Petition For Financial Non-Disclosure

To combat a newly released petition that has the audacity to politely request “the Church” disclose its financials, as found at, I’m providing an alternative petition, exactly as delivered to me by “insiders” at the Church: 

Invitation To Not Disclose Your Works And Show Our Lack Of Faith

We non-members of the non-existing Church that is branded by a logo and trademark currently registered to a corporation sole, hereby demand said corporation never disclose to us any of its financial dealings; believing as the sacred holy scriptures declare, that the Lord doesn’t work in darkness, except when handling another person’s charitable contribution for the purposes of investment, resource allocation, payment of “stipends and modest living allowances but not ‘modest modest’, meaning ‘poor’ or ‘middle class’ living allowances,” setting aside a few billion for a “rainy day,” asset reassignment, and many other things too complex for us to understand;

And in these times it is our duty, nay, our privilege as followers of the Prophet, to allow whosoever may come into contact with said charitable contribution, claiming to represent the Lord by virtue of his happening to have been once upon a time touched by another man, who claimed to be touched by someone who, a long time ago, etcetera, was Touched By An Angel (TM); or anyone employed by such a man; or anyone employed to handle said contributions, or volunteering to do so; or really anyone wearing a modest (but not “cheap” modest) suit more than twice a week;

As we said, it is our duty to allow these persons to do whatsoever things they deem right and correct, as defined by them, according to standards which also shall be kept in the dark, even as the scriptures testifieth.  Our faith is collectively defined by allowing others to keep us in the dark, because we get a tax deduction either way, and its not like God will ever allow His Sacred Funds, not even a farthing, shekel, hay-penny, talent, or other strange scriptural monetary unit like Shiblum which gives a veneer of religiosity to our exchanging of money, God will not allow, we testifieth, a single tiny piece of Faith-units to be ever wasted, misspent, or go unaccounted for in a vast financial empire not unlike that of Satan’s, except this one is righteous and his is the counterfeit; and if it turned out that they did things with our money that we’d never do, that might challenge our testimony not unlike the casting of pearls of mystery before the wicked, or public witnessing of having even brief conversations with Christ, or many other things we know they know but we being too unrighteous cannot hear lest our souls explode, not unlike as we said allowing Tiffany pearls for some reason to be tried-on by swine that happen to get loose at City Creek Mall (which swarm of pigs is us, symbolically); for God does not need our money, and we are pigs; but we need to give Faith-units to his representatives on Earth so that we can have faith by his keeping us in the dark.  And sacrifice too.  We need to sacrifice, even more than a broken heart and a contrite spirit.  All in favor, say “oink”. (ldsnewsroom approved 7.17.12) 


16 thoughts on “Petition For Financial Non-Disclosure

  1. Ron Madson says:

    For verily, I saith, that it has been numerous years since I have engaged in such loud laughter that my milk speweth through my nose.

  2. Ksmith says:

    If there is nothing to hide? What is the big deal? The church is governed by humans. Humans make mistakes:)
    If you are a member you have the right to know what is going on behind the scenes.

    1. Korrihor Jones says:

      Humans make mistakes, but God doesn’t make mistakes, and picking humans who would make mistakes would be…a mistake!

      All the prophets God has chosen have led his church perfectly. Except when they said or did things that were horrible or ignorant, in which case, they were just acting as men. But we only can say that about the ones who are dead. The ones who are alive are perfect, and never act as men. Until after they die, and we look back and find something embarrassing…then we can recognize that they were acting as men. But God’s still perfect.


  3. Peter McCombs says:

    I, for one, welcome these modest-but-not-cheap-modest suit wearing overlords. Of course I do: They’ve been touched by another man. Yes, in these man-touching days, I semiannually salute/Heil with enthusiasm the most man-touched of all. I ask you: Who can withhold faith units from such as these?

  4. Mitch Hansen says:

    This is tprobably the best post I’ve read anywhere in a long time. Kudos, Mr. Smith.

  5. Chuck says:

    You make a good point, Daymon. We are invited, as members of the church, to sign our names (and I’m being pretty loose with terms here) to a petition requesting a trademark disclose financials in a (perhaps disingenuous) attempt to vindicate unverifiable speculation regarding them.

    One need not look far to see where money goes; it’s not easy to hide billions of dollars, after all. One could spend a couple of months as a “contingent employee” of the COPB; read some books; go to church; ask around. Petitioning it to disclose anything is like looking for evidence of bullying on the play ground by talking to the bully. No, the “fixes” can only come from without; anything else would only serve to strengthen its position–to give it more power.

    And I’m pretty sure there is no moderation by the petition site whatsoever to guard against bogus identities, false personas, double-dips, bots, attacks, etc.

  6. Bry says:

    Humorous? Maybe. While I support the principle of disclosure, I fear this kind of rhetoric doesn’t help the appeal. My 2 cents.

    1. Peter McCombs says:

      What helps? I asked my oldest son to disclose whether or not he was guilty of pestering his kid brother, and he claimed not to be guilty of doing anything wrong. I even asked nicely. So the kid brother was left with his rhetoric, and I with my suspicions.

      Sometimes we have rhetoric. It’s good for something.

      1. day2mon says:

        “Disclosure” and “transparency” are terms which require the consent of both the disclosure and some other party. That is, simply by advocating for “transparency” one is building in a dialogue where presently there is monologue. Given the presumption of secrecy which mobilizes the petition, it is evident that no satisfactory transparency will ever really be achieved. Suspicions will now govern where once silence and consent were the status quo, and that is something one can build other things upon.

      1. Dave Gardner says:

        Wow Daymon. You sure are a very smart “smart-a@@” :). Oink oink. Have you had any good banana bread lately, btw?

Comments are closed.