- This topic is empty.
-
Posts
-
With so much talk over the wealth of the church I wonder what is going on here. There are reports the church has 40 billion in the stock market and they hide it. They have untold for profit real estate holdings. And of course they require tithing. Who knows what the real worth of the church is.
I certainly do not want the church to be so poor it struggles to pay bills yet so many investments seem contrary to everything Christ taught.
Is there a happy medium? Do you think the church is justifiable in its wealth?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
To be blunt, I think the Church requires tithing these days, not of necessity, but because it increases our commitment to the Church. I’d also say the Church never wants to struggle financially ever again, and has worked hard to get themselves in a position where money will never be an issue. If times got tough, they could close buildings in areas where the membership is the weakest, but no matter what happens, the Church will endure. There are also plenty of problems and challenges that can be solved by throwing enough money at them; specifically, legal problems, lobbying efforts, and PR. The Church has plenty for both those areas. Unfortuantely, most of the problems we’d like to see them solve, such as poverty, can’t be handled by throwing money. “Solving poverty is hard and the science is complicated.” What’s worse, is this leaves them sitting on piles and piles of money, while challenges persist, and there’s nothing they can do about it. What else are they going to do with it, but invest and invest, until they actually need it?
I’m not sure what you mean by “happy medium”, “contrary to everything Christ taught”, or “justifiable”. Last I checked, Jesus is said to be rich beyond imagination. At least in the US, it’s held that weath justifies itself, or in other words, those who are rich deserve to be. Who would they be justifying themselves to? God? The governments? The people? Us? And how would the Church be happier with less? How would they get to a “happy medium”?
I was about to essentially say what dande48 said in his first 2 paragraphs. For most people the sacrifice of paying tithing actually increases their commitment to the church. Once making such a sacrifice, mentally/emotionally it is hard to admit it you were wrong to do so. What to do about it? What is a better approach? I think there are options, but I don’t see the church leaders really even looking at that. I would assume they are looking at the shrinking of the church (or at least it moving from US growth to mainly southern hemisphere growth) and it makes them want to hold tight and invest with the expectation that tithing will be decreasing. If I were worried about getting laid off from work, I wouldn’t go make some big contributions to the poor. I think it is essentially the same thing going on in the church.
The church must have massive overheads, especially all the temples etc. I think some of it should be put into social improvement projects. Trade not aid is the long term answer to poverty in many places like Haiti. I think there are other things we could do like that. I am responding most specifically to the title “more than enough” I am probably one of the more frugal people that you will ever meet. I save for a “rainy day”. I am at a comfortable pace for a good retirement. If my lifestyle does not change then I will probably have “more than enough.” Yet, I still live just as frugally as before even though I can likely “afford” many more convenience purchases.
A big part of my frugality is fear of the unknown. I do not know what the future might hold. Will we have a medical emergency with a lengthy hospital stay? Will I become unable to work and retire much sooner than planned? Will the stock market crash at an inopportune time taking a large chunk of savings with it? If I die young will DW have enough to raise the children into adulthood without worrying about making ends meet? Will my children require help paying for college (to assist, if necessary is a major goal for DW and I)? How much becomes “more than enough” and how much becomes a nasty surprise of “not enough”?
I believe that the church operates in a similar way to my own frugality and “raind day” saving.
I believe that I would be defensive if people started to become critical of my saving habits. If someone accused me of hiding my wealth I would feel that my wealth is none of their business. If I were accused of having “untold” profit. I might wonder what that has to do with anything. I pay my legal taxes. Some people might feel that because I have the means that I should be more generous to charitable causes. Didn’t Jesus tell the young rich man to sell all that he owned and donate the proceeds to the poor? There is a good point to this. I do not know how to live up to this ideal that Jesus created in that moment. It seems so foreign and un-natural to me. What I do feel passionately is the desire to protect and provide for the people in my care. I do that by providing a financially stable household – a household that can weather many of life’s storms of misfortune.
I like to think of the fable of the grasshooper and the ant in explaining my frugality. I am an ant on a personal level. The church is an ant on an organizational level. The grasshoppers of the world can say, “Stop your hoarding. Winter is a long ways off. The weather is fine. Sing and dance the evening away with me.” Can anyone imagine the church as an ant being happy in taking the night off? More likely that the church ant would be wracked with guilt over all the time that was wasted in frivolity with the proverbial clock getting closer to midnight.
I (as an ant) have come to realize that my way of living does not make me better than anyone else. I am following my internal programming just as much as the grasshoppers are following theirs. Saving for a rainy day just makes me happy. I am what I am … and what I am is an ant.
The church doesn’t need the money. They like the money, and it gives them freedom to invest aggressively. But they don’t need it. I view it as an obvious obedience test. This (like many things about the corporate church) is one of my hot buttons. I work in commercial real estate as a profession. Some of my closest work friends manage high profile church real estate assets around the country, but mostly in Salt Lake county where I too reside. I also at one point was a candidate to lead the formerly PRI real estate asset management arm of the church. Things were restructured and this went nowhere (I would not have accepted anyhow; it was not a fit for either of us). During that process I got a small peek behind the scenes. The church’s two signature investment real estate assets downtown are valued in the billions. I do not begrudge these investments. They are good for the city and they are good for the communities they are placed. The church has many, many many assets similar to, but not quite as large, around the world. Multi family. Retail. Office. Industrial. Land. You could argue the pace of investment and acquisition is increasing. For example, last fall a new church owned 28 story office tower was announced for downtown SLC.
What I do begrudge from our wealthy church:
1) the forced service of chapel cleaning and exterior maintenance
2) forced service of temple cleaning and exterior maintenance
3) take my tithing dollars or invest aggressively but not both
4) prosperity gospel: as I look at the history of my local leaders, most, of not all, have achieved some greater than average level of success and prosperity. So the lesson here is obedience = prosperity = leadership opportunities
With tithing we are taught that if we pay the lord first, he will take care of us if we have enough faith. I know too many people that this is not the case. But they do get the benefit of the church welfare system. But so do people who are less scrupulous tithe layers.
I feel the church is having its cake and eating it too. As ward clerk I see all sorts of donations. The church can use those anywhere and in any place at their discretion. There are some exceptions to this.
I’ve tried here to temper my resentments. But asking for 10% of the gross income (this IS what is taught and accepted in most circles) of people who live paycheck to paycheck while investing billions of dollars each year in income producing and non-income producing (temples) each year feels and looks like priestcraft to me.
They also give a pittance to the wards to help run their programs. I used a lot of my own money to do my callings. I drove a lot for years in my callings and was never allowed to be reimbursed for gas. One of my bishops said I wasn’t even allowed to give the YW a small birthday gift. I spent most of my part time work paychecks on callings. This on top of paying my tithing, cleaning the church, doing very demanding callings for free, VT, paying fast offerings, donating to scouts, etc. It’s one thing to be frugal and smart with your money. It’s another thing to be miserly and greedy. When your members are sacrificing everything including time spent away from family, money and serving, I think they at least need to be given some reimbursements for their money spent and not be expected to run programs on practically nothing when the money is there.
I forgot about the meager ward budgets. I am a bad ward clerk. Add that to my list of “begrudges.” Rumin8 wrote:
What I do begrudge from our wealthy church:1) the forced service of chapel cleaning and exterior maintenance
2) forced service of temple cleaning and exterior maintenance
3) take my tithing dollars or invest aggressively but not both
4) prosperity gospel: as I look at the history of my local leaders, most, of not all, have achieved some greater than average level of success and prosperity. So the lesson here is obedience = prosperity = leadership opportunities
I would agree with these, as well. I’ll never forget an experience from when my wife and I were first starting out. We had a young family and were really struggling financially. During our annual tithing settlement, our bishop asked how we were doing, and we explained how tight things were for us. We were still paying our tithing and fast offerings, and we weren’t asking for any financial help from the ward. We were just being honest that we were barely getting by. Most of our meals were rice, PBJ sandwiches, ramen noodles, or spaghetti. But we were surviving. The bishop barely acknowledged what we said, and immediately ended the meeting by asking us if we would donate to the Boy Scouts. He said, “We’re asking most people to donate $100, but even half of that would be helpful.” I just sat there for a moment with a shocked look on my face (probably looking very much like my avatar picture)!
That experience helped me shape how I feel about giving to the church now. I still give tithing, or at least I consider it to be tithing. I just don’t give it to the church. I donate to charities that I feel truly need it and will use it for a good cause. I also donate to fast offerings, because I like that the money helps people locally. The church wouldn’t consider me as a tithe payer, but I do. I just give my money to organizations who will use it in a way that I would prefer to see it used. I have no desire to help build temples all over the world or add to the churches full coffers.
I would prefer to see the church hire custodians to have our buildings cleaned by professionals. If the church wants to provide opportunities for members to serve, they could set up more soup kitchens and donation facilities where members could serve on a regular basis. That type of service is much more rewarding than vacuuming the church hallways and scrubbing toilets.
🙄 Holy Cow wrote:
…we were barely getting by.Holy cow! It’s funny how statements like that often get translated to Church leaders into “black and white” dichotomies. “Barely at Church each Sunday” means active, “Barely on the records” means member, and “Barely surviving” means doing pretty good!
I guess, if I have one wish or hope from this discussion, it’s that 100% of the tithing goes to supporting local congregations, and any excess is then passed on to Church corp. I don’t like our current model, which is the exact opposite, and feels like bad communism.
The churches approach to tithing and investing seem contrary to me. We are asked to sacrifice to pay tithing no matter how desperate financially we may be. We are told the lord will provide. It is an exercise in faith. However the church does not exercise faith. If they did they would distribute every dollar by year end and have faith the lord would provide for the future. I do not think the church can solve poverty or do many things no matter how much money they throw at it. I do agree hiring some janitors to provide jobs is a good idea. In fact they could compensate bishops as far as I am concerned. There are many things they could do to enhance the lives of the members and still hang onto a sizable cash reserve for a rainy day. I just think money sitting in the stock market is not a thing the church should be doing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I liked what Ghandi said. He said no charitable organization, or organization that claims to exist for the benefit of its members should have more than it needs to survive and serve its target group. Otherwise, they aren’t accountable to anybody. I personally think it’s wise advice.
At the same time, I don’t fault them for surplus money.
But I take exception to the paltry lack of social services provided by the church for its members given such surpluses. I tried to adopt a child years ago, and it was botched by a poorly trained, ill-fitting social worker managed by an absentee office director. The director was on a mission as a president, so they had the office managed by a remote director who wasn’t involved at all to see the incompetence.
I needed a release from my calling years ago due to mental and physical health issues, and the local stake presidency was too busy to address it. They came off as not giving a hoot. I tried to then get counseling after I went into depression by that, and some destructive behavior from members in our Ward while in leadership. I couldn’t even get an appointment with LDS Social Services.
I still remember a Bishop saying “you’d be surprised how long a member claiming the need to see me can wait”. That’s not good service to members. Something I might expect from a lay minister with a full time job and young family. Not something I would expect from a church that claims to be there for its members.
I think early morning seminary, required at a time teenagers need their sleep, and which cause big sacrifices from parents to get them there, wait, and take them to school due to missing the bus — needs to go online. In my PhD education studies (switch to business later), I did a research report on whether the church should put seminary online. Looking at it from a purely financial perspective, it’s wasn’t worth it given free teaching labor, no cost to making parents get up way early 5 days a week, and drive kids to school, and no extra infrastructure cost due to brick and mortar churches not utilized at that time. But they won’t spend on the technology infrastructure, help desk, training and other costly aspects of it — while they sit awash in cash.
So, if what you are saying is true — the church is awash in cash or at least wealth, then I think it’s time to lighten the burden of members and expand services to help them. To hoard it, and purchase 5% of the land in Florida like they did doesn’t hold water with me. There is a small campground on it owned by the church, but it just sits there, doing nothing but probably increasing in value. Your tithing funds at “work”.
I GET that they instituted tithing and fiscal responsibility many decades ago, as well as the TR tithing concept, and I GET that it worked in generating surpluses. If they cut tithing back, and times get hard, it will be hard to reinstitute it. I GET that too. I don’t blame them for that. But I do fault them for not using surpluses to make the lives of members better. To expand Ward budgets, and to make services more available for members.
The LDS Church almost went extinct once from forced intervention by the US government. Thereafter, it has worked hard to avoid that happening again. Some say they obsess unnecessarily about religious freedom, but their history in that area still lives in the collective memories of the leadership. The LDS Church almost went bankrupt more than once from lack of professional financial leadership. Thereafter, it has worked hard to avoid that happening again. Some say they obsess unnecessarily about “saving for a seven year drought”, but their history still lives in the collective memories of the leadership.
Members used to fund much of the operating costs of the LDS Church, including the cost of constructing buildings. The LDS Church now finances units independent of contributions from the local members. That allows it to fund units worldwide that can’t be funded by the local membership. Our pittance is seen as a bounty in many parts of the world.
The LDS Church heavily subsidizes higher education for its membership, to a FAR greater extent than any other denomination of which I am aware.
The LDS Church funds missions for members who can’t afford to serve otherwise. It also provides amazing retirement benefits to its member-employees, to be used in any way they desire but to allow retirement missions, if desired. They absolutely put their money where their mouth is in that regard.
The LDS Church donates extensively to disaster relief, humanitarian aid, and welfare assistance. One intentionally misleading article years ago cast that aid in a dishonestly unfavorable light, and most people have no clue how much actually is donated, when all giving is calculated.
Yes, there are legitimate criticisms that can be made from various perspectives, but a thread like this that starts out as criticism only, with no attempt at any balance or acknowledgment of any positive, skews everything right from the start. How much is enough? How much is appropriate? Ask any individual member that question about the LDS Church, and you will get an infinite number of answers. More pointedly, ask those same members that question about themselves, and you also will get an infinite number of answers. Even more pointedly, if I asked that question here about us, the conversation might get uncomfortable and even heated.
So far, I have read few comments that even try to answer the questions posed in the post. I also have read few comments that even acknowledge any good or try to understand the history that drives the desire to insulate the Church from future financial difficulties. There has been little attempt at any semblance of balance thus far.
Our mission requires we strive to see as much of the whole picture as possible as we discuss the topics posted. We aren’t here just to gripe, although venting sometimes is necessary. More than Enough? For now? Sure. For two years from now? Sure. For ten years from now? I have no freaking clue. There are all kinds of financial and political issues boiling right now that could change the worldwide economic situation dramatically. Maybe nothing will happen. Maybe this concern will continue unabated. Maybe we will have another depression – in the US and/or worldwide. Maybe this concern will disappear. Who knows?
Therefore, all I ask is that we try to be a bit more balanced as we discuss this topic. Maybe focus on the negative AND positive aspects. There absolutely are a number of both, and the overall picture is nowhere close to as simple as most of the conversation thus far has made it appear to be.
(If that is too blunt, I have been driving all day and am exhausted. Good night.)
Holy Cow wrote:I still give tithing, or at least I consider it to be tithing. I just don’t give it to the church. I donate to charities that I feel truly need it and will use it for a good cause. I also donate to fast offerings, because I like that the money helps people locally. The church wouldn’t consider me as a tithe payer, but I do. I just give my money to organizations who will use it in a way that I would prefer to see it used.
The church is actually a typical charity. If most people knew how major charities were run then they would not give to them. Take the example of Haiti, which had the bad earthquake a few years ago and has a horrific economy – even today, very few new homes have been built/rebuilt in Port-au-Prince (the main city) as charities promised they would, despite receiving millions to do so. All that would be required is for dozens of shipping containers to be sent over there and some makeshift temporary homes could be made from them, followed by proper ones. But that’s barely happened.
We had a charity in this country designed to send money to one of the southern African countries. It later came out in the press that 1/3 of its money was being spent before it went anywhere near Africa. And that begged the question of how much of the remaining 2/3 got to the people it was supposed to (I strongly suspect probably another third was creamed off by rich Africans and corrupt politicians when it got there though I can’t prove it).
It is extremely common for the people who head up large charities to have six figure salaries, yet some of these same charities still go begging for money off the poorest people in this city, or run ads telling us $20 will help feed a village for a week.
I worked a bit in the charitable sector myself for a while and it was an eyeopener. I find it a dilemma,. because I’d like to help people but I know when I give money to a major charity much of it will be swallowed up by lawyers, admin, CEOs and rentals. My experience in the charitable sector led me to realize I was working for a medium sized business with a charity attached.
So the LDS church is not atypical in this regard. These charities rely on thousands of volunteers like the church does. They invest money in commercial ventures, like the church does. There is considerable wastage – ditto. And to be fair, overheads. I’m well aware that 70s, the 12 and the president are all looked after, but in fact, compared to some of the big name charities, they (bizarrely) come off better.
SamBee wrote:
Holy Cow wrote:I still give tithing, or at least I consider it to be tithing. I just don’t give it to the church. I donate to charities that I feel truly need it and will use it for a good cause. I also donate to fast offerings, because I like that the money helps people locally. The church wouldn’t consider me as a tithe payer, but I do. I just give my money to organizations who will use it in a way that I would prefer to see it used.
The church is actually a typical charity. If most people knew how major charities were run then they would not give to them. Take the example of Haiti, which had the bad earthquake a few years ago and has a horrific economy – even today, very few new homes have been built/rebuilt in Port-au-Prince (the main city) as charities promised they would, despite receiving millions to do so. All that would be required is for dozens of shipping containers to be sent over there and some makeshift temporary homes could be made from them, followed by proper ones. But that’s barely happened.
We had a charity in this country designed to send money to one of the southern African countries. It later came out in the press that 1/3 of its money was being spent before it went anywhere near Africa. And that begged the question of how much of the remaining 2/3 got to the people it was supposed to (I strongly suspect probably another third was creamed off by rich Africans and corrupt politicians when it got there though I can’t prove it).
It is extremely common for the people who head up large charities to have six figure salaries, yet some of these same charities still go begging for money off the poorest people in this city, or run ads telling us $20 will help feed a village for a week.
I worked a bit in the charitable sector myself for a while and it was an eyeopener. I find it a dilemma,. because I’d like to help people but I know when I give money to a major charity much of it will be swallowed up by lawyers, admin, CEOs and rentals. My experience in the charitable sector led me to realize I was working for a medium sized business with a charity attached.
So the LDS church is not atypical in this regard. These charities rely on thousands of volunteers like the church does. They invest money in commercial ventures, like the church does. There is considerable wastage – ditto. And to be fair, overheads. I’m well aware that 70s, the 12 and the president are all looked after, but in fact, compared to some of the big name charities, they (bizarrely) come off better.
I run a charity — registered it almost 4 years ago. 100% of proceeds go to our mission. The only exception is our annual $87.50 “business” registration fee to our state department that oversees organizations, and a one time $275 fee we had to pay to the IRS for 501 (c) 3 status. Any bit of surplus we generate goes right back into our programs. Everyone is volunteer– we rent no space, we don’t feed anyone, we raise money and work to fulfill our mission. Some of our volunteers just buy what we need out of their own personal funds and never submit receipts either.
My understanding is that one thing you do to measure the validity of the charity is to find out what percent of its gross revenues goes to funding its mission. I understand the need for a certain percent to go out in salaries to certain people — you are limited in what you can do with 100% volunteers. And if you need people to dedicate their full-time life to the charity, then they have to be supported some way. So there is no criticism there.
In fact, I wish we paid our local leaders — particularly our Bishops. I wish we required them to have professional counseling skills so they aren’t just shooting from the hip when you go in for counseling. I wouldn’t care if the church had a bazillion dollar surplus if the funds went back into programs while holding on to a reasonable reserve for a rainy day.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.