$1.5Mn Charity Donation To... A War Museum In America?

[canard78]

Canard,

 

In your opinion, should the church build and support universities, a cultural center, church office buildings?

 

Re. Universities. I think education is important and I feel that using tithing to support the education of people who otherwise would be unable to receive education to be a positive thing. Having said that, I personally have concerns about the church disproportionately spending millions subsidising the University education of American Mormons while largely ignoring members in the rest of the world. Why are members in other countries not provided the same subsidy? Why are third-world Mormons asked to get into debt with the church to get a basic education? If the church has millions to invest in education wouldn't it be better to allow members in the developed world to pay for themselves while making a significant difference to illiterate and impoverished people in the emerging and developing countries?

 

All of this combines to emphasise that the church that is supposed to be the kingdom of God on earth is still very American-centric.

 

Finally you strain your credibility to imply the possibility that tithing was used in this project.  Can we assume that you also think the mall used tithing money as well.

 

Show me where I made a reference to tithing in the OP?

The article specifically states the donation was made by the church, but doesn't mention the source of the funds. Given you have brought up tithing, can you show that this donation did not use tithing funds?

Finally, you strain your credibility to imply the possibility that I've made any suggestion that the mall was built with tithing money.

[canard78]

More people hard at work telling the Lord how to spend His money.

 

Everyone is willing to serve God as long as it is in an advisory capacity.

 

Asking a question, not telling. Maybe you'd like to join the discussion rather than simply taking a swipe.

 

Having said that...

 

Others have excused this on the basis that this is not the Lord's money. This is apparently not tithing funds. Are you saying it is.

 

Further, if it is tithing funds can you show that this is indeed the way the Lord wants to spend his money? Can you present any evidence the Lord was consulted before this donation was made?

 

If you can provide all of this then it might be of some merit to the conversation. I'd be fascinated to see it. If not I'll leave you to make your Nehorisms.

[canard78]

Canard

 

There really is little use in raising objections to the church's uses of money.  If you really have a problem with it, then simply quit contributing.  I know that has ramifications and is easier said than done.

 

Fair point. I suppose that if I'd prefer to have money go towards the thirsty and hungry in the third world rather than the affluent and educated in America then I could just donate directly. As you say, it would come with its own implications.

[canard78]

I think so, considering the role the American Revolution had in the Restoration, as understood from the Book of Mormon.

 

Will they also be donating to the Martin Luther museum? The Mayflower restoration project? The Christopher Columbus collection? The list could go on. Does a museum really need to be funded given the role the American Revolution is said to have played in the restoration is a matter for the past.

[Mystery Meat]

Will they also be donating to the Martin Luther museum? The Mayflower restoration project? The Christopher Columbus collection? The list could go on. Does a museum really need to be funded given the role the American Revolution is said to have played in the restoration is a matter for the past.

 

canard, I respect your opinion on this. To me, however, it seems likely that with the projects in Philly (including and especially the temple) this seems like an attempt at goodwill. To me that serves one of the four missions of the Church. 

[The Nehor]

Asking a question, not telling. Maybe you'd like to join the discussion rather than simply taking a swipe.

 

Swiping is more fun.

 

 

Others have excused this on the basis that this is not the Lord's money. This is apparently not tithing funds. Are you saying it is.

 

The Church as a whole belongs to the Lord no matter where the funds come from. Tithing funds might be more "sacred" but it is all His.

 

 

Further, if it is tithing funds can you show that this is indeed the way the Lord wants to spend his money? Can you present any evidence the Lord was consulted before this donation was made?

 

Sure, I secretly record all the meetings of the Presiding Bishopric and the Quorum of the 12 and use special PKE meters from the Ghostbusters to track whether they are getting revelation when they make decisions.

 

 

If you can provide all of this then it might be of some merit to the conversation. I'd be fascinated to see it. If not I'll leave you to make your Nehorisms.

 

I was wondering if you could have bought a cheaper house and car and used the money you saved to buy shoes for orphans you evil greedy person.

[canard78]

Strange that it was an executive of FamilySearch and it is even more strange that the article said the Church did it.  What it did not do is say where the funds came from.  The Church has purely investment groups - i.e. they manage funds that are not from tithes and manage for profits - their risk profile is different.  The Church also has investment groups that manage tithes - the groups are separate and do not overlap.

Maybe Scott Lloyd could inquire of the article writer to clarify why it specifically states that the church is the source of the donation.

 

No; I did not say that, Jesus said that.  What do you think he meant?  He said this after Judas complained about the woman wasting expensive oils by anointing Jesus. Judas felt it would have been better to sell the oil and give the funds to the poor.  This would seem to apply perfectly to the topic. Strange that Jesus felt it was entirely appropriate NOT to sell the oils and give the proceeds to the poor.  Why?

Like I mentioned in the OP, Jesus' teaching in Matthew 25 seems to make a very clear statement of how the righteous will be filtered from the unrighteous.

The line in John seems to be unfortunately often used to justify ignoring the poor and enjoying our comforts. I don't think that's the message (especially when you compare many of the other messages he taught).

I've read a suggestion that Jesus is quoting from Deut. 15

 

7. If there be among you a poor man of one of thy brethren within any of thy gates in thy land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not harden thine heart, nor shut thine hand from thy poor brother:

10 Thou shalt surely give him, and thine heart shall not be grieved when thou givest unto him: because that for this thing the Lord thy God shall bless thee in all thy works, and in all that thou puttest thine hand unto.

11 For the poor shall never cease out of the land: therefore I command thee, saying, Thou shalt open thine hand wide unto thy brother, to thy poor, and to thy needy, in thy land.

 

Jesus was certainly not saying forget about the poor.

[CV75]

Will they also be donating to the Martin Luther museum? The Mayflower restoration project? The Christopher Columbus collection? The list could go on. Does a museum really need to be funded given the role the American Revolution is said to have played in the restoration is a matter for the past.

Your question was whether it was a good choice, not the only option. No museum needs to be funded, but this one seems to be a good choice representing a prophesied link between the Reformation and the Restoration.

[canard78]

Swiping is more fun.

 

The Church as a whole belongs to the Lord no matter where the funds come from. Tithing funds might be more "sacred" but it is all His.

 

Sure, I secretly record all the meetings of the Presiding Bishopric and the Quorum of the 12 and use special PKE meters from the Ghostbusters to track whether they are getting revelation when they make decisions.

 

I was wondering if you could have bought a cheaper house and car and used the money you saved to buy shoes for orphans you evil greedy person.

 

You're often amusing Nehor but let me know when you're ready for a real conversation.

 

As it happens we just moved into a smaller cheaper house last month because, in part, we wanted more flexibility with our finances to do things that matter most to us.

[Tacenda]

Tacenda, indexing is through Family Search. The results of indexing are on FamilySearch for everyone for free. Always has been that way. Family Search is run by the Church. Ancestry.com is not, and is something different.

So what does it mean when they join forces? This doesn't include all the indexing info? My "conspiracy theorist" personality thinks that they made the push for indexers when the two hooked up, but I may be wrong. ETA: Here are links that discuss the merge or partership.

frequently-asked-questions/

www.deseretnews.com/article/865585877/LDS-FamilySearch--Ancestrycom--1-billion-new-historical-records-online.html?pg=all

http://boards.ancestry.com/topics.ancestry.ancsite/13518.1/mb.ashx interesting comment below..

"I don't like this development either. However, if you go to familysearch you can browse those data bases for free instead of paying Ancestry for a subscription. That might not be good for Ancestry's bottom line!!! Maybe they should rethink this. In another case, if you try to pull up Military data bases through Familysearch, you will be redirected to Fold3 which needs a subscription. And some census data bses found thru familysearch wiull redirect youy to Ancestry which requires a subscription. In other words, Ancestry and familysearch are in bed together."

bold mine

Edited April 26, 2014 by Tacenda

[canard78]

Your question was whether it was a good choice, not the only option. No museum needs to be funded, but this one seems to be a good choice representing a prophesied link between the Reformation and the Restoration.

 

Sounds like post-rationalisation to me. Out of interest, if the $1.5mn donation was at your discretion, would you give it to the museum or some other cause?

[Kenngo1969]

The members help build a corporation which is the church, in so many other ways besides paying tithing. With the push for indexing in all the wards and stakes not too long ago, it helps the "for profit" arm of the church, Ancestry.com. Nothing new that members give service and monies to help the church put money into projects like these, if only it was something Christ would want.

Thanks for tellling us what Christ would[n't] want!  Good to have you around!  We need to have an IRL chat so that you can help me figure out some other (more personal) issues, about which, alas, I "see through a glass, darkly" (or at least, I would ... without you to help me!  Please PM me with adequate IRL contact information, forthwith!) 

Edited April 26, 2014 by Kenngo1969

[The Nehor]

Sounds like post-rationalisation to me. Out of interest, if the $1.5mn donation was at your discretion, would you give it to the museum or some other cause?

 

Since it is God's money I would ask Him where He wants it to go. Using my discretion could rightly be called stealing.

[Tacenda]

Thanks for tellling us what Christ would[n't] want! Good to have you around! We need to have an IRL chat so that you can help me figure out some other (more personal) issues, about which, alas, I "see through a glass, darkly" (or at least, I would ... without you to help me! Please PM me with adequate IRL contact information, forthwith!)

I put my foot in my mouth all the time, hopefully not again but you guys should pay me. I make you look good, haha. Seriously though, have not the members ever been able to disagree on the tithing fund or church fund disbursements, ever in history. When did the phrase "the Lord's money" come into existance? That's a great way to keep people's mouths shut.

[Calm]

So they're investing $1.5mn in order to get a place in the museum? Seems a hefty price-tag.

I suppose we can classify this as marketing funds rather than charitable giving. It's not really presented that way in the coverage.

Not sure, would like confirmation if so.

[Kenngo1969]

A lot of posters on this thread have questioned why the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints would contribute to such a museum.  But the title of the thread is disingenuous.  This isn't just any "war museum." Your mileage may vary (although I think The Book of Mormon makes this clear) no American Revolution, no Restoration.  It's that simple.  

Edited April 26, 2014 by Kenngo1969

[canard78]

Since it is God's money I would ask Him where He wants it to go. Using my discretion could rightly be called stealing.

 

First, we haven't established whether the contribution is "God's money" or not. If it is tithing funds we've also seen no evidence that He was asked about the actual donation that has been made.

 

Second, the question still stands. I'm still interested to know what people would do if it was their decision. Do people feel that funding an American War Museum (enabling the church to have a family history exhibit in the museum) has more merit than education or feeding the third world.

[bluebell]

 

Second, the question still stands. I'm still interested to know what people would do if it was their decision. Do people feel that funding an American War Museum (enabling the church to have a family history exhibit in the museum) has more merit than education or feeding the third world.

 

I don't feel like i have enough information to know whether or not i would do the same thing in the same situation.

 

Without having more information, i don't believe it's possible to decide which option has more merit than the others.  Things can look one way and then look a completely different way when knowledge is added to perception.

[BlueDreams]

Second, the question still stands. I'm still interested to know what people would do if it was their decision. Do people feel that funding an American War Museum (enabling the church to have a family history exhibit in the museum) has more merit than education or feeding the third world.

 

If I had 1.5 million to blow it probably means I could afford to delve into more than one project and I wouldn't have to choose. I would invest in a museum because I find value in maintaining cultural/historical heritage. I may not do it on the revolutionary war....less because I find that un-important, but because there's other projects that I would be more interested in (say an art museum and a civil rights museum or a local park....more my cup of tea). I would also invest in other humanitarian projects with careful consideration as to which ones I delve into. I'd want to know overhead costs, sustainability of these projects, etc. So I'd know how my money was being used and in what way my large pockets would have the greater impact.   

 

 

Personally, I have no prob with what the church does. From what I've seen, their investments are safe and stable and generally increase resources. And the charitable contributions are within a well established niches that push for sustainability while increasing personal capacity. To me the choices represent a false dilemma ....these are two very different branches of the church financial structures. It's not an either/or choice for them. They can and do run multiple programs simultaneously. Spend 1.5 there does not alter how much they can/will spend in time and money in their various humanitarian efforts. 

 

With luv,

BD

Edited April 26, 2014 by BlueDreams

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

If you had $1.5mn to give to a good cause would you:

 

a) Buy 230,000 school kits to contribute towards over 9,000,000 children in Africa being brought out of the enslavement of illiteracy?

b) Fund water purification kits for 600,000 Philippines typhoon survivors to avoid further deaths from cholera?

c) Make a PR inducing contribution to the Philadelphia Museum of the American Revolution?

 

In case you need a clue, Matthew 25:31-46 might be a good place to start.

 

Is this a good use of funds? Is this the best way to fulfill the mandate "inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren...?"

 

The question "...when saw we thee a museum raising millions to promote American history and culture?" doesn't seem to appear in the reference.

 

This isn't simply me trying to take a swipe at the church. I also don't want to directly discuss the merits of the first two. There are starving, thirsty, illiterate children and families all over the world. 

 

It's a genuine question and I concern I've been wrestling with. Are these the sorts of projects the church should be supporting? You can only spend a dollar once. Given it can only spent once, is a war museum the most beneficial charitable use for the funds?

 

I don't know whether it has been taken from tithing or other activities. Does it matter? If it is money available to donate to a charity, is this a good choice?

Honoring those who fought for our Nation is a very good cause...but hey I served our country for eight years, so maybe I have a different take.

[Calm]

So what does it mean when they join forces? This doesn't include all the indexing info? My "conspiracy theorist" personality thinks that they made the push for indexers when the two hooked up, but I may be wrong. ETA: Here are links that discuss the merge or partership.frequently-asked-questions/www.deseretnews.com/article/865585877/LDS-FamilySearch--Ancestrycom--1-billion-new-historical-records-online.html?pg=allhttp://boards.ancestry.com/topics.ancestry.ancsite/13518.1/mb.ashx interesting comment below..

"I don't like this development either. However, if you go to familysearch you can browse those data bases for free instead of paying Ancestry for a subscription. That might not be good for Ancestry's bottom line!!! Maybe they should rethink this. In another case, if you try to pull up Military data bases through Familysearch, you will be redirected to Fold3 which needs a subscription. And some census data bses found thru familysearch wiull redirect youy to Ancestry which requires a subscription. In other words, Ancestry and familysearch are in bed together."

bold mine

https://familysearch.org/blog/en/questions-answers-familysearch-partners/

Q.        Will the records indexed by the partners be freely available?

A.        When the partner creates the index, FamilySearch allows for a period when the index is only available on the partner site to allow them to recover the investment they made in creating the index. If FamilySearch has the image rights from the original record archive, the images will continue to be available for all on the FamilySearch site. After this restricted period has passed, FamilySearch will publish the index on FamilySearch as well.

Q.        How can someone get access to records that have been indexed by the partners earlier than the end of the restricted period?

A.        Part of the agreement with our partners stipulates that members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints will gain the ability to access the full collections of records published on their sites. We would like to be clear that members will be able to view these images free in nearly all circumstances. These same sites are available free to all researchers in the Family History Library and our more than 4,700 family history centers worldwide. The other way to gain access at this point is to subscribe to the partner services.

Q.        Is this fair to volunteers who are not members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints?

A.        These agreements do not change the status of volunteers who are not members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. All records publicly indexed through FamilySearch indexing are still free and will remain available on FamilySearch.org without a fee.

Further, donations from Church members fund FamilySearch. These contributions and the efforts of thousands of missionaries who work without pay are the means by which FamilySearch has been able to gather records for more than 100 years and make these records available to the public at no cost through FamilySearch.org, at the free Family History Library in Salt Lake City, and at the more than 4,700 family history centers around the world. This is an enormously expensive undertaking that is unparalleled in history. Clearly, these people deserve our thanks for enabling this work to go forward and for making it possible for tens of millions of people to discover their ancestors.

Q.        I am a volunteer; is my work being sold to the commercial companies for them to profit from it?

A.        FamilySearch honors the sacrifice of its volunteers by freely sharing what it freely receives. Your contribution of time and effort will always be freely available on FamilySearch.org. Under some circumstances, FamilySearch may deem it advisable to allow a commercial partner to offer records on their site that have been keyed by volunteers in order to make other records held by the partner freely available on FamilySearch.org. In this case, the value of your contribution doubles by making even more records freely searchable by all.

Q.        Will FamilySearch continue to form these kinds of partnerships with commercial vendors?

A.        Yes. This collaboration is one of the many ways we will accelerate the delivery of family history resources and make them accessible to the world. As long as we can continue to create a win-win situation for the other players in the family history community, we will continue to invite them to join with us, not just to exchange records, but to continue to innovate and develop the next generation of tools to search, organize, and present these records as well.

Our hope is that we can continue to find ways to help the commercial companies to be successful so they will continue doing the innovative kinds of things that have made family history the exciting pursuit it is today.

[CV75]

Sounds like post-rationalisation to me.

Of course it does, but that doesn't matter; i answered your question!

 

Out of interest, if the $1.5mn donation was at your discretion, would you give it to the museum or some other cause?

I would probably give it to some other cause, but I still support the donation as it stands. If given the opportunity to make the Church revoke it and give to some other cause(s), or to have influenced the Church's original decision so as to steer the donation some other cause9s), I would decline that opportunity.

 

The reason I think i would give it to some other cause is that (based on prior experience) the Lord would inspire my selection in a manner that teaches me to perfect my charitable giving. Since I would be operating as the sole agent of those funds, I wouldn't require inspiration about sitting in counsel to decide upon and direct the disposition of Church funds.

[Scott Lloyd]

I just now saw this thread, so I don't know whether anyone has brought this up, but I'm reasonably sure the complaint in the OP has might have nothing to do with a nationalistic antipathy for the American Revolution.

Edited April 27, 2014 by Scott Lloyd

[canard78]

A lot of posters on this thread have questioned why the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints would contribute to such a museum.  But the title of the thread is disingenuous.  This isn't just any "war museum." Your mileage may vary (although I think The Book of Mormon makes this clear) no American Revolution, no Restoration.  It's that simple.  

 

CV75 made a similar point. It's one small part. How about no apostasy no restoration? How about no printing press no restoration? No reformers no restoration... Why does the american revolution need special treatment?

[canard78]

Honoring those who fought for our Nation is a very good cause...but hey I served our country for eight years, so maybe I have a different take.

 

How about the British war museum? Or an Aztec was museum? Or...

 

I suppose, an American church will be drawn to fund American history. Seems a shame when we claim to be a global church representing the God of the entire universe.