To understand this post, you need to comprehend a couple things about Mormon culture. First, Mormons assign a very high value to Marriage. To us, marriage is an eternal thing. Once you are married on Earth by the proper authority, you and your spouse are sealed together forever, even after death. Not only is marriage eternal, it is also necessary for exaltation - in the life to come, you can't obtain the highest degree of happiness without a spouse. We therefore encourage young adults to not unnecessarily delay marriage. It is, in a real way, the "next step" in your progression. Because of this, Mormons often marry at younger ages than people in other cultures.
Second, Mormons are encouraged to serve ecclesiastical missions for the church. Young men are almost expected to do so - they typically go for a full two years at the age of 19. Young women, on the other hand, can choose to go if they want, but there is no real cultural expectation for them to do so. Unlike young men, young women go at the age of 21. I tend to think that guys go starting at an earlier age because it provides good training that keeps them out of trouble during those formative late-teen years. I feel like women are usually more mature at that age and are less in need of a rigid mission life-structure to keep them out of trouble... In any event, we serve missions because we feel it is important for everyone to understand the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
Now, to the point. It often happens in the strange world of Mormonism that young women who are dating seriously entertain the idea of going on a mission instead (or, more rarely, the young woman is willing to delay the mission to see if the relationship will pan out, but the guy involved thinks that the mission ought not be delayed). From a Mormon theological perspective, this makes no sense!
While it is important to spread the gospel, marriage is generally considered a trump card. Why? Because marriage is eternally important and, contrary to some commonly-held perceptions, the Lord can do His work without the aid of one more sister missionary. Of course, some will argue that "the field is white, already to harvest," and that there are souls waiting for the gospel, souls who "won't be reached if I don't serve." In response, I point out that I spent 80% of my proselyting time in more or less fruitless cold-contacting. If my own mission were really bursting with hungry souls, we wouldn't have been so actively engaged in searching for them and not finding them. If someone is genuinely prepared to hear the gospel, there are slews of church members and cold-calling missionaries who have time enough to teach them as soon as the Lord steers them in the right direction. Don't flatter yourself into thinking that there are people who you and only you can reach.
To be clear, no soul will rot in hell because you chose to get married instead of serving a mission. On the other hand, you might stymie your own progression by insisting that there is a dire need for your help as a full-time missionary. I'm sorry to break it to you, but... there isn't. This is why virtually every Bishop or Stake President you talk to will encourage you to pursue the relationship. Maybe you should take their advice.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Are you kidding me?
ReplyDeleteWhile we are being honest, what are the chances that a "sister" will miss her only opportunity to get married because she goes on a mission? Are we saying there's a "one and only" partner out there for her, and if she blows it, she ain't goin ta heavin?
Don't flatter yourself into thinking that any relationship is so special that one of equivalent (or better) importance couldn't be had with anyone else, especially only 18 months later.
How many guys say "the mission was the best time of my life?" The returned missionary says this with a hint of irony, but also tells the truth. The time out there was worth it, for the variety of germane reasons anyone participating in Mormon culture will hear. 18 months seems like a small price to pay for the experiences. It certainly won't keep someone from eventually getting married. In fact, the experience will almost certainly contribute to a good relationship.
If marriage is so difficult to achieve, then everyone (girls AND boys) should stay at home and find someone as a freshman at BYU.
If the mission is just to keep people out of trouble, there would be better ways to do it. In fact, they won't let the "trouble makers" out anymore. If the idea is to represent the church, then by your estimation the young ladies should go out first. I saw plenty of PR nightmares and cleaned up messes made by many a 19-year-old.
Then what is this about? Missions create leaders. The church is lead by men. "Dissonance Reduction" Theory predicts that Mormon males who sacrifice for the church for two years will become stronger supporters of the faith. In addition they will have the beginnings of real leadership experience. Women, on the other hand, are generally expected to raise a family. They will not lead the organization (other than their own special group that is overseen by men).
Something tells me this has less to do with preaching, keeping kids out of trouble, or getting into heaven, and more to do with preserving the social structure of the society.
I'm not saying there is anything wrong with the Mormon social structure, or that stay-at-home moms are missing out on something. I'm just pointing out that the emphasis on missions for men and not women would seem to have an objective that you're missing here.
I wasn't missing anything - I simply chose to gloss over the issue because that isn't what my post is about.
ReplyDeleteOf course there is more to serving a mission than keeping kids out of trouble - my object wasn't to explain or justify the cultural practices of the Mormon church. My own understanding of the real "reasons" for missionary work parallels your own, and I alluded to them when I spoke of "training" for men in "formative years."
In fact, your point lines up with mine quite nicely. People get the idea that they have a God-given responsibility to proclaim the gospel to the world. If they understood, though, that the main purpose has less to do with spreading the gospel and more to do with training, they might be less inclined to destroy promising relationships in an imagined urgent call from God.
I have nothing against women serving missions. In fact, now that I'm a little older, I prefer to date women who have had the experience. But I do have a problem with women cutting a relationship short out of a misguided attempt to appease God.
My thinking applies equally well to men and to women. If either sex chooses to terminate or suspend a relationship in the interest of soul-saving, I think it is silly. If it is for the experience, then fine - at least they have the right motives.