Not Tithing Funds

[Stone holm]

Another thread got locked before I could ask a question, so will ask it now. One frequently hears the statement that tithing funds were not used for such and such an investment. And while I like to think that is true, I have to pause and think...if not tithing then what funds were used? Surely not Fast Offerings, too many those are even more sacred as to their dedicated use, and surely not missionary funds. So, what are these mysterious "not tithing" funds?

[The Nehor]

Another thread got locked before I could ask a question, so will ask it now. One frequently hears the statement that tithing funds were not used for such and such an investment. And while I like to think that is true, I have to pause and think...if not tithing then what funds were used? Surely not Fast Offerings, too many those are even more sacred as to their dedicated use, and surely not missionary funds. So, what are these mysterious "not tithing" funds?

Income from church owned businesses and sometimes from direct donations from members for a specific purpose.

Edited June 13, 2015 by The Nehor

[Avatar4321]

Personally I think the Lord can use His money for whatever He wants.

[Kenngo1969]

God should simply have let the area around the headquarters of His Church degenerate into a slum!  After all, that's basically what's happened in the core of other major metropolitan areas.  What's so special about Salt Lake?

[Brian 2.0]

Income from church owned businesses and sometimes from direct donations from members for a specific purpose.

Are these church owned businesses started via tithing? Is interest earned from tithing dollars considered "not tithing"?

[mormonnewb]

All money is fungible. To say that no tithing funds were used is like saying that my kids only pee in the water in the shallow end of our pool. If profits from Church-owned businesses are used for one purpose, then that money must be made up from some other source (eg, investment revenue, real estate rents, tithing, etc).

That being said, I'm in line with Team Church on this one. I trust Church leaders to spend the money wisely. And while I reserve the right to question their decisions, I haven't been persuaded as of yet that any such decisions have been clearly improper. Of course, I come from a tradition where misuse of church funds is so endemic that if this church used tithing funds to build Mount Prophetmore, I'd take solace that at least, it wasn't a Rolls Royce or hush money for the pastor's mistress.

[HappyJackWagon]

All money is fungible. To say that no tithing funds were used is like saying that my kids only pee in the water in the shallow end of our pool. If profits from Church-owned businesses are used for one purpose, then that money must be made up from some other source (eg, investment revenue, real estate rents, tithing, etc).

That being said, I'm in line with Team Church on this one. I trust Church leaders to spend the money wisely. And while I reserve the right to question their decisions, I haven't been persuaded as of yet that any such decisions have been clearly improper. Of course, I come from a tradition where misuse of church funds is so endemic that if this church used tithing funds to build Mount Prophetmore, I'd take solace that at least, it wasn't a Rolls Royce or hush money for the pastor's mistress.

So you're fine with the way the church uses money but you confess to having low standards in this regard? ok.

 

I think the church is wise with it's money and it's great the church is in a strong financial condition. That said, statements like "no tithing funds were used" is a little disengenuous. Like Newb said, funds are fungible and it's difficult to get to the root of funds. Are the funds business proceeds for a business that was started with tithing funds? Who knows? The church doesn't disclose financial details so it's impossible to know how it really does spend its money. A little transparency would go a long ways.

[Robert F. Smith]

Are these church owned businesses started via tithing? Is interest earned from tithing dollars considered "not tithing"?

There a great many original non-tithing sources of funds, beginning with Martin Harris mortgaging his farm to get the Book of Mormon printed.  The revolving Perpetual Emigration Fund used to get people into the Valley, and now the Perpetual Education Fund.  Huge donations and loans of that kind have always been available.  It used to be that local members were assessed for building contributions (ward & stake meeting houses, temples), though that isn't done anymore.  However, members can still choose to contribute to temple, fast offerings, and humanitarian aid funds (they have separate boxes in the tithing slip and are not tithing contributions).  When I was financial clerk I noticed that some members gave substantial contributions to these funds without being asked, and LDS members donate far more per captia to charity than members of other religions.

[The Nehor]

Are these church owned businesses started via tithing? Is interest earned from tithing dollars considered "not tithing"?

Most likely not from tithing. Most church businesses are descendants from early church businesses set up around the time they came to Utah. Tithing payment was sporadic at best before President Snow. Some of the businesses were set up by investors with the church running it. Others were donated. Later the church sold many of these businesses off. I would not be surprised if no tithing money ever went to church businesses but I suppose it is possible it happened in the past. If that offends you be offended.

I have no idea about interest. If you want to strain at that gnat have fun.

[HappyJackWagon]

There a great many original non-tithing sources of funds, beginning with Martin Harris mortgaging his farm to get the Book of Mormon printed.  The revolving Perpetual Emigration Fund used to get people into the Valley, and now the Perpetual Education Fund.  Huge donations and loans of that kind have always been available.  It used to be that local members were assessed for building contributions (ward & stake meeting houses, temples), though that isn't done anymore.  However, members can still choose to contribute to temple, fast offerings, and humanitarian aid funds (they have separate boxes in the tithing slip and are not tithing contributions).  When I was financial clerk I noticed that some members gave substantial contributions to these funds without being asked, and LDS members donate far more per captia to charity than members of other religions.

So you're drawing a line of difference between "tithing" funds and all other "consecrated" funds. Good distinction.

 

It's important to remember though that the church has one BIG general fund into which all donations go. It appears they are then funnelled into investments and then back out into separate ledgers for tithing, perpetual education, fast offerings etc. So again, the fungibility issue is salient.

 

Lets say, for example, that the church makes a large purchase of land from their ledger for business acquisitions and real estate. They then send money to a child abuse advocacy group in Utah from a Humanitarian Aid fund. In each case the overall resources of the church have been diminished leaving tithing funds to be used for purposes that may have otherwise been paid for out of the RE acquisitions fund. It's just shuffling money around from different categories. There's nothing wrong with that but it's important to understand that's what they're doing, so saying "No tithing funds were used on this project" only means that tithing funds had to be used on some other project.

[mormonnewb]

So you're fine with the way the church uses money but you confess to having low standards in this regard? ok.

I think the church is wise with it's money and it's great the church is in a strong financial condition. That said, statements like "no tithing funds were used" is a little disengenuous. Like Newb said, funds are fungible and it's difficult to get to the root of funds. Are the funds business proceeds for a business that was started with tithing funds? Who knows? The church doesn't disclose financial details so it's impossible to know how it really does spend its money. A little transparency would go a long ways.

In this case, there really shouldn't be any argument as to whether money is fungible as this isn't a concept created by Dehlin or Kelly. This is a bedrock economic principle taught at every reputable university (and even BYU-I ... sorry, I couldn't help myself). And so, the statement that "no tithing funds were used in ..." is factually false, but I think of it more as a term of art, like "activity rates in the Church." It's arguable whether attending once every, what, three months is really "active," but we know what is meant by the term. Likewise, I think we all know what is meant by the "no tithing funds" phrase (ie, "We wrote this check from a different account"). I can live with that. Edited June 13, 2015 by mormonnewb

[JLHPROF]

I think tithing funds may have been dipped into at one time, possibly decades ago, for investment. The returns (interest, dividends, stock return, business profits, rent on properties owned etc) are probably now used for projects where they claim no tithing money was used. They may not have needed to use new tithe money for decades.

[bluebell]

 

 

It's important to remember though that the church has one BIG general fund into which all donations go. 

 

Can i get a reference on that.  I had not heard before that tithing and fast offers, for example, were all put into the same general fund.

[JAHS]

We had quite an extensive conversation about this a few years ago:

 

http://www.mormondialogue.org/topic/57308-was-my-mormon-ancestors-tithing-used-to-build-city-creek-mall/?hl=%2Btithing+%2Bmall

[HappyJackWagon]

Can i get a reference on that.  I had not heard before that tithing and fast offers, for example, were all put into the same general fund.

You might also consider the disclaimer on the donation slips.

 

"Though reasonable efforts will be made globally to use donations as desingated, all donations become the Church's property and will be used at the Church's sole discretion to further the Church's overall mission."

 

[Rain]

Attending a Deseret Book focus I learned that some of the profits went to humanitarian aid of some kind. From a tax attorney I learned that legally they could only give so much.

So this makes me wonder if the "corporate" money and the "church" money can even be "mixed"? It seems like there would be rules on just what can be used for what?

Edited June 13, 2015 by Rain

[JAHS]

So you're fine with the way the church uses money but you confess to having low standards in this regard? ok.

 

I think the church is wise with it's money and it's great the church is in a strong financial condition. That said, statements like "no tithing funds were used" is a little disengenuous. Like Newb said, funds are fungible and it's difficult to get to the root of funds. Are the funds business proceeds for a business that was started with tithing funds? Who knows? The church doesn't disclose financial details so it's impossible to know how it really does spend its money. A little transparency would go a long ways.

 

Go a long ways doing what? Satisfying the critics? People sometimes claim that they have a right to know the details of what their donated hard earned money is being used for in the church. Wrong atttude. The money I give as tithing is NOT my hard earned money. It belongs to God. 

I trust the people who manage and spend the tithing I donate. I know who they are. I know the kind of lives the General Authorities have had to live to get in the positions they are in now. They are sincere honest people who are there to serve God and ther fellow man, not to serve themselves. 

Usually, the people who want to know exactly where the money is going are church critics or those who are beginning to distance themselves from the Church and are looking for reasons to justify their leaving. Most of the faithful members simply trust those who are in charge and therefore really don't feel a need to know. If they were told what the numbers were they would probably say, "Oh, that's interesting!" and then think no more about it. They understand that once the money leaves their hands, they have done their duty in obeying the commandment of God. What they donate  belongs to God now; and they no longer concern themselves with it.

[Storm Rider]

The Church has more than one bucket of investment funds.  It has a diversified portfolio of almost all investment opportunities - stocks, bonds, real estate, etc.  Church funds, tithing funds, are not commingled with investment funds.  Investment funds may go into Church funds, but I am not aware of it going the other way around,

 

A dollar is fungible - it is freely exchangeable or replaceable, in whole or in part, for another of like nature or kind.  However, because a dollar is fungible does not indicate that dollars are commingled between a tithing fund and an investment fund or group of funds.  Don't confuse the two or make it appear that it is easy to do.  They are accounted for on separate books and managed separately by separate people/individuals.  

[bluebell]

You might also consider the disclaimer on the donation slips.

 

"Though reasonable efforts will be made globally to use donations as desingated, all donations become the Church's property and will be used at the Church's sole discretion to further the Church's overall mission."

 

 

Yes, but that's not what you said.  You said they were all put into a general fund.  I'd like a reference for that statement of fact.

 

I, for example, have two bank accounts.  I reserve the right to use money from either one for anything if it's necessary to do so, but regardless of that possibility, both accounts serve a specific purpose and money is divided into each account by those purposes accordingly.  I don't think i'm odd in that way.

 

All of my friends (close friends for whom i would have such information) have different accounts (savings, vacation, Christmas, etc.) and all of them also know they can use the money in any account for anything that they need to, but the separate accounts still very much exist, and except for emergencies, the funds are not mingled.

 

 

So, while the church says that if it needs to it can use funds for whatever is necessary, that does not mean all funds go into one giant account.  Nor does it mean that it happens regularly.  From my perspective and real world experience, it would be weird to interpret such a statement to mean that.  

[Rain]

Go a long ways doing what? Satisfying the critics? People sometimes claim that they have a right to know the details of what their donated hard earned money is being used for in the church. Wrong atttude. The money I give as tithing is NOT my hard earned money. It belongs to God.

I trust the people who manage and spend the tithing I donate. I know who they are. I know the kind of lives the General Authorities have had to live to get in the positions they are in now. They are sincere honest people who are there to serve God and ther fellow man, not to serve themselves.

Usually, the people who want to know exactly where the money is going are church critics or those who are beginning to distance themselves from the Church and are looking for reasons to justify their leaving. Most of the faithful members simply trust those who are in charge and therefore really don't feel a need to know. If they were told what the numbers were they would probably say, "Oh, that's interesting!" and then think no more about it. They understand that once the money leaves their hands, they have done their duty in obeying the commandment of God. What they donate belongs to God now; and they no longer concern themselves with it.

I am fine with not knowing. I see some real problems with knowing, however I understand how good, strong church members would like for it to be known. There are so many scams in today's world, so much dishonesty even by some church members and sometimes even just members who make mistakes. We are told to be wise with our money. Told not to just donate to every charity without looking into them. I even got a brief glance that a major reputable charity may have had a real problem recently.

It's really not hard to see why some people would like things to be more open. Again, I'm not so much wanting things open except for being the curious person I am, but I don't think it good the put forth the idea that only critics and those leaving the church want things to be open so they can slam the church.

[rongo]

Bishop Burton explained to a group of bishops in our stake a few years ago that there is only one account in the Church. All money (tithing, fast offerings, business profit, PEF, humanitarian, etc.) all goes into one account in reality. For accounting purposes, there are different categories on paper, but as he put it, "there is only one checking account, with about 100,000 signatories worldwide."

 

This was a specific answer to *my* hypothetical question of what money would  be used to cover a fast offering disbursement on January 2, when Sunday isn't until January 6. Would tithing temporarily "cover" this until fast offerings were collected on Sunday? He said that this is a misunderstanding of how it works, and answered as above. 

[rongo]

Bishop Burton explained to a group of bishops in our stake a few years ago that there is only one account in the Church. All money (tithing, fast offerings, business profit, PEF, humanitarian, etc.) all goes into one account in reality. For accounting purposes, there are different categories on paper, but as he put it, "there is only one checking account, with about 100,000 signatories worldwide."

 

This was a specific answer to *my* hypothetical question of what money would  be used to cover a fast offering disbursement on January 2, when Sunday isn't until January 6. Would tithing temporarily "cover" this until fast offerings were collected on Sunday? He said that this is a misunderstanding of how it works, and answered as above. 

Can you imagine what a mess it would be if the Church had to do zillions of internal transfers between zillions of accounts? His explanation made a lot of sense to me. In fact, he was the best GA I have ever had the chance to ask questions of (he also gave a really good answer to another question of mine concerning priesthood keys).

[JAHS]

I am fine with not knowing. I see some real problems with knowing, however I understand how good, strong church members would like for it to be known. There are so many scams in today's world, so much dishonesty even by some church members and sometimes even just members who make mistakes. We are told to be wise with our money. Told not to just donate to every charity without looking into them. I even got a brief glance that a major reputable charity may have had a real problem recently.

It's really not hard to see why some people would like things to be more open. Again, I'm not so much wanting things open except for being the curious person I am, but I don't think it good the put forth the idea that only critics and those leaving the church want things to be open so they can slam the church.

Yes there might be some who for curiosity sake would like to see how things work, but they woud not insist on it. I do try to be wise with my own money, and do look into any other charity I donate to. But the point is, the Church is not just any other charity and the tithing I donate is not my own money. I guess I'm just not as curious as others might be about this.

[Robert F. Smith]

Bishop Burton explained to a group of bishops in our stake a few years ago that there is only one account in the Church. All money (tithing, fast offerings, business profit, PEF, humanitarian, etc.) all goes into one account in reality. For accounting purposes, there are different categories on paper, but as he put it, "there is only one checking account, with about 100,000 signatories worldwide."

 

This was a specific answer to *my* hypothetical question of what money would  be used to cover a fast offering disbursement on January 2, when Sunday isn't until January 6. Would tithing temporarily "cover" this until fast offerings were collected on Sunday? He said that this is a misunderstanding of how it works, and answered as above. 

You are overlooking the fact that fast offering accounts are independently controlled by the local bishop.  He spends them as he wishes, and must ask the congregation for more if the amount gets too low.  Church HQ does not contribute to it.  No tithing funds used.  On the other hand, a bishop can give a food order to someone, and that is paid for by central Church welfare operations (ranches, packing plants.storehouses, etc.).

 

All businesses and governments pool their money into one general fund, because all money is fungible.  However, payments for specific expenses can only be paid out of that fund based on a controlling and preapproved budget.  If the money has not been preapproved, it cannot be spent.  Governments and churches generally operate on specific budgets (as does the LDS Church), allocating resources based on the purpose for which they were contributed.  For example, even though parents of a missionary now pool their contributions into one missionary fund (unlike in the past when they funded their specific missionary).  Tithing funds are not allocated for missionary operations, unless there is an extraordinary need of some kind (building a missionary headquarters somewhere, for example).

 

When someone at Church HQ says that no tithing funds were used, it is very likely true.

[Robert F. Smith]

So you're drawing a line of difference between "tithing" funds and all other "consecrated" funds. Good distinction.

 

It's important to remember though that the church has one BIG general fund into which all donations go. It appears they are then funnelled into investments and then back out into separate ledgers for tithing, perpetual education, fast offerings etc. So again, the fungibility issue is salient.

 

Lets say, for example, that the church makes a large purchase of land from their ledger for business acquisitions and real estate. They then send money to a child abuse advocacy group in Utah from a Humanitarian Aid fund. In each case the overall resources of the church have been diminished leaving tithing funds to be used for purposes that may have otherwise been paid for out of the RE acquisitions fund. It's just shuffling money around from different categories. There's nothing wrong with that but it's important to understand that's what they're doing, so saying "No tithing funds were used on this project" only means that tithing funds had to be used on some other project.

Generally correct, HappyJack, although with the distinctions I make in post #24.

 

The problem most people have stems from their lack of understanding of fungibility.  They tend to think that, because the funds are pooled, therefore there are no distinctions.  That is dead wrong.