Tom Phillips joins Scott, Matt, Bob and Glenn to discuss the recent summons against Thomas S. Monson and the LDS Church. Part one explores:

• Why the October Surprise became the January Surprise
• Why these allegations are for criminal fraud against a corporation – and why this is not an attack on religion
• The process Tom went through with the courts to issue this summons
• How Steven Bloor and Christopher Ralph became involved in this case
• What Response Tom has heard from the Church so far
• Why the church in this case is rightfully being looked at as a corporation
• The significance of Tithing in this fraud case

(I must admit there is some odd music on here, but the substance is awesome.)

http://infantsonthrones.com/the-summons-tom-phillips-vs-thomas-s-monson-part-1/

bumpity bump

It's very interesting and explains what steps Tom has already gone through to get this far.I think the church PR folks are doing a good job but the legal fraud allegations may be stronger than they are letting on.

Go Tom!

yeah, the audio clips were a bit distracting (I did appreciate the Anchorman reference, tho) but they were mostly at the beginning

the last 15 minutes were golden - the talk about how Mormon tithing is different from offerings to other churches and the perspective on just how much information was given to the judge (magistrate?) was, to use Tom's word, illuminating

Brilliant!

Thanks for the introduction to a great new podcast. I am subscribing.

It was great to get more explanation from Tom. Thank you,Tom!

Thank you!

I think this is helpful for those here who have been confused about lawsuit, the US First Amendment, and this case in the UK.

Not sure what to hope for as an objective, but I'm grateful for the effort and sacrifice. I would love for Mormonism to be transparent, this case is an effort to get them on the record for something.

Is Mormon tithing voluntary? Would love to hear them make their case it is not. I am confident there are a lot of witnesses and materials out there that show the financial compulsion that the Mormon church has created to pay a full tithe.

In Preach My Gospel

"Qualifications for Baptism"

Doctrine and Covenants 20:37:

• Humble themselves before God.
• Desire to be baptized.
• Come forth with broken hearts and contrite spirits.
• Repent of all their sins.
• Be willing to take upon them the name of Christ.
• Have a determination to serve Christ to the end.
• Manifest by their works that they have received the Spirit of Christ unto a remission of their sins.
First Presidency and the Quorum of the Twelve:

• Make sufficient changes in their lives to qualify as commanded in Doctrine and Covenants 20:37.
• Develop faith in Christ.
• Repent of transgressions.
• Live the principles of moral worthiness.
• Live the Word of Wisdom.
• Commit to pay tithing.
• Receive all the missionary lessons [lessons 1–4 on the Teaching Record and associated commitments].
• Meet the bishop or branch president.
• Attend several sacrament meetings.
(“Statement on Missionary Work,” First Presidency letter, 11 Dec. 2002)"

http://www.lds.org/manual/preach-my-gospel-a-guide-to-missionary-service/how-do-i-prepare-people-for-baptism-and-confirmation?lang=eng

It is a mandatory requirement for admission as a member.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2014 12:14PM by Stumbling.

This is rather damning, now isn't it? Voluntary, my a$$.

I love the quote (paraphrased) "...in the US, you can indict a ham sandwich..." (they basically said that if it goes anywhere after that is a whole other issue).

Folks, this is no ham sandwich...this case has been heavily vetted prior to a summons being issued.

Btw, I just finished the podcast and I have to say that Tom does an EXCELLENT job explaining how the fraud allegation is tied to tithing.

I was in the car by myself and was exclaiming to myself "Wow, that is HUGE"...the explanation about the 30 day after baptism follow up was especially compelling...they include tithing as part of the questioning in the follow up.

(people next to be at the light probably thought I was crazy :) )

I didn't know about that point - and that pledging to pay a full tithe was a mandatory condition for baptizing in the first place. As an adult convert I would question that - I was 8, my excuse for not connecting the dots. No wonder so many new converts leave quick!

It looks really damning for the church in the context of the case.

As a Mormon missionary I had a very intense experience with a parent of two young adults that wanted to join Mormonism prior to learning about a full tithing requirement.

She had a very good point. I also found these requirements to be self-serving and selective. If being an a@@ were an excommunicable offense, how man SPs and RSPs would be in power?

I served on a mission in the 70s when we had the six or seven missionary discussions/lessons we gave to our investigators.
If I remember correctly, the next to last missionary discussion centered around tithing.
In order to be baptized the investigators had to make a promise/commitment to pay tithing as members of the church.
IT WAS NOT VOLUNTARY!
Either they committed/promised to pay tithing as members of the church or we absolutely could not baptize them.
That was a hard & fast rule, period.

I suspect, even to this day, investigators are still required
to promise/commit to pay tithing as members before they can be baptized.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2014 06:47PM by heretic.

Yes. As I've said on RfM earlier, I'm sure Tom has his ducks lined up in a row on this matter, but if he needs me.

I was definitely trained as a missionary and required as a worthiness interviewer Zone Leader to get commitment from an investigator to pay a full tithe in order for them to be baptized.

The thing that still pisses me off the most though is the way we were trained to tell the Joseph Smith related stories, the way we were taught in Seminary, Sunday School, and the MTC--HF and Jesus visits, hand on plates translation of the BoM, priesthood restoration, and 11 witnesses.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/17/2014 06:43PM by gentlestrength.

Thank you Lori for sharing.

I will in turn share this to as many people as I can.

Spread the truth!!

Fascinating. Thanks for posting this.

I, too, appreciate your sharing this and found the podcast informative, as well as entertaining.

This interview has been very helpful in understanding British law.

To Tom: I was one who was skeptical about this. But after hearing this interview, how you laid out your case, you have persuaded me that this really does have teeth.

Wish you nothing but the best in your endeavor. Don't know if you have felt patient with those of us who have raised a skeptical eyebrow, but thanks for not giving up.

Good show, Tom

I've also been skeptical about this, but the key difference with the Mormon Church vs other churches that makes this fraud case plausible is the way the Church uses tithing as a requirement for marriages and other ordinances. As Tom noted, tithing is not simply a "free-will offering" like it is in other Churches. This makes the UK fraud act operational, since people are brought into the Church under false pretenses, must pay to be fully a part of it, and reasonably wouldn't have joined and parted with their money if they'd been given the whole story.

I'm working on a TRANSCRIPT of the interview. I should have it up by tomorrow A.M.

Great!

Is it going to be accessible on you tube?

Does anyone get understand the star chamber concept.

We yanks think our system is soooo superior. . . but secret grand jury proceedings, the only recourse and requisite in order for a US citizen to petition the Courts is appalling when you realize that any Brit (or Welchman too, I must observe) is guaranteed the right of petition to the King's Court on his own recognizance, guaranteed and so exected, eversince the Magna Carta.

Look that up sometimes, Elder Oakes and all yer ilk, ye purveyors of jurisprudence.

>

Thanks for the listen, BTW.

I remember one little old lady who didn't have much money. She wanted to join, but we couldn't let her get baptized until she committed to tithing.

Had forgotten about that.

I listened to it all. It was easier to understand than I was expecting--given all the forwards by the team of infants.
Learning the differences in the UK vs US legal system helps a lot to see how a ruling could go against Mr Monson & his corporate charity.

I especially like Martin Short blurb doing the creepy chain smoking lawyer. Yes, I could smell the tobacco.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOLBQxk72NY

Great job Tom!!! KUDOS!!!! Even if the current level of news is all we get out of this it is more than if not attempted. I certainly have brought it up to my TBM wife and tried to get some feed back. Great discussion topic with any TBMs!

I think also this will get more of us thinking about what we can do to try to get the Truth out. I have tried some things and will continue with what appears to have merit. But we have to realize we are dealing with Liars and Scammers ----- people who are really LAW BREAKERS who are just hard to prosecute legally because of laws protecting religious beliefs. Thinking about these crooks as crooks opens a lot of avenues to applying more leverage on them!