- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Quote:
“It’s none of your business how the church spends THEIR money.” – Wade Englund, LDS apoligist.
And there you have what bothers me in a nutshell. It is a classic case of power without accountability. And of course, it’s entirely their business how much of my money I give to the church.
Anyway, enough said on this one…sorry. I need to leave it alone for my own inner peace, There is nothing we can do about it.
Quote:“It’s none of your business how the church spends THEIR money.” – Wade Englund, LDS apoligist.
I have no idea who this wade guy is but for me personally he does have a point.
1) I do not currently pay tithing.
2) I don’t feel particular angst about my former tithing (it’s gone, let it go!)
3) I believe the church to be fiscally responsible. I don’t see them paying out million dollar bonuses or taking the leadership on extravagant “retreats.”
So, for me and only me, I support the church having the freedom to do whatever the church leadership thinks the church oughtta do with the funds.
I reserve the right to divide our family’s charity budget as DW and I see fit, based on whatever criteria is important to us. The church has many donation opportunities that we find to be worthwhile (PEF is a big one for us).
Roy wrote:Quote:“It’s none of your business how the church spends THEIR money.” – Wade Englund, LDS apoligist.
I have no idea who this wade guy is but for me personally he does have a point.
1) I do not currently pay tithing.
….
So, for me and only me, I support the church having the freedom to do whatever the church leadership thinks the church oughtta do with the funds….
I agree Roy, which is why I can no longer pay tithing.
But what about when we were paying?
Would it change your mind if you were paying tithing?
Do MEMBERS who donate to a non profit charity (church) have a right to know how their donation is being spent?
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
A right to know? No – that is a legal term, and once I give someone money without stipulation, I have no right to demand to know how it is used. A right to want to know? Yes. Absolutely.
A right not to give if how the money is used is unknown? Yes.
Old-Timer wrote:A right to know? No – that is a legal term, and once I give someone money without stipulation, I have no right to demand to know how it is used.
A right to want to know? Yes. Absolutely.
A right not to give if how the money is used is unknown? Yes.
Ray beat me to the punch but I will add my 2 cents.
First I believe it is important to emphasize that we seem to agree that as non-current contributers the church doesn’t owe us any answers.
I believe that some level of transparency to the “stakeholders” is the moral thing to do. I can only begin to speculate whether the moral thing is also the right thing. What would more transparency reveal? Would it shake testimonies and ruin currently faithfull families? Give more amunition to those that hate the church?
The church is being more transparent about it’s history and it is a painful process. Maybe financial transparency would be similar.
In any event, I retain my right to decide my actions. The church legally defines my tithing as donations without any stipulation and my callings as volunteer labor. I have the right to place stipulations on those donations (as I have with the PEF, humanitarian aid, and fast offerings). I have the right to place stipulations on my volunteer labor (as long as it fits within my work and family schedule.)
:thumbup: So, are you suggesting that we have two options. 1. Either pay tithing and keep your mouth shut, and don’t question.
Or
2. Don’t pay tithing, complain, and just get used to the fact that you will never see your children married in the temple?
Is that it then? We have no right to know how tithing is spent. And if you one doesn’t pay tithing, they have no right to participate in temple worship?
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
No, I am not suggesting those two options as the only options. There are lots of options. What I’m saying, very simply, is that the organization that uses the donations gets to make the rules for how that money is used (in every, single case imaginable, no matter its nature) – and, if it is a non-profit organization, there is no legal duty for full financial disclosure, thus, no “right” to know, in detail, how the donations are used. That’s all I’m saying.
I didn’t say one thing about my view on tithing as a requirement of temple attendance, and it’s not relevant to this thread. That is a completely separate issue.
Old-Timer wrote:… tithing as a requirement of temple attendance, and it’s not relevant to this thread. That is a completely separate issue.
I disagree. I think it is very relevant.
Any time tithing or church finances are the subject of a thread, temple recommends are going to be relevant to the discussion.
Especially when someone makes the argument that one can always just not pay tithing if they don’t like the “rules” of the church. Which is what I hear quite often btw.
It simply is not that easy…and that it why we are talking about temple recommends now.
This is just the logical, natural, progression of the thread. Most people reading it, are asking and thinking what I wrote.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
Quote:Especially when someone makes the argument that one can always just not pay tithing if they don’t like the “rules” of the church.
I didn’t say that, either – although it is perfectly true.
🙂 In fact, a number of people here have made that exact choice for that exact reason. I know it’s not easy and that it’s painful often, but it absolutely is an option.What I actually said, although not in these exact words, is that someone can refuse to pay tithing if financial transparency is important enough to them. I didn’t add “important enough to over-ride other reasons for paying tithing, like attending the temple” – but the issue in this post is using the funds generated by the for-profit entities to purchase land. Centrally, it’s not about financial transparency, since reasonable transparency is required in the for-profit arena and exists in this case. The only issue is whether or not the funds are co-mingled – and there simply isn’t a “right” to know that within a non-profit organization. It boils down to whether or not someone trusts or doesn’t trust that particular claim – that the funds are not co-mingled.
Old-Timer wrote:Quote:Especially when someone makes the argument that one can always just not pay tithing if they don’t like the “rules” of the church.
I didn’t say that, either – although it is perfectly true.
🙂 In fact, a number of people here have made that exact choice for that exact reason. I know it’s not easy and that it’s painful often, but it absolutely is an option.What I actually said, although not in these exact words, is that someone can refuse to pay tithing if financial transparency is important enough to them. I didn’t add “important enough to over-ride other reasons for paying tithing, like attending the temple” – but the issue in this post is using the funds generated by the for-profit entities to purchase land. Centrally, it’s not about financial transparency, since reasonable transparency is required in the for-profit arena and exists in this case. The only issue is whether or not the funds are co-mingled – and there simply isn’t a “right” to know that within a non-profit organization. It boils down to whether or not someone trusts or doesn’t trust that particular claim – that the funds are not co-mingled.
Okay. Maybe Roy made that claim?
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
cwald wrote:So, are you suggesting that we have two options.
1. Either pay tithing and keep your mouth shut, and don’t question.
Or
2. Don’t pay tithing, complain, and just get used to the fact that you will never see your children married in the temple?
I know this is off-topic. But I wish I had been gutsy enough when I was young to: have a civil wedding, wait the year, get sealed. I could have had the people there who were really important to me beyond just the temple-recommend holders.
Old-Timer wrote:The Church is going to send extensive aid to the Phillipines, and part of their ability to do so is because they own food-producing land (including ranches) on which they can grow products for a pittance compared to what it would cost to buy those products from others.
Win/win.Old-Timer wrote:No, I am not suggesting those two options as the only options. There are lots of options.
What I’m saying, very simply, is that the organization that uses the donations gets to make the rules for how that money is used (in every, single case imaginable, no matter its nature) – and, if it is a non-profit organization, there is no legal duty for full financial disclosure, thus, no “right” to know, in detail, how the donations are used. That’s all I’m saying.
I didn’t say one thing about my view on tithing as a requirement of temple attendance, and it’s not relevant to this thread. That is a completely separate issue.
“They” are not the organisation. “We” are. So it’s either “God’s” money or “our” money. It should never be “their” money.
In the UK, as a charity, I do have a right to know. The UK church had to publish annual accounts. So too in Canada.
I get all of that mackay11, but the rules are different in the US. As I have said, I would like transparency for many reasons, but there also are reasons I couldn’t care less about it. The question wasn’t about what we think ought to happen; it was about whether we have a “right” to a detailed accounting. We don’t here in the US. What I’m saying is that once I give my money to an organization, no strings attached, there are no strings attached. I have the right to ask for an accounting of how the money was used, but I have no right to get that accounting. I have no recourse to demand it and be given it. It no longer is my money; it is the organization’s money. Therefore, it is up to “them” to decide if they give a detailed accounting – not me.
Also, saying it is God’s money gives me less of a “right” to receive a detailed accounting, since, theologically, it’s rather thin ice to make demands on God. Of course, I can believe that those who administer the funds aren’t automatically acting as God would act – but, seriously, at that point it turns into nothing more than an argument about personal inclinations and beliefs, since there is no objective way to confirm what God would do with it.
I’ve tried hard in this thread to avoid the general should or shouldn’t of transparency – since the question was about the use of for-profit funds and the question of rights.
cwald wrote:Old-Timer wrote:Quote:Especially when someone makes the argument that one can always just not pay tithing if they don’t like the “rules” of the church.
I didn’t say that, either – although it is perfectly true.
🙂 In fact, a number of people here have made that exact choice for that exact reason. I know it’s not easy and that it’s painful often, but it absolutely is an option.Okay. Maybe Roy made that claim?
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
My decision not to pay tithing has nothing to do with transparency. It is a result of being disillusioned with the tithing=blessings model. I just don’t believe that God decides how he will interact in my life based upon if I cut that check every month based on my experience. Right or wrong, this is one of the reasons that I was given for why we pay tithing and the one that became my primary motivation.
My not paying tithing just gives me a sense of detachment. It is not personal for me.
I am saying that we can place stipulations on our donations. The church leadership won’t like it much and won’t consider it tithing. This will most likely mean that the individual won’t be able to renew a TR. For someone that has grown up all their lives in the church that might sound like almost as bad as banishment in outer darkness. I remember when my bishop confiscated my recommend. Even now, it’s not an easy road but it does get better.
I also believe in agitating for change, not because I have a right to the change but because I believe in working towards a better tomorrow. I hope for many things to change in the church. If I were to rank them by order of priority then financial transparency would be pretty low on my list. It is ok if someone elses priority list is different than mine and if this remains an important issue for someone even after they decide not to pay tithing.
Old-Timer wrote:The question wasn’t about what we think ought to happen; it was about whether we have a “right” to a detailed accounting. We don’t here in the US.
One way to “agitate for change” is to work to change the law. I have great respect for people that have given of themselves to help shape the world that we live in today. I don’t think I am as ambitious/passionate as they are/were but I admire them nonetheless.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.