- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
I wonder if there are occurrences of female genital mutilation among the saints in Africa. I assume that there aren’t any as RMN would probably want to put a halt to that post haste. Roy wrote:
I wonder if there are occurrences of female genital mutilation among the saints in Africa. I assume that there aren’t any as RMN would probably want to put a halt to that post haste.
It tends to be non-Christians, notably Muslims who do that and since most LDS converts come from Christian backgrounds…
Roy wrote:
I wonder if there are occurrences of female genital mutilation among the saints in Africa. I assume that there aren’t any as RMN would probably want to put a halt to that post haste.
Interesting thought. I would hope they’d address that, too.
SamBee wrote:It tends to be non-Christians, notably Muslims who do that and since most LDS converts come from Christian backgrounds…
It’s more common amongst Muslims but Christians in some countries practice it. In 2013, Ethiopia had a 75% female genital mutilation rate with 63% of the country Christian. Eritrea was at 89% and is a majority Christian country.
I’ve just looked up the stats for Eritrea and some sources put Islam at 40%, and there is a figure around 30% for Ethiopia. Either way it’s the parts of Africa nearest the Arabian peninsula who seem keenest on it (no pun intended).
nibbler wrote:
Quote:“We preach tithing to the poor people of the world because the
poor people of the world have had cycles of poverty, generation after generation,” he said. “ That same poverty continues from one generation to another, until people pay their tithing.“ I can see how the principle of tithing can help people learn to do more with less and learn the differences between wants and needs but i
f you’re already poor I’d imagine that life is constantly teaching you those lessons.
What I don’t understand about this claim about the supposed relationship between tithing and breaking out of “cycles of poverty, generation after generation” is that it’s not like Nelson is talking about something like the afterlife where they can easily get away with imagining whatever fantasy scenario they want to and then if their promises and threats are never delivered no one will know the difference for sure either way. He is basically making extremely bold (and reckless in my opinion) claims about real life here when people can easily look at the actual results of paying or not paying tithing after the fact. So what happens if Church members faithfully pay tithing and then can’t afford to pay for their mortgage/rent or even food for their families in the worst cases?
It’s almost like Nelson has never even considered this as a possibility in the first place. And of course, there’s a good chance that top Church leaders will never hear about any real-life cases like this but instead mostly hear faith-promoting anecdotes that lead to confirmation bias. So it’s easy for them to make claims like this when they are not the ones that will have to live with or even acknowledge the results in any cases where this type of prosperity gospel theory fails miserably just like they don’t have to live with the results when young LDS adults rush into marriage ASAP and start having children right away as if it is their sacred duty only to end up divorced or at the very least suffering through a lot of pointless and unnecessary stress early in their marriages.
It looks like many of these top Church leaders have lived rather privileged and sheltered lives. Nelson didn’t even serve a mission. I doubt he has a very good idea what life is really like for average people in some of these countries in Latin America, Africa, the Philippines, etc. But even living in the United States, all you have to do is look at all the people both in and out of the Church that are doing just fine or actually very well financially that have not been paying tithing to clearly see that the “cycle of poverty” absolutely does not continue until people pay tithing in real life. It’s almost like standing up and telling people 2+2=5 with a straight face and expecting them to believe it; but it wouldn’t surprise me if Nelson actually does believe it himself because I’m not sure he has really thought this one through and carefully considered the implications of what he is saying in this case.
DevilsAdvocate wrote:
So what happens if Church members faithfully pay tithing and then can’t afford to pay for their mortgage/rent or even food for their families in the worst cases?
They’ll probably give them support through fast offerings, which will both increase their loyalty to the Church and feel indebted to it.
dande48 wrote:
DevilsAdvocate wrote:
So what happens if Church members faithfully pay tithing and then can’t afford to pay for their mortgage/rent or even food for their families in the worst cases?
They’ll probably give them support through fast offerings, which will both increase their loyalty to the Church and feel indebted to it.
Or stop paying tithing and feel guilty, or stop paying tithing and quietly disbelieve, or go inactive. Almost every outcome allows for strengthened testimonies via confirmation bias. The only one that doesn’t is they stop paying tithing, stay active, and loudly disbelieve. I don’t think I’ve ever seen anything like this. The social costs are too high.
Imagine what would happen if everyone who bought essential oils wasn’t allowed to say when they didn’t work.
Every time I read the thread title: 
[img]https://i.imgur.com/3Yua0sd.png [/img] dande48 wrote:
DevilsAdvocate wrote:
So what happens if Church members faithfully pay tithing and then can’t afford to pay for their mortgage/rent or even food for their families in the worst cases?
They’ll probably give them support through fast offerings, which will both increase their loyalty to the Church and feel indebted to it.
Maybe if they are lucky; it depends on the bishop (leadership roulette). There are plenty of horror stories online of Church members that were denied any assistance when they really needed it after they had been paying tithing for years leading up to that point. In any case, my impression is that the leaders typically view Church welfare as a temporary safety net for cases such as if someone is laid off until they can find a new job, not a permanent solution. But for many people, especially in some of these countries where the Church is growing the fastest poverty is a permanent condition even with their normal employment.
I don’t think Church welfare is a very good answer for that. So what is the long-term answer from leaders like Nelson? Magic, as far as I can tell; basically they are counting on God blessing the poorest members so that they can afford to pay tithing consistently. But I think the more likely scenario is that members will either accumulate large debts, move in with their parents or other family members, etc. or else they will not remain faithful very long if 90% of their net or gross income is simply not enough to cover their basic living expenses .
As someone as privileged as myself, I feel somewhat uncomfortable discussing the situation of the poor in Africa. Suffice it to say, that in my observation the poor tend to be more religious. My theory is that life is more difficult and precarious for the poor. Therefore they need religion more than their wealthier counterparts in order to inject meaning and stability into their lives.
P.S. Thank you Nibbler. I had a hard laugh upon seeing that picture. The monocle is perfect!
To follow up on what Roy just said: I have a huge problem with anything that even implies ridicule of the widow for paying her mite – or even the system that demanded she do so. It is important for people to feel like they are contributing to something about which they care deeply, and it is uncharitable to insist they shouldn’t do so primarily because we believe they shouldn’t.
I also have a huge problem with not providing fast offering assistance for people who are paying tithing in their poverty. However, we have an over-inflated sense of what is necessary in this country. Frankly, the biggest issue when discussing tithing and fast offerings, from a purely statistical perspective, generally isn’t poor people; rather, it is people in the middle and upper-middle classes in wealthier countries.
I know I have been a MUCH bigger drain on the balance at a few times in my life than any average member in Africa.That actually haunts me to a degree when I think about it. Finally, unless we have a solid understanding of the economics of church membership in Africa, we are on incredibly thin ice when we try to discuss this topic from the luxury of our computers in our relatively luxurious homes.
Certain programs like emergency preparedness are probably even better suited to Africa than the developed world. I think also that the meetinghouses will also provide much needed cultural, social and sporting facilities in the places that need them, where corrupt governments will fail to provide for their poor citizens. Also the fact that the church uses local labor provides a degree of self-reliance that aid agencies do not always promote. DevilsAdvocate wrote:
Maybe if they are lucky; it depends on the bishop (leadership roulette). There are plenty of horror stories online of Church members that were denied any assistance when they really needed it after they had been paying tithing for years leading up to that point. In any case, my impression is that the leaders typically view Church welfare as a temporary safety net for cases such as if someone is laid off until they can find a new job, not a permanent solution. But for many people, especially in some of these countries where the Church is growing the fastest poverty is a permanent condition even with their normal employment.
Been there and done that. Withholding of church welfare after many years of paying tithing and fast offerings (some of those years with above average income) was not the cause of my faith crisis but it was a contributing factor to it and to inactivity.I sometimes listen to financial guru types on the radio. I see somewhat the same theme sometimes. The reason some people don’t save isn’t because they don’t want to but because they literally can’t. Even without debt (or cable TV) truly impoverished people are usually just getting by on what they earn, and often not really even getting by (without the help of food banks, etc.). From my point of view most if not all of these financial gurus do not truly understand poverty and the same can be said for the vast majority of our GAs and local leaders. Very few of them have ever known want, much less experienced unmet needs.
In truth this creates a conundrum for me. I may be prideful, and if I am I am – but I refuse to contribute to fast offerings and if asked why I’ll tell them. I will however contribute to local food banks, etc. On the other hand, I do see that fast offerings do benefit some people who need it (and some who don’t). I’m pulled both ways.
Quote:I don’t think Church welfare is a very good answer for that. So what is the long-term answer from leaders like Nelson? Magic, as far as I can tell; basically they are counting on God blessing the poorest members so that they can afford to pay tithing consistently. But I think the more likely scenario is that members will either accumulate large debts, move in with their parents or other family members, etc. or else they will not remain faithful very long if 90% of their net or gross income is simply not enough to cover their basic living expenses .
Agreed. I don’t think they have in mind that people will leave, but I don’t think they fully understand that “blessings” might not always work that way.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.