Dear Bro Jo,
My question is probably a very simple question and I most likely already know the answer but I guess I need someone to be brutally honest.
Anyways, there is this guy... he is 18 going on 19 and I'm about to turn 19. We have been dating for a couple of years. He is a great guy with amazing standards and a strong member of the church. We have been best friends since we were both about 15 and have just been super close since then. Last night as we were talking on the phone I was telling him about the talk our Bishop of the ward gave about our dreams and fears. He asked what my dreams are and I told him ultimately to get married to a worthy priesthood holder and return missionary in the temple. I have always thought that he wanted to serve a mission and that's what he has always said.
Out of nowhere he was like well would you marry me if I didn't serve a mission. I told him no, because I always promised myself to marry a return missionary because I think it's amazing how a young man can sacrifice two years of his life for the Savior and that shows how he is obedient unto the Lord's commandments. I then told him that if a guy couldn't serve because of a physical problem or health issue then yes I would still marry him but if he didn't serve because he got a football scholarship or something like that then no I would not marry him.
I guess my ultimate question is... Is it wrong that I wouldn't marry a guy unless he is a return missionary? I understand that there are other amazing men out there who have not served missions but I honestly believe that if you are able and worthy to go then you should go. I'm not sure if I should lower my expectations because I love someone.
Slighty confused,
The RM Girl
PS: I'm not just talking about this guy... he is an example but I'm wanting to know in general for future reference. Thanks! :)
Dear RM Girl,
For starters, when you say "dating" it sounds like you've been a couple, not just Casual Group Dating, and one result of that is you may become his excuse not to go. I know you're trying to encourage him, but there's just something in your letter that gives me the feeling that he's hesitant and that part of that hesitation is his fear that you'll be with someone else while he's gone and when he comes back. (Which, for the record, is one of the many reasons that I say A) girls shouldn't have a boyfriend in High School, and B) guys and girls should cut any ties whilst he's gone.) He's scared, which is actually quite understandable, and he may be using you as a crutch.
That's bad.
Serving a mission is NOT a guarantee that a guy is a good guy NOR is it a promise that he'll be a decent husband. Most honorable missionaries make excellent husbands, but even though the bar has been raised, there are still way too many losers and liars who are serving missions that shouldn't be. The pressure and expectation to serve a mission, especially inside the Zion curtain, obscures the reason to serve and prompts many who are unworthy and unready to pretend to the contrary. A calling, including a mission, doesn't make a bad guy good simply because it was extended.
That said, is it okay for you to include "having honorably served a mission" among your list of future spouse standards?
Absolutely.
The skills, both temporal and spiritual, that a young man can gain on a mission are tough to gain any other way. A missionary should learn sacrifice, placing others before self, domestic skills, and other things that will make him a better spouse, plus his testimony of the priesthood, service, and the savior can grow in such a way as to make him a far superior spouse than had he not served.
It's because you love him that you should let him go. It's because you love him that you should encourage him to serve. And it's because he loves you that he must recognize that you may indeed be sealed to someone else, perhaps, while he's gone, and allow you the freedom to accept that possibility.
Love doesn't require us to lower our expectations, but it does require us to put someone else before ourselves.
Never regret having high standards. Kiss him on the cheek, wish him well, and encourage him to go. And don't let him use you as his excuse.
- Bro Jo
6 comments:
You may want to be a little more flexible with those "lists" that many young women make about what they want in a future spouse. Would you marry a convert? What if you marry someone who was very ill? Or wasn't called because of family problems?
I would encourage you to choose someone righteous you love and who you can feel the spirit with, regardless of whether they served a mission or not. Those lists that so many young women make about their "future husbands" can really limit your dating pool. I say this because I married someone who was very much "not my type." If I stuck to that silly list, I wouldn't have even considered him.
Also, you say "I think it's amazing how a young man can sacrifice two years of his life for the Savior and that shows how he is obedient unto the Lord's commandments." If serving a mission is so important and you are 19, maybe you should consider serving one yourself in a few years.
Lauren,
You're forgetting that worthy young men are commanded to serve, while for young women a mission is an option.
Readers, you can find much more discussion on this topic on our Facebook Fan page!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Dear-Bro-Jo/52304699634
I worry when young men and the women that are attracted to them begin to look the other way and make excuses for not serving a mission.
Is it for everyone? No.
Does it make someone a Bad Guy for not serving? Not necessarily.
Does serving guarantee that a guy is a Good Guy? Not necessarily that, either.
But when a young man answers the call, works hard and serves honorably, it does say a lot about his character and commitment to Christ.
There's nothing wrong with a young women wanting to marry a man that has that level of hard work, dedication, and testimony. In fact, it's highly desirable. Sister Jo and I hope that our boys are that kind of young man and that our daughters find that kind of young man to marry.
One more thing: a mission, guy or girl, can be a glorious and unique experience; setting a goal to serve is honorable and smart.
- Bro Jo
Lauren said something that I'd like to make note of- the list. I remember a visiting apostle asking the YSA who had a "list", then promptly telling all of them to go home and tear it up.
As a returned Sister missionary I can testify that you learn things on a mission about the gospel, about yourself, about the world and people in general that you can NOT learn anywhere else. After thinking about it extensively, there is really no reason (health issues aside) a worthy Priesthood holder could not serve.
Having said that, I have an older brother who was not active in the church from the time he graduated high school until after the age cut-off date for missionaries. But as a 27-year-old worthy priesthood holder his now wife was able to understand why he had not served, and marry him anyway.
I think it's good to have a 'list' of requirements so you can keep your standards high. (After all, it's a 'list' that the lord makes [of questions to find our worthiness] for his children to enter the Temple.) But it's MOSTLY important to have the spirit with you to discern amongst situations AND people.
@ Anonymous -
The Church is rife with "I heard a story once" and "one time a visiting General Authority said" and "when I was a kid my uncle's cousin's friend's grandma's bishop's second counselor said . . ."
All of which is a) dangerous, b) conjecture, c) dependent upon memory and interpretation, and d) by definition Not Scripture.
I'm not saying it didn't happen. I'm not saying it's not true.
I'm not saying it isn't meaningful.
I'm reminding you and everyone else that unless it's in the four standard works or spoken in General Conference (without having been since corrected or changed), anything said by anyone (Especially me!) isn't Gospel, it's just words.
The value is in the idea, not in the claim that an authority said it.
Heck, even if someone says "on this date, in this location, this specific person said this bit of wisdom", not only is it very difficult to verify (by the way, this is one of the reasons sacrament meetings and stake conferences are not recorded, lest someone take what's said therein as "new revelation"), it's inspiring, but nothing more.
I don't mean to belittle your comment - I think you bring up an interesting point - I just felt the need to remind everyone that quotes, especially unattributed ones, can be quite dangerous.
- Bro Jo
As much as I agree with having a "list" and holding high standards. I must say that the only thing I take issue with is the requirement that your husband be a RM. I'm not saying you shouldn't look for that, in fact I agree that it IS better for a young man to serve a mission. I just think that before you write off a guy just because he's not a RM, find out more about him and his reasons for not going. It could be that he's been in the hospital fighting cancer for the last several years or he might have joined the church only recently. By all means have a "list", deal maker/breakers,but when it comes to "is he a RM or not", just look into it first and don't make snap decisions is all I'm saying.
Post a Comment