Cicero, I think you make some excellent points, and express some of those points very eloquently.
Cicero wrote: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.
If there were no newspapers, schools, or farms--or that the LDS Church was such a much more efficient producer of such--then it could be justified. There would be a need. But that's not what is going on with LDS Inc having those interests. Ironically, the LDS Church has divested itself of hospitals for providing care for the poor and afflicted, opting instead for grandiose malls and private hunting preserves. Jesus has certainly grown a lot since his days emerging from the tomb.
Cicero wrote:I see no legitimate spiritual justification for [the Jesus Mall]. 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?
Since the advent of Hinckley in Charge, yes, LDS Inc really did have to invest billions of dollars in a Jesus Mall. A for-profit corporation is compelled to do just as LDS Inc is doing--making a profit without regard for the people that get run over in the process.
Cicero wrote:The church cuts corners to save money in building cookie-cutter temples and chapels so why did they go all out here?
Priorities. Fancy malls draw more patrons; endowment temples are becoming passe.
Cicero wrote: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?
Tithe payers. Big tithe payers to be exact.
Cicero wrote: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!!"
LDS is now the life insurance sales version of religions. It's packaged. It plays off of fear. It's slick. And it requires a promoter.
Cicero wrote: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.
Actually, the ribbon-cutting may have been cheeky, but it was one of the most genuine moments for a Mormon prophet in the last 35 years.