Plutarch wrote:guy sajer wrote:Finally, your last sentence tells precisely why there is no accountability in the Mormon Church--members believe it is wrong to hold leaders accountable (criticize) for their policies, doctrines, and actions. You have allowed yourself to be totally disenfranchized under a very misguided theory that men in ecclesiastical leadership positions are beyond reproach, and more, holding them accountable is evidence of character flaw.
"Disenfranchisement" is a term which applies to "rights" provided, denied, or protected by a majority-controlled government. The concept does not apply to voluntary organizations, especially those protected by the First Amendment, which have the power to create a religion which requires its adherents to be "sheep." You may mock and ridicule the organization for its sheeplike behavior, you may disagree with it, but the organization has the protection of law to behave that way. It does not "disenfranchise" anybody; by definition, an adherent may choose to be a sheep or not.
Similarly, a First Amendment organization has the complete freedom not to account for its finances to its adherents. By definition, as the LDS faith defines itself, a First Amendment organization may choose to espouse a belief that it accounts only to the Lord. Sam Brannan once said that he'd turn over tithing funds he'd collected to Brigham Young if the latter could produce a receipt from God. Brannan was excommunicated and died a murderer and a derelict. The kingdom has rolled on and over the likes of you.
P
This is a classic example of a debating technique used by people who lack substantive arguments: parse over the technical definitions of words, ignore the context in which they are used, demonstrate that the word does not fit the technical definition, and declare yourself winner.
As, I think, most others can see, the use of the term “disenfranchise” in this context was not intended to imply that Mormon faithful are denied a “right” to vote, but that they are denied any meaningful mechanism for providing feedback or otherwise influencing organizational policies, rules, doctrines, etc. In this sense, yes, Mormon rank and file are effectively disenfranchised.
The Mormon Church is a curious creation. A voluntary membership organization created ostensibly for the benefit of rank and file members that gives not a micros*** about what its members think, denies them any meaningful role in governance and policymaking, and tells them that they are weak, sinful, or whatever for daring to assert any claim to participate in governance or otherwise hold those in power accountable.
I must say, though, that is refreshing for a believer to admit that he’s a sheep and further to concede that he has willingly so debased himself.
Now, I ask you, since when has “what is legally permissible under law,” been the ethical standard under Christian, and Mormon, theology? You make the common mistake of conflating legal with moral. The former reflects society’s collective sense of the latter (in democratic society) but captures it imperfectly. That is why there are such things as “codes of conduct,” “ethical standards,” and the like.
What is the prevailing ethical standard in the non-profit world (which includes the Mormon Church)? Full financial disclosure, that’s what. Almost all mainstream non-profits publicly make available audited financial statements to members and donors. It is part of the industry ethos.
Not so for religions, I’ve heard said. Thus, the Mormon Church is consistent with prevailing ethical standards.
Not so. As an example, I am pasting in a portion from the website of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops. Here’s the full link:
ttp://www.usccb.org/bishops/dfi/appendix1.htm
Financial Statements and Notes--Samples
The following financial statements and notes represent the results of a broad range of transactions of a central administrative office/pastoral center/chancery of a diocese. However, it is not all-inclusive for presentation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America.
Please refer to the appropriate sections of Practitioners Publishing Company's Guide to Preparing Nonprofit Financial Statements and Nonprofit Financial Statements Illustrations and Trends for specific financial statement treatments of transactions and appropriate note disclosures for items not included in these samples.
New Text Here
FINANCIAL REPORTING
In addition to financial reporting requirements resulting from outside debt arrangements, any state and local regulatory requirements, and other Church Norms, dioceses should provide periodic communications to the Christian-faithful concerning the financial position and the results of activities of the Central Administrative Offices/Pastoral Center/Chancery offices. These periodic financial reports should be in a format and provide sufficient information to enable the Christian-faithful to understand and appreciate the stewardship that the diocese exercises with respect to the funds entrusted to it by the Christian-faithful.
Each diocese should consult with their diocesan consultative bodies, especially the diocesan Financial Council, to determine the frequency, format, content and distribution channels for these financial reports. These consultations will produce many and varied options to accomplish these financial communications. However, in addition to generally accepted reporting practices, each diocese should endeavor to accomplish reasonable norms of accountability and transparency with respect to the financial activities of the diocesan offices.
Statements of Financial Position
Statements of Activities
Statements of Cash Flows
I am willing to risk dying a murderer and derelict like Sam Brannon. (Are you claiming cause and effect here?) I’d rather take that risk than turning over my money to an organization so arrogant that it feels no responsibility to account for what it does with my money, and further, no responsibility to account for anything it does.
Yes, the Kingdom is rolling indeed. I think by now it’s up to .001% of the population. 100 years from now it’ll be .0111%. In a million more years, it may even reach .01%. Yowza! Watch that baby roll.
God . . . "who mouths morals to other people and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, . . . and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites this poor, abused slave to worship him ..."