speech offhand. If someone has it, please post!)

I may be wrong, but if I'd been a missionary, member, church officer, etc. I just couldn't have gone through with that. I KNOW it wouldn't have been done in my right concience.

wow!! I think Mr. Romney and his wife were married in a temple and then had another ceremony b/c her family,friends, etc. couldn't attend the temple wedding.

I know the 1st time anyone came to my home(LDS) the first or one of the first questions was "Is your husband home?" I had to tell him "My husband's deceased" Of course response "I'm so sorry" but shortly after I'd realized LDS doesn't necessarily become upset about death. Maybe I'm wrong, here. That's just how I saw it.

There is a lot of pressure to go, especially as every nice Mormon girl has been trained to seek out a RM to marry. And the non-RM guys are looked down as lacking in manhood and obviously rarely get any prestigious callings in the ward.

What's also frustrating, this happened to me and I'm sure is common, as an RM when you are questioning they use the fact that you went on a mission and preached the gospel as proof you did have a testimony rather than the social guilt trip it was.

I do have some good memories from my mission and feel I did help some people plus I got to live in a foreign country. But there was much angst as well and so much wasted time.

I am so glad I did not go on a mission. There was considerable pressure, but I managed to avoid it.

Cludgie is right. They sucked all the joy out of Mormonism.

"Often the Spirit is repulsed by humorous experiences or jokes when the time could be devoted to teaching the things of the Spirit, even the sacred things"

Actually, what is repulsed by these experiences are people who mistake themselves as the representative of God on Earth, who would not recognise the true words of the Lord if they were bawled into their ears...

But I thought that God had a sense of humor. A twisted one at times, but still a sense of humor. Why would He be repulsed at humorous experiences if He provides them? Unfortunately, I don't think Mormons are alone in thinking that humor and reverence are mutually exclusive.

Personally, I think he'd have to have a sense of humor, especially looking down @ all of the people and what we all do on a daily basis.