Financial Statements for the Church(UK) 2005

[_asbestosman]

ABman - My point wasn't to figure out what the correct amount per person is. Rather, it was to show that the "$1 billion over 10 years" claim probably isn't as spectacular as it sounds. In fact, we have no way of knowing, as the church won't give us the necessary information to figure that out.

I'm not sure whether it probably is or isn't as spectacular as it sounds. I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't so spectacular seeing as how feeding the hungry isn't exactly the main focus of any part of the 3-fold mission of the church. It would seem to fit more under perfecting the saints, but there are many other ways in which the saints need to be perfected besides in paying fast offerings.

[_Who Knows]

I'm not sure whether it probably is or isn't as spectacular as it sounds.

Not sure either way? Would 500,000 members be better? That's $200 per year. What about $1,000 per year? How about $34k for the UK branch of the LDS church? From what we do know, and what we can infer, it tends to look pretty unspectacular to me.

I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't so spectacular seeing as how feeding the hungry isn't exactly the main focus of any part of the 3-fold mission of the church. It would seem to fit more under perfecting the saints, but there are many other ways in which the saints need to be perfected besides in paying fast offerings.

That's where these discussions usually end up: With the member claiming something along the lines of "well, the goal of the church isn't to help people out physically, it's to help them out spiritually. And this is done by putting money into churches, temples, missionaries, materials, etc."

Which is fine. I just don't want to hear how great the LDS church is regarding humanitarian aid. They're average at best.

[_Jason Bourne]

The LDS Church claims to be the one and only "true" and legitimate representative of Jesus Christ on the earth. It is very difficult to my mind to reconcile the corporate structure, values, organization, and mindset that permeate the Church and its leadership. One would, I think, reasonably expect the heir of Jesus Christ to show more concern for the poor and downtrodden of the world and a bit less in developing a diversified portfolio of businesses into which it is sinking, literally, billions of dollars, an amount that drawfs by multiples the relatively puny amount it is investing in alleviating the burden of those who stand in material and other need.

Ok. So this is your opinion. As noted I think there could be more as a % of revenue that goes to direct relief and assuage suffering. Course on a whole, you and really do not know that actual amount in total. It may be quite large in dollars. I do not know if you ever visited the Humanitarian center is SLC but it is quite impressive and so is what they do. The Church welfare and fast offering fund system is quite impressive as well and there is no question that the LDS Church is often early on the scene of many natural disasters. That is helping even if they get good PR out of it.

The LDS Church looks and acts like a corporation; it is the very emobidment of establishment corporate conformity. I don't see anything anywhere in the New Testament that would lead one to believe that this is the type of institution that Jesus Christ would establish were he truly at its helm.

I think statements like this are really rather naïve. What organization that is large and has major membership world wide does not operate like a corporation? All NFPs that are substantial operate on corporate and fiscally responsible business principles or they die. The world is quite different now then it was 2000 years ago. On top of that Jesus did say a lot about increasing your talents as well as making friends with money principles in order to survive in the world we live in.

Finally, I understand fully that a mission of the LDS Church is to redeem the dead (or however they phrase it), but I do not find that compelling. With all the suffering in the world, it is tragic waste to spend so much money on the dead, who are way past feeling the benefits. I see no excuse for ignoring the needy living to benefit the dead.

You are entitled to your opinion and I may even agree with you some. However I think those who are in charge of this work actually do believe they are doing something real and of worth. So your point is really moot. Also, you assume the two are mutually exclusive which they are not as the LDS Church does do both temple work and humanitarian. Neither you or I know for certain the total ratios but I would guess that given the price of the real estate that makes up temples it has been higher then humanitarian aid.

It is a perversion of priorities and yet one more piece of evidence that the LDS Church is not the heir of Jesus Christ

I really do not think it is any evidence at all but it helps you conclude it because it fits your opinion. Also, do you believe in Jesus Christ and his reality? If not then how can you make the claim above?

[_Jason Bourne]

I would suggest spending some time reading:

http://www.mormoncurtain.com/topic_money.html

From what I have seen, the LDS Corporation donates less than one half one 1 penny to humanitarian aid.

When you have watched the forums as long as I have, you see that the LDS Corporation also demands that members be prior tithing payers before they are helped. Some families, who have never been baptized, are denied help from even local wards when such things as catastrophic house fires are included.

Mormons who help out in places like hurricane Katrina like to boast about their charity by wearing special t-shirts marking them as Mormons.

It is mostly about Image.

Jesus needs his new food court, and I can't wait for it to open.

Fast offering aid varies from bishop to bishop some being more lenient and generous and others more stingy. I opt for the more generous and was always told to err on the side of generosity. From my experience I think my ward gives about $30,000 per year out in fast offering assistance which may be higher then many wards but not as high as some. That is I guess about 10% of what we took in for tithing annually.

[_guy sajer]

The LDS Church claims to be the one and only "true" and legitimate representative of Jesus Christ on the earth. It is very difficult to my mind to reconcile the corporate structure, values, organization, and mindset that permeate the Church and its leadership. One would, I think, reasonably expect the heir of Jesus Christ to show more concern for the poor and downtrodden of the world and a bit less in developing a diversified portfolio of businesses into which it is sinking, literally, billions of dollars, an amount that drawfs by multiples the relatively puny amount it is investing in alleviating the burden of those who stand in material and other need.

Ok. So this is your opinion. As noted I think there could be more as a % of revenue that goes to direct relief and assuage suffering. Course on a whole, you and really do not know that actual amount in total. It may be quite large in dollars. I do not know if you ever visited the Humanitarian center is SLC but it is quite impressive and so is what they do. The Church welfare and fast offering fund system is quite impressive as well and there is no question that the LDS Church is often early on the scene of many natural disasters. That is helping even if they get good PR out of it.

I am not saying that the LDS Church does not humanitarian work. They do; it is reasonably large in absolute value; and they often to a good job. My point is that in relative term (relative to its resources), it is quite small. Smaller than one might reasonably expect for an institution that claims itself to be the sole heir of Jesus Christ (particularly given the doctrines preached by Christ in the New Testament).

The LDS Church looks and acts like a corporation; it is the very emobidment of establishment corporate conformity. I don't see anything anywhere in the New Testament that would lead one to believe that this is the type of institution that Jesus Christ would establish were he truly at its helm.

I think statements like this are really rather naïve. What organization that is large and has major membership world wide does not operate like a corporation? All NFPs that are substantial operate on corporate and fiscally responsible business principles or they die. The world is quite different now then it was 2000 years ago. On top of that Jesus did say a lot about increasing your talents as well as making friends with money principles in order to survive in the world we live in.

I don't think this is naïve at all. I am not talking solely of organization structure; I am also talking about values, norms of behavior, dress, language, culture; etc. I concede that a large organization requires a relatively sophisticated admin and org structure; but I do not concede that it ought to look, act, dress, talk, and share the values of, saya, IBM.

Finally, I understand fully that a mission of the LDS Church is to redeem the dead (or however they phrase it), but I do not find that compelling. With all the suffering in the world, it is tragic waste to spend so much money on the dead, who are way past feeling the benefits. I see no excuse for ignoring the needy living to benefit the dead.

You are entitled to your opinion and I may even agree with you some. However I think those who are in charge of this work actually do believe they are doing something real and of worth. So your point is really moot. Also, you assume the two are mutually exclusive which they are not as the LDS Church does do both temple work and humanitarian. Neither you or I know for certain the total ratios but I would guess that given the price of the real estate that makes up temples it has been higher then humanitarian aid.

I think that they believe also that they think they are doing something real and of worth. But that's part of the problem; the fact that they in fact think that doing works on behalf of the dead is as important or more important than doing works on behalf of the living. There's something funamentally perverse with valuing the dead equal to or over the living.

It is a perversion of priorities and yet one more piece of evidence that the LDS Church is not the heir of Jesus Christ

I really do not think it is any evidence at all but it helps you conclude it because it fits your opinion. Also, do you believe in Jesus Christ and his reality? If not then how can you make the claim above?

I think it IS evidence. I base it on the doctrine I've read in the New Testament, which Mormons believe to be the actual teachings of JC. JC's teachings were radical, non-establishment, with a strong emphasis on succor of the less fortunate and the person within. The Mormon Church is conservative, the very embodiment of coporate establishment, and pays scant attention to the less fortunate, prefering instead to focus on a negative morality (that shalt not) obsessed with sex and one's outward appearance.

I don't believe in JC; he may have been real, but the New Testament is mythology. BUT, I believe it for over 30 decades; I gave nearly 40 years of my life to this Church, so I have very legitimate right to make these claims and to critique the Church and its teachings.