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

[MorningStar]

It will be interesting to revisit this in five years ago to see how accurate the naysayers over the past several years have in their doomsday prophecies about City Creek. Of course, by then they'll be nowhere to be found.

It was interesting to be downtown this past week and weekend. I haven't seen it this crowded and festive since the Olympics in 2001.

I'm looking forward to seeing it!

[Senator]

Senator:

Because making money is not one of the four fold missions of the Church.

Directly, no. However, it is obvious that the church (like eveyone else) realizes that money is an unavoidable commodity needed to fulfill its missions. It is also indeed obvious that the church takes great interest in making money by making its money work. I therefore think it would be a boon to teach their investment strategies to members.

[Senator]

Ah... but we do. How many times have you been counseled to avoid debt, increase savings, prepare for emergencies... That is what the church does and it works well for individual members.

Agreed. There is no doubt that penny-pinching and deptlessness is the seedbed for economic independence. However, I highly doubt that that is all the chuch has done to amass the kind of wealth that it has.

[Jaybear]

It will be interesting to revisit this in five years ago to see how accurate the naysayers over the past several years have in their doomsday prophecies about City Creek. Of course, by then they'll be nowhere to be found.

It was interesting to be downtown this past week and weekend. I haven't seen it this crowded and festive since the Olympics in 2001.

Who are these naysayers and what did they predict?

[Deborah]

For those of us old enough to remember, we once had building funds and temple funds along with tithing and fast offerings as part of expected contributions. Because of the church's investments and ability to grow money, the building and temple funds were no longer necessary and it all comes from the general fund now. So I am happy that the church has been so wise with its money.

[LeSellers]

For those of us old enough to remember, we once had building funds and temple funds along with tithing and fast offerings as part of expected contributions.

That ain't the half of it, dear sister.

As seen here.

Let us not forget, either, that we Saints now get off very lightly. When I was a child, it was far from uncommon for a Saint to donate 25% or more of his income to the Church for tithing, Fast Offerings, ward building funds, Temple funds, welfare assessments, ward (and stake) budgets, Relief Society and Elders' Quorum budgets, Scouting assessments, et cetera, etc, &c. We don't give as much any more as we used to. For a Church whose primary goal is, in the eyes of many critics, "to get gain", we seem to be going about it backwards: asking less and less rather than more and more.

With new emphases.

Lehi

[Deborah]

Ha, ha, I missed that one Lehi. I forgot about all those other things and missed your prior post.

[LeSellers]

Ha, ha, I missed that one Lehi. I forgot about all those other things and missed your prior post.

The funny thing is, as I recall, my father and mother never complained about tithing and the others nearly as much as some people whine today about the much lower, present-day, economic cost of being a Saint.

I'm not worried about losing blessings because we do not donate at the same levels an earlier generation did, but one is left pondering what the outcome would be if God were to ask us to return to the programs of yesteryear. When Israel was camped at the foot of Sinai, God had to command them to stop giving to the "Temple Fund". They were desperate to make it as costly and as elegant as they could because they cherished the idea of the Tabernacle. Today, people complain that taxes shouldn't be part of the "tithable base". O tempore o mores.

Lehi

[KevinG]

In other words your ancestors tithing helped build today's economic security for the Saints.

[wenglund]

I therefore think it would be a boon to teach their investment strategies to members.

I don't know that their investment strategies are much, if any, different from other successful entities, including various private individuals--particularly in terms of economy to scale, and can be learn about via a number of mediums (Internet, books, TV, etc.), and are often written and produced by entities, unlike the Church, whose primary purpose is financial investments.

As I see it, the issue for some of us members isn't so much investment strategies, but the lack of capital to invest. Most of us haven't been around accumulating capital for more than 250 years, nor are our revenue streams as diversified and relatively uninterrupted as with the Church, nor might not our revenue streams, for extended periods of time, exceed the cost of our basic needs.

In short, for those of us who aren't, to a proportional extent, experiencing the same financial success as the Church, this may be less a function of our lack of learning successful investments strategies as it may be a matter of circumstances.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited March 26, 2012 by wenglund

[wenglund]

That ain't the half of it, dear sister.

As seen here.

Let's not also forget church fund-raisers, like bazaars and bake sales and auctions, where we used to donated our own goods for sale, and the man-hours we used to donate to welfare farms and sweat-equity in building church facilities.

Back then, our families were lucky to have one dependable car, a TV set, washer and dryer, several changes of clothing each, and three square meals a day. We could barely afford our needs, let alone our wants. Healthcare and retirement were relatively rare benefits. Yet, we still were able and pleased to give, and didn't fuss about how the Church spent our offerings.

It is only after periods of abundance and wealth that some of the more spoiled among us think to gripe and complain.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited March 26, 2012 by wenglund

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

I don't understand why people criticise the church for building a mall. I think its a good use of money. Its job creation. It stimulates the economy.

I don’t think they care. It is just another issue to attack the Church for being prosperous…any port in a storm.

[JAHS]

I still remember the ward budget dinners that we would hold in the back yard of the church. My dad would hand over a check to the finance clerk sitting at a table and we would load up our plates with steaks and corn on the cob (mine would always roll of the plate and end up in the grass).

I always wondered if the check my dad wrote was enough to even pay for the meal we ate.

[KevinG]

Back then, our families were lucky to have one dependable car, a TV set, washer and dryer, several changes of clothing each, and three square meals a day. We could barely afford our needs, let alone our wants. Healthcare and retirement were relatively rare benefits. Yet, we still were able and pleased to give, and didn't fuss about how the Church spent our offerings.

Whaddya mean "back then"?

[wenglund]

Whaddya mean "back then"?

That you typed this question to me via the marvel of modern technology (something we didn't have, let alone couldn't afford "back then"--mainframe/dummy terminal networks existed "back them," but the technology or functionality wasn't accessible to your average Joe) kind of answers itself.

But, I get what you are saying, and I feel your pain.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[KevinG]

I whine... I kid...

Even in our relative poverty of unemployment we still eat better, travel more and are provided for much better than my fathers generation during the great depression.

[Scott Lloyd]

How long has Utah had Nordstrom anyway? It's about time! It is the one true department store. Best return policy ever!

Nordstrom has actually been in Salt Lake City for many years. They were going to shut down their store in the old Crossroads Mall but were persuaded to stay. I think this was shortly after the Church bought Crossroads, which was located just across the street from ZCMI Center. Then, shortly thereafter, the City Creek project was initiated, involving the razing of ZCMI Center and Crossroads. Early on, Nordstrom signed on as an anchor store for City Creek.

[Duncan]

I still remember the ward budget dinners that we would hold in the back yard of the church. My dad would hand over a check to the finance clerk sitting at a table and we would load up our plates with steaks and corn on the cob (mine would always roll of the plate and end up in the grass).

I always wondered if the check my dad wrote was enough to even pay for the meal we ate.

reason number 18 why I don't like corn on the cob!

[Cobalt-70]

I work downtown. My office used to be right across the street from the ZCMI Center (predecessor to City Creek). Downtown has been pretty bad for quite a few years. And more and more bars were popping up. Some people don't consider that urban blight, but it's definitely out of keeping with a sacred space such as Temple Square.

Actually, I understand that people will still be able to go into the mall and order a cocktail at a couple of restaurants (on mall property not owned by the church). I think the church is okay with that. To have a vibrant downtown, you need to bring in tourists. Tourists get annoyed if there is nowhere within walking distance where you can get a drink.

[Scott Lloyd]

Actually, I understand that people will still be able to go into the mall and order a cocktail at a couple of restaurants (on mall property not owned by the church). I think the church is okay with that. To have a vibrant downtown, you need to bring in tourists. Tourists get annoyed if there is nowhere within walking distance where you can get a drink.

I see a qualitative difference between a restaurant that serves drinks and a bar whose principal business is the dispensing of alcohol and whose principal clientele are drinkers.

[Cobalt-70]

I think there is a good reason for finances not being transparent. There are many good people out there, my father for one, that have a problem letting go of control or trusting someone else to do the work, carry the burden, etc, especially when it comes to money. My dad would give us gifts of money and other stuff, but with conditions attached of what it was to be spent on or require receipts. It ended up warping our relationship so I said "thanks but no thanks". With individuals like that, often if there were detailed reports on how the money was being used, they would be studying them and still thinking of their "contribution" to the whole, dwelling a bit too much upon it for their own good; it runs the risk of warping their relationship with their leaders or others who have stewardship over church funds and even ultimately the whole community and the Lord.

On the other hand, some people would have more trust in the church system if there were transparency. Transparency does more than keep everybody honest; it also generates trust. Ultimately, I think there would be far less criticism for what the church actually spends money on and receives income from, than the existing criticism that the church's finances are not transparent. If the church is managing its finances fairly and in conformity with its mission, which I believe it is, then I don't see how the church could be hurt in the long run by opening its books. I'm frankly baffled that the church didn't open its books a long time ago. Why needlessly create the appearance that you have something to hide? Until it is, people will always wonder if there is something about church finances that needs to be kept secret.

[Deborah]

Why needlessly create the appearance that you have something to hide? Until it is, people will always wonder if there is something about church finances that needs to be kept secret.

Some people, mainly those with no coal in the fire, will wonder. But the rest of us won't because we understand the law of stewardship. Once we pay our tithes or offerings the stewardship to dispense those rests with others and we are neither accountable nor have a say in the matter. I would not want to be responsible for misusing the Lord's funds.

[KevinG]

Some people, mainly those with no coal in the fire, will wonder. But the rest of us won't because we understand the law of stewardship. Once we pay our tithes or offerings the stewardship to dispense those rests with others and we are neither accountable nor have a say in the matter. I would not want to be responsible for misusing the Lord's funds.

Uh... yeah. I've been through this discussion numerous times. As one who has been a steward of tithes and offerings I know exactly how careful the church is with funds and how carefully audited each and every unit of the church is.

By that logic I would trust critics more if they would show me their charitable giving amounts on their tax returns.

[Scott Lloyd]

Some people, mainly those with no coal in the fire, will wonder. But the rest of us won't because we understand the law of stewardship. Once we pay our tithes or offerings the stewardship to dispense those rests with others and we are neither accountable nor have a say in the matter. I would not want to be responsible for misusing the Lord's funds.

It has to do with what Richard Bushman has called "the routinization of charisma."

"How can we account for the success of this lay-led Church, which seems to run against all expectations?" Brother Bushman asked. He said that its genius can be largely explained in the fact that the expectation of divine revelation has been built into the very administrative structure and offices of the Church, an expectation attributable to the Prophet himself.

"Latter-day Saints know in their bones that only leadership based on righteousness and spirituality will work," Brother Bushman said. Every new office holder knows it, and that, in itself, provides a check on the abuse of power within the Church.

Those who despise the Church of Jesus Christ or who are chronically inclined to mistrust the Church, its leaders, and members, will never grasp this. And so I fear we are fated to go round and round on this and related arguments because they will not open their minds to the possibility that the Church is led by divine inspiration.

Edited March 26, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

Uh... yeah. I've been through this discussion numerous times. As one who has been a steward of tithes and offerings I know exactly how careful the church is with funds and how carefully audited each and every unit of the church is.

By that logic I would trust critics more if they would show me their charitable giving amounts on their tax returns.

I've tried asking some of them a time or two. They won't even answer a straight-up question about how much they give to charity, let alone open their tax returns to scrutiny.