- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
All are good reasons why tithing needs to be left between the individual and God alone. We just can’t seem to live without placing expectations on our neighbor. Thatis one of the struggles we are given the opportunity to work on. Rob4Hope wrote:When I start to pay tithing again, what kinds of problems will I get if I pay on my income AFTER expenses? I’m sure I will get spoken to.
Actually I don’t think anyone would notice. Bishops I know don’t really look at how much you pay – they simply ask if you are a full tithe payer. There may be exceptions but there is really no way a local bishop would know a) how much money you gross b) how much money you pay.
There are many individuals in my ward who pay directly to the church office building and local leaders get no reports about that. My father in law pays tithing once every two years for tax reasons. Some people in my ward live off of tribal money and they pay less than $100 per year in tithing. It’s all over the place.
If you tell the bishop and SP you are a full tithe payer it’s highly likely they will take you at your word.
Rob4Hope wrote:I STRONGLY agree that what is paid is self determined. However, there is cultural pressure, sometimes intrusive (like BYU and COB interference — which I think would be a really good case for a lawsuit IMHO)
This would be a difficult lawsuit because there are often excemptions for employment by religious institutions. If the employment requires that you live the standards of the religion and you do not, then you can be legally fired. Similar to the unmarried female teacher at a catholic school that was fired for getting pregnant.
Roy wrote:Rob4Hope wrote:I STRONGLY agree that what is paid is self determined. However, there is cultural pressure, sometimes intrusive (like BYU and COB interference — which I think would be a really good case for a lawsuit IMHO)
This would be a difficult lawsuit because there are often exceptions for employment by religious institutions. If the employment requires that you live the standards of the religion and you do not, then you can be legally fired. Similar to the unmarried female teacher at a catholic school that was fired for getting pregnant.
Sad.
And, being a right to work state, people in Utah can be fired at any time with no reason given. I think, however, it is rather intrusive for people to compare what you pay to an organization from which you are being paid. The government does it, so why not the church. It is still intrusive in IMHO….and wrong.
Rob4Hope wrote:Roy wrote:Rob4Hope wrote:I STRONGLY agree that what is paid is self determined. However, there is cultural pressure, sometimes intrusive (like BYU and COB interference — which I think would be a really good case for a lawsuit IMHO)
This would be a difficult lawsuit because there are often exceptions for employment by religious institutions. If the employment requires that you live the standards of the religion and you do not, then you can be legally fired. Similar to the unmarried female teacher at a catholic school that was fired for getting pregnant.
Sad.
And, being a right to work state, people in Utah can be fired at any time with no reason given. I think, however, it is rather intrusive for people to compare what you pay to an organization from which you are being paid. The government does it, so why not the church. It is still intrusive in IMHO….and wrong.
No disrespect intended, Rob, but this part of the thread started with a supposition on your part that a bishop might ask. I’m not saying it’s totally outside the realm of possibility, but unless you can provide some evidence this has occurred or is occurring I’m going to have to take the stance that it does not occur. Even if it does/has, it is not church policy to do it, rather it is a rogue who is answerable to someone who should put a stop to it.
I think I have a quote to support this. Will address when I have a moment in front of my computer. Sent from my SM-N910T using Tapatalk
I know that Bill will probably come on in a few days and mention his latest podcast and I hope he won’t be upset, but he did just release a new podcast The Church CollectiveIt was a good podcast and I enjoyed it and it made me think.
But I want to mention the part that actually struck me really hard.
I have mentioned that one of my main issues is a bit with leaders. Bill has even talked with me once on this issue and I appreciate his time and effort. I have had a hard time describing it (or even actually understanding) the tension I have. My bishop is a great guy and I get along with him great – same with the two previous bishops. Our stake president is great and has a big heart. I know our area rep (or area authority or whatever they are titled). He was in the stake YM group when I was in YM. A great guy with a wonderful wife. The closest “confrontation” I have had with any priesthood leader is when I told my bishop that I don’t support the policy change and as of yet I don’t feel it is of God.
So I don’t feel like I am someone that has an absolute problem with authority or am just some quirky anti-social guy.
In fact my issue isn’t so much with historical church leaders. I am not “OK” with all that I read about church leaders, but given that I am a constant sinner I feel I have come to a place where I can give them a break – in fact I think a “huge” break. But in order to do that, I have to look at leaders, including current leaders, much differently. Even though I have been whining on this site as a classic Fowler stage 4 kind of a guy lately, I see that my locus of authority is much more between me and my God than the leaders as intermediaries. I should listen to what church leaders say, but it is up to me to get confirmation from God before I am bound to act on anything they say. But I keep hearing them say, often indirectly and via policy, “no – you MUST see the leaders of the church as central and superseding to your relationship with God and revelation from him”.
So what is my issue with leaders? I don’t think this fully explains it, but I think it comes down to they over-extend their speaking for God / authority and they assume way to often that they know exactly what God wants for other individuals. I have always been very empathetic and maybe it bothers me because I see others getting hurt by bad advice. I also look at what “advice” has been given and it seems like they are giving any
goodrevelations in my lifetime – in fact they have not given ANYrevelation that I can see. I can see that the church does good. I am not blind to that. The welfare system is great (a bit “US” focused vs. anybody that needs help, but 1 church can’t solve all the worlds issues). But policy after policy after teaching has done harm to people. I was in my house alone I think it was last April watching conference when Elder Ballard said, “We will not, we can not, lead you astray” I yelled at the TV (BTW – that didn’t help
state farmSo let me tie in Bills podcast with leaders. At about 40:55 to 45:00 in the podcast he talks about a minister that wants to pay tribute to a transvestite that committed suicide. Now I could not even imagine MY church trying to help, but that isn’t what really got me. It was the humility of the minister that asked the trans community if she (the minister) should say the prayer at the service or if it would be better for a trans person to give it. Now that is humility and serving. I know someone that had an infant die. I thought at the time about the family might not be so hip on the bishop being in charge of it. Then I went and read from the handbook that, “A member of the stake presidency, an Area Seventy, or a General Authority presides at funeral services he attends. The person who is conducting consults him in advance and recognizes him during the service.” So if some leader attends a funeral he has to be recognized?
Does the difference between the minister’s way of interacting vs the CHI way of interacting bother anybody else? But this is just one example. There are just so many others. Just as one example, even if the church leaders didn’t feel it was appropriate, I feel that someone in the leadership chain should have given Ordain Women an audience with their original request of “can we have the top church leaders pray and check with Heavenly Father on this subject?” It was rude that they would not even talk to a group of thousands of women with this concern. I don’t think they realize that tactic worked in the past, but is becoming less and less effective and may eventually backfire.
I appreciate the helpful responses on this site and I appoligize for such a lengthy post. But this one area is one that is making it very hard for me to want to stay engaged with the church even as a nuanced member.
DarkJedi wrote:Rob4Hope wrote:I STRONGLY agree that what is paid is self determined. However, there is cultural pressure, sometimes intrusive (like BYU and COB interference — which I think would be a really good case for a lawsuit IMHO)
No disrespect intended, Rob, but this part of the thread started with a supposition on your part that a bishop might ask. I’m not saying it’s totally outside the realm of possibility, but unless you can provide some evidence this has occurred or is occurring I’m going to have to take the stance that it does not occur. Even if it does/has, it is not church policy to do it, rather it is a rogue who is answerable to someone who should put a stop to it.
DJ, I just re-read your question, and I think in my haste before on my phone, I mis-understood. Let me go back to what happened at BYU.
Quote:168; attempted to enforce tithing compliance by BYU professors,
Prince, Gregory A; Wright, Wm Robert (2014-10-01). David O. McKay and the Rise of Modern Mormonism (Kindle Location 12074). University of Utah Press. Kindle Edition.
It appears Wilkinson was kindof a hard-liner with regards to orthodoxy (as he saw it). With help from church headquarters, he was able to find out not how much the individuals paid for tithing, but whether they were “full tithe payers”. (I don’t know if that meant the church audited their income and tallied amounts, or shared their “tithing settlement declaration” or what. But, HQ was involved in the process, and Wilkinson put pressure on the professors if they didn’t comply according to HIS rules.)
Wilkinson was able to push this, and a “calculation” of some type happened.
Now, with regards to the same statement I made about COB….my information is anecdotal and not completely reliable. I once worked at HQ for about 6 years. While there, I heard rumors about a policy they use to have where the church would take tithing right out of the paycheck of its employees there: if you didn’t pay, you would be in trouble for your job–a kindof defacto compliance. Because of the crazy things Wilkinson did, there seems to be precedence for anomalies like this, so I can’t dismiss out of hand this rumor. It was a persistent rumor…but then most
rumorscan be persistent.It is my opinion on this last one, this COB concern, that something–whatever it was for sure I don’t know–did happen to make such a rumor take root. But that is all I have right now on that one.
Now, with regards to direct questions by bishops? I’ve seen bishops comment in PEC meetings with other counselors about “so and so had a good month”…because of their tithing payments. I am of the opinion that it depends on the bishop, and the general “upbringing” said bishop had.
I do not have any evidence that a bishop asked someone what their income was, and then compared their tithing to it. I would be interested, learning of the writings of Lavina Fielding Anderson, if such an abuse of tithing pressure has ever happened. I think it is possible.
As a counselor in the bishopric counting tithing I did see what people paid, Rob. I was aware that some people paid quite a bit and some paid very little. Sometimes I would think “Wow, he makes that much?” or “That’s all he makes?” I did realize there were differences in the ways tithing is calculated, and I never paid on gross even during what I would consider my “TBM” days, so my thoughts were tempered by that. I also realized that sometimes people were “behind” in tithing (forgot to pay or whatever) and a check would seem unusually large – I was guilty of forgetting my checkbook more than once. Other than perhaps commenting to the clerk (or him commenting to me) that’s all that was ever said. For a while I counted almost every week, and at least half the time otherwise. The bishop never talked to us about tithing/donations. In tithing settlement all I have ever been asked is “are you a full tithe payer?” (and I will note that I have not been to tithing settlement in several years). I could see in the bygone era (what I call the McConkie era) that the church might have given at least the option of having tithing deducted from church employee paychecks although I have no evidence either way if they did or did not. Either way we’re talking a few hundred people at most, and it was during that same era that the infamous statement about tithing was made. So, back to your question – when/if you start paying tithing again your bishop will not ask you anything more than if you are a full tithe payer unless he is going rogue – in which case you can appeal to the SP who also knows he’s not supposed to ask. You are not required to give anything more than a yes or no answer and they must take you at your word. They are not investigators.
Rob4Hope wrote:It appears Wilkinson was kindof a hard-liner with regards to orthodoxy (as he saw it). With help from church headquarters, he was able to find out not how much the individuals paid for tithing, but whether they were “full tithe payers”. (I don’t know if that meant the church audited their income and tallied amounts, or shared their “tithing settlement declaration” or what. But, HQ was involved in the process, and Wilkinson put pressure on the professors if they didn’t comply according to HIS rules.)
Yes, Wilkinson seems to have been a very extreme person. I do not know if COB supported him or not. I have to imagine that it was a mixture, with some supporting him, others supporting the principle but not the method, and some even that were embarrassed by his extremes. If there were conflicting attitudes about Wilkinson’s actions then that might explain why nothing was done against him. The church needs unity in order to act on something such as removing a BYU president.
I also get that there does seem to be an orthodox understanding of tithing as 10% of gross and I imagine that was how Wilkinson made his calculations.
DarkJedi wrote:So, back to your question – when/if you start paying tithing again your bishop will not ask you anything more than if you are a full tithe payer unless he is going rogue – in which case you can appeal to the SP who also knows he’s not supposed to ask. You are not required to give anything more than a yes or no answer and they must take you at your word. They are not investigators.
Yes, your bishop should not ask more than this. However, in my case I have had multiple years of meetings with my bishop over the payment of tithing. In Rob’s case, he would be an excommunicated member returning to fellowship. In these situations a bishop may feel more emboldened to make sure that the applicant is paying a “proper” tithe.
I am listening to the Nelson BYU-H devotional. Sister Nelson says: Quote:When we’re desperate to be guided by heaven, we work harder than ever to tune into heaven. When we’re desperate to be physically healthy, we eat and exercise accordingly. No excuses. When we’re desperate to have more money, we eagerly follow the Lord’s law of finances, which is, of course, tithing. Consider Pres. George Q. Cannon’s approach to tithing when he was an impoverished young man. When his bishop commented on the large amount of tithing poor young George was paying, George said something like, “Oh, Bishop, I’m not paying tithing on what I make. I’m paying tithing on what I want to make”. And the very next year, George earned exactly the amount of money he had paid tithing on the year before.
I tried an internet search but could not find a reference to this story. I wonder where Sister Nelson is getting it from.
Roy wrote:I am listening to the Nelson BYU-H devotional. Sister Nelson says:
Quote:When we’re desperate to be guided by heaven, we work harder than ever to tune into heaven. When we’re desperate to be physically healthy, we eat and exercise accordingly. No excuses. When we’re desperate to have more money, we eagerly follow the Lord’s law of finances, which is, of course, tithing. Consider Pres. George Q. Cannon’s approach to tithing when he was an impoverished young man. When his bishop commented on the large amount of tithing poor young George was paying, George said something like, “Oh, Bishop, I’m not paying tithing on what I make. I’m paying tithing on what I want to make”. And the very next year, George earned exactly the amount of money he had paid tithing on the year before.
I tried an internet search but could not find a reference to this story. I wonder where Sister Nelson is getting it from.
This story from Sister Nelson (might be true or false, I don’t know), sends a DANGEROUS message IMHO. We have people who become desperate in our society, and if they think that they can somehow sway the heavens and create a blessing chain coming their way, they will do just about anything,…INCLUDING mismanaging what little resources they have. In my open opinion, I think such stories are reckless and wrong to teach.
Terrible example – and directly opposed to the actual law of tithing. What bothers me is that we teach self-reliance. Yet we throw out that principle as soon as it hurts the church’s coffers. Tithing is more important than self-reliance…yikes. Quote:When we’re desperate to be guided by heaven, we work harder than ever to tune into heaven. When we’re desperate to be physically healthy, we eat and exercise accordingly. No excuses. When we’re desperate to have more money, we eagerly follow the Lord’s law of finances, which is, of course, tithing. Consider Pres. George Q. Cannon’s approach to tithing when he was an impoverished young man. When his bishop commented on the large amount of tithing poor young George was paying, George said something like, “Oh, Bishop, I’m not paying tithing on what I make. I’m paying tithing on what I want to make”. And the very next year, George earned exactly the amount of money he had paid tithing on the year before.
Ha. That’s a good one.
When is a tithe not a tithe? When it’s more than 10%.
What would you even call a tithe above 10%? Would paying 20% be considered a twithe? Maybe anything above 10% would be considered a tip. “Here’s a little something extra for you god. Go get your wife something nice.”
😈 :angel: Quote:Oh, Bishop, I’m not paying tithing on what I make. I’m paying tithing on what I want to make.
As a bishop, the only acceptable response to someone making a comment like this would be, “You idiot.”
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.