Posted on 12/06/2010 8:12:02 PM PST by Colofornian
Do we really believe that just because one is rich one is blessed by God? According to a study published in 2004 which researched the Mormon Wealth Attribution (MWA), we do. The MWA can be defined as the tendency of LDS individuals to perceive those who are wealthy as more righteous or pious than their less wealthy neighbors. The randomized empirical study reported that “Church members are more likely to attribute righteousness to a wealthy church member than to a poor one” and that (in general) wealthy members of the church are seen as being better people, both secularly and spiritually than poor people.
I have seen many LDS individuals (including priesthood leaders) apply negative attributions and stereotypes toward those who are poor or lacking resources. They implied that these poor individuals need to “pull themselves up by their bootstraps” and either work harder or be more righteous. To me, making these kinds of attributions based on wealth alone (or at all) seems to be dangerous and hurtful.
What about environmental influences? Take the example of someone who has worked diligently to obtain training in a tech position. Then abruptly all of those tech jobs are shifted out of country. Did that person sin? Is s/he somehow less righteous than the wealthy person whose job was not shipped overseas? What about the person who invested all their savings in the housing market?
Wealth does not equal righteousness. There are many wealthy people within the LDS church (more per capita than most religions). However, just because one is LDS and rich does not mean one is righteous. I have known many wealthy LDS members who ran pyramid schemes, sold faulty merchandise, and were certainly not kind to their fellow-man. And yet at Church they were given a level of respect and positive regard simply because they made more than six figures. It has always struck me as odd that individuals who ruin other peoples financial stability can be perceived as somehow more righteous simply because they figured out how to make money and keep it. Does the value of the almighty dollar outweigh other values?
Poverty does not equal unrighteousness. I have known many people who had difficulty making ends meet. To me, these people seemed to be righteous and pious people who had deep and abiding faith in God. And yet these people were slighted, marginalized, and given menial callings at church. I also once had a close relative (who had experienced several financial setbacks in a row) ask me “why is it that this keeps happening to us? We pray, we go to church, we pay our tithing, we budget, we work hard, we do everything we are supposed to, why can’t we seem to get ahead?” Should I tell her she simply isn’t righteous enough?
While I disagree with people within the church that apply the MWA, I can understand why they apply it. Many LDS members buy into the concept of individualism as an explanation of poverty, if someone is lazy (an ungodly trait) then they are simply earning their just rewards. If they would pray more, be more obedient and work hard they would earn money. Individualism as an explanation of poverty asserts that poverty is always within ones control (based on secular conduct or spiritual conduct).
Mormons are also encouraged to believe in the MWA because of scriptures in the Book of Mormon which state that blessings (including worldly ones) are predicated upon righteousness; the more righteous the more blessings. At least until an individual becomes prideful (an unrighteous state) which is followed by a fall (which could mean they lose their money). It’s not a big leap to see why many members view those who are wealthy as somehow more righteous (They have earned their blessings by piety!). Those who are poor may have been prideful, or were guilty of some other sin which caused their fall.
The full reference for the study is: Rector, J. M. (2004). The Symbolic Universe of Latter-day Saints: Do We Believe The Wealthy Are More Righteous? AMCAP Journal, 29, 102-112. And can be read here:
https://ojs.lib.byu.edu/spc/index.php/IssuesInReligionAndPsychotherapy/article/viewFile/494/469
Do you believe wealth and righteousness are relate? What do you think about the MWA? What are the implications of such beliefs?
One example of gossip.
I really think what is going on here is that you may have envy envy.
He did name Bob Bennet, recently ousted from his seat.
Conservative?
The GOP Convention in Utah didn’t think so.
I do not know if Bennet was LDS or not.
BB is not a conservative. I mean some people even try and say Romney is a conservative.
Bennett is LDS and a RINO.
There is a truly conservative member of the House who is LDS. Jason Caffetz is known for his leadership in the Tea Party caucus. Time will tell.
Mormons are just like anyone else. There a conservative LDS, liberal LDS, ethical ones, criminal ones, good and bad.
They all need salvation.
Gossip is a passive-agressive form of malice favored by women. Envy wears many disguises.
__________________________________________________
WOW
Is this something that the mormon guys are taught in their pesthood meetings ???
That when men do it its called “discernment”
But when woman do it is called “gossip” ???
Good thing we now know that men do it disguised as women...
That was what you meant right ???
The MWA can be defined as the tendency of LDS individuals to perceive those who are wealthy as more righteous or pious than their less wealthy neighbors.
________________________________________________
Just imagine what they thought of Mother Teresa...
And then theres the Biblical Jesus...
Jesus said, “Foxes haves holes, birds have nests, but the Son of man has no place to rest His head”...Matthew 8:20, Luke 9:58
for your sakes He became poor, so that you through His poverty might become rich. ... 2 Corinthians 8:9
Bull!
The ELECTED MORMONs are very solidly on the LEFT of Conservatism!
Do I need to post a LIST?
And yet so MANY of our laws are based on Biblical concepts.
Amazing; ain't it!
And there are some pretty strong and perfectly valid arguments that Communism is based on Biblical concepts, perhaps even more so than any governments of Western Civilization.
And of all the societies and governments discussed in the Old and New Testaments, not a single one of them bore the slightest resemblance to a Constitutional Republican form of government, and not a single one of them would be suitable for a modern civilization.
There is a whole world of difference between "borrowing a few concepts" from the Bible, and "structuring a government based on the Bible" or any other religious basis.
During the development of the US Constitution, there was no shortage of wannabee religious tyrants who wanted to inject their personal congregational dogma into the Constitution, and the framers wisely sent them packing. There is likewise today, no shortage of wannabee religious tyrants who would like to recreate our Constitutional Republic into some kind of religious tyranny based on their narrow-minded method of worship and faith.
Religious tyranny is no more desirable than any other sort, and will be fought against and defeated by freedom-loving patriots just as fervently as any other sort.
There is little doubt that our founders and framers were in fact "religious and moral" people, but they were wise enough to differentiate between their personal religious beliefs (which would NOT provide a unifying foundation across all congregations and faiths), and a unifying Constitutional Republic, with a separate guarantee in the Bill of Rights, of each person's right to worship, or not, as each person sees fit.
Sent packing?
So THAT's how we ended up with a Living Document and ABORTION as LAW of the land!
English translation for the pathetically ignorant: sent packing, disinvited, kicked out, got the boot, deported, sent away, 86'ed, kicked to the curb, defenestrated, etc., etc.
So THAT's how we ended up with a Living Document and ABORTION as LAW of the land!
You can do some google searches for US History timelines, and I'll bet you'll find that there were many generations between the time of the writing of the US Constitution, and the time of the US Supreme Court ruling on Roe vs. Wade.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.