Tithing

[UtahDan]

My comments were simply meant to clearly define why I choose to pay tithing, based upon what I consider gross. Sorry, if I offended you. If I come across as self-righteous or pompous, then I will answer for it. Are you inviting me to join you in the temple? I hope to attend the BYU vs Virginia game. Maybe we can arrange to meet at the DC temple before or after.

Hi tooblue. Just a reminder that I live very close to UVA. Would love to see you if are you out this way.

[Moliere]

Hi tooblue. Just a reminder that I live very close to UVA. Would love to see you if are you out this way.

Maybe UD can even meet you and Pilgrim in the temple...

[mUUser]

http://www.cougaruteforum.com/showpo...1&postcount=37

This nailed it. I also like the poster that said something to the effect of "pay 10 percent of something".....anything.

[Paperback Writer]

This tithing discussion has caused me to ponder. Back in Utah Territory, many LDS didn't pay tithing because they couldn't due to the interpertation of tithing being that of giving 10% of one's net worth for settling in Zion in addition to 10% of one's annual income. When tithing was changed to just 10% of one's annual income more LDS paid tithing. From a devout believer perspective, more LDS were then able to be blessed more abundantly by the Lord.

It is my observation and experience that the law of tithing is being mistaught or at least obfuscated. I wonder if more LDS would be active and tithe paying if there was at least some clarification that income does not necessarily mean gross revenue for tithing purposes.

It's also interesting to note that I had a RLDS (now C of C) friend as a teenager and one of the differences in our faiths was that they interpreted the law of tithing to be that of tithing on surplus - after all the necessary bills are paid. I mention it as a difference because I was taught to tithe on gross revenue but I think my parents may have adjusted their views since then. Both faiths base their intepretation of tithing on the same scripture.

[Paperback Writer]

This nailed it. I also like the poster that said something to the effect of "pay 10 percent of something".....anything.

If only there was an official, plainly-worded declaration that said this. Instead we are left to the "unwritten order of things".

[Moliere]

Among the tithing payers in this crowd, do some of you count your fast offerings and other contributions as part of your 10% paid to the church? I don't and likely won't in the future, but I know there was a push to get people to donate a bit to the missionary fund (both locally and generally) with the increasing mission labor force. I just wonder if with the new wording on the tithing slip (see below) if any donation should now be counted as tithing, because essentially now tithing can be used to pay for missionaries and missionary donations can be used to pay for temples, buildings and malls.

"Though reasonable efforts will be made globally to use donations as designated," it now reads on the bottom of the form, "all donations become the church's property and will be used at the church's sole discretion to further the church's overall mission."

[Uncle Ted]

Among the tithing payers in this crowd, do some of you count your fast offerings and other contributions as part of your 10% paid to the church? I don't and likely won't in the future, but I know there was a push to get people to donate a bit to the missionary fund (both locally and generally) with the increasing mission labor force. I just wonder if with the new wording on the tithing slip (see below) if any donation should now be counted as tithing, because essentially now tithing can be used to pay for missionaries and missionary donations can be used to pay for temples, buildings and malls.

"Though reasonable efforts will be made globally to use donations as designated," it now reads on the bottom of the form, "all donations become the church's property and will be used at the church's sole discretion to further the church's overall mission."

So the "church's overall mission" now includes building malls?

[Moliere]

So the "church's overall mission" now includes building malls?

Well, I'm sure it fits somewhere, like under Proclaiming the Gospel seeing as how the mall brings people downtown and they might wander over to Temple Square after dinner.

It's just an interesting thought on the comingling of funds. I'm sure the funds were comingled back in the day, but now it's explicit they are comingled. It's probably better for tax reasons, but it makes me nervous to donate to the general missionary fund if I have no assurance the money will be used for missionary work.

[SCcoug]

So the "church's overall mission" now includes building malls?

Caring for the poor in materialism!

[Uncle Ted]

Well, I'm sure it fits somewhere, like under Proclaiming the Gospel seeing as how the mall brings people downtown and they might wander over to Temple Square after dinner.

It's just an interesting thought on the comingling of funds. I'm sure the funds were comingled back in the day, but now it's explicit they are comingled. It's probably better for tax reasons, but it makes me nervous to donate to the general missionary fund if I have no assurance the money will be used for missionary work.

I think I will just donate the Lord's 10% directly to the Lord's University so it doesn't end up at TSM's mall by accident.

[Paperback Writer]

Among the tithing payers in this crowd, do some of you count your fast offerings and other contributions as part of your 10% paid to the church? I don't and likely won't in the future, but I know there was a push to get people to donate a bit to the missionary fund (both locally and generally) with the increasing mission labor force. I just wonder if with the new wording on the tithing slip (see below) if any donation should now be counted as tithing, because essentially now tithing can be used to pay for missionaries and missionary donations can be used to pay for temples, buildings and malls.

I've never thought about including FO donations towards the 10%. but I think a good case can be made for it. I have thought about including the $400 monthly missionary donation that familes are responsible for if they have a son or daughter serving a full-time mission. The case I make for this are ancestor journals where wives and children worked to support and send funds to the father who was serving a full-time mission. They viewed that income as concecrated to missionary work and did not pay tithing on it. If the church can take tithing funds to support missionary work, why can't a tithe payer count missionary donations towards tithing?

I'll admit to going down this rabbit hole when serving in Scouts/YM and dealing with a measly budget and having disagreements about what should be reimbursed. I got tired of debating it and just subtracted needed expenses from tithing since the stake was determined not to increase Scouts/YM budgets.

[Katy Lied]

This tithing discussion has caused me to ponder. Back in Utah Territory, many LDS didn't pay tithing because they couldn't due to the interpertation of tithing being that of giving 10% of one's net worth for settling in Zion in addition to 10% of one's annual income. When tithing was changed to just 10% of one's annual income more LDS paid tithing. From a devout believer perspective, more LDS were then able to be blessed more abundantly by the Lord.

It is my observation and experience that the law of tithing is being mistaught or at least obfuscated. I wonder if more LDS would be active and tithe paying if there was at least some clarification that income does not necessarily mean gross revenue for tithing purposes.

It's also interesting to note that I had a RLDS (now C of C) friend as a teenager and one of the differences in our faiths was that they interpreted the law of tithing to be that of tithing on surplus - after all the necessary bills are paid. I mention it as a difference because I was taught to tithe on gross revenue but I think my parents may have adjusted their views since then. Both faiths base their interpretation of tithing on the same scripture.

I think the tithing that they paid in the UT territory isn't really comparable to now. It was much much more back then, but they also got lots of benefits in return. Every pioneer settler got 35 acres to plant as he wanted- the land was free. No one could own water sources so the water was free. The church provided infrastructure and market systems so access to that was all free as well. Lots of assets were comingled between church, state and private enterprise, and the members got access mostly free.

Re: The C of C interpretation: Doesn't that just devolve into a tax on savings?

[Pheidippides]

I think the tithing that they paid in the UT territory isn't really comparable to now. It was much much more back then, but they also got lots of benefits in return. Every pioneer settler got 35 acres to plant as he wanted- the land was free. No one could own water sources so the water was free. The church provided infrastructure and market systems so access to that was all free as well. Lots of assets were comingled between church, state and private enterprise, and the members got access mostly free.

Re: The C of C interpretation: Doesn't that just devolve into a tax on savings?

Agreed, but it was also different on the other end as well. Until Lorenzo Snow tithing was 10% on conversion, immigration and increase thereafter. But the participation rate was very low too. The church very much treated it as a debt in arrears but sometimes forgave it altogether (such as in their year of Jubilee). I don't even know if you can properly compare the two systems because they were so different.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 4

[Uncle Ted]

I think the tithing that they paid in the UT territory isn't really comparable to now. It was much much more back then, but they also got lots of benefits in return. Every pioneer settler got 35 acres to plant as he wanted- the land was free. No one could own water sources so the water was free. The church provided infrastructure and market systems so access to that was all free as well. Lots of assets were comingled between church, state and private enterprise, and the members got access mostly free.

Re: The C of C interpretation: Doesn't that just devolve into a tax on savings?

Yes, tithing back when Utah was a territory was a bit different. For example, stake presidents and bishops would get a nice kick back if they did a good job raising funds:

https://www.sunstonemagazine.com/pdf/102-17-29.pdf

Maybe they should try this for Friends of Scouting.

[Paperback Writer]

Agreed, but it was also different on the other end as well. Until Lorenzo Snow tithing was 10% on conversion, immigration and increase thereafter. But the participation rate was very low too. The church very much treated it as a debt in arrears but sometimes forgave it altogether (such as in their year of Jubilee). I don't even know if you can properly compare the two systems because they were so different.

Perhaps it was not useful for me to attempt to contrast Utah territory to modern times since so much has changed as you point out. I was just pointing out that at one point Mormons considered supporting missionaries as part of tithing. They first sent funds to the husband serving in the mission field and paid tithing on their increase after that.

Although the LDS church did much to support members in Utah territory, poverty was a real problem. And lets not forget that back then SP collected a salary (Uncle Ted beat me in making this point) and the Q12 and FP voted to exempt themselves from tithing and did so for a time. I think a lot of progress has been made in the area of defining tithing and allowing members to keep it between them and the Lord.

In my lifetime, my family moved 800+ miles in the midwest. In the area my family was moving from, SLC finally approved the building of a chapel and my father donated generously to the building fund, far above his allocated amount, to lesson the burden on other familes. After we moved, our new stake had just purchaed a vast stake farm and we were assessed a sizeable contribution. It created a hardship on my family for several years because of moving expenses and contributing to a new chapel, a stake farm, a significant ward budget...all in addition to tithing. To my Dad's credit, I never remember him complaining. I like the current system much better.

A few years ago, I learned that this vast stake farm had become valuable property as urban crawl came to its doorstep. The church sold it at considerable profit. I doubt any of that increase went to stake members who put up much of the funds to buy it in the first place. At least the area got a temple, so there's that.