My Links

Bloggernacle Links

  • Mormon Archipelago
  • Mormon Blogs
  • LDSelect
  • LDS Blogs

Article Categories

Post Categories

Archives

Other LDS Blogs

Our Individual Blogs
<< The Right Argument Against Gay Marriage | Home | Of Priesthood Bans and Atomic Bombs >>

Classic "No Win" Situations

By: The Baron

Recently, I received the following spam email from a local member:

I am contacting as many Mormon bloggers as I can to spread the word about my petition, “LDS Financial Disclosure.” As you know, the Church does not disclose any of its financial records.  Financial disclosure is an easy way for any organization to do right by its supporters and publicly declare that it is ethically managed and putting its funds to good use. Further, this will enable the church to clear the air of any detractors and demonstrate how it is using Church funds to bless lives.


This is a oft-heard complaint, and one of the classic 'no-win' situations for the Church, which, if you'll recall:
  • Gets criticized for becoming involved in political/moral issues
  • Gets criticized for NOT becoming involved in political/moral issues.
  • Gets criticized for changing from the way things were done in the past
  • Gets criticized for NOT changing from the way things were done in the past.
Publicly disclosing financial records to "do right" by (some) supporters may have merit, but the idea that it would "clear the air of any detractors" is categorically false.  It doesn't matter in the least what the financial records actually look like, public disclosure is guaranteed to result in more criticism, not less.

"The Church is spending X dollars on [something], and only Y dollars on [something else]?  I can't believe it." --someone will say.  Then, multiply that by tens of thousands of different opinions about what the 'something' and the 'something else' are and the likelihood that the people who complain about not having financial specifics will NOT quickly and automatically be able to find something specific in the specifics to complain about afterwards is slim to none.  (Then, add in the people who genuinely didn't care beforehand, but look up the specifics out of curiosity and find something they approve/disapprove of that's getting too little/much money respectively, and then...)

Church members are welcome to continue to encourage financial openness, but let's stop with the idea that this has an upside for the Church itself.  There is no upside for the Church.  The idea that the Church can do anything to 'silence detractors', from without or within, has no basis.  (Gee, no one talks about the black priesthood ban anymore, do they? Considering it ended thirty years ago...)    If you know people are going to find fault with the specifics regardless, what's the incentive to be more open?  Isn't it better to leave people to complain about the 'general' and the 'unknown' then just supply specific ammunition for the critics who were inclined to shoot you, anyway?

Print | posted on Tuesday, June 03, 2008 1:17 PM | Filed Under [ The Baron General Mormon Culture Politics ]

Comments:

#1: Eric Nielson

Amen Baron.

As an aside, I was recently called as the Ward Clerk in my ward. And I have never been more aware of the need of confidentiality at the ward. level, with things like tithing payments, fast offering disbursments, etc. I believe that doing what was suggested at either the general or at the ward level would be a disaster.
6/3/2008 3:14 PM

#2: Vince Grimm

May I put in my two cents worth. As a financial clerk for 3 years then ward clerk for 4 years, my eyes have been opened to the generousity and love of the saints that put into donations. I have learned a number of spiritual lessons about the donation process and the reciepants. Let me start by saying I was not a fan of inactive members coming to the bishop on the last day of the month asking for rent help or food vouchers or what ever it may be. (side note)That is why was not called to bishop. Whether the inactive member ever started coming again or not didn't matter to me after time. I noticed the Spirit of the Lord working on my heart. I could feel the love of neighbors/members that would donate willingly to help another person. The one donating doesn't know to whom it is going. (and SHOULDN'T know). At the same time other people don't need to know how much the 'Jones' donated this week, it just opens the door to jealeousies and gossip. I raised my hand to the square and sustained my Bishop to his calling. I felt the Spirit when I did to know that it was God's will. I can say that I know that my Bishop is consulting the Lord in every use of donated money. It is being used the way the Lord would like it to be handled. That is a witness to me that the donations are between the one donating the one receiveing and the Lord (or His properly called and ordained servant..aka the Bishop/Stake Pres. or even Branch Pres.) I have seen the wisdom in the way the Lord has set up and organized His financial dealing and should not be changed. I would like to add that one doesn't need to be a clerk to get this witness either take the matter to the Lord, is prayer and study and fasting.
6/3/2008 4:03 PM

#3: Last Lemming

I can't speak for your spammer, but no call for financial disclosure that I have heard involves violating anybody's privacy. The disclosure could be limited to summaries of receipts and expenditures. No information on tithing, fast offerings, or any other contribution beyond the total amount collected (Churchwide) would be needed. Expenditures could be aggregated to categories like General Administration, Temples, Family History, Missionary program, Welfare program, Church Education System, etc. Personally, I would like a little more detail than that, but nothing approaching the level of "How big a check did we write to Brother Jones last month?"

We used to do this with Ward budgets, which were presented to ward members at roughly that level of detail and sustained each year. I think that stopped after wards stopped collecting budget assessments. But all of the debate took place among the various auxiliary leaders. Getting the members to even read the budget before voting to sustain it was an exercise in futility.
6/4/2008 12:53 PM

#4: The Baron

I think the general push for 'financial disclosure' in on a general Church level, not a local level. Basically, how much does the Church bring in per year, and how much is the Church spending on temples, chapels, disaster aid, printing materials, GA stipends, etc... No one (that I know of) is requesting that individual family tithing amounts be disclosed--that would be even worse.

All my observations apply to the idea of general financial disclosure: can you imagine how many different people would start saying, "The Church brings in THAT much in tithing, and isn't spending more than X on [pet project I care about]? I'm never paying tithing again." How many members would, perhaps, not care at all about how money is spent, but simply say, "The Church is bringing in X millions in tithing every month? They certainly don't need me to pay tithing this month..." (oblivious to the real purpose behind paying tithing in the first place)
6/4/2008 2:54 PM

#5: Nemesis

I agree with the Baron on this one, no good can come from this disclosure, only suspicion and griping and even a possible loss of revenue as folks become disgruntled.

And what would be the reasons for disclosure? How would it change anything? You either believe in the righteousness of the decisions for disbursement, or you don't. And if you don't, knowing how it's spent will not help you regain spirituality and trust in the least. And if you do believe, you already trust their judgment so you don't really care about the details.

It just seems like some digging for proof of possible wrongdoing, such as spending money politically (which should be a no-no for a non profit church). The request to disclose doesn't feel legitimate, it feels disingenuous, with a hidden agenda.
6/8/2008 10:41 AM

Post Comment:

Name  
Email
Url
Comment   

Powered by:

Copyright © The Baron