Agree Or Disagree: Church Handbook Of Instructions: Book 1

[cinepro]

As a counter-example, the Church of Scientology does have secret manuals for "auditors" (their equivalent of priests). But that is part of their business structure: people pay for "audits" and if the audit documents were published, people could theoretically obtain "clear" status without paying a hundred thousand dollars to the church. The LDS Church, by contrast, does not have pastoral "trade secrets" which, if revealed, would reduce tithing income.

According to one person in the comments section of an article on Scientology...

There are other ways to do Scientology cheaper.

Early 1980`s, there was a power struggle in the Church of Scientology, with 3 major factions fighting over control

The first faction was faction-Miscavige, who won the power struggle and got the Church and copyrights.

The second faction was faction-David Mayo. David Mayo was the Senior C/S international (the top technical person in the Church after L.Ron Hubbard). David Mayo set up his own organization, the AAC. The AAC was destroyed through the courts for violating copyrights.

The third faction was faction-Captain Bill. Captain Bill was the head of the Sea Org (the inner core of dedicated staffmembers). He moved with a lot of followers to Germany and set up an underground organization, known as Ron`s Org. Ron`s Org today is very much alive, setting up lots of new groups all over Europe, while staying as close to the original technology of L.Ron Hubbard as possible. It is the biggest group of Scientologists outside of the Church. It has a very loose organization, to make it difficult for the Church to attack it.

Prices are a lot lower, and the social atmosphere is a lot friendlier.

Also over the years a lot more Scientologists have left the Church, disgusted by current management. They set up their own organizations, collectively known as the “Freezone”

It does raise the question of how much incentive the Temple gives to pay tithing. If a letter from the First Presidency was read in every ward next Sunday saying that tithing would no longer be a pre-condition for receiving a Temple recommend, I wonder if tithing receipts would drop, stay the same, or increase?

[ERayR]

here is one for the Free Methodists Churches: http://docs.google.c...OojIG2_J43lK4vg

Has some CHI characteristics but not as comprehensive but I'll give you 1.

[Saints Alive]

In case you missed it, I'm not "calling for the Church to make the CHI public".

I will take Cinepro's statement as an opportunity to clarify my own position.

I feel that the church has every right to NOT publish CHI 1 if they don't want to. I can even understand SOME of the reasons they choose not to publish it. I also think I have demonstrated that it is not the norm for a church to keep their Procedural manual confidential

[ERayR]

In case you missed it, I'm not "calling for the Church to make the CHI public".

I did miss that. My bad.

[Saints Alive]

Has some CHI characteristics but not as comprehensive but I'll give you 1.

I think I previously said that you wont find another book that covers all the material CHI 1 covers, they are likely contained in several manuals.

Did you see the one for the Presbyterian Church dealing with finances?

[ERayR]

here is one for the Presbyterian church Specifically about finances: http://www.pcusa.org...ardship-manual/

Again it is similar but only a small part of CHI. You now have 1 1/2. I'm still wondering where is SBC and Catholics.

Gotta go.

[Saints Alive]

Again it is similar but only a small part of CHI. You now have 1 1/2. I'm still wondering where is SBC and Catholics.

Gotta go.

see post #112

[Saints Alive]

Here is one for the Catholic Church: http://www.austindiocese.org/resources/pdf/DIOCESAN_POLICY_MANUAL.pdf

[Cobalt-70]

that and we don't really want to compare ourselves to Scientology if we dont have to.

But I'm troubled that our shared penchant for secrecy and corporate-style management allows that comparison to be made in people's minds. It would be much better for us if Scientology did not exist as a point of comparison.

[Saints Alive]

But I'm troubled that our shared penchant for secrecy and corporate-style management allows that comparison to be made in people's minds. It would be much better for us if Scientology did not exist as a point of comparison.

At the same time it seems to be a fallacious to say that because we share common elements with scientology we are equally as kooky or weird. It should give us pause about the similarities though.

[ERayR]

At the same time it seems to be a fallacious to say that because we share common elements with scientology we are equally as kooky or weird. It should give us pause about the similarities though.

What makes kooky and wierd? As you can see there are enough who think that a belief in angels and sacred translations as kooky and wierd. Those of us who have reason to believe think they are kooky and wierd. So again what makes kooky and wierd?

[Saints Alive]

What makes kooky and wierd? As you can see there are enough who think that a belief in angels and sacred translations as kooky and wierd. Those of us who have reason to believe think they are kooky and wierd. So again what makes kooky and wierd?

You don't find scientology kooky or weird?

[Arkholt]

I will take Cinepro's statement as an opportunity to clarify my own position.

I feel that the church has every right to NOT publish CHI 1 if they don't want to. I can even understand SOME of the reasons they choose not to publish it. I also think I have demonstrated that it is not the norm for a church to keep their Procedural manual confidential

Emphasis mine. Which part of the CHI is confidential? Which part of it has information in it that only certain members of the Church get to know? Which part would a bishop not tell anybody, member or non-member, about if they went up and asked him? Just because it isn't handed out to every member doesn't make it confidential.

Edited October 20, 2011 by Arkholt

[ERayR]

You don't find scientology kooky or weird?

For the record I don't agree with its tenets. That however does not give me the right to label someone else for their beliefs. Do you find Tome Cruise kooky and wierd?

[ERayR]

I will take Cinepro's statement as an opportunity to clarify my own position.

I feel that the church has every right to NOT publish CHI 1 if they don't want to. I can even understand SOME of the reasons they choose not to publish it. I also think I have demonstrated that it is not the norm for a church to keep their Procedural manual confidential

You continue to misrepresent the character of the CHI. It is not confidential. It is available through the Bishop. You have been informed of this many times in this thread. I am beginning to think your misrepresentation is deliberate.

[seriously honestly]

You continue to misrepresent the character of the CHI. It is not confidential. It is available through the Bishop. You have been informed of this many times in this thread. I am beginning to think your misrepresentation is deliberate.

Maybe he just meant kept away from the public?

[ERayR]

Maybe he just meant kept away from the public?

That may be. I don't know but there have been more than one post that refuted confidentiality yet Saints Alive still characterizes it as such.

[Saints Alive]

That may be. I don't know but there have been more than one post that refuted confidentiality yet Saints Alive still characterizes it as such.

Here are the facts:

1. CHI 1 is not available on the Churches website for anyone who is not authorized access to it

2. Bishops / SP may share information in the CHI but they are not required to do so

3. It has been proven that the Church is peculiar in keeping its CHI from the general public as compared to other churches.

Edited October 20, 2011 by Saints Alive

[Saints Alive]

Do you find Tome Cruise kooky and wierd?

Frankly, yes I do

[ERayR]

Here are the facts:

1. CHI 1 is not available on the Churches website for anyone who is not authorized access to it

2. Bishops / SP may share information in the CHI but they are not required to do so

3. It has been proven that the Church is peculiar in keeping its CHI from the general public as compared to other churches.

con·fi·den·tial

   /ˌkɒnfɪˈdɛnʃəl/ Show Spelled[kon-fi-den-shuhl] Show IPA

adjective

1.

spoken, written, acted on, etc., in strict privacy or secrecy; secret: a confidential remark.

2.

indicating confidence or intimacy; imparting private matters: a confidential tone of voice.

3.

having another's trust or confidence; entrusted with secrets or private affairs: a confidential secretary.

1) Just because it is not on the web does not mean it is secret. It is available through other channels.

2) Just because one is not required to share does not mean it is secret (confidential).

3) It has been proven that other churches have similar publications on the web but not comparable.

Why the obsessive need to have a proceedures manual in your possession?

[Saints Alive]

con·fi·den·tial

   /ˌkɒnfɪˈdɛnʃəl/ Show IPA

adjective

1.

spoken, written, acted on, etc., in strict privacy or secrecy; secret: a confidential remark.

2.

indicating confidence or intimacy; imparting private matters: a confidential tone of voice.

3.

having another's trust or confidence; entrusted with secrets or private affairs: a confidential secretary.

1) Just because it is not on the web does not mean it is secret. It is available through other channels.

2) Just because one is not required to share does not mean it is secret (confidential).

3) It has been proven that other churches have similar publications on the web but not comparable.

Why the obsessive need to have a proceedures manual in your possession?

Ray: its a matter of principle for me, I do have a copy of both CHI 1&2 limiting the distribution of CHI 1 does more harm that good for the church IMHO. I am not sure why you are so defensive about the issue. What great harm do you for see if the CHI1 were to be available inPDF format on the churches website?

[ERayR]

Ray: its a matter of principle for me, I do have a copy of both CHI 1&2 limiting the distribution of CHI 1 does more harm that good for the church IMHO. I am not sure why you are so defensive about the issue. What great harm do you for see if the CHI1 were to be available inPDF format on the churches website?

I see members doing just what you are doing, second guessing every move the bishoprics and stake presidencies make. Especially when they are moved upon by the spirit to deviate from the instructions. Frankly most members could care less about having a copy of the books. And frankly I find it kooky and wierd that you are so obsessed with everyone having a copy.

[Saints Alive]

I see members doing just what you are doing, second guessing every move the bishoprics and stake presidencies make. Especially when they are moved upon by the spirit to deviate from the instructions. Frankly most members could care less about having a copy of the books. And frankly I find it kooky and wierd that you are so obsessed with everyone having a copy.

I really don't think anyone would have a problem with a Bishop deviating from the CHI, I wouldn't. I don't care if every one has a copy or not, I even support the Church's right to keep it from every member. But, I think the harm it causes keeping it exclusive is more that the good it does.

[ERayR]

I really don't think anyone would have a problem with a Bishop deviating from the CHI, I wouldn't. I don't care if every one has a copy or not, I even support the Church's right to keep it from every member. But, I think the harm it causes keeping it exclusive is more that the good it does.

Your opinion and you are entitled. Obviousley the presiding authorities in the church think otherwise. I am sure ther would be some, few but some, who would use it to find problems with a bishops course of action.

"I don't care if every one has a copy or not, I even support the Church's right to keep it from every member." Your actions on this forum and in this thread contradict this statement and I do find it strange that you don't recognize this.

[Saints Alive]

Your opinion and you are entitled. Obviousley the presiding authorities in the church think otherwise. I am sure ther would be some, few but some, who would use it to find problems with a bishops course of action.

How would that be different from the way things are now?