Crisis of Faith - Dear John Letters


Recommended Posts

Sam Cooke captured the pre-mission dating dilemma best in his song, "Only Sixteen":

"She was only sixteen, only sixteen

But I loved her so.

But she was too young, to fall in love,

and I was too young to know."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lostboy289 said:

So why are they not biologically capable of making a promise to wait when they are 19, yet capable of making an enternal promise of marriage when they are 19.5 and dump their former boyfriend for a shiney new fiancé?

Take it up with God.  My best guess would be something along the lines of Genesis 2:18, and how we are genetically geared.

I wonder how much of this non-culpability for consequences is actually biological and how much is cultural, as this is really the first era in history that we don't expect people in their late teens/early 20s to be responsible for their actions.

That's a fair point.  We're only a handful of decades past frontier America and it's acceptance of getting married (or even married off) by 15 or 16.  

I don't get why this is a 'crisis of faith' moment, but I think that's a fair point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The real reason why so many posters here aren't willing to acknowledge the problem is because they cannot see a reasonable solution (after all, complaining about problems without proposing solutions risks getting "likened" to that notorious Book of Mormon person - King Noah, the whine-bibber). This particular problem is enshrined in mormonhub because they don't allow signatures anymore. With the wisdom of my historic signature riding the coattails of each of my posts, a sensible solution would be engrained in the subconscious of these elite advice-givers. For reference, I'll post it again.

Quote

This is why we need arranged marriages.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, DoctorLemon said:

Another consideration - people change a lot between 18 and 22.  I went from being a long haired nu-metal fanboy punk to a respectable adult in those years.  If you get engaged to an 18 year old, that person may be completely different in just a few years.  (This is likely one reason why missions happen during this timeframe - people are very malleable at this age and it is a good time to sway them towards righteousness for the rest of their lives).  I would wait until a person has stabilized as an adult before making a commitment such as an engagement.  

Send pictures!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Backroads said:

I think that's fair, but is it right to force someone to participate in a non-marriage relationship longer than they feel emotionally connected?

A mission is a considerably long time. 2 years, generally taken at the time where young adults are going through changes:

I think we might just have to agree to disagree on this one.

I get what you are saying, but at the same time I can't just bring myself to say that a promise made to someone should be disregarded when it becomes inconvenient or we realize we acted hastily in making it. Especially when feelings as deep as this are on the line. And this goes for any promises. To me, they are incredibly sacred.

And while prevention is great, it doesn't really solve the problem at hand any more than the existence of birth control solves the abortion debate for non-members. Prevention is always the best defense, but what happens when that fails and you actually find yourself there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Lostboy289 said:

I can't just bring myself to say that a promise made to someone should be disregarded when it becomes inconvenient or we realize we acted hastily in making it.

I think what has been lost in this debate is that from what I know of the regulars on this forum, none of them would support casual or insensitive disregarding of a promise nor of another's feelings.  None of them would think it's "OK" to deceive yon missionary while dating someone else.  None would think it OK to break the LOC in the process.  Most, if not all, would think that if the feelings are gone, the honest thing is to inform the missionary before any further action is taken.  We just disagree on whether it's possible or right to keep the promise once the "in love" feelings on which is was founded are gone, and on the moral severity of breaking such a promise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, zil said:

I think what has been lost in this debate is that from what I know of the regulars on this forum, none of them would support casual or insensitive disregarding of a promise nor of another's feelings.  None of them would think it's "OK" to deceive yon missionary while dating someone else.  None would think it OK to break the LOC in the process.  Most, if not all, would think that if the feelings are gone, the honest thing is to inform the missionary before any further action is taken.  We just disagree on whether it's possible or right to keep the promise once the "in love" feelings on which is was founded are gone, and on the moral severity of breaking such a promise.

We also (well...at least I also) am skeptical of the one sided story we're getting. Experience has taught me that break-ups are never as black and white as the one-sided view you get from either side. Experience and maturity sometimes tend towards those involved in such things being able to see the bigger picture. This report does not sound like the bigger picture to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well all I can tell you about my friend's story is what I saw. However I know for a fact it involved his fiancé dating another man before she told him it was over (I remember checking and she was still wearing the ring). Which regardless of context cant really be explained away.

As for my story, I really don't think this is the place to post my sob story. If anyone really wants to  know it we can talk in PM.

 

Quote

We just disagree on whether it's possible or right to keep the promise once the "in love" feelings on which is was founded are gone, and on the moral severity of breaking such a promise.

I think another point of disagreement is the severity of breaking a promise if you start dating someone before you end it with the missionary.

Edited by Lostboy289
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
2 minutes ago, Lostboy289 said:

Well all I can tell you about my friend's story is what I saw. However I know for a fact it involved his fiancé dating another man before she told him it was over (I remember checking and she was still wearing the ring). Which regardless of context cant really be explained away.

As for my story, I really don't think this is the place to post my sob story. If anyone really wants to  know it we can talk in PM.

Whatever your story is, I truly hope you find peace my brother. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For every girl that says she'll wait for a missionary, there's a guy who tells her she should date while he's gone (to be noble and try to do the right thing) but doesn't really mean it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Lostboy289 said:

I think we might just have to agree to disagree on this one.

I get what you are saying, but at the same time I can't just bring myself to say that a promise made to someone should be disregarded when it becomes inconvenient or we realize we acted hastily in making it. Especially when feelings as deep as this are on the line. And this goes for any promises. To me, they are incredibly sacred.

And while prevention is great, it doesn't really solve the problem at hand any more than the existence of birth control solves the abortion debate for non-members. Prevention is always the best defense, but what happens when that fails and you actually find yourself there?

So you have an opinion and you demand that church conform to your opinion.  And yet when we ask you how church has handled you when you are the one lied and were dishonest and hurt people you are strangely silent. Sorry you don't get to have the church treat your sins one way and someone else sins differently.

And also please quote were anyone said "disregarding" a promise was a good thing... 

The closest we have come was saying that we understand how people might make foolish error in judgement on the matter.

It would be wonderful if everyone was Christ-like all the time...  But even in the church that is not way things work, because we are all works in progress. So the church teaches repeatedly things like faith, repentance, forgiveness, and honesty.  And constantly teaches us to do those things...  And that is how it handles it.  Knowing that we are all selective when it comes to the things we are willing to understand and do. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

So you have an opinion and you demand that church conform to your opinion.  And yet when we ask you how church has handled you when you are the one lied and were dishonest and hurt people you are strangely silent. Sorry you don't get to have the church treat your sins one way and someone else sins differently.

Strangely silent?! What are you talking about? I answered your question twice. Once fairly straightforward and then when you quite rudely claimed I avoided the question, I tried to answer it a different way in more detail. What more do you want?

Also, one thing that you completely ignored my point on is that there is a massive difference between sinning in private, and sinning in the full witness of others (something that doesn't really apply to anything ive had to repent for). Also a massive difference between loving the sinner but hating the sin, and simply ignoring the sin and acting like it is fun gossip.

Edited by Lostboy289
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Lostboy289 said:

Strangely silent?! What are you talking about? I answered your question twice. Once fairly straightforward and then when you quite rudely claimed I avoided the question, I tried to answer it a different way in more detail. What more do you want?

Also, one thing that you completely ignored my point on is that there is a massive difference between sinning in private, and sinning in the full witness of others. Also a massive difference between loving the sinner but hating the sin, and simply ignoring the sin and acting like it is fun gossip.

Then clearly I missed your answer so please quote yourself where state how the Church responded to you.

As for the massive difference... the difference is in your mind not with God.  Private or public sin is sin in the eyes of God...  By your definition the church ignores everyone sins... because it what?  Doesn't rebuke them publicly?  Or you could realize that the Church addresses everyone sins public and private by teaching correct principles, and only steps in more directly in the cases of breaking the law or breaking of covenants they made with God 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

Then clearly I missed your answer so please quote yourself where state how the Church responded to you.

As for the massive difference... the difference is in your mind not with God.  Private or public sin is sin in the eyes of God...  By your definition the church ignores everyone sins... because it what?  Doesn't rebuke them publicly?  Or you could realize that the Church addresses everyone sins public and private by teaching correct principles, and only steps in more directly in the cases of breaking the law or breaking of covenants they made with God 

 

Here you go:

Quote

I mean its hard to say because iv'e repented for a few things during my 3 years in the church and each one of them is different. In a couple cases I lost my temple recommend for a few months. And il admit I haven't talked to the Bishop in every case, since some I didn't feel was necessary to. But in every case I can tell you that I prayed about it, found a way to atone, and if a person was hurt, always find a way to make it right with that person. Ive never just moved on when another person's feelings were involved.

It wasn't that the church had to go out and "attack" me personally. But there was a culture created where I felt accountable for my actions and because of my relationship with the lord, felt obligated to go repent.

However I feel that the social stigma would have been more apparent if I had done anything that was in full public display of the ward. Like for example cheating on my girlfriend in front of everyone.

 

Edited by Lostboy289
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From personal experience, I know that while it is generally good counsel that you shouldn't get serious about somebody before going on a mission, it is not a hard and fast rule, there are exceptions.  At the same time however, until a wedding vow has been made, either party has the right to change their mind and end an existing romance and/or start a new one, even if engaged.  While a Dear John is rough, it is not some kind of moral blot to send one to a missionary.  It is part of the game so to speak and you have to accept that possibility at the outset. The fact that somebody one day says (and means it) that they are committed to somebody doesn't obligate them to marry them if their feelings have changed.  Nor is it their fault if somebody goes to pieces for being dumped.  An Elder's inability to deal with a Dear John is his own issue to deal with.  If she wasn't two-timing him, leading him on and lying to him she did nothing wrong sending a Dear John.  Even if she did cheat on him etc.  he is the one responsible for his own reaction.

I don't think it is fair to accuse ward members of supporting cheating either.  When it comes to guys going on a mission, different couples set different 'rules' for each other and usually they are not printed up and handed out to all the ward members so they are not really in a position to tell if the rules are being broken.  The rules can change at any time as well.  Some couples have no rules and essentially break up or hit pause on their romance, perhaps planning to see how things are after the mission.  Some decide there will be no dating at all (not practical IMHO).   I told my wife that dating other guys while I was away was OK with me (well, I would tolerate it) as long as she kept it casual, if she wanted to get serious with somebody else, I expected to get a Dear John. Only one boyfriend at a time and I would rather be dumped than cheated on or lied to.  She did date other guys and that helped her to know for sure that I was the one for her.

I think if a guy proposes to a girl before he goes on his mission that he has some insecurity about the relationship and is using a ring to try and counteract that.  Thing is, it is like waving a big red flag daring Satan to come along and mess it up, and the Elder probably feels that insecurity for a reason.  She has the right to break off the engagement any time she wants, for any reason she wants and she is not a hostage to his reaction.  At the same time, until she breaks it off she is obligated to be loyal to her fiance.  If she is not doing that then a parent, sibling or close friend who knows the situation should call them on it privately, but I don't think it is business of the ward in general, nor would the other ward members be in a position to judge.

If a girl is carrying on a romance with some guy while at the same time telling some Elder that she is faithfully and loyally waiting for him, then she is in the wrong.  Whoever it is she is now with shouldn't put up with that either.  A girl who does that is disloyal to both of them, but it may be that nobody but her and God knows she is doing that. 

I've heard that about 90% of couples break up before the end of the mission, so members pretty much expect it to happen.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Lostboy289 said:

Here you go:

 

Ok thank you... so lets translate what you say how the church handled your sin.

The church taught you correct principles , including honesty and integrity

Then you sinned anyway... No church leader called you out... Not publicly... not privately...  No church member rebuked you.

Instead they continued to teach correct principles and let the spirit of God work on you.

You happened to be personally in tune with the spirit and repented... But you mistake it as culture .

 

Now lets compare the treatment of the Girl

Then the church taught this young woman about honesty and integrity just like they do everyone else.

Then she sinned anyways... No church leader called her out... Not publicly... not privately... No church member rebuked her (that is your opinion anyway)

Instead they continued to teach her correct principles and let the spirit of God work on her..

She (at least in your opinion) was not in tune with spirit and did not repent... and again you mistake this as culture.

 

So you are fighting against the culture of the church when both you and her had the exact same cultural exposure and expectations and same treatment when you sinned.

That is not signs of a broken culture or a sign of something the church needs to fix.  It is a sign that both you and the girl have agency and the right to follow the commandments of God or not as you choose.  A right that God himself protected and defended when he cast Satan out. 

You can complain about "culture" all you want but the simple fact is that you used your agency to respond to your sins...  And she used her agency to respond to her sins.  But you don't like how she used her agency so you want to take it away from her so that she can only go down paths you think are acceptable.  And that is flat out wrong.

Edited by estradling75
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

So you are fighting against the culture of the church when both you and her had the exact same cultural exposure and expectations and same treatment when you sinned.

That is not signs of a broken culture or a sign of something the church needs to fix.  It is a sign that both you and the girl have agency and the right to follow the commandments of God or not as you choose.  A right that God himself protected and defended when he cast Satan out. 

You can complain about "culture" all you want but the simple fact is that you used your agency to respond to your sins...  And she used her agency to respond to her sins.  But you don't like how she used her agency so you want to take it away from her so that she can only go down paths you think are acceptable.  And that is flat out wrong.

Being part of a YSA gave me an almost blunt level of insight into how people saw the sins of those around them. Young people talk after all.

-When a convert who was struggling with a smoking addiction took smoke breaks during sacrament meeting and institute class, people talked.

-When one girl came back from summer break noticeably pregnant, people talked.

-When one guy who was having some struggles in life didn't at all hide the fact that he started regularly drinking, people talked.

But when this happened, everyone thought it was either funny gossip, or acted like it was great ("they make such a great couple", ect), not even caring that one of their friends was devastated. THAT is flat out wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Lostboy289 said:

Being part of a YSA gave me an almost blunt level of insight into how people saw the sins of those around them. Young people talk after all.

-When a convert who was struggling with a smoking addiction took smoke breaks during sacrament meeting and institute class, people talked.

-When one girl came back from summer break noticeably pregnant, people talked.

-When one guy who was having some struggles in life didn't at all hide the fact that he started regularly drinking, people talked.

But when this happened, everyone thought it was either funny gossip, or acted like it was great ("they make such a great couple", ect), not even caring that one of their friends was devastated. THAT is flat out wrong.

And those are things they did in spite of what the church teaches them to do, not because of it.

The church is not a new car showroom, it is a garage.  Everybody arrives broken, with problems, flaws, dents, cracks, flaws etc,  Some are just dented and scratched, some are a wreck.  While the church will help them get better over time they won't become perfect.

Don't let the sins of others get in the way of overcoming your own sins.  Show them a better example if you can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Lostboy289 said:

Being part of a YSA gave me an almost blunt level of insight into how people saw the sins of those around them. Young people talk after all.

-When a convert who was struggling with a smoking addiction took smoke breaks during sacrament meeting and institute class, people talked.

-When one girl came back from summer break noticeably pregnant, people talked.

-When one guy who was having some struggles in life didn't at all hide the fact that he started regularly drinking, people talked.

But when this happened, everyone thought it was either funny gossip, or acted like it was great ("they make such a great couple", ect), not even caring that one of their friends was devastated. THAT is flat out wrong.

And so... you want to correct this how...   Wave a magic fairy wand and turn sinners into saints?  You got to know that is not going to happen.

Christ (and his church) is working to make sinners in to saints as fast as each individual will allow them to...  It can go no faster then that.  The only thing you can do about it (the only thing any of us can do about it) is to work on ourselves.  To let go of the slights and the hurts and the comparisons and turn it all over to Christ and let him deal with the dispensing of justice and fairness and handing other peoples flaws

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Id like to weed out cultural acceptance of

33 minutes ago, estradling75 said:

And so... you want to correct this how...   Wave a magic fairy wand and turn sinners into saints?  You got to know that is not going to happen.

Christ (and his church) is working to make sinners in to saints as fast as each individual will allow them to...  It can go no faster then that.  The only thing you can do about it (the only thing any of us can do about it) is to work on ourselves.  To let go of the slights and the hurts and the comparisons and turn it all over to Christ and let him deal with the dispensing of justice and fairness and handing other peoples flaws

There is a massive difference between "love the sinner, hate the sin" and simply being indifferent to the sin.

What Id like to do to correct this is just let it be known that this behavior is not acceptable for a Christlike individual. The same way that we let it be known that pornography, breaking the law of chastity, or violating the word of wisdom is not acceptable. Just getting the message out there in a general sense is enough through a sacrament or even conference talk. And we cannot solve it entirely in a preventative way by telling people don't get serious before their mission. How to handle situations you already are in has to be addressed as well.

Quote

No church leader called you out... Not publicly... not privately...

Privately I was called out by the Bishop when I confessed what I had done.

And the boy I mentioned that took up drinking? He was actually kicked out of his apartment by his member roomates for not promoting Chrislike ideals in their home.

Edited by Lostboy289
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

Would you feel better if the ward held a public stoning?

Oh come on!! Can you please stop with this garbage?! This is both insulting and getting in the way of any intelligent discussion.

You've called me bitter, you've insulted my opinions, and now you are resorting to straw men arguments.

I just said that even coming forward and stating during a sacrament talk or conference that we have a responsibility for the feelings of those we are close to. Even just creating a culture where members know that this isn't acceptable is enough.

Edited by Lostboy289
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You act like the church never talks about honesty or kindness. The rest is up to us to figure out, and in that figuring, people make mistakes. Especially in their youth.

Again... please listen to what people are saying... no one is saying it's great to cheat on someone you're attached to. What they are saying is that there is no covenant made when a girl says she'll wait for a missionary, or even when she says she'll marry a guy. Yes, the right thing to do would be breaking it off with him before taking up with someone else, but AGAIN, most missionaries encourage girls to date while they're gone.

As for whether this should be made a specific issue to preach over the pulpit and whatnot:

 

Quote

26 For behold, it is not meet that I should command in all things; for he that is compelled in all things, the same is a slothful and not a wise servant; wherefore he receiveth no reward.

27 Verily I say, men should be anxiously engaged in a good cause, and do many things of their own free will, and bring to pass much righteousness;

28 For the power is in them, wherein they are agents unto themselves. And inasmuch as men do good they shall in nowise lose their reward.

29 But he that doeth not anything until he is commanded, and receiveth a commandment with doubtful heart, and keepeth it with slothfulness, the same is damned.

30 Who am I that made man, saith the Lord, that will hold him guiltless that obeys not my commandments?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • pam featured this topic
  • pam unfeatured this topic

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share