President Monson Issued A Court Summons? Is This For Real?

[ALarson]

True, but a good case would be one where the defense's case comparatively would appear weak. The other half, feels more like the other 2/3 and leaves their statement shoddy. 

I disagree regarding it being shoddy.  Examples have already been given on here (and there are many more) of statements spoken by and in writing from our church leaders supporting their claims. (See what omni posted above along with mine.)  I honestly believe that this one point will be quite easy for them to prove as factual.  However, the church can supply other evidence as to why they teach this, etc.

[Okrahomer]

CFR please.

 

Perhaps Grudunza is referring to instructions in Handbook 2.  It describes 2 situations where tithing should not be paid: 1) when the member is dependent upon Church assistance; and 2) when the member is a fulltime missionary.

[Sleeper Cell]

I agree.  But there is ample evidence and statements supporting their claim on this.  I'm sure that the church will supply evidence to prove the other half of the story too.

Except that I would expect that those bringing a criminal action against someone -- essentially for not giving “the other half of the story” -- would not, themselves,  make accusations without giving  “the other half of the story.”

[why me]

This case will never get to see the light of day beyond the process now. Here is the situation in Germany. If one does not pay the catholic church tax, one cannot be a member of the catholic church. If one does not pay the church tax in scandinavia, one cannot be a member of the lutheran church. How to justify it? It matters not if one is poor etc.

 

http://en.mercopress.com/2013/10/23/german-catholics-can-only-remain-in-the-church-if-they-pay-membership-tax-rules-court

 

This had been challenged by a retired law professor who said he wanted to remain a Catholic but not pay the tax. Last week, a new bishops' decree warned that anyone not paying the tax would be denied the right to religious rites. The German church levy was introduced in 1803 in compensation for the nationalization of religious property.

In 2011, the Catholic Church received 5bn Euros and the Protestant Church 4.5bn Euros from taxpayers, each adding up to the bulk of the churches' income, the BBC's Berlin correspondent Stephen Evans said.

He added that this arrangement, whereby the state collects taxes on behalf of religious groups and then reimburses them, was unusual in Western secular societies.

Hartmut Zapp, a retired professor of church law, filed a legal challenge in 2007, arguing that under Catholic doctrine, Church membership was determined by a person's beliefs and not by a financial relationship. The Freiburg University academic said he wanted to continue praying and receiving Holy Communion without paying the religious levy.

Judges at the Leipzig Federal Administrative Court, however, disagreed with Prof Zapp and ruled that there could not be partial Church membership. Their verdict follows a new bishops' decree issued last week, according to which anyone failing to pay the tax will no longer have the right to Holy Communion and religious burial.

Already alarmed by declining congregation numbers, the bishops were also pushed into action by Mr Zapp's legal challenge. They said refusal to pay Church tax should be seen as a serious act against the community.

Catholics make up around 30% of Germany's population but the number of congregants leaving the church swelled to 181,000 in 2010, with the increase blamed on revelations of sexual abuse by German priests.

“This decree makes clear that one cannot partly leave the Church,” Germany's bishops' conference said last week, in a decision endorsed by the Vatican.

Unless they pay the religious tax, Catholics will no longer be allowed receive sacraments, except before death, or work in the church and its schools or hospitals.

Without a “sign of repentance before death, a religious burial can be refused”, the decree states. Opting out of the tax would also bar people from acting as godparents to Catholic children.

“This decree at this moment of time is really the wrong signal by the German bishops who know that the Catholic church is in a deep crisis,” said Christian Weisner from the grassroots Catholic campaign group We Are Church.

But a priest from Mannheim in south-western Germany, Father Lukas Glocker, said the tax was used to do essential good works.

“With kindergarten, with homes for elderly or unemployed, we've got really good things so I know we need the tax to help the German country to do good things.”

While the decree severely limits active participation in the German Catholic Church, it does hold out some hope for anyone considering a return to the fold.

Until now, any German Catholic who stopped payment faced eventual excommunication. Although the measures laid out in the decree are similar to excommunication from the church, German observers say the word is carefully avoided in the decree.

 

Britain is an EU country. Tithing is being forced on members of other faiths through state taxes. For the lds church, it is voluntary. This case will not go anywhere.

Edited February 7, 2014 by why me

[why me]

Except that I would expect that those bringing a criminal action against someone -- essentially for not giving “the other half of the story” -- would not, themselves,  make accusations without giving  “the other half of the story.”

In the european union, many states have church taxes. What side of the story are these church members getting who are members of state churches? I can assure you not much of the other side. Now britain may have a different law. But this case will go anywhere far. Too much is at stake. And also we have islam which is a very powerful in britain. In islam, every muslim must give 2.5 percent of their income to the poor if they wish to go to Alla. It is one of the pillars of islam. If one does not pay the tithe, one is not a good muslim. Can a fraud case be implemented against the leading mullah in britain? if this gets the green light, then yes, a fraud case can be presented.

 

http://www.saudiembassy.net/about/country-information/Islam/five_pillars_of_Islam.aspx

 

Zakat, almsgiving, is the third pillar. Social responsibility is considered part of one's service to God; the obligatory act of zakat enshrines this duty. Zakat prescribes payment of fixed proportions of a Muslim's possessions for the welfare of the entire community and in particular for its neediest members. It is equal to 2.5 percent of an individual's total net worth, excluding obligations and family expenses.

[bluebell]

True, but it's also giving only half the picture....such as if you don't have enough money for food, you can use the bishop's warehouse and various other resources provided by the church to help in financially tough times. I haven't finished reading the statement, but this is my major problem in general with it: they only give a slither of the story/truth of the LDS faith and then propping it up as the whole enchilada. I'll mention more when I have more time to read it.

 

With luv,

BD 

 

Exactly.

 

If these men are trying to suggest that the church pushes people to pay tithing during difficult financial times because the church wants the money (rather than because the leaders of the church sincerely believe paying tithing will help the family) then their omission about how the church helps people who are in financial need is a serious one.

 

I've served as a RS president and have worked with the bishop and families who are struggling to pay tithing because they don't have enough money to meet all of their needs.  Not every ward is able to help to the same degree, but usually some kind of help is offered.  

 

When someone is financially destitute, they will typically be paying practically nothing in tithing.  But, these same people can then ask, and also typically receive, money from the church to help pay mortgages, utilities, food, etc.  In these kinds of situations, the church loses money on these people.  It would not make sense, if the church is purposefully trying to defraud people out of money, for them to teach these kinds of people to pay tithing first.

[ALarson]

Any legal experts (or others) have any insight to give on this paragraph?

 

We are also anxious to see the church offer assurances about the position with Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs of members and former members who now feel, as we do, that our tithing and other offerings were obtained by the church under false pretenses. For every pound paid to the church by LDS members in the UK who, (following leadership counsel), have availed themselves of Deeds of Covenant and Gift Aid, £0.20 has been added by the British Taxpayer to the church’s bank accounts. The sum paid out by HMRC in this connection must now amount to tens of millions of pounds. It is understood that in most cases the resulting tax rebates made to individuals, were handed over to the church at its request. We seek an assurance from the church therefore, that in the event that at some future time these payments made by HMRC will be deemed to have been fraudulently obtained, the LDS church will offer immunity to those individuals, and ensure that such sums as were rebated will be returned with the due interest to HMRC.

[juliann]

MormonThink will also get a huge surge in the google rankings.

 

Having high traffic, respected websites (times, telegraph, usatoday etc) link to MormonThink will be a boost to their rankings. Having them link to MT from an article with phrases like "Book of Abraham translation" or "Book of Mormon translation" etc will mean that MT will appear higher up the search results for those phrases.

 

Assuming this never goes to trial (which I do) then the gain made by MT will be the longer term. People will continue searching those phrases far longer than the articles continue to be read or the case is talked about. There will be a much higher volume of people searching those phrases than reading those articles. If MT is appearing 'above the fold' (in the first 5-6 results) then they have had a big "win" from this summons, whatever the trial result.

 

I'm not celebrating that. I'm no fan of MT.

 

MT will be left preaching to the choir, which is why they were so deceptive about what they were really about...ironic considering the lawsuit they suddenly never supported, but I digress....

 

Googling will also lead people to newspaper article after newspaper article that hangs a big red sign on MT that says "critical of the church"...or worse.  Anyone anywhere can now unquestionably label them as nothing but critics and have an "objective" newspaper to back them up.

 

This ultimately won't be about Google rankings.  It is about their brand.  They just sold it for a mess of pottage.

[why me]

MT will be left preaching to the choir, which is why they were so deceptive about what they were really about...ironic considering the lawsuit they suddenly never supported, but I digress....

 

Googling will also lead people to newspaper article after newspaper article that hangs a big red sign on MT that says "critical of the church"...or worse.  Anyone anywhere can now unquestionably label them as nothing but critics and have an "objective" newspaper to back them up.

 

This ultimately won't be about Google rankings.  It is about their brand.  They just sold it for a mess of pottage.

This is true. No critic can now claim that MT is impartial. MT is finally where it should be: in the antimormon camp for all to see. And that is a good thing for the church and for the lds apologists.

[juliann]

The two men involved in the lawsuit  (Steve Bloor and Chris Ralph) posted a joint statements today:

 

 

Good grief, and what is one of the dumbest thing you can do when involved in a legal proceeding?

[why me]

Any legal experts (or others) have any insight to give on this paragraph?

 

We are also anxious to see the church offer assurances about the position with Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs of members and former members who now feel, as we do, that our tithing and other offerings were obtained by the church under false pretenses. For every pound paid to the church by LDS members in the UK who, (following leadership counsel), have availed themselves of Deeds of Covenant and Gift Aid, £0.20 has been added by the British Taxpayer to the church’s bank accounts. The sum paid out by HMRC in this connection must now amount to tens of millions of pounds. It is understood that in most cases the resulting tax rebates made to individuals, were handed over to the church at its request. We seek an assurance from the church therefore, that in the event that at some future time these payments made by HMRC will be deemed to have been fraudulently obtained, the LDS church will offer immunity to those individuals, and ensure that such sums as were rebated will be returned with the due interest to HMRC.

Since tithing is voluntary, it should not have a impact. One can be a member and not pay tithing. But one cannot receive the ordinances in the catholic faith in germany unless one pays the state tax. And one cannot be a good muslim in britain unless one tithes their income. If the lds church has a problem in britain, so does islam. And the courts will know this. This case will not get very far.

[why me]

Good grief, and what is one of the dumbest thing you can do when involved in a legal proceeding?

I felt the same way when I saw it. If the court reads their statement, the case will be history.

[Avatar4321]

They are representing themselves, correct? Or did I read that wrong?

[sheilauk]

Mr Phillips has issued the information and is the prosecutor and appears to be representing himself. The other two men are witnesses. Mr. Philips could hire a lawyer to represent him in court. The two men cannot. Again, I feel they have not had any legal advice or if they have it's very poor advice.

Edited February 7, 2014 by sheilauk

[BlueDreams]

I disagree regarding it being shoddy.  Examples have already been given on here (and there are many more) of statements spoken by and in writing from our church leaders supporting their claims. (See what omni posted above along with mine.)  I honestly believe that this one point will be quite easy for them to prove as factual.  However, the church can supply other evidence as to why they teach this, etc.

 

Sleeper cell and BB mentioned what I'd say. Basically it's shoddy because they should have thought of this before bringing it as a solid case before a court of law. Their point isn't shoddy because they have not evidence, but that that evidence is not very strident or robust in light of other evidence that is easily available.

 

With luv,

BD

[juliann]

Mr Phillips has issued the information and is the prosecutor and appears to be representing himself. The other two men are witnesses. Mr. Philips could hire a lawyer to represent him in court. The two men cannot. Again, I feel they have not had any legal advice or if they have it's very poor advice.

It was reported on another site that Steve Benson (RFM) reported the magistrate spent months questioning Phillips from every angle until she was satisfied. 

 

Can he pick his magistrate or is determined by where one of them lives?  

[sheilauk]

This statement does not aid their case. So many things to raise in defence but I'm sure the church's lawyers are more than capable of spotting them and I've no wish to aid Mr Phillips.

I do think that this statement is rather garbled but I'm touched by their concern for converts like me. I wonder why if I only got half the information when I joined I haven't left now I know the whole terrible truth. Am i stupid? Wonder if I could sign up to be a witness for the defence?

[sheilauk]

It was reported on another site that Steve Benson (RFM) reported the magistrate spent months questioning Phillips from every angle until she was satisfied.

Can he pick his magistrate or is determined by where one of them lives?

Months questioning him? Don't believe it. Might have met him a few times and questioned him and may gave spent time considering it. If so, it makes it even worse that she issued the summons. As to your question, normally the court is determined by the place the offence was committed. A private prosecutor would approach the court with his request for a summons and the head of legal services would allocate a magistrate/district judge or deal with it themselves.

[sethpayne]

Good grief, and what is one of the dumbest thing you can do when involved in a legal proceeding?

 

 

juliann -- at this point would you expect anything else from this gang?  If Twede can't even figure out how to use an internet proxy .....   Let's just say I'm not surprised.

[Grudunza]

The last official statement by the Church on tithing (from 1970) is this: "For your guidance in this matter, please be advised that we have uniformly replied that the simplest statement we know of is that statement of the Lord himself that the members of the Church should pay one-tenth of all their interest annually, which is understood to mean income.  No one is justified in making any other statement than this.  We feel that every member of the Church should be entitled to make his own decision as to what he thinks he owes the Lord, and to make payment accordingly."  (emphasis mine)  That statement has been quoted, whole or in part, several times since 1970.

 

D&C 119 indicates that tithing is referring to surplus, or profit.  Elder Bednar quoted that last Conference: "Section 119 simply states that all members “shall pay one-tenth of all their interest annually; and this shall be a standing law unto them forever."  There have been numerous debates about the gross/net thing, and what "interest" and "increase" and "income" should mean, but to me it seems clear that it should be net, as some families and businesses make very little net compared to their gross.  You could have a business that grosses a million dollars, but from which you net $90,000 after expenses.  $90,000 would be a very good salary for most people, and would certainly justify owning and running that business.  But if you paid tithing on the gross, you'd be in debt by $10,000 every year, which would be absurd to expect the Lord to want.  And the same type of distinction may apply to certain families who have different needs for food, clothing, rent, medicine, etc.  A family with 1-2 children may easily live on a $50,000 salary and gladly pay tithing before food or clothing expenses, but would the same be reasonable to expect from a family with 6-7 kids and a $50,000 income?  I know that many leaders have said to pay tithing before all of that stuff, but I don't believe that's really appropriate for them to say, based on the bolded part of the official statement above.  The terms "increase" and "interest" and "income" can certainly be interpreted (if someone will "make his own decision" to do so) as what you earn in gross, or to be applied before all food expenses, but I believe you are also justified (if you make your own decision to do so) to include certain necessary expenses as applying before considering what your "increase" really amounts to.

 

Here's an interesting article about what a tithe should constitute: http://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2012/12/are-we-paying-too-much-tithing.html

And, here's one from, of all places, MormonThink (showing that they are well aware of the Church's official position and statement): http://mormonthink.com/tithingdefinition.htm  Again, if they want to complain about some Church leaders being wishy-washy or misleading about tithing, fine, I'll grant them some grievance-airing in that regard, but they clearly know the official statement that it's up to us how we interpret tithing payment, so to claim that the Church as a whole is responsible for requiring tithing over feeding our families is very disingenuous.

[Calm]

Months questioning him? Don't believe it. Might have met him a few times and questioned him and may gave spent time considering it. If so, it makes it even worse that she issued the summons. As to your question, normally the court is determined by the place the offence was committed. A private prosecutor would approach the court with his request for a summons and the head of legal services would allocate a magistrate/district judge or deal with it themselves.

Does the magistrate get paid by the State? If so, spending months questioning someone before deciding to go for it seems a waste of state resources and would likely raise a question about her effectiveness and efficiency.

Otoh having a couple of appts to discuss it being spread over several months seems more likely.

[canard78]

MT will be left preaching to the choir, which is why they were so deceptive about what they were really about...ironic considering the lawsuit they suddenly never supported, but I digress....

 

Googling will also lead people to newspaper article after newspaper article that hangs a big red sign on MT that says "critical of the church"...or worse.  Anyone anywhere can now unquestionably label them as nothing but critics and have an "objective" newspaper to back them up.

 

This ultimately won't be about Google rankings.  It is about their brand.  They just sold it for a mess of pottage.

 

You don't seem to get how this works. We, in the "bloggernacle" are in the tiny, tiny minority. The vast majority of people who reach mormonthink will do so because they googled a general Mormon phrase which MT appears on the front page for. They will read the articles and might not have ever heard of FAIRmormon/Mormondialogue etc. This is a massive coup for MT's search rankings. MT has no "brand" for the vast majority of people because most people have never heard of it. Try it. Go and ask a few of your church friends, they'll mainly not have heard of it. Then go and ask the missionaries' investigators. They will also not have heard of it. This is simply a website that most people will land on during a google search.

 

Also, those newspaper articles will never appear on the first page for the key search terms because they don't have inbound links mentioning the terms that are searched for.

[sheilauk]

Does the magistrate get paid by the State? If so, spending months questioning someone before deciding to go for it seems a waste of

state resources and would likely raise a question about her effectiveness and efficiency.

Otoh having a couple of appts to discuss it being spread over several months seems more likely.

District judges as in this case are employed and paid by the state. They work fulll time. The 2nd scenario is more likely.

[Kenngo1969]

This is a well thought out judgement.  I believe it could be applied to UK law.  However, I don't think that any UK judge will even read it and certainly not magistrates.  I haven't looked into whether there are any UK judgements that might be referred to.  As the lowest Courts in the land, the Magistrates and Crown Courts can interprete evidence re the facts but can only apply the law (ie follow judgements from the UK's Court of Appeal and Supreme Court).  They don't make law.

Hopefully, in the unlikely and unfortunate event that the Church of Jesus Christ suffers an adverse result at trial in this case, appellate judges will pay due attention to Justice Jackson's (albeit dissenting) opinion.

[bluebell]

You don't seem to get how this works. We, in the "bloggernacle" are in the tiny, tiny minority. The vast majority of people who reach mormonthink will do so because they googled a general Mormon phrase which MT appears on the front page for. They will read the articles and might not have ever heard of FAIRmormon/Mormondialogue etc. This is a massive coup for MT's search rankings. MT has no "brand" for the vast majority of people because most people have never heard of it. Try it. Go and ask a few of your church friends, they'll mainly not have heard of it. Then go and ask the missionaries' investigators. They will also not have heard of it. This is simply a website that most people will land on during a google search.

 

Also, those newspaper articles will never appear on the first page for the key search terms because they don't have inbound links mentioning the terms that are searched for.

 

This might have been true in a different scenario, but if this lawsuit becomes popular news, people will soon recognize MT because of it's role in the lawsuit.  It will not be a case of stumbling upon it without having ever heard of it before but a case of people, looking for information because of some article they have read about the legal case, recognizing it for what it is.  Members especially will quickly become familiar with the site, typically without ever visiting it.

 

MT will become linked with 'critical of the LDS church' and 'suing the prophet for fraud'.  That's not necessarily a bad thing for MT, if they are o.k. with being known as an anti-Mormon site.  If they don't want that designation though, then it would be problematic for them.

 

My guess though is that they are willing to become 'that' site to Mormons (much like the God-makers became 'that' movie) if there is a chance it will get them what they want in the end-to discredit the LDS church.