DiscussMormonism.com

This post is partially a response to Alan Hurst's post on Peculiar People entitled "Everything is Spiritual" (link here: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/peculiarpeople/2012/07/everything-is-spiritual/).

Alan's post is a response to the latest Businessweek article (http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-07-10/how-the-mormons-make-money#p1). The topic of the uneasy juxtaposition of God and mammon is a very old one. Luther's famous Ninety-Five theses were heavily focused on what he saw as ecclesiastical abuses for financial gain (the sale of indulgences being the most prominent example). It is certainly not a new topic to Mormons either. As Hurst notes, the Businessweek article written by Caroline Winters is only the latest in several attempts to estimate the the net worth and income of the church.

The Church has invested in profit-seeking ventures pretty much from its inception. One could even argue that it goes back to Joseph Smith's treasure-hunting days. The Businessweek article states that the Church owns businesses because, for Mormons, "making money is spiritual." Hurst correctly notes that this overly simplistic view of Mormonism would, if true, be horrifying:

If this presentation of Mormonism were accurate, it would be horrifying. Prosperity gospels are bad enough when they claim merely that wealth is a sign of God’s approval, but Winter’s Mormonism would claim that wealth actually merits God’s approval, that winning fortunes wins salvation. It would be hard to imagine a belief more at odds with Jesus’ teachings in the New Testament.

Hurst argues that the Businessweek article fails to explain why believing that "making money is spiritual" does not make Mormonism just another crude prosperity gospel, and that this failure is based on a lack of understanding of Mormons' beliefs regarding heaven:

To Mormons, heaven is not merely a state of mind. It is also not, as Dante imagined it, a host of souls sitting still, gazing eternally at God. To us, heaven is active and communal. God has work for us there, not merely for each of us individually but for all of us, together, as his children and heirs. The joy of heaven comes from communion with God, but also from our participation in God’s work and our communion with each other in a perfect community. Heaven is other people. . . . Everything is spiritual to Mormons because everything matters, because there is nothing that can be dismissed as irrelevant to our salvation.

So if I am reading this correctly, for Hurst "making money is spiritual" is just fine because for the Mormons everything is eschatological. In other words, it all relates back to Mormon beliefs of heaven and salvation. There is some merit in this view. After all, as Hurst notes, it makes sense for the Church to own "newspapers, broadcasters, and publishing companies" in order to spread its message to the world. It makes sense for the Church to own post-secondary educational enterprises so that its youth can "go to college away from the drinking, sex, and atheism stereotypical of today’s higher education." It makes sense for the Church to own "farms and food processing plants to help feed" the needy.

A lot of what Hurst says makes sense, and it essentially mirrors what I used to believe, which is precisely why I found the mall so troubling. I see no legitimate spiritual justification for it. Again, I do not have an issue with the church investing in businesses, but for me the mall simply represents a bridge too far. There were several choices made along the way that are unjustifiable. Did the Church really have to invest billions of dollars into this project? The church cuts corners to save money in building cookie-cutter temples and chapels so why did they go all out here? Why a high-end luxury mall with stores like Tiffanys? What does that say about the type of people you want to attract to downtown SLC? And for the love of Pete, why on earth would you have the prophet stand there with the First Presidency to cut the ribbon and say "let's go shopping!!" I can think of only one reason: to generate publicity and encourage Mormons to come out and shop at the mall. What a great message to send during a recession. What happened to "avoid debt and unnecessary expenditures"? Why not have Mcmurrin cut the ribbon? It would still be offensive, but much less so. As I said above, the juxtaposition of God and mammon has always been uneasy, but the Church just put them right together in a very striking "in-your-face" manner by having the prophet cut the ribbon and utter those now infamous words. Is the President of the church really supposed to be prophet, seer and . . . salesman? I see nothing spiritual in that and I will no longer pay any tithing to support it.

This is the same organization that sent an apostle to offer a dedicatory prayer at a new law-office building. It's always been about making money (good point with the treasure-seeking). A friend of mine says the best way to understand the church is that it's a large corporation that has a religious subsidiary.

Bob Loblaw wrote:This is the same organization that sent an apostle to offer a dedicatory prayer at a new law-office building. It's always been about making money (good point with the treasure-seeking). A friend of mine says the best way to understand the church is that it's a large corporation that has a religious subsidiary.

But would you agree that the mall is taking it to another level? I can't think of another example of the prophet acting so blatantly like a salesman before.

Cicero wrote:But would you agree that the mall is taking it to another level? I can't think of another example of the prophet acting so blatantly like a salesman before.

At least he wasn't telling people God wanted them to invest, like Joseph Smith did with the Kirtland Bank. Or that God wanted a hotel to be built and by revelation (D&C 124) dictated the price of shares.

Bob Loblaw wrote:

Cicero wrote:But would you agree that the mall is taking it to another level? I can't think of another example of the prophet acting so blatantly like a salesman before.

At least he wasn't telling people God wanted them to invest, like Joseph Smith did with the Kirtland Bank. Or that God wanted a hotel to be built and by revelation (D&C 124) dictated the price of shares.

Ah yes, how could I forget about the bank. That turned out so well for the investors, but I am sure it was just another trial of faith.

Cicero wrote:Ah yes, how could I forget about the bank. That turned out so well for the investors, but I am sure it was just another trial of faith.

A canonized revelation that sets share prices and directs how God wants money to be invested ought to be a major red flag, dontcha think?

Bob Loblaw wrote:

Cicero wrote:Ah yes, how could I forget about the bank. That turned out so well for the investors, but I am sure it was just another trial of faith.

A canonized revelation that sets share prices and directs how God wants money to be invested ought to be a major red flag, dontcha think?

Oh I don't know, His ways are not our ways and all that. In addition to hotels, God also does seem to take a peculiar interest in ship building. He even designed a functional wooden submarine. Amazing!

Bob Loblaw wrote:This is the same organization that sent an apostle to offer a dedicatory prayer at a new law-office building. It's always been about making money (good point with the treasure-seeking).

Has LDS Inc been more successful in the outcomes of pieces of litigation since the apostle blessed the Inc's law firm's new digs?

I have a hard time understanding why you paid tithing at all in the first place.

bcspace wrote:I have a hard time understanding why you paid tithing at all in the first place.

No crap. Why any of did is an unsolvable riddle.