Doctrinal History of Tithing

[Anonymous]

Thanks everyone for your opinions, you all have been very helpful. I do want to give money to help those in need, I definitely feel that is something healthy and right for everyone in life to do. I have a difficult time with the business ventures of the church, because I feel like if we have that much surplus, we could be making a much bigger difference in helping the poor and needy then say, investment in a mall or real estate. Does anyone know if the church has ever made a strict command of 10% being tithed to the church? Or is that just an unspoken rule? I was thinking about it, and realized in all my upbringing, I was always taught you just pay 10% tithing, it was always by default to the church, but I never heard anything indicating that it had to be paid to the church to count. I could see myself paying some tithing to the church for ‘my part’ in building maintenance, etc., and the rest to other organizations that are not interested in making money through business ventures.

Anyway, I appreciate everyone’s comments here, they have really helped broaden my perspective.

[Anonymous]

Roadlesstraveled wrote:

Thanks everyone for your opinions, you all have been very helpful. I do want to give money to help those in need, I definitely feel that is something healthy and right for everyone in life to do. I have a difficult time with the business ventures of the church, because I feel like if we have that much surplus, we could be making a much bigger difference in helping the poor and needy then say, investment in a mall or real estate. Does anyone know if the church has ever made a strict command of 10% being tithed to the church? Or is that just an unspoken rule? I was thinking about it, and realized in all my upbringing, I was always taught you just pay 10% tithing, it was always by default to the church, but I never heard anything indicating that it had to be paid to the church to count. I could see myself paying some tithing to the church for ‘my part’ in building maintenance, etc., and the rest to other organizations that are not interested in making money through business ventures.

Anyway, I appreciate everyone’s comments here, they have really helped broaden my perspective.

For a temple recommend, and to be declared a full-tithe payer, you have to give your 10% to the Church. However, nothing would stop you personally from paying your 10% to different organizations for the good of your character etcetera, but I this wouldn’t put you on full-tithing status with the Church…..that’s my opinion.

[Anonymous]

Roadlesstraveled wrote:

and the rest to other organizations that are not interested in making money through business ventures.

Just as an added dose of reality, I can’t recommend enough to thoroughly investigate all religious or secular charities before donating money to them. To be blunt (and my usual cynical self), most charities exist to raise money to keep existing and raising money. Precious little of their funds make it to programs to benefit whoever it is they say they help.

Here is a pretty good summary article that gives tips on evaluating charity organizations:

http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/savinganddebt/consumeractionguide/p58021.asp

[Anonymous]

Quote:

most charities exist to raise money to keep existing and raising money

There has never been a “successful” organization of ANY kind in the history of the world that wasn’t successful at raising enough money to continue its existence. There has never been a successful church that didn’t “fundraise” in some manner. With any organization that has philanthropic giving as part of its mission, cash influx must be greater than cash outflow in order to be successful in carrying out its mission to give.

I have no problem with disagreements about “how” the Church uses its money, but I can’t condemn it for having a corporate component – especially if that corporate component allows it to use its members’ donations to fund meetinghouses, temples, colleges, missionary work, etc. and to feed, clothe, house and otherwise bless the poor and suffering. Frankly, and this is just me being me, I also want its corporate component to be profitable – specifically so it doesn’t have to tap into its donations during difficult financial times simply to survive.

One last thing just for perspective:

Many people use the failed bank attempt of Joseph’s day as “proof” that he wasn’t really a prophet (since God would have helped a real prophet know how to invest the Church’s money successfully), while many of those same people use the Church’s current financial success as “proof” that our current leaders aren’t really prophets (since God would use the Church’s financial success differently or not allow it to be so successful financially in the first place). In this case, the issue isn’t the Church’s financial success; it’s the outlook of the people evalutating it.

That alone is worth recognizing and considering.

[Anonymous]

I meant my comment above more towards the idea of giving donations to other organizations in lieu of donating tithing to the LDS Church. The LDS Church does, in my opinion, use the funds in a fairly responsible way, relatively speaking.

There are “charities” out there that really do little else of substance beyond fund-raising and paying their directors.

[Anonymous]

I understood what you meant, Brian. I just was riffing with whatever struck me, as it my tendency.

[Anonymous]

Brian Johnston wrote:

There are “charities” out there that really do little else of substance beyond fund-raising and paying their directors.

Yes, especially animal charities which are often way over endowed. The guide dogs groups for example have more money than they can use.

[Author]

Posts