“Dr. Daniel C Peterson” wrote: In the comment just above, I wrote that "I can easily imagine that some members might decide not to tithe if they feel that the Church already has too much money."
Over on the Peterson Obsession Board, a fellow who goes by something like "Dumb Dud" is one of the more frenetic tale-bearers about my various idiocies, buffooneries, lies, and outrages here -- and, perhaps not coincidentally, one of the most breathlessly inaccurate. He is now claiming (and some of his eagerly gullible audience there are gobbling it down with gusto and positively quivering with deliciously righteous indignation about it) that I advocate hiding information -- in this case, specifically financial information -- so that people won't be able to exercise their agency or make informed decisions.
But, of course, my sentence above advocates nothing. Nothing at all, let alone the proposition that Dumb Dud ascribes to me. It simply acknowledges the likelihood that some members of the Church might, in fact, choose to discontinue tithing if they felt that the Church already had too much money. Pretty clear, I think.
“Lord, what fools these mortals be!” (William Shakespeare, A Midsummer Night's Dream, III.ii.117)
Daniel,
I think a close (or even just cursory) read of what I wrote will show that I said nothing of the sort. I said nothing about agency. I said nothing about informed decision.
I simply drew attention to DCP admitting that the brethren had a perfectly logical reason to hide their finances.
I think it’s a pretty noteworthy admission and I appreciate you, DCP, making it publicly. It doesn’t look good for the church, which is why I got not one but two “dumb dude” mentions!
