Page 1 of 1

Looking for explanation that means MPs aren't required to be a**holes

Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 2:58 pm
by Reuben
So it seems like the church requires mission presidents to be total assholes. But I can't always think of charitable explanations anymore, so maybe I'm missing something.

Mission president's handbook, 2006 edition, page 25, in the context of dealing with missionaries who want to go home:
Explain that if the missionary returns home at his or her own insistence, the missionary and the family are to reimburse the Church for the cost of the return trip home.
According to various exmos, MPs do use this tactic, but I haven't read any firsthand accounts of anyone actually being required to pay up. So it seems like they're instructed to lie in order to manipulate missionaries into staying. Possibly gives new meaning to Elder Zwick's "demolition wrecking ball."

If a missionary were actually required to reimburse the church, what are the legal implications?

I wonder if my FIL has ever done this.

Oh, I did it! Maybe this is leftover policy from days of yore when missionaries actually did have to reimburse the church. But then, it was the church being the asshole then instead of the MP now.

Re: Looking for explanation that means MPs aren't required to be a**holes

Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 5:32 pm
by Palerider
I can't remember for sure who it was that told me about this policy. Maybe my Bishop or SP at the time. But it was just a "casual" mention before I even left. That was in the 70's.

I guess the Savior would probably say the same thing. Or Peter or Paul....they were manipulative like that.

Re: Looking for explanation that means MPs aren't required to be a**holes

Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 6:44 pm
by 1smartdodog
I would have gladly paid my way home if it meant I could leave easily. I think that is a minor detail in keepin you on a mission. Social pressure is way morneffectivem

Re: Looking for explanation that means MPs aren't required to be a**holes

Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2017 11:44 pm
by moksha
Pay our own way home? Suddenly Elder Cunningham realized that being assigned to labor in the Boise, Idaho mission was not such a curse after all.

Re: Looking for explanation that means MPs aren't required to be a**holes

Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2017 2:39 pm
by LostGirl
Lol moshka. You crack me up. :D

Re: Looking for explanation that means MPs aren't required to be a**holes

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 2:57 pm
by nibbler
Explain that if the missionary returns home at his or her own insistence, the missionary and the family are to reimburse the Church for the cost of the return trip home.
Explain that if I return home at my own insistence, the church and its subsidiaries are to reimburse me for the monthly cost of my mission.

How would that fly?

Re: Looking for explanation that means MPs aren't required to be a**holes

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 4:40 pm
by FiveFingerMnemonic
I have an exmo coworker who had to come home early for surgery at the halfway mark and opted not to go back after recovering. They billed him for the foreign flight home.

Re: Looking for explanation that means MPs aren't required to be a**holes

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2017 5:41 pm
by 2bizE
Being an A$$hole is a general characteristic in the progression in the church. Now, not all MPs are a$$holes, but many are. After MP, they later progress to AA70, then to GA, then to Pres of 70, then Q15. Each level requires a higher degree of A$$hole.