scottyg

What percentage of young 19-20 year old's are going to be withdrawing from an investment account while on their mission? Methinks less than 0.1%, mostly because less than 0.1% are going to have one at that age. If I was a mission president, I would recommend them to not withdraw any funds from any account outside of what they are allotted by the church unless there is a real emergency. And even in that case, the church will cover real emergencies...the young elder or sister just needs to reach out to their leadership and explain the situation. Ultimately, we do our best to follow the spirit. Senior missionaries on the other hand is a different story. I can see them pulling from retirement accounts often, in which case tithing would be expected.

I never said the money used to fund their missions was untithed. Of course that money would be. I only said that missionaries themselves do not pay tithing while serving because they have no income. No slips are filled out by them, no tithing declaration is held with their mission president, etc... Anything they earned before their mission should have been tithed when they earned it, but they were not missionaries then. I understand what you are saying, but I am simply saying that during the 18 months - 2 years of service, they will not be paying anything. No one pays tithing unless they have an increase. Regardless, the exempt status does not exist anymore. Bishops can only mark a member's tithing status as full, part, or none.

I work in healthcare and agree 100%. What concerns me moving forward (and right now to an extent) is who is doing the accrediting? How can those groups or organizations be trusted to have the public's best interests at heart? And, who decides what "best interests" are? Is it competence...or having a high ESG score? I know that's an extreme and glass half full view, but as the world gets ever closer to the Lord's second coming, I can't help but find myself becoming more and more skeptical of the real motives around me.

Agreed. I said that.

Wise, yet not always easy to do.

Actually I had never heard of her. A brief search just shows she is another early SJW type feminist that was let go for statements on abortion that go against church teachings. I'm sure there is much more to her case than that, as well as the after effects, but I have always found people like that just silly and insecure with themselves. If I was a professor teaching at Notre Dame for example, I would know better than to viscously attack the Catholic Church while employed there. Some folks just seem to feel that they are more important than the establishment, and probably go into these positions with the intent to stir the pot for "their cause".

Just personal experience. Missionaries don't pay tithing...what you get in your monthly allowance is yours to spend as you wish. Same goes for mission presidents. They don't have any increase while serving, just a monthly living stipend from church headquarters, and they aren't expected to pay back 10% of it. General authorities work full-time for the church until their release, and receive living stipends as well. This does not include area seventies however, many of whom are still actively employed while also serving in their callings. However, it depends on where the money comes from - all of this only includes what reimbursement they receive from the church. If I was a mission president or general authority for example, and continued to earn interest in my retirement plan, I would choose to pay tithing on that when I withdrew the funds to my bank account. I would be surprised if the brethren don't also do this. If my wife had a hobby making and selling items on a website like Etsy, we would pay tithing on that income.

Slightly off topic, but I can't begin to tell you how bad my grades were in math in middle and high school because they "wanted me to show my work". I could understand the concept and solve the problems, but the way they wanted me to do it didn't make sense...and still doesn't. I liked doing it my way (the easy way) and got marked down for it even though I got the right answer. It was very discouraging and stressful for a young kid to be forced to take a long and winding road when an easy shortcut (without the need of graphing T83 calculators) is always available in my head with the use of basic arithmetic.

Indeed. I don't want to be known as one of those members who says or thinks that the brethren aren't aware of issues taking place in the world, because they are very well informed in multiple comings and goings worldwide, and even in the loop with things like pop culture. I do feel however that they may have been lax in truly monitoring the goings on at BYU over the past few years; perhaps thinking that it was okay to not micromanage, and just get the usual reports from BYU admin and the church board of education and whatnot. Because, well, it is BYU after all, right? Plus, they are very busy, and also want to give others the opportunity to lead. Do I really know what went on in those meetings...of course not. But I do know that many, many LDS parents wrote very angry letters to church headquarters over what their children were being taught. From what I saw coming out of BYU the past 4-5 years, it was discouraging to say the least, and I would not have encouraged my children to attend there the way I would have in years past. That school should clearly be seen as different, and stand as a beacon for those wanting a place of learning that also adheres to the Lord's principles and standards. If the far left crowd doesn't like it, they can pound sand. There are thousands of other 4 year universities across the country that they can choose from, with close to a dozen based in Utah alone, not to mention the thousands of additional 2 year and vocational schools.

Anyone serving the church full-time is exempt from paying tithing...because you are already giving your all. This includes the general authorities, mission presidents, and missionaries. When choosing to enter the United Order, the right to personal property was retained. The church did not own everything. If they did, that would be socialism, and that practice is contrary to the Father's plan. It should also be noted that the Law of Consecration and the United Order are not the same thing. The ultimate goal is to be self sufficient. The church would not be able to assist in caring for the poor and needy if it's members weren't largely taking care of themselves already. We are responsible for our own welfare, largely by living providently. But when assistance is required, we should first seek help from family, then from community/government programs, then the church.

I usually call the most recent Bishop "Bishop", but anyone farther back than that I just use the term "brother". If a man was a Bishop in his ward 40 years ago, I'm not going to call him Bishop. Many folks want to continue showing a sign of respect and gratitude...especially if the man had a great impact on their life. If I was a released Bishop, I wouldn't care what folks called me by.

I hadn't heard about the crypto stuff, but have also heard about an Apple merger.

I was pitched one my first semester of college at Utah State after my mission...almost fell for it too. It sounded like an easy way to make a lot of money. But then I started asking questions about the actual product I and others would be buying. Turns out there wasn't one.

I know several faithful LDS persons who almost worship the ground Mitt Romney walks upon. "He was a stake president, is reasonable, and has experience leading the Lord's church". I also know many equally as faithful to Mike Lee. Ultimately, they all have their faith misplaced. No one should believe a politician (or anyone) cannot fall just because they are a member of the church. There is a reason Utah continually ranks at the top of the list in regards to people falling for scams. Among other things, many will unfortunately be deceived and disaffected because of their own foolishness in this matter, and failing to think for themselves. "if we are to have any hope of sifting through the myriad of voices and the philosophies of men that attack truth, we must learn to receive revelation.” Russel M Nelson, Apr 2018 general conference

I don't know anyone that actually wants to be a Bishop in the first place. If they do...then they have no idea what a Bishop really does and how much time they have to sacrifice. Hardest calling in the church if you ask me.

Jason David Frank (the Green Power Ranger)

Some did, and some just had one. Those who have multiple usually only need to serve in them on occasion. For example we had one sister who served as a relief society pianist and also as a ward family history consultant. Another brother served as a sunday school secretary and ward missionary. Memebrs that had any calling that required service multiple times a week, like a youth leader or RS / EQ pres member never had more than one...unless they chose to seek them out. It also depends on your current life situation. Retired empty nesters usually have more time to serve than a young couple with many small children. However, our stake recently released a young bishop a few months ago after 5 years of service who was called at age 29. If the Lord prompts someone to be called...who are we to choose to not extend that call. One of my current callings is a gospel doctrine instructor, and since our ward has 2, that equates to only 1 lesson a month for me...and I am more than able to serve more than that.

I also agree with laronius' post in that we never really knew what people were dealing with in their lives until they brought it up to us. The Bishopric doesn't have a crystal ball or anything like that, so don't be afraid to let them know your current circumstances.

I have never felt the need to turn a calling down, and right now I have 3...one of which was actually extended to me this week: one in my ward, one in my stake, and 1 at my Temple. Having 5 is a lot, and if you are working along with going to school you will be stretched pretty thin. I would ask to speak with a member of the Bishopric and let them know your situation. I have been a counselor in the Bishopric multiple times, and we never refused to release a person when they asked for it - both Bishops were more than understanding. When the individuals let me know, I would usually ask them what they preferred us to do. Most releases were done that next Sunday, but if the calling was one that absolutely needed a person in it, it usually took us no more than 2 weeks to make a change.

Big bummer. One of the voices of my childhood.

Nope. Only in instances of natural disasters are church buildings opened up as shelter to the community, and for good reason. Our church is busy every day of the week except Monday. On each of the other 6 days it has multiple functions taking place, many including children. Some may call me a bigot, but I would outright refuse to attend church in a building used to shelter the homeless. I will not worship, or allow my children to have their activities, in the same area as drugs, feces and filth, used needles and condoms, alcohol and all other nasty aspects of homeless culture. If persons criticize the church over this issue, then we can do a trial run with their house; that way, those persons get to be the crew that clean up after the homeless each morning. Their tune would change if they spent just one day actually in and around that community of people. The homeless love to push boundaries, and being housed in a place of worship would mean nothing to them in regards to changing their attitudes and behavior. These people need help, but as Ironhold said, many of them do not want it. Some truly are down on their luck, and need a true lift up, and I am more than willing to offer assistance, but others choose to be homeless. The legal ramifications would also be enormous if the church were to undertake something like that.

Mine is actually like that. After the blessing was done the Patriarch had to add an addendum to mine by giving me a second "mini" blessing declaring the specific tribe.

We always take our kids to a store like walmart and have each of them pick a name off of their Angel Trees. The Angel Tree is sponsored by the Salvation Army, and I trust them to do a decent job of vetting true persons in need.

For what it's worth, Ezra Taft Benson was against government subsidies to farmers. He especially hated the large conglomorates that knew better than to overproduce, but purposly did it anyway knowing that the government would pay them for that "lost revenue". If no one is eating the food, the farmers need to sell it to other countries, or grow something different; not plan in advance to plow under your crops and get paid by your government to do it.

The way he twists the meaning of love has always troubled me. I personally don't think that everyone who chose to follow the adversary was inherently evil at the time. I think many of them could have been scared or uncertain of themselves, and knew that they wouldn't be able to make it to His presence, so in their minds (though wrong) they had no other choice. Others, despite the warnings, may not have thought that God would actually cast them off if enough of them banded together. "He loves us, and if x number of us band together, and show Him that we want another way, He will change His mind. Surely a loving Father wouldn't cast all of us out." And some were just plain ol nasty spirits. Whatever reasons they had, they all chose not to follow the Christ.