Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

For discussion of liberty, freedom, government and politics.
Benjamin_LK
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2502
Location: Valley Forge, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by Benjamin_LK »

ajax wrote:Do we have the full story? Where is the link?

How did this come up in the interview? Is the potential missionary a member of an SSM group? A financial supporter?

If I were to say in a TR interview that I think the SSM issue should be left up to the states, would I be denied?

If I were to disclose during 2004 that I supported the anti-war movement, would I have been denied?

Full story please. That would really help.
That's the part that really boggles me too, Ajax. I mean, I was denied to go on a mission because I was considered having a disability and thus a liability to other elders in the field because of it. It was disappointing, but I can tell you, dating as far back as 2003-2004, that the missionary interviews NEVER asked if you were a supporter of SSM. If there was ANY MENTION of SSM, it would be up to you to bring up the issue. And if someone brings such an issue up without being asked, such a person would be a liability due to his overt preoccupation with something other than the material he should be teaching, which is a bad disciplinary sign for a prospective elder who doesn't have some understanding of the proper time and place to mention certain issues.

Benjamin_LK
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2502
Location: Valley Forge, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by Benjamin_LK »

samizdat wrote:It's in the SL Trib. Apparently an prospective missionary was denied going on a mission due to his view on SSM. Peggy Fletcher Stack is quoting from Joanna Brooks...

He says he was also denied a TR.

When I read the story for myself I couldn't believe it but I remembered one of the TR questions about supporting groups or ideas contrary to the teachings of the Church, and I saw right through the story. In my opinion the SP did good here.

What say you?
It seems highly likely to me that the prospective Elder would have to bring the issue up himself in the interview. If someone doesn't know a proper time and place for bringing up an issue, how well do you expect said person to be focusing on delivering the gospel message out in the field to investigators? Again, sometimes people can conceal certain beliefs for a long time quite well, but really, there isn't a question I have found from the interview that they give you as a prospective elder before serving a mission that explicitly singles out SSM as your stance on an issue. NONE WHATSOEVER. My only disclaimer is that the interview questions which I am referring to come from 2004, so it may have changed since then, but I doubt that they have changed drastically.

Silas
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1564

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by Silas »

ajax wrote:Do we have the full story? Where is the link?

How did this come up in the interview? Is the potential missionary a member of an SSM group? A financial supporter?He brought up.

If I were to say in a TR interview that I think the SSM issue should be left up to the states, would I be denied? No because that is not open opposition to the Lord and the brethren by teaching that there should be homosexual temple marriage.

If I were to disclose during 2004 that I supported the anti-war movement, would I have been denied? No and irrelevant.

Full story please. That would really help. The text of the article was already posted.

User avatar
mes5464
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 29570
Location: Seneca, South Carolina

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by mes5464 »

AussieOi wrote:
ebenezerarise wrote:I am really disturbed at how many members of the Church are coming out on the wrong side of marriage issue.

I agree emphatically

I mean to think that we need the state to sanction our unions

I mean its not like we even accept "earth" marriages as being anything of much value anyway as LDS, although very important.

But permitting the state to say who and who can't be married, why, thats only going to let abuses like when they USA Govt stopped our right to marriage as we required to exercise our freedom of religion

apparently there is something in the US constition about Freedom?

Or is it our Articles of Faith?

Here Here, I agree
I agree with you.

Would we want the government to issue licenses in order for a person to get baptized?! Government has no place in marriage. I do believe we need a government definition of what is a marriage to prevent gay marriage or some other abomination of marriage.

User avatar
mes5464
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 29570
Location: Seneca, South Carolina

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by mes5464 »

A missionary is called to represent the Church and Jesus Christ.
If a person is going to represent anything other than that, then they ARE unqualified to server as a missionary.
Missionary service isn't a right and you don't get to do it if you are not going to do it correctly.

User avatar
ajax
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7988
Location: Pf, Texas

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by ajax »

Ah, thanks Silas. I didn't notice the article posted in Dr Jones post. :ymblushing:

I guess the real kicker is his belief that temple marriages should be available to them.

But is it just a personal belief or is he openly advocating?(Well maybe he is openly advocating now since I assume he approached Joanna Brooks about it. How else would she know?)

User avatar
Sheol27
captain of 100
Posts: 716
Location: Wyoming

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by Sheol27 »

I have a couple thoughts. Aren't we free to believe whatever we want to believe? I heard that you only have a problem WHEN you preach about what you believe that is contrary to believe. So of the young man answers the question I personally believe this way but I don't preach anything different that what the church teaches, isn't that fine?
The 2nd thought is what is with everyone trying to change the Lord isn't of changing themselves? The Lord is more intelligent than all of us. We should learn from him.

User avatar
ajax
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7988
Location: Pf, Texas

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by ajax »

Sheol27 wrote:Aren't we free to believe whatever we want to believe? I heard that you only have a problem WHEN you preach about what you believe that is contrary to believe. So of the young man answers the question I personally believe this way but I don't preach anything different that what the church teaches, isn't that fine?
Should be IMO.

This from Joseph:
"I did not like the old man being called up for erring in doctrine. It looks too much like the Methodist, and not like the Latter-day Saints. Methodists have creeds which a man must believe or be asked out of their church. I want the liberty of thinking and believing as I please. It feels so good not to be trammeled. It does not prove that a man is not a good man because he errs in doctrine. (History of the Church, 5:340)

If I were the leader, the question in my mind would be - Is this personal opinion or open advocacy?

User avatar
InfoWarrior82
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 10861
Location: "There are 15 on the earth today, you can trust them completely." -President Nelson (Jan 2022)

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by InfoWarrior82 »

ajax wrote:
If I were to say in a TR interview that I think the SSM issue should be left up to the states, would I be denied?
I believe the church believes that it should be left to the states since it is a 10th amendment issue. And of course, we know what the church's stance is on the constitution, right? Furthermore, I also believe that if there came an opportunity for an amendment that defines marriage as one man and one woman, the church would endorse that as well.

So, no. You would still get your TR if you said you believe that the issue should be left to the states to decide. BUT, if you then went on to say that you yourself endorsed SSM, then you would not get your TR.

User avatar
North_Star
captain of 100
Posts: 465

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by North_Star »

http://denversnuffer.blogspot.com/2012/02/zion.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

"When there is an abomination that renders desolate in the Temple, you will also see afflictions. You will see those who claim they are Christ, or they are Christ's true living prophet-- though they are not. "

sevenator
captain of 100
Posts: 387

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by sevenator »

I like Elder Holland's comments:

http://www.lds.org/broadcasts/article/c ... g?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Young people may ask about this position taken or that policy made by the Church, saying: “Well, we don’t believe we should live or behave in such and such a way, but why do we have to make other people do the same? Don’t they have their free agency? Aren’t we being self-righteous and judgmental, forcing our beliefs on others, demanding that they act in a certain way?” In those situations you are going to have to explain sensitively why some principles are defended and some sins opposed wherever they are found because the issues and the laws involved are not just social or political but eternal in their consequence. And while not wishing to offend those who believe differently from us, we are even more anxious not to offend God, or as the scripture says, “not offend him who is your lawgiver” 19 —and I am speaking here of serious moral laws.

...there is a wide variety of beliefs in this world, and there is moral agency for all, but no one is entitled to act as if God is mute on these subjects or as if commandments only matter if there is public agreement over them.

User avatar
bobhenstra
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7236
Location: Central Utah

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by bobhenstra »

We can always expect Nan to understand the obvious and get right to the point!

Thank you Nan!

The facts are there's going to be a great division, and if we actually think about it, we discover that the cause of the great division "needs" to start with the church, the church needs to be cleansed first. Then why bother wondering why 50% of us will fail the tests! However, we must try to help our brethren and sisters understand the obvious---Which is--

Follow the Prophet, he's following the will of our Lord! I find it quite easy! What our Prophet says, how he guides the Church, after proper study always seems to be my opinion. Why? I know he cannot lead me astray, I trust him!

Bob

User avatar
SmallFarm
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4643
Location: Holbrook, Az
Contact:

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by SmallFarm »

ajax wrote:Do we have the full story? Where is the link?

How did this come up in the interview? Is the potential missionary a member of an SSM group? A financial supporter?

If I were to say in a TR interview that I think the SSM issue should be left up to the states, would I be denied?

If I were to disclose during 2004 that I supported the anti-war movement, would I have been denied?

Full story please. That would really help.
Dr. Jones posted the article. He said that he'd tell people his opinion that gays should be married in the Temple. 8-|

User avatar
ajax
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7988
Location: Pf, Texas

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by ajax »

Yeah I know, I caught that later.

User avatar
bobhenstra
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7236
Location: Central Utah

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by bobhenstra »

JohnnyL wrote:Are there any more marriages in temples, or is it all just sealings?

If it isn't just sealings yet, I believe that will be the policy--would gay marriages in temples be an issue anymore?
My youngest daughter was married in the temple last Saturday, the sealer told them they were NOW married for time and all eternity. So the word "married" was used, and they were ask the normal marriage questions. So as of yet, no changes!

User avatar
skmo
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4495

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by skmo »

Sheol27 wrote:I have a couple thoughts. Aren't we free to believe whatever we want to believe? I heard that you only have a problem WHEN you preach about what you believe that is contrary to believe. So of the young man answers the question I personally believe this way but I don't preach anything different that what the church teaches, isn't that fine?
Someone unwilling to believe a basic tenet of our faith is unfit to represent us. It's like having political leaders who SAY they believe in the Constitution, take an OATH to uphold the Constitution, but in practice they do whatever the crap they want.

User avatar
ajax
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 7988
Location: Pf, Texas

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by ajax »

But is there a difference between private belief and public advocacy?
(Now in this case the elder seems to have taken it to the advocacy stage by contacting Joanna Brooks and making it public.)

There are probably A LOT of members who privately believe things that aren't a basic tenet of the faith.

User avatar
skmo
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4495

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by skmo »

I am opposed to gay marriage because I am opposed to government being involved in marriage at all. I don't believe the government has any business involving itself in religious rites, that legal and spiritual need to remain separated. If my position becomes out of step with what the Brethren ask me to do, I will follow what they say while praying about it to verify the position is correct. My default position is to accept that what our inspired leaders tell us is God's will, then I confirm it on my own with study and supplication.

User avatar
skmo
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4495

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by skmo »

ajax wrote:But is there a difference between private belief and public advocacy?
Somewhat. However, you can't privately believe one thing and honestly testify of something different. A missionary has to testify of the truthfulness of the gospel, and they can't honestly do that if they don't believe in it.
There are probably A LOT of members who privately believe things that aren't a basic tenet of the faith.
While that may be, it's more likely that there are a lot of people who believe the gospel but have trouble living them. As a missionary, I would have felt seriously inadequate had I not completely believed everything I taught.

User avatar
Rensai
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1340

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by Rensai »

skmo wrote:
Sheol27 wrote:I have a couple thoughts. Aren't we free to believe whatever we want to believe? I heard that you only have a problem WHEN you preach about what you believe that is contrary to believe. So of the young man answers the question I personally believe this way but I don't preach anything different that what the church teaches, isn't that fine?
Someone unwilling to believe a basic tenet of our faith is unfit to represent us. It's like having political leaders who SAY they believe in the Constitution, take an OATH to uphold the Constitution, but in practice they do whatever the crap they want.
That was my thought too. Besides, how effective can you be as a missionary if you don't fully believe in what you are teaching? I don't understand why you would even want to be part of a church you don't agree with on such fundamental issues, let alone serve a mission for it. I'm not saying there isn't room for questions, doubts, etc, depending on the topic, but SSM is a very cut and dry doctrine, I don't see how there's any wiggle room there for different views. All the scriptures make it very clear that it is a terrible sin.
ajax wrote: This from Joseph:
"I did not like the old man being called up for erring in doctrine. It looks too much like the Methodist, and not like the Latter-day Saints. Methodists have creeds which a man must believe or be asked out of their church. I want the liberty of thinking and believing as I please. It feels so good not to be trammeled. It does not prove that a man is not a good man because he errs in doctrine. (History of the Church, 5:340)
I think there's a big difference between erring in doctrine due to an honest mistake vs knowingly and willfully erring in doctrine and rebelling against the gospel. I'm sure he didn't mean to apply this statement to the latter group. Joseph shows that through all the early leaders who were disfellowshipped and excommunicated, mostly for being willful dissenters.

User avatar
Sheol27
captain of 100
Posts: 716
Location: Wyoming

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by Sheol27 »

You all have some good points about being a missionary that you would need to believe what you testify but on the other hand why can't you have a TR and have a few different opinions as long as you don't voice those opinions? When you read about what church leaders say about where the Lost Tribes are at you will hear 3 different theories.

User avatar
kgrigio
captain of 100
Posts: 423
Location: Iowa

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by kgrigio »

The problem as I see it is the church (local leaders) are being very inconsistent when applying standards. You all may remember an openly gay man was put into the bishopric in a ward in San Fransisco. There were several articles with people, including the SP, glowing about what a great man he was and how great it was for relationships with the gay community. The problem is, at least at the time, he openly said that if he found the right guy, he would be enter into a relationship and realized he would no longer be worthy. Do you think you would get a TR if you told the SP that you were committed to your marriage, but if you found someone else you would "test the waters"?

I also remember that during the Prop 8 debate there were some very prominent people in the church that came out against the church's stance and even gave large sums of money to the pro gay crowd, namely Steve Young's wife. The brethren are going to have a hard time with the membership if there continues to be such public inconsistencies. I know the local leaders make these decisions, but it puts a really confusing face to a lot of people.

Benjamin_LK
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2502
Location: Valley Forge, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by Benjamin_LK »

AussieOi wrote:He's not suitable for an LDS mission
he should have known that
he needs to find another way to serve



Not a value judgement, but really, if he thinks gays should be able to marry in temples, what does he think he's doing on a mission?
I have no idea, I personally never minded civil benefits being given to same-sex couples, and we go about doing our own marriages as we Temple-going church members please. But I would say that if anyone honestly wanted to serve a mission, plenty of political stances aren't a priority issue to share or be of concern in the mission field. The Plan of Salvation, and the missionary lessons are.

Benjamin_LK
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2502
Location: Valley Forge, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by Benjamin_LK »

ajax wrote:But is there a difference between private belief and public advocacy?
(Now in this case the elder seems to have taken it to the advocacy stage by contacting Joanna Brooks and making it public.)

There are probably A LOT of members who privately believe things that aren't a basic tenet of the faith.
I would say that that's quite normal, there's plenty of things that I personally have as conjecture that aren't rock solid in terms of being declared in General Conference. However, I have no problem thinking through and accepting some things as an override, with prayer, as needs be. Frankly, it's quite incredible all the interesting conjectures I have heard from members of the church on various issues like evolution, the timeline of the creation, and so on, but unlike an anti-mormon, I honestly take it as it was meant to be taken, especially when the person giving his/her extradoctrinal opinion calls it his/her own opinion.

I found the idea of the devil and his angels being neaderthals, primeval ape-men, or the idea that God recycled us from the wreckage of a previous life on Earth (dinosaurs, anyone?) to be a previous dispensation of people tested by God, and much more. Again, it's often easiest to find conjecture laughable when it's not your own.

Benjamin_LK
captain of 1,000
Posts: 2502
Location: Valley Forge, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM

Post by Benjamin_LK »

kgrigio wrote:The problem as I see it is the church (local leaders) are being very inconsistent when applying standards. You all may remember an openly gay man was put into the bishopric in a ward in San Fransisco. There were several articles with people, including the SP, glowing about what a great man he was and how great it was for relationships with the gay community. The problem is, at least at the time, he openly said that if he found the right guy, he would be enter into a relationship and realized he would no longer be worthy. Do you think you would get a TR if you told the SP that you were committed to your marriage, but if you found someone else you would "test the waters"?

I also remember that during the Prop 8 debate there were some very prominent people in the church that came out against the church's stance and even gave large sums of money to the pro gay crowd, namely Steve Young's wife. The brethren are going to have a hard time with the membership if there continues to be such public inconsistencies. I know the local leaders make these decisions, but it puts a really confusing face to a lot of people.
Well, membership in the church is going to be a test for all of us in very different ways: either we are willing to stay members despite the fact that we either don't perfectly feel comfortable with living within the commandments and not having everyone approve of your church, or perhaps winning out against your own personal pride, or feeling that you're more righteous than other church members, or you fall down the other way. It's not going to be easy, but there will be a lot of struggle throughout the church membership one way or another.

Post Reply