The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church • Hacker News Board

Re: The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church

#281

Post by sturgill » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 7:09 PM UTC

darksaints wrote: post #260

sturgill wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a reasonable conversation to be had about when to spend and when to save. I don’t pretend to have all the answers there. But as someone on the inside, I’ll say this: local congregations have very strict budgets allotted to them, but the welfare component of the budget is essentially unlimited. Local leaders are encouraged (and it is part of their mandate) to “seek out the poor”. Most individual welfare happen…

And yet, with no explicit cap on welfare spending, the church only claims about $40 million per year on charitable giving. As a percentage of their revenue, that is monstrously pathetic. I have a better chance of feeding the poor by giving my money to a Fyre Festival who will take 95% of the money and skip town but pay 5% to a local vendor who buys shitty bread from a local company who employs a poor person for minim…

Bad comparison when you’re skeptical of an entity investing money in businesses who employ lots of people...

Re: The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church

#282

Post by GnarfGnarf » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 7:11 PM UTC

The Church gives back too. FamilySearch.org is a website with billions of names, where you can build your genealogy and collaborate with others who share your pedigree and provide you your ancestry from their own research.

The website must cost millions to operate, yet is available for free.

Re: The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church

#283

Post by umvi » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 7:11 PM UTC

darksaints wrote: post #241

gwilliams wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't get wealthy from it. Those who work for the church full time (with the exception of missionaries) receive a stipend to cover their living expenses and not much else.

> They don't get wealthy from it. We have no way of knowing that, because the church keeps their finances shrouded from public view. Not even members that have paid 10% for their entire lives have a view into how the money is spent. What we do have is a few leaked pay stubs showing actual amounts, and leaked memos acknowledging the existence of, but not quantifying, other forms of compensation. We also have some tang…

To me, Occam's Razor suggests not that there is a massive conspiracy in the upper echelons of the LDS church where general authorities are glutting themselves on tithes, but rather that Thomas S. Monson had private sources of income outside of his church employment that account for his wealth.

Re: The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church

#284

Post by darksaints » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 7:15 PM UTC

keiferski wrote: post #146

mrosett wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

/r/exmormon has a very particular perspective, largely driven by the people who are active there are usually the ones who genuinely had the worst experience.

This is pretty much true of any online community built around the opposition to something. People that had a positive or simply ‘meh’ experience don’t tend to spend time talking about it online.

The r/exmormon subreddit has 155,000 members. The r/exchristian subreddit has 60,000 members. When you compare as a percentage of global population of members of their respective religions, it looks even larger.

You're right that people who have had "meh" experiences don't tend to talk about it online. What is it about being mormon that makes exmormons so bitter, in comparison to more benign religions? Try reading the subreddit and you'll find out.

Re: The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church

#285

Post by tylerchr » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 7:18 PM UTC

jbellis wrote: post #73

As an ex Mormon, I've read a lot about this. The single most useful piece for additional context that I've seen is this one by historian Kathleen Flake. https://mormonstudies.as.virginia.edu/2019/12/23/mormonism-a...

Though one-sided, that’s a well-reasoned and well-argued piece I had not seen before. Thanks for sharing it.

Disclaimer: I’m an active Mormon.

Re: The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church

#286

Post by dkarl » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 7:18 PM UTC

curiousgeorgio wrote: post #275

godelski wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If that person is really an "ex-member" (meaning they had their name removed from the church's records), This is the issue. The names don't get removed. Everyone that leaves is just "inactive". Tell me you don't see that. Tell me you don't see people talking about how to get them active again. Because I've been to a lot of wards and seen that discussion in every single one. "They are just inactive". I've told membe…

> The names don't get removed. Everyone that leaves is just "inactive". Tell me you don't see that. I don't see that. If they're removed, they're removed, at least from any lists that local leaders, members or missionaries could see.

> If they're removed, they're removed, at least from any lists that local leaders, members or missionaries could see.

This is exactly the kind of dishonest bullshit line that local leaders use when people ask to be removed and not contacted again. I don't know how these "lists" work internally in the church, but local leaders can happily say, "Sure, we'll remove you from the list. Done! No more visits!" knowing that they haven't done what the person requested, knowing that the church will continue to send people to that person's home, even if they move hundreds of miles away. They believe this is the right thing to do. It is the right thing to do for a believing Mormon, which is why it's so important to call it out in public. The only way they will back off from this kind of behavior is if it harms the public image of the church.

Re: The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church

#287

Post by darksaints » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 7:20 PM UTC

sturgill wrote: post #281

darksaints wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet, with no explicit cap on welfare spending, the church only claims about $40 million per year on charitable giving. As a percentage of their revenue, that is monstrously pathetic. I have a better chance of feeding the poor by giving my money to a Fyre Festival who will take 95% of the money and skip town but pay 5% to a local vendor who buys shitty bread from a local company who employs a poor person for minim…

Bad comparison when you’re skeptical of an entity investing money in businesses who employ lots of people...

I see you're admitting the church is a business. Too bad that's not how they tell it to their members. I'd be perfectly fine with the church's actions if they would just admit that they're a profit seeking enterprise and charity is only of value for the PR it brings.

At least then I wouldn't have felt swindled when I found out that all that money I spent on tithing while working 80 hours a week as a truck driver to pay my way though college was actually just sitting in an investment fund making a handful of people rich. I would have known from the beginning that that was where my money was going, and I would have no room to complain.

Re: The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church

#288

Post by throwaway99199 » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 7:22 PM UTC

Robin_Message wrote: post #217

curiousgeorgio wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IAANATheologian (I am also not a theologian), but I suppose those other Christian denominations conveniently skipped chapter 2 of James, where it says: "What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the…

I think the Protestants focused on that last sentence, taking it to mean that you are saved by faith, but you can assess if someone does truly have faith by their works. So you are not saved by the works, but if you don't have works, your faith is questionable.

Ok, IAANAtheologian, but I do read a lot and believe this aligns with most Protestant doctrine (faith+grace yields salvation which yields faith which yields works), but not with LDS or Catholic doctrine which essentially teach that works yield salvation, and if you lack works, you will not be saved.

This is confusing, because there are many different passages that highlight different things. It seems easiest to look at it as a process that begins with salvation through grace and continues as you grow in faith.

You're not saved by faith alone. You do need a small amount of faith to believe in the first place, but then it is grace (the unwarranted forgiveness of your sins) that saves you, but only if you accept it and repent (reject/renounce/turn away) from your sins:

"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God" (Eph 2:8)

As you grow in faith, you will produce works, and if you do not, then your faith is dead. (the aforementioned James 2, which was really aimed at believers, not those who hadn't yet accepted Christ.)

So, it goes like this:

(little) faith -> salvation by grace -> more faith -> works

"If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." (I John 1:9)

But if you die after salvation and true acceptance of your guilt and sin and repentance, you still go to Heaven, even if you are the most vile murderer on death row, because that's what grace is: completely unwarranted forgiveness.

But, if you stay alive and truly have faith, you will naturally produce works (that is, doing good things). If you don't do that, your faith is dead.

Re: The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church

#289

Post by rayiner » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 7:23 PM UTC

knicholes wrote: post #197

umvi wrote: post #156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's an organization which does not allow you to leave with your dignity intact. This is definitely not true. It may have been the case for you, but my dad and brother/wife all left years ago without any problems at all. We are still on great terms.

I dunno. One has to deal with the random crying, the questions of "Why haven't you baptized your children? I want to spend eternity with my grandbabies!", "They need primary!", etc. Then there's the endless gossip at family activities when you're absent about how you're leading your family to hell.

Which is fine. Families have the right to criticize each other for how they raise their children and to enforce common norms, where they genuinely believe decisions to be harmful. If my brother was raising my nephews/nieces in a way that I felt was harmful you bet he’d get an earful. Families aren’t just federations of sovereign individuals. Kids are community property.

Re: The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church

#290

Post by tomohawk » Sat, Feb 08, 2020, 7:23 PM UTC

tomrod wrote: post #265

tomohawk wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For example, Christians and LDS have different answers for these 3 fundamental questions: Who is God? LDS: God was once a man, who became a god There is more than one god, but only one god that we have to do with. Christianity: There is only one God, who is the creator of all other things. What happens when you die? LDS: If you are truly evil, you will go to the bad place. If you are generally ok, you will go to the…

Your example covers a large plurality of Christianity but does not define the umbrella of Christianity. For the record, Mormons consider themselves Christian, and are considered part of the Christian taxonomy. As an example, the first line of "Mormonism" wiki article says: > Mormonism is the predominant religious tradition of the Latter Day Saint movement of Restorationist Christianity started by Joseph Smith in West…

Two groups of people who are worshiping different gods, who have a different concept of the afterlife, and who do not agree on how life should be lived - they are in fact two different groups. It doesn't matter what one group or the other believes about themselves. This does not mean that one group or the other is bad or better.