Single men and the church

[Anonymous]

I did have a very compassionate bishop in one small eastern ward where I lived where marriage opportunities were non-existent. I once told him I really liked a non-member girl and asked his advice about marrying a non-member. His reply was that we’re all children of God. That said, I think he was the exception to the rule. There is so much stigma tied to not marrying in the temple, and if one marries a non-member who never converts there is no chance at temple marriage. The idea that a man who is an Eagle Scout, serves a mission, and marries in the temple as the only measure of success is not doctrinal – God is no respecter of persons. I know those who are married to nonmembers are able to receive their own endowment. Are they allowed to be temple workers?

[Anonymous]

In every practical way, single straight men should be treated the same as single gay men.

From mormonsandgays.org:

Quote:

Though some people, including those resisting same-sex attraction, may not have the opportunity to marry a person of the opposite sex in this life, a just God will provide them with ample opportunity to do so in the next. We can all live life in the full context of who we are, which is much broader than sexual attraction.

I don’t see how the Church can make the above statement and at the same time restrict single men (gay or straight) from being temple workers.

[Anonymous]

This is actually the first issue that triggered my disaffection with the Church. Nibbler, the picture is bleak. It doesn’t have to be, but it is.

The following is descriptive–it does not represent my view of how things should be, but how they are. The problem of single men in the church stems from a key aspect of Mormon theology–the importance of eternal marriage and childbirth to seal and perpetuate the the plan of salvation. Because it is so fundamental, there is a lot of cultural pressure and baggage associated with it. If you are an unmarried woman, you are pitied (because women are not to act in this process, but be acted upon). If you are a man, heaven help you. You have turned down the greatest blessing of Mormonism, and since you have rejected the greater law, you will not be eligible to receive the greater light. This is why men who have “rejected” marriage by not marrying before they turn 30 are not allowed to be temple workers (with the exception of veil work). It is a punitive measure.

Temple marriage and childbearing/rearing is a fundamental part of the Mormon social contract. Everyone is expected to get with the plan. If a person violates this contract in some way (fornication, adultery, homosexuality, not marrying before age 25, not having children), that person is rejected from the community, sometimes subtly, and sometimes in a public and overt way.

Marriage is synonymous with maturity and adulthood. If you aren’t married, you aren’t really considered to be an adult–you are something in between adolescent and adult. Additionally, a married woman with children is considered to be more grown-up and wiser than a woman with no children.

Because of the things above, single people, LGBT folks, divorcees, and the infertile have a big problem. They can get with the program, endure second-class status, or leave.

Some married folks with children are very kind and try to do what they can to alleviate the problems above. But things won’t really change until the social contract changes. We need to teach our children and each other that there are many acceptable life paths. But I think leaders are deathly afraid that if they do that, fewer people will marry and have children. I disagree with that analysis. I think people who want to marry will do so, and that people who want children will have them.

Anyway the point is this: singles are generally treated poorly by the system, and leaving is the option most take.

BTW, I think marriage to nonmembers needs to be considered as an acceptable option for many people.

[Author]

Posts