- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
Much of my view of the Church’s financial situation, including not publishing detailed financial reports, is influenced heavily by what wayfarer shared. Remember, those who actually lived during that time period of severe financial hardship and attempted (actually, successful, in a real way) destruction of the Church were the parents and grandparents of some of our current leaders. That’s not ancient history, folks; that’s one and two generations ago.
Frankly, I also believe that influneces the leaderships’ hesitance to believe that “the government never will try to force the LDS Church to do _______________” when it comes to other issues. If we were separated from the former time of disenfranchisment by hundreds of years, it would be different – but we’re not. When it’s your own grandfater telling you about having to hide to avoid jail and watching the governement effectively eliminate his church “just because people disagreed with my religious beliefs” . . .
That changes the conversation in a very fundamental way. Building an earthly kingdom strong enough to ensure that can’t happen again becomes much more important than average members often realize. Again, there are specific things that I don’t see as ideal, and some I don’t see as good, but I think I understand the “why” enough to give the leadership the benefit of the doubt overall. I do believe they are trying to etablish both a literal kingdom and a Zion – and that type of balance is not a simple thing.
Ray, I find these intelligent, empathetic comments, but I also find them hollow, speaking personally. But I don’t want to beat the church up over it anymore (not that you are; I know I have in the past). One has to find their own peace with what the church leaders do, and if that means making personal adjustments,to bring the perceived inequilibrium into a personal balance, then so be it. That’s where I’ve come to rest. I’ll bite and argue the other side of this. The LDS church is merely following the parable of the talents. If it has the money it should be putting it to good use. The money spent on the City Creek Mall for example created needed jobs in a recession. It is a valid attempt to prevent downtown Salt Lake from going downhill like so many other large cities.
The church should be a steward of the Lord’s money that it is collecting. Who knows at what point this money will be needed for something – putting the money away for a rainy day by creating a portfolio of investments is prudent. It ensures that the church can continue it’s mission effectively even if hard times are ahead.
I honestly don’t have much of a problem with how the church uses the money, my frustrations are with the unusually high pressure it puts on it’s members to contribute a full 10% vs. other US churches.
I think that the current trend toward members leaving and/or becoming disillusioned might be, in part, helped by the Church(TM) being transparent as to where the financial resources go. I paid my 10% for many years and would like to know where it went.
I went from being a TBM to a fundamentalist to….heck, I don’t know anymore.
Does anyone know where/when/why the current policy of nondisclosure started? The powers-that-be have to know that this is causing a huge problem. Hopefully, they will start listening to the membership soon.
The Church(TM) provides a wonderful service for many folks/families, but, these problems really need to be addressed IMHO.
Now…today. Not next week or next year. How does one get the message to the top?
Bruce in Montana wrote:… these problems really need to be addressed IMHO.
Now…today. Not next week or next year. How does one get the message to the top?
Write a letter to the prophet. See how well that works.
😆 Sent from my SCH-I500 using Tapatalk 2
after reading waterman’s review of damon smith’s book, i feel like repenting of my repenting. i have been so naïve… (sigh)
Bruce in Montana wrote:I went from being a TBM to a fundamentalist to….heck, I don’t know anymore.
That made me smile. I have no idea what I am either.
Quote:Does anyone know where/when/why the current policy of nondisclosure started?
The last time the church made a public financial disclosure was in 1959. I always assumed that the reason they stopped was because the church was running in the black and didn’t want to discourage members from continuing to tithe faithfully, but according to Michael Quinn it was to hide deficit spending that was going on at the time.Yeah, it was only in the last 40-50 years that the Church has become truly solvent – and building and maintaing the physical holdings isn’t cheap. Again, it’s too easy to judge financial matters without the perspective of where the Church was, for example, as recently as when Pres. Monson became an apostle. This isn’t ancient history to our leadership. The most senior ones were involved directly in getting the Church out of debt and financially stable. It’s very real for them in a powerful way.
I personally find the Church’s financial practices to be one of the biggest challenges to my faith reconstruction. It’s unsettling to see the Church spend $2 billion on a shopping mall when some of its members don’t have enough food to eat. I know that the Church has to do somethingwith the excess money it takes in, but why not use it to help the poor rather than catering to the wealthy? Or why not lower tithing to 7%? Sometimes it’s easier to see the Church as a corporate empire, and the LDS religion is one “business arm” of that empire; this religious business arm sells religious products and services to its customers (the members) for a fee (tithing.) The members are literally buying a religious experience from the Church. The Church advertises is products and services by sending out missionaries to recruit new customers; it works to maintain customer retention through programs like home teaching; and it warns its customers that they will be punished in the afterlife if they take their membership and money to a competing business (another religion.) This religion-as-business view kind of disgusts me, but it completely makes sense when you consider that the Church’s policy decisions seem a lot like business decisions and that tithing must always be paid even if it means that a poor widow must make her children go without shoes or proper healthcare. I don’t want to see the Church as simply a business, but when that paradigm fits the facts, it’s hard to see things differently. Quote:but when that paradigm fits the facts
There are multiple paradigms that fit multiple sets of facts(if you don’t believe me, watch political talk shows on both sides of issues use the exact same things to reach polar opposite conclusions) – and I can take the same approach and tear apart ANY organization that has existed in the history of the world. I mean that sincerely; I can do it. It is every bit as legitimate to describe the finances of the Church and how they are used as a means of bringing great blessings to its membership and many outside its membership. I personally can view it either way, intellectually. I choose to view it as some of both – with a belief that those who make the decisions truly do see it the second way and aren’t charlatans.
Things just aren’t that easy.
I love the saying:
Quote:We don’t believe what we see; we see what we believe.
This financial issue is one that began my initial questioning and my transition from a TBM to a Liahona. Quite a few years ago I heard from a pretty reliable and well-placed source in SLC that the second largest line item in the church’s budget from year to year is BYU (second only to physical facilities construction and maintenance). I just had to question whether it was fair, truly charitable or even defensible to spend such a large outlay of church $$ to educate 28,000 white kids from the US ( and yes, I’m aware there are a small percentage of the students who come from overseas) while the church is now larger outside the US than in. How in the world do we ask those dear saints in Guatemala, Cote d’Ivoire, the Philippines, and Papua New Guinea to pay their widow’s mite worth of tithing when we spend so much $$ on BYU, a shopping mall, and hunting lodges? I still haven’t resolved that one for myself. Don’t know that my grey matter is capable of cutting that gordian knot.
I sympathize with both you kumahito(sounds Japanese or manderin, either way I like it)and Old-Timer. Their really are cases for both points. The line really does get blurry with all the different interest to serve and it is hard in them or anyone to try to find balance once the different business take on a life of there own. Forgotten_Charity, I don’t completely agree with what you’re saying. For example:
Quote:But remember that smart business are unfeeling corporate souls.
I’ve worked for a number of large, medium & small corporations over the years. Some were private & some were public corporations.I can’t remember any that I would classify as “unfeeling corporate souls”. Some even laid me off. Others companies went bankrupt & filed Chapter 11.
My oldest son was recently laid off from a corporation that he loved. His family had to file for bankrupcy. I told my son that he can’t take it personally & move on.
He recently found a better job & is doing well.
This is a tough economic times we’re living in. Some companies have to make tough economic decisions. Their decisions are not going to be popular.
From the outside, it may seem as “unfeeling” or “greedy”. I know from personal experience that decisions that effect peoples lives are usually very difficult to make.
I’m going to assume (unless I have other information) that similar decisions for the Church are difficult too.
I’ve noticed that you haven’t written an Introduction yet. I would encourage you to do that. I want to better understand who you are & where you’re coming from.
Mike from Milton.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.