
The vast but little-known fund of the Mormon Church - havella
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-mormon-church-amassed-100-billion-it-was-the-best-kept-secret-in-the-investment-world-11581138011
======
sturgill
Can you imagine the criticism if the investment arm was losing money? The
Church does amazing work providing resources during crises. I’ve personally
cut trees off of people’s houses with chainsaws provided by the Church and
given buckets of sanitation supplies when hurricanes swept through Florida.

There is always a tension in “what do you spend now and what do you invest for
later” but I honesty feel like the Church cannot win this argument. Those who
are distrustful of organized religion can win if the church is poor (“why
didn’t their ‘prophet’ know better”); if they’re rich (“why don’t they give to
X”); or if they do nothing (“they teach their own members to save but don’t
practice that themselves—the hypocrites”).

I’m a believer so my view is not disinterested, but where is the conversation
that they are conservative in their investments; won’t make money from
industries they teach against; etc.

There are very few people in the ecclesiastical arm of the church who work
full-time and are provided a living stipend. And many of those people were
very successful before leaving their professional lives.

The current President (Russel Nelson) was a pioneer in open heart surgery. I’m
pretty comfortable assuming he would have made more money in his life had he
not accepted a calling to full-time ministry.

To me this article is interesting but the reaction is predictable. People will
read into the confirmation of whatever biases they had to begin with.

For my part, I’d rather the church invest wisely than poorly...

~~~
tomrod
> I’m pretty comfortable assuming he would have made more money in his life
> had he not accepted a calling to full-time ministry.

Two comments.

[1] The Mormon church is a corporation sole, meaning presently Nelson is the
sole controller of all assets. He could reasonably set up his family for life
with beneficial contacts and contracts. That is worth more than (now probably
expired) intellectual property associated with open-heart surgery.

[2] The leadership of the Mormon church tends to come from the same set of
Utah-based families. Not 100%, but certainly a high representation. It's a
social network that has been extractive on the work and labor of their
membership for over a century, benefiting these few families greatly. This
doesn't mean the organization hasn't done good -- it has. It's just that good
doesn't blot out bad, nefarious, negligence, or other societal negatives.

~~~
starskublue
[1] Yet no one has alleged that anything like that has happened. Also if I was
90 years old and had plenty of money I would much rather live a comfortable
retired life than work at the pace he works at.

~~~
tomrod
People have, it just doesn't hit home like seeing the $100B figure.[0]

[0] [https://davidvbartosiewicz.blogspot.com/2010/12/lds-
apostles...](https://davidvbartosiewicz.blogspot.com/2010/12/lds-apostles-and-
prophet-thomas-s.html)

------
tomrod
That is just what is uncovered in the investment market with one subsidiary.

They also own 2% of Florida[0], huge land tracts in Argentina, Oklahoma and
elsewhere, and attractive urban real estate in most major metropolises
including apartment complexes in PA. They centralize donation collection of
tithes and good will offerings such that about 8% stays back at congregations
(based on personal observation as the finance clerk across several
congregations and the analogue of dioceses--wealthy congregations would
regularly see $25k/week from 200 congregants and have a budget of ~$8k
annually, but this offset with congregations in less affluent areas). They
also have massive economic influence over Utah, surrounding states, and often
growing suburbs.

They have a very diversified portfolio. As doctrine they take the second
coming of Christ seriously and believe they will transform into the world wide
government on his return.

For the record I left several years ago, but have many family members still
heavily involved. It's an organization which does not allow you to leave with
your dignity intact.

[0]
[https://www.bizjournals.com/orlando/morning_call/2014/03/far...](https://www.bizjournals.com/orlando/morning_call/2014/03/farmland-
reserve-own-2-percent-of.html)

~~~
x1oqw
It always surprises me that wealthy churches pretend to take Christ seriously,
when Jesus was not very fond of amassing money.

I get why the churches do it (of course they don't believe in Christ), but why
do the exploited masses believe them?

~~~
weare138
"It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich
person to enter the Kingdom of God."

-Jesus

Matthew 19:24

~~~
zippie
I see this quoted a lot whenever there is discussion of wealth. However, as
with all verses, the context is important as well as the follow up verses.
This is not in defense of.

17 “Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One
who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.” “Which ones?”
he inquired. Jesus replied, “‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit
adultery, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, 19 honor
your father and mother,’ and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’” “All these I
have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?” Jesus answered, “If
you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and give to the poor, and
you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.” When the young man
heard this, he went away sad, because he had great wealth. Then Jesus said to
his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for someone who is rich to enter
the kingdom of heaven. 24 Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go
through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom
of God.” When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and
asked, “Who then can be saved?” Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this
is impossible, but with God all things are possible.” Matthew 19:17-26 -
[https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=Matthew%2019:17-...](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage?search=Matthew%2019:17-26&version=NIV)

~~~
xtracto
As an atheist I love reading these passages.. it is amazing how people in this
day and age are trying to find "meanings" from a book full of the stories of
one person... who lived 2000+ years ago.. imagine if someone tried to find
meaning in Beckhams biography 2000 years from now...

~~~
tomohawk
Jesus makes several truth claims, that if true, are extremely compelling for
why someone may want to pay attention today. One of these is His claim to be
God. You can either dismiss Jesus as a lunatic, dismiss Jesus as a liar, or
accept Jesus for who He claimed to be. If Jesus was merely a good man, He
would not have claimed to be God. That is not something good people do.

~~~
darksaints
We have no first hand accounts from Jesus himself. We have a couple of first
hand accounts from followers. Most of them don't reconcile with each other
very well. And even if they did, humans have a long history of collectively
believing and participating in supernatural bullshit.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbCzb_FWpi4](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbCzb_FWpi4)

Lots of people have claimed to be god. Some are even widely recognized as good
people. Do we need to give them all our attention? Cause I'm pretty content
living my life without believing in wild fairy tales.

~~~
tomohawk
Does your belief system require you to be so disparaging to people who believe
differently?

If you don't want to pay any attention to the claims of Christianity, then by
all means don't.

~~~
darksaints
No, but I'm pretty happy with seeking its demise. Christianity, along with the
rest of the abrahamic religions, are a corrupting plague on our planet and
society. That which is good about it is not unique to it, and that which is
unique to it is not good. We are stagnant in our progress as humans to the
degree that we still believe in it.

~~~
tomohawk
So, intolerance is the way forward?

~~~
catalogia
It's not intolerant to state that you do not believe in somebody else's
religion. Nothing above is even "disparaging", even that fairy tale remark.
It's not disparaging to state that, without good evidence, you believe
fantastic stories from thousands of years ago to be fairy tails.

~~~
guidance
> 'It's not intolerant to state that you do not believe in somebody else's
> religion.'

Stating that you are, quote, "seeking its demise", is the very definition of
intolerance.

> 'Nothing above is even "disparaging", even that fairy tale remark. It's not
> disparaging to state that, without good evidence, you believe fantastic
> stories from thousands of years ago to be fairy tails.'

This is the very definition of disparagement.

If I were to refer to your atheistic beliefs as 'the ignorance of children,
raised by a wicked society that is under the influence of psychopathic
demons', would you view that as disparaging? Of course you would.

The difference between that way of viewing things and your way of viewing
things is simply a matter of perspective. The difference is, one viewpoint is
based on knowledge, whereas the other is based in ignorance.

Source: I used to be an atheist also. As a teenager. In the Bible Belt.

~~~
catalogia
> _Stating that you are, quote, "seeking its demise", is the very definition
> of intolerance._

Evangelizing atheism is no more intolerant than evangelizing your religion.
Personally I have no particular interest in doing either, but if you get bent
out of shape over somebody doing it, that's on you. If you don't like somebody
disagreeing with your beliefs then move to a theocracy where such things are
forbidden. The "intolerance" you describe is in fact an expression of the
bedrock of liberal society.

------
starskublue
It's important to note the historical context around this. The LDS church used
to be constantly in extreme debt and close to having their religious buildings
taken away due to it. Then in the early 1900s they instituted a simple
financial policy that could also be an example for members.

1\. Spend less than you take in. 2\. Save/invest a portion of what you bring
in for a rainy day.

Thus over a hundred years that builds up. I'm a Mormon and personally don't
have an issue with it as I know that wealth doesn't go to church leaders (they
all get the same stipend which for many is less than they made in their
professional lives) and is simply fund available to the Church for times of
need.

~~~
trenning
> they all get the same stipend which for many is less than they made in their
> professional lives

It's weird how much this is being repeated in this thread. It's clear this
opinion didn't form on an individual level but rather is directed by the
church to their followers to repeat. It's an odd way of justifying position is
all.

~~~
jacurtis
Ex Mormon here. Yes, it is drilled down into our brains. The same exact
phrases.

And the stipend is 6-figures per year (most members don't know this though, it
was leaked a few times now on paystubs). But all travel and room is also paid
for. Plus most leaders of the church that receive this stipend are 70+ years
old, so they are already living off healthy retirements in addition to now
free housing and a healthy stipend. Church leaders are all successful
businessman, doctors, and lawyers. Basically you pay your way to the top. So
all of these people have incredible riches before they start taking these
stipends.

Church members like to pretend like our leaders are scraping by... but they
are in top 1% of income earners. Further, you should hear those same leaders
talk about tithing to members. Even encouraging their poor members to pay up
because "they can't afford not to".

It should also be noted that the church pays these top leaders, but chooses
not to pay anyone at the congregation level. From the bishop (equivilant to a
Pastor in most other religions), to the people teaching sunday school, the
people cleaning the buildings, the bookkeepers, etc are all asked to do it for
free. These are generally lower-income or middle-income members with full time
jobs, asked to do this in addition to normal jobs... oh and they have to pay
10% of their pre-tax income to the church that they make from their job.

> No bishop [aka 'Pastor'], no missionary should ever hesitate or lack the
> faith to teach the law of tithing to the poor. The sentiment of “They can’t
> afford to” needs to be replaced with “They can’t afford not to.”

That quote is direct from their official prophet.

Source: [https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-
conference...](https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-
conference/2005/04/tithing-a-commandment-even-for-the-destitute?lang=eng)

Note: If you click that link you will see that the title is "Tithing - A
commandment even for the destitute", this man had the hairy balls to stand up
with a straight face and say that no one is too poor to pay his church. While
he flies private jets everywhere from these poor family's sacrifices.

~~~
Aperocky
It seem to me that humans who does advance to the top are either greedy,
combative and out of touch. The question is whether the selection criteria
favors such people or the position itself engages part of human nature that
are such. I incline to the former, it's sad to see there's no other way to
make decent leader other than have everyone's eye fixated on any mistake he
might have made.

One more argument for AI overlord.

------
hpoe
Many have been asking what the Church does with the money it has. The official
response can be found here
[https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/church-
of-j...](https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/church-of-jesus-
christ-finances)

In addition this is the official response of the Church in reply to an almost
identical story that ran not too long ago
[https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/first-
presi...](https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/first-presidency-
statement-church-finances)

~~~
Ididntdothis
I bet there are some people in the background who make tons of money through
contracts as suppliers . Seems this happens with most big non profits.

~~~
lotsofityetnone
You bet or do you know? Just sounds like you're accusing people without any
proof.

~~~
tomrod
It is a reasonable expectation given lack of financial transparency.

------
jbellis
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...](https://mormonstudies.as.virginia.edu/2019/12/23/mormonism-
and-its-money/)

~~~
tylerchr
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.

------
bensonn
Is 100 billion really that much? The church has 16 million members. That is
about $6,000 per member. The church has had 200 years of tithing and compound
interest to get to this point. If used as an endowment to support 16 million
people in 170+ countries that doesn't seem too crazy.

A single human (not mentioning any names) having 100 billion seems crazy.

~~~
jacurtis
This isn't that the church has $100 billion dollars. They actually are
estimated to be worth more than Apple in real estate and cash.

This $100B is one single fund that is a "secret" fund. It was collected by the
church members donating to charity, but asking the church to allocate the
funds. So this is in addition to all the other offerings a member is required
to make (10% of pre-tax gross income). So the church took money promising to
allocate it to charity, and the church members thought they were donating to
charity, but the church instead siphoned it off and kept it for themselves in
a secret fund that they denied existed. It took a whistleblower from within
the fund's organization to reveal it to the public.

So this is in addition to normal money that the church has, or its real
estates, or its hundreds of billions in other investments. This is actually a
tiny slice of the pie, but it was collected maliciously and wasn't reported to
the IRS.

~~~
pc2g4d
"kept it for themselves"\---it still belongs to the church.

I thought everybody assumed, since the church so frequently taught its members
about prudent financial management, that the church itself was doing the same
thing.

I've left the church, I have many criticisms of it, but I really don't have a
problem with an organization taking the long view and accumulating a large
enough reserve to survive on the interest. It's the same approach universities
and other large nonprofits use. And it's not like it's particularly neglecting
its present-day mission either. Probably is too stingy, though (e.g. using
volunteers to clean buildings.)

------
ashton314
Here is one statement that the Church of Jesus Christ put out about their
finances, which addresses several of the complaints/questions posited here:

[https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/church-
fina...](https://newsroom.churchofjesuschrist.org/article/church-finances-and-
a-growing-global-church#questions)

I don’t see any incongruity with a church that teaches its members to save to
likewise have a large savings fund. It’s not like they’re just hoarding money:
the Church actively donates billions of dollars to world-wide humanitarian
projects. For a religion that believes in the second coming of Jesus Christ
and a worldwide crisis preceding that, it only makes sense for them to save so
that they can continue to aid people of and not of their faith during that
time.

~~~
nabla9
> the Church actively donates billions of dollars to world-wide humanitarian
> projects.

This is not true. Just tens of millions annually. Laughably small sum compared
to $7 billion annually in tithes (in 2012).

Insight: Mormon church made wealthy by donations
[https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-politics-
mormons/insi...](https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-politics-
mormons/insight-mormon-church-made-wealthy-by-donations-idUSBRE87B05W20120812)

How the Mormons Make Money- How the Mormon Church Makes Its Billions
[https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-07-18/how-
the-m...](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-07-18/how-the-mormons-
make-money)

>According to an official church Welfare Services fact sheet, the church gave
$1.3 billion in humanitarian aid in more than 178 countries and territories
during the 25 years between 1985 and 2010. A fact sheet from the previous year
indicates that less than one-third of the sum was monetary assistance, while
the rest was in the form of “material assistance.” All in all, if one were to
evenly distribute that $1.3 billion over a quarter-century, it would mean that
the church gave $52 million annually. A study co-written by Cragun and
recently published in Free Inquiry estimates that the Mormon Church donates
only about 0.7 percent of its annual income to charity; the United Methodist
Church gives about 29 percent.

They even use volunteer work for for-profit enterprises.

~~~
henrikschroder
Yeah, but you see, building that temple in Rome was just so much more
important than actual charity work...

I like how the Mormon church one-upped the Catholic church in this. The
Catholic church sold indulgences, one-time absolutions for sin to fund their
projects, but the Mormon church transformed it into a subscription service,
for the low low fee of 10% of all your income forever.

------
Ididntdothis
Seems most churches are basically real estate companies. The same is said
about the Catholic Church and Scientology. Even if they lost all of their
members they could keep going forever.

~~~
tomrod
This seems true regarding most old-school power brokers. Isn't the UK monarchy
funded by the UK government renting land?

------
anonsivalley652
Meh. Moonies, Scientology and Catholic church are loaded too. Also, the IRS
makes it too easy to run an Our Lady of Perpetual Exemption. Furthermore, tax
exemption does actively promote religion by expressly discriminating in their
economic favor. End tax exemption for magical thinking!

------
simonebrunozzi
Any discussion related to "church" funds makes me go back to a very
interesting question: how much is the Catholic church worth today?

I remember a while ago spending a few hours trying to dig some useful info. Of
course there's not much online, and estimates range from 100s of B$ to
something between 1 and 2 T$. Still credible.

The even more interesting part is how the Catholic church managed to amass
this huge wealth over the course of two millenia.

~~~
giarc
>The even more interesting part is how the Catholic church managed to amass
this huge wealth over the course of two millenia.

Really? I thought it was pretty obvious. They literally pass around a plate
and millions of people around the world are expected to put in 10% of their
salary. In addition they have been around forever so have a vast collection of
property and priceless art etc.

~~~
javagram
FWIW I don’t believe the Catholic Church teaches a “10% of their salary” tithe
at all. Certainly not in the way some other churches do.

The church in the USA receives funds from passing the plate, but European
Catholic Churches historically receive their money from a voluntary church tax
levied by the civil government, which is also not 10%.

Most parishes I’ve been to in the USA publish their weekly offering and from
those numbers it’s pretty clear people are not putting in 10% of their salary.
Maybe 1%?

------
squarefoot
"You don't get rich writing science fiction. If you want to get rich, you
start a religion".

~~~
tasogare
You can do both at the same time like Raël (Claude Vorilhon) did.

~~~
zozbot234
> You can do both at the same time

Of course you can. Do you know whom that quote came from?

~~~
mindcrime
L. Ron Hubbard?

~~~
squarefoot
Yes, it's him.

------
GnarfGnarf
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.

~~~
ashton314
familysearch.org is incredible. My previous bishop (a Bishop in the Church of
Jesus Christ is essentially a pastor; bishops are unpaid volunteers) worked
for Family Search in their engineering department. It most certainly costs
millions to operate, and is being _extremely_ actively developed. Last I heard
they’re using machine learning to index obituaries from old newspapers so that
people could find records of their ancestors more easily. Pretty incredible
stuff.

Try taking a look at Family Search. It’s so cool.

------
kyrieeschaton
Other ethnoreligious groups do this at vastly larger scale with surprisingly
little publicity.

[https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB894240270899870000](https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB894240270899870000)

[https://www.jta.org/2009/10/27/united-states/jewish-
charitie...](https://www.jta.org/2009/10/27/united-states/jewish-charities-on-
top-400-list-see-how-they-ranked)

------
Iwillgetby
Question as a member. Would today be a good day to request that janitorial
services be restored? Do I really need to clean the church's toilets once a
year to get to heaven?

~~~
tzs
That's the thing I find most interesting about the Mormon church.

In most other churches if you don't get into heaven your afterlife really
really really sucks. They tend to be very binary--eternity in paradise, or
eternity of inconceivable torture and torment.

Mormon afterlife has four possible destinations: the Celestial Kingdom, the
Terrestrial Kingdom, the Telestial Kingdom, and the outer darkness.

The Celestial Kingdom corresponds with heaven of other Christian sects.

The outer darkness kind of corresponds to hell in that it is where Satan
resides, but I don't know if it is a place to torment like it is in other
sects.

It's pretty hard to get sent to the outer darkness. It's for people who _know_
that God is real, and choose to go against Him. Note that this does not
include people that are _told_ about God and do not believe--it is people who
receive a personal revelation that He exists and still reject it.

Those who are merely told about God and reject those teachings, but who were
decent people get the Terrestrial Kingdom.

Those who don't qualify for that because they were not decent, such as liars,
sorcerers, whoremongers, etc., get the Telestial Kingdom. They are resurrected
and given an immortal physical body. No torment or torture...the Telestial
Kingdom is supposed to be a very nice place to live out your now eternal
physical life.

The Telestial Kingdom sounds acceptable to me, and I'd probably actually make
it to the Terrestrial Kingdom if Mormonism turns out to be right.

So what's the case to convert to Mormonism, or for people raised Mormon to
stick with it? With the churches with the binary paradise/infinite torture
afterlife, a Pascal's Wager type argument might work, even if I think there is
a low probability that the church is right.

With Mormonism, if I think that there is only a low probability that it is
right, a Pascal's Wager approach can tell me to optimize for my mortal life.

Even if I decide that some sort of Christian or Christian offshoot must be
correct, if I narrow it down to a list that includes Mormonism and one or more
of the eternal damnation sects, another Pascal's Wager like argument would
tell me to pick one of the eternal damnation sects.

~~~
miedpo
For a simple answer to your question (you may have answered it asked it more
rhetorically, and if so, sorry), the case to convert is just that we pray
about it and get an answer.

There's a lot of reasons the church's teachings are good to believe in, but
it's kinda useless if God isn't saying it's right if you know what I mean.

I grew up not believing in God at all. But when it came time, I asked God, if
he existed, to give me an answer. And as best as I can interpret, he did.

So yeah, that's kinda why, if you wanted to know. The reasons are extra on top
of the actual question if that makes any sense :p

Hope you're having a good day.

------
tony
I have LDS in my family, I have an anecdote just this week

I was looking up genealogy of my family and found my Aunt already added my
great grandparents back in Poland. The church runs the website and offers it
free of charge
([https://www.familysearch.org/](https://www.familysearch.org/)), you don't
need to be a member to use it.

Another anecdote is Matz, creator of ruby is a member:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkh0gPf4Noc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkh0gPf4Noc)

Also they make really nice music:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msoqtX4YAIY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=msoqtX4YAIY)

On the subject of churches asking for tithes and donations - I've seen various
denominations do it and never felt odd about it. Back in my hometown, our
church was the ones doing outreach to help the local homeless and getting them
back on their feet (not the city or country, that's for sure). This was the
early 90s though.

------
zmix
One of my favorite passages from the New Testament is this:

    
    
      Matthew 19:16-30 New International Version (NIV)[1]
      
      The Rich and the Kingdom of God
    
      16 Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, “Teacher, what good thing
      must I do to get eternal life?”
    
      17 “Why do you ask me about what is good?” Jesus replied. “There is only One
      who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.”
    
      18 “Which ones?” he inquired.
    
      Jesus replied, “‘You shall not murder, you shall not commit adultery, you
      shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, 
    
      19 honor your father and mother,’ and ‘love your neighbor as yourself.’”
    
      20 “All these I have kept,” the young man said. “What do I still lack?”
    
      21 Jesus answered, “If you want to be perfect, go, sell your possessions and
      give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow
      me.”
    
      22 When the young man heard this, he went away sad, because he had great
      wealth.
    
      23 Then Jesus said to his disciples, “Truly I tell you, it is hard for
      someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of heaven. 
    
      24 Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of 
      a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”
    
      25 When the disciples heard this, they were greatly astonished and asked,
      “Who then can be saved?”
    
      26 Jesus looked at them and said, “With man this is impossible, but with God
      all things are possible.”
    
      27 Peter answered him, “We have left everything to follow you! What then
      will there be for us?”
    
      28 Jesus said to them, “Truly I tell you, at the renewal of all things, when
      the Son of Man sits on his glorious throne, you who have followed me will
      also sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 
    
      29 And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother 
      or wife or children or fields for my sake will receive a hundred times as
      much and will inherit eternal life. 
    
      30 But many who are first will be last, and many who are last will be first.
    
    

This is what comes to my mind each time when I hear about people, who call
themselves Christians and their love for property.

[1]:
[https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+19%3A16...](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+19%3A16-30&version=NIV)

~~~
abnry
There are numerous rich disciples of Jesus. It is not clear that all of them
gave away all of their wealth.

You are correct that love of money and possessions is crucial concern as a
Christian, and that Christians are taught to rely on the Lord for their day to
day needs.

But ultimately it is the heart attitude towards money. Money is a resource
like any other resource, such as time or people. You can be idolatrous about
any resource, including money, but it isn't having the resource that is bad.

Anyone who is a true follower of Jesus would be willing to lose their wealth
for his sake if necessary (just as it might be leaving family for the sake of
being a Christian), but just having wealth isn't the problem.

~~~
zmix
Jesus words are very clear here and leave no place for doubt. Therefore all of
those, who followed him, must have given up on material property, which makes
sense, if one accepts the idea, that "Money corrupts."

------
GlenTheMachine
I'm an active Mormon, and I want to try to address a couple of the ideas being
discussed on this thread. My purpose is not to change anyone's mind, nor is it
to defend the LDS church in this particular case (actually I think they've got
it quite wrong). Instead, it is to inform people what the culture of the
church is like, and maybe if I'm really successful to help you understand how
we can produce members like Clay Christensen on the one hand, and own 2% of
Florida on the other.

One thing to understand about the LDS church is that the leadership is drawn
from the membership, but is really _really_ not representative of that
membership. In order to become a member of the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles,
the highest leadership body in the church, you essentially have to have spent
decades serving full-time as a church leader at lower levels. This means that
all the members of the quorum are old men (and yes, they are all men - that's
another discussion). We have been accused - correctly - of being a
gerontocracy.

There are two implications of this. One is that on social issues, the church
leadership lags the membership by at least a generation, usually two.
Furthermore, the upper membership of the church leads by consensus, ideally
unanimous consensus. It takes a long time to get more than a dozen people on
the same page about almost anything, much less something like the theological
implications of homosexuality (to name one topic of the day). This goes some
way to explaining why the leadership keeps getting caught flat-footed when
regarding issues of transparency, LGBTQ relations, race, and so on. They
aren't the internet generation and it shows.

But it has a second implication as well. Church leadership often remembers and
understands church history completely differently than the lay membership
does. In particular, for this issue, in the early part of the 20th century the
church nearly went bankrupt. They ended up calling several people with strong
business backgrounds to the Quorum of the Twelve, and one of those went on to
become President. They managed to put the church's finances on a firm
foundation. For obvious reasons, none of this tends to get discussed in Sunday
School, and most of the membership of the church no longer remembers it. But
the leadership most certainly does. In addition, it led to more and more
church leaders having business backgrounds instead of pastoral care
backgrounds, and as a consequence they tend to view achieving a good ROI on
"the Lord's money" as being a primary good. I personally disagree, but it is
what it is.

Next, one thing to note is that none of the church leadership is personally
getting rich off of tithing funds. The leadership draws a salary; that salary
lets them live comfortably, but it isn't 7 figures. Nobody lives in a mansion
or flies a private jet. So, then, why are they sitting on an enormous cash
pile? In my personal opinion, it isn't primarily about the money. It's
primarily about increasing commitment to the institution. Paying tithing is
"faith promoting". It gives the membership skin in the game. They aren't just
showing up to a church building for two hours on Sunday. They're actively
participating in building the Kingdom of God.

Of course, you can take the phrase "commitment to the institution" two
different ways, depending on your going-in assumptions. For the faithful,
building the faith of the membership is a primary good and indeed a principal
goal of God. For the skeptical it looks like brainwashing with a nice side
benefit of extra cash in the coffers.

The next obvious question is, even if you're one of the faithful, and you
assume that paying tithing is indeed a good way of building a faith community,
can't they come up with ways of using the money that are more in line with
Christ's teachings than buying up 2% of Florida? And I wholeheartedly agree.
There are. And, of course, owning large tracts of real estate and a mall in
downtown Salt Lake City and your own private securities investment firm don't
make a lot of sense if nobody in the leadership is living like a sheik. So why
not spend all of (or at least a lot more of) that cash on charitable works?
Why not just go in and rebuild Haiti, or cure cancer, or something?

And I honestly don't know. I go back to the leadership's business background
and their recollection of the church nearly going bankrupt, and I can sort of
see it... but then I read the Sermon on the Mount, and I can't again. I have
to chalk it up to a lack of imagination, combined with a loss of pastoral care
instincts in the church leadership.

For what it's worth, I think it will change... eventually. The time constant
of change in the LDS church is something like 20 years, so don't expect it to
happen tomorrow.

Finally, for those of you who have left the church and felt like it tried to
take your dignity when you left, I'm sorry. My wife left, and that wasn't our
experience. Your experience with the church is almost completely due to the
culture and local leadership in your local congregation, and in a lot of cases
that can be quite good, but it can also be fairly toxic if you're unlucky.
I've experienced both, but more of the former. Of course, my experiences don't
help you if yours are different. I hope you find your peace.

~~~
Invictus0
Thanks for your comment, it provides nice additional context to the discussion
--but I feel like you've done more to affirm the other comments in this thread
than refute them. In your own words, the Church is a gerontocracy wielding
enormous wealth and therefore power, dodging taxes, and siphoning funds
intended for charitable purposes. It's one thing for the Church to want to
avoid going bankrupt, but how can you justify an ostensibly charitable, non-
profit organization amassing funds in excess of $100B?

~~~
GlenTheMachine
The claimed concern is that in a severe economic downturn, the church wants to
be able to both continue operating and help people in need. They say it’s a
rainy day fund, and I think in the leadership’s mind that’s exactly what it
is.

The church’s yearly operating expenses are somewhere in the neighborhood of
$7B. Add another $7B on top of that for feeding the membership in a Great
Depression situation, and add a loss of 50% of your investments due to the
stock market crash, and some loss of liquidity due to market turmoil, and a
significant loss of tithing income due to that same downturn, and $100B isn’t
that far off the right number.

The problem, of course, is that there are people who are hungry today. We
don’t need to wait for an economic downturn to find people in need.

But I guess my overall point is this. The church makes a lot of mistakes, and
it has some significant structural issues. But at core it isn’t malicious.
Church leadership really isn’t getting rich off this. They’re true believers,
and although they have a culture of secrecy you can usually take what they do
say at face value.

They’re just... about forty years behind culturally, and very slow to change,
and have a world view that was informed by many decades of teetering on the
edge of bankruptcy. And they really do believe that Jesus is going to return
sometime soon.

But, again: people are hungry right now. We should feed them.

~~~
beatgammit
And for secrecy, the church got screwed pretty hard early on (driven from
place to place, leadership beaten and murdered, forced to move west,
investigated by the military, etc). It makes complete sense to only give out
as much information as you can, especially when there are so many looking to
destroy the church _and_ if you assume that the devil is literally behind
people trying to destroy the church. It's a very different type of secrecy
compared to other groups, like Scientologists, at least that's the way it
feels to me.

And yes, I completely agree that the church should probably adjust its focus a
bit. I think the church has plenty in the bank, so what's wrong with having
most of the income used for feeding the poor and everything else Jesus
recommended?

However, that's really not my call, and IMO it's not really my business. I
give my tithing because I'm asked to, not because I think the church will use
it optimally. It's a show of obedience to God and faith that the leadership is
being a good steward of that money. It isn't my choice how the church
leadership chooses to use that money, it's my choice whether to give, and it's
my choice whether to give extra to causes I believe in. So I do. I give to the
church as well as other causes I believe in. Jesus recommended to give
everything, and I feel like I do pretty much the same thing as the church
(most excess goes to investments, which I hope will allow me to dedicate my
life to helping others once I retire, hopefully early).

------
wincy
So I’m officially a Mormon but am not a tithing member or active at all. I’ve
asked some of my Mormon friends about this and their response is basically
“well of course they are, how else would they build Zion in the city of
Independence, Missouri?”. They’ve said that’s where the latter days will be
spent a long time ago, and they’re preparing to make that a reality “when the
time comes”.

They have a form of socialism called the law of consecration that Mormon
society will live under (I believe they might have lived like that in Salt
Lake while initially settling there). My seminary teacher, the sweetest woman
you’ve ever met, got VERY upset and yelled at me when I said that it sounded
like Communism. It still sounds a lot like Communism, though.

It’s truly amazing that they have 15 years worth of tithing for their members
saved up. I have concerns though, when my friends family lives in a house
where their youngest kid got lead exposure, and they’re barely getting by,
tithing their 10%, but the Mormon church is amassing such wealth yet my
friend’s family of five is on food stamps. Something feels off there.

~~~
codingdave
> It still sounds a lot like Communism, though.

That is because it is, 100%. If your teacher freaked out over it, she is
having trouble reconciling it with the American cultural meme of "Communism is
pure evil.", which stems from the Cold War, not religious doctrine.

And yes, something is off if a tithing LDS family is living on food stamps. I
have had family who lost jobs and had no money, and the LDS church gave them
food and money to cover bills, until they could get back on their feet. Such
situations tend to be handled at the local level, and there are definitely
good and bad leaders in all organizations, including churches.

~~~
starskublue
I think the key difference is the Church's system is voluntary and communism
is not voluntary.

~~~
darksaints
State communism might not be voluntary, but there are plenty of forms of
communism that are voluntary: employee owned companies and cooperatives are
literally communist.

And I don't really consider it voluntary if I am to believe the consequences
that they teach: the threat of being ripped from and permanently separated
from your family for eternity is just as coercive of a punishment as the
threat of being sent to a gulag.

~~~
lcall
Nobody I know teaches that, in that way, but that some opportunities and
blessings are gained or lost based on our choices: to say otherwise would be
simply deceptive. Most marriages say "until death do us part", or such, or
assume it, but eternal promises do have requirements to be met. God is both
merciful and just: one attribute cannot rob the other. He gives us real
choices, too.

------
calibas
I was told that capitalism is supposed to be opposed to ideals like theocracy,
monarchy and socialism, but look at the Mormons, the Evangelicals, Saudi
Arabia and China, they're better at capitalism than most capitalists.

And I'm not ranting against capitalism, I'm against this fairy tale idea that
capitalism somehow magically brings freedom. Especially in America, it's
become part of national pride, yet we've forgotten about boycotts and "voting
with your wallet", so the system is largely directed by blind greed and
powerful special interests.

~~~
mistrial9
dramatically declining attendance and other factors, have led various
Protestant churches in California to divest, divide or sub-let many family-
oriented Church properties.. The LDS does not seem to be suffering from that..
so its not so simple as "for or against" .. there is execution and timing, and
a lot of other factors

------
rachellogan5
The specific dealings of the church aside, there are some seriously concerning
philosophies coming out of all this. I wrote up a little something because I'm
uncomfortable with the things I'm hearing members say.

[https://apathofmyown.com/saving-for-a-rainy-day-
prosperity-a...](https://apathofmyown.com/saving-for-a-rainy-day-prosperity-
and-the-gospel/)

------
metabagel
I guess it’s really the First National Bank of Latter Day Saints.

------
mistrial9
Is this a deep, publicity lead to attacking the tax status of the LDS in the
USA, as political retribution to Sen Romney ?

~~~
tomrod
Only if we have a time machine that takes us back a few months:
[https://kutv.com/news/local/washington-post-lds-church-
accus...](https://kutv.com/news/local/washington-post-lds-church-accused-of-
stockpiling-100b-intended-for-charitable-use)

~~~
mistrial9
WSJ yesterday looks specifically like escalation, from here

------
yters
I'm Catholic, and I wonder whether it might be a good test of the divinity of
the institution just to give away all the wealth accrued over the centuries.
If it is God ordained, then it should survive in the same setting as it was
founded, i.e. without any material goods. If not, then why bother with it?

------
irrational
Here is a related article from Forbes.

[https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjreilly/2020/12/30/mormons...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterjreilly/2020/12/30/mormons-
and-the-tax-law/#7c04e4351d2c)

------
lr4444lr
How much does the Roman Catholic Church have, especially when you appraise the
artwork?

~~~
NiekvdMaas
According to the article around 50 billion USD, so half the size.

~~~
xlqiwq
The catholic church has unbelievable real estate locations in Europe. The arch
diocese Cologne has 12 billion in assets.

If you count the real estate, it is easily at least 500 million _per historic
city in Europe_. This is a rough estimate (area for 500 houses in absolutely
top locations).

------
mattigames
From a business perspective a religion is one of the best things you can
start, it's free of taxes on most countries, it autoscales after convincing
the first few people because it's now their (unpaid) job to convince even
more; the demand is always there because most people have a biological innate
fear of death/non-existence and just like with movies people crave a "happy
ending", call it paradise, heaven or else; the best part is that the children
of your believers are bound to be converted to your religion so there will be
no lack of money donators on the long term, and is pretty easy to teach
believers to denounce anyone that tries to convince them of leaving your
religion as intolerant.

------
NiekvdMaas
Mirror: [http://archive.is/sy1Ay](http://archive.is/sy1Ay)

------
neonate
[https://archive.md/sy1Ay](https://archive.md/sy1Ay)

------
elkos
[http://archive.is/sy1Ay](http://archive.is/sy1Ay)

------
mymythisisthis
Churches shouldn't be allowed to amass money. It screws up the economy and
politics.

------
thecrumb
Now I understand those "Thank you Jesus" signs.

------
gigatexal
How is this on HN? And on the front page no less?

~~~
tomrod
Hackers have a natural affinity for the structure of systems, be they
behavioral/political or technological.

------
cultus
I cannot fathom why churches are automatically tax exempt. Regular nonprofits
have to jump through all kinds of hoops to prevent these kind of shenanigans.
We are supposed to have a secular government. How is it that we single out
this one class of institution for special treatment?

~~~
zozbot234
Religious orgs are a time-tested model for providing sustainable and
widespread social cohesion, which is a huge positive externality and also
protects the most vulnerable against marginalization and oppression. The tax
exemption seems obviously warranted on that basis alone, even abstracting away
from any of the more visible charity work or social support that these orgs
usually provide.

~~~
dagmx
I'd definitely not agree with the "protects the most vulnerable against
marginalization and oppression"

Perhaps if you are a member of the church, but definitely not if you don't
abide by the exact, often conservative , rules of a given church.

Look at slavery, equal rights for lgbtq and people of color, abortion etc. Not
only do people in power use the churches to hide their personal beliefs
behind, many churches use their power to oppress others.

I mean the crusades were a thing...

I'll agree churches provide social cohesion but often at the cost of tribalism
against people outside that given churches norms.

------
foobarbecue
Any way around the paywall?

------
mythrwy
Churches should go back to being churches. No reason a religious organization
needs a 100 billion warchest.

What they are planning to eventually do with it? Buy off my local pol? Buy
Utah and secede? Never mind the advantageous tax treatment enjoyed. This
disturbs me.

~~~
Findeton
I would be happy if churches had exactly the same status as any other
business. Nothing less, nothing more.

~~~
mattrp
It is often the case that they do. For example, the church that I attend
bought adjacent property to keep as vacant open space.. but since there is no
church on the land, the church pays property tax on it just like any other non
tax exempt entity would. Kind of ironic since if it were farmland deemed open
space it would be a different story in most places. Our tax code is not
perfect but the path forward is to look at it in totality... the minute you
try to solve one problem here, you’ll create a dozen there. Churches are
global organizations... I’m sure it wouldn’t take much thinking, painful as it
may be, for the Mormons to decide to hold their wealth outside of the US
should our tax policies become unsustainable for them. Just because it’s a
large number doesn’t mean it’s wrong.

~~~
lotsofpulp
> Our tax code is not perfect but the path forward is to look at it in
> totality... the minute you try to solve one problem here, you’ll create a
> dozen there.

Not really. Remove all exemption, deductions, credits, and special treatments.

~~~
mattrp
Generally I’m with you but in the case of religion, I think it’s a bad idea to
tax one’s belief in God. The key issue here is the state isn’t supreme... just
because there is untaxed wealth doesn’t mean it automatically belongs to the
government... especially if we believe in separation of church and state.

~~~
lotsofpulp
Not providing an exemption for donations is not taxing one’s beliefs.

~~~
mattrp
So I guess we shouldn’t provide military service exemptions to conscientious
objectors either. You either have separation of church and state or you don’t.
As a practical matter I’m unaware of any church organization even the Mormons
who are ‘killing’ it with the exemption. Very few people give 1% of their
income to their church much less a full tithe or anything more than tithe
despite the favorable tax treatment. I submit you’re angry about organized
religion, the size of the investment fund or both... but neither are a
justification to change separation of church and state.

~~~
lotsofpulp
I’m not angry about organized religion and tax rules specifically. I just know
that the more complicated the rules get, the more they get exploited.

Off topic, but I would also support mandatory service in military for all
similar to Israel. I can’t think of any other way to make people care about
their country’s actions.

------
blacklion
I've found why anybody outside the church should care:

«If the whistleblower’s claim is successful, that person could receive up to
30% of the proceeds collected by the IRS.»

Meh.

~~~
cultus
They are stealing from everyone. Churches do not pay taxes. This is supposed
to be contingent on not engaging in politics and actually acting like a non-
profit.

~~~
Osiris
Some people might be able to claim coercion because tithing is required to
participate in certain ceremonies, but I don't see how that's stealing
(forced, against one's will).

~~~
cultus
I meant that it is stealing from the taxpayer.

------
jquery
So the Mormon Church has created an endowment instead of corruptly spending
the tithes on trifles and graft for their leaders, in preparation to help
their members when needed and continue their operations in times of scarcity.
I see this as a very smart thing, not nefarious. Not any more “scandalous” or
hidden than the Harvard endowment.

Mormons are well aware the Church uses its tithes to invest. Much of this
thread’s comments are little more than ignorant and bigoted attacks on Mormons
and Christians.

~~~
tomrod
> Much of this thread’s comments are little more than ignorant and bigoted
> attacks on Mormons and Christians.

Please call out such. I'm sure dang and the mods would prefer to keep bigotry
out of HN.

Especially if you are referring to my comments, I would like to be told where
my expressions and observations are being perceived as bigotry. I love my
currently Mormon family deeply and work hard to not push them away, despite
their actions towards me.

~~~
jquery
Not you, I’m thinking specifically of certain comments that are using this
thread as a thinly veiled excuse to attack Mormonism and even Christians in
general.

I’m not Mormon myself but I have Mormon family members and the openly upvoted
bigotry disturbs me.

------
dropit_sphere
Honestly you guys, we really don't care about the money, take it and fund
another Uber or something if you can find a loophole that lets you do it, we
live and breathe this stuff.

------
xrd
A prior discussion of Clay Christianson mentioned how he wouldn't play
basketball on Sunday because it was the first small step that leads to larger
steps (of sinning). This is a massive amount of money.

I'm struggling to understand if this money was gathered under the tax exempt
status of churches in the US. And if this isn't a bigger sin than playing
basketball on Sunday, if you believe in sinning.

Remember, downvotes are just like playing basketball on Sunday...

~~~
rrss
Clay Christensen was referring to one of the Ten Commandments - "Remember the
Sabbath day, to keep it holy."

I don't think many religions count churches not paying taxes as sins.

Incidentally, Christensen almost certainly contributed a rather significant
amount of money to this sum, and likely would have said it would be a sin not
to have done so. "Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say,
Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings"

~~~
tomrod
Note the irony that the scripture you quote was given to the priests, who were
benefiting from the tithes and offerings of the nation [akin to the Mormon
church giving luxurious homes to their General Authorities and plum book deals
through Deseret Book], not the people themselves.

Tithing got re-defined over the years. Consider:
[https://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2012/12/are-we-paying-
too...](https://puremormonism.blogspot.com/2012/12/are-we-paying-too-much-
tithing.html)

~~~
starskublue
Do you really think former heart surgeons and company executives are making
more money now on the general authority stipend than before?

~~~
tomrod
Let's collate our conversation regarding this to the other thread.

