Mission Age Lowered by Pres. Monson

[Anonymous]

I saw this and I had to smile.

How many times I’ve heard that the new mission ages was inspired and from God himself…maybe it was…maybe it wasn’t…Elder Holland seems to think it was lowered by Pres. Monson, so…

“President Monson never intended for all of the young women in the Church to go on missions by dropping [the] age [to 19].

Elder Jeffrey R. Holland of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, Face to Face broadcast, Mar. 8, 2016, facetoface.lds.org.

[Anonymous]

There’s never been any question in my mind this was anything but a policy change, decided upon as a group by the Q15. Pres. Monson’s words follow (emphasis added):

Quote:

For some time the First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles have allowed young men from certain countries to serve at the age of 18 when they are worthy, able, have graduated from high school, and have expressed a sincere desire to serve. This has been a country-specific policy and has allowed thousands of young men to serve honorable missions and also fulfill required military obligations and educational opportunities.

Our experience with these 18-year-old missionaries has been positive. Their mission presidents report that they are obedient, faithful, mature, and serve just as competently as do the older missionaries who serve in the same missions. Their faithfulness, obedience, and maturity have caused us to desire the same option of earlier missionary service for all young men, regardless of the country from which they come.

I am pleased to announce that effective immediately all worthy and able young men who have graduated from high school or its equivalent, regardless of where they live, will have the option of being recommended for missionary service beginning at the age of 18, instead of age 19. I am not suggesting that all young men will—or should—serve at this earlier age. Rather, based on individual circumstances as well as upon a determination by priesthood leaders, this option is now available.

As we have prayerfully pondered the age at which young men may begin their missionary service, we have also given consideration to the age at which a young woman might serve. Today I am pleased to announce that able, worthy young women who have the desire to serve may be recommended for missionary service beginning at age 19, instead of age 21.

We affirm that missionary work is a priesthood duty—and we encourage all young men who are worthy and who are physically able and mentally capable to respond to the call to serve. Many young women also serve, but they are not under the same mandate to serve as are the young men. We assure the young sisters of the Church, however, that they make a valuable contribution as missionaries, and we welcome their service.

Nowhere does he refer to this as anything other than a policy (he uses the word policy specifically).

I was missionary age at the time there were 18 month missions. I served an 18 month mission. That change, which lasted only a few years, was not stated as revelation and was rolled back rather quickly because mission presidents didn’t like it. When you put something out there as revelation, it’s tough to roll it back (think polygamy and priesthood racism).

I won’t stir the pot, but there was one major GA who did claim the age change was a revelation. He only said it once that I am aware of and no other member of the Q15 ever said so that I am aware of.

[Anonymous]

Yep. Policy. Doesn’t matter what one leader and some members say. Policy.

[Anonymous]

That quote appears in the April ’17 Ensign in an article called Young Women—Mission or Not?

At the end of the article:

Quote:

No Young Woman Should Be Judged for Not Serving a Mission

“President Monson never intended for all of the young women in the Church to go on missions by dropping [the] age [to 19]. We’re very grateful for those who go. It’s changed the face of the Church. … But we do not want anyone feeling inadequate or left out or undignified or tarnished because she did not choose to serve a mission. And we’re a little irritated with young men who say, ‘Well, I’m not going to date you because you didn’t serve a mission.’ … We do not want that kind of climate over dating or marriages. … It isn’t our place to pass a judgment.”

Elder Jeffrey R. Holland of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, Face to Face broadcast, Mar. 8, 2016, facetoface.lds.org.

Here Holland was speaking specifically to the women of the church. I’m going to go ahead and make the assumption that leaders would say something similar about the men of the church.

[Anonymous]

nibbler wrote:

That quote appears in the April ’17 Ensign in an article called Young Women—Mission or Not?

At the end of the article:

Quote:

No Young Woman Should Be Judged for Not Serving a Mission

“President Monson never intended for all of the young women in the Church to go on missions by dropping [the] age [to 19]. We’re very grateful for those who go. It’s changed the face of the Church. … But we do not want anyone feeling inadequate or left out or undignified or tarnished because she did not choose to serve a mission. And we’re a little irritated with young men who say, ‘Well, I’m not going to date you because you didn’t serve a mission.’ … We do not want that kind of climate over dating or marriages. … It isn’t our place to pass a judgment.”

Elder Jeffrey R. Holland of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, Face to Face broadcast, Mar. 8, 2016, facetoface.lds.org.

Here Holland was speaking specifically to the women of the church. I’m going to go ahead and make the assumption that leaders would say something similar about the men of the church.

😆 You’re killing me Smalls.

My sons at BYU tell me there is much more pressure on sisters to go on missions than there used to be. Of course, there’s tons of pressure on guys too, but that’s not new.

I’m mostly not critical of TSM these days (such was not always the case), but I do have a hard time when he talks about serving a mission being a commandment. I don’t believe it is to begin with, and he didn’t serve a mission himself. Yes he had the war as an excuse, but he also was still mission age when the war was over. And neither of his counselors served.

[Anonymous]

Quote:

But we do not want anyone feeling inadequate or left out or undignified or tarnished because [he] did not choose to serve a mission. And we’re a little irritated with young [wo]men who say, ‘Well, I’m not going to date you because you didn’t serve a mission.’ … We do not want that kind of climate over dating or marriages. … It isn’t our place to pass a judgment.”

I am unaware of any such statement being made towards young men that do not serve and the feelings of being inadequate, left out, undignified, and tarnished that they may go through. In seminary (long before the age change) we were asked to submit a list of attributes that we would look for in a potential spouse and then the teacher compiled the results on the chalkboard. RM was at the top of all the YW lists.

If a YM desires for his future spouse to be an RM for all the benefits in experience and maturity that he perceives – then why should church leadership be “a little irritated” with such an individual?

[Anonymous]

Roy wrote:

If a YM desires for his future spouse to be an RM for all the benefits in experience and maturity that he perceives – then why should church leadership be “a little irritated” with such an individual?

I was trying to be nice above :angel: but that’s where I landed. The men of the church simply started holding women up to the same standard that they’ve been held up to for so long. A little irritated. I don’t know whether [irritated] is a good apostolic word. But [he is].

I’ve also heard that some women have PBs that indicate that they will marry an RM. It’s certainly the expectation of young men in the church.

[Author]

Posts