{"id":3969,"date":"2016-06-16T12:27:19","date_gmt":"2016-06-16T18:27:19","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/stallioncornell.com\/blog\/?p=3969"},"modified":"2016-06-16T12:27:19","modified_gmt":"2016-06-16T18:27:19","slug":"ces-reply-follow-the-money","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stallioncornell.com\/blog\/ces-reply-follow-the-money\/","title":{"rendered":"CES Reply: Follow the Money"},"content":{"rendered":"

Continuing\u00a0my reply<\/a>\u00a0to Jeremy Runnells \u201cLetter to a CES Director,\u201d with Jeremy\u2019s original words in green:<\/p>\n

2.Church Finances:<\/span><\/p>\n

Zero transparency to members of the Church. Why is the one and only true Church keeping its books in the dark? Why would God\u2019s one true Church choose to \u201ckeep<\/a> them in darkness<\/a>\u201d over such a stewardship?<\/span><\/p>\n

Why do you provide a really weird link to a scripture in Ether that talks about oaths used to keep murders secret? Are you equating the Church\u2019s unwillingness to release financial statements with deliberately killing people?<\/p>\n

History has shown time and time again that corporate secret wealth is breeding ground for corruption.
\n<\/span>
\nNo, I don\u2019t think it has. Only publicly traded companies are required to make their financial records public, and the vast majority of businesses across the world are privately held and keep their finances to themselves. Almost all of these private businesses are small businesses, while the publicly traded corporations are huge corporations, which tend to be more corrupt than the mom-and-pop store down the street. Yet it\u2019s the family business with private financials who, by your definition, are trafficking in \u201ccorporate secret wealth.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Church used to be transparent with its finances but stopped in 1959<\/a>.<\/span><\/p>\n

I didn\u2019t know that. I also didn\u2019t know, as the Wikipedia article to which you link states, that the Church \u201cdoes disclose its financials in the United Kingdom and Canada<\/a> where it is required to do so by law.\u201d<\/p>\n

Estimated $1.5 billion megamall City Creek Center<\/a>:<\/span><\/p>\n

Which was funded by a for-profit entity owned by the church and not paid for by tithes or offerings of church members.<\/p>\n

Total Church humanitarian aid from 1985-2011:\u00a0 $1.4 billion
\n<\/a><\/span>
\nYour link appears to be broken, so I don\u2019t know where you arrive at that figure, especially since your broken link was supposed to take me to a welfare services fact sheet put out by the Church. If the Church website is admitting that figure, then how can you say it\u2019s not being transparent on this subject?<\/p>\n

So, with a little Googling effort of my own, I found an interesting post over at TimesandSeasons.org<\/a> that shows where this number came from, and why it\u2019s bogus.<\/p>\n

Attributing the figure to an article from someone named Cragun, T&S writes:<\/p>\n

Where does Cragun get this information? He draws from a single source: This fact sheet, published by the church. It\u2019s a single-page document, well worth a look. In fact, you should go take a look at it right now. In particular, watch the nomenclature.<\/p>\n

The damning language is found in these lines:<\/p>\n

Humanitarian assistance rendered (1985\u20132009)<\/p>\n

Cash donations $327.6 million<\/p>\n

Value of material assistance $884.6 million<\/p>\n

That shows that the church gave about $1 billion in total humanitarian aid over 25 years.<\/p>\n

Or does it?<\/em><\/p>\n

Look at that sheet again. It highlights numbers of food storehouses, food production for the needy, employment training, church-run thrift stores, and so on. The sheet states _also_ discusses global work worldwide on disaster relief (such as responses to tsunami or earthquake victims). It uses different nomenclature for each type of donation. That is donations to worldwide emergency response are classified under the humanitarian label. But the extensive ongoing infrastructure to feed the needy is classified under the church welfare label. I contacted the church today and was able to verify that this is correct\u2026<\/p>\n

Given this crucial misunderstanding of the fact sheet, Cragun\u2019s factual claim is incorrect and in fact very misleading on an important point\u2026 observers can certainly still make critiques of church financial practices. Such critiques, however, should be based on accurate statements of fact. [Emphasis in original.]<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Something is fundamentally wrong with \u201cthe one true Church\u201d spending more on an estimated $1.5 billion dollar high-end megamall than it has in 26 years of humanitarian aid.<\/span><\/p>\n

Given the reality that your figure is, in reality, only a small portion of the Church\u2019s overall welfare efforts, this is criticism based on a substantial error on your part.<\/p>\n

For an organization that claims to be Christ\u2019s only true Church, this expenditure is a moral failure on so many different levels.\u00a0 For a Church that asks its members to sacrifice greatly for Temple building, such as the case of Argentinians giving the Church gold from their dental work for the S\u00e3o Paulo Brazil Temple, this mall business is absolutely shameful.<\/span><\/p>\n

Why? Members weren\u2019t asked to pay a dime for the mall, and none of their donations were used to fund it. As a for-profit business, the mall generates revenue, which means that the mall will ultimately earn its money back.<\/p>\n

Of all the things that Christ would tell the prophet, the prophet buys a mall and says \u201cLet\u2019s go shopping!\u201d<\/a>?\u00a0 Of all the sum total of human suffering and poverty on this planet, the inspiration the Brethren feel for His Church is to get into the shopping mall business?|<\/span><\/p>\n

The mall wasn\u2019t built with the intent to get the Saints to \u201cgo shopping.\u201d My understanding with regard to the purpose of City Creek was to stave off the urban blight that was gripping downtown Salt Lake City, which would ultimately have placed Temple Square and the surrounding buildings that constitute the headquarters of the Church into the middle of a dangerous slum. City Creek has accomplished that goal by revitalizing\u00a0downtown and making it safe for families. The fact that this was done without taxpayer or tithepayer dollars makes it a boon to the community that cost church members nothing at all.<\/p>\n

Hinckley made the following dishonest statement in a 2002 interview <\/a>to a German journalist:<\/span><\/p>\n

Reporter:\u00a0 In my country, the\u2026we say the people\u2019s Churches, the Protestants, the Catholics, they publish all their budgets, to all the public.<\/span><\/p>\n

Hinckley:\u00a0 Yeah. Yeah.<\/span><\/p>\n

Reporter: \u00a0 Why is it impossible for your Church?<\/span><\/p>\n

Hinckley: \u00a0 Well, we simply think that the\u2026that information belongs to those who made the contribution, and not to the world.\u00a0 That\u2019s the only thing. Yes.<\/span><\/p>\n

I don\u2019t see this as dishonest, but I do think President Hinckley and the reporter are talking past each other here. President Hinckley\u2019s talking about the confidentiality of individual contributions, which should rightly remain private, although that doesn\u2019t seem to be what the reporter asked. It may be that President Hinckley misheard the question. Your link plays a very short snippet of this interview, and a broader context might be helpful.<\/p>\n

Where can I see the Church\u2019s books? \u00a0 I\u2019ve paid tithing. \u00a0 Where can I go to see what the Church\u2019s finances are? Where can current tithing paying members go to see the books? \u00a0 The answer: we can\u2019t. \u00a0 Even if you\u2019ve made the contributions as Hinckley stated above??<\/span><\/p>\n

When I was a counselor in the bishopric, I was actually uncomfortable with how much I knew about the finances of ward members, based on my access to ward tithing and fast offering records. Much of that information is available to counselors and clerks, and it is remarkable to me how responsibly they handle that information. That information isn\u2019t the finances of the entire Church, of course, but my personal experience makes me more grateful for confidentiality than curious about the Church\u2019s books.<\/p>\n

Unless you\u2019re an authorized General Authority\u00a0 or\u00a0 senior\u00a0 Church\u00a0 employee\u00a0 in\u00a0 the\u00a0 accounting\u00a0 department with a Non-Disclosure Agreement? \u00a0 You\u2019re out of luck. Hinckley knew this and for whatever reason made the dishonest statement.<\/span><\/p>\n

Again, I don\u2019t see how the statement is dishonest, although I do see that it seems to be an answer to a question that wasn\u2019t asked. More context would be helpful.<\/p>\n

Tithing: I find the following quote in the December 2012 Ensign<\/a> very disturbing:<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cIf paying tithing means that you can\u2019t pay for water or electricity, pay tithing. If paying tithing means that you can\u2019t pay your rent, pay tithing. Even if paying tithing means that you don\u2019t have enough money to feed your family, pay tithing. The Lord will not abandon you.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

Ripped out of context, it is disturbing. In the article this advice is given to someone who receives generous financial assistance from the Church in order to get back on their feet, assistance in a dollar amount in excess of the money they paid in tithing.<\/p>\n

\u201cWell, God tested Abraham by asking him to kill his son and besides, the Lord will take care of them through the Bishop\u2019s storehouse.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

You put these words in quotes for some reason. Did a real person actually say this, or is this just another strawman argument?<\/p>\n

Yes, the same god who tested Abraham is also the same crazy god who killed innocent babies and endorsed genocide, slavery, and rape.<\/span><\/p>\n

Quite the non sequitur there. The weirdness of many Old Testament accounts does not deny anyone access to the bishop\u2019s storehouse.<\/p>\n

Besides, whatever happened to self-sufficiency<\/a>? Begging the Bishop for food when you had the money for food but because you followed the above Ensign advice and gave your food money to the Church you\u2019re now dependent on the Church for food money.<\/span><\/p>\n

Just a few paragraphs ago, you were upset that the Church doesn\u2019t offer enough humanitarian aid, and now you\u2019re complaining that they offer too much aid and make people dependent. Which is it?<\/p>\n

3.Names of the Church:<\/span><\/p>\n

    \n
      \n