- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
So over holiday I went to my in-laws and did my best not to cause any troubles. For the most part I think I did fairly well 
During the visit my Bro-in-law, who is a young bishop (called in his early 30’s and has 5 small children at home), was bemoaning the amount of time and effort tithing settlement was.
Canucknuckle: “If someone doesn’t make an appointment and your exec. secretary isn’t able to arrange one for you, then why not just accept that the individual doesn’t really want to see you for tithing settlement.”
Bro-in-law: “I don’t feel comfortable with making the decision to declare them a full (or partial or non) tithe payer on my own.”
Canucknuckle: “Why does it matter, just leave the form blank.”
Bro-in-law: “I am responsible for reporting the tithing status for each member of my ward to the Stake.”
Canucknuckle: “Oh, is see the conundrum.” (not really but I felt I should not press any further)
So this has been stirring in my mind for a few days now and I just can’t shake one thing from my mind. Why does the church track the tithing status for each member? You are asked if you are a full tithe payer in the TR interview (I know that this only needs to be answered every 2 years now). So why does anyone need to track this info. What possible benefit can having this stat provide? Anyone care to help me out on this one?
On a side note, my Bro-in-law said that his SP told him the since TR interviews are only every other year, it was his duty as a Bishop to take away the TR of any member who did not declare they were a full tithe payer at tithing settlement. Also he was told that if a member ever stopped paying a full tithe and then started up again, they would have to pay a full tithe for one full year before they could be considered a full tithe payer again.
“On a side note, my Bro-in-law said that his SP told him the since TR interviews are only every other year, it was his duty as a Bishop to take away the TR of any member who did not declare they were a full tithe payer at tithing settlement. Also he was told that if a member ever stopped paying a full tithe and then started up again, they would have to pay a full tithe for one full year before they could be considered a full tithe payer again.” I think this is another case of local leaders making up their own rules and failing to consult the handbooks.
The tracking is for statistical purposes and alson to help determine when new units are created. It takes a certain number of full tithe paying Melchizedek PH holders to form the leadership base for a new ward. Tithing is one of the measurements of faithfulness. It absolutely has nothing to do with dangling the carrot called the TR. 😆 What other corporation is able to collect revenue by threatening someone’s status in the next life?
And, of course, the Lord doesn’t need the money….paying tithing is for the individual….obedience is a good thing.
:yawn: Personally, I don’t have any interest over the year after meeting my family’s needs, so I simply don’t owe any. I’ll probably sign up for settement this year and tell our little punk branch president that, just to watch his face.
Sometimes this stuff is fun.
For me there is another reason for the Tithing settlement. To verify that the payments on the church records match the members records. In the US, there are tax return considerations. Imagine how many members there are with the last name of Brown.
The Stake President . . . I won’t say it. That’s all. 😈 In all the areas where I have lived, I have never had a Bishop or Stake President who denied temple recommends to members who didn’t attend settlement, much less pull them before they expire naturally. This is the sort of thing that drives me nuts.
The Church uses tithing payment numbers as part of the calculation for the creation of new wards and branches and, especially, the building of temples.
Mike wrote:For me there is another reason for the Tithing settlement. To verify that the payments on the church records match the members
records. In the US, there are tax return considerations. Imagine how many members there are with the last name of Brown.
I completely understand the need to verify records and feel this is best done when the financial clerk passes out the tithing summary statements prior to tithing settlement. It is then that members can check their receipts and verify the amounts.
Old-Timer wrote:The Church uses tithing payment numbers as part of the calculation for the creation of new wards and branches and, especially, the building of temples.
I always thought that all that mattered was the number of priesthood holders in an area that determined if there were sufficient numbers to create a new unit. But I guess I can see the benefit of using tithing status to further gauge “active” membership numbers.
Thanks all for providing the further insights that I needed.
When I was a stake clerk back in the day tithing faithfulness, the percent of a ward population that declared themselves full tithe payers, was used as Ray said to determine where new buildings would be built, formation of new units, and and also to determine budget allotments when the church took over supplying all budget monies. Get your bro-in-law to ask the stake president whether they’d also have to vomit up all the beer they drank before repenting. Yikes!
Wow, I know that’s second or third hand information (so may very well have been misinterpreted), but SP asking bishops to make members pay for a full year before receiving their TR back is an interpretation of “full tithe payer” is certainly not delineated in the CHI. The question is this: “Are you a full tithe payer?” The member decides what that means. I have been in meetings discussing how to get more members to the temple. When the Bp was asked what was the most common reason members did not have a TR, the response was “tithing, by far.” It was also presented that “generally” in our stake, paying a full tithe meant paying it for six months. I suggested to the Bp that rather than ask if those members were paying tithing for 6 months, just stick to the question in the CHI and let them decide. I got some chuckles and strange glances, as well as some “not a bad idea’s”, but I don’t think the policy changed. Oh well. Some bishops in my stake reportedly DO pull recommends if members report they are not full tithers at tithing settlement. Tithing Settlement seems unnecessarily taxing on the Bishop’s time. A settlement or balancing of records is important but can be done as simply as the financial clerk passing out the sheets showing what the church has, with a note saying “make an appointment and come in if this doesn’t agree with your records”. Or, have it all done online. A similar thing could be done to declare if people are full tithers or not. I understand the utility of bishops getting to spend some personal time with all the ward families, and that’s cool, but why not spread those meetings out evenly through the year and not just have it be focused on tithing?
It’s interesting that TITHING is the one commandment that needs to be reported yearly in order to determine when and where the church can build new units. Obviously this is a money thing, not a need for determining active leadership since that can easily be determined by the “Members with Recommends” list.
I have never been told to use Tithing Settlement in any kind of coercive way. I haven’t done so on my own. I agree tithing settlement is a hassle in regards to the reports to turn in, but I enjoy sitting with the families and seeing how they are doing and letting know I appreciate them. I do not attend tithing settlement. Period. The entire concept does not feel “right” to me. I think it is a relic from the old days when members paid tithing with goods and barter.
It needs to go away, IMO.
Of course…I think the entire tithing requirement for “exultation” needs to go away. So what do I know.
Cnsl1 wrote:
It’s interesting that TITHING is the one commandment that needs to be reported yearly in order to determine when and where the church can build new units. Obviously this is a money thing, not a need for determining active leadership since that can easily be determined by the “Members with Recommends” list.I think it also has an effect on Temples. I was on my mission in France in the late 90s. A visiting 70 (don’t remember who) spoke at stake conference and said “a lot of people have asked me this weekend why France has no temple. Until more of you pay a full tithe, there will be no temple in France.”
They built one about 10 years later, so I guess they started paying tithing. Or maybe it had nothing to do with it and the 70 was speaking out of turn.
I went to Tithing settlement yesterday. So, I asked my Bishop why do we have this meeting every year? The only thing he could come up with, to reconcile your records of payment to the churches record.
For now, that’s good enough for me.
The Financial Clerk printed out the wrong record for me. When the Bishop tried to do it, it came back that
I didn’t make any contributions. With a common name like Smith, Jones or Brown, it’s easy to make mistakes.
Wow I learned something today. After reading the tithing post at Pure Mormonism I now get the terminology. “Income” historically is not the same thing as “wages.” It’s easier to get when you think about a business – there is revenue or sales, and then after the expenses of doing business there are earnings or income. I found it very interesting that Income Tax in the beginning was meant to tax income, not wages. The way the amount of “income” is found includes deductions for living expenses etc. if it was a Wage Tax it would be simple, right off the top with no deductions or allowances. Sadly we are moving toward a true wage tax, but that is beside the point.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.