Core Functions Only

For those of us who aren’t up to speed on the latest CJCLDS news, is there some particular rite of passage that the Church has recently stopped providing because it was interfering with proselytizing?

No.

It refers to the mission age change which happened several years ago and almost certainly was not intended to abolish missions as a rite of passage for men, though it has had that effect

G, my observation is from a strong Utah ward. The initial crop of 18yr olds went on missions as everyone was excited by the change. Boys who likely wouldn’t have gone had they waited an extra year or two went. The went, they served, they felt guilty for various reasons, even though there was surely much good they did but didn’t fully understand in their immaturity.

They came home feeling dishonored despite the encouragement otherwise. In my strong utah ward, they are universally inactive or not contributing in any way unless frequently cajoled.

The next group of young men, those who watched their older idols in action didn’t even bother to go on missions and certainly don’t go to church, let alone zoom, which should be an easier box than ever to tick.

A combined elders quorum now just consists of mostly former high priests, or those who would have likelybeen high priests by now. The younger elders are missing in action.

Surely not the fault of the missionary change, but that change must be influencing as well. I note, weekly, with sad irony, that the young and old timers who used to be a part of elders quorum are no longer showing on zoom. The young newly minted elders who should be showing on zoom, even those leaving on a mission this week, don’t show.

What is going on? All these changes in church over the years I can see why they can be both inspired, needed positive steps for the faithful, but seem to have destroyed the foundation the next group built on. Then I look at the youth programs and worry the same by even more.

My boys would have loved scouting. Now replaced by primary goals that at best are a poor substitute. At worst, likely most common, are not even an afterthought.

The only thing I can cling to with my faith is a counterfactual theory that if not for these changes, it could have been worse. That’s not a comforting thought in a faith led by revealed truth.

It looks more to me like a bunch of changes were made by those eager to take the reigns once they got control, and those changes all flopped, despite being based or justified on sound principles.

You see it in every age group and organization from “Relief Society Activities” to primary, young women classes, to Aaronic and Melch priesthood quorums.

Our institutions have failed us, and covid has only hastened this demise.

Don’t prove me wrong, but instead tell me what we need to be doing to rebuild faith in Jesus Christ. Because it feels like that function is completely missing everytime we focus on the institutional reforms.

Does the restoration need restoring?

Sute, speaking from the midwest, it’s not so dire here, afaik.

In my view, the age change of 2012 was tightly linked to the raising of the bar in 2002. The 8 year olds baptized in 2002 and onwards, had 10 years to prepare under the new paradigm and programs and standards. Families and wards that embraced the new paradigm/programs/standards did well.

“Does the restoration need restoring?”

I think we do need a good old-fashioned “revival.” Many of us, including myself, have let our fires dim.

I want to emphasize that it’s not the Brethren. It’s us. We need to awake and arise.

“Rites of passage for men aren’t a core function for the Church of Christ, it shouldn’t get in the way of proselyting, which is core. ”

Not sure what you’re getting at here, but I think I disagree.

Prior to 2002, many/most rank-and-file considered missions to be a last ditch effort to make sure young men got a testimony. Raise-the-bar of 2002 put an end to that.

With or without a pre-mission testimony, missions always were, and 2002 confirmed it, about building future leadership. A la Zion’s Camp, the publicly stated purpose (of missions) was not the privately spoken ultimate purpose.

It took me way too long, almost near the end, on my mission, to realize that full time missions are not about proselyting. Proselyting is the “cover story” that everyone focuses on in order to bring about the not-publicly-spoken reasons.

This also ties into chapter 13 (and maybe chapter 11), of a book I recommended, “This Land of Strangers” by Robert Hall. A full-time mission is a “shared sacrifice” that knits men together in the church. Not so much you and your companions and co-serving missionaries of that time, but the contemporary men you sit next to and serve next to at church.

Shared _meaningful_ sacrifice is more than a right of passage. You actually learned things and gained skills; you became significant in the lives of strangers.

Even though the publicly-stated “cover story” of Zion’s camp was a failure, the lessons learned and the training received by the participants was real, meaningful, and had great positive consequence later on.

—

Either I’m not picking up on the direness of the young-men-into-missionaries situation outside the Intermountain West, or the situations are different twixt there and here.

I agree the brethren are surely not the problem. They know, they consecrate, they testify.

It’s possible they’ve misjudged the capability of their various institutional changes vs society weight. But even that pushes too much blame on them. Surely, every program change they’ve offered could have resulted for the better if “we” magnified it with our efforts.

If I were to pick a flaw, I’d guess it’s that perhaps we haven’t done well enough highlighting the subtle and not so subtle evils of the world that we strive so hard to belong to, lead, and influence.

I think of Brigham Young and his retrenchment society efforts. Pleading with the saints to withdrawal from worldly influences. I sense President Nelson and others share this concern even now, with social media fasts etc.

But as BY pleaded to not import clothing fashions from outside Utah (ineffective it seems at least to my modern eyes), we probably need a lot more retrenchment from the world. And history hasn’t shown we’re long term effective together at it.

Again though, these are just program solutions. Faith in Christ comes from covenants, study, service, sacrifice in my experience. Showing up to church meetings is but a small component and the one we focus on all too easily.

That’s interesting. Why would doing it one year earlier make it any less of a rite of passage?

In answer WJT, the church’s missionary labor started as the work of men, many of them husbands and fathers. A few youth were among them, and it easily was understood that those youth were doing a man’s job since there were men doing it with them, and so it went well into the 20th Century. Gordon Hinckley and David O. McKay, future church presidents, accepted mission calls shortly after graduating from the University of Utah. George Benson was called when his oldest son, future church president Ezra Taft Benson, was 12. My sister’s late father-in-law was one who as a 28-year-old newlywed was called to be a missionary. In his case, he soon had an office assignment and convinced the mission president that his wife back home could handle the desk work and free him to proselyte, so she was called too, and their oldest daughter was born in 1953 during their missions.

Though there had been teen-aged missionaries in the past, 20 was the minimum age in 1960 when the age requirement was lowered a year, and Jeff Holland, future apostle, was called as one of the first of the new breed of 19-year-old missionaries. There was more than a century of history by 1960 of what a Mormon missionary was, but the new pattern grew to be the new stereotype, a pattern in which fully adult men performing missionary labor was only a historical memory, dimmer by the decade.

And here we are now, with the missionaries are mostly teen-agers throughout most of their mission labor, and almost half of the missionaries are very young women. The demographics make it harder to for these recent high school graduates (and their families and wards and those they labor among) to see the undertaking as a man’s job that must mean they are men if they are the ones performing it.

It is about 98% that the age change meant there are lots more sister missionaries.

WJT: “Why would doing it one year earlier make it any less of a rite of passage?”

If you directed that at me…. That’s not what I meant. It was the raise-the-bar of 2002, and actually enforcing standards and minimums (as opposed to a wink and a nod and saying “Just go”) that made it less than a right of passage.

Starting in 2002, If you told your bishop or stake pres that you honestly didn’t think that the church was what it claimed to be, they (your bishop and SP) were then not supposed to pressure you into going.

Starting in 2002, and I think things continued to tighten up as time went on, bishops and SPs were given new and more comprehensive “Go/No-go” checklists.

This is a great post. I wish I had something insightful to say about it.

The one thing that does come to mind is “preparation.” For chaos—though whether that comes in the form of opportunity or calamity I can’t say.

Human-scale challenges will reassert themselves, as they always do.

Very interesting discussion. May I add my two cents. I’m currently reading the second volume of Saints and have felt a renewed amazement at how little we moderns are asked to sacrifice for the gospel. I was thinking about how my grandmas both coped when their husbands were called on missions in the 1940’s. Both were still raising families, and relatively poor. How many of us could do that now? I remember the olden days before the current unit budgeting system when we had to raise funds for our operating budgets–dinners, bazaars, bake sales, service auctions, etc. were all held to raise the money. And then there were the welfare assignments at the cannery (I grew up in San Diego where our contribution was canning tuna fish.) My parents helped to build two buildings–contributing both money and labor! I think we are missing something by not having to sacrifice so much. I’ve been in wards where the RS president refused to ask the sisters to bring any food or refreshments to church for fear of asking them to do too much and sending them into inactivity! Really? Ask the oldest folks if they felt more unity and commitment in the wards back when much was sacrificed for building up the kingdom. Growing up for me the church was the center of our social life. Sports, drama, public speaking, music, each had a season and festival or competition. Somehow the public schools took over and the church dropped out. Now members are too busy to participate in much at church. Is it any wonder we aren’t more united? How can we know others if we never do anything with them? Ministering should be effective, and obviously there must be places and circumstances where it is; but we haven’t been visited or even contacted since the change. I hear from my ministering sister about once a year whether I need it or not! It’s been challenging to be creative about contacting my sisters during the lockdown, but I’ve managed to contact them at least once a month, often two or three times. After reading about the efforts of the RS in the early days I wonder why so many of the units I’ve lived in are so “lame” and apathetic about service, especially in the community and with other Christian groups that work for righteous causes. We could be a force for good! (We’ve lived in tiny branches for the last ten years and frankly, I totally dislike them; too few people, and too great of distances between the few.)
I think SUTE got it just right: “Surely, every program change they’ve offered could have resulted for the better if “we” magnified it with our efforts.” I remember what was said in a RS training meeting in VA ca. 1996–The RS leaders from SLC told us that President Hinckley was frustrated at how slow the church was moving forward. He had a grand vision of what could be, but the membership were slow to adopt and obey all that was asked of them. It was sobering to hear that and I think of it every time something new is announced.
So much of success depends on many factors–personal commitment, local leadership, family support, and peer group support; and so often we have little control over anything but our own commitment. We have lost three boys to the world in part because of the lack of good local leadership and no peer support in the branches. It’s hard to feel you did everything right at home, but never got the support desired from an absentee branch president, and the fact that none of the RM’s stayed as role models for the younger boys (they all went out west to school).
Sorry, didn’t mean for this to turn into a whine fest (just give me a little cheese to go with my whine!) We just have to do the best we can and pray that the Lord will make up the deficiencies.
For the church as a whole, wouldn’t it be great to have regional “revivals” to rekindle (or perhaps kindle for the first time) a fire under the saints to recommit to the work and retrench from our worldliness?

Rozy, you commented on my post a while back on Robert Hall’s book “This Land of Strangers.”

https://www.amazon.com/This-Land-Strangers-Relationship-Imperils/dp/1608322998

It’s still only $7, including shipping, in used condition. Did you ever get it and read chapters 11 and 13?

Book–no, but thanks for the reminder.

John, I think that’s a great comment / summary.
I’ve spent a lot of time with missionaries as I’ve lived in the field and I have seen a handful of really good ones (and no surprise) the 1-2 excellent ones years after they left their missions not only continued to stay in touch with the converts – all inactive of course – but continued to care for them in a truly Christlike ways.

But I’ve seen first hand what I can only describe as a decline in social competency and situational awareness.

Maybe it’s the effect of cell phones, internet, etc. as those technologies have played a larger role in the development of the missionaries. Maybe it’s age, and a mix of both.

But as I’ve seen that, I’ve often envied these young men who are called to full time focus their lives in the service of their fellow man. And wished that pattern still continued. Of course, I also chastise myself with the message of Elder Clay Christensen to “call yourself on a mission”. I don’t need a full time call to lift where I stand.

But the idea surely seems romantic and I have to assume that an elder called to serve who has the life experience of a husband and father would approach many situations in a better way.

“Growing up for me the church was the center of our social life. Sports, drama, public speaking, music, each had a season and festival or competition. Somehow the public schools took over and the church dropped out. Now members are too busy to participate in much at church.”

I wonder why this has changed. Is it a top directed change or a bottom up change? Is the high school play simply more prestigious (say, to colleges) than the stake pageant? Or is it that stake pageants now have to be about Churchy things, whereas in the past the stake could perform the Sound of Music, or what have you, slowly restricting the ward community to only strictly “spiritual” things?

@sute and Rozy: re: revival.

This reminds me of another book that I recommended a while back:

“Whatever Happened to the Power of God” by Dr. Michael L. Brown.

https://www.amazon.com/Whatever-Happened-Power-Time-Rock/dp/0768430569/

There are currently 3 used copies available from third parties for about $7 including shipping.

IMO, the book is not 100% correct, nor 100% applicable to the Restored Church, but there is still much good in it that we would do well to take to heart. It speaks to our situation ( ie the fires dimming, world-culture encroaching into church-culture) as well as to Evangelicals/Pentecostals. It calls for commandment-keeping, repentance, humility, and holy living.

It might be best to read the last chapter first, chapter 20 – A Radical Proposal ?

—
The edition that is linked above has a second book included.