Go Sign Up (it doesn't hurt)

[FSM]

question: how will knowing/not knowing affect your testimonies?

Since my testimony is in the Savior and God only, it won't affect my testimony a bit! Now if you want to ask how secrecy and half-truths and some of the things I've seen first hand affects my trust in the corporation, well that's a different story.

Jules! There you are. I wish I could hear that story one day. I haven't thought too much about church financing. I will consider it. By Jules.

[Obrien]

On a different note but related. Did David Bednar ever respond? No need to answer. I think I already know the answer to that. ;)

......

[Daryl]

I signed up. I want to see the truth about LDS finances.

[A Random Phrase]

bump

[ebenezerarise]

Yeah, let's sign a petition and then march on Temple Square, shall we? What a ridiculous idea.

[A Random Phrase]

Nah. That isn't why I bumped it. The church sends out surveys to find out what people think. If they come across this, it is a bona fide representation of what people think. And all they want is to know where the money goes. That is all they are asking.

[Elizabeth]

D&C Section 121.

16 Cursed are all those that shall lift up the heel against mine anointed, saith the Lord, and cry they have sinned when they have not sinned before me, saith the Lord, but have done that which was meet in mine eyes, and which I commanded them.

17 But those who cry transgression do it because they are the servants of sin, and are the children of disobedience themselves.

[dtanner]

Just signed it.
#1984
ominous

[BrotherOfMahonri]

http://bycommonconsent.org/

if I did that right, you should be looking at a link the go and view a simply worded petition. the purpose of the petition is to let the church leaders know we want transparency in church finance. read it. be bold and sign it.

what's the worst that can happen - you self identify as a responsible person seeking to be responsible and they take away your temple recommend and kick you out of the church? does that idea concern you? doesn't it bother you more to be in a fear-based relationship?

Its interesting, as I feel just reading this first post now the equal fear driven tactic here in this invite to sign the "simply worded, self identifying, responsible, temple recommend holding, anti-fear based" petition, as I do at church with a bishop and my temple recommend being withheld because I have faith "the brethren" could be who they say they are.

Not trying to knock on anyone, esp. Obrien who I do admire, but as much as I really believe things should be transparent, I feel (key word feel) in my heart of hearts, if we are to unite our prayers, the prayers of the "righteous" will do much more than petitions.

An invite to consider the though that your invite to sign has a similar feel to the tactics that are complained of by many on here, including myself, towards what feels like controlling the spirit and the will of the hearts of others (which we know is impossible) to achieve some purpose.

[Obrien]

http://bycommonconsent.org/

if I did that right, you should be looking at a link the go and view a simply worded petition. the purpose of the petition is to let the church leaders know we want transparency in church finance. read it. be bold and sign it.

what's the worst that can happen - you self identify as a responsible person seeking to be responsible and they take away your temple recommend and kick you out of the church? does that idea concern you? doesn't it bother you more to be in a fear-based relationship?

Its interesting, as I feel just reading this first post now the equal fear driven tactic here in this invite to sign the "simply worded, self identifying, responsible, temple recommend holding, anti-fear based" petition, as I do at church with a bishop and my temple recommend being withheld because I have faith "the brethren" could be who they say they are.

Not trying to knock on anyone, esp. Obrien who I do admire, but as much as I really believe things should be transparent, I feel (key word feel) in my heart of hearts, if we are to unite our prayers, the prayers of the "righteous" will do much more than petitions.

An invite to consider the though that your invite to sign has a similar feel to the tactics that are complained of by many on here, including myself, towards what feels like controlling the spirit and the will of the hearts of others (which we know is impossible) to achieve some purpose.

BDL - I was not seeking to scare anyone. I was simply pointing out what could be the worst case scenario for many LDS who are timid about "raising their heel against the anointed" (sheesh Regina,, really??) Once the worst case scenario is recognized, the fear of that potential outcome can be overcome and rational behavior could be considered.

I'M not threatening anyone, just asking that people of their own free will make their voice heard. I suffer no illusion that it will change anything.

[Robert Sinclair]

The Lord has commanded that you weep and howl and sound the alarm and blow the trumpet in Zion about the perversion of equity. This may help with that perfectly. ♡ ♡

Part of the process of Ephraim being ashamed as the Lord has said that they should be.

This that his bride might be brought out of the closet.

If this helps bring her out of the closet, good, the Lord will be pleased. ♡ ♡

Let's all help bring the bride out of the closet, that the bridegroom may come forth. ♡ ♡

[ajax]

Were the early saints lifting their heels against the Lord's anointed in this episode of church history?

...when the Church was eight years old, some 15,000 converts had already emigrated from their homes and gathered to Missouri, the new Zion. Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon, who constituted the First Presidency at the time, were spending all their time dealing with and settling this huge flow of immigrants, to the exclusion of being able to provide a living for their own families. Things were at a point where Joseph and Sidney must either be compensated for their time, or they were both going to have to stop what they were doing and go out and get a real job. On May 12th the two men took the matter before the High Council of the Church. George W. Robinson recorded the minutes:

The Presidency laid before the High Council their situation as to maintaining their families in the situation and relation they stood to the Church, spending as they have for eight years their time, talents, and property in the service of the Church and now reduced as it were to absolute beggary and still were detained in the service of the Church. It now [had] become necessary that something should be done for their support, either by the Church or else they must do it themselves of their own labors. If the Church said, "Help yourselves," they would thank them and immediately do so, but if the Church said, "Serve us," then some provisions must be made for them. (Scott Faulring, An American Prophet's Record, Pg 182.)

The High Council voted eleven to one (George Hinkle vigorously opposed "a salaried ministry") to further contract the two men for their services, being careful to note that the money was "not for preaching or for receiving the word of God by revelation, neither for instructing the Saints in righteousness," but for work in the "printing establishment, in translating the ancient records, &c, &c." (ibid.)

Richard S. Van Wagoner, in his biography of Sidney Rigdon, further explains:

After negotiations, they agreed to offer Rigdon and Smith an annual contract of $1,100 apiece, more than three times what the average worker of the day could earn. Ebenezer Robinson, the High Council's clerk, later wrote that "when it was noised abroad that the Council had taken such a step, the members of the Church, almost to a man, lifted their voices against it. The expression of disapprobation was so strong and emphatic that at the next meeting of the High Council, the resolution voting them a salary was rescinded." (Richard S. Van Wagoner, Sidney Rigdon, Pg 230.)What the High Council did instead was offer the men 80 acres for their families to live on. So now Joseph and Sidney had some ground under them, but no walking around money. Maybe if they had asked for a more reasonable salary to begin with, there might not have been such an outcry. (Frankly, I blame Rigdon for the overreach. That just sounds like Sidney Rigdon to me.)

http://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2012/ ... thing.html

I'd say members have a right to expect and demand common decency, accountability, and transparency from leadership. I'd go so far as to say it is our duty to help our brothers stay in the right way as much as it is their duty to minister to the saints, lest some of the branches suffer from bouts of mild loftiness.

It is an abuse of power for leadership of any stripe to suggest they cannot be questioned. And then to trot out life and death rhetoric like "lifting your heel against the lord's anointed" to back their position is nothing more than hubris.

[Obrien]

Were the early saints lifting their heels against the Lord's anointed in this episode of church history?

...when the Church was eight years old, some 15,000 converts had already emigrated from their homes and gathered to Missouri, the new Zion. Joseph Smith and Sidney Rigdon, who constituted the First Presidency at the time, were spending all their time dealing with and settling this huge flow of immigrants, to the exclusion of being able to provide a living for their own families. Things were at a point where Joseph and Sidney must either be compensated for their time, or they were both going to have to stop what they were doing and go out and get a real job. On May 12th the two men took the matter before the High Council of the Church. George W. Robinson recorded the minutes:

The Presidency laid before the High Council their situation as to maintaining their families in the situation and relation they stood to the Church, spending as they have for eight years their time, talents, and property in the service of the Church and now reduced as it were to absolute beggary and still were detained in the service of the Church. It now [had] become necessary that something should be done for their support, either by the Church or else they must do it themselves of their own labors. If the Church said, "Help yourselves," they would thank them and immediately do so, but if the Church said, "Serve us," then some provisions must be made for them. (Scott Faulring, An American Prophet's Record, Pg 182.)

The High Council voted eleven to one (George Hinkle vigorously opposed "a salaried ministry") to further contract the two men for their services, being careful to note that the money was "not for preaching or for receiving the word of God by revelation, neither for instructing the Saints in righteousness," but for work in the "printing establishment, in translating the ancient records, &c, &c." (ibid.)

Richard S. Van Wagoner, in his biography of Sidney Rigdon, further explains:

After negotiations, they agreed to offer Rigdon and Smith an annual contract of $1,100 apiece, more than three times what the average worker of the day could earn. Ebenezer Robinson, the High Council's clerk, later wrote that "when it was noised abroad that the Council had taken such a step, the members of the Church, almost to a man, lifted their voices against it. The expression of disapprobation was so strong and emphatic that at the next meeting of the High Council, the resolution voting them a salary was rescinded." (Richard S. Van Wagoner, Sidney Rigdon, Pg 230.)What the High Council did instead was offer the men 80 acres for their families to live on. So now Joseph and Sidney had some ground under them, but no walking around money. Maybe if they had asked for a more reasonable salary to begin with, there might not have been such an outcry. (Frankly, I blame Rigdon for the overreach. That just sounds like Sidney Rigdon to me.)

http://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2012/ ... thing.html

I'd say members have a right to expect and demand common decency, accountability, and transparency from leadership. I'd go so far as to say it is our duty to help our brothers stay in the right way as much as it is their duty to minister to the saints, lest some of the branches suffer from bouts of mild loftiness.

It is an abuse of power for leadership of any stripe to suggest they cannot be questioned. And then to trot out life and death rhetoric like "lifting your heel against the lord's anointed" to back their position is nothing more than hubris.

Or desperation...

[Lizzy60]

Amen, ajax (and Obrien).

[A Random Phrase]

D&C Section 121.

16 Cursed are all those that shall lift up the heel against mine anointed, saith the Lord, and cry they have sinned when they have not sinned before me, saith the Lord, but have done that which was meet in mine eyes, and which I commanded them.

17 But those who cry transgression do it because they are the servants of sin, and are the children of disobedience themselves.

I don't think asking, "How do you spend the money we donate to you?" is lifting up the heel against the Lord's anointed, nor is it crying that anyone has sinned. Now, if we find out how the money is spent, there may be some crying that someone has sinned - or not. Depends on how they spend/spent it.

[Obrien]

[Insert Obrien's favorite curse word here], where's that thank button? Good point ^^^, Toni.

[Desert Roses]

I suspect I'll be flamed for my point of view, but here it is. I don't give a hoot in h*ll what happens to tithing money. It wasn't mine even when I signed the check; it was God's sufferance that allows me the means to live. I consistently receive the blessings. If there is any "misuse" of those sacred funds, it's on the head of those who do wrong. Everything in this world materially is Messiah's and His Father's. They, likewise, are in charge of the organization of the church and each and every penny. If They want it spent differently, they can (and will) take care of that. I wouldn't second guess my Lord and Savior on anything!

[A Random Phrase]

True, Desert Roses. At least imo.

The money is God's if the person giving it is giving it to God with all their heart. If it is mismanaged, heaven help those who did so. Perhaps we would be best served to look at ourselves and see where we are mismanaging what God has given to us? (Not just money, but time, talents, family, friends, and so forth.)

Some people have a problem, though, with not knowing how it is spent because the Doctrine and Covenants leads us to believe that the members of the LDS church should have a say in how it is spent, and should know where the money goes. As far as I know, God has never given a revelation negating that revelation.

P.S. I did sign the petition a few years ago and don't regret doing so.

[ajax]

From a book I'm reading, The Vatican Exposed:

...scandal has resulted in a precipitous decrease in donations not only by blue-collar Catholic families but also by major philanthropists and Catholic foundations. "The Church should open its books," said Erica P. John, heiress to the Miller brewery fortune and president of a private foundation that contributes $5 million a year to Catholic causes in Milwaukee. "The Church is not a secret society. We're the people of God and we want transparency."

Seems like a reasonable position.

[shadow]

None but the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints has twelve and seventy shepherds appointed to such a work.

Must they bake in the lake, is there no hope?

Cry unto the Lord to spare these twelve and seventy shepherds a little bit longer "if" it may be of his will ♡

Since even Joseph Smith couldn't help the saints live in Zion, is it your interpretation that every Latter day prophet from Joseph Smith to Gordon Hinckley and all the apostles therein have been thrust to the lake of Hell at their deaths?

[Elizabeth]

[Robert Sinclair]

They come to realize that the opportunity to redeem Zion once their lives have past, is over for them, and passed on to others to awaken and acknowledge and atone, Jesus Christ is there and loves each and everyone of Ephraim dearly as has been written, and he will ransom each and everyone of them as has been written-

"I will ransom them from the grave: I will redeem them from death: O death, I will be thy plagues; O grave, I will be thy destruction."

You will come to know all of these things, that redemption is of Jesus Christ for Ephraim whether from the fiery abyss spoken of by Enoch, or where ever he may place them.

How joyous to be of that generation of Ephraim that finally says,

"What have I to do anymore with idols?"

And finally return to bring forth fruits equal and delightful unto the Lord?

That would be wonderful if in our lifetime, would you agree? ♡ ♡

[BrotherOfMahonri]

True, Desert Roses. At least imo.

The money is God's if the person giving it is giving it to God with all their heart. If it is mismanaged, heaven help those who did so. Perhaps we would be best served to look at ourselves and see where we are mismanaging what God has given to us? (Not just money, but time, talents, family, friends, and so forth.)

Some people have a problem, though, with not knowing how it is spent because the Doctrine and Covenants leads us to believe that the members of the LDS church should have a say in how it is spent, and should know where the money goes. As far as I know, God has never given a revelation negating that revelation.

P.S. I did sign the petition a few years ago and don't regret doing so.

I think the problem comes when there is misuse or abuse of the offerings given by those in leadership, and the leadership uses their position as justification.

An example I have had first hand. As a naive missionary, I was asked to be the financial AP as we called them, where I had direct access to our mission's funds and SLC as needed. As the financial AP or secretary to the president, the first North American in such an office after 10 or so years of all Peruvian financial secretaries, I was lead unexpectedly by the spirit to discover where leaders, members, and presidency members were using the mission funds for a decade to live the life they wanted in many varying degrees. A report was made and given to the proper person which held a meeting and for all their protection decided to tell the one individual to get out of town and released him to protect the rest from what SLC might do to them all?

Also, an entire, well known, once very inspired stake presidency and many bishops were excommunicated during my mission for misuse of fast offerings and tithing funds (us missionaries were put in as temporary bishoprics and stake pres members - it was a huge insult to many old time members of that stake and wards - who let us know of the insult and spoke about it in fast and testimony meetings, how they were having to be be lead by babes instead of men of sound understanding because of sin and pride within the church there).

So my point is within the church, money given or tithes given should be sacred, and we are taught that they are sacred, and if it ever got out that it was misused purposefully, excommunications most likley would be issued - the problem however that I discovered as a 20 yr old, was nobody was willing to rat out another due to their leadership positions, ramifications, justifications, etc..

I don't think the Lord cares about the money as much as he does the heart's of his children who are in charge of the monies and the use of such, so when a person, like in the example of my mission, willfully deceives when they have power over the monies, I feel that is when the Lord sets up an adversary so to speak against that person, out of love and teaching them, or provides a witness to help that person confess of the sin or willful deceit (ie. David and Uriah and the prophet Nathan and the little lamb) and it usually ends in excommunication or disfellowship.

[jockeybox]

I suspect I'll be flamed for my point of view, but here it is. I don't give a hoot in h*ll what happens to tithing money. It wasn't mine even when I signed the check; it was God's sufferance that allows me the means to live. I consistently receive the blessings. If there is any "misuse" of those sacred funds, it's on the head of those who do wrong. Everything in this world materially is Messiah's and His Father's. They, likewise, are in charge of the organization of the church and each and every penny. If They want it spent differently, they can (and will) take care of that. I wouldn't second guess my Lord and Savior on anything!

I don't see anyone second guessing The Lord. His ways are perfect, not mans. Your assumption that a mall for 1.5 billion was the Lord's preference seems like unsafe territory. I wouldn't want to be the one justifying that to the God at a judgement bar! I pray The Lord shows them mercy. I desire the same.

Hypothetically, if you were given the choice to use that money, and you had the scriptures and spirit as your guide, what would you spend it on?

[A Random Phrase]

I think the problem comes when there is misuse or abuse of the offerings given by those in leadership, and the leadership uses their position as justification.

Thank you for sharing your experiences.

I think there is a tendency to not question the leaders. Even if it was found out that leaders squandered the money or used it on things that would surprise most people, unless it was a local leader being called on the carpet by a higher leader, not much (if anything) would be done.