Lds Church Issues Statement Re: Church Finances

[CASteinman]

I think the Church understands that, so we can rest assured that as long as they aren't publishing the numbers, we're doing okay.

I don't really see how my concern and interest would matter to the Church all that much.

[Scott Lloyd]

Are you sure you aren't reading too much into the claim "not one penny of tithing goes to the church’s for-profit endeavors?"

After all, McMullin said the following:

If "not one penny of tithing goes to the church’s for-profit endeavors" is meant to be taken as literally as how you read it, then money would never "flow in the opposite direction" and there would never "be some monies available."

It's funny that you are arguing with me about this. I'll repeat my position: I think that in years of plenty, the church "sets aside" tithing funds for a rainy day. And I think it puts those funds to productive use so that they'll grow.

If you now want to moderate your position, I suppose that's your prerogative. I just think you should come clean and acknowledge that what you are saying now is not what you started with when you asserted that yesterday's Church statement "vindicates the critics who have claimed that the for-profit businesses were in fact capitalized with tithing money" and when you said:

I would think they'd invest it in Deseret Management Corp stocks and bonds. After all, that's their rainy day fund.

Edited July 13, 2012 by Scott Lloyd

[Analytics]

If you now want to moderate your position, I suppose that's your prerogative. I just think you should come clean and acknowledge that what you are saying now is now [sic] what you started with when you asserted that yesterday's Church statement "vindicates the critics who have claimed that the for-profit businesses were in fact capitalized with tithing money" and when you said:

It looks like you concede that you misunderstood McMullin when he said "not one penny of tithing goes to the church’s for-profit endeavors." If you don't understand him when he talks about finance, are you sure you understand me? Because I don't think you understand the difference between capitalizing a corporation, mingling funds, using money for expenditures, or spending money on for-profit endeavors. I think that if read from an understanding of finance, what the church actually said did in fact vindicate what the critics have said. But I don't think you understand any of it.

Edited July 13, 2012 by Analytics

[Calm]

Fair enough.

I was pissed...and I was not treated well here three weeks ago...I was told to consider this "biology class and that all the new people should expect to get dissected"...decided to spend my time at MDB instead.

I will be careful in the future not to use that analogy. I assume that most people post on the board in part because they want people interested in what they say which often expands to interested in them. I was simply making an observation that such interest can be intense at times and that intensity might be uncomfortable if unexpected, less uncomfortable, maybe even enjoyable if expected (after all, again people generally post with the desire for people to be interested in their posts...such "dissection" demonstrates a strong interest.)

I will have to find a less visceral analogy, I guess.

[Calm]

I always did like Burger King better. I just didn't know why.

We always went to BK growing up. Except the one closest to home now was so run down and took forever and wasn't that good that I've never gone back. It has gotten an upgrade so maybe I will try it again.

[cwald]

I will be careful in the future not to use that analogy. I assume that most people post on the board in part because they want people interested in what they say which often expands to interested in them. I was simply making an observation that such interest can be intense at times and that intensity might be uncomfortable if unexpected, less uncomfortable, maybe even enjoyable if expected (after all, again people generally post with the desire for people to be interested in their posts...such "dissection" demonstrates a strong interest.)

I will have to find a less visceral analogy, I guess.

Yes. It is a poor analogy. Especially when directed towards someone who teaches biology.

[Calm]

Technically I said "anatomy" and was referring to medical school....just as a note. Don't know if that is what you teach or not.

[bluebell]

If "not one penny of tithing goes to the church’s for-profit endeavors" is meant to be taken as literally as how you read it, then money would never "flow in the opposite direction" and there would never "be some monies available."

Is tithing money the only money in the Church's treasury? (honest question, i have no idea).

[ERayR]

Is tithing money the only money in the Church's treasury? (honest question, i have no idea).

No.

Tithing

Fast Offerings

Humanitarian Donations

Missionary donations

Donations of property and money from peoples estates

I am sure there is probably more

[bluebell]

No.

Tithing

Fast Offerings

Humanitarian Donations

Missionary donations

Donations of property and money from peoples estates

I am sure there is probably more

Could member donations (like that of stocks and other large scale donations, such as those we read about which the Romney's have donated) also be considered nontithing parts of the church's treasury?

[ERayR]

Could member donations (like that of stocks and other large scale donations, such as those we read about which the Romney's have donated) also be considered nontithing parts of the church's treasury?

Yes

[bluebell]

Yes

Analytics, is there a reason that you believe tithing funds are the only funds which go into the church's treasury?

[selek1]

Analytics, is there a reason that you believe tithing funds are the only funds which go into the church's treasury?

Does "vexatious need" count as a reason?

[Duncan]

well, if we are going to talk about Burger King, I can speak to that!!!! I buy a whopper every wednesday, well very nearly every wednesday, due to their king deals. I don't care who owns it, or who partially owns it, it's a wonderful place-w.o.n.d.e.r.f.u.l.

[selek1]

well, if we are going to talk about Burger King, I can speak to that!!!! I buy a whopper every wednesday, well very nearly every wednesday, due to their king deals. I don't care who owns it, or who partially owns it, it's a wonderful place-w.o.n.d.e.r.f.u.l.

Says the Canadian.

I have trouble taking culinary advice from people who think "curling" is a sport and can't tell the difference between ham slices and bacon.

[Duncan]

Says the Canadian.

I have trouble taking culinary advice from people who think "curling" is a sport and can't tell the difference between ham slices and bacon.

oh!!! that's rich!!! Well, pardon me monsieur but I just came back from a whirlwind trip to the United StatesLand and was most perplexed at the local people talking about "Spongebab skwerpants" and "The Caps" instead of saying it like normal people saying it as "spongebawb" and "the cops" because you do realize there is an "o" in those words eh?! And what is more the AW Restaurant at the Mall of America has never even heard of Teen Burgers before?? how is that even possible!!

[DJBrown]

When did the policy change on using tithing money to fund for-profit investments? Does anyone know? I assume that in the early stages of the Church that tithing money was used as the seed money for the investments (unless the early Church had another source of income I'm not aware of). I'm just curious when they (The Church) started keeping the two completely seperate.

Do you know how many members will their estates, or portions of their estates, to the church? It is a large number.

And those willed assets are over and above tithing. I believe it is from those donations, not tithing, that have largely generated the church's business interests.

For example, the jet donated to the first presidency by John Huntsman (I believe). This is not tithing but an asset gifted to the church by a faithful member.

[selek1]

For example, the jet donated to the first presidency by John Huntsman (I believe). This is not tithing but an asset gifted to the church by a faithful member.

I agree with everything you've posted- but I don't think this last point is technically correct.

It was my understanding that Brother Huntsman had made the jet available for the First Presidency to use essentially as needed. I do not believe he has actually deeded the property itself over to the Church.

[Hestia]

Due to other threads on this topic and more than one complaint about the tone, shutting this down.