Recovery Board  : RfM
Recovery from Mormonism (RfM) discussion forum. 
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In
Posted by: passingthrough ( )
Date: December 09, 2010 12:47AM

I just got back from working out of state, and my wife informs me that a Bishop with whom she works stated that starting next year, husbands and wives will be required to turn in their tithing separately from each other. I think this may have been something in a new Hand Book of Instruction introduced at the conference. Any of you know more about this? I wonder what the Church's 'angle" is for doing something like this--any thoughts?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: borninfellout ( )
Date: December 09, 2010 01:23AM

I have not heard this but would not surprise me as I have read there are more active women in the tscc than men.
They better think this one through real well because it will backfire more than they know. Trying to give the ladies a little more power since they got jilted on the priesthood..


Again follow the money.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: passingthrough ( )
Date: December 09, 2010 01:35AM

It seems like there is always a hidden agenda with the Morg.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Truthseeker ( )
Date: December 09, 2010 09:11AM

This is part of CUBS, the new accounting system used by SLC as part of the MLS software package. CUBS was installed in each ward using MLS on October 22nd. The new accounting system logs/tracks tithing and other offerings by individual, rather than family unit.

The new system appeals to the clerk in me because there is less to deal with at the end of the year. In previous years you would have people complaining that their balance was wrong b/c their children's donation, or spouse's donations were mixed with theirs.

The other big change that came with CUBS is the disbursement of funds. Each ward will now receive a quarterly disbursement from the stake rather than an one annual disbursement. This change is partially in response to auxiliary leaders that overspend and use their annual allotment in 6 months.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Simone Stigmata ( )
Date: December 09, 2010 09:25AM

I don't know that there is any hidden agenda here. As a former financial clerk I can tell you that at the end of the year there are always some couples who have a beef with the way it is tracked. Some families we would list the donations under both the husband and wife as one entry, and others we would separate out. I always preferred separating them as most married TBM couples tended to have separate sources of income.

It presented problems at times when the donations were not separated. One family, the father got a terminal illness and the wife wanted the donations that she was making separate in case he passed away. Another couple, the husband got excommunicated after a huge, bitter divorce, and the wife didn't like his name showing up on her donations. Another family, the wife passed away and her name kept showing up on the husband's donations.

It just makes it a little more accurate IMHO to keep them separate.

I've heard from the poor b*stards in my ward who still attend church that switching over to the new software has been a pain in the butt. The church gets free bookkeeping as well as free janitorial service from the drones.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Truthseeker ( )
Date: December 09, 2010 09:27AM

The transition to CUBS was not smooth.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Jesus Smith ( )
Date: December 09, 2010 09:46AM

My bet is, whenever there is a dispute about the base on which a couple tithes, the more frugal of the pair wins much more often.

By dividing the couple, the frugal donation can be compensated by the more "charitable" of the two.

It's a good financial move.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Lost ( )
Date: December 09, 2010 09:52AM

The problem with this system is the capacity for abuse by Bishops.

Consider what will happen if a wife declares a full tithing, but hasn't paid anything because she doesn't work or have income.

Some bishops will not accept this and will refuse to consider the wife a full tithe payer, at least not until the husband pays the tithing.

I can see where the Bishop may refuse a temple recommend because of the non payment of tithing by the wife even though the wife is in fact a full tithe payer because her husband earns the money, not her.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Truthseeker ( )
Date: December 09, 2010 09:58AM

Most families in our ward pay tithing under the husbands name. That said, in our ward there are very few wives working outside the home so they have no income to tithe.

My TBM wife does work and she does pay tithing under her name. I am self-employed and have no net income. My business pays my expenses and taxes and anything left is reinvested in the business.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: JoD3:360 ( )
Date: December 09, 2010 10:04AM

In our ward when I was Finance Clerk, we had seperate entries already...providing that the husband and the wife fill out seperate tithing slips, as well as the kids. Most couples just do it under the hubbys name, but there are a few who seperate theirs.

Every person who fills out a tithing slip will create an individual entry in MLS. At the end of the year when we would run the reports, every individual donor would be represented.

Usually in a typical family there would be a total for Bro & Sis X, and a seperate total for each of the kids.

HOWEVER

Making the spouses contribute seperately is in poor taste, plain and simple. The effort is obviously to ensure that people will pay more, and to make it possible to single out the wife or the husband for worthiness issues.

It makes me sick. I am so grateful that the Lord has seen fit to help me and my family to escape the madness.

Options: ReplyQuote
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In


Screen Name: 
Your Email (optional): 
Subject: 
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 **     **  ********  **    **  ********   *******  
  **   **   **        **   **      **     **     ** 
   ** **    **        **  **       **     **        
    ***     ******    *****        **     ********  
   ** **    **        **  **       **     **     ** 
  **   **   **        **   **      **     **     ** 
 **     **  ********  **    **     **      *******