Mutiny Afoot?

[Guest]

I've spoken too a few TBM's it seems many of them disagree with the Faith being so political.

Logically it seem Fox News CNN and Various Local media have brainwashed the LDS leaders.

Do the Wealthy control the faith?

Is Monson loosing Control?

On CNN When Rupert Murdoch fell, CNN did not mention a word about DirecTv being a Newscorp Company. However CNN did mention Foxtel(AU/NZ) DirecTV. Why? because of advertising revenue. Bill O' Riley is blowing Anderson Cooper figuratively speaking.


______________________________________________________________________________
Personally I in no way support ''News Media'' that looks the other way when their sponsors kill people.

The whole job for a television executive producer is to not piss off rich people, Even if people get seriously hurt or killed because of it. The rich buy air time thus putting food in the mouths of a television station's employees.

[_Joseph Antley]

You seem like a fun guy.

[_The Nehor]

I've spoken too a few TBM's it seems many of them disagree with the Faith being so political.

They've been told they may not like it. They'll have to deal with it.

Logically it seem Fox News CNN and Various Local media have brainwashed the LDS leaders.

The use of the word "logically" here is an abuse of the English language.

Do the Wealthy control the faith?

No.

Is Monson loosing Control?

No.

[_Simon Belmont]

Yup, it all makes sense.

For 180 years both mild and vile anti-Mormonism has been published, and from every possible angle, yet the Church has grown. But now because of this one thing it will fall.

Seems logical, right?

[_Some Schmo]

For 180 years both mild and vile anti-Mormonism has been published, and from every possible angle, yet the Church has grown.

I suppose it's true what they say. There's a sucker born every minute.

[_hatersinmyward]

Yup, it all makes sense.

For 180 years both mild and vile anti-Mormonism has been published, and from every possible angle, yet the Church has grown. But now because of this one thing it will fall.

Seems logical, right?

Simon = Piss Ant?

Why don't you just quit Simon? You have already stated your insignificance and the fact you are unable to conger up an idea that has any civic value.

I have no desire to create some type of Anarchic Utopia; Although if it comes down to it I already have shoulder pads, bondage pants, a baseball bat and a blow torch in the back of my SUV.

[_jon]

Yup, it all makes sense.

For 180 years both mild and vile anti-Mormonism has been published, and from every possible angle, yet the Church has grown. But now because of this one thing it will fall.

Seems logical, right?

Simon, I agree with you, the media won't cause the Church to fall.
The Church won't fall at all.
But it will always be a steadily diminishing percentage of the worlds population (less than 0.2% and getting smaller each year).
And the Church endorsed news articles will never reflect reflect the reality that less than 10% of the published membership numbers are active tithe payers.

More than 90% Non tithe paying members...now THAT sounds like a mutiny...

[_DrW]

Simon, I agree with you, the media won't cause the Church to fall.
The Church won't fall at all.

But it will always be a steadily diminishing percentage of the worlds population (less than 0.2% and getting smaller each year).
And the Church endorsed news articles will never reflect reflect the reality that less than 10% of the published membership numbers are active tithe payers.

More than 90% Non tithe paying members...now THAT sounds like a mutiny...

Jon,

Just curious where you got the less than 10% tithe payer number.

Do you have a reference?

Thanks in advance.

[_jon]

Simon, I agree with you, the media won't cause the Church to fall.
The Church won't fall at all.

But it will always be a steadily diminishing percentage of the worlds population (less than 0.2% and getting smaller each year).
And the Church endorsed news articles will never reflect reflect the reality that less than 10% of the published membership numbers are active tithe payers.

More than 90% Non tithe paying members...now THAT sounds like a mutiny...

Jon,

Just curious where you got the less than 10% tithe payer number.

Do you have a reference?

Thanks in advance.

Hi DrW,

It is an educated assumption based on the financial statements of the Church published in Great Britain.
In 2009 the Church had a published GB membership number of c185,000.
In that same year the Church received £27,500 in tithing donations.

If every member had paid tithing that would equate to just £12 per month per member.

If 10% of the membership had paid tithing that would equate to £124 per month per paying member - which calculates to the paying members having an annual salary of just less than £15,000.
Government published national statistics for that year show that the average gross salary at that point was £25,948 per annum.

Given the difference I think it is a reasonable assumption that less than 10% of the published number of members paid tithing in 2009 in GB.

Do you think that's a reasonable assumption and that it may be indicative of the worldwide position?

[_DrW]

But it will always be a steadily diminishing percentage of the worlds population (less than 0.2% and getting smaller each year).
And the Church endorsed news articles will never reflect reflect the reality that less than 10% of the published membership numbers are active tithe payers.

More than 90% Non tithe paying members...now THAT sounds like a mutiny...

Jon,

Just curious where you got the less than 10% tithe payer number.

Do you have a reference?

Thanks in advance.

Hi DrW,

It is an educated assumption based on the financial statements of the Church published in Great Britain.
In 2009 the Church had a published GB membership number of c185,000.
In that same year the Church received £27,500 in tithing donations.

If every member had paid tithing that would equate to just £12 per month per member.

If 10% of the membership had paid tithing that would equate to £124 per month per paying member - which calculates to the paying members having an annual salary of just less than £15,000.
Government published national statistics for that year show that the average gross salary at that point was £25,948 per annum.

Given the difference I think it is a reasonable assumption that less than 10% of the published number of members paid tithing in 2009 in GB.

Do you think that's a reasonable assumption and that it may be indicative of the worldwide position?

Thanks for the response and the analysis. If one does the calculation as a proportion of all members of record, then family size would make a big difference.

I was EQP in a branch in London in 1976-77. The branch met in a house that had been converted to a chapel. It was in a working class area, and many of the members who attended were struggling to make ends meet. While I had no access to tithing records, I can well imagine that the BP would have been very lucky to see much more than 10% of a full tithe from the members there (even considering eligible tithe payers, only).

If I am not mistaken, the Church claimed in its financial disclosure in the UK that it actually lost money on operations (I may be mistaken here and will check this out again). If this is true, however, then rates must be higher in the US, because the Church is certainly not losing money on its operations here.

Unlike in the US, the UK has a fairly effective social contract or social safety net. Because things like some basic foodstuffs and healthcare are subsidized, people can get by with a lower proportion of their income as "disposable" than in the US. So folks in the UK have less to spend on religion than we do, on average.

Religion is not nearly the social force in the UK that it is in the US. Cathedrals in the UK that would cost many millions of dollars to build (if it were even possible to do so today) have been abandoned as places of worship and can be leased or rented for very little on a sf basis. While the UK is not as secular as the Nordic countries, for example, it would appear pretty much godless to most American Christians.

This is a long way of saying that I think tithe paying among active members in the UK (and many other foreign countries) may not be a good indication of tithe payer rates among active members in the US (and especially in Utah where there is a lot of peer pressure to conform).

If one looks at tithe paying by head of households in the US, the 10% would seem a bit low to me, but again, I don't have any data.

If one asks about "FTEs" (Full Tithing Equivalents) as a proportion of all members of record, including children, then the 10% figure may be reasonable. (Families are smaller in the UK.)

Interesting topic.

Would like to hear from others with more data and or experience on this issue.
___________

ETA: Just saw your thread on finances in the upper Kingdom. Will check it out later. Sorry if I missed anything important on the subject.