A simple question, great punchline

[boo]

Sigh ! I really expected better.

[mhewett]

Hey, I think it was more I've have found the answer when I wrote this post. The only ones who would be totally disappointed I think are the ones that harp on about the church being a corporation and nothing else which is quite false. So Boo, you and Obrien and all the rest are wrong on this issue, even the government disagrees with you yet you continue to push a false teaching. If truth was important to you you would try to understand what I have been saying but because it contradicts you, you dismiss it.

With a lot of people, what is important is not the principle, it is what side you are on. That is so obvious from many on this site. I thought originally, I'll get you Boo because what you wrote was so stupid and I have found the answer. On reflection, I began to think differently as to the reasons i wanted to do this post so rather than ridicule anyone or attack anyone I just wanted to explain some truth to you guys who have an obsession with the church having a corporation. I''ll bet you guys, do not even know why the concept of corporations exist. Ignorance maybe bliss but it is no help in the search for truth. Didn't you say you studied corporations Boo? About 40 years ago? Then why do you not understand about them and why they are necessary?

[nicknack22]

Well I had planned on replying a couple of days ago and I know you've all been waiting for the answer to the question with great anticipation (sarcasm) so I am sorry and apologize profusely for the delay and making you wait so long, I got caught up with other things, you know, like life, anyway,

What prompted this question was a comment on one of the posts I wrote and out of disgust I posed this question, I guess with the intent of showing how ridiculous that comment was and say gotcha!!! well I don't feel quite the same now but I guess I have to follow through with the answer which some may find amusing and others I know will not, I don't find it so funny now because it is about an issue that many on this site struggle with but I hope at least that it edifies some of you a bit and maybe be a bit uplifting and give validation to some in their commitments to remain true to Jesus Christ and His Church.

Now the 'punchline', first a bit of info (please stay with me). I did a bit of digging and came across a book that increased my learning on the subject involved. The book is called, “Sacred Origins: Organizational Aspects of Religion and Religious Aspects of Organizations”. One of the chapters talks about the exact subject of interest to us and that is, yes Boo, about corporations and in particular, Corporation Sole” of which category the church is in. (Thanks to those of you who pointed that out to me, I obviously was asleep when that section came up in my studies) It takes a bit to get your head around what it all means and all of the implications and requirements, at least from the chapter. One statement from the book is, “It (corporation sole) is an extraordinary, irregular, custom tailored effort at translating religious principles into secular terms.” One thing that this says to me is that even the Federal Government recognizes that there are 2 parts to a church, an obviously religious part but also a secular part. Corporation sole is suited to the type of Organization that churches are. So if the Federal government recognizes that there are 2 parts to a church why can't some of us? Well now we can answer the question I posed.

I did some more digging and discovered the churches listed in the question also use Corporation Sole which means the assets of the Catholic Church has the Pope as, in Boo's terms, the sole shareholder, though if you learn about Corporation Sole, you will discover in the case of churches, it has a lot to do with what happens when the 'shareholder' dies and the transfer of assets to the next 'shareholder and is nothing to do with someone at the top with unfettered access to all of the money.

So with that in mind, the answer to the question is that they are church’s and yes ,Boo, they are corporations, but corporations known as corporation sole. The punchline is this, the person who made the initial comment to me about bearing my testimony about ridiculous things about the church being a trademark and that the members are members of a corporation and not a church, and you know who you are, I'm afraid you have one hell of a lot of work to do. There are 1.2 billion Catholics waiting for you to tell them they don’t actually belong to a church but they belong to a corporation, then there are the hundreds of millions of Church of England who need you to tell then they belong to a trademark. Then there are the Episcopalians etc, you have a big task my friend, better get started

Well,doesn't seen so funny to me now and I have not meant to ridicule you but what I want you to know is that a little knowledge can go a long way to dispelling falsehoods, learn about corporations and you will learn it does not have to be an issue.

For some reason I think I read somewhere that harold b lee actually disolved or was planning to disolve the corp. of the presiding bishopric, and then he died or something and the church instantly reinstated it?... I don't know but you seem smart about this stuff I was wondering if you or anyone else knew if this was true or just a made up rumor?

[mhewett]

For some reason I think I read somewhere that harold b lee actually disolved or was planning to disolve the corp. of the presiding bishopric, and then he died or something and the church instantly reinstated it?... I don't know but you seem smart about this stuff I was wondering if you or anyone else knew if this was true or just a made up rumor?

to tell you the truth, I don't know, I'm not sure how you would find out. There may be a record somewhere if it was as you put it, dissolved and reinstated but I don't know how you would get access to it if it exists.

May have to put it down to myth unless someone has some actual evidence, something more than you may get here on this site which all too often is mere opinion.

[Obrien]

M - I'm not belittling you. I just think it's sad so many people think the church is the leaders in slc and the buildings and the temples. the church is people. we should be bound together in love, not in a Corp Sole.

[ithink]

Well I had planned on replying a couple of days ago and I know you've all been waiting for the answer to the question with great anticipation (sarcasm) so I am sorry and apologize profusely for the delay and making you wait so long, I got caught up with other things, you know, like life, anyway,

What prompted this question was a comment on one of the posts I wrote and out of disgust I posed this question, I guess with the intent of showing how ridiculous that comment was and say gotcha!!! well I don't feel quite the same now but I guess I have to follow through with the answer which some may find amusing and others I know will not, I don't find it so funny now because it is about an issue that many on this site struggle with but I hope at least that it edifies some of you a bit and maybe be a bit uplifting and give validation to some in their commitments to remain true to Jesus Christ and His Church.

Now the 'punchline', first a bit of info (please stay with me). I did a bit of digging and came across a book that increased my learning on the subject involved. The book is called, “Sacred Origins: Organizational Aspects of Religion and Religious Aspects of Organizations”. One of the chapters talks about the exact subject of interest to us and that is, yes Boo, about corporations and in particular, Corporation Sole” of which category the church is in. (Thanks to those of you who pointed that out to me, I obviously was asleep when that section came up in my studies) It takes a bit to get your head around what it all means and all of the implications and requirements, at least from the chapter. One statement from the book is, “It (corporation sole) is an extraordinary, irregular, custom tailored effort at translating religious principles into secular terms.” One thing that this says to me is that even the Federal Government recognizes that there are 2 parts to a church, an obviously religious part but also a secular part. Corporation sole is suited to the type of Organization that churches are. So if the Federal government recognizes that there are 2 parts to a church why can't some of us? Well now we can answer the question I posed.

I did some more digging and discovered the churches listed in the question also use Corporation Sole which means the assets of the Catholic Church has the Pope as, in Boo's terms, the sole shareholder, though if you learn about Corporation Sole, you will discover in the case of churches, it has a lot to do with what happens when the 'shareholder' dies and the transfer of assets to the next 'shareholder and is nothing to do with someone at the top with unfettered access to all of the money.

So with that in mind, the answer to the question is that they are church’s and yes ,Boo, they are corporations, but corporations known as corporation sole. The punchline is this, the person who made the initial comment to me about bearing my testimony about ridiculous things about the church being a trademark and that the members are members of a corporation and not a church, and you know who you are, I'm afraid you have one hell of a lot of work to do. There are 1.2 billion Catholics waiting for you to tell them they don’t actually belong to a church but they belong to a corporation, then there are the hundreds of millions of Church of England who need you to tell then they belong to a trademark. Then there are the Episcopalians etc, you have a big task my friend, better get started

Well,doesn't seen so funny to me now and I have not meant to ridicule you but what I want you to know is that a little knowledge can go a long way to dispelling falsehoods, learn about corporations and you will learn it does not have to be an issue.

Interesting take on things mhewett, but I have to ask:

1. Are all the baptismal records of those other Churches also sent to "Intellectual Reserve"? This is anecdotal, but isn't it odd that in a church that teaches never letting the spirit be subjected to the temporal, the symbol of your perpetual divorce from the temporal is held by anything but the spiritual?

2. The law governing Corporations Sole in Utah mandates that the prophetic successor to the prophet be spelled out before the current head is severed. This circumvents the doctrine of succession as outlined in D&C 107, but that is no big deal, as that doctrine has never been adhered to -- not even since the month after June 1844. This means that today, the next LDS President is decided not by you, me, or even God (unless you count killing prophets as His way of choosing new prophets), but by the Utah / US governments through the laws they have enacted to govern CS's, of which the LDS Church has decided to inure itself -- because there "was no other way". Personally, for me to buy your argument, I'd have to insist that the Presiding Bishop hold the title to that Corporation, freeing the prophet to be spiritual alone, while the Bishop could get all down and dirty as needs be. This in fact is the structure the Catholics have adopted though (see who are Jesuits), and look where they are now. Oh, and the Vatican is it's own bird, which owes no allegiance to anyone, but in fact, who are owed every allegiance by everyone in the western world, (including the incorporated LDS Church), but that is a different story.

3. Ye cannot serve God and Mammon. Christ was the quintessential definition of this. He was heaven bent on ruining a lot of things -- temples included. He accomplished quite a lot with just a robe and sandals. His mandate was "where 2 or 3 are gathered in my name, there I will be also".

"In summary, culture, tradition, and the legal requirements of the government of the US and the State of Utah have transcended the original
rules regarding succession as outlined in the LDS Church. While it is true that the Quorum of the Twelve could pick any High Priest from the general membership, my guess is that they never will, rendering Section 107:22 a moot doctrine." (A Burnt Child)

[mhewett]

so the punchline is that all those " wrong" religions are legally organized just as the " only true and living church on the face of the whole earth" is organized? everyone must adopt Babylon to have a continuation in mortality?
that is a joke...

The last line of my comment above yours says, " learn about corporations and you will learn it does not have to be an issue".

take that advice, it is not what you think.

[boo]

Hey, I think it was more I've have found the answer when I wrote this post. The only ones who would be totally disappointed I think are the ones that harp on about the church being a corporation and nothing else which is quite false. So Boo, you and Obrien and all the rest are wrong on this issue, even the government disagrees with you yet you continue to push a false teaching. If truth was important to you you would try to understand what I have been saying but because it contradicts you, you dismiss it.

With a lot of people, what is important is not the principle, it is what side you are on. That is so obvious from many on this site. I thought originally, I'll get you Boo because what you wrote was so stupid and I have found the answer. On reflection, I began to think differently as to the reasons i wanted to do this post so rather than ridicule anyone or attack anyone I just wanted to explain some truth to you guys who have an obsession with the church having a corporation. I''ll bet you guys, do not even know why the concept of corporations exist. Ignorance maybe bliss but it is no help in the search for truth. Didn't you say you studied corporations Boo? About 40 years ago? Then why do you not understand about them and why they are necessary?

I am very reluctant to continue this useless quasi dialogue but since you directly asked. Remember you are talking to the guy who had to explain to you what a corporation sole was. Yet you impune my knowledge ? I think I understand the value of corporations, limited liability companies , limited partnerships , general partnerships ,professional partnerships , corporations sole,joint ventures , sole proprietorships , Mass business trusts etc better than most. I also understand the relative merits and the value of forming entities alternatively in AZ ,Calif, Ut, Nevada, Hawaii , or Delaware. I have depending upon the needs of my clients formed them in each jurisdiction ..I have made a comfortable living for 40 years forming them and advising clients about the relative advantages and disadvantages of each. I bet dollars to donuts I know more about the Greco Roman origins of the various corporate forms than you do . How many years of classical Latin and Greek have you studied ? I have for 7 years. Are you a member of any society that exists to study the growth of use of business forms in the late dark ages in Europe . I am . You can join . It only costs $60 /year and we meet in Chicago each year . I formed 2 corporations and 2 LLCs last week including 2 in Delaware . And I will be flying to Hawaii next week to advise a client about forming business entities under Hawaiian law. I have formed corporations for the Kuwaiti govt as an investment vehicle for their 100s of millions they invested in Az. I would not normally discuss my professional activities or my resume in this forum but you must forgive me please . I get exercised when someone asks me " why do you not understand " corporations. It is because I do that I say what I say about how they corrupt the 'holy church of God " Mormon 8. Power corrupts and formal institutions/ corporations are intended to take power and capital from the hands of the many and aggregate power and capital in the hands of the few. That is their principal purpose. That is their genius. That is their curse and their danger

[ithink]

Hey, I think it was more I've have found the answer when I wrote this post. The only ones who would be totally disappointed I think are the ones that harp on about the church being a corporation and nothing else which is quite false. So Boo, you and Obrien and all the rest are wrong on this issue, even the government disagrees with you yet you continue to push a false teaching. If truth was important to you you would try to understand what I have been saying but because it contradicts you, you dismiss it.

With a lot of people, what is important is not the principle, it is what side you are on. That is so obvious from many on this site. I thought originally, I'll get you Boo because what you wrote was so stupid and I have found the answer. On reflection, I began to think differently as to the reasons i wanted to do this post so rather than ridicule anyone or attack anyone I just wanted to explain some truth to you guys who have an obsession with the church having a corporation. I''ll bet you guys, do not even know why the concept of corporations exist. Ignorance maybe bliss but it is no help in the search for truth. Didn't you say you studied corporations Boo? About 40 years ago? Then why do you not understand about them and why they are necessary?

I am very reluctant to continue this useless quasi dialogue but since you directly asked. Remember you are talking to the guy who had to explain to you what a corporation sole was. Yet you impune my knowledge ? I think I understand the value of corporations, limited liability companies , limited partnerships , general partnerships ,professional partnerships , corporations sole,joint ventures , sole proprietorships , Mass business trusts etc better than most. I also understand the relative merits and the value of forming entities alternatively in AZ ,Calif, Ut, Nevada, Hawaii , or Delaware. I have depending upon the needs of my clients formed them in each jurisdiction ..I have made a comfortable living for 40 years forming them and advising clients about the relative advantages and disadvantages of each. I bet dollars to donuts I know more about the Greco Roman origins of the various corporate forms than you do . How many years of classical Latin and Greek have you studied ? I have for 7 years. Are you a member of any society that exists to study the growth of use of business forms in the late dark ages in Europe . I am . You can join . It only costs $60 /year and we meet in Chicago each year . I formed 2 corporations and 2 LLCs last week including 2 in Delaware . And I will be flying to Hawaii next week to advise a client about forming business entities under Hawaiian law. I have formed corporations for the Kuwaiti govt as an investment vehicle for their 100s of millions they invested in Az. I would not normally discuss my professional activities or my resume in this forum but you must forgive me please . I get exercised when someone asks me " why do you not understand " corporations. It is because I do that I say what I say about how they corrupt the 'holy church of God " Mormon 8. Power corrupts and formal institutions/ corporations are intended to take power and capital from the hands of the many and aggregate power and capital in the hands of the few. That is their principal purpose. That is their genius. That is their curse and their danger

Good comments. Not to mention that the "corporation" (or embodiment), is literally (pun intended) immortal, giving it the leg up on everyone else, which is it's intention. So where Christ offers us immortality, the Corporation already has that figured out. I agree with everything boo has said here as one who knows nearly nothing on the matter, but who still knew what a corporation sole was more than a decade ago because of my own research on a separate matter.

There is no reason the Church couldn't set up it's corporate side under something other than what it has, and left it under a different umbrella, so the "oracles" can be at least once removed.

[mhewett]

Hey, I think it was more I've have found the answer when I wrote this post. The only ones who would be totally disappointed I think are the ones that harp on about the church being a corporation and nothing else which is quite false. So Boo, you and Obrien and all the rest are wrong on this issue, even the government disagrees with you yet you continue to push a false teaching. If truth was important to you you would try to understand what I have been saying but because it contradicts you, you dismiss it.

With a lot of people, what is important is not the principle, it is what side you are on. That is so obvious from many on this site. I thought originally, I'll get you Boo because what you wrote was so stupid and I have found the answer. On reflection, I began to think differently as to the reasons i wanted to do this post so rather than ridicule anyone or attack anyone I just wanted to explain some truth to you guys who have an obsession with the church having a corporation. I''ll bet you guys, do not even know why the concept of corporations exist. Ignorance maybe bliss but it is no help in the search for truth. Didn't you say you studied corporations Boo? About 40 years ago? Then why do you not understand about them and why they are necessary?

I am very reluctant to continue this useless quasi dialogue but since you directly asked. Remember you are talking to the guy who had to explain to you what a corporation sole was. Yet you impune my knowledge ? I think I understand the value of corporations, limited liability companies , limited partnerships , general partnerships ,professional partnerships , corporations sole,joint ventures , sole proprietorships , Mass business trusts etc better than most. I also understand the relative merits and the value of forming entities alternatively in AZ ,Calif, Ut, Nevada, Hawaii , or Delaware. I have depending upon the needs of my clients formed them in each jurisdiction ..I have made a comfortable living for 40 years forming them and advising clients about the relative advantages and disadvantages of each. I bet dollars to donuts I know more about the Greco Roman origins of the various corporate forms than you do . How many years of classical Latin and Greek have you studied ? I have for 7 years. Are you a member of any society that exists to study the growth of use of business forms in the late dark ages in Europe . I am . You can join . It only costs $60 /year and we meet in Chicago each year . I formed 2 corporations and 2 LLCs last week including 2 in Delaware . And I will be flying to Hawaii next week to advise a client about forming business entities under Hawaiian law. I have formed corporations for the Kuwaiti govt as an investment vehicle for their 100s of millions they invested in Az. I would not normally discuss my professional activities or my resume in this forum but you must forgive me please . I get exercised when someone asks me " why do you not understand " corporations. It is because I do that I say what I say about how they corrupt the 'holy church of God " Mormon 8. Power corrupts and formal institutions/ corporations are intended to take power and capital from the hands of the many and aggregate power and capital in the hands of the few. That is their principal purpose. That is their genius. That is their curse and their danger

Wow Boo, you sure told me off, wow, my tail is between my legs and I am scampering back to the doghouse, wow, what a lashing. Just a couple of points however Boo.

You give yourself too much credit Boo, you didn't tell me about corporation sole or explain it to me. Other people mentioned it to me and I then got my information from a book written by couple of University professors that deals with this exact subject. Maybe you disagree with them but I would have thought professors at University on a subject like this would be a fairly reliable source.

Ok, I get it, you've formed a zillion corporations and know the value of them. Ok Boo, then maybe you can answer this question. You stated previously that President Monson is the only shareholder in the Corporation of the President and thus, everything belongs to him. Correct me if I am wrong. Tell me then, if President Monson owns everything, when he dies, what is to stop any children he has from claiming any of it when he dies?

[boo]

It is simple. Read the Articles of the COPOTCJCLDS. It is all there. Look at section 4 of the amended articles. You see I don't want to be accused of improperly claiming I told you anything. This avoids that risk .

[mhewett]

It is simple. Read the Articles of the COPOTCJCLDS. It is all there. Look at section 4 of the amended articles. You see I don't want to be accused of improperly claiming I told you anything. This avoids that risk .

Quite honestly, why can't people just answer simple questions and spell it out in a simple way. What is the point if asking a question when people avoid directly answering the question? Could it be that it may be hard to concede something? Maybe you could have included the articles in question as part of the answer.

So basically what you could have said is, "because the articles of incorporation don't allow assets of the church to be passed on to Pres Monsons beneficiaries were he to die". Is that fair to say?

So the point is that there is limits on what Pres Monson can do with the corporation even though he is the only shareholder. Is that a fair enough statement?

Now have you read the second?

Here it is,

"Second: The object of this corporation shall be to acquire, hold and dispose of such real and personal property as may be conveyed to or acquired by said corporation for the benefit of the members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a religious society, for the benefit of religion, for works of charity and for public worship. Such real and personal property may be situated, either within the State of Utah, or elsewhere, and this corporation shall have power, without any authority or authorization from the members of said Church or religious society, to grant, sell, convey, rent, mortgage, exchange, or otherwise dispose of any part or all of such property.

Who is to benefit from the corporation? (Hint: I underlined it)

Has this article been fulfilled? If no, why not?

[Obrien]

It is simple. Read the Articles of the COPOTCJCLDS. It is all there. Look at section 4 of the amended articles. You see I don't want to be accused of improperly claiming I told you anything. This avoids that risk .

Quite honestly, why can't people just answer simple questions and spell it out in a simple way. What is the point if asking a question when people avoid directly answering the question? Could it be that it may be hard to concede something? Maybe you could have included the articles in question as part of the answer.

So basically what you could have said is, "because the articles of incorporation don't allow assets of the church to be passed on to Pres Monsons beneficiaries were he to die". Is that fair to say?

So the point is that there is limits on what Pres Monson can do with the corporation even though he is the only shareholder. Is that a fair enough statement?

Now have you read the second?

Here it is,

"Second: The object of this corporation shall be to acquire, hold and dispose of such real and personal property as may be conveyed to or acquired by said corporation for the benefit of the members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a religious society, for the benefit of religion, for works of charity and for public worship. Such real and personal property may be situated, either within the State of Utah, or elsewhere, and this corporation shall have power, without any authority or authorization from the members of said Church or religious society, to grant, sell, convey, rent, mortgage, exchange, or otherwise dispose of any part or all of such property.

Who is to benefit from the corporation? (Hint: I underlined it)

Has this article been fulfilled? If no, why not?

Mildly interesting thread, especially in light of the recent WP story regarding the $100B+ sitting at Ensign Peak. Even the staunchest of the staunch know the real purpose of tithes and offerings, noted above in RED.
Boo - where are you? I hope all is well...