Church Service Missionary funding

Could someone explain why funds are pulled from the unit for a Church Service missionary?

I understand the purpose for the monthly contribution commitment for full-time missionaries covers service-related expenses (housing, transportation, basic medical, etc.) and provides a small monthly stipend for personal expenses (food, hygiene). I'm not clear on what the purpose of pulling funds from the ward for Church Service missionaries.

For example, a ward family has a son serving a Family History Church Service mission with $480 being pulled each month as the contribution commitment. In reviewing the General Handbook, Church Service missionaries are supposed to cover all their expenses to include all living expenses, insurance, and medical and dental expenses (24.12.1 & 24.12.6) as well as their own transportation (24.12.2). They usually live at home (24.12.1) but not in this case.

The son is nearing the end of the mission and the bishop informed the family that there was sufficient funds in his Ward Missionary account so they no longer needed to contribute. In fact there would be a small surplus (less than $500). The family then asked if they could have the surplus back so the son could purchase airfare to return home. I referred the bishop to 24.6.1 which prohibits refunds. In researching this I found a quirk in the language of 24.6.1 describing the purpose of the Ward Missionary fund which says its used solely for full-time missionaries. This caused me to re-think why Church Service missionaries are sub-listed in the Ward Missionary category and why funds are pulled for them if they are expected to cover all their expenses.

cjbeckert wrote:They usually live at home (24.12.1) but not in this case.

The operative word here is "usually". Clearly this was something set up by/though SLC. Not something dreamed up by local leaders.

I think I've heard of cases where someone applies to be a missionary and they get called to be a service missionary. In many ways, they're identical to the full-time proselyting missionaries (an 18-21 year old leaves home to live in the mission), but their mission is service. That may be the case here.

In the language of the Handbook, a "service missionary" seems to be something closer to a "ward missionary" and isn't talking about the "full-time" ones.

Since this missionary wasn't living at home, I suspect the arrangement is much like proselyting missionaries, so their finances will be similar. Which does beg the question of who should be paying the return ticket. I'd imagine that was all in the original mission call.

It might be worth a call to the Missionary Department to discuss that part of it.

We had a church service missionary serving in the Family History Department in Salt Lake that returned in December. In all regards, except the monthly payment of $480, everything was the same as a proselyting missionary. Well there was something else different - the monthly payment amount was payed by IROP to the Family History Department.

What is IROP???

ernestj wrote:What is IROP???

Internal record of purchase

It is basically a document that details the transfer of funds between internal accounts (the ward and the missionary account, in this case).