Has the raised bar been beneficial to missionary work?

[pelagius]

My former bishop told me, when I questioned him about it, that he would've made me lose 14 lbs before he would've signed my call, no matter how healthy I was, because, "The Lord set a standard and has me to see it met."

Nevermind that my physician said I was fine, a BMI chart from SLC would've trumped my desires to serve. That one man can have that kind of arbitrary power bothers me. And, I have a connection to Bloomington and that stake that influences my reaction to the type of thinking that leads to some kids being on the receiving end of this kind of thinking.

What is the maximum BMI that is allowed?

[Topper]

What is the maximum BMI that is allowed?

Don't worry, you pass. More importantly, the BMI test doens't apply to mission presidents.

[wuapinmon]

I know lots of counter-example anecdotes.

And yet, stuff like this still shows up. The entire notion of raising the bar denies the Atonement to people. I find it repugnant. Anything that flows from that line of thinking is equally corporate and/or bureaucratic.

[wuapinmon]

Don't worry, you pass. More importantly, the BMI test doens't apply to mission presidents.

They have a height/weight chart. For 5'10" it was 258 lbs.

[Green Monstah]

Interesting data.

I don't believe the "raise the bar" rhetorical or administrative change is affecting the numbers of missionaries serving.

Really? Look at the number of missionaries serving in 2002 in JL's graph. Then look at the number of missionaries serving from 2003-2012.

[Topper]

They have a height/weight chart. For 5'10" it was 258 lbs.

Well BMI charts don't apply to Pelagius. He is 6 foot, 230 with a body fat of 4 percent. Plus he's aiming for bigger and better things, MP and beyond. He qualifies.

[The_Douger]

What is the maximum BMI that is allowed?

I had a Polynesian kid tell me a couple days ago it was higher for them. I am not sure if that's true or not.

[wuapinmon]

Well BMI charts don't apply to Pelagius. He is 6 foot, 230 with a body fat of 4 percent. Plus he's aiming for bigger and better things, MP and beyond. He qualifies.

Bully for him! What about the introverted fat kid who is ugly and has few friends, but wants to challenge himself by serving, but won't have to courage to try again if he applies and is denied the first time? How do we quantify that loss to the world, to the Church, and to the boy? Isaiah 53:2

[Topper]

Really? Look at the number of missionaries serving in 2002 in JL's graph. Then look at the number of missionaries serving from 2003-2012.

We would also need to see what the available pool was. Just seeing a decline does not inform us as to what the percentage of available eligibles was. Perhaps it did make a difference, but the mere reference you made does not lead to the undeniable conclusion that RTB affected the numbers of persons serving.

[Topper]

Bully for him! What about the introverted fat kid who is ugly and has few friends, but wants to challenge himself by serving, but won't have to courage to try again if he applies and is denied the first time? How do we quantify that loss to the world, to the Church, and to the boy? Isaiah 53:2

Talk to the bureaucrats, not me.

However, if they possess data that statistically speaking those who fall outside of adopted standards that the missionary will in all likelihood not succeed, you will need to refute that data for that missionary.

[Moliere]

Absolutely.

In spite of all the hand-wringing about "raising the bar", we have more missionaries out than ever before.

Bishops are bending over backwards because they have to get around the new rules. And the fact there are more missionaries has everything to do with the age changes. When kids go straight out of high school we lose less of them, which was the main reason given for changing the age. Not to mention its vastly easier for women to go now.

While raising the bar probably hasn't significantly impacted the number of missionaries serving, it has resulted in some stakes setting arbitrary goals for prospective missionaries, which I think is unacceptable. Sure no stake president is going to keep a kid home if he doesn't get his eagle, but even making kids think obtaining eagle is required leads to unnecessary personal conflict for some.

I would probably conclude that the list wuap posted is more hurtful than you think.

[TripletDaddy]

what about a church service mission for those that don't meet health standards? The scriptures teach that desires lead to service callings but they don't specify traditional proselyting missions.

[pelagius]

Well BMI charts don't apply to Pelagius. He is 6 foot, 230 with a body fat of 4 percent. Plus he's aiming for bigger and better things, MP and beyond. He qualifies.

Well, Wuap's data point is a BMI of 37. You give me a little time and I could be over a 37. My natural eating habits lead to a gain of about 15-20 a year; I naturally eat way too many calories. I only maintain a reasonable body fat level if I'm tracking and hitting my Macros

[wuapinmon]

Talk to the bureaucrats, not me.

However, if they possess data that statistically speaking those who fall outside of adopted standards that the missionary will in all likelihood not succeed, you will need to refute that data for that missionary.

I reject even the line of thinking that relies on stats and likelihoods for allowing someone the chance to serve. It is repugnant to reduce a desire to serve to probabilities. And, speaking to the bureaucrats will only get you grief, or worse. To challenge LDS thinking is apostasy. Maybe I'm there.

[wuapinmon]

what about a church service mission for those that don't meet health standards? The scriptures teach that desires lead to service callings but they don't specify traditional proselyting missions.

I'd be fine with that if it didn't create a hierarchy of "righteousness" or some other Utah cultural creation. I can only imagine that it would. It injects yet another level of potential arbitrariness into a very human system that aspires to divine inspiration.