Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As noted in that thread, the synagogues ask for dues partly because they don't otherwise collect money during the year from members to cover their operations. Depending on how observant you are, you're possibly not even carrying money on Shabbat or holidays, so there's no passing the hat, no opportunity to collect funds except in the annual dues campaign and the occasional separate capital campaign.

Besides, some churches have an explicit requirement that believers tithe 10 percent of their income, which isn't really that different from the approach synagogues take, is it?

I think only the Mormon church tithes.

OP here. I assume that the synagogue and churches (and mosques?) end up in the same fiscal place at the end of the year (unless there is a big difference that I don't know about.) I'm curious about the culture surrounding the money. In my WASPy culture it's considered very rude to discuss money --and my church doesn't even give a suggestion on how much to pledge. Is there a connection?

Seventh Day asks for a certain percentage of earnings.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:God loves the rich. That is why there are poor people in the world. Not enough love for everyone so he had to choose and he picked the wealthy.

the rich support his kingdom on Earth. In that respect, God is like politicians

so why did He make poor people and inequality?

Or did man invent that. Well I suppose the winners are loved, not the loosers

He gave us free will. True, some people are born into abject poverty, but along the way, that person's predecessors had free will too -- a great gift from God that without we would just be robots, doing whatever god said while alive and then ending up in heaven for eternity without ever having thought for ourselves. What a dull existence that would be!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:God loves the rich. That is why there are poor people in the world. Not enough love for everyone so he had to choose and he picked the wealthy.

the rich support his kingdom on Earth. In that respect, God is like politicians

so why did He make poor people and inequality?

Or did man invent that. Well I suppose the winners are loved, not the loosers

Anonymous wrote:God loves the rich. That is why there are poor people in the world. Not enough love for everyone so he had to choose and he picked the wealthy.

the rich support his kingdom on Earth. In that respect, God is like politicians

God loves the rich. That is why there are poor people in the world. Not enough love for everyone so he had to choose and he picked the wealthy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
But nobody's checking your balance sheet.

It seems like people are checking balance sheets, or at least think they have the right to, which I think was OP's entire point.

No one has ever asked to see my pay stub, bank accounts, or tax returns. The Clergy (rabbi and cantors) are unaware what people are contributing. Only the business office is, and they keep it confidential. I used to pay more, but my life situation changed: I was suddenly paying 1K/month extra for non-optional expenses (medical treatments). Instead of paying 2% of my income, I am paying 1/2 of 1%. (3K vs $750). But, no one audited me to see what I could afford. They did ask why I was requesting the reduction in dues -- but more in the line that do I need other help? I only asked for prayer.

One other point is yes, it is harder for a family with 165K to pay the dues than it is for a single person, but the family will require much more services...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
But nobody's checking your balance sheet.

It seems like people are checking balance sheets, or at least think they have the right to, which I think was OP's entire point.

No, they're saying, based on what your (totally self-reported) income is, please give this amount, but if you can't afford that, give less, and you don't have to document why -- or even that -- you can't afford it. Not quite the same as demanding all sorts of financial information.

Anonymous wrote:
But nobody's checking your balance sheet.

It seems like people are checking balance sheets, or at least think they have the right to, which I think was OP's entire point.

My Conservative synagogue in D.C. charges just under $3,000 for a family of two adults if both are 35 and over, no matter how much they make. It's just under $2,000 for two adults if you're under 35 and only $225 if you're under 30. Anyone 45 and over is also required to give another $300 or so to the building fund each year. But for anyone who can't afford those dues, they'll work out individualized plans.

My understanding is that's a bit lower than some of the shuls that charge a percentage of household income -- in our case, it's less than 2 percent of our income -- but I also strongly suspect they devote a lot of energy to soliciting larger donations from significantly wealthier members.

I was raised Episcopalian, and my mother would pledge a yearly amount of support for the church. She would get a numbered envelope for each week to put in the collection plate, along with holiday envelopes for special offerings. Each year there would essentially be a pledge drive for all current parishioners so that the church would be able to budget for the upcoming year.

I am now married to a Jew, and raising my children Jewish. We belong to a reform temple, and now pay dues instead of pledges. It is essentially the same thing my Mom does at her church, except we are giving guidelines based on income and billed quarterly. The income guidelines are guidelines only, and AFAIK, no one is turned away from joining the temple for not meeting the dues guidelines.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

The cost is progressive: the wealthy members pay more than the poor members.

That doesn't mean anything. We have a household income of $160,000 (now living outside of DC) which appears to be in the top 5% of our small town BUT we're dipping into savings to pay a nanny. I'd be pretty ticked off if we were expected to pay based on our HHI.

At our temple, there is a list of suggested donations depending on income level. However, no one ever checks to verify if your income matches your donation. It's a matter of conscience. If, in good faith, you could not meet the suggested dues obligation then you just put what you can afford. There is trust by the temple administration that you do the best you can.

Exactly this. The people arguing about whether a nanny is a luxury item and how much their house cost are missing the point completely. PP with the nanny, if in good conscience you know that your resources cannot allow you to pay your full share, then you simply don't. Nobody's going to give you a hard time about it like PP is. The hope, however, is that you will pay more when your circumstances allow to hopefully offset others who cannot afford their full share for any reason.

That being said, I think you are obligated to at least step back and look at your priorities to see where your money is going before you just assume you can't pay it. If temple membership is more important to you than other things you are currently paying for, I don't think you can in good conscience expect to pay less than your share just because you don't "have" to. But nobody's checking your balance sheet. At a HHI of $160K, your share at my temple would be $3,200-$4,800 per year. HHI is used as a GUIDELINE but you are of course welcome to explain your individual circumstances.

Two of my uncles are Presbyterian ministers. In WASPy churches, no one talks about money, but it's there. You still need to pay salaries, electric bills etc. Not talking about it means that things get swept under the rug. There are churches where the pressure to donate for bigger and bigger buildings drives away all but the wealthy. There are churches where wealthy donors get way more time from the clergy and influence over the actions of the church.

Then there are the churches where the lack of willingness to talk means that people can siphon off revenue without being noticed.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/walterpavlo/2013/11/18/fraud-thriving-in-u-s-churches-but-you-wouldnt-know-it/

The only churches that can really get away from this are older churches, who have built up an endowment from generations worth of bequests from elderly ladies.

In my opinion, transparency is your friend.