My nineteen year old first cousin once removed is preparing to go on a mission.

He updates his Facebook status from time to time with stuff like this:

"Got a missionary haircut today."

"I am now an elder!"

Once he talked about how god got after Joseph Smith for not following directions and hid the plates away from him for a while. I think my child-cousin's point is that one needs to mind god.

Or whatever.

The stuff this child says on Facebook is trite, superficial, ignorant, unaware, parochial. This boy does not know what he does not know.

Oh, he doesn't talk about church stuff in all his status updates. In fact, most of the time he sounds like the immature, thoughtless teenage boy that he is. Girls. Music. School. Such slop though.

This is what goes out into the world to "convert" people to the only true church on the face of the earth?

How utterly laughable.

I was just on FB looking at pictures my sil had posted of my nephew that is currently in the MTC. Most of the pictures of are of the 'Elders' acting like kindergarteners. There's one where they're all sticking out their tongues and have their fingers in their mouths trying to look stupid. My ten year old son has outgrown that kind of behavior. It's so weird to see 19 yo's behaving that way.

Another one of the pics is of several of the elders standing in a line and one of them is holding up a picture of Thomas S. Monson. It it one of the creepiest most cult-like things I have ever seen.

Another thing I have noticed...out of probably 25 missionaries pictured in these photos, I would say that only 2 appear to not be total nerds. I know that sounds mean, but these are not attractive, confident looking young men. The really cute ones don't seem to go anymore.

Just my observations.

What picks me is how their Mums refer to them as "Elder ..." instead of by their first names, which the silly cows gave them in the first place!

What picks me is how their Mums refer to them as "Elder ..." instead of by their first names, which the silly cows gave them in the first place!

As missionaries in Germany and Austria, we did not go by "Elder" (or the German), as that would look just to silly, since we were just boys. We were known as "brother" instead.

I see missionaries heading home and they still look like little boys.

My European relatives would laugh right in the faces of missionaries if they said they were "Elders."

Americans are so open and accepting, which is why Mormonism was able to flourish at all.

None of them should be going till they have all thair higher education out thew ay.

Well, yes, if the title is misunderstood. It's just a rank. It's not about age. Important to remember that, I think.
Different religions have different ranks and titles for their members.
Those that are believers will do what is required of them to obtain the ranks and titles. It's just the nature of how all organizations are organized.

SusieQ#1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, yes, if the title is misunderstood. It's
> just a rank. It's not about age. Important to
> remember that, I think.

The title is not misunderstood... precisely because the word 'elder' means 'of a greater age'.


> Different religions have different ranks and
> titles for their members.
> Those that are believers will do what is required
> of them to obtain the ranks and titles. It's just
> the nature of how all organizations are organized.

Are there any other (religious or non religious) organizations where 19 year old boys are called 'elders'?

According to the New Oxford American Dictionary:
elder (noun)
• a person of a greater age, a person of advanced age
• (often elders) a leader or senior figure in a tribe or other group
• an official in the early Christian Church, or of various Protestant Churches and sects.

"The title is not misunderstood... precisely because the word 'elder' means 'of a greater age'."

No it doesn't. It means whatever the person giving the title wants it to mean.

If I call you "peanut butter sandwich," and you accept that as a title, it has the meaning that WE decide. If someone else wanted to challenge our usage of that title, they would be irrelevant.

Elder, to the people that are relevant to that title, means 19 year old missionary who is going out to try and sell religion.

It is just a rank, but the LDS church has done some really silly things with these ranks in correlation to other churches or even the ranks in the early 1800s church.

Deacon:

Regular definition -
Deacon is a ministry in the Christian Church that is generally associated with service of some kind, but which varies among theological and denominational traditions. In many traditions the "diaconate", the term for a deacon's office, is a clerical office; in others it is for laity.

Mormon definition -
A boy age 12 or 13. May or may not attend church regularly. Had to show up for at least an interview with the bishop and be reasonably "worthy".

And it goes from there.

So the Mormon church suffers from title inflation. Elder is a ridiculous title for a 19 year old just like priest is a ridiculous title for a 16 year old.

Anyone know the history of when they switched the aaronic priesthood from being given to men to boys?

Why do they have a greater rank than their fellow sister mishies?

Oh yeah, it's a sexist patriarchal church.

SusieQ#1 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, yes, if the title is misunderstood. It's
> just a rank. It's not about age. Important to
> remember that, I think.
> Different religions have different ranks and
> titles for their members.
> Those that are believers will do what is required
> of them to obtain the ranks and titles. It's just
> the nature of how all organizations are organized.


From time to time, SusieQ#1 you weigh in on something and just stagger me.

The Mormon church makes a mockery of the titles, Deacon, Priest, Elder, Bishop, Patriarch.

A teenage boy an elder?

The judgment part of the brain does even mature until one is 27 or 28.

Why do you insist on using only your definition? Words change meaning on a daily basis, and every person's lexicon is different. It doesn't matter what you think the title should mean, it only matters what they think the title should mean.

Appeals to an authoritative definition don't change the fact that they are using the word in their own way.

Now that makes me really confused. How come Romney recently called himself a "pastor" instead of just saying "bishop". Didn't he do it just because people in general think bishop means something else than what mormons think it means?

Whenever the mishies come over now (and it's extremely rare - I wonder why?), I tell them, "I can't call you elder. Are you elder than I am? I'm going to call you younger."

Too bad Joseph Smith didn't understand that 'elder' is a translation of the Greek 'presbyter' from which we also get the English word priest. Priest and Elder are the same. Oops!

Jesus did not pick children to be his disciples and carry on his missionary work. He picked adult men who had life experience.

If you were my cousin and had just as much contempt for me years ago when I was a missionary, I would have dropped you out of my life and even to this day I would never want anything to do with you. I'm lucky that my family members are not like you.

Nobody needs someone like you, especially a 19 year old missionary who is being manipulated into what will be one of the most unnecessary, difficult and possibly humiliating times of his life. What he needs is someone to pat him on the back and help him when he finally decides to leave Mormonism behind, not for someone to misuse the word oxymoron in an attempt to be selfish and uncaring.

This 19 year old cousin has no idea how I feel about him. You made a huge leap in misunderstanding.

Not a huge leap. If you really feel that way about him and have any sort of relationship with him, he'll be able to feel it. I feel sorry for you because of your outlook and I feel sorry for him because he is going on a mission.

Your projection of contempt onto the OP says more about you than about her. Go on with your bad self and your Peter Priesthood, faux-authority rebuke.

From your "peanut butter sandwich" post farther up the thread... You and your pal may agree that you call him "peanut butter sandwich," but if your pal knocks on someone's door and introduces himself as "peanut butter sandwich," the person answering the door has no obligation to accept the agreement the two of you made. It's an out-of-context reference, just like a 19-year old boy knocking on the door calling himself "Elder" is an out-of-context definition for what "Elder" means to most of the world.

She did a good job of pointing at that elder for her cousin was a silly title because:

1) He's just a regular teenager.

2) He's knowledge of and involvement in his religion is rather at a surface level.

How does that in any way personally denigrate her cousin?

"The stuff this child says on Facebook is trite, superficial, ignorant, unaware, parochial."

"In fact, most of the time he sounds like the immature, thoughtless teenage boy that he is. Girls. Music. School. Such slop though."

"How utterly laughable."

[sarcasm]
Yes, you are right, these are all non-denigrating comments about her cousin. She clearly respects and understands him while lamenting his decision to be an idiot and sell religion. She is a model family member and I would want her to be my own first cousin.
[/sarcasm]

I feel sorry for this boy. He is caught up in the nonsense of the church.

He is flagrantly immature and superficial, which is to say, he is a typical 19 year old kid.

My comments, as you rightly point out, ARE denigrating of him. He is an idiot, as are almost all 19 year old kids.

My frustration lies in what he represents metaphorically: unexamined and blind faith.

This boy has no idea of my feelings as I haven't much contact with him or his family so your concern about his hurt feelings (if that is what it is) is misplaced.

I guess facebook friend status doesn't necessarily indicate a close family. Makes sense.

Kids are kids, and such being the case, we are not surprised when they act like it. It's normal. Most kids do become emotional adults - sadly, of course, some never do. 19 year old boys are famous for being dorky, sophmoric and still lovable. This boy is demonstrating that he's acting like a normal 19 year old kid who isn't considered old enough yet to be trusted to drink alcohol responsibly. He doesn't know much about his own religion, and at his age, he hasn't started thinking like an adult yet about it. He's a kid, acting like a kid. And soon he'll be called Elder.

See, this is ridiculous.

Kids can be irritating, obnoxious, self-absorbed - but this is what kids do, because they are KIDS. We don't denigrate them for being kids. But to call them ELDERS? Give me a break. They don't know enough yet to not squeeze their zits and put the footage of the squeezage on Youtube, or even to pick up their own dirty clothes off the floor - they're still operating on the "Oh my mommy/the magic fairy will do it." And these kids are called Elder...

They are still in puberty. That's why they act like children.

The awful thing is not these boys who go are lead into dangerous situations all over the world...but the men who send them. Men in their 50s, 60s and older who use them like fodder for the "Cause". I'm almost 50 and could never do this to a child.

Let those self-rightous bastards in the 12 go out and live on a few hundred dollars a month. Let them tract 4 hours a day. Let them ride bikes. Let them go into dangerous neighborhoods.

Let Monson (didn't he skip mission service?) live like that. Then maybe they will have some pity on the slaves of their empire.