Mormons are ashamed of their own beliefs

[_Buffalo]

Likewise, Elder Packer should pray for more merciful judgment than that which he uses against, gays, intellectuals and feminists.

I think he's been misrepresented and slandered very grievously on those issues.

Mostly by himself, if that's true.

[_Yoda]

Actually, for all we know, President Packer may have provisions in his will for some of the financial proceeds from his home to be donated to the Church. There are just a lot of things we don't know.

I agree that the books should be open..or at least with the option for tithe payers to view.

However, I don't hold any malice toward President Packer.

Also...as far as how General Authorities are paid...since I have relatives who have/are serving as General Authorities, I know how this works.

GA's are compensated based on their personal financial need. If they have sufficient funds to make their current house payment, etc., then they do not receive a stipend. If they have to take a 100% leave from their job and do not have sufficient retirement or 401K to cover their expenses, then the Church will pay them a stipend to cover their basic living expenses, such as housing and food. Since mission presidents and temple presidents often house and feed people in their homes, a mission home and temple home is provided for them that they can live in during their service. The Church also covers travel expenses and health insurance for GA's who do not have their own health insurance.

I find all of these coverages quite reasonable.

And, if we are going to start "hating on" the GA's for being paid out of the tithing funds, then we better add the BYU professors and employees to the list. (Sorry, Dan! LOL) BYU, after all, is a direct reflection of tithing dollars. That is why tithe payers get a discount in tuition cost.

My only beef is when we make claims that the LDS Church has an unpaid clergy. We need to include a caviet stating that the LDS Church as an unpaid local clergy. Rank and file callings such as Bishops, teachers, musicians, etc., are not paid. And, in many other churches, they are. This is a distinct difference. However, just as the upper officers in the Catholic Church are paid, the upper officers in the LDS Church are paid various stipends. There is no shame in this, particularly since the stipends provided are much more modest than other comparable Christian church stipends. I just think it is important to be honest.

[_Runtu]

I think he's been misrepresented and slandered very grievously on those issues.

I don't have any animosity toward President Packer. I was, however, in attendance when he gave the talk to the All-Church Coordinating Council wherein he discussed the threats from the gays, feminists, and intellectuals. It was shocking and troubling to see an apostle making light of the heartfelt letters he read from struggling church members. I was ashamed of all those in the audience who laughed raucously at the people who wrote those letters. Attending that meeting was a jarring experience, one that I will never forget (it was topped off by President Monson yelling at us).

I have no idea what President Packer is like in person or what he thinks or desires, and I do not judge him based on that single event. But it isn't slander or misrepresentation to say that he did not come across as very Christlike on that occasion.

[_malaise]

As I said above, no amount of evidence or reasoning will separate harmony from her consuming contempt for the leaders of the Church. It's perhaps her single least attractive public trait, but she clings to it with grim tenacity.

It's already been pointed out that the house wasn't paid for by tithing funds, that it's an old and relatively modest one, that it's the oldest in its neighborhood (which should suggest, to anybody who knows real estate, that the value of the land on which it sits rose markedly after it was built), and so on and so forth.

But none of that makes any difference to harmony, who, when she hates, hates passionately and irrationally.

All the money the Church has comes from tithings and other donations. The fact that the money used to pay for his home came from some investment the church made using money from tithes does not make it morally distinct in some relevant way. It all comes from the same source.

[_Yoda]

As I said above, no amount of evidence or reasoning will separate harmony from her consuming contempt for the leaders of the Church. It's perhaps her single least attractive public trait, but she clings to it with grim tenacity.

It's already been pointed out that the house wasn't paid for by tithing funds, that it's an old and relatively modest one, that it's the oldest in its neighborhood (which should suggest, to anybody who knows real estate, that the value of the land on which it sits rose markedly after it was built), and so on and so forth.

But none of that makes any difference to harmony, who, when she hates, hates passionately and irrationally.

All the money the Church has comes from tithings and other donations. The fact that the money used to pay for his home came from some investment the church made using money from tithes does not make it morally distinct in some relevant way. It all comes from the same source.

This is true. The entire Church is built on donations and tithes. Simply because these monies have been divied into separate buckets based on investments, etc., it all grew from one source...tithes and offerings.

Again, I have no problem with GA's being compensated for what they do, but I think we have to look at things with a "big picture" perspective.

The Church owns and has interest and investments in many cooperations. Those companies that are Church owned would not exist if member tithes did not happen. Member tithes is where ALL of the Church's assets originally generated from. BYU is a prime example of that. As a professor of BYU, you, Dan, are paid by the Church. The Church owns BYU. A portion of my tithing goes to support BYU. Do I begrudge this? No, not at all...

But, again, I think we need to call a spade a spade when it comes to some of this.

President Packer has been an employee of the Church for most of his life. He was employed by the Church Education System, and then, was called as a General Authority.

So, yes, my tithing did, in part, go toward paying for President Packer's house. My tithing also, in part, went to BYU. It went to pay for some of my father-in-law's expenses as both a Mission President and a Temple President. A portion of my tithing also went to pay for items in the Bishop's storehouse, which my Dad, who is elderly and needy, partakes of. My tithing also has gone toward the charitable acts that the Church has contributed to, such as Tsunami relief, etc.

Do I regret any of this? Absolutely not!

I don't think that any Church member should regret these investments. However, I think it is important that all Church members are blatantly aware of where this money is going.

I don't think that the Church is being dishonest about where this money is going...and I would submit to Harmony that it is likely that her mother-in-law cheerfully contributed her 10% knowing where her money was going.

However, I do think it is disingenuous for the Church, or anyone associated with the Church, to make a statement that we are a 100% volunteer organization. We are not. It is more complicated than that.

[_Runtu]

That he is not ashamed to accept the money says a lot about his character. That the church tries to hide it says a lot about the integrity of the men in charge of the checkbook. That the books aren't open and this sort of thing is inside them says 'way too much about this church.

First of all, I can't believe I'm defending an apostle, but here goes. :-)

President Packer was a church employee up until his calling in 1961 as an assistant to the Twelve. People get paid at the Church Office Building. I got paid out of tithing funds when I worked there. Should I be ashamed that I accepted the money?

As for the GAs getting rich off the backs of the poor, I don't see it in such harsh terms. Yes, they have some "perks," such as a church car, travel expenses, and the stipend for living expenses. From what I gather, most of the apostles sit on the boards of companies that the church at least partly owns. Board members get paid for serving on boards. Also, most of these men write and sell books.

The apostles that have a lot of material wealth seem, at least to me, those who came into church service with a lot of wealth. Elder Ballard is a good example. President Kimball lived a very modest life before and after his calling to church leadership. And if Dan says President Packer's house is modest, I take his word for it and apologize for confusing President Packer with someone else.

Frankly, I think the bigger problem in the church is that its wealth goes mainly to a network of connected families and businesses. The GAs are elderly men with health problems who should be enjoying retirement. Instead, they're running around working long hours and traveling. It's no wonder President Packer collapsed. I would imagine one would have to be really committed to a cause to do what they do. And I don't begrudge them being compensated for their work.

[_Jason Bourne]

Surely you jest. The Brethren have no interest in improving the lot of the general membership. Never have. It's always been about improving the lives of the leaders; were that not so, our leaders would not be spending billions of tithes on conference centers, malls, or scenic pathways in SLCentral. Leaders would not build million dollar estates on the tithes of the poor and widowed. Leaders would open the books and publish annual reports that showed every dime in the tithing account and every dime that was spent.

Harmony/Serenity/WAZing,

would you be so kind as to print out the above tissue of lies and take it to your next TR interview? I think your bishop has a right to know what he's letting into the Temple.
Pahoran

The leaders are spending billions on a mall. Where it comes from we do not know because it is also true the leaders do not disclose financial information. And it is really a moot point as to whether tithes or some other funds are being used to build the mall because all the money the church has can be ultimately traced to member contributions. So Harmony made two points that are certainly not lies.

As for the million dollar estates well I know she is referring to Elder Packer's home that was purchased after he became an apostle for a rather low sum even for the time he bought it but has since appreciated substantially. Personally I don't take issue with this but Harmony does.

[_Jason Bourne]

The exact numbers are not known, that's all. The LDS church is the biggest landowner in Britain, has tons of useless stuff like their farmland in Florida, and pays for Salt Lake City development projects on the reg. They won't reveal the exact numbers because they are damning, and because they are spending money on themselves (or so I suspect).

You think the cattle ranch the LDS church owns is useless? Why so?

[_jon]

So, yes, my tithing did, in part, go toward paying for President Packer's house. My tithing also, in part, went to BYU. It went to pay for some of my father-in-law's expenses as both a Mission President and a Temple President. A portion of my tithing also went to pay for items in the Bishop's storehouse, which my Dad, who is elderly and needy, partakes of. My tithing also has gone toward the charitable acts that the Church has contributed to, such as Tsunami relief, etc.

Sorry liz, but not a single cent of your tithing went to this.
Church humanitarian efforts and contributions are made from separate member donations NOT tithing funds.

The Church 'spent' $88 million in total last year on humanitarian aid (Provident Living Factsheet).
How do you think that compares to what the Church spent on City Creek Mall over the same period?

[_Jason Bourne]

As I said above, no amount of evidence or reasoning will separate harmony from her consuming contempt for the leaders of the Church. It's perhaps her single least attractive public trait, but she clings to it with grim tenacity.

It's already been pointed out that the house wasn't paid for by tithing funds, that it's an old and relatively modest one, that it's the oldest in its neighborhood (which should suggest, to anybody who knows real estate, that the value of the land on which it sits rose markedly after it was built), and so on and so forth.

But none of that makes any difference to harmony, who, when she hates, hates passionately and irrationally.

Please Dan. You no it matters not whether GAs are paid out of tithing funds or some other bucket of money. Money is fungible and all money the church has comes ultimately at some point from members. I understand over the years the church has built up for profit asset and income generating businesses. But those could never have been acquired or built without some sort of member donations.

That said I could care less if GAs are paid with tithing money or some other bucket. Thet should be paid since they give their full time to the Church. But it would be nice if such things were disclosed to the members who tithe at least. Most other churches do this.