Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
- sadie_Mormon
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1479
- Location: Northeastern US
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
They did right in denying him the Mission as well at the TR. But let's see in time what happens... I just see this turning ugly.
-
- captain of 100
- Posts: 450
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
There is a sifting going on! A sifting indeed. And, upon my house shall it begin. :-ss
-
- captain of 100
- Posts: 450
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
I agree......sadie_Mormon wrote:They did right in denying him the Mission as well at the TR. But let's see in time what happens... I just see this turning ugly.
- ajax
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 8014
- Location: Pf, Texas
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
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.
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.
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2001
- Location: texas
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
Only have his word for it that it happened the way he said it did.
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2504
- Location: Valley Forge, Pennsylvania
- Contact:
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
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.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.
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 2504
- Location: Valley Forge, Pennsylvania
- Contact:
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
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.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?
-
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1564
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
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.
- mes5464
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 29586
- Location: Seneca, South Carolina
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
I agree with you.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
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.
- mes5464
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 29586
- Location: Seneca, South Carolina
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
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.
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.
- ajax
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 8014
- Location: Pf, Texas
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
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?)
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?)
- Sheol27
- captain of 100
- Posts: 716
- Location: Wyoming
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
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.
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.
- ajax
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 8014
- Location: Pf, Texas
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
Should be IMO.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?
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?
- InfoWarrior82
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 10937
- 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
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.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?
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.
- North_Star
- captain of 100
- Posts: 465
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
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. "
"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. "
-
- captain of 100
- Posts: 389
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
I like Elder Holland's comments:
http://www.lds.org/broadcasts/article/c ... g?lang=eng" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
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.
- bobhenstra
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 7236
- Location: Central Utah
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
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
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
- SmallFarm
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 4643
- Location: Holbrook, Az
- Contact:
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
Dr. Jones posted the article. He said that he'd tell people his opinion that gays should be married in the Temple. 8-|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.
- ajax
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 8014
- Location: Pf, Texas
- bobhenstra
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 7236
- Location: Central Utah
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
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!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?
- skmo
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 4495
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
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.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?
- ajax
- Level 34 Illuminated
- Posts: 8014
- Location: Pf, Texas
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
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.
(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.
- skmo
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 4495
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
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.
- skmo
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 4495
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
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.ajax wrote:But is there a difference between private belief and public advocacy?
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.There are probably A LOT of members who privately believe things that aren't a basic tenet of the faith.
- Rensai
- captain of 1,000
- Posts: 1340
Re: Mormon denied application to a full time mission RE SSM
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.skmo wrote: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.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?
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.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)