- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I know we have hashed tithing out around here, but I don’t recall a specific on fast offerings. For the recently released Bishops in this ward, can you tell me if you used fast offerings to help people directly or do all of our donations go in a lump sum to Salt Lake. I want to assist the needy in times of trouble and have been faithful and dedicated to fast offerings all my life, I also donate to other needy charities, so it’s not a lack of desire, it’s a hope that the funds really do go where I hope they go. I believe it’s a stake fast offering budget. Wealthier wards often subsidize wards that run fast offering deficits, but local bishops are always after each ward to be self-sufficient. That is my understanding, although not authoritative. I know this from Ward councils and PEC meetings where the Bishop would always ask us leaders to help clear off the fast offering deficit. I would wait for others to also share their piece of the pie knowledge here — perhaps anyone who acted as a clerk. All money gets paid into the bank and sits in a central account. But like SD said, a stake is encouraged to give Welfare support that doesn’t exceed the FO contributions. If a stake runs with funds to spare then it is will be used to offset stakes (such as those in developing countries) who need more. I like fast offering and humanitarian aid. They feel like good, pure programs. I’ve considered giving more to those two by adjusting my definition of tithing (after expenses or something). Probably not officially acceptable, but I don’t think The Lord would mind as much as the administrators.
SD is correct. All excesses are sent to SLC to be used where needed. Ironcially, because of much higher costs of living, first world countries often are subsidized by poorer countries. It sounds unbelievable at first to lots of people, but it makes sense when it’s broken out on a cost of living basis.
All money goes to a central account in SLC. But each ward and each stake has precise accounting on what goes in and what goes out. Each ward is expected to “live within its means”, i.e. take in more than they pay out. While bishop, as long as I paid out less than I took in for the ward, my SP never questioned me. But as soon as I went over, he wanted to review every expenditure, and wanted to know what I was doing to get people off welfare.
This is repeated at the stake level. The stake is expected to spend less than they pay out. Wealthier wards will subsidize the poorer wards. If they don’t, the SP then needs to answer to his Area Authority.
And Ray is exactly right about Third World countries subsidizing the United States. We were told by a visiting 70 in a Bishop’s training session that Mexico has a net surplus of fast offerings, while the USA is a net user of fast offerings.
Sheldon’s description actually is more accurate. Thanks! Sheldon wrote:And Ray is exactly right about Third World countries subsidizing the United States. We were told by a visiting 70 in a Bishop’s training session that Mexico has a net surplus of fast offerings, while the USA is a net user of fast offerings.
Not questioning the truthfulness of this statement, I just find it deeply troubling. I just can’t bear the thought that poor people – even for a brief time – pay for large mortgages of people living in the United States. I know a ward whose bishop pays for EFY for “needy” kids with fast offering funds, and I realize this is an exception to the rule. Perhaps it’s more prevalent than I thought.
Roadrunner, I am with you, that wasn’t the answer I was expecting to read. For the past 24 hours I’ve been stunned thinking that the impoverished, with no floor and little else are fronting our 3 car families. Clearly all things are not equal. I actually am contemplating upping my donation just to offset that issue. Unfortunately, it won’t really help, because some one in California whose never heard this, will be using some Guatamalans money to keep things going.
It’s weird – in a subtle way, it’s kind of a Lamanite saving a Nephite. (I know don’t everyone start explaining the disconnect, but that’s how it feels. The poorer humbler, less able are carrying the abundant (?) ).
I know our ward has sometimes paid out more than comes in, and some months has a surplus. The net over the last several years since 2008 may be slightly negative, just a guess without doing the research. To answer the original question yes the funds go directly to help people in need. Roadrunner wrote:Sheldon wrote:And Ray is exactly right about Third World countries subsidizing the United States. We were told by a visiting 70 in a Bishop’s training session that Mexico has a net surplus of fast offerings, while the USA is a net user of fast offerings.
Not questioning the truthfulness of this statement, I just find it deeply troubling. I served a mission in rural and remote Guatemala areas and ever since then crushing poverty troubles me deeply. I just can’t bear the thought that poor people – even for a brief time – pay for large mortgages of people living in the United States.
I know a ward whose bishop pays for EFY for “needy” kids with fast offering funds, and I realize this is an exception to the rule. Perhaps it’s more prevalent than I thought. I am surprised and disappointed that this happens.
This is going to sound weird at first, but even though I was upset when I first learned that the poor often help the not-as-poor, I actually like it after having had a chance to reflect deeply on it. In cases where someone could cut way back and doesn’t, it’s different, but in cases where economic differences force unequal costs of living, it is what it is – and I think this situation actually is more of an example of what Zion really means, at the most basic level, than my initial gut reaction allowed me to see. Having said that, I wish the wealthy paid so much in fast offerings that this changed. I think that is the ideal, but, lacking that, I am okay with the imbalance that exists currently and the “power to help those in need” it gives to the objectively poor.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.