Citizens Call For Fbi Investigation Of Mormon Church

[Bernard Gui]

Meh, you guys are taking to long to answer this - so I'll do it. Stake and ward auditing is done by a stake auditor. This person is called and is trained in the church auditing system. The auditor does not need to have any skill or training in auditing or accounting.

As for the twice per year requirement, audits only need to happen once per year if I recall. However, the stakes I have been in have always gotten behind for various reasons. SLC sends a notice reminding stakes to catch up. I've been in stakes where wards were not audited for a couple of years.

H.

And I, as ward clerk, take the audits very seriously. My assistant for finances has a great deal of experience in financial auditing and he takes it very seriously, too. So does the stake auditor who audits us. We account for

every penny that passes through our ward system. Our bishop and his councilors, the stake presidency and

high council are scrupulous when it comes to handling the money people donate to the Church, the money we

receive from SLC to run our programs, and the way for which it is accounted.

Bernard

[Calm]

Someone wants thier 15 minutes of fame, makes wild/baseless allegations.

Paul Drockton actually. (He's the Illuminati guy, if you remember).

So far he has 33 signatures, of which quite a few (at least 12) are ineligible.

Edited April 10, 2012 by calmoriah

[cdowis]

Stake and ward auditing is done by a stake auditor. This person is called and is trained in the church auditing system. The auditor does not need to have any skill or training in auditing or accounting.

As for the twice per year requirement, audits only need to happen once per year if I recall. However, the stakes I have been in have always gotten behind for various reasons. SLC sends a notice reminding stakes to catch up. I've been in stakes where wards were not audited for a couple of years.

The ultimate responsibility for an audit is the responsibility of the individual at tithing settlement. The ward record is given to the member and they can compare it with their personal records (their copy of the tithing slip).

[jadams_4242]

jealousy....:}

[LDSToronto]

The ultimate responsibility for an audit is the responsibility of the individual at tithing settlement. The ward record is given to the member and they can compare it with their personal records (their copy of the tithing slip).

That's false. The audit goes beyond donations.

H.

[LDSToronto]

And I, as ward clerk, take the audits very seriously. My assistant for finances has a great deal of experience in financial auditing and he takes it very seriously, too. So does the stake auditor who audits us. We account for

every penny that passes through our ward system. Our bishop and his councilors, the stake presidency and

high council are scrupulous when it comes to handling the money people donate to the Church, the money we

receive from SLC to run our programs, and the way for which it is accounted.

Bernard

Perhaps i gave the wrong impression; the majority of local leaders are honest and trustworthy with respect to handling donations and disbursements. In all my years, I've only experienced two misappropriations, both criminal acts, and nothing I would attribute to being LDS.

The point I was making was that audits are conducted by internal auditors who are are not trained as accountants and there is a tendency to let audits slide in local units. While I would never call into question your integrity, there are more than 35,000 units in the church, implying 35,000+ clerks; there are varying levels of commitment.

I think the church would do better to use an independent auditor, just to remove that as a point of concern for us critics

H.

[cdowis]

del

Edited April 10, 2012 by cdowis

[Avatar4321]

I feel so flattered that we reached the attention of the DU. They are much like certain unnamed message boards that ban anyone who even hints as disagreement. I have countless acquaintences who have been banned from it. I probably would have as well if I hadnt gotten board with the place really fast.

I take them about as seriously as any other anti-mormon site.

[Avatar4321]

Reading some of the comments. Someone is claiming there were major changes at General Conference. What on earth are they talking about?

[LDSToronto]

My post was exactly correct as I actually wrote it. Please cease putting words in my mouth.

My post too! JINX!

H.

[ERayR]

Meh, you guys are taking to long to answer this - so I'll do it. Stake and ward auditing is done by a stake auditor. This person is called and is trained in the church auditing system. The auditor does not need to have any skill or training in auditing or accounting.

As for the twice per year requirement, audits only need to happen once per year if I recall. However, the stakes I have been in have always gotten behind for various reasons. SLC sends a notice reminding stakes to catch up. I've been in stakes where wards were not audited for a couple of years.

H.

You are wrong on all three assertions.

1) Auditing is not about what the number are but whether or not procedures are followed. If procedures re followed then defalcations and mistake don't happen. The audit program the church uses is comprehensive and effective. If problems are detected they must be corrected and a report of the corrective action made. It is an thorough and effective process.

2) Audits are done every six months.

3) Frankly I do not believe you have been in stakes where the financial audits have not been performed for two years. If that were the case SLC would be down on them like stink on a skunk.

[Calm]

Reading some of the comments. Someone is claiming there were major changes at General Conference. What on earth are they talking about?

The release of certain GAs. They apparently assume that all callings at that level are for life, at least they don't take into account the usual length of a calling, usual retirement, etc.

[ERayR]

Perhaps i gave the wrong impression; the majority of local leaders are honest and trustworthy with respect to handling donations and disbursements. In all my years, I've only experienced two misappropriations, both criminal acts, and nothing I would attribute to being LDS.

The point I was making was that audits are conducted by internal auditors who are are not trained as accountants and there is a tendency to let audits slide in local units. While I would never call into question your integrity, there are more than 35,000 units in the church, implying 35,000+ clerks; there are varying levels of commitment.

I think the church would do better to use an independent auditor, just to remove that as a point of concern for us critics

H.

To do an effective audit one does not have to be an accountant. They must, however, follow the audit program very diligently.

[LDSToronto]

You are wrong on all three assertions.

1) Auditing is not about what the number are but whether or not procedures are followed. If procedures re followed then defalcations and mistake don't happen. The audit program the church uses is comprehensive and effective. If problems are detected they must be corrected and a report of the corrective action made. It is an thorough and effective process.

I don't think I commented about what happend in an audit..

2) Audits are done every six months.

Then my current stake is definitely not keeping up.

3) Frankly I do not believe you have been in stakes where the financial audits have not been performed for two years. If that were the case SLC would be down on them like stink on a skunk.

You don't have to believe it. But here's what happens. First, you get snail mail from SLC, usually a few months after the audit was due. Then, when stake conference rolls around, if a general authority is visiting, he instructs the stake presidency to get a move on. But they don't come down on you like "stink on a skunk". They just keep sending letters.

H.

[Jeff K.]

And this takes two years, in Canada? In a stake? I find that hard to believe. Stakes are important elements to Salt Lake, especially in a place as well developed as Canada. Information travels rapidly, and not just by "snail mail" and they don't wait until a General Authority happens to come by, they send a General Authority.

What you suggest is not the reality reflected. Granted it may be slower in third world countries where communication and travel is somewhat problematic, but in Canada the issue is remarkably different, like a 51st state. Movement is easy to do, and there are plenty of authorities in Canada to speak to the issue directly and quickly.

[LDSToronto]

And this takes two years, in Canada? In a stake? I find that hard to believe. Stakes are important elements to Salt Lake, especially in a place as well developed as Canada. Information travels rapidly, and not just by "snail mail" and they don't wait until a General Authority happens to come by, they send a General Authority.

What you suggest is not the reality reflected. Granted it may be slower in third world countries where communication and travel is somewhat problematic, but in Canada the issue is remarkably different, like a 51st state. Movement is easy to do, and there are plenty of authorities in Canada to speak to the issue directly and quickly.

I didn't say these things happen because we live in Canada. I happen to live in Canada, ergo, I experienced these things in Canada. But I didn't draw any specific conclusion; this isn't a Canadian problem.

And no, Jeff, SLC doesn't send a general authority. And yes, Jeff, the church still uses regular post for much of it's communications. My stake president had a pile of mail every stake presidency meeting to sort through.

And yes, Jeff, I am currently in a stake where a couple of units were not audited for two years. And yes, Jeff, the GA who visited during stake conference asked about it. I was in the room. And no Jeff, we don't have to wait for a GA to visit - we have an AA70 who asks on occasion. But no one has ever been sent to straighten the stake out. And the stake I'm currently in regularly falls behind in audits. But it has nothing to do with being in Canada.

The reason it falls behind is because our stake covers a large geographical area. We have never had a consistent stake auditor - either moves or doesn't magnify calling. The outlying units cycle through clerks quickly or have clerks that also perform a number of other callings.

I hope that your confusion is now cleared up, Jeff.

H.

[Duncan]

And this takes two years, in Canada? In a stake? I find that hard to believe. Stakes are important elements to Salt Lake, especially in a place as well developed as Canada. Information travels rapidly, and not just by "snail mail" and they don't wait until a General Authority happens to come by, they send a General Authority.

What you suggest is not the reality reflected. Granted it may be slower in third world countries where communication and travel is somewhat problematic, but in Canada the issue is remarkably different, like a 51st state. Movement is easy to do, and there are plenty of authorities in Canada to speak to the issue directly and quickly.

Have you taken leave of your senses? Canada isn't the 51st State! Watch this! I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUE6Sl79rw8&feature=related

Edited April 10, 2012 by Duncan

[Jeff K.]

My apologies, I presumed Canada wasn't some primitive backwater nation with little or not communication in its organizations. Toronto apparently believes it to be so. I bow to his superior knowledge of the primitive and disorganized nature of Canadians.

Though I must say there seems to be a correction, two "units" ie wards or branches or auxiliaries have not been audited, not a stake. In other words it remains in the hands of the local stake leadership to audit the wards and branches and it is their decision to do so? Not an entire Stake that has not been audited. Contextual lies are still lies. Given that, how would Toronto know what was sent to the Stake President specifically and what the reply is? Well he wouldn't. So his scenario is doubtful at best. I see no credibility in his statement.

As for the twice per year requirement, audits only need to happen once per year if I recall. However, the stakes I have been in have always gotten behind for various reasons. SLC sends a notice reminding stakes to catch up. I've been in stakes where wards were not audited for a couple of years.

ERayr;

3) Frankly I do not believe you have been in stakes where the financial audits have not been performed for two years. If that were the case SLC would be down on them like stink on a skunk.

Toronto:

You don't have to believe it. But here's what happens. First, you get snail mail from SLC, usually a few months after the audit was due. Then, when stake conference rolls around, if a general authority is visiting, he instructs the stake presidency to get a move on. But they don't come down on you like "stink on a skunk". They just keep sending letters.

Toronto

And yes, Jeff, I am currently in a stake where a couple of units were not audited for two years. And yes, Jeff, the GA who visited during stake conference asked about it. I was in the room. And no Jeff, we don't have to wait for a GA to visit - we have an AA70 who asks on occasion. But no one has ever been sent to straighten the stake out. And the stake I'm currently in regularly falls behind in audits. But it has nothing to do with being in Canada

So now its "a couple of units", not a stake, and the context of both my point and ERayR dealt with the stake issue, which would have been shocking. Toronto confuses things, and it has a huge impact on his credibility. Men of integrity rarely revert to confusion in order to win a debate, but when your quiver is empty of anything truly remarkable as far as intellectual counterpoint, what are left to do but conflate Stakes and "units"?

Remember, some people purposely make honest debate difficult because they forget the first part of the phrase "honest debate".

.

[LDSToronto]

My apologies, I presumed Canada wasn't some primitive backwater nation with little or not communication in its organizations. Toronto apparently believes it to be so. I bow to his superior knowledge of the primitive and disorganized nature of Canadians.

Huh? CFR - show me where I referred to the Canadian church as a "primitive backwater nation with little or no communication". And don't post another response until you do so, or you will be in violation of board rules.

Though I must say there seems to be a correction, two "units" ie wards or branches or auxiliaries have not been audited, not a stake. In other words it remains in the hands of the local stake leadership to audit the wards and branches and it is their decision to do so? Not an entire Stake that has not been audited. Contextual lies are still lies. Given that, how would Toronto know what was sent to the Stake President specifically and what the reply is? Well he wouldn't. So his scenario is doubtful at best. I see no credibility in his statement.

Two units = two wards. And it is not the stake's decision to audit or not audit - it's a requirement. And, please, for the love of all that is good - try to read what you actually quoted. I mean, you quoted me saying:

" I've been in stakes where wards were not audited for a couple of years." and " I am currently in a stake where a couple of units were not audited for two years."

Because I use the word "wards" and "units" interchangeably, i am lying? Jeez, you really are grasping at straws, Jeff. "Unit" is the word used by the Church itself to refer to wards and branches. Read tech.lds.org for more information.

So now its "a couple of units", not a stake, and the context of both my point and ERayR dealt with the stake issue, which would have been shocking. Toronto confuses things, and it has a huge impact on his credibility. Men of integrity rarely revert to confusion in order to win a debate, but when your quiver is empty of anything truly remarkable as far as intellectual counterpoint, what are left to do but conflate Stakes and "units"?

Well, as you pointed out, I never said I've been in a stake that wasn't audited for two years. I always maintained I was in stakes that hadn't audited some of their units in two years.

When I say, "I've been to many baseball games where the Blue Jays won" and then I say, "I am currently at a baseball game where the Blue Jays are winning", my current state does not make my prior experiences a lie.

Remember, some people purposely make honest debate difficult because they forget the first part of the phrase "honest debate".

So true. Mind you, I was sharing my experiences, and you and ERayR turned my experiences into a debate.

H.

[Jeff K.]

I think your attempts at obfuscation have been revealed, much as your attempts to use other identities marks you as wanting in the integrity department.

[Saints Alive]

According to Wikipedia: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finances_of_The_Church_of_Jesus_Christ_of_Latter-day_Saints

The churches finances are public in the UK and Canada and are audited by public firms in both countries. In the US the Church is audited both internally by the Churches auditing committee and by a private auditing firm. I found this info with a 5 second google search if anyone cared to look.

[ebeddoulos]

Who does the auditing?

H.

Members of the stake were called to be on the stake audit committee to audit the wards/branches. Who audited the stakes and above, I do not know. That was above my job description.

[KevinG]

If your Stake is two years behind on auditing that may explain why you still have access to New Family Search.

Either both are sloppy or both are fiction.

[LDSToronto]

If your Stake is two years behind on auditing that may explain why you still have access to New Family Search.

Either both are sloppy or both are fiction.

I don't see how the two things are related. Stakes don't audit FamilySearch accounts, do they?

H.

[Damien the Leper]

OK.

We are professionals and members of the opposition research group for Team Obama. We have done just enough research to manufacture a scandal for Romney and his church. The petition makes everything sound sinister, even though it is normal business for any financial institution. No big deal but it sounds very very scary --

"These transactions appeared to involve sub-prime mortgages, high-risk derivatives, put options, call options and futures."

"Ensign Peak Advisors Appears to have involved Mitt Romney, Bain Capital and Robert Gay and Goldman Sachs in this wealth transfer." (emphasis mine)

Very clever how we bring Romney into this with complete deniability ("appears" is used several times).

This is carefully written with a specific agenda. It is a "hit piece" with Romney as the target.

Note: On the registration page, it says, "Join the Web's most popular liberal message board!"

Thanks for the response. I won't be joining the message board as I'm a Log Cabin Republican.