New Project Shows Church Finance Corruption

[Canadiandude2]

They’ve never been more wealthy than they are now, but they’re also set to possibly lose a larger share of subsequent generations of members than perhaps ever before as well.

They could respond with increasing church budgets for activities and crap, but ‘buying the members loyalty with expensive membership rewards’ doesn’t actually strengthen any of their truth claims.

Would it work? Ski trips, elaborate camp-outs, more elaborate festivities?

I wouldn't call any of that "buying loyalty." I think the church has made a huge mistake in gutting community-building activities at the ward and stake levels. Dances, overnights, camping trips, roller skating. To the extent that those things "keep people in the church," they do so in a healthy, pro-social way.

I feel bad for kids in the church today, who don't seem to be getting much, if any, fun church activities anymore. Neither do the adults, for that matter. Even the pageants have been cancelled. It's like they realized all this stuff wasn't the missionary tool it was always superficially billed as ("Bring a non-member friend!"), so they refuse to keep spending even a tiny fraction of their loot on activities that members enjoy and that increase social investment in the church.

Maybe they’ll also opt to buy other institutions’ silence instead by donating more to nonprofits that would normally otherwise be hostile towards them?

Who's truly hostile to Mormons anymore? Most people don't give a crap about Mormons. The press was almost too gentle on Mitt Romney's religion during his presidential campaign. Even our one natural enemy---the Evangelicals---have realized Mormons are useful political allies.

It's kind of a circular question, because having that kind of money has probably bought Mormons some respectability and opened some powerful doors, leaving them with no one who really needs buying off. The major newspapers haven't remained silent when there's a good story brewing in Zion. There just usually isn't one that anybody but other Mormons would care about.

That makes sense. What I meant by the phrase was the possible reaction of just increasing spending on social activities without making the doctrine & policies more equitable and transparent.

[MG 2.0]

An excellent presentation, although I think their estimates of church wealth may be low.

According to this well researched website, the church has between USD300 and USD400 in commercial and agricultural real estate.
http://www.bidstrup.com/ldsfinances.htm

60% of church membership is outside of the United States. Hypothetically speaking, if one was to determine whether or not the majority of the church, which exists outside of the U.S., could maintain themselves financially over the long haul without significant financial reserves is literally the billion(s) dollar question.

Europe, including the UK is 3% of church membership. South and Central America are over 30%. So you would have an interesting mix of economic structures holding up the church. As it is, what happens within the 40% of the church that consists of members in the U.S. matters. The financial reserves then become of grater importance. At some point we may see those reserves becoming integral to the overall temporal health of the church.

We tend to focus on the 40% rather than the 60%. Personally, I’m comfortable with more financial reserves than less in an international church which sees the U.S. as less than half of its membership. And that trend is more than likely to continue.

Regards,
MG

[Dr Moore]

It’s a strange position they’re in.

They’ve never been more wealthy than they are now, but they’re also set to possibly lose a larger share of subsequent generations of members than perhaps ever before as well.

In our area, despite the promise of a new-and-improved post-scouting youth program, the young men's activities are required to be low cost. They've been essentially limited to firesides, "gaming nights," and random lame activities such as the "grocery store scavenger hunt." Then, expressing their desires to do something more enjoyable last week, the young men voted to do an activity at Top Golf, which would cost about $20 per boy for 8-10 young men for 2 hours. They were thrilled. The activity was approved (by the bishopric counselor in charge), then scheduled and communicated to parents. Everyone was excited about it. A few inactive youth planned to attend. But then, the bishop, acting out of hand, made them cancel the activity, stating that it was too expensive and the ward budget did not have room to cover the cost. Ouch! So much for an improved youth program post scouting. Instead, all of the youth get to be babysat by members of the bishopric every week. It's truly lame.

I'm hearing other instances of crimped budgets. As communicated from area authorities, the church is tightening its belt in order to build more temples. How interesting, as page 14 of the document shows, several budget cuts have already become evident, conveniently offsetting Nelson's temple building binge. It may be that the nickle and diming of ward budgets ultimately closes whatever gap may remain.

And then what's really disheartening is to see page 12. Such a disproportionate amount of church growth from lower-income regions, for like a generation or more. Has the church ever spent its money to support growth in those poorer regions? No, it doesn't. The church crimps every region's budgets to the lowest common denominator, in order to bank a cool $billion or so every year. There is no reason to believe that it ever will change. Arguably, leaders are flat lying about the notion that the church will one day break with tradition and just begin to run deficit spending in order to continue growing in poor countries like Africa. Newsflash: it won't. Evidence? Oh just a few decades of track record.

One has to wonder, what is the end game? A smaller church with more temples? That might be Nelson's greatest wish. The Q15 have been leaning in lately on the notion that Nephi saw a church that would be "small, because of wickedness." In other words, let's sift out the tares and get to a lighter-weight church that's more wheat-filled. In which case, what is the point of so many new temples then? They won't be utilized. It feels like just a big bet on marketing to the wheat.

[MG 2.0]

The Q15 have been leaning in lately on the notion that Nephi saw a church that would be "small, because of wickedness." In other words, let's sift out the tares and get to a lighter-weight church that's more wheat-filled.

That’s what we are seeing. Remember when you were younger and you’d hear and/or read that there would be a day of sifting, and then wonder, “What’s that going to look like?”

Well, now you know.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

And then what's really disheartening is to see page 12. Such a disproportionate amount of church growth from lower-income regions, for like a generation or more. Has the church ever spent its money to support growth in those poorer regions? No, it doesn't. The church crimps every region's budgets to the lowest common denominator, in order to bank a cool $billion or so every year. There is no reason to believe that it ever will change. Arguably, leaders are flat lying about the notion that the church will one day break with tradition and just begin to run deficit spending in order to continue growing in poor countries like Africa. Newsflash: it won't. Evidence? Oh just a few decades of track record.

That is what is truly despicable. The Zimbabwe president was asking for help with water— just WATER! For God’s sake, when the lds leader told him “we are not a wealthy people.” Bullshiit. The water emergency hasn’t improved in that country in decades. Meanwhile, donating a couple of days of just the interest from just one of the lds hoards would give the country hundreds of millions of dollars to work with, and would overshadow the couple of millions Zimbabwe has been scraping together for decades.

But what the Mormons did do was build a temple, in Harare, Zimbabwe. Where members can’t attend unless they pay 10%.

I’m sure the local mission home and the temple president’s home both have access to drinkable water. What do you think?

[MG 2.0]

And then what's really disheartening is to see page 12. Such a disproportionate amount of church growth from lower-income regions, for like a generation or more. Has the church ever spent its money to support growth in those poorer regions? No, it doesn't. The church crimps every region's budgets to the lowest common denominator, in order to bank a cool $billion or so every year. There is no reason to believe that it ever will change. Arguably, leaders are flat lying about the notion that the church will one day break with tradition and just begin to run deficit spending in order to continue growing in poor countries like Africa. Newsflash: it won't. Evidence? Oh just a few decades of track record.

That is what is truly despicable. The Zimbabwe president was asking for help with water— just WATER! For God’s sake, when the lds leader told him “we are not a wealthy people.” Bullshiit. The water emergency hasn’t improved in that country in decades. Meanwhile, donating a couple of days of just the interest from just one of the lds hoards would give the country hundreds of millions of dollars to work with, and would overshadow the couple of millions Zimbabwe has been scraping together for decades.

But what the Mormons did do was build a temple, in Harare, Zimbabwe. Where members can’t attend unless they pay 10%.

I’m sure the local mission home and the temple president’s home both have access to drinkable water. What do you think?

Here is an opportunity for you to put your money where your mouth is:

https://www.wateraid.org/us/

Got its start right here in good ol’ Utah, if I’m not mistaken. Worthy charity. They’ve done a whole lot of good.

Just a shout out.

Regards,
MG

[Marcus]

That is what is truly despicable. The Zimbabwe president was asking for help with water— just WATER! For God’s sake, when the lds leader told him “we are not a wealthy people.” Bullshiit. The water emergency hasn’t improved in that country in decades. Meanwhile, donating a couple of days of just the interest from just one of the lds hoards would give the country hundreds of millions of dollars to work with, and would overshadow the couple of millions Zimbabwe has been scraping together for decades.

But what the Mormons did do was build a temple, in Harare, Zimbabwe. Where members can’t attend unless they pay 10%.

I’m sure the local mission home and the temple president’s home both have access to drinkable water. What do you think?

Here is an opportunity for you to put your money where your mouth is:

https://www.wateraid.org/us/

Got its start right here in good ol’ Utah, if I’m not mistaken. Worthy charity. They’ve done a whole lot of good.

Just a shout out.

Regards,
MG

Your point is weak and ineffectual.

I didn’t tell the Zimbabwe president “we are not a wealthy people” when he asked for help with water.

I am not hoarding hundreds of billions of dollars that are the outcome of collecting people’s charitable and tax-deductible donations for proper uses.

But, your attempts to change the subject don’t bypass the point:

That is what is truly despicable. The Zimbabwe president was asking for help with water— just WATER! For God’s sake, when the lds leader told him “we are not a wealthy people.” Bullshiit. The water emergency hasn’t improved in that country in decades. Meanwhile, donating a couple of days of just the interest from just one of the lds hoards would give the country hundreds of millions of dollars to work with, and would overshadow the couple of millions Zimbabwe has been scraping together for decades.

But what the Mormons did do was build a temple, in Harare, Zimbabwe. Where members can’t attend unless they pay 10%.

I’m sure the local mission home and the temple president’s home both have access to drinkable water. What do you think?

[MG 2.0]

I didn’t tell the Zimbabwe president “we are not a wealthy people” when he asked for help with water.

This seems to be a problem for you. You are referring to:

When Zimbabwe Vice President Mohandi requested support for clean-water wells, Mormon apostle Neil Anderson said “We are not a wealthy people but we are a good people, and we share what we have.”

https://www.mormonstories.org/top-40-mo ... h-history/

This is your source? Any chance of a primary source on this that shows the actual quote contextually? I’m a bit hesitant about taking something posted on Mormon Stories as being gospel truth.

I am not hoarding hundreds of billions of dollars that are the outcome of collecting people’s charitable and tax-deductible donations for proper uses.

Proper uses?

But what the Mormons did do was build a temple, in Harare, Zimbabwe. Where members can’t attend unless they pay 10%.

I’m sure the local mission home and the temple president’s home both have access to drinkable water. What do you think?

More than likely. Would you have it any other way? In regards to the temple in Zimbabwe:

John 4:14
“But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.”

Members of the church, believe it or not, look at that temple with this scripture in mind. The church mission is four fold. And the spiritual mission of the church is primary. You seem to think that the most important function of the church is to solve all the world’s problems.

Again, check out:
https://www.wateraid.org/us/

Stop your complaining.

By the way, earlier in this thread I gave rationale for the church practice of having a hefty reserve of financial resources. Hoarding, as you put it, may have a useful rhyme and reason behind it.

Sheesh. You folks are looking for a conspiracy.

Regards,
MG

[Morley]

Here is an opportunity for you to put your money where your mouth is:

https://www.wateraid.org/us/

Got its start right here in good ol’ Utah, if I’m not mistaken.

You are mistaken. Again and interminably. If you actually donated to the charity, you would know.

And you're off topic.

[Marcus]

I didn’t tell the Zimbabwe president “we are not a wealthy people” when he asked for help with water.

This seems to be a problem for you. You are referring to:

When Zimbabwe Vice President Mohandi requested support for clean-water wells, Mormon apostle Neil Anderson said “We are not a wealthy people but we are a good people, and we share what we have.”

https://www.mormonstories.org/top-40-mo ... h-history/

This is your source? Any chance of a primary source on this that shows the actual quote contextually? I’m a bit hesitant about taking something posted on Mormon Stories as being gospel truth.

lol. This is a known and documented event. Do your own homework.

But what the Mormons did do was build a temple, in Harare, Zimbabwe. Where members can’t attend unless they pay 10%.

I’m sure the local mission home and the temple president’s home both have access to drinkable water. What do you think?

More than likely. Would you have it any other way?

Wow. Yes I would. I find it insufferably condescending that a religion enters an area, pretends they are "not wealthy," and asks for 10% instead of behaving in a Christ-like manner.

But I agree with Morley. You've derailed enough so let's get back on topic.