Post tithing settlement thoughts...

[Mormon Red Death]

What????

I was just saying that your solution would probably not be viable for members outside the U.S. where most of The Church now resides. Having some experience with multinational organizations, I know they prefer consistent processes across borders. Your suggestion doesn't translate very well outside the U.S. and Canada without what I would expect are some significant adjustments. In contrast, the current system seems to work pretty well.

It's just my view that your suggestion has a limited audience within The Church. If The Church wants to focus on making it easier for that particular audience to pay tithing easier, then great.

So what if it doesnt work outside of America? They can continue with the old process. There are still 7 million members in North America. I would venture of all the tithing paying members at least 70% of them are in the US and Canada. I am not saying get rid of the old process. I am saying add on something that is electronic and doesnt require a boatload of maintenance. People are acting like what I suggest is going to be this huge burden when it reality it will make things 10x easier.

Its amazing that we have an organization that will only take your money if you fill out a paper sheet and write a physical check. What other organization that is even close to the size of the LDS church would act in this manner?

I FEEL LIKE I AM TAKING CRAZY PILLS!!!!

[NorthShoreCoug]

I agree for the most part but I have to say it's hard for my little brain not to take note of some of the high outliers.

I had one guy come in for tithing settlement and he handed us a check for over 30K. In our area, that grabs your attention a bit.

I'm the same way, I don't purposely pay attention, but certain things catch my eye from time to time. Just last Sunday, we opened an envelope and found a $100k check. I immediately asked the counselor what this guy (who I hardly know at all) did for a living. I also decided I need to make more friends in the ward...

[Uncle Ted]

As I look back I realize I didn't tell the story all that well, and left out one crucial detail.

My wife went to the bishop (against my advice) to talk about the problems she felt the RS (not just her) was having. She went feeling that she was speaking in confidence with the bishop and that when talk to the RS president her name wouldn't be brought into it. She wasn't expecting the RS president to call her.

My wife was disappointed that the bishop used her name, but she was mad at the RS president (they're ) because when she asked her if the bishop had spoken with her the RS president said "No, I don't know what you're talking about. I just felt that I should call you and tell you about these activities that some sisters are sponsoring." It was within a few days of having spoken with the bishop and it seemed quite clear to my wife that for some reason the RS president was not being honest with her.

I should add that I didn't and don't condone my wife's actions.

I've come to realize since that experience that our ward can be very dysfunctional. Nearly all of the competing voices in Mormonism from the ultra-conservative, extremely literal to the ultra-metaphorical and extremely liberal are well represented in our ward. Those voices and pressures come to a head about every six weeks and have caused some serious fallout over the past year.

Stuff like this has happened so many times to me and my wife it makes my head hurt. Any more I don't feel like I can talk to a bishop or leader without first having a signed NDA in place. In my older age and wisdom I have finally come to the conclusion that it is better to just take things directly to the Lord and cut out the middle-man.

[Uncle Ted]

I'm the same way, I don't purposely pay attention, but certain things catch my eye from time to time. Just last Sunday, we opened an envelope and found a $100k check. I immediately asked the counselor what this guy (who I hardly know at all) did for a living. I also decided I need to make more friends in the ward...

Back when I was shortly out of college I had started a company with some college friends and we were making good money on the internet bubble. I was also writing some good sized tithing checks. One Sunday, I was standing in the hall, and one of the clerks made the comment that some other brother could just "hit Bro. Ted up for a loan" in front of a bunch other people standing in the hall. We lived in a 1700 sq ft home with an unfinished basement. I drove a 1979 toyota pickup with a body that was made up of mostly rust (thanks mostly to all the salt utah put down on its roads). From that point on I paid directly to the church office building and never again to my own ward.

[Mormon Red Death]

Back when I was shortly out of college I had started a company with some college friends and we were making good money on the internet bubble. I was also writing some good sized tithing checks. One Sunday, I was standing in the hall, and one of the clerks made the comment that some other brother could just "hit Bro. Ted up for a loan" in front of a bunch other people standing in the hall. We lived in a 1700 sq ft home with an unfinished basement. I drove a 1979 toyota pickup with a body that was made up of mostly rust (thanks mostly to all the salt utah put down on its roads). From that point on I paid directly to the church office building and never again to my own ward.

The biggest problem with the way we currently do things is that I or anyone else can't make a charitable donation without at least 3 other people seeing how much I donated and having a good indication on what my salary is. Keep in mind these people interact with me and family a lot and our sometimes close neighbors. Sometimes they can be relatives.

I remember we received a large end of the year donation from guy who was working for one of the Autos overseas. He generally sent his donations by mail. Well he was in town for the end of the year for work and put his tithing from his bonus in. Both the bishop and 1st counselor worked in the auto business and were privy to how much his bonus was (very large) due to seeing his tithing. They were a buzz talking all afternoon about it. Those types of situations should be a big reason why we should be able to pay online.

[RC Vikings]

I think one of the great misunderstandings about the finance clerk calling is that they are sitting there taking copious notes (if only mentally) of how much other people in the ward make.

I agree with this. Nobody says anything about amounts but myself I always wonder what the hell is going on with this one guy because he always pays in cash and it's not a small amount.

[Moliere]

The biggest problem with the way we currently do things is that I or anyone else can't make a charitable donation without at least 3 other people seeing how much I donated and having a good indication on what my salary is. Keep in mind these people interact with me and family a lot and our sometimes close neighbors. Sometimes they can be relatives.

I remember we received a large end of the year donation from guy who was working for one of the Autos overseas. He generally sent his donations by mail. Well he was in town for the end of the year for work and put his tithing from his bonus in. Both the bishop and 1st counselor worked in the auto business and were privy to how much his bonus was (very large) due to seeing his tithing. They were a buzz talking all afternoon about it. Those types of situations should be a big reason why we should be able to pay online.

I can see you concerns with privacy and I wouldn't trust your leaders either. Even though I'm no longer a WFC I still take the privacy matter seriously. I only once slipped and I think I posted about it here. Basically I made a reference to an open job to a friend in the same business as me and how it might not be a huge increase in pay for him. I felt terrible and apologized, and he was cool with it but I still felt bad.

I've seen some large donations in my time as WFC and stake auditor but I've never referred to them, and neither has the counselor with whom I counted, outside of the 30 minutes in which we were behind closed doors counting the days donations. If someone was "a buzz" about it all afternoon taht would be troubling to me.

I'll add that I'm typically a good person with secrets. I'm not a gossiper. I learned at an early age as a bank teller and later in my current professions to keep personal items under wraps always. I'm sure the lawyers around here are even better at this given their professional standards, which is probably why many are skeptical of non-lawyers handling compensation related matters in a non-professional setting.

[Mormon Red Death]

I can see you concerns with privacy and I wouldn't trust your leaders either. Even though I'm no longer a WFC I still take the privacy matter seriously. I only once slipped and I think I posted about it here. Basically I made a reference to an open job to a friend in the same business as me and how it might not be a huge increase in pay for him. I felt terrible and apologized, and he was cool with it but I still felt bad.

I've seen some large donations in my time as WFC and stake auditor but I've never referred to them, and neither has the counselor with whom I counted, outside of the 30 minutes in which we were behind closed doors counting the days donations. If someone was "a buzz" about it all afternoon taht would be troubling to me.

I'll add that I'm typically a good person with secrets. I'm not a gossiper. I learned at an early age as a bank teller and later in my current professions to keep personal items under wraps always. I'm sure the lawyers around here are even better at this given their professional standards, which is probably why many are skeptical of non-lawyers handling compensation related matters in a non-professional setting.

For these guys it was just us three in the office. I don't really blame the guys If someone who worked for the same company I did got an assignment I could get got a huge bonus it would definitely be of interest. Interestingly enough the bishop in the story is now in year 2 being overseas.

[creekster]

You and creekster are are unbelievable in your apologetics. Its really easy to be the most preferable choice when you are the only choice. Offering an easy on line solution would not be harder for the church. In fact, it would make things easier for the church. Is it that important for you guys to toe the company line that you have to fight a process that is way better for a large portion of its members?

You keep assuming, without evidence as you admitted, that your proposal works "way better" for a "large portion" of North American members. Sure, if you assume that conclusion, then your reasoning works. As I have set forth above, I am not sure if that conclusion is always accurate and even if it is it may ignore other factors, which I have stated repeatedly.

Its like the bank. Lots of people just prefer to go to the teller.

I share your privacy concerns. While usually around 5 people in a ward are authorized to look at donations (bishopric and clerks but not the exec secty), I am not sure why three people would need to see any given donation. Instead, it is usually only two in our ward. Anyone buzzing about someone's donation should be corrected immediately and perhaps replaced in their calling, IMO, including a bishop.

As to Solon's comment, I think you are mixing issues. The mode of donation has little to do with whether the person believes the funds are staying locally. I really think it is pretty clearly set out that tithing does not stay locally. Our ward had a fifth Sunday devoted to this a year or two ago. Plus, one of our bishopric members gave a talk on tithing and made this clear a few weeks ago. The connection I spoke of was not meant to fool people into thinking tithing money stays local (although fast offerings do and they would also be in the envelope) but to allow a connection with the church on a personal level. The bishop is the representative of the Church locally. That's all.

[Mormon Red Death]

You keep assuming, without evidence as you admitted, that your proposal works "way better" for a "large portion" of North American members. Sure, if you assume that conclusion, then your reasoning works. As I have set forth above, I am not sure if that conclusion is always accurate and even if it is it may ignore other factors, which I have stated repeatedly.

Its like the bank. Lots of people just prefer to go to the teller.

I share your privacy concerns. While usually around 5 people in a ward are authorized to look at donations (bishopric and clerks but not the exec secty), I am not sure why three people would need to see any given donation. Instead, it is usually only two in our ward. Anyone buzzing about someone's donation should be corrected immediately and perhaps replaced in their calling, IMO, including a bishop.

As to Solon's comment, I think you are mixing issues. The mode of donation has little to do with whether the person believes the funds are staying locally. I really think it is pretty clearly set out that tithing does not stay locally. Our ward had a fifth Sunday devoted to this a year or two ago. Plus, one of our bishopric members gave a talk on tithing and made this clear a few weeks ago. The connection I spoke of was not meant to fool people into thinking tithing money stays local (although fast offerings do and they would also be in the envelope) but to allow a connection with the church on a personal level. The bishop is the representative of the Church locally. That's all.

Creekster my friend maybe its just that you are getting old. Is there anyone under 40 willing to make Creekster's arguments? Do you still pay all your other bills by check?

[creekster]

Creekster my friend maybe its just that you are getting old. Is there anyone under 40 willing to make Creekster's arguments? Do you still pay all your other bills by check?

Why do you assume I dont use on-line payment?

[Mormon Red Death]

Why do you assume I dont use on-line payment?

because you are arguing that they keep the process of paying by check. Seems like a fair assumption looking at your posts.

[creekster]

because you are arguing that they keep the process of paying by check. Seems like a fair assumption looking at your posts.

You have a very didactic view of this discussion.

We signed up for on-line donation about a month ago. It is the only recurring bill that we were still paying by check.

[Solon]

because you are arguing that they keep the process of paying by check. Seems like a fair assumption looking at your posts.

I'm surprised by how adamantly people are defending the current practice. Nobody is suggesting that the LDS hierarchy do away with the check-and-envelope procedure. All MRD is doing is pointing out that the church should ALSO offer a convenient way to pay online, and that there would be benefits to having such a system in place other than payers' convenience.

But still people insist that the way we're doing it now is the best possible way. Get some vision, people. It's supposed to be a forward-looking organization.

[creekster]

I'm surprised by how adamantly people are defending the current practice. Nobody is suggesting that the LDS hierarchy do away with the check-and-envelope procedure. All MRD is doing is pointing out that the church should ALSO offer a convenient way to pay on line, and that there would be benefits to having such a system in place other than payers' convenience.

But still people insist that the way we're doing it now is the best possible way. Get some vision, people. It's supposed to be a forward-looking organization.

Really? Where did I say any of that? Best possible way? Look at my initial post. It suggested why MRD's reasoning may be incorrect and how some of his assumptions may be flawed. It was also directed at his suggestion (since abandoned, I think) of using paypal.

And what does it mean that it is supposed to be a 'forward looking' organization? Isn't that being corporate in approach, which notion is criticized here all the time?

Sometimes people read what they expect instead of what is written.