Why do LDS church members refer to "the church" like it is an entity that is separate from them?

My FB friend just posted one of those promotional ads from LDS Inc. with a picture of boxes of food being shipped to hurricane victims in Texas. My friend commented about how generous "the church" was. I wanted to scream: "YOUR tithing money made it possible, not "the church!"

And then there are members that I have known who have given thousands of dollars and volunteer hours to LDS inc. most of their lives. When they needed help and went to their Bishop and were given food form the church storehouse - only possible because of tithing money from the members (including them), they were so grateful to "the church." Didn't they realize that they were only getting back a small amount of what they donated to "the church?" Why should they be grateful to "the church" when money from THEIR and millions of other members' donations made it possible for the billion dollar corporation to give a little bit back to them?

I was curious about LDS Inc.'s huge land purchase in Florida and googled an article in the Deseret News. I scrolled down to the comments (most of the comments not in support of the purchase were deleted). Most were in favor of "the church" for their wise investment. Heres an example: "I have no problem with what the church does." Again, they refer to "the church" as an organization that makes decisions independent of its members - almost like it is totally separate from its members.

Is it just me or do any of you get a sense that Mormons talk about "the church" like it's got a life of its own? It's something separate that guides them - tells them what to do with their time and money and freely spends its huge stash of cash without input from the members who donated it. The LDS church members seem to forget that THEY ARE THE CHURCH! They provide the free labor and money that make "the church" possible. It makes it so much more clear to me how cleverly those in charge have manipulated the members and made them feel beholden to those who took from them - made them feel that their contributions were to feed "the church," almost like "the church" is a deity to be worshiped and not an organization they belong to. Weird.

The Church = Big Brother.

The "CHURCH" is an inanimate object it does not think,feel, eat,drink, or sleep. It is run by human beings and supported by dues paying members. Therefore anything that is done in its' name is in fact done by human beings acting under the shelter of a religious name.

Only the IRS has any influence with 'the church.' Members sure don't. 'The church' has on occasion taken some direction from the members via surveys, but headlines will always be of more importance than any trend fostered or supported by the members.

Just look at the stand against same sex relationships. I'm reminded of the Oregon or Washington priesthood leader to gave a Black member the priesthood a week or so before ghawd (the IRS) convinced Spencer and the boys to reveal that such would be the new law. The poor schlub who jumped the gun was ex'd. Nothing I read mentioned the Black member, whether his ordination was recognized...

Makes sense to me that something along these lines will be happening regarding same sex unions.

The Church is the Gospel.
The Gospel is not what Jesus taught. Jesus is not more important than the Church.

interesting Q from a sociological POView!

I'd love to read a researched analysis of lds written about the lds, by someone who has seen the inside / dark side of Momism, perhaps with some numbers to demonstrate his analysis / findings.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/07/2017 09:40PM by GNPE.

I think it is a defense mechanism that separates people for deniability when the need arises. It happens in business, too. When the company I worked for fired me for no other reason than I had left the church, associates with whom I had been on a first names basis now declared it was the company that was doing the firing. It is much easier to heap everything on a faceless entity. With the church there is such a disconnect between ordinary members and the establishment of the church that it is an easy pattern to fall into.

Interesting observation. I wonder why the members feel a need to disconnect from their church. Doesn't say much about a church when its members feel disconnected from it.

IMV it's because deep down they know they do not and cannot measure up to the perfection standard taught them.

What I hate is the announcements from members that 'the church donated xyz', with the implication that the 'church' donated separately from it's members.

For example, the christmas shoebox box appeal (don't know if they do it in across the pond, a shoebox is filled with christmas gifts for kids in underdeveloped countries - toiletries, bouncy ball, skipping ropes, etc), the church gleefully informs the membership that £X (value of all shoeboxes from UK) was donated by 'the church'. This implies to the membership that it was the hierarchy, not the membership that donated because the church takes all the credit for it's members' generosity. There will probably be a separate sentence in the 'memo from H.O.' stating how much the local area donated in shoeboxes, but it is never implicitly stated that the members' donations were the only donations made to the charity, the church itself took no money from it's bank accounts, but lets the membership believe they did.

Trying to get a tbm to see that it was all donations from members that made up the total of amount of the donation, NOT any money from mormon church coffers is akin to getting blood from a a stone.

I feel it is the church which fosters this apparent disconnect so the individual priesthood holding leaders can disassociate themselves of any blame for any wrong doing. If it is of good report then 'the church' takes the credit for it; if it is not of good report then the lowliest priesthood leader involved takes the rap. It is just the same behaviour as any large international company - the business' reputation is all that matters, individuals can be sacrificed for the 'greater good' of the business.

Exactly! "The church" takes credit for everything good.

I haven't attended general conference in a long time, but I don't recall one of the 15 big wigs ever thanking the members for their tithing donations or hours of service that make the church corporation possible. Even the 15 talk about "the church" like it's something the members need to send money to. Crazy.

I think the opposite is the case. Mormons don't view "the Church" as a separate entity, it actually is their identity.

That is why we struggle when we leave "the Church". We lose our identities and have to reinvent ourselves (or revert to our pre-Church identities in the case of converts).

At the same time, though, because "the Church" is a cult, Mormons don't have control over their own identity. The Church decides what to eat, wear, think and feel. Maybe this lack of control causes the disconnect you observed.

I have catholic friends, and a family member that is a vicar in the church of England. They refer to their church as the Church also.

The Church is the bride of Christ in many of the metaphors used in the Bible. I don't find it unusual, and nor would most Christians I know.