NOM

More watering down/normalization of the missionary standards. Good stuff.

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900 ... unces.html

FiveFingerMnemonic wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 10:59 am More watering down/normalization of the missionary standards. Good stuff.

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900 ... unces.html

I think it's a good thing!

Some dumbass in the comments clearly doesn't!

BYU NATION Salt Lake, UT
Feb. 15, 2019 10:31 a.m.
My advice to the missionaries is to still only call home on Mother's Day and Christmas if you want to baptize more and receive extra blessings. The zone leaders and AP's for sure should only call home twice a year to set a good example to the other missionaries.

Sacrifice brings forth the blessings from Heaven!

I wonder if his comment would have been the same in 1978?

Don't baptize black people! The zone leaders and AP's won't!

Red Ryder wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 11:05 am

BYU NATION Salt Lake, UT
Feb. 15, 2019 10:31 a.m.
My advice to the missionaries is to still only call home on Mother's Day and Christmas if you want to baptize more and receive extra blessings. The zone leaders and AP's for sure should only call home twice a year to set a good example to the other missionaries.

Sacrifice brings forth the blessings from Heaven!

In fairness, that guy is getting ripped by the TBM's right now for not 'following the prophet."

Yet another "we did this messed up stuff for years but it's OK we don't do that anymore" revelation. Is it a good thing that they no longer isolate young people from their families while they are missionaries? Yes. Is it still messed up that they did that in the first place? Absolutely. Does that undo the harm they did with the isolation all these years? Nope.

# of kids (prob mostly 18 year old boys) coming home early finally reached critical mass.

Wait - is there a scandal about to break that involves missionaries not being able to call home?

Not Buying It wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 11:35 am Yet another "we did this messed up stuff for years but it's OK we don't do that anymore" revelation. Is it a good thing that they no longer isolate young people from their families while they are missionaries? Yes. Is it still messed up that they did that in the first place? Absolutely. Does that undo the harm they did with the isolation all these years? Nope.

This is such a great point. The isolation of missionaries was horrible. In 50 years, the church will be able to deny the isolation was ever a problem.

Not Buying It wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 11:48 am Wait - is there a scandal about to break that involves missionaries not being able to call home?

Not Buying It wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 11:35 am Yet another "we did this messed up stuff for years but it's OK we don't do that anymore" revelation. Is it a good thing that they no longer isolate young people from their families while they are missionaries? Yes. Is it still messed up that they did that in the first place? Absolutely. Does that undo the harm they did with the isolation all these years? Nope.

Spot on.

StarbucksMom wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 11:47 am # of kids (prob mostly 18 year old boys) coming home early finally reached critical mass.

Also, spot on.

“Regular communication with their families is an important part of a missionary’s service,” said the First Presidency in a statement. “One of the major purposes of this adjustment is to encourage families to be more involved in their missionary’s efforts and experiences.”

I served in Japan a couple of decades ago. Internet access was prevalent at the time. Email was a thing. But weekly communication wasn't important then?

Elder Uchtdorf said the new guidelines offer several additional benefits including accommodating varied family circumstances, as well as better supporting those missionaries who would benefit from increased personal contact with family at home.

There it is. Eighteen year olds with internet access and no prior time away from home just won't stay on their two-year stints of indentured servitude without parents continually laying on the guilt.

græy wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 12:12 pm

Not Buying It wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 11:48 am Wait - is there a scandal about to break that involves missionaries not being able to call home?

Not Buying It wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 11:35 am Yet another "we did this messed up stuff for years but it's OK we don't do that anymore" revelation. Is it a good thing that they no longer isolate young people from their families while they are missionaries? Yes. Is it still messed up that they did that in the first place? Absolutely. Does that undo the harm they did with the isolation all these years? Nope.

Spot on.

StarbucksMom wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 11:47 am # of kids (prob mostly 18 year old boys) coming home early finally reached critical mass.

Also, spot on.

“Regular communication with their families is an important part of a missionary’s service,” said the First Presidency in a statement. “One of the major purposes of this adjustment is to encourage families to be more involved in their missionary’s efforts and experiences.”

I served in Japan a couple of decades ago. Internet access was prevalent at the time. Email was a thing. But weekly communication wasn't important then?

Elder Uchtdorf said the new guidelines offer several additional benefits including accommodating varied family circumstances, as well as better supporting those missionaries who would benefit from increased personal contact with family at home.

There it is. Eighteen year olds with internet access and no prior time away from home just won't stay on their two-year stints of indentured servitude without parents continually laying on the guilt.

All these thoughts ran through my head. Plus the thought that with cell phones, an overseas call is not costing an arm and a leg. Often with the church it comes down to worship of the almighty $$$

There have been problems in the past where a missionary got sick and the mission president thought it was just a belly aching kid, and refused to let him see a doctor, so the kid got sicker and sicker and finally broke rules and called home and mama bear raised Cain. So, a missionary suing the church isn’t out of the question. My husband SHOULD have sued for the church for ignoring his illness until it caused permanent liver damage, then when they finally sent him to a doctor, it was a quack using medieval medical techniques.

When emailing and Skype were so easy, to forbid contact with family when there was a death or other crisis was just cruel.

Agree that the old policy was likely to minimize long distance call cost. Today those calls cost very little to nothing for most missionaries and their families. The cost issue is no longer a consideration.

I wonder how much is to try to curb the epidemic of mental health issues. On one of his podcasts, Bill Reel was saying that right now 1 in 3 missionaries do not make it through due to mental health issues. Allowing regular contact could help a lot to alleviate those issues. I would be interested if there are any statistics on activity rates of missionaries who come home early compared to those who complete their stint.

They lower the mission age to get more people out on missions to help get more into the indoctrination program, but their washout rate goes though the roof, countermanding the effectiveness of it.

Just This Guy wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 1:12 pm Agree that the old policy was likely to minimize long distance call cost. Today those calls cost very little to nothing for most missionaries and their families. The cost issue is no longer a consideration.

I wonder how much is to try to curb the epidemic of mental health issues. On one of his podcasts, Bill Reel was saying that right now 1 in 3 missionaries do not make it through due to mental health issues. Allowing regular contact could help a lot to alleviate those issues. I would be interested if there are any statistics on activity rates of missionaries who come home early compared to those who complete their stint.

They lower the mission age to get more people out on missions to help get more into the indoctrination program, but their washout rate goes though the roof, countermanding the effectiveness of it.

I think long distance charges was a main concern.

I am a little pissed right now. A lot was going on at home when I went (family business was struggling etc.) My family could have used some weekly support, since I had worked for the company for years. Makes my blood boil when I think of the all the sh** I peddled instead of helping family...

My eldest son went out on his mission about a year after his younger brother died. It was a hard, dark time for him and for us -- to me, missing two sons and having lost any belief that there was any purpose or meaning in the absence of either, it was beyond hideous. I'm really, really, really glad that young missionaries will no longer be so isolated from their families. But all the rage and anguish that I didn't allow myself to feel when he was gone is rising like bile.

I don't think it was about long distance costs to a large extent. I was told when I went it was to help me focus on my mission. I really don't think it was primarily a cost savings measure - I think it was about keeping the minds of missionaries where they were at and not back at home. And I think it was a control mechanism. Cost may have been a factor, but I don't think it was the main factor. I promise you, the Church didn't decide to get nicer about this on its own, something has motivated this - we may or may not find out what, but there is something going on behind the scenes on this. Maybe it is an attempt to stem the loss of missionaries leaving the field - or maybe something is about to become public and the Church doesn't want to come across as the oppressive, controlling organization that it really is.

It will also alleviate the pain MP's go through coaching struggling missionaries.

Now their parents will get to do it!

Legal CYA. Now theproblem its mom and dads fault if a missionary comes unglued.

Fifi de la Vergne wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 1:45 pm My eldest son went out on his mission about a year after his younger brother died. It was a hard, dark time for him and for us -- to me, missing two sons and having lost any belief that there was any purpose or meaning in the absence of either, it was beyond hideous. I'm really, really, really glad that young missionaries will no longer be so isolated from their families. But all the rage and anguish that I didn't allow myself to feel when he was gone is rising like bile.

((Hugs!!!))

Not Buying It wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 3:14 pm I promise you, the Church didn't decide to get nicer about this on its own, something has motivated this - we may or may not find out what, but there is something going on behind the scenes on this. Maybe it is an attempt to stem the loss of missionaries leaving the field - or maybe something is about to become public and the Church doesn't want to come across as the oppressive, controlling organization that it really is.

Yep^^^ I wonder what this is really all about.

Why not daily?

Look, the real problem is in the acceptance of the idea that a volunteer needs permission to talk to anyone on their own time and dime. I'll talk to who I want, when I want, where I want...after all, I'm doing the service for you, not the other way around.

-Lost

Fifi de la Vergne wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 1:45 pm My eldest son went out on his mission about a year after his younger brother died. It was a hard, dark time for him and for us -- to me, missing two sons and having lost any belief that there was any purpose or meaning in the absence of either, it was beyond hideous. I'm really, really, really glad that young missionaries will no longer be so isolated from their families. But all the rage and anguish that I didn't allow myself to feel when he was gone is rising like bile.

I understand. Joy for families.

Anger at the Church for their silly, petty policies, and money grubbing.
I had a friend feel guilty because he called home a few times as his father was dealing with terminal cancer and died. Bastards!!!

Not Buying It wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 3:14 pm I don't think it was about long distance costs to a large extent. I was told when I went it was to help me focus on my mission. I really don't think it was primarily a cost savings measure - I think it was about keeping the minds of missionaries where they were at and not back at home. And I think it was a control mechanism. Cost may have been a factor, but I don't think it was the main factor. I promise you, the Church didn't decide to get nicer about this on its own, something has motivated this - we may or may not find out what, but there is something going on behind the scenes on this. Maybe it is an attempt to stem the loss of missionaries leaving the field - or maybe something is about to become public and the Church doesn't want to come across as the oppressive, controlling organization that it really is.

This is 100% the church trying to slow the bleeding of missionaries coming home. No doubt in my mind. The lowering of the mission age has been a colossal mistake and they are scrambling to fix it. Only they can never admit it was a mistake so they play the revelation card and say it's God's will. Unfortunately, for the church, this is not going to work. Young missionaries will still come home increased numbers. When will they learn door to door sales is horribly ineffective, especially when it's so easy to figure out the product is false? I have to admit it's fun to watch the church scramble like has with all these changes.

I think the bigger picture with this and all of these "revelatory" changes is that the church is losing control.

One of our bishopric councilors just had his son come home after a couple of months for anxiety. I can think of several people I know well who have come home early from missions recently. It is becoming so common. We have callings left unfilled because people are saying no. Just in our smallish to midsize ward we've had a lot of people leave the church outright who were once "solid", but even worse (better ) people just aren't generally as committed. Where once you could assign them anything and they'd do it, now if they accept any calling they put limitations on what they will do.

Even if people don't know about Fanny and Helen Mar and Book of Abraham issues and all of that, the days of hardcore "I'll do anything for the church!" are gone. I mean all of this in a general sense among the active membership; you'll always have the hyper-dedicated leadership-seeking types but your general rank and file members are becoming less dedicated, like they just aren't buying that their salvation is tied to them doing whatever stupid self-serving thing leadership wants.

2 hour church, missionaries calling home, Sisters wearing pants, whatever else they come up with.....too little too late... they'll never get back the dedication levels they once had.