Corporation of the Lds Church.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

6 minutes ago, Rain said:

Because, as far as I am aware, you haven't lived in the Salt Lake area.

Lived, no. Spent a lot of time there, over many decades, yes. I guess all will have to determine if that is a plus or a minus. Members of my family have lived there for over a decade, so I do miss visiting them, now that they are here. 

Edited May 10, 2020 by Bill “Papa” Lee

[Rain]

1 hour ago, Bill “Papa” Lee said:

Lived, no. Spent a lot of time there, over many decades, yes. I guess all will have to determine if that is a plus or a minus. Members of my family have lived there for over a decade, so I do miss visiting them, now that they are here. 

That's why you wouldn't have heard anything in leadership about Lagoon.  It wasn't close enough to where you lived.

[Fair Dinkum]

I must be living in an alternative universe.  I just read through the thread and it seems that I am very much in the minority on this board.  So it is ok for Jesus to profit from the Temple but not those that sold animals for sacrifice and the money changers right?  As a side note, it always bothered me that on the rare occasion, I do own my own clothing, I would rent Temple Clothing that I had to pay for the privilege of doing so.   It never felt right to have a cash register in the temple.  But again I recognize the I am in the minority.

 

[mfbukowski]

17 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

I must be living in an alternative universe.  I just read through the thread and it seems that I am very much in the minority on this board.  So it is ok for Jesus to profit from the Temple but not those that sold animals for sacrifice and the money changers right?  As a side note, it always bothered me that on the rare occasion, I do own my own clothing, I would rent Temple Clothing that I had to pay for the privilege of doing so.   It never felt right to have a cash register in the temple.  But again I recognize the I am in the minority.

 

By expecting the temple to do your laundry for you, you are creating a cost for them while you give your tithing with one hand, and get "free laundry" with the other.

You need to see the bigger picture.

Many many of the white shirts which are rented, magically disappear, and there are locks on the lockers for a reason.

The problem lies not with the temple but with its "natural man" attendees.

The temple is a bridge between heaven and earth, not heaven itself, and can't be as long as it serves humans as they are, on the journey to what they could be.

Edited May 11, 2020 by mfbukowski

[CV75]

36 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

I must be living in an alternative universe.  I just read through the thread and it seems that I am very much in the minority on this board.  So it is ok for Jesus to profit from the Temple but not those that sold animals for sacrifice and the money changers right?  As a side note, it always bothered me that on the rare occasion, I do own my own clothing, I would rent Temple Clothing that I had to pay for the privilege of doing so.   It never felt right to have a cash register in the temple.  But again I recognize the I am in the minority.

Yes, given that those He kicked out had made the temple a den of thieves, not by simply selling doves and changing money, but by the way thieves do that, and participating in a larger scheme that defrauded honest people.

[Tacenda]

57 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

I must be living in an alternative universe.  I just read through the thread and it seems that I am very much in the minority on this board.  So it is ok for Jesus to profit from the Temple but not those that sold animals for sacrifice and the money changers right?  As a side note, it always bothered me that on the rare occasion, I do own my own clothing, I would rent Temple Clothing that I had to pay for the privilege of doing so.   It never felt right to have a cash register in the temple.  But again I recognize the I am in the minority.

 

I don't have a problem with the church making a profit, I only have a problem that so many needs of the poor or needy, aren't being met. The church has a lot more than the rainy day fund of 100 billion. Probably triple that, I have no facts, I just know they own tons of real estate that is worth billions. So they can do so much more, and should do as Christ taught about the poor and needy. In fact Christ taught this way more than building temples and redeeming the dead. Christ already redeemed us. 

I've had this conversation over and over with others that disagree with me, and say the church can't get into certain areas etc. Or this or that is stopping them from helping. But when you put a side by side of what the church makes on one day of interest of the 100 billion for instance, the church is giving pennies.

Edited May 11, 2020 by Tacenda

[ksfisher]

1 hour ago, Fair Dinkum said:

I would rent Temple Clothing that I had to pay for the privilege of doing so.   It never felt right to have a cash register in the temple. 

Clothing rental at the temple actually pays for the service.  There is no profit and maybe even a loss.  Same with the cafeteria. 

[Fair Dinkum]

6 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

Clothing rental at the temple actually pays for the service.  There is no profit and maybe even a loss.  Same with the cafeteria. 

So am I being nit picky?  The church needed my $0.10 to rent a pair of pants? 

[JAHS]

19 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

28 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

Clothing rental at the temple actually pays for the service.  There is no profit and maybe even a loss.  Same with the cafeteria. 

So am I being nit picky?  The church needed my $0.10 to rent a pair of pants? 

I think it also acts more as an incentive to get patrons to purchase their own temple clothing. I also think first time temple goers are not charged the rental fees.

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, Tacenda said:

I don't have a problem with the church making a profit, I only have a problem that so many needs of the poor or needy, aren't being met. The church has a lot more than the rainy day fund of 100 billion. Probably triple that, I have no facts, I just know they own tons of real estate that is worth billions. So they can do so much more, and should do as Christ taught about the poor and needy. In fact Christ taught this way more than building temples and redeeming the dead. Christ already redeemed us. 

I've had this conversation over and over with others that disagree with me, and say the church can't get into certain areas etc. Or this or that is stopping them from helping. But when you put a side by side of what the church makes on one day of interest of the 100 billion for instance, the church is giving pennies.

The mechanisms are in place for individual Church members to care for the poor and needy through the auspices of the Church, limited only by the member’s own capacity to give. They can do it through fast offerings and humanitarian donations. 
 

So if you think the Church isn’t doing enough, you can help by increasing your donations to those funds (I assume you are already donating to some extent). 

Edited May 11, 2020 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

51 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

So am I being nit picky?  The church needed my $0.10 to rent a pair of pants? 

Is it a problem for you to bring your own pants?

Maybe it is. Sometimes circumstances are such that it can be. I get that. But if so, why begrudge a remuneration in lieu thereof if you are in a position to provide it? 

[ksfisher]

2 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

So am I being nit picky?  The church needed my $0.10 to rent a pair of pants? 

I think you're being a tad nit-picky.  While the church doesn't need the 10 cents, when you multiply that by the amount of clothing that is rented every day at (fully functioning ) temples, it does add up to a significant cost. 

With the easy available of inexpensive to rent clothing at the Salt Lake temple I've chosen never to buy my own.  I don't have to worry about washing or getting them folded correctly and I never grow out of a pant size.  I don't see it as a real problem to pay a minimal cost for something that makes my life easier.

Edited May 11, 2020 by ksfisher

[ksfisher]

3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

if you think the Church isn’t doing enough, you can help by increasing your donations to those funds

This seems like such an easy solution for someone who thinks the church should be doing more .

Edited May 11, 2020 by ksfisher

[ksfisher]

1 hour ago, JAHS said:

I think it also acts more as an incentive to get patrons to purchase their own temple clothing. I also think first time temple goers are not charged the rental fees.

I've never bought my own because it's so easy, and cheap, to rent clothing at the temples I attend.  I've also never grown out of the rental clothing .

[JAHS]

Just now, ksfisher said:

I've also never grown out of the rental clothing

Good point. My pants keep shrinking. 
In the temples that don't have clothing to rent they usually still have extras that people can borrow if needed.

[Amulek]

On 5/7/2020 at 5:01 PM, Fair Dinkum said:

And promoting a business like Lagoon, which profited greatly from our annual Stake Lagoon Day also left me somewhat conflicted.  I don't think I've been back to Lagoon since.

Stake activities like this have to take place somewhere, and most water parks (like the one our stake rents out annually) are for-profit endeavors. I don't have a problem with them profiting off our use. 

The only conflict I would see is if the Stake President also happened to be the owner of Lagoon.  

 

On 5/7/2020 at 5:01 PM, Fair Dinkum said:

So the other day I read about a new Real Estate project the corporate church has just rolled out.  A complete planned community around the proposed Tooele Valley Temple, complete with pickle ball courts, lots of open space and manicured gardens and grounds.  [...]  The thought of the church profiting from its temple construction turns my stomach and disgusts me. 

Have you ever tried to build a temple (or even a meetinghouse) in a pre-existing neighborhood? There are all kinds of headaches that come along with that process, and sometimes the opposition can be significant enough to forestall the whole endeavor - especially in locals outside of Utah where people think far less favorably about the church. 

Plus, if you want to build the temple in a 'nice' neighborhood, you're going to have to fork out a bunch of extra money for that prime location. Sometimes that will be unavoidable; but there's no reason to aim for that outcome every time. I don't see why temple construction ought to be a money pit. 

No, it's far more efficient - both in terms of time and money - to simply buy a significant plot of land, construct the temple, and then build out the surrounding residential community after you're done.

I don't know about you, but I'm really grateful the church has both the resources and the real estate know-how to get our temples built in a timely manner.

 

Edited May 11, 2020 by Amulek

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, CV75 said:

Yes, given that those He kicked out had made the temple a den of thieves, not by simply selling doves and changing money, but by the way thieves do that, and participating in a larger scheme that defrauded honest people.

You mean that the money changers did not look at the published exchange rates for the day, and calculate it all very carefully??

Oh my!!

[Rain]

3 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

I must be living in an alternative universe.  I just read through the thread and it seems that I am very much in the minority on this board.  So it is ok for Jesus to profit from the Temple but not those that sold animals for sacrifice and the money changers right? 

You have lost me. Where did anyone say anything that this is similar to?

3 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

As a side note, it always bothered me that on the rare occasion, I do own my own clothing, I would rent Temple Clothing that I had to pay for the privilege of doing so.   It never felt right to have a cash register in the temple.  But again I recognize the I am in the minority.

 

 

[mgy401]

2 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

So am I being nit picky?  The church needed my $0.10 to rent a pair of pants? 

“Balancing your budget is like protecting your virtue. You have to learn when to say ‘no’.”

—Ronald Reagan

[Fair Dinkum]

2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

The mechanisms are in place for individual Church members to care for the poor and needy through the auspices of the Church, limited only by the member’s own capacity to give. They can do it through fast offerings and humanitarian donations. 
 

So if you think the Church isn’t doing enough, you can help by increasing your donations to those funds (I assume you are already donating to some extent). 

For the record.  I have always given an extremely generous fast offering donation.  I have a testimony of this offering and know it goes to those within my community who need assistance.

[Rain]

3 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I don't have a problem with the church making a profit, I only have a problem that so many needs of the poor or needy, aren't being met. The church has a lot more than the rainy day fund of 100 billion. Probably triple that, I have no facts, I just know they own tons of real estate that is worth billions. So they can do so much more,

Real question here: At what point have they hit "more"? What do they have to do when you say "this is enough?"

3 hours ago, Tacenda said:

and should do as Christ taught about the poor and needy. In fact Christ taught this way more than building temples and redeeming the dead. Christ already redeemed us. 

I've had this conversation over and over with others that disagree with me, and say the church can't get into certain areas etc. Or this or that is stopping them from helping. But when you put a side by side of what the church makes on one day of interest of the 100 billion for instance, the church is giving pennies.

 

[Fair Dinkum]

1 hour ago, Amulek said:

Stake activities like this have to take place somewhere, and most water parks (like the one our stake rents out annually) are for-profit endeavors. I don't have a problem with them profiting off our use. 

The only conflict I would see is if the Stake President also happened to be the owner of Lagoon.  

 

Have you ever tried to build a temple (or even a meetinghouse) in a pre-existing neighborhood? There are all kinds of headaches that come along with that process, and sometimes the opposition can be significant enough to forestall the whole endeavor - especially in locals outside of Utah where people think far less favorably about the church. 

Plus, if you want to build the temple in a 'nice' neighborhood, you're going to have to fork out a bunch of extra money for that prime location. Sometimes that will be unavoidable; but there's no reason to aim for that outcome every time. I don't see why temple construction ought to be a money pit. 

No, it's far more efficient - both in terms of time and money - to simply buy a significant plot of land, construct the temple, and then build out the surrounding residential community after you're done.

I don't know about you, but I'm really grateful the church has both the resources and the real estate know-how to get our temples built in a timely manner.

 

The new temple is being built on property that is currently in an undeveloped part of the Tooele Valley.  There will be great expense to bring water, sewer and power to this area.  Turning the surrounding area into a for profit enterprise will pay for this cost.  Business smart yes.

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, ksfisher said:

This seems like such an easy solution for someone who doesn't think the church should be doing more .

Yeah. 
 

I’m quite content to trust those who are in charge of such things to set the priorities for disbursement of the tithes and offerings the Church collects and the growth thereon. I feel greatly blessed not to have the burden of looking over their shoulders and second-guessing their decisions. I have quite enough to occupy my time and energies without trying to take on matters that are not my business. 
 

The same principle acts to make me more than willing not to second-guess an individual who decides to maintain a house that is larger than he needs rather than downsizing and giving the money saved to support the poor and needy. 

Edited May 11, 2020 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

11 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

For the record.  I have always given an extremely generous fast offering donation.  I have a testimony of this offering and know it goes to those within my community who need assistance.

I believe you. And I would never criticize you for failing to adopt a more spartan lifestyle so you could give even more. Just as I would never criticize the Church for the priorities it sets in disbursement of the tithes and offerings. 

[Tacenda]

11 minutes ago, Rain said:

Real question here: At what point have they hit "more"? What do they have to do when you say "this is enough?"

 

Well according to Scott Lloyd, the members pay for the poor and needy through fast offerings and the humanitarian aid, so therefore we members shouldn't expect the church to pay for anything through their for-profit companies/investments. So when they pay pennies on the dollar, we should be ever so grateful. I guess the church doesn't have to make a sacrifice like the members do when it comes to over and above, such as the members do when they pay fast offerings on top of tithing.