Was My Mormon Ancestor'S Tithing Used To Build City Creek Mall?

[JAHS]

When people accuse the Church of using sacred tithing money to fund things like the building of the City Creek mall, the obvious answer is of course that tithing money is not used; rather money from the for-profit arm of the church is used that was obtained through business investments over the years.

But then of course critics ask the next question; "Where do you think the church got the money to buy the businesses in the first place?"

And they conclude that It must have started with tithing money donated by early church members. So in an indirect way the City Creek mall was made possible by sacred tithing money donated by members 150 years ago; money that is supposed to be dedicated to building God's church and helping the poor; not for building shopping malls. How does one respond to this?

[Pahoran]

When people accuse the Church of using sacred tithing money to fund things like the building of the City Creek mall, the obvious answer is of course that tithing money is not used; rather money from the for-profit arm of the church is used that was obtained through business investments over the years.

But then of course critics ask the next question; "Where do you think the church got the money to buy the businesses in the first place?"

And they conclude that It must have started with tithing money donated by early church members. So in an indirect way the City Creek mall was made possible by sacred tithing money donated by members 150 years ago; money that is supposed to be dedicated to building God's church and helping the poor; not for building shopping malls. How does one respond to this?

The first response is that their criticism is not based upon evidence, but is merely an assumption.

They seem to assume that the Saints settled in Utah, started earning money, paid tithing on their earnings, and so 170 years later, the Church has money to invest in a commercial enterprise. They don't stop to actually ask where the money came from that, so they suppose, those first settlers were earning.

Of course, planting and raising crops, building houses and cities, digging irrigation ditches and various other activities does create wealth; just not of the monetary kind. Monetary wealth comes from business, the buying and selling of goods and services. From the very earliest period of settlement, the Church was investing in business ventures. They were primarily driven by "community good" considerations, but of course they had to make a profit in order to be viable. If a "genealogy" of Church-owned businesses were to be researched, I am confident that the City Creek Mall's pedigree would trace back, not to the tithing paid in St George after President Snow's famous "Windows of Heaven" talk, but to the original Zion's Co-operative Mercantile Institution.

Regards,

Pahoran

Edited March 22, 2012 by Pahoran

[Sky]

I guess you could make an argument that tithing money was used in an indirect way to help fund this project. But trying to make a connection to our ancestor’s is dubious at best, IMHO. The tithing money donated by our ancestor’s has long ago been used.

I’m sick and tired of people who hate the Church in the first place trying to dictate how the Church should use its money!! If they hate the mall so much, I trust that they won’t be shopping there.

I, for one, am excited to see City Creek up and running. The fact of the matter is that the Church has done more to make Salt Lake City a vibrant and beautiful city than anybody else could ever hope to.

[Scott Lloyd]

When people accuse the Church of using sacred tithing money to fund things like the building of the City Creek mall, the obvious answer is of course that tithing money is not used; rather money from the for-profit arm of the church is used that was obtained through business investments over the years.

But then of course critics ask the next question; "Where do you think the church got the money to buy the businesses in the first place?"

And they conclude that It must have started with tithing money donated by early church members. So in an indirect way the City Creek mall was made possible by sacred tithing money donated by members 150 years ago; money that is supposed to be dedicated to building God's church and helping the poor; not for building shopping malls. How does one respond to this?

Tithing and other consecrated funds are used to build the Kingdom of God on earth. Part of that is preserving the sacred spaces surrounding the Salt Lake Temple and the headquarters of the Church from urban blight. You will recall that President Gordon B. Hinckley gave that as a reason for undertaking the City Creek project way back in the early stages of planning and construction.

The Church of Jesus Christ settled the downtown Salt Lake City area and founded the city in 1847. That put the Church in a position of strength so that 170 years later, being a major property owner, it could preserve the heart and never center of the Church from encroachment.

I doubt that will quiet the critics. But their carping has never giving me one nanosecond of concern in any case.

Edited March 22, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[Duncan]

what about the criticism that the Church has only spent 1 billion, as per the welfare fact sheet, on humanitarian aid yet 5 billion on this mall thing?

http://www.providentliving.org/ under welfare fact sheet

[Craig Paxton]

When people accuse the Church of using sacred tithing money to fund things like the building of the City Creek mall, the obvious answer is of course that tithing money is not used; rather money from the for-profit arm of the church is used that was obtained through business investments over the years.

But then of course critics ask the next question; "Where do you think the church got the money to buy the businesses in the first place?"

And they conclude that It must have started with tithing money donated by early church members. So in an indirect way the City Creek mall was made possible by sacred tithing money donated by members 150 years ago; money that is supposed to be dedicated to building God's church and helping the poor; not for building shopping malls. How does one respond to this?

It is disingenuous for the church to claim that no tithing funds were used to fund the City Creek Mall. Member Pays Tithing à Tithing in Excess of Current Needs is Invested à Investments Earn Return à $$$ From This Return on Investments is Reinvested in the City Creek Mall…. Classic Money Laundering...So can the Church really claim that they didn’t use tithing funds to fund the City Creek mall? Ummm I suppose so…but is it really an honest statement to claim such or is the church just being disingenuous?

PS: Just for the record...I really don't care if they used tithing funds or not....I'm personally glad that they did it...I can't enter their temples...but at least for the time being, I can enter their mall

Edited March 22, 2012 by Craig Paxton

[Scott Lloyd]

It is disingenuous for the church to claim that no tithing funds were used to fund the City Creek Mall. Member Pays Tithing à Tithing in Excess of Current Needs is Invested à Investments Earn Return à $$$ From This Return on Investments is Reinvested in the City Creek Mall…. Classic Money Laundering...So can the Church really claim that they didn’t use tithing funds to fund the City Creek mall? Ummm I suppose so…but is it really an honest statement to claim such or is the church just being disingenuous?

CFR

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

It is disingenuous for the church to claim that no tithing funds were used to fund the City Creek Mall. Member Pays Tithing à Tithing in Excess of Current Needs is Invested à Investments Earn Return à $$$ From This Return on Investments is Reinvested in the City Creek Mall…. Classic Money Laundering...So can the Church really claim that they didn’t use tithing funds to fund the City Creek mall? Ummm I suppose so…but is it really an honest statement to claim such or is the church just being disingenuous?

PS: Just for the record...I really don't care if they used tithing funds or not....I'm personally glad that they did it...I can't enter their temples...at least for the time being, I can enter their mall

Acutally yes, the church can claim it because they did not. Funny.

On another unrelated point,

Of course the real joke is that teh Gateway mall will die and go the way of the world. Man, I wish the previous mayor of salt lake was on this board. He is the real joke.

Edited March 22, 2012 by Mola Ram Suda Ram

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

CFR

I 2nd that. I think he is fluff and stuff.

[JAHS]

Any references that support the statement that "Tithing in Excess of Current Needs is Invested"?

[JAHS]

The first response is that their criticism is not based upon evidence, but is merely an assumption.

They seem to assume that the Saints settled in Utah, started earning money, paid tithing on their earnings, and so 170 years later, the Church has money to invest in a commercial enterprise. They don't stop to actually ask where the money came from that, so they suppose, those first settlers were earning.

Of course, planting and raising crops, building houses and cities, digging irrigation ditches and various other activities does create wealth; just not of the monetary kind. Monetary wealth comes from business, the buying and selling of goods and services. From the very earliest period of settlement, the Church was investing in business ventures. They were primarily driven by "community good" considerations, but of course they had to make a profit in order to be viable. If a "genealogy" of Church-owned businesses were to be researched, I am confident that the City Creek Mall's pedigree would trace back, not to the tithing paid in St George after President Snow's famous "Windows of Heaven" talk, but to the original Zion's Co-operative Mercantile Institution.

Regards,

Pahoran

I suppose we could say that it is just an assumption without basis in fact. The Church members back then were an isolated community of people and anything anyone could do build the community was appreciated and used and invested to make it grow. I doubt that they even called it or considered it tithing.

[Scott Lloyd]

If a "genealogy" of Church-owned businesses were to be researched, I am confident that the City Creek Mall's pedigree would trace back, not to the tithing paid in St George after President Snow's famous "Windows of Heaven" talk, but to the original Zion's Co-operative Mercantile Institution.

Regards,

Pahoran

In fact, Macy's, which is the anchor and most visible element for the new City Creek Center, has a facsimile of the original ZCMI storefront, being at the original ZCMI location.

[Scott Lloyd]

I 2nd that. I think he is fluff and stuff.

And bluster with no substance. I predict he will ignore or fail to answer the CFR.

[Craig Paxton]

Any references that support the statement that "Tithing in Excess of Current Needs is Invested"?

CFR? I"m gooing to assume that you are smart enough to follow the dots... When the LDS Church takes in more donations than it pays out in current expenses, it uses the surplus to build a reserve for capital expenditures and for future years when period expenses may exceed donations. The LDS Church invests its reserve to maintain the principal and generate a reasonable return and directs its investments into income-producing assets that may help it in its mission, such as farmland, communication-related companies and commercial realestate.

Come on...surly you're not niave enough to think that excess funds beyond those not needed in curent years arn't invested...what you think the church would NOT invest expess funds? Now that would be naive.

No need to report this. Craig has been suspended for a week.

[Pahoran]

It is disingenuous for the church to claim that no tithing funds were used to fund the City Creek Mall.

No, it's just truthful.

Member Pays Tithing à Tithing in Excess of Current Needs is Invested à Investments Earn Return à $$$ From This Return on Investments is Reinvested in the City Creek Mall….

Yes, I can see how someone with no awareness of history might assume some process similar to the above. I won't ask if you have a reference for your assumption, because of course we both know that you don't.

Classic Money Laundering...

Classic unsupported false accusation, expressed in the most inflammatory terms possible. Since "Money laundering" is a criminal offence, I'm going to ask you to withdraw this assertion, which we both know to be false.

So can the Church really claim that they didn’t use tithing funds to fund the City Creek mall? Ummm I suppose so…but is it really an honest statement to claim such or is the church just being disingenuous?

Why pretend to ask a question when you have already dogmatically asserted your preferred answer?

Regards,

Pahoran

[Pahoran]

CFR? I"m gooing to assume that you are smart enough to follow the dots...

Which means that that's all you were doing.

Thank you for confirming what we already knew.

Regards,

Pahoran

[Cobalt-70]

Any references that support the statement that "Tithing in Excess of Current Needs is Invested"?

Many years ago, Gordon B. Hinckley said the following:

"In the financial operations of the Church, we have observed two basic and fixed principles: One, the Church will live within its means. It will not spend more than it receives. Two, a fixed percentage of the income will be set aside to build reserves against what might be called a possible “rainy day.”" https://www.lds.org/...ch.p23?lang=eng

Apparently, the church has a rule to invest some "fixed percentage" of the funds it takes in. It would be a lot less directly lucrative to put these "reserves" in the bank and let bankers invest it for them, than for the church to directly manage its own investments, through its commercial real estate and business arms. But nobody outside the church knows the full answer, given that these companies are not publicly traded, and therefore do not have to disclose their finances except to the IRS.

It's possible that the church buys shares in the stock of companies like Property Reserve, Inc. That way, tithing funds are not directly used to finance investments like City Creek. Or perhaps Property Reserve, Inc. has accumulated cash on hand for such projects from its other investments.

Edited March 22, 2012 by Cobalt-70

[JAHS]

Many years ago, Gordon B. Hinckley said the following:

"In the financial operations of the Church, we have observed two basic and fixed principles: One, the Church will live within its means. It will not spend more than it receives. Two, a fixed percentage of the income will be set aside to build reserves against what might be called a possible “rainy day.”" https://www.lds.org/...ch.p23?lang=eng

Apparently, the church has a rule to invest some "fixed percentage" of the funds it takes in. It would be a lot less directly lucrative to put these "reserves" in the bank and let bankers invest it for them, than for the church to directly manage its own investments, through its commercial real estate and business arms. But nobody outside the church knows the full answer, given that these companies are not publicly traded, and therefore do not have to disclose their finances except to the IRS.

It's possible that the church buys shares in the stock of companies like Property Reserve, Inc. That way, tithing funds are not directly used to finance investments like City Creek. Or perhaps Property Reserve, Inc. has accumulated cash on hand for such projects from its other investments.

"a fixed percentage of the income will be set aside to build reserves against what might be called a possible “rainy day.”

It's also possible that this "rainy day" money will not be used for investments or to build shopping malls; it would probably be used for the upkeep of the church through hard times.

[Jeff K.]

The question of tithing money tied to a mall is a red herring that still has not been proven, but there are also other points to consider

I look at it from a different perspective. There are two or three important points.

1- When many saints first came to the valley, after arrival, they had very little left in the way of food and material for survival or to make their homes. The church provided many with shelter and food until they could care for themselves. In many cases, were it not for the church, there wouldn't be ancestors one could complain about. So how much is your present existence worth relative to their well being? Would you be willing to allow a mall to be constructed a century or so later so that you and your ancestors could continue to exist?

2-Agency..... Ancestors had their choice to pay what they wanted to, to whom they wished to pay, for whatever reason they wished, after all they earned it (not us). You might as well complain they wasted their money on a fare to the US, or that they over spent on the land they might have purchased, or that some other charity they gave to didn't live up to your present reason for complaint. In other words, you have no standing in the case. It is not for you to decide whether their spending was accurate, good, or wrong, or that the church failed to live up to some pre arranged agreement long ago.

3-There is however a more important aspect that tithe payers understand, and complainers (ie those without faith) do not understand. From the perspective of the faithful, tithing is not the payment of income, it is the setting aside of income for a repayment. In other words, all that we have was given to us by the Lord and as such He is only asking for 10% of what He has blessed us with. How the Lord's authorized agents deal with that repayment is not of our concern, indeed if we, any of us, felt that the agents were corrupted or corrupt, we could simpy cease payment until a less corrupt agent manifests itself. Once I write the check, I don't care what is done with it. It is no longer my money. As an additional point..... I have trust/faith in the Lord's agents to do what is best. Building temples and churches, helping missionaries, or mission work, helping the poor, or building a mall (if such did occur), would to me be irrelevant since my tithing is a repayment. My responsibility lies in paying the tithe, others will answer to the Lord regarding how that tithing is managed.

[wenglund]

I think it important to remember that the City Creek project has employed thousands of people during hard economic times, particularly construction workers who have been hit the hardest.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[Jeff K.]

Wade, don't you know that such benefits to the local populace are exactly why they want to keep tithing within some undefined narrow corridor of economics.

Next thing you know, the church will be blessing all kinds of people in all kinds of ways, we just can't have that.

[Tepui]

"Your ancestor's tithing" LOL!

No one has claim on their ancestor's tithing. Pay your own tithes.

[Minos]

It is disingenuous for the church to claim that no tithing funds were used to fund the City Creek Mall. Member Pays Tithing à Tithing in Excess of Current Needs is Invested à Investments Earn Return à $$$ From This Return on Investments is Reinvested in the City Creek Mall…. Classic Money Laundering...So can the Church really claim that they didn’t use tithing funds to fund the City Creek mall? Ummm I suppose so…but is it really an honest statement to claim such or is the church just being disingenuous?

Those are unpleasant accusations. You do need to follow board guidelines and support them.

[Cobalt-70]

"a fixed percentage of the income will be set aside to build reserves against what might be called a possible “rainy day.”

It's also possible that this "rainy day" money will not be used for investments or to build shopping malls; it would probably be used for the upkeep of the church through hard times.

That's how it would be used in a "rainy day," but until the rainy day, the money has to be put somewhere, and the church probably doesn't want to just deposit it with bankers. They'd rather make more lucrative investments in real estate, etc.

[wenglund]

Wade, don't you know that such benefits to the local populace are exactly why they want to keep tithing within some undefined narrow corridor of economics.

Next thing you know, the church will be blessing all kinds of people in all kinds of ways, we just can't have that.

The busy-bodies won't be denied their belly-aches.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-