Critics Accusations Of Financial Improprieties

[ERayR]

That is really a super statement. 

'His chosen leaders...'     

Any mistake by 'the church' in the past has been attributed, by members,  to acting as a man.   Your statement seems to infer that tithing money is exempted from men acting as men and only 100% directed by the Lord.  Those that are in control of all tithing money could follow accounting priciples to the mark and still  misdirect church funds to the detriment of the church. 

The way our current tax code is set up for the common man and for-profit businesses, you are guilty(accountable for 100% of tax burden) until you can prove your deductions.  I would like to see non profits be accountable as well in the same manner.  I would like to see them made public, but if not public, audited by an independent firm to assure non profit status vs 'proper' accounting procedures.

 

Are you purposely misinterpreting what rpn posted?

[CV75]

Well, no worries.  I see the Church trending toward less disclosure rather than more.  As I alluded to earlier, I think the next thing they will pull back on is membership figures.  As those numbers continue to deteriorate, I predict that we'll see less information being shared.

Non-sequitir.

 

It doesn't matter what church leaders do with the tithing that is collected on behalf of the Lord?  Really?

The actual statement was ;"Doesn't matter what the Lord (though His chosen leaders) does with it."

 

 

Your statement seems to infer that tithing money is exempted from men acting as men and only 100% directed by the Lord.  Those that are in control of all tithing money could follow accounting priciples to the mark and still  misdirect church funds to the detriment of the church. 

From “Gospel Topics” https://www.lds.org/topics/tithing?lang=eng

 

“These [tithing] funds are used to build up the Church and further the work of the Lord throughout the world.”

 

“Church members give their tithing donations to local leaders. These local leaders transmit tithing funds directly to the headquarters of the Church, where a council determines specific ways to use the sacred funds. This council is comprised of the First Presidency, the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, and the Presiding Bishopric. Acting according to revelation, they make decisions as they are directed by the Lord. (See D&C 120:1.)”

 

“Tithing funds are always used for the Lord’s purposes—to build and maintain temples and meetinghouses, to sustain missionary work, to educate Church members, and to carry on the work of the Lord throughout the world.”

 

From “Mormon.org” http://www.mormon.org/faq/purpose-of-tithing

Tithing funds are used for:

 

   Constructing temples, chapels, and other buildings.

   Providing operating funds for the Church.

   Funding the missionary program (This does not include individual missionary expenses.)

   Preparing materials used in Church classes and organizations.

   Temple work, family history, and many other important Church functions.

   Education.

 

From October 2013 General Conference https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/10/the-windows-of-heaven?lang=eng

 

“The basic financial program of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints—for both income and disbursement—is defined in sections 119 and 120 of the Doctrine and Covenants. Two statements found in these revelations provide the foundation for the fiscal affairs of the Church.”

 

“Then, concerning the authorized disbursement of the tithes, the Lord said, “It shall be disposed of by a council, composed of the First Presidency of my Church, and of the bishop and his council, and by my high council; and by mine own voice unto them, saith the Lord” (D&C 120:1). The “bishop and his council” and “my high council” referred to in this revelation are known today as the Presiding Bishopric and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles, respectively. These sacred funds are used in a rapidly growing church to spiritually bless individuals and families by constructing and maintaining temples and houses of worship, supporting missionary work, translating and publishing scriptures, fostering family history research, funding schools and religious education, and accomplishing many other Church purposes as directed by the Lord’s ordained servants.”

 

I think anyone would be hard-pressed to prove that maintaining non-profit status alone would guarantee that “These [tithing] funds are used to build up the Church and further the work of the Lord throughout the world.” Just as publishing financial records.

[rockpond]

The actual statement was ;"Doesn't matter what the Lord (though His chosen leaders) does with it."

 

Okay... do you want to stand by that statement as well?  Is doesn't matter what the leaders do with funds consecrated to the church?

[CV75]

Okay... do you want to stand by that statement as well?  Is doesn't matter what the leaders do with funds consecrated to the church?

Yes. See details post # 877. It doesn't matter what leaders do with consecrated funds because everything they do with them builds up the Church and furthers the work of the Lord throughout the world. The leaders are directed in this responsibility by the Lord in accordance with scriptural principles and processes.

[rockpond]

Yes. See details post # 877. It doesn't matter what leaders do with consecrated funds because everything they do with them builds up the Church and furthers the work of the Lord throughout the world. The leaders are directed in this responsibility by the Lord in accordance with scriptural principles and processes.

 

Well then it actually *does* matter what leaders do with consecrated funds, right?  Everything they do with them must be something that builds up the Church and furthers the work of the Lord, correct?

 

How would you know if what they are doing is directed by the Lord and in accordance with scriptural principles and processes?

[sdc999]

Yes. See details post # 877. It doesn't matter what leaders do with consecrated funds because everything they do with them builds up the Church and furthers the work of the Lord throughout the world. The leaders are directed in this responsibility by the Lord in accordance with scriptural principles and processes.

Well then, If everyone who had a calling was to adhere specifically to what the Lord directed, there would be no need for windows in classroom doors, two deep leadership for functions, and missionaries could visit single women in their homes.    I would sincerely hope that they use the funds to do just that which you have stated.  But men err and they are probably more apt to err when they are not accountable to their fellow man and not just the Lord.

[Kenngo1969]

Well then, If everyone who had a calling was to adhere specifically to what the Lord directed, there would be no need for windows in classroom doors, two deep leadership for functions, and missionaries could visit single women in their homes.    I would sincerely hope that they use the funds to do just that which you have stated.  But men err and they are probably more apt to err when they are not accountable to their fellow man and not just the Lord.

Even if you believe Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints does not adhere to the level of disclosure you believe it should, or if you believe that disclosure does not happen in the precise way that it should, does not mean that leaders "are not accountable to their fellow men."  You may believe, in good conscience and in good faith, that current practices are insufficient, and those who disagree may also do so in good conscience and in good faith.  Perhaps you believe that the annual letter from the Church Auditing Department read in General Conference is insufficient.  You would be free to believe that.  But even if that's what you believe, that's a far cry from saying that Church leaders aren't (or that they believe they're not) accountable to anyone but the Lord.

 

P.S.: And while I'm not naive enough to believe that no terribly unfortunate, terribly untoward incidents of the kind you mention have occurred in the Church of Jesus Christ,  I also believe that the other practices you mention that have been instituted in the Church are due less to the fact that there are widespread problems with such incidents than that the Church's leaders simply choose to act out of an abundance of caution and, by so doing, to lessen, as much as possible, even the possibility that such things will occur.

Edited September 11, 2014 by Kenngo1969

[CV75]

Well then it actually *does* matter what leaders do with consecrated funds, right?  Everything they do with them must be something that builds up the Church and furthers the work of the Lord, correct?

That’s like saying something matters unless it isn’t what it is. But (to use a phrase I dislike), "It is what it is." So no, it does not matter within the parameters of what they are. It also doesn’t matter in relation to the principle of common consent or the accusations of those not appointed to use the funds.

 

How would you know if what they are doing is directed by the Lord and in accordance with scriptural principles and processes?

What’s this about “would [know] if”? I am satisfied that I “do [know] that”, by my temporal and spiritual senses picking up the evidences that abound. I see the construction and maintenance of  temples, chapels, and other buildings; I see funds being spent for their operations; the missionary program is obviously funded beyond individual missionary expenses; materials used in Church classes and organizations cost money as do temple work, family history, and many other important Church functions; Church schools.

[CV75]

I would sincerely hope that they use the funds to do just that which you have stated.  But men err and they are probably more apt to err when they are not accountable to their fellow man and not just the Lord.

This is part of the function of the quorums within which they operate.

 

“A priesthood quorum is an organized group of brethren who hold the same priesthood office. The primary purposes of quorums are to serve others, build unity and brotherhood, and instruct members in doctrines, principles, and duties.”  https://www.lds.org/handbook/handbook-2-administering-the-church/melchizedek-priesthood

 

“The strength of a quorum comes in large measure from how completely its members are united in righteousness.” https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2006/10/a-priesthood-quorum?lang=eng Therein is a powerful check-and-balance and a positive influence on behavior to do the right things. Unanimity in their decision-making is another.

 

The United Order also operated this way. Also, see D&C 51:4-5 as another example and the disciplinary procedures for the leaders of the Church (D&C 107).

[Tacenda]

That’s like saying something matters unless it isn’t what it is. But (to use a phrase I dislike), "It is what it is." So no, it does not matter within the parameters of what they are. It also doesn’t matter in relation to the principle of common consent or the accusations of those not appointed to use the funds.

What’s this about “would [know] if”? I am satisfied that I “do [know] that”, by my temporal and spiritual senses picking up the evidences that abound. I see the construction and maintenance of temples, chapels, and other buildings; I see funds being spent for their operations; the missionary program is obviously funded beyond individual missionary expenses; materials used in Church classes and organizations cost money as do temple work, family history, and many other important Church functions; Church schools.

I agree with this to a point...I believe the church is beyond wealthy, it owns a sizeable portion of Florida. A lot of missionaries do work that is sometimes in the clerical realm and recently I saw a couple serving a mission refurbishing a temple. So a lot of free labor vs. proselytizing missions. I believe the church may have paid people before this? So I'm thinking when comparing the wealth to output, it may be just pennies to keep up/build church/temples. But definitely a guess on my part and when rethinking about it, a lot of wealth is in land ownership, not liquid wealth. Edited September 11, 2014 by Tacenda

[sdc999]

 

 

P.S.: And while I'm not naive enough to believe that no terribly unfortunate, terribly untoward incidents of the kind you mention have occurred in the Church of Jesus Christ,  I also believe that the other practices you mention that have been instituted in the Church are due less to the fact that there are widespread problems with such incidents than that the Church's leaders simply choose to act out of an abundance of caution and, by so doing, to lessen, as much as possible, even the possibility that such things will occur.

But yet they act totally the opposite with church finances; thus, accepting the increased possibility that such things could occur.  I do not believe these things were widespread for the other circumstances either. 

[rpn]

When I say it doesn't matter what the Lord (through His chosen leaders ---sorry for the missing letter in the OP) does with the money, I mean that His leaders are accountable to Him alone, not to those who  return to the Lord ten percent of what He has given them as sacrificial gifts.

[rockpond]

That’s like saying something matters unless it isn’t what it is. But (to use a phrase I dislike), "It is what it is." So no, it does not matter within the parameters of what they are.

 

My point is, it DOES matter how the consecrated funds are used (something upon which I think we both agree).  You are satisfied in trusting that they are being used appropriately for the purposes you mentioned because you can see that there are churches/temples being built and missionaries being supported.  But that does not, by any means, indicate that the men managing them are perfect and lack any need for transparency.

 

 

What’s this about “would [know] if”? I am satisfied that I “do [know] that”, by my temporal and spiritual senses picking up the evidences that abound. I see the construction and maintenance of  temples, chapels, and other buildings; I see funds being spent for their operations; the missionary program is obviously funded beyond individual missionary expenses; materials used in Church classes and organizations cost money as do temple work, family history, and many other important Church functions; Church schools.

 

And other church members see all those things as well.  But they also see massive commercial development projects, extensive business holdings, and a large investment portfolio.  Then they wonder... why did we have to let the local janitor go?

 

It's a wonderful gift of faith that you have.

[rockpond]

When I say it doesn't matter what the Lord (through His chosen leaders ---sorry for the missing letter in the OP) does with the money, I mean that His leaders are accountable to Him alone, not to those who  return to the Lord ten percent of what He has given them as sacrificial gifts.

 

I believe that the church, all of us, are accountable for how sacred funds are used.  Not just the leaders.

Edited September 11, 2014 by rockpond

[CV75]

 a lot of wealth is in land ownership, not liquid wealth.

In either case, I consider consecrated funds to be purposed for the work of the Lord, spent in His own way and time.

 

 

But that does not, by any means, indicate that the men managing them are perfect and lack any need for transparency.

So now we’re getting into how the Lord could possibly lead His Church through imperfect people and without the oversight methods of men*.

 

Why would the imperfect be any more transparent than the perfect? (Isaiah 55:7-11) Have you personally found God to be the epitome of transparency to you? (D&C 88:49)

 

*An example of how:

“I marvel at the clarity and brevity of these two revelations in comparison to the complicated financial guidelines and administrative procedures used in so many organizations and governments around the world. How can the temporal affairs of an organization as large as the restored Church of Jesus Christ possibly operate throughout the entire world using such succinct instructions? To me the answer is quite straightforward: this is the Lord’s work, He is able to do His own work (see 2 Nephi 27:20), and the Savior inspires and directs His servants as they apply His directions and labor in His cause.” https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2013/10/the-windows-of-heaven?lang=eng

 

And other church members see all those things as well.  But they also see massive commercial development projects, extensive business holdings, and a large investment portfolio.  Then they wonder... why did we have to let the local janitor go?

I see them too (and have no problem with them--as I said to Tacenda, the wealth is purposed for the work of the Lord), and I have helped the janitor in his want and to obtain new and better employment, a faith-affirming experience for all who were willing to permit it to be.

 

It's a wonderful gift of faith that you have.

You still haven't learned to not critique another person's faith.

[rockpond]

So now we’re getting into how the Lord could possibly lead His Church through imperfect people and without the oversight methods of men*.

 

I'm quite comfortable with the church being led by the Lord through imperfect people.  And I believe that is why He organized it the way that he did... including the principle of common consent in all things.

 

 

You still haven't learned to not critique another person's faith.

 

That was meant as a sincere compliment.  So I am not sure what you mean by this statement.

[Kenngo1969]

But yet they act totally the opposite with church finances; thus, accepting the increased possibility that such things could occur.  I do not believe these things were widespread for the other circumstances either. 

I don't think people who call for increased disclosure would be satisfied if the Church of Jesus Christ practiced increased disclosure with respect to its financial dealings.  Sometimes, the more information there is out there (even if its innocuous), the more propensity there is for people who are prone to find fault to do exactly that.  

[sdc999]

I don't think people who call for increased disclosure would be satisfied if the Church of Jesus Christ practiced increased disclosure with respect to its financial dealings.  Sometimes, the more information there is out there (even if its innocuous), the more propensity there is for people who are prone to find fault to do exactly that.  

The purpose of disclosure should not be to satisfy anyone.  The church did not put windows in classroom doors to satisfy anyone.  They did it out of abundance of caution.   Similar to locks on doors.  Locks don't keeps crimals out.  They keep honest people honest.  

I sit on  a board where an extremely respectable person in the community runs the organization.  I purposed a quarterly internal audit by 3 board members to be openly reported.  Seveal board members were appalled that I would question this mans integrity.  (he, his family does great things for our community).  I didn't do it to try to find fault.  I did it out of an abundance of caution.  To exhibit we have nothing to hide.  Do some people now look and question/accuse/find fault? - yes, but you will find that no matter what.  I know we are doing the right thing. 

Now that is an internal perspective from an organization.  I have heard many LDS patrons who have expressed this desire to open the books.  Their voice carries no weight in the church though. 

As an outside perspective though, your church can do what it wishes but I believe as an entity who is exempted from paying 'fair-share' taxes (all non-profits), I think the burden of proof should be with the entity ie open books.

[ERayR]

I have been rethinking this just a little.  Perhaps we should print the detailed financials.  By the time they have taken the hundreds of pages and pored over them with their magnifying glass it should take them a month or two and keep them out of everybody's hair.  Of course after that they would again become a royal pain again but then a couple of months of peace and quiet might be worth it. :crazy:

[rockpond]

I don't think people who call for increased disclosure would be satisfied if the Church of Jesus Christ practiced increased disclosure with respect to its financial dealings.  Sometimes, the more information there is out there (even if its innocuous), the more propensity there is for people who are prone to find fault to do exactly that.  

 

People will find fault with or without disclosure.

[rockpond]

I have been rethinking this just a little.  Perhaps we should print the detailed financials.  By the time they have taken the hundreds of pages and pored over them with their magnifying glass it should take them a month or two and keep them out of everybody's hair.  Of course after that they would again become a royal pain again but then a couple of months of peace and quiet might be worth it. :crazy:

 

In the 1950's the church was publishing its financials in just 2-3 pages.

 

I used to work for a Fortune 500 company... a large global multi-billion-dollar business.  We published our annual financial statements in a booklet of just about a dozen pages (and that included more than just finances).

 

It's really not as complex as you make it out to be.

[CV75]

I'm quite comfortable with the church being led by the Lord through imperfect people.  And I believe that is why He organized it the way that he did... including the principle of common consent in all things.

LOL, of course (except when it becomes transparent what you mean by that)!

 

That was meant as a sincere compliment.  So I am not sure what you mean by this statement.

I took it as a compliment, but your assessment of my faith has no bearing on the discussion.

[rockpond]

LOL, of course (except when it becomes transparent what you mean by that)!

 

I'm not sure what you mean.

 

 

I took it as a compliment, but your assessment of my faith has no bearing on the discussion.

 

Was it not your faith that you were describing when you said:  "I am satisfied that I “do [know] that”, by my temporal and spiritual senses picking up the evidences that abound."

[CV75]

I'm not sure what you mean.

LOL—see our previous exchanges on the subject.

 

 

Was it not your faith that you were describing when you said:  "I am satisfied that I “do [know] that”, by my temporal and spiritual senses picking up the evidences that abound."

In response to your question, “How would you know if what they are doing is directed by the Lord and in accordance with scriptural principles and processes?” I said, “I am satisfied that I “do [know] that”, by my temporal and spiritual senses picking up the evidences that abound." While faith and knowledge have a relationship in understanding both temporal and spiritual things, my reply was describing my knowledge, not my faith. And sharing your critique or assessment of the quality of my knowledge has no bearing on the discussion either -- you might as well say I have great knowledge (or that I don’t)!

 

So, back to the folks that wonder about the janitor: I wonder how many of them would wonder why I helped him, knowing what might be, or even is, known about him. And is "wonder" a function of faith or knowledge?

[rockpond]

LOL—see our previous exchanges on the subject.

 

 

In response to your question, “How would you know if what they are doing is directed by the Lord and in accordance with scriptural principles and processes?” I said, “I am satisfied that I “do [know] that”, by my temporal and spiritual senses picking up the evidences that abound." While faith and knowledge have a relationship in understanding both temporal and spiritual things, my reply was describing my knowledge, not my faith. And sharing your critique or assessment of the quality of my knowledge has no bearing on the discussion either -- you might as well say I have great knowledge (or that I don’t)!

 

So, back to the folks that wonder about the janitor: I wonder how many of them would wonder why I helped him, knowing what might be, or even is, known about him. And is "wonder" a function of faith or knowledge?

Well you have no material knowledge of the general church budget. You may have knowledge that the church is building and maintaining meeting houses, temples, mission homes, offices, etc but you do not know what the overall budget is in terms of the amount of funds that flow in vs how they are divided spent/saved.