Indexes
The following stories have received the most reader comments during the last 7 days.
- On global warming and same-sex marriage (180)
- George W. Bush will take a legacy of failure with him (134)
- Another vote against the Supercenter (64)
- Being a Kennedy doesn't make you qualified (27)
- People can find an excuse for doing almost anything (26)
- Lodi City Council sends plan for DeBenedetti Park back to staff for more review (25)
- Regional Roundup (24)
- Wine Country Cardroom in Lodi wants to increase games, hours, tables (23)
- Elm Street eyesore (20)
'On assignment to teach'
Mormon missionaries: Who are they and what do they do?
News-Sentinel Staff Writer
It's a frequent sight in Lodi and other cities and towns across the nation: A team of two young Mormons, dressed in sharp, black slacks; white shirts; ties and bike helmets.
They peddle across town looking to talk to people about their faith and about joining the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
The young Mormons who serve their two-year mission when they turn 19 must give up quite a bit while telling people about Jesus Christ and the Book of Mormon.
They don't drive for two years unless they're in a rural area, such as Amador and Calaveras counties, where it's too difficult to get around on a bicycle.
They aren't allowed to see a single television show or movie for two years.
They are allowed to phone home only twice a year — on Christmas and Mother's Day.
They are allowed to write letters to friends and loved ones once a week.
They must also give up their first name.
Eight missionaries peddle on their bicycles in Lodi, and four do the same in Galt. They introduce themselves as "Elder" followed by their last name, and they address each other that way.
"In Lodi, nobody knows our name," Elder Payne said.
"It's to give up our past life (for two years)," said Elder Zurita, who came to Lodi from Chile. "We're on an assignment to teach other people (about the faith)."
The missionaries, serving the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Lodi and Galt, come from such places as Utah, Atlanta and Chile. Three of those serving locally are from the Canadian province of Alberta. They talk to 50 or 60 people a day in the Lodi area, and five to eight of those people eventually become baptized as Mormons, Elder Payne said.
How missionaries are assigned to a location
When they turns 19 years old, church members have the opportunity to serve a two-year mission. They send their personal information to church headquarters in Salt Lake City, according to Elder Payne.
While most missionaries whom people see out in the field are young men, the church does have women and older missionaries. Women, however, don't ride bikes.
Church leaders ask missionaries questions about their knowledge of the faith, if they have read the scriptures and their opinions regarding different topics, Elder Zurita said.
A special committee of apostles and current church Prophet Thomas S. Monson assigned the Lodi group to the California-Sacramento Mission. From there, the Sacramento Mission president, known only as President Jardine, assigns missionaries to communities in San Joaquin, Sacramento, Calaveras, Amador and El Dorado Counties.

After six weeks, missionaries are considered for reassignment to another community in the five-county area. For example, Elder Payne has served in Sacramento, Cameron Park and Stockton before coming to Lodi.
Missionaries are in groups of two, with one of them having been in the community longer than the other. That way, he can acclimate the newcomer about what Lodi is like, for example.
Daily routine
6:30 a.m.: Wake up, exercise for 30 minutes.
7 a.m.: Eat and get dressed.
8 a.m.: Study alone.
9 a.m.: Study with one's "companion," as the bicycle partner is referred to in the church. They share ideas with each other.
10 a.m.: Those studying Spanish take their lesson to communicate with Lodi's and Galt's Spanish-speaking community. Others go out on their bicycles for the day, where they meet and greet people and share the gospel.
11 a.m.: Those who took their Spanish lesson at 10 began their bicycle trip, which lasts until 9 p.m. except for lunch and dinner breaks.
They bicycle around looking for people to teach the gospel. It could be someone at the street corner or working in their front yard.
9 p.m.: Plan the next day's itinerary.
Day of rest
Monday is their day to go grocery shopping for the week, do laundry, play basketball or other games and write letters home (they're not allowed to write any other day). Usually it's by snail mail, although some elders will e-mail from a computer at the Lodi or Galt library.
Loneliness
"Of course, it's natural," said Elder Bench of Ogden, Utah. "But our families know what it's like."
It's not any different from the loneliness servicemen and women experience, he said.
"The Lord blesses us, so it doesn't bother us," Elder Payne said.
The purpose of not being allowed to communicate with family and friends except on Mondays is to avoid being distracted from missionary work.
"It's important not to get lost on what you're doing here," Elder Lindeman of Atlanta said.
Missionaries only have church-issued cell phones, and their parents, girlfriends and other friends don't have access to the phone number.
If a family emergency like a death in the family takes place, their parents still can't contact the missionary directly. Instead, the call goes to the California-Sacramento Mission, and word is relayed to the missionary.
To compensate for lack of contact with family and friends, there are great people in each community who become your family, Elder Zuniga said.
Why do they dress in suits?
Missionaries wear standard business attire, including white dress shirts, dark slacks, usually black, and sometimes a dress coat. They all wear ties, but of different colors.
"We represent Jesus Christ," Elder Payne said, explaining why they dress so formally. "We are going to be united in what we wear."
Elder Bench added, "We have to give our best."
Church leaders recommend that each missionary has eight to 10 white dress shirts, three to four pairs of slacks, two matching suit jackets and two pairs of shoes.
Who pays for their shoes and bikes?
Missionaries pay for their own supplies, including food, rent, clothing, bicycles and other items. They don't get paid for their work, so they save money a few years in advance. Church leaders recommend saving $10,000 toward the two-year mission.
Missionaries give their savings to the church, which then metes out the money as needed. The Lodi missionaries live in apartments and the rent is paid by the church out of the missionaries' savings. Galt missionaries share a house.
Elder Rasmussen said he began saving money from jobs as early as his high-school years.
Elder Abeyta, from Salt Lake City, has used four bikes during his mission. One bike was stolen in Stockton, he gave another bike to a boy who had had his bike stolen, another bike is at his apartment and he built one bike from spare parts.
Dealing with rejection
It's something they have to learn to deal with, Elder Abeyta said.
"If someone slams the door in my face, I know I did my part," said Elder Rasmussen, who added that he was once sprayed with a garden hose.
Elder Hull said they want people to notice them, so if someone yells or swears at them from a car, at least they knew who they were.
Elder Zurita said he has twice been threatened by a knife in Stockton.
Only five to 10 percent of the people missionaries talk to invite them for a return visit to discuss the faith, Elder Rasmussen said.
Elder Abeyta said their job is simply to invite people to learn about the Latter-day Saints faith, not to coerce.
Confusion about polygamy
Most people realize that the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not believe in polygamy and that polygamy is practiced by a different sect with a similar name — the Fundamentalist Latter-day Saints, Elder Hatch said.
"Some of them say, 'I don't want to hear from you guys. You believe in polygamy,'" Elder Robison said. "They just want to get you riled up."
Elder Rasmussen added, "We ask them to read the Book of Mormon, come to church and pray to God and ask him if it's true."
Elder Hatch cited Jacob 2 in the Book of Mormon, which says that marriage is limited to one spouse.
Unique aspects of Lodi, Galt
"The smell of General Mills," Elder Hatch said. "It was awesome. I was thinking, 'What is this heavenly place?'"
Elder Rasmussen said he is intrigued by the Galt Market because he gets to talk to people from a large area. One day, he met someone who drove from Reno to shop at the flea market.
Elder Lindeman was impressed with Lodi's Farmers Market.
Elder Payne was impressed with how many churches Lodi has. Lodi has more churches than any town he has seen.
"They are the nicest people in Lodi," Elder Abeyta said. "It's like Pleasantville."
People, not necessarily Mormons, sometimes invite missionaries to stay for dinner or give them water for the road because they appreciate the missionaries for spreading God's message, Elder Abeyta said.
Contact reporter Ross Farrow at rossf@lodinews.com.

Reader Feedback
voter wrote on Jul 19, 2008 10:27 PM:
voter wrote on Jul 19, 2008 10:05 PM:
Lodi78 wrote on Jul 19, 2008 1:03 PM:
"Please be aware that people who worship animal deities and all manner of spiritual beings report the same experiences."
I am highly offended by this comment. Who are you to say what individual people feel spiritually? My point was that I felt God's love when I was in a different Christian denomination. I now feel that same love, only stronger, from the LDS church. To me, that's all I need to know that God lives and Jesus Christ is our Savior. I don't need to see them to believe it. Truth is testified to us by way of the Holy Ghost, which it sounds to me as if you've never allowed yourself to listen to the spirit of the Lord. "
voter wrote on Jul 19, 2008 11:26 AM:
I just checked the FSM website and it looks as if a number of noted Ph.d.s and scientists are now endorsing Pastafarianism's version of creation as on an equal par with creation science and intelligent design. "
nylodian wrote on Jul 19, 2008 10:01 AM:
Seriously now, we were AGAIN visited by LDSers this morning. We have asked them, respectfully, not to come back on several occasions. It got to the point where we even called their church to complain and threaten trespassing charges. That worked for a few years, but now they're back. It's not like we're in a suburban neighborhood - we live out in the country. "
voter wrote on Jul 19, 2008 9:30 AM:
Lodi78 wrote on Jul 19, 2008 8:29 AM:
For myself, I came to know I had a belief in God and Jesus Christ around junior high school. Then when I studied the BOM and LDS church and was truly open to its truthfulness, I received a very strong testimony from the Holy Spirit. I know it was the Holy Spirit because it was the same feeling I used to feel before the LDS church, only stronger.
No one else knows what I feel except myself. So to say that it was Satan giving me false promptings, that is wrong because I know I've felt the promptings of the Spirit before and I know that I feel it even stronger now in the LDS church. Why? Not because of some scientific study. But through faith, prayer, and listening/feeling the Holy Spirit. "
voter wrote on Jul 19, 2008 7:28 AM:
Would you like me to begin compiling a list of all of the crazy, dangerous, and cruel beliefs and practices humans have engaged just in the last century--all in the name of blind faith? Without evidence, your faith is no more valid than those who believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster. "
Lodi78 wrote on Jul 18, 2008 10:14 PM:
If we base EVERYTHING off of 'unbiased historical evidence' then what is the point of faith? "
voter wrote on Jul 18, 2008 6:16 PM:
http://www.i4m.com/think/leaders/mormon_loyalty.htm
Please let me know if you come across any unbiased evidence to support historical ideas in the BOM. "
rick wrote on Jul 18, 2008 5:27 PM:
It is insulting to say I have been "conditioned to believe what the church hierarchy" wants. It insults my faith, and the great men of faith who have believed.
I have come to know for myself, after many days of fasting and prayer. I know independent of any living person that these things are true, and though all the world should reject it, and claim it false, it would not matter one iota -I know what I know.
Go read Nibley for your evidence...but you have all the evidence you need right in your hands - the Book itself.
Don't wait too long, we do not have much time here to prepare...
Good luck, and farewell, and I hope and pray you will find that these things are true. "
voter wrote on Jul 18, 2008 4:18 PM:
Lodi78 wrote on Jul 18, 2008 4:08 PM:
I guess there is no God then either since there's no scientific evidence, same goes for Jesus Christ. "
voter wrote on Jul 18, 2008 3:42 PM:
rick wrote on Jul 18, 2008 3:16 PM:
No, modern science has not debunked the Book of Mormon. Your opinion only, and you have every right to it, but by no means is it fact or true.
There has been mountains of evidence unearthed in support of the Book of Mormon.
Two books (of many) I would recommend for those looking for "evidence" is "An Approach to the Book of Mormon", and "Lehi in the Desert; The World of Jaredites; There were Jaradites", both written by Hugh Nibley. Nibley researched much, much harder tests than the few you mention, and in every regard, the Book stands tall.
However, the real evidence is spiritual - read, ponder, pray over it, in humility and honesty, and you will come to see that the Book of Mormon is just what it claims. I invite you to honestly and sincerely try the promise at the end of the Book - to read, then ask God if it's true, and by the power of the Spirit you will come to know it's true. It will be all the "evidence" you need, and the only evidence that will matter. "
voter wrote on Jul 18, 2008 1:07 PM:
voter wrote on Jul 18, 2008 12:50 PM:
Rick wrote on Jul 18, 2008 9:56 AM:
It is useless to explain the temple - and in reality, this really isn't your problem. The real question is modern revelation.
If you knew God spake to Joseph Smith, and Joseph was the Lord's mouthpiece on the earth, then you would know revelation is a true princple, and what he tells you is truth.
The Savior himself said to Nicodemus:
"If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?"
It was the same problem. The Savior right there in the flesh, and people couldn't accept current revelation, but clung to the old.
So, was Joseph the Prophet? The way the Lord has provided for us all to find out is to take the Book of Mormon and read, ponder, and ask God to find out for yourself.
It is useless to talk of temples, or "heavenly things" if you do not accept "earthly things". So, I challenge you to start with the Book of Mormon.
I testify it is God's revealed word today, joining with the Bible of yesterday. "
Rick wrote on Jul 18, 2008 9:43 AM:
Two things struck me that need clarifying. 200 words can't address all.
There is freedom to state one's opinion, and ask, and question. You probably don't know, there was a huge debate with a member of the Quorum of the 12 and a 70 (subordinate) on the doctrinal question of the origin of man. Two powerful figures, completely diametrically opposed opinions, and the First Presidency welcomed the debate, and much good came of it.
In terms of the ultimate destiny of us all, the Savior himself said (Matt 19:29):
"And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my names sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit ceverlasting life"
If you are faithful, you will receive an hundredfold of those things - and most of this is family - 100x, and more.
If you don't believe that, you do not believe the Bible.
Also - Rev 1:6 "And hath made us kings ane priests unto God and His Father.."
What exactly will you be a king of? "
Lodi78 wrote on Jul 18, 2008 9:29 AM:
Your series of posts couldn't be any further from the truth. Have you had any firsthand experience with the LDS church? "
essayjay wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:23 PM:
essayjay wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:22 PM:
essayjay wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:22 PM:
essayjay wrote on Jul 17, 2008 11:16 PM:
You see, they won't tell you that "Heavenly Father," according to Mormonism, was once a man like yourself who achieved godhood through a process called "eternal progression." You'll hear great reverence expressed for Jesus Christ, yet the missionaries won't say that they believe that Jesus Christ is a created being, a literal son of a Heavenly Father that had sexual intercourse with the Virgin Mary to provide him a physical body to dwell in. "
rick wrote on Jul 17, 2008 5:35 PM:
"God's Word is complete...The next revelation will occur when Christ...come(s)..."
Bry, unfortunately, the Bible does not support such positions. Those are traditions of men.
Where did you learn that the next revelation would be the 2nd coming? It's not in the Bible, and neither is the concept of the Bible being complete. The Bible does not deny the spirit of revelation - even after all the Apostles were killed.
You cannot take Rev 22:18-19 to mean such a thing. (Numerous posts on this) That only pertains to John's Revelation.
Amos 3:7 "Surely the Lord God will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets"
If you believe the Bible, God will do nothing until he reveals his secret..therefore, there must be an authorized prophet on the earth to whom God will reveal the things pertaining to the Kingdom of God in preparation for His 2nd Coming.
That means revelation - which means the Bible is not complete, and the next revelation is not the 2nd coming, but will proceed it, else the scripture is broken. "
JD wrote on Jul 15, 2008 1:58 PM:
What could very possibly happen down the road, though, is that the church might de-link civil marriages from temple sealings. This is already the case in some other countries where religious marriage ceremonies of any kind are not recognized--Mormon couples marry civilly in an open ceremony, and are then "sealed" in a temple some days or weeks later.
In the US, however, couples who elect to marry civilly first must wait for a year before they can be sealed. I wish I could give you a cogent set of reasons as to why this is the case, but anything I could offer in this regard would be speculation. "
Lodian wrote on Jul 15, 2008 1:28 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jul 15, 2008 1:25 PM:
I realize these are Mormon traditions, but maybe the church can take a look into the non-Mormon parent issue and allow the parents to be witness to their child's marriage.....someday perhaps. "
Lodian wrote on Jul 15, 2008 1:12 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jul 15, 2008 1:07 PM:
You are wrong, as I agree.
The problem comes in when that new chosen path rejects family at any point. THAT is dangerous territory and should be watched very carefully as there are many "groups" out there that will purposely separate the family from their members. In my opinion, this is not a healthy choice for a family. Would you be pleased and accepting if your child chose to be a member, and one of the wives, in the FLDS? "
Lodian wrote on Jul 15, 2008 1:00 PM:
What accusation? "
JD wrote on Jul 15, 2008 12:50 PM:
But I am sort of hoping that we can at least put the "cult-like shunning" thing to bed. The comparisons that have been drawn thus far strike me as superficial, imperfect, and/or just plain inaccurate. "
Love For The Truth wrote on Jul 15, 2008 12:29 PM:
I have observed the Mormon faith for a considerable time. Your assertion that it is a cult speaks volumes to hate, myopic arrogance and bias. I have never observed an organization that does more good individually and collectively than the Mormons. I counter your unfounded accusation, and assert that they are the most Christian Christians I have observed.
I suggest, again, that if my child has the guts to make a decision contrary to their upbringing, and tell me that the religion (or lack thereof) that I raised them in--is no-longer a part of their life, my child deserves consideration and respect. We apparently will not agree.
In Mormon families, I have observed family focus through a specific weeknight of togetherness, teachings of mutual consideration and respect; avoidance of pornography, alcohol and harmful drugs which tear families apart; focus on selfless service, which builds families up. Apparently now, also daily family scripture study and prayer?
I can say, without hesitation--that the Mormons focus on family happiness, and that spills over into whatever community they are in. I enjoy it. "
Lodian wrote on Jul 15, 2008 12:23 PM:
Lodian wrote on Jul 15, 2008 12:15 PM:
" Hi Lodi78-- I prefer to take Voter's and Lodian's expressed concerns at face value, as I've found them to be generally fair and open-minded in past discussions. The question of "shunning" is a valid concern, especially because it's a recurring theme among ex-Mormons."
JD: I appreciate your attitude and patience with all the discussion of Mormonism. My questions and concerns are sincere. Yes, I have my own beliefs and opinions (God only knows!), but I also have a sincere desire to learn and understand the beliefs of others. Even if I do not agree with those beliefs I can respect them. Some things though are too hard for me to respect, like this barring of non-Mormon parents at a child's wedding, so I will dig in on the issue and discuss it. I am glad you are a person of patience and intellect that does not take it personally and get upset. Thanks. "
Lodian wrote on Jul 15, 2008 12:07 PM:
Lodi78: I guess you could say that about anything. Are you spinning my comments to fit your agenda? And I'm not sure why you are suspicious that this discussion has gone on for a week. Religion has been discussed long before you were here and it will be discussed long after we are all dead and gone. Surprised? Sorry, but your comments are odd. "
Lodian wrote on Jul 15, 2008 12:02 PM:
Lodi78: Your statement couldn't be farther from the truth. I have a sincere desire for understanding what is being discussed here. And, yes, I do have personal opinions. You don't? "
Lodian wrote on Jul 15, 2008 11:59 AM:
Lodi78: Don't put words in my mouth. I am quite capable, most of the time, of expressing myself. "
Lodian wrote on Jul 15, 2008 11:55 AM:
JD wrote on Jul 15, 2008 11:00 AM:
Voter hints at an interesting point when he says,
I did not realize that even younger siblings of the bride and groom are barred from the ceremony because only adults would have previously been endowed.
You see, I missed a couple of my own siblings' weddings (not the reception, but the ceremony). I was brought up to anticipate it, and it just wasn't a big deal to me--I'm still very close to those siblings. It's probably no exaggeration to say that you and I are from different subcultures with different values, and we're just not understanding each other.
I hope I haven't been too dismissive of your own values. Ultimately, whether you agree with me or not isn't my business. But I do hope that if you reject my position, you at least understand fully what my position is. To hint that Mormonism engages in a deliberate, protracted, cult-like campaign of driving wedges between Mormons and their non-Mormon family members suggests strongly that you have misinterpreted a fundamental dynamic of Mormonism. This is probably my own fault for not representing myself clearly, and I do apologize for that. "
JD wrote on Jul 15, 2008 10:55 AM:
I prefer to take Voter's and Lodian's expressed concerns at face value, as I've found them to be generally fair and open-minded in past discussions. The question of "shunning" is a valid concern, especially because it's a recurring theme among ex-Mormons. "
Lodi78 wrote on Jul 15, 2008 9:37 AM:
I'm still fairly certain these two have no intention of understanding the practices of the church, rather they seem intent on mudslinging and accusatory statements.
Anyone who wants to discredit the church can take any area of it and spin it to support their own agenda. I suspect that's what we're dealing with here. Why else has this discussion gone on for well over a week? "
JD wrote on Jul 15, 2008 9:08 AM:
The killer is that non-mormon parents of the bride would not only be barred from the ceremony, but then would be expected to pay for it as per tradition.
Well, Mormon temple weddings are free. I suspect you mean the reception--in which case, according to "conventional culture" you're probably right (though Mormon wedding receptions, in many ways, are a culture unto themselves--don't get me started!)
They are specifically asked if they have associated with anyone whose practices are in opposition to church teachings.
The question is technically whether one affiliates with any group or individual. I actually asked my bishop about this question some years back, and his reply was that the practical emphasis is on "groups". You've probably heard of the FLDS and other Mormon offshoot groups that still practice polygamy. Oddly, some of those groups believe that they must get their marriage solemnized in mainstream Mormon temples, and thus would try to maintain official membership in both the mainline Mormon church (whence they would apply for a temple recommend) and their own polygamous splinter group. The question was designed specifically to weed out these individuals. "
Lodi78 wrote on Jul 15, 2008 8:47 AM:
Thank you for proving my point :) "
voter wrote on Jul 15, 2008 8:36 AM:
You wrote, "After all, if you want to buy a Ford you don't go ask a Chevy dealer what they think do you? "
If I wanted to buy a Ford, I certainly wouldn't limit my information to only that given by the Ford dealer. I would check neutral sources and would be stupid to ignore negative reviews, especially when they all pointed to the same serious issues. "
voter wrote on Jul 15, 2008 8:28 AM:
voter wrote on Jul 15, 2008 8:20 AM:
voter wrote on Jul 15, 2008 8:14 AM:
Lodian wrote on Jul 14, 2008 10:23 PM:
Love the truth: I don't appreciate you belittling my stand on this issue. If, as a parent, I would have to change religions or miss the wedding I would definitely be working on getting my daughter out of such a cult. The truth is that a church/religion that professes to value family yet rejects non-Mormon family members is something much less than a healthy place for my children. It's not something I can remotely agree to support. "
Lodian wrote on Jul 14, 2008 10:16 PM:
What I am hearing from you is that to be allowed into the temple to stand beside my child at his/her marriage I would have to change my religion??? That's beyond ridiculous. "
Lodian wrote on Jul 14, 2008 10:13 PM:
"Lodian--If I were a parent who had successfully raised a child that I must accept some of the credit/blame for their strength in making a commitment as an adult."
Love For The Truth: I would be incredibly disappointed if my child allowed his/her parents to be banned from the wedding. We have raised our children that family is important and we stick together. I would have to concede that I did something wrong in raising my child if he/she allowed such a ban of parents from such an important day...or any day just because the church says so. "
Lodian wrote on Jul 14, 2008 10:06 PM:
JD wrote on Jul 14, 2008 5:26 PM:
A mother or father in a healthy relationship with their son or daughter is not a bad influence, so why shun/bar them from the wedding, and other significant events in the couples life?
In talking about "bad influences", I was not referring to exclusion from temple weddings or limited contact during missionary service. I was responding to Voters apparent implication that Mormons are routinely "commanded" to cut non-Mormons out of their lives on an ongoing, perpetual basis. Again, there is no express direction from church authorities to do this. A local church authority who encouraged this course of action would be way out of line. "
JD wrote on Jul 14, 2008 5:19 PM:
"...see it in the same ballpark as "come and live on our compound. Oh, and by the way, your parents are evil--dont contact them anymore." "
JD wrote on Jul 14, 2008 5:17 PM:
Cults and abusers divide and separate families on purpose to get a better hold on their subjects.
Granted. But, while not wanting to downplay the pain inherent to such a situationabsence from a fifteen-minute marriage ceremony, followed by an opportunity to be present at a three- or four-hour reception (that often includes a formal exchange of additional vows and rings) held that same day, followed by a lifetime of continued opportunities to perpetuate a conventional family relationship, is only divisive if the parties involved allow it to be so. I just dont see it in the same ballpark as come and live on our compound. Oh, and by the way, your parents are evildont contact them anymore.
so why shun/bar [non-Mormon parents] from the wedding, and other significant events in the couples life?
Once the wedding ceremony is over, there are no other significant events from which the couples non-Mormon family members would be barred. Again, it's hard for me to call Mormonism "cultlike" because its policies tend towards isolation for two years and fifteen minutes of a decades-long relationship.
(to be continued) "
Lodi78 wrote on Jul 14, 2008 3:53 PM:
His posts are full of heresay and speculation. It appears most of his "research" is from the Internet (the worst possible place).
Voter, if you REALLY want to learn about the LDS church...invite the missionaries to your home. Learn about the church from them. Read the Book of Mormom. Pray to Heavenly Father with an OPEN heart and mind of its truthfulness. Then make an informed decision on whether you wish to convert or continue along your way.
After all, if you want to buy a Ford you don't go ask a Chevy dealer what they think do you? "
Love For The Truth wrote on Jul 14, 2008 2:52 PM:
If I were a parent who had successfully raised a child that I must accept some of the credit/blame for their strength in making a commitment as an adult.
If, perhaps, they chose to be a part of another faith--I would feel some pride in the fact that they have become autonomous adults--capable of self-management. What joy that would be, whether I agreed with the decision or not!
So, as a parent--in supporting my child's strength of decision, I would now have a choice to make. I am certain that I would know well in-advance of the wedding, where it would be and what needs to be done to participate. I envision, that I would need to move my pride aside, and do anything (including baptism) to be there with them on that day.
Alternatively, if the wedding was Hindu, in Sri Lanka, I could not expect them to move the island closer to my home. I would need to pay the price to get there, or miss it.
For me, that is what love of a parent is about. "
JD wrote on Jul 14, 2008 2:40 PM:
JD wrote on Jul 14, 2008 2:34 PM:
You may want to take a look at the Church Handbook of Instructions, which was placed online recently at Wikileaks (over the church's objection). It gives details for (among other things) the grounds, process and consequences of excommunication hearings. In short, you cannot be excommunicated for simply coming home and saying, "Mom, Dad, I think I'm gay". Nor does excommunication impute a duty on the part of church members to "shun" the individual. "
Love For The Truth wrote on Jul 14, 2008 2:31 PM:
Remember, that the Mormons are not a 'business venture' religion, like most churches with paid clergy. There is not one person that receives a salary or bonus for ecclesiastical work. Participation at all levels is SERVICE of time and effort, a 'lay-clergy'.
Prophet v. profit.
What would the basic motivation be of the control you express concern for? If the leaders don't profit from my offerings--why would they care if one is there or not? Or paying tithing or not? There must be something more to the principle of tithing--than profit.
It still comes down to the principle of faith.
"...prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it." Malachi 3:10
My GUESS, is that the lay clergy actually has faith, that the blessings of tithing are real.
The motivation I see, is faith. "
JD wrote on Jul 14, 2008 2:17 PM:
The tensions between the hard-line, wrath-of-God Mormonism of my great-grandparents and the warm-fuzzy Mormonism as generally practiced today certainly raises questions. But then, it evokes a similar tension in Christianity vis a vis the Old and New Testaments. Yeah, oaths of vengeance raise red flags. But I have to look at it in light of my larger experience with Mormonism. If that experience allows me to accept that God could slaughter Ananias and Sapphira because they misled Peter about their contributions, it also enables me to accept that a lot of Mormons were kind of pi**ed about the Illinois government's basically handing Joseph Smith over to his killers on a silver platter. "
voter wrote on Jul 14, 2008 2:08 PM:
voter wrote on Jul 14, 2008 1:58 PM:
voter wrote on Jul 14, 2008 1:56 PM:
voter wrote on Jul 14, 2008 1:52 PM:
The Mormons I know are all good people; however whenever there is a mandate for absolute submission to a group's dogma, there is cause for concern. "
Lodian wrote on Jul 14, 2008 1:51 PM:
JD: A mother or father in a healthy relationship with their son or daughter is not a bad influence, so why shun/bar them from the wedding, and other significant events in the couples life? "
Lodian wrote on Jul 14, 2008 1:45 PM:
When a group, any group or person (church, organization, club, man or woman) forces the exclusion of a person's family from ones life especially when celebrating significant events in that person's life then there is something seriously wrong.
I would definitely start in with investigations of cult status if this were to happen with my children and I'd try to get them out! NO ONE should separate a son/daughter from his or her healthy mother/father relationships. To me, that is a glaring sign of trouble and an unhealthy engagement with the group in question.
Cults and abusers divide and separate families on purpose to get a better hold on their subjects. This makes for an easier transition into what that group/person wants out of their subject.
It's unfortunate that the Mormons feel this is okay in their book. I believe it is fundamentally wrong and I would never stand for it.
Honor thy father and mother. "