The Great Fast Offering Myth

[Mortal Man]

A few weeks ago in Gospel Doctrine class the subject turned to the economy and the fact that many of our ward members are struggling. Our former GD teacher pipes up and begins explaining how the fast offerings we pay stay right here in the ward for the use of our members. She gives an impassioned exposition of how that is such a comfort to her and goes on and on about how that knowledge motivates her to pay a generous fast offering. She says that the money isn't just sent off to a big bureaucracy, like other charitable donations, but is used directly by the bishop for the benefit of our own ward members. It is therefore our responsibility to ensure that our own members are taken care of etc.

Now this would have been all fine and dandy, except that the next week in PEC the subject again turns to the economy and the High Priest group leader launches into a teary-eyed testimony of how grateful he is to know that all of the fast offerings we pay stay right here in the ward for the benefit of our own ward members. His voice is cracking as he expresses how grateful he is to know that fast offering money never leaves the ward and that every dollar he pays goes directly to our own needy ward members. The room is quiet due to his heightened emotional state. At the end of his speech he looks at the bishop and says, "The money stays right here in the ward, isn't that right bishop?" The bishop, who is sitting right next to me, looks back at him and says, "That's absolutely right, the money stays right here in our ward."

Now having been finance clerk for a number of years I know full well that the money we drop off at the bank on Sunday gets transferred to Salt Lake on Monday. Contrary to popular opinion, the bishop does not have his own Fast Offering account, at least not in our ward. Nevertheless, not wanting to disrupt the spirit or contradict the bishop, I sat silent in both Sunday School and PEC. I did, however, bring up the subject in bishopric meeting last Wednesday...

By coincidence, it turns out that the second counselor in our current bishopric was the counselor in charge of donations back when I was finance clerk. In fact, he's the guy who trained me to be finance clerk. This counselor had not attended either of the aforementioned meetings; so when I mentioned the events to him I expected him to say, "No, that's not right, we've got to correct this." (In the previous week's bishopric meeting both counselors had expressed their intention to correct some false doctrine relating to the resurrection that had come up in GD class, but that no one had the answer to at the time.) Instead, he replied that there "was nothing wrong with that belief." Being a little surprised, I decided to press the issue and the conversation went roughly as follows:

"Is it not true that the money all gets sent to SLC?"

"Yes"

"And that we don't keep Fast Offerings in our own local account?"

"It doesn't matter where the money is. It's not like we're talking about the physical location of actual dollar bills, it's all just numbers in accounts."

"Yes, but do you realize that everyone in the ward thinks that the bishop keeps control of Fast Offering donations?"

"The bishop has discretion to provide assistance to the members that need it."

"I know that, but our ward members think that the money we pay out is correlated to the amount we take in, like the 'Other' account for scout camp."

"The Stake President gets the numbers and if we're not bringing in enough to cover our own needs he lets the bishop know."

"Yes, yes, but that's not the same as the bishop retaining exclusive control of the money."

"What do you want? People to bring in their geese and the bishop to keep them in his house? It's not like the bishop has his own storehouse anymore, that would be horrible. We have a much better system today."

"Why do you keep twisting my words? I agree our new system is better but people still think it works like the storehouse."

"And there's nothing technically wrong with that idea, especially if it motivates them to pay their Fast Offerings. If you're so smart, why didn't you say anything?"

"I don't want to discourage them from paying Fast Offerings. That's why I didn't say anything in SS class or PEC. But I'm bringing it up now because it is a myth and I was wondering if you were going to do anything about it."

"Gee, since you're so worked up about this, I guess we'll have to assign you to speak on Fast Offerings next week. (ha ha)"

"I'm not 'worked up' about this. And if you assign me to speak, you're not going to like what I have to say. You'll have no control over me while I'm up there. I saw you cringing at Sister so-and-so's testimony last Sunday. If you thought she was bad, you ain't seen nothing yet!"

"(grumble grumble)..."

The bishop broke in at this point and said, "What set this all off anyway?" So I reminded him that the prior week Brother so-and-so had asked him point blank if the money stays here and that he had replied point blank "Yes it does." He said something like, "Are you sure? Were you even at that meeting?" "I was sitting right there!" I said, pointing to the chair next to him. "Oh, well thank you gentlemen for this most interesting discussion. We'll have to visit this topic again sometime."

In our bishop's defense, I should point out that: 1. he is new, 2. he recently lost his job and 3. he has a million other things on his mind, so it's understandable that his memory of certain events is poor.

The counselor however, I thought could have been a tad more committed to accuracy and a tad less comitted to faith-promoting myths.

What do you think?

[JangoStango]

What do I think? First, I think it's a great story.

Second, I'm not a bit surprised that the rationalization works: let them have a false belief if it helps them keep paying.

It isn't your place to correct their myths, Mortal Man. It's their own fault for not seeking out correct information.

[charity]

I think you are nitpicking.

1. I have never been in a bishopric or been a ward clerk. My husband has, though.

2. The bishop does not have an account in the local US Bank.

3. The amunt of money needed to provide assistance varies from ward to ward.

4. The amont of money contributed by members varies from ward to ward.

5. Fast offerings are used for the benefit of those that need it.

So what is the problem here?

[Sevenbak]

A few weeks ago in Gospel Doctrine class the subject turned to the economy and the fact that many of our ward members are struggling. Our former GD teacher pipes up and begins explaining how the fast offerings we pay stay right here in the ward for the use of our members. She gives an impassioned exposition of how that is such a comfort to her and goes on and on about how that knowledge motivates her to pay a generous fast offering. She says that the money isn't just sent off to a big bureaucracy, like other charitable donations, but is used directly by the bishop for the benefit of our own ward members. It is therefore our responsibility to ensure that our own members are taken care of etc.

Now this would have been all fine and dandy, except that the next week in PEC the subject again turns to the economy and the High Priest group leader launches into a teary-eyed testimony of how grateful he is to know that all of the fast offerings we pay stay right here in the ward for the benefit of our own ward members. His voice is cracking as he expresses how grateful he is to know that fast offering money never leaves the ward and that every dollar he pays goes directly to our own needy ward members. The room is quiet due to his heightened emotional state. At the end of his speech he looks at the bishop and says, "The money stays right here in the ward, isn't that right bishop?" The bishop, who is sitting right next to me, looks back at him and says, "That's absolutely right, the money stays right here in our ward."

Now having been finance clerk for a number of years I know full well that the money we drop off at the bank on Sunday gets transferred to Salt Lake on Monday. Contrary to popular opinion, the bishop does not have his own Fast Offering account, at least not in our ward. Nevertheless, not wanting to disrupt the spirit or contradict the bishop, I sat silent in both Sunday School and PEC. I did, however, bring up the subject in bishopric meeting last Wednesday...

By coincidence, it turns out that the second counselor in our current bishopric was the counselor in charge of donations back when I was finance clerk. In fact, he's the guy who trained me to be finance clerk. This counselor had not attended either of the aforementioned meetings; so when I mentioned the events to him I expected him to say, "No, that's not right, we've got to correct this." (In the previous week's bishopric meeting both counselors had expressed their intention to correct some false doctrine relating to the resurrection that had come up in GD class, but that no one had the answer to at the time.) Instead, he replied that there "was nothing wrong with that belief." Being a little surprised, I decided to press the issue and the conversation went roughly as follows:

"Is it not true that the money all gets sent to SLC?"

"Yes"

"And that we don't keep Fast Offerings in our own local account?"

"It doesn't matter where the money is. It's not like we're talking about the physical location of actual dollar bills, it's all just numbers in accounts."

"Yes, but do you realize that everyone in the ward thinks that the bishop keeps control of Fast Offering donations?"

"The bishop has discretion to provide assistance to the members that need it."

"I know that, but our ward members think that the money we pay out is correlated to the amount we take in, like the 'Other' account for scout camp."

"The Stake President gets the numbers and if we're not bringing in enough to cover our own needs he lets the bishop know."

"Yes, yes, but that's not the same as the bishop retaining exclusive control of the money."

"What do you want? People to bring in their geese and the bishop to keep them in his house? It's not like the bishop has his own storehouse anymore, that would be horrible. We have a much better system today."

"Why do you keep twisting my words? I agree our new system is better but people still think it works like the storehouse."

"And there's nothing technically wrong with that idea, especially if it motivates them to pay their Fast Offerings. If you're so smart, why didn't you say anything?"

"I don't want to discourage them from paying Fast Offerings. That's why I didn't say anything in SS class or PEC. But I'm bringing it up now because it is a myth and I was wondering if you were going to do anything about it."

"Gee, since you're so worked up about this, I guess we'll have to assign you to speak on Fast Offerings next week. (ha ha)"

"I'm not 'worked up' about this. And if you assign me to speak, you're not going to like what I have to say. You'll have no control over me while I'm up there. I saw you cringing at Sister so-and-so's testimony last Sunday. If you thought she was bad, you ain't seen nothing yet!"

"(grumble grumble)..."

The bishop broke in at this point and said, "What set this all off anyway?" So I reminded him that the prior week Brother so-and-so had asked him point blank if the money stays here and that he had replied point blank "Yes it does." He said something like, "Are you sure? Were you even at that meeting?" "I was sitting right there!" I said, pointing to the chair next to him. "Oh, well thank you gentlemen for this most interesting discussion. We'll have to visit this topic again sometime."

In our bishop's defense, I should point out that: 1. he is new, 2. he recently lost his job and 3. he has a million other things on his mind, so it's understandable that his memory of certain events is poor.

The counselor however, I thought could have been a tad more committed to accuracy and a tad less comitted to faith-promoting myths.

What do you think?

This is a silly thread.

All funds that a ward uses for it's operation needs, including FO for it's own needy members gets paid out if the ward's account, as it is returned to the ward from SL for it's needs. It is all accounted in SL initially, yes, but it comes back in the budget. Your notion of deceptive practices is misleading. I suspect you know this.

[Mormon Vader]

Big deal.

I find it hard to believe that those "teary-eyed" members would lose their fast offering testimony if they found out the money goes to SLC. It's pretty insignificant where the money goes as long as those that need it get it.

I don't understand the aversion to the money going to SLC in the first place. It's not like it's the Red Cross. (ooohhh, burn!)

[gurn]

I guess it really depends on whether or not your unit is self sufficient in fast offerings. My financial clerk would give me a report from time to time showing income and out go of the fast offering account. I know the account only exists in the MLS software, but you get my point.

More often than not my unit spent a little more on the needy than we took in. That was also true for the stake. So members in my unit would be correct in stating that everything donated goes to the needy in our unit, despite which physical account the funds a deposited in.

[Anijen]

"Silly thread".

I agree.

[rpn]

So why is it deceptive --- the fact that it is handled in SLC and the amount that is donated does first come from the ward (and if there is left over the rest of the stake) doesn't change the fact that it fast offerings are local in income and hopefuly from each ward they cover the needs of that ward.

[Sevenbak]

So why is it deceptive --- the fact that it is handled in SLC and the amount that is donated does first come from the ward (and if there is left over the rest of the stake) doesn't change the fact that it fast offerings are local in income and hopefuly from each ward they cover the needs of that ward.

It's deceptive in that the claim is made that SLC gets all the local money.

All local budgets are met from said accounts.

[Thinking]

"The Stake President gets the numbers and if we're not bringing in enough to cover our own needs he lets the bishop know."

What? Does the stake president let the bishop know if a ward is bringing in more than what is needed to cover its own needs? Would the bishop then ask the members in that ward to pay less?

[Asaph]

I am not put-off by this post but fail to see its significance. One thing I do know, however, is that FO funds have gone from my ward to another in the Stake that was "short", whatever "short" means. I live in a very affluent ward.

Asaph

[Sevenbak]

I am not put-off by this post but fail to see its significance. One thing I do know, however, is that FO funds have gone from my ward to another in the Stake that was "short", whatever "short" means. I live in a very affluent ward.

Asaph

It's the same principle in the way missionary families fund their missions.

Mini United Order.

[mfbukowski]

This is ridiculous.

I am a bishop.

This is how it works: Fast offerings do stay in the ward

You contribute $10. to the fast offering fund. Your contribution is recorded in the computer under your name. The money is physically deposited in a local bank and then transferred to SLC. You have credit for that donation as a tax deduction.

Many other people also contribute. Now let's say the people in your ward have donated a total of $500. Your total fast offering fund for the ward is now $500. No it is not in the bishop's house, it is not in a safe in the basement. It is a credit on the ward account in Salt lake. Now let's say sister Jones needs help with her rent, and the bishop writes a check to her landlord for $200. The ward fund is now $300. The next week other expenses for other people total let's say, $400. The ward fund is now minus $100, and that comes out of the stake fund. Of course all these are computer entries and credits and debits.

In these times, when the stake fund goes broke, it comes as needed from Salt Lake from surpluses contributed in previous years.

If it all stayed "in the ward" you would have indigent people who needed help going hungry. So would you rather have it stay "in the ward"--(it does as long as the ward is contributing enough for its own welfare expenses)

But indeed, if your ward is pulling its weight, it does "stay in the ward".

Are you going to tell me that ward members would not want the surplus to go where it is needed when and if there is a surplus over what they need?

Some wards would have hundreds of thousands in surpluses and others would have people without basic needs. Is that what you want?

But the idea that the bishop is misleading people by saying the money "stays in the ward" is just absurd. It does "stay in the ward" if you are pulling your own weight.

[Sevenbak]

This is ridiculous.

I am a bishop.

Thanks for clearing that up so thoroughly.

[Nofear]

Perhaps Mortal Man should apologize to his bishopric for trying to confuse them.

[mbh26]

Some wards would have hundreds of thousands in surpluses and others would have people without basic needs. Is that what you want?

No I think he just wants them to tell the truth, not a partial truth, the complete truth that you told just now. So why don't they tell the complete truth? As far as I'm concerned, stating, "The money stays in the ward," is not the complete truth. Do you really call that the complete truth? Do you think the complete truth as you just stated would have the same faith promoting effect on people as, "The money stays in the ward." I don't. I don't limit lying to semantic accuracy of a statement. A true statement can be just as deceptive and misleading as any false statement if it is incomplete. Guess where I learned that? CHURCH!

I'd like to get a poll of how many people think it's good to deceive people as long as it's faith promoting. Where do you stand on that? How do you define "Lie." Is it a false statement, or is it a statement that produces a non faith promoting result? What is truth? Is it a correct statement, or is it a statement that is faith promoting and optimistic? Do words have any meaning at all? I guess not.

[Sevenbak]

No I think he just wants them to tell the truth, not a partial truth, the complete truth that you told just now. So why don't they tell the complete truth? As far as I'm concerned, stating, "The money stays in the ward," is not the complete truth. Do you really call that the complete truth? Do you think the complete truth as you just stated would have the same faith promoting effect on people as, "The money stays in the ward." I don't. I don't limit lying to semantic accuracy of a statement. A true statement can be just as deceptive and misleading as any false statement if it is incomplete. Guess where I learned that? CHURCH!

I'd like to get a poll of how many people think it's good to deceive people as long as it's faith promoting. Where do you stand on that? How do you define "Lie." Is it a false statement, or is it a statement that produces a non faith promoting result? What is truth? Is it a correct statement, or is it a statement that is faith promoting and optimistic? Do words have any meaning at all? I guess not.

Apples and oranges. It's understood by nearly all members that any excess goes to help Stake members, and any excess from that goes to help worldwide FO relief. And it's also commonly understand that a ward with not enough will be taken care of by the stake or higher up if needed.

The half truth was that all funds go to SL, not that all the money stays in the ward.

[charity]

No I think he just wants them to tell the truth, not a partial truth, the complete truth that you told just now. So why don't they tell the complete truth? As far as I'm concerned, stating, "The money stays in the ward," is not the complete truth. Do you really call that the complete truth? Do you think the complete truth as you just stated would have the same faith promoting effect on people as, "The money stays in the ward." I don't. I don't limit lying to semantic accuracy of a statement. A true statement can be just as deceptive and misleading as any false statement if it is incomplete. Guess where I learned that? CHURCH!

I'd like to get a poll of how many people think it's good to deceive people as long as it's faith promoting. Where do you stand on that? How do you define "Lie." Is it a false statement, or is it a statement that produces a non faith promoting result? What is truth? Is it a correct statement, or is it a statement that is faith promoting and optimistic? Do words have any meaning at all? I guess not.

This deception stuff is stupid. Complte truth, my foot. And anyone how needs a real bishop's explanation as just given above is prett petty and small minded.

So Sister X is going to lose her testimony if she thinks that fast offerings she contributes might go to someone in need someplace if her ward and/or stake has a surplus? Then she never had a testimony in the first place.

Good grief.

[Yirgacheffe]

I think you are nitpicking.

1. I have never been in a bishopric or been a ward clerk. My husband has, though.

2. The bishop does not have an account in the local US Bank.

3. The amunt of money needed to provide assistance varies from ward to ward.

4. The amont of money contributed by members varies from ward to ward.

5. Fast offerings are used for the benefit of those that need it.

So what is the problem here?

I think it makes more sense to have it done this way. I live in the wealthiest county in my state, (though I did something wrong and don't hit the average) but there are other area's not so lucky. In small rural towns, where the closing of factories that supplied a living for residents, a church may be hard pressed to raise enough to cover need.

"She gives an impassioned exposition of how that is such a comfort to her and goes on and on about how that knowledge motivates her to pay a generous fast offering. She says that the money isn't just sent off to a big bureaucracy, like other charitable donations, but is used directly by the bishop for the benefit of our own ward members. It is therefore our responsibility to ensure that our own members are taken care of etc.

Now this would have been all fine and dandy, except that the next week in PEC the subject again turns to the economy and the High Priest group leader launches into a teary-eyed testimony of how grateful he is to know that all of the fast offerings we pay stay right here in the ward for the benefit of our own ward members. His voice is cracking as he expresses how grateful he is to know that fast offering money never leaves the ward and that every dollar he pays goes directly to our own needy ward members. The room is quiet due to his heightened emotional state."

These are strong emotional testimonies about the way the LDS take care of their own. I think if members of other churches heard LDS members give this kind of testimony and then found out it was in reality much more like the way their own churches do things that a bit of skepticism might follow. I think it's best to present it the way it really is, after all the system does a darn fine job of it, it needs no embellishing in the telling.

[Sevenbak]

I think it makes more sense to have it done this way. I live in the wealthiest county in my state, (though I did something wrong and don't hit the average) but there are other area's not so lucky. In small rural towns, where the closing of factories that supplied a living for residents, a church may be hard pressed to raise enough to cover need.

"She gives an impassioned exposition of how that is such a comfort to her and goes on and on about how that knowledge motivates her to pay a generous fast offering. She says that the money isn't just sent off to a big bureaucracy, like other charitable donations, but is used directly by the bishop for the benefit of our own ward members. It is therefore our responsibility to ensure that our own members are taken care of etc.

Now this would have been all fine and dandy, except that the next week in PEC the subject again turns to the economy and the High Priest group leader launches into a teary-eyed testimony of how grateful he is to know that all of the fast offerings we pay stay right here in the ward for the benefit of our own ward members. His voice is cracking as he expresses how grateful he is to know that fast offering money never leaves the ward and that every dollar he pays goes directly to our own needy ward members. The room is quiet due to his heightened emotional state."

These are strong emotional testimonies about the way the LDS take care of their own. I think if members of other churches heard LDS members give this kind of testimony and then found out it was in reality much more like the way their own churches do things that a bit of skepticism might follow. I think it's best to present it the way it really is, after all the system does a darn fine job of it, it needs no embellishing in the telling.

In the case of that brother's testimony, it was probably true. It sounded like the ward members were really struggling, so likely each and every dollar did in fact stay in the ward, plus they were given extra by the Stake or higher.

I don't see any inaccuracies at all.

[Free Agent]

This deception stuff is stupid. Complte truth, my foot. And anyone how needs a real bishop's explanation as just given above is prett petty and small minded.

So Sister X is going to lose her testimony if she thinks that fast offerings she contributes might go to someone in need someplace if her ward and/or stake has a surplus? Then she never had a testimony in the first place.

Good grief.

No, Sister X might lose her testimony because she heard from those in authority one thing, and later verified it to be something else. But I guess Sister X needs to spend most of her week verifying everything she ever hears in Church for herself, and even things she doesn't hear but should hear so that one day the things she should have known don't come back to ruin the testimony she never had in the first place.

I think all OP is saying is its wrong to perpetuate a half truth or mistruth.

[mnn727]

What do you think?

What do I think, I'm with the counselor on this one - the Bishop has enough to help everyone in the ward he needs to and the money is all electrons in a computer somewhere anyway - you're making a mountain out of a mole hill.

[Sevenbak]

you're making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Hey, it's easier for some people to move mountains if they are only mole hills.

[Calm]

No I think he just wants them to tell the truth, not a partial truth, the complete truth that you told just now. So why don't they tell the complete truth?

I rarely have any cash beyond some loose change in the house, just credit cards and checks...yet I have no problem feeling like I'm telling the truth when I say "I've got plenty of money" or even "I've got plenty on hand".

In this day and age where money is more about exchanging info between banks rather than actual cash transactions, it seems strange to not to accept the shorthand.

[charity]

No, Sister X might lose her testimony because she heard from those in authority one thing, and later verified it to be something else. But I guess Sister X needs to spend most of her week verifying everything she ever hears in Church for herself, and even things she doesn't hear but should hear so that one day the things she should have known don't come back to ruin the testimony she never had in the first place.

I think all OP is saying is its wrong to perpetuate a half truth or mistruth.

Sister X needs to be concerned about the welfare of the Saints, and not about which little account goes where.

And if Sister X is basing her testimony on any human, like I said, she doesn't have one. You get a testimony from the witness of the Holy Ghost. Does she have a testimony of the Lord's welfare plan? That is what is important.