Missionary Age Lowered to 18 for males, 19 for females

[_AdamFord]

It is sad to me that a simple policy change on the age at which we allow missionaries to serve is seen as evidence of divine oracles and vibrant and active communication between God and Church leaders. I think we have no idea what it was like to live with Joseph Smith or Heber C. Kimball or even Joseph F. Smith. This is wonderful, but it isn't a "momentous revelation".

I agree that it will be viewed as such by those the sycophants who deify modern Church leaders.

AdamFord, I had no idea you were here. I first heard about this from your post on the same subject on Facebook.

Who is this? I have only made two (now three) posts here. Don't really know this place yet.

[_AdamFord]

It is sad to me that a simple policy change on the age at which we allow missionaries to serve is seen as evidence of divine oracles and vibrant and active communication between God and Church leaders. I think we have no idea what it was like to live with Joseph Smith or Heber C. Kimball or even Joseph F. Smith. This is wonderful, but it isn't a "momentous revelation".

I agree that it will be viewed as such by those the sycophants who deify modern Church leaders.

Who has claimed this? It seems that it was introduced as something practical since a couple of countries had the policy already and did well. At least this is how it was explained.

Rockslider did.

[_keithb]

This is probably a smart move for the Mormon church. First off, it is much easier to indoctrinate people when they're young. Second, it means that they will have a larger workforce, meaning more potential converts. Third, it makes the church seem like it has greater gender equality. Fourth, it will probably have a "wheat from tares" separating effect where the faithful young Mormons will go serve a mission and the others will go drink lots of beer.

Kudos to the Mormon corporation. That was a good business move.

[_brade]

Funny thing is this was predicted on reddit on r/exmormon several days ago.

[_angsty]

More important is that girls can now go on missions at age 19.

But I could not help thinking that regardless of the change, girls still need to understand that are not on an equal playing field.

Why on earth couldn't they just make it the same for girls, just like the boys?

Where would be the harm in saying girls can go on missions at 18 if they have graduated from high school, too?

I am left to think it is an intentional decision to make sure women do not get the idea they are equal to men.

Just my two cents.

All the Best!

--Consiglieri

I think this is one of the creepier policy decisions to come down from on high-- perhaps even since the all-important proclamation on a single pair of earrings.

I can't say I understand it, except as a concession meant to appeal to women who don't realize how sexist Mormonism is and will think this is some kind of move toward equality. The reasoning we always got for the age policy was that the first priority of a young woman was to marry and start a family, thus women women didn't need to be running off to serve a mission if they had viable marriage prospects. I personally was rejected by a bishop when I inquired about serving, because I was dating a worthy, priesthood-holding RM who wanted to marry me (never mind whether I wanted to marry him).

Why the gender gap still? Given the history of encouraging women to prioritize marriage before the prospect of missionary service, the lingering age difference suggests that during the year between 18-19, there's an expectation that women will be pursuing meaningful marriage prospects and that the age difference is meant to encourage that. in a world where lower age at the time of marriage is a strong predictor of marriage failure, is that really a message women of the church need to hear? Do women of the church really need institutional encouragement to marry during that year rather than serve a mission? Seriously? As if they don't face enough pressure already.

[_quaker]

Why on earth couldn't they just make it the same for girls, just like the boys?

Where would be the harm in saying girls can go on missions at 18 if they have graduated from high school, too?

I am left to think it is an intentional decision to make sure women do not get the idea they are equal to men.

I doubt the command to all women to serve missions is coming in the future and there has been no talk of revoking the command for males to serve. There is less pressure for males to chose to serve but until women are commanded to serve missions then there will always be a difference, regardless of age requirements.

But I tend to think it is for more practical reasons like you don't want a group of males and females who all know one another from high school at the MTC together.

[_Infymus]

This is going to put more pressure on young men. They know that as soon as they are finished with high school, no more year wait, it will be off to the MTC. And the pressure from their families will increase and make it harder for them.

I've seen a lot of Mormon families disown their boys for not going on a mission. A son on a mission is a badge of honor for a family in the ward. The names of their son or sons are up on a plaque showing where they are. Coming home early or "dishonorably" can be catastrophic for families trying to appear more righteous than their fellow members.

Boys used to have a year to get a job and possibly even move out. Now they won't have that option. A year to study, a year to sow their oats, learn about the real truth of Mormonism? All will be tossed out.

And with the pressure to get married young and have babies when they get back - it creates poverty and that in turn creates reliance on the cult.

No, the cult knows what it is doing. Missions have never been about spreading the gospel. The real purpose is to further indoctrinate the young man and turn them into a lifetime tithe paying member.

[Guest]

But one is entitled to a US centric view of the change (which was your criticism of some of the posts here) because the change was already in effect outside the US and thus affects the US only, not non-US countries.

I think that I told you that the change was not in effect in many countries with military service, ie, in europe and in russia. Now it is all over the world. It doesn't just affect the US but all of europe, and russia among other places in the world.

Looks pretty European to me. By far the largest number of males affected by this change will be in the US, since the change was in effect in South American even before it was in Europe. Hard to call comments on the change US centric since that's where its major impact will be.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/blogsfaith ... y.html.csp

[_sock puppet]

I think this will lead to more early aborted missions by young men. That's when Mormon families really have a high rate of disowning their sons.

[_angsty]

But I tend to think it is for more practical reasons like you don't want a group of males and females who all know one another from high school at the MTC together.

They could just stagger them schedule-wise throughout the year based on high school affiliation. There are less-sexist ways to deal with whatever problems might be caused by men and women having known each other from high school.