Why Are Church Finances Kept Secret From The Members?

[citizen28]

In other countries such as England their financial statements are made public because that's the law. If someone wanted to have an idea about how the church was managing its money, that might help.

As to why all of it isn't released, the church hasn't said. I would guess that it has something to do with so many nonmembers and exmembers being obsessed with finding something wrong with everything the church does. Just my opinion though.

I've seen people try to extrapolate the main budget of the church based on the financials published in Britain, but I find it rather unsatisfying. Obviously church critics would pick the budget apart completely, but I'd be very surprised if the church is acting in fear of what the critics think. Most believing Mormons pay the critics little or no heed. Once again, I think the most obvious question is, if there's nothing to hide, then why hide it? In some ways, the secrecy provides more ammunition.

Edited April 8, 2012 by citizen28

[citizen28]

Elder Eyring has made it known that the prophet receives revelations regarding the stock market. Such revelations are obviously very sacred. According to Elder Eyring, the church's financial holdings are a result of the prophet's obedience to the promptings of the spirit in this matter. To expose such revelations to the general public would be like casting pearls before swine.

Interesting. I think most members would find this very hard to believe.

[citizen28]

Which church organizations do this?

Alternatively, the Church hides it because we use it to buy virgins throughout the world and bring them to Salt Lake City serve as polygamous wives to the General Authorities. Also, we use the money to promote good dental hygiene in England where dentists are almost non-existent. Finally, we roll up the tithing funds and burn them while we see starving people throughout the world. I cannot imagine anything else, but if there was, it simply is not for the world to see. The Church exists for one single purpose; to focus the efforts of the saints on personal exaltation and helping others learn of the gospel of jesus Christ.

That's funny, I guess.

[Log]

I've never once seen a compelling argument why the Church's financials should be released. In fact, I've never seen a cogent argument why anyone without stewardship over them should even care in the slightest bit about the Church's financials. Words cannot express just how apathetic I am towards this issue. I cannot understand why people keep bringing it up.

[citizen28]

I wish there was a good answer to your question. There are lots of theories and guesses, but ultimately we just don't know. I've never quite understood the assurance (and insistence) that even though the information is hidden, there is nothing to hide.

I do admire the churches that make general financial information available to their members. I think it shows an admirable attitude towards the donations, and respect for the church members.

But I suspect we'll never see the Church make anything public unless the government makes them (e.g. England). People who have become accustomed to their privacy usually don't give it up willingly.

I've always wish more pressure were put on the church by the members and outside organizations to start releasing the financials. Unfortunately, this question rarely comes up when e.g. news organizations cover the church. For example, I would have loved Sweeney in the BBC special to ask Elder Holland point blank why the church doesn't release its budget. A reporter asked President Hinckley this question and the reply was (according to the transcript):

"WELL, WE SIMPLY THINK THAT THE.THAT INFORMATION BELONGS TO THOSE WHO MADE THE CONTRIBUTION, AND NOT TO THE WORLD. THAT'S THE ONLY THING. YES."

I think we all know that the people who make the donations in fact know no more of the budget specifics than outsiders do.

[citizen28]

Jehovah's Witnesses, Christian Scientistis and Scientologists don't appear to share it.

I would say that's not the best of company to be in, but maybe it's just me.

[citizen28]

I've never once seen a compelling argument why the Church's financials should be released. In fact, I've never seen a cogent argument why anyone without stewardship over them should even care in the slightest bit about the Church's financials. Words cannot express just how apathetic I am towards this issue. I cannot understand why people keep bringing it up.

I'm glad you're completely at ease over the issue, but I think accountability is extremely important to any organization that uses donated finds (yes, even God's church). It makes perfect sense to me that people who donate money freely to an organization ought to know where that money is going. Yes, many church members would never dream of steadying the ark or even implicitly criticizing the way the church is run, but no one can doubt that financial secrecy raises a huge red flag to most outsiders. Of course, maybe that doesn't matter.

[Storm Rider]

I've seen lots of people discussing City Creek and/or whether or not the church gives enough money to the poor, but most of the discussion around those issues is completely speculative until budget information is released. I've been surprised that apologists (who are usually a pretty imaginative bunch) have a difficult time coming up with reasons why the budget might be secret. I've never been able to think of any good reasons myself.

East answer. If the question is difficult we just say it is secret and sacred. Then those lovely critics have to shut up. I don't see a problem. Particularly when critics have the mental ability of a gnat. Here is a clue: the Church has funds from investments, you know, all those corporations it owns. Then, believe it or not, we have sacred funds that are reserved for sacred purposes (unless we want to buy virgins and eat them; it really isn't sacred but we like to say it is to twist the nose of critics). Sacred funds and funds from corporations are not mixed nor should they be. One is taxed and the other is not.

Come to think of it, it does seem stunningly simple that critics cannot see the answer all by their creative little selves. I wonder why they cannot answer the stupid questions themselves. Oh, I remember, they are not really interested in "answers", but in sensationalism. How dense of me. Please go on, sensationalize away. No answers are needed.

Edited April 8, 2012 by Storm Rider

[citizen28]

Here is a clue: the Church has funds from investments, you know, all those corporatesions it owns. Then, believe it or not, we have sacred funds that are reserved for sacred purposes. Sacred funds and funds from corporations are not mixed nor should they be. One is taxed and the other is not.

Until the church publishes its financials, any talk about the separation of corporate and sacred funds is completely speculative, and certainly does nothing to resolve the question of why the church keeps its budget secret in the first place.

[Log]

I'm glad you're completely at ease over the issue, but I think accountability is extremely important to any organization that uses donated finds (yes, even God's church). It makes perfect sense to me that people who donate money freely to an organization ought to know where that money is going. Yes, many church members would never dream of steadying the ark or even implicitly criticizing the way the church is run, but no one can doubt that financial secrecy raises a huge red flag to most outsiders. Of course, maybe that doesn't matter.

This is supposed to be an argument? Really? This is the best you could come up with?

When I allow money to pass from my ownership to any other entity, you think I ought to know where the money is going?

When I freely give Walmart $1 for an overpriced pack of gum, do you think I ought to know where that money is going?

When I freely give a bum on the street $1, do you think I ought to know where the money is going?

Busybodies ought to live in their own segregated communities. Really they should.

Edited April 8, 2012 by Log

[citizen28]

This is supposed to be an argument? Really? This is the best you could come up with?

We're not in seventh grade buddy.

Please feel free to address any of my ideas that you disagree with and explain why.

[Log]

You've offered solely your opinion that "people who donate money freely to an organization ought to know where that money is going." That's it! That's hardly "ideas" plural, and there's no arguing about taste. You're entitled to your opinion - indeed, it is impossible to deprive you of it - however, stating your opinion does not an argument make. And, as we all know, opinions are like ******** - everyone's got one, but yours is the only one that doesn't stink.

"No man's opinion is worth a straw." - Brigham Young

Busybodies really ought to be segregated into their own communities, free to write their own laws and enforce them upon each other.

"The Mormon creed is to mind your own business." - Brigham Young

"[We ought to] mind our own business and hold our tongues." - Joseph Smith

Edited April 8, 2012 by Log

[citizen28]

When I freely give Walmart $1 for an overpriced pack of gum, do you think I ought to know where that money is going?

When I freely give a bum on the street $1, do you think I ought to know where the money is going?

Paying Walmart for a good/service does not qualify as a donation, but believe me, there is a lot more public information about Walmart's budget than the church's.

In regards to the bum, yes, I think you ought to know where the money is going. In fact, most people prefer to give something other than cash to bums and in a sense "budget" for them.

[citizen28]

"No man's opinion is worth a straw." - Brigham Young

Busybodies really ought to be segregated into their own communities, free to write their own laws and enforce them upon each other.

"The Mormon creed is to mind your own business." - Brigham Young

"[We ought to] mind our own business and hold our tongues." - Joseph Smith

Pretty ironic coming from leaders of a church known for proselyting and political activism. Obviously these off-the-cuff statements by dead church leaders have very little bearing on church policy past and present.

Edited April 8, 2012 by citizen28

[Storm Rider]

Until the church publishes its financials, any talk about the separation of corporate and sacred funds is completely speculative, and certainly does nothing to resolve the question of why the church keeps its budget secret in the first place.

Says you. Maybe you should start your own blog. Better yet, never give another cent to the LDS Churcha s tithing until they listen your opinion and believe you are the new Messiah and know all that should be done.

Geez, this is a tired thread. This just too easy. Don't pay tithing and then you have nothing to be concerned about. Please don't pay tithing if it means that we never have to hear another word about this silly, tired position.

[Storm Rider]

Pretty ironic coming from leaders of a church known for proselyting and political activism. Obviously these off-the-cuff statements by dead church leaders have very little bearing on church policy past and present.

Can we all say, TROLL?!? Let's not feed him any longer.

[Kenngo1969]

I have received food orders from the storehouse that included toilet paper. Do not fear. It is not the good stuff.

Ouch! Hope you didn't end up with any slivers where they ... don't belong!

[Deborah]

I always wonder why some people, usually non-members or ex-members or dissatisfied members, need to know the details of what is spent. For a believer who understands the principle of stewardship the answer is simple. Once I pay my tithes and offerings they are no longer mine and I am not the steward over them. That is someone else's responsibility.

I do know there are enough checks and balances and auditing that if there is anything misused it will come to light and action will be taken. Years ago I knew of a bishop in our stake who was excommunicated for embezzlement. It is not easy to hide such actions in the church. Because I see the church buildings and temples and supplies and maintenance and see all the efforts to give humanitarian aide and to help those poor in the wards it is not hard to see that the money is well spent and going where it should.

[Damien the Leper]

Is the end-of-year receipt you received, which was signed by your bishop, insufficient for any reason?

I like specific dispersment accountings. This is no different than requesting a receipt for any purchases I make with cash or card.

[Damien the Leper]

According to the itemized reports I have, the church spent all of my tithing and donations to help the poor. It spent all of yours to help build the City Creek Mall.

Ugh! I hope not. But thanks for the laugh.

[Damien the Leper]

Do you ask that of Goodwill or other organizations you give to?

Yes. General descriptions of donations don't give me peace of mind. It is very important to me where my money is being spent. As for Goodwill, its unnecessary to know who bought my former posessions because the posessions are either put on the shelves or disposed of. I know this because a high school friend is a manager at Goodwill.

[thesometimesaint]

Valentinus:

Once you give it to someone it isn't YOUR money.

[LDSToronto]

Here are two things I've been told by members of this board regarding tithing and the church's finances:

1. It never was your money. In fact, none of the money you have is your money; it all belongs to the Lord. Giving 10% of the Lord's money back to the Lord is not a donation.

2. It's none of your business.

H.

[cinepro]

I've never once seen a compelling argument why the Church's financials should be released. In fact, I've never seen a cogent argument why anyone without stewardship over them should even care in the slightest bit about the Church's financials. Words cannot express just how apathetic I am towards this issue. I cannot understand why people keep bringing it up.

For me, the two biggest reasons are these:

1. The leaders of the Church have had times when they did a good job managing the money, and times when they did not so good. Public disclosure may help to prevent the "not so good" times; at the very least, I think the Church members should know what decisions the Church leaders have made to safeguard and grow the Lord's balance sheet.

2. If the Church leaders are acting through revelation to manage Church finances, then the financial statement is scripture, and I see no reason why it isn't revelation that can be shared with the Church members. If they're not acting via revelation, then see #1.

Edited April 8, 2012 by cinepro

[Deborah]

For me, the two biggest reasons are these:

Once again, it's not your stewardship and those who may not have done a good job managing will have answer to those above them. They have outside audits done also which insures the accuracy of the books. Anyone who questions how the money is spent is free to stop giving at any time.