Post Reply
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
7 years ago  ::  Oct 20, 2007 - 9:51AM #1
spiritalk
Posts: 1,165
As organized Spiritualism, this topic could do with some input.  It only scratched the surface of concerns in the old forum. 

With a little respect for everyone's opinion, we may arrive at some real solutions for Spiritualism, the organization.
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Oct 21, 2007 - 6:10PM #2
Spiritual_Cat
Posts: 9
Well let's start by posting the links to the reports for folks....

As I posted on the old boards:

Who has actually read all the reports? Those who have let's discuss what is practical or not about the findings and the suggestions for change.

Do you think that the suggested changes can really be implemented? Why or why not?

And here is the link for those who are new to the bnet and the www.califreport.com/


I hope that Intuitive will repost her reply to the old thread here also...

Cat
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Oct 22, 2007 - 10:05AM #3
Intuitivespirit
Posts: 193
"10/14/2007 4:08 PM  3 out of 3   

Spiritual_Cat

I think that everything in the Reports can be implimented either as they relate to the National Body or individual Churches.

The Reports go into so much detail and outline specifics as to what applies where. They are a how to guide.

I personally don't think anything is very difficult in the Reports. Some things are time-consuming, that's all. I think the stumbling block will be any leadership who is unwilling to change or make any effort. There are also those who will be unable to make changes for the same reasons they have been unable to acquire a Canadian Charity number or administer their groups properly. It will be beyond their abilities. So the outcome will not be good for them. "
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Oct 24, 2007 - 10:21PM #4
Spiritual_Cat
Posts: 9
Yes it seems to be the out of date leadership in Spiritualism that will resist the changes that the reports suggest... :rolleyes: :(

You say it (the changes recommended in the California Reports) will not be good for the groups that lack the Canadian Charity number or who have poor administration practices... I can see why the changes would not be good for such groups but it could also be a useful weeding out tool to rid Spiritualism of those leaders who are not up to the task and who cannot bring the movement into modern times. This might be an indirect benefit to spiritualism as a whole don't you think? Change is not easy but it needs to happen and will happen eventually anyway so it is better that we do it from the inside of the organizations rather than have the changes imposed from outside spiritualism by governments or other regulatory bodies wouldn't you agree?   

You also commented that some of the initiatives are time consuming. What ones are you referring to when you are making that comment? Do you think that the churches can work with the ideas from the reports in stages or are they meant to be implemented in order and over a specific amount of time? Just curious to see if you think that there is some flexibility in how the recommendations can be applied or not...

Blessings,

Cat
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Oct 25, 2007 - 10:27AM #5
Intuitivespirit
Posts: 193

Spiritual_Cat wrote:

Yes it seems to be the out of date leadership in Spiritualism that will resist the changes that the reports suggest... :rolleyes: :(

You say it (the changes recommended in the California Reports) will not be good for the groups that lack the Canadian Charity number or who have poor administration practices... I can see why the changes would not be good for such groups but it could also be a useful weeding out tool to rid Spiritualism of those leaders who are not up to the task and who cannot bring the movement into modern times. This might be an indirect benefit to spiritualism as a whole don't you think? Change is not easy but it needs to happen and will happen eventually anyway so it is better that we do it from the inside of the organizations rather than have the changes imposed from outside spiritualism by governments or other regulatory bodies wouldn't you agree?

You also commented that some of the initiatives are time consuming. What ones are you referring to when you are making that comment? Do you think that the churches can work with the ideas from the reports in stages or are they meant to be implemented in order and over a specific amount of time? Just curious to see if you think that there is some flexibility in how the recommendations can be applied or not...

Blessings,

Cat



If the past is an indicator of the future, some Churches will fold, some will survive, some will regroup and continue with the old habits that keep them stifled and like cliques.

Writing new policies and procedures and either revising or creating new education materials will be time consuming. Then there will be training. The SCC in Canada or any Church that has affiliated branches can implement these changes. Changes can take effect based on the expertise and time available. Independent Churches have to go through the report and institute changes that apply to them.

What specifically do you think can be implemented from the California Reports and how? Love to hear your views.:)

Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Nov 09, 2007 - 8:34AM #6
spiritalk
Posts: 1,165
For those aware of Canadian tax calculations you will find this totally misleading.  Tax benefits on tax returns are limited at best.  And those here who may have donated their small sums (it requires thousands to reap dollars) will find that there was no benefit whatsoever.

That, in itself, makes the need to have a tax number redundant in itself.  Only when organization are large and dependent upon large incomes do they benefit in any way (in Canada).

The California report was written for large organization.  Are we saying here there is no place for small groups?  It would appear to me this is limiting the growth and potential of so many groups.
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Nov 09, 2007 - 10:29AM #7
Intuitivespirit
Posts: 193

spiritalk wrote:

For those aware of Canadian tax calculations you will find this totally misleading. Tax benefits on tax returns are limited at best. And those here who may have donated their small sums (it requires thousands to reap dollars) will find that there was no benefit whatsoever.

That, in itself, makes the need to have a tax number redundant in itself. Only when organization are large and dependent upon large incomes do they benefit in any way (in Canada).

The California report was written for large organization. Are we saying here there is no place for small groups? It would appear to me this is limiting the growth and potential of so many groups.



A Canadian Charity number is for the benefit of those who donate. It is a safeguard for those who donate, regardless of the amount. Canadian rules are fairly strict on how a Charity operates with a Charity number. It means that a group must be auditied, provide proper financial statements and issue receipts by a specified deadline and be transparent with their finances to their members and the public.

The only real way to ensure that a "Church" is on the up and up is to ask if they have a Charity number. If they don't, then keep your money in your pocket and donate where you have some safeguards.

Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Nov 09, 2007 - 10:29AM #8
Intuitivespirit
Posts: 193

spiritalk wrote:

For those aware of Canadian tax calculations you will find this totally misleading. Tax benefits on tax returns are limited at best. And those here who may have donated their small sums (it requires thousands to reap dollars) will find that there was no benefit whatsoever.

That, in itself, makes the need to have a tax number redundant in itself. Only when organization are large and dependent upon large incomes do they benefit in any way (in Canada).

The California report was written for large organization. Are we saying here there is no place for small groups? It would appear to me this is limiting the growth and potential of so many groups.



A Canadian Charity number is for the benefit of those who donate. It is a safeguard for those who donate, regardless of the amount. Canadian rules are fairly strict on how a Charity operates with a Charity number. It means that a group must be auditied, provide proper financial statements and issue receipts by a specified deadline and be transparent with their finances to their members and the public.

The only real way to ensure that a "Church" is on the up and up is to ask if they have a Charity number. If they don't, then keep your money in your pocket and donate where you have some safeguards.

Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Nov 10, 2007 - 12:09PM #9
spiritalk
Posts: 1,165
And those safeguards are in place with a charitable organization with or without the tax number - get the facts straight before suggesting non-compliance.

If you are accusing plagerism give your sources.
Quick Reply
Cancel
7 years ago  ::  Nov 10, 2007 - 6:48PM #10
Intuitivespirit
Posts: 193

spiritalk wrote:

And those safeguards are in place with a charitable organization with or without the tax number - get the facts straight before suggesting non-compliance.

If you are accusing plagerism give your sources.



Sorry, but in Canada you cannot call yourself a Charity without a Tax number. I think maybe you have the facts wrong. There are not the same safeguards as with a Registered Charity. That is easily verifiable by going to the Government of Canada and applicable Provincial Government websites.

There isn't one word about plagarism in any one of my posts or any reference to non-compliance in this thread.

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 2  •  1 2 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook