What would you like to see done with the $100 bn?

[etravis0219]

There seems to be an awful lot of folks ready to spend the Church’s $100 bn. While I personally don’t have a problem with the way the church handles our tithing money, I think we can all agree that more charitable giving is never a bad thing. What would you like to see happen with the money if you were in charge?

My selfish desire is for janitors to be hired again to clean the chapels and more attention given to the conditions of the older buildings.

I would also like to see some sort of k-12 education program developed.

I certainly wouldn’t be opposed to increasing charity work but I don’t know what that would look like.

[BeNotDeceived]

OTEC

[ori]

I also don’t have a problem with how they handle the funds.

The government schools are teaching heresies. Such as homosexual “marriage”. I would like to see a Church school k-12.

[Elizabeth]

Education facilities and Chapels in Australia

[Alaris]

When money becomes worthless I hope the Lord shows us how it was never needed.

[mahalanobis]

I also don’t have a problem with how they handle the funds.

The government schools are teaching heresies. Such as homosexual “marriage”. I would like to see a Church school k-12.

Something I had thought about recently:

What if BYU (and other church colleges/universities) removed the tuition subsidies - resulting in higher "normal" tuition costs for church schools. Then the church replace it with a scholarship program that is basically available to all members who can maintain the ecclesiastical endorsement. Work the numbers such that the $ amount breaks even for current students at BYU. In the end the change won't affect current BYU students, but will help out all higher education students throughout the church. There would be institute requirements, etc.

In the years going forward, BYU will still be net cheaper compared to other schools because it will have other subsidies from the church that are unrelated to tuition (facilities, salaries, etc). But students can still get church support for their higher education goals external to BYU. It could include direct counseling with the recipients that basically prevents subsidization of stupid majors that don't lead to provident living.

Now, I can imagine many issues with this system. I'm not blind. But if we're honest with ourselves, the current setup already has lots of issues. Also, keep in mind that the $amount isn't going to cover all tuition (just like how current BYU students aren't currently getting free tuition... they still pay). So if you choose to go to some expensive law school where the church financial help is relatively a tiny drop in the bucket, that's your choice.

------------------

And a K-12 program would be awesome, of course. I'd like the best teachers that are cream of the crop get paid 4x what other teachers make. Make it the workplace envy of all teachers.

[Aprhys]

How about reduce the cost of missions? I dont see the need for people to take on night jobs to support their kids who are on missions for the church. In fact, almost every church that has a missionary program actually pays their missionaries to serve. If the church leadership gets paid then why are missionaries not paid? I guarantee many missionaries work a lot harder than some of the church leaders yet their parents are cleaning toilets at night to pay for it.

[Robin Hood]

I think the church should transfer it to my bank account. After 1 day I will give it all to charitable purposes, or they can have it back.
Just 1 days interest would generate £millions.

[Yahtzee]

I love my homeschooling freedom, I wouldn't want a church k-12 school any more than I want my kids to go to BYU. Heck I just wish they'd open up our buildings to homeschoolers in the stake in exchange for us cleaning up the building.
But the best thing I can think of is education - teach a man to fish type stuff. I think this is particularly needful in 2nd and 3rd world countries. Teach people how to get clean water, nurse or EMT training, and in particular, mental health.
I also support lowering mission costs.

[abijah`]

it should buy russia

would be a smart move. the whore of babylon will be a slav after all.

[Robin Hood]

I love my homeschooling freedom, I wouldn't want a church k-12 school any more than I want my kids to go to BYU. Heck I just wish they'd open up our buildings to homeschoolers in the stake in exchange for us cleaning up the building.
But the best thing I can think of is education - teach a man to fish type stuff. I think this is particularly needful in 2nd and 3rd world countries. Teach people how to get clean water, nurse or EMT training, and in particular, mental health.
I also support lowering mission costs.

We do that in my ward.
Home schoolers use the building twice a week.

[Mike Griffith]

Since that money is the Lord's money, I have total confidence that the Lord is using it in the best way possible. As others have said, in this time when so many governments are hundreds of billions and even tens of trillions of dollars in debt, I am glad that the Lord has inspired our leaders to build up a large reserve fund. By the way, the interest from that money helps to pay the stipends of general authorities who need it.

[Matchmaker]

Luckily, having an opinion on how we would like to see the Church use some of the surplus money, if we had a say, does not mean we are being disloyal to our leaders. We can support them and still have our opinion.

I would like to see the Church create a welfare farm in each of its Stakes in underdeveloped countries which would help provide food for families who lacked the resources to feed all of their children. I never want to hear that one of our Primary children had to die from malnutrition again.

[h_p]

I'm not asking for much: just fix our stake center's roof. It leaks so bad that when it rains, there's literally a waterfall on one of the walls, and the back hallway floods. And of course, this has led to a mold infestation. We've been asking for years to get it fixed.

[LadyT]

How about reduce the cost of missions? I dont see the need for people to take on night jobs to support their kids who are on missions for the church. In fact, almost every church that has a missionary program actually pays their missionaries to serve. If the church leadership gets paid then why are missionaries not paid? I guarantee many missionaries work a lot harder than some of the church leaders yet their parents are cleaning toilets at night to pay for it.

I agree with this one.

[LadyT]

I'm not asking for much: just fix our stake center's roof. It leaks so bad that when it rains, there's literally a waterfall on one of the walls, and the back hallway floods. And of course, this has led to a mold infestation. We've been asking for years to get it fixed.

I am horrified at the condition of some of the buildings. We have the money to fix them. Why isn't it being done?

[Lexew1899]

It should try to institute living the law of Consecration. Under the law of tithing, caring for the poor and needy is the primary purpose. Under the law of Consecration, establishing a self sufficient, meritocratic process of investing in the success of the community is established, The replete funds are pooled together and increase this success.

Here is a basic list of things they could do.

1. Establish a program to eliminate malnutrition in all primary children worldwide. Malnutrition affects the brain, body, and those saints ability to be self sufficient later in life.

2. Increase the perpetual education fund globally. The church could build schools in underserved areas, creating more professionals, and a wealthier people. The initial cost would be paid for over time by the success of the saints in those areas. They could also create church colleges in areas like the UK, Mexico, and Australia.

3. Buy up farming lands globally. Produce meat, and high cash crops. Employ unemployed saints, so they can provide for their family. These enterprises would pay for themselves.

4. Have stakes assess an expensive product that isn't manufactured in their area, shoes, blankets, tires, etc., and use the replete funds to open a manufacturing plant for those items. Excess profit is placed back into the replete. If there Enterprise fails, fire those responsible for the poor stewardship, and repurpose it into another successful venture.

That is the elementary basis for the law of Consecration. Meritocracy, stewardship, self self-sufficiency, accountability. If it is still confusing, read the parable of the talents to understand why hiding your money away is a foolish errand, and why those who succeed are rewarded with more.

[Mindfields]

Provide food, shelter, and clothing to those that have need, hospitals and health care for the poor, food banks, schools for the those who can't afford it or don't currently have access to, provide assistance to widows, and orphans. Or in other words do as Jesus would do.

While I don't disagree with the concept of self-sufficiency we need to be careful in using that as a reason not to provide assistance.

[Lexew1899]

Under the law of Consecration, there wouldn't be poor as we know it. There will of course be those who are not successful with their stewardships, and others will succeed more, some with gross excess. But those excesses would provide for the poor, and any more excess placed in the replete bank to reinvest again. Better than my simple description, here is a very detailed General Conference talk about it by Apostle Orson Pratt...

“We ask, are they not all equal now? Yes. If the whole Church have consecrated everything in their possession to the Bishop, is there not a perfect equality among them before they get their stewardship? Yes: this makes them perfectly so, as far as property is concerned; they are all in a state of equality, owning nothing. What is the next step to be taken in order to bring about equality of property? The Lord says, “Let the Bishop appoint every man his stewardship,” for, says the Lord, “It is required of every man to render an account of his stewardship, both in time and in eternity.” Now the Bishop begins and parcels out to this man his stewardship, and to that one his stewardship, according to the counsels of the First Presidency of the Church—the authority that has the management and control of the Lord's property. Each one gets his stewardship.

Now supposing one man obtained double the quantity of another; it is not his, but the stewardship is the Lord's; consequently the man is on a perfect equality with his brother still. But there is another sense in which this equality may be made, so far as the consecrating of property to the Church is concerned, which includes the whole of it. I say, who does it belong to in another sense of the word? I have shown you that it belongs to the Lord, and if we are His, we shall inherit it with Him; consequently in another sense of the word it is all ours. If each one in the Church, then, possesses the whole of it, as joint heirs with the Lord, is there not an equality? You may diminish the common property or joint fund just as much as you please. Suppose it were diminished to one half by mobs, &c., it does not make the Church unequal, not in the least; for each one may be considered as the possessor of the whole; he inherits all things; he is a joint heir with Jesus Christ in the inheritance of the earth, and all the fulness thereof. Can you make any inequality here? If each man in the Church is a joint inheritor of all the property, and a part of it, it makes each one perfectly equal with the rest.

Now I defy you to bring about an equality upon any other principle. You may divide the properties of the Church today, yes, if it be possible, make a perfectly equal division of it, so that every man in the whole Church should have his share, and let him call it his own; it would not be one day before there would be an inequality again introduced; and one man would possess that which is above another; it could not be otherwise; the changes, difficulties, want of judgment in the management and control of property, and all these things combined together, would serve to render these divided shares unequal; one man losing a large portion of his property through mismanagement; another by fire, by mobocracy, or in some other way, so that neither would have one half, one quarter, or perhaps one hundredth part as much as some of his brethren with whom he was only a short time before perfectly equal.

No equality can be brought about by dividing property; the Lord never intended such an order of things. It is not a division of property that is going to bring about a oneness among the Latter-day Saints in temporal things, but it is a union of property, that all the property may be united, and considered belonging to the Lord, and to every individual in the whole Church, as joint heirs with Him, or as His stewards. You may imagine, then, how my heart rejoiced, when I received a letter from our beloved President, informing me that steps had been taken for a full consecration of the property of the Church, to introduce the order of stewardships among the Saints of God.

But in regard to these stewardships, it is not needful or necessary, or the Lord never intended, that every man should possess an equal amount of stewardship with his brother. Why? Because God has given to some men greater ability to manage and control property than others. He may give to one, one talent; to another, two; to another, three; to another, five; and to another, ten; and then command them to make use of these talents according to the instructions and revelations given, and be accountable to Him who gave them. “It is required of every man,” says the Lord, “to be accountable to me in their stewardships, both in time and in eternity;” consequently these stewards have to render all their accounts to some one in time, but to whom? To the Lord's Bishop—to those whom the Lord has appointed to receive the accounts. And if a man undertakes to squander the stewardship which the Lord has entrusted to him, He takes it away, and gives it to another who is a more wise steward; one who will manage His property in such a way as to benefit the whole; each one seeking the interest of the whole as well as of himself.

Each one is to be considered as possessor of all things in the Church: but if it be all common property, how is it that the Saints can get along and give an account of their stewardship of property? Will not one brother go and pick up his brother's plow, and take it off, without asking him for it, imagining that he is the possessor of all things? Yes, if that brother had no understanding he would do it, but when he comes to understand the law of the Lord, he will find that all these stewardships are controlled by the wisest kind of laws; hence the Lord says, “Thou shall not take thy brother's garment; thou shalt pay for that which thou dost receive from thy brother.” Notwithstanding the whole property belongs to the Lord, and to each one as joint heirs, yet the Lord has given strict laws with regard to the stewardships, so that one has no business to go and pick up his neighbor's ax, or take any of his stewardship from him, without leave; but he is to pay for that which he receives from his brother steward, unless he borrow it by fairly asking for it.

On this principle it would be an easy matter for each steward to render an account of his time; and if necessary he could account for every item of his stewardship. But if it were permitted to run at random, according to the vague ideas of common stock in some societies in the world, away would go a man's hat, or his coat, and he could render no account of it at all. But according to the strict principle which the Lord has ordained, he could show to his Bishop a full account of everything in his stewardship—that he has gained so much here, and made so much there, upon the Lord's property. What says the Bishop? “Well done, good and faithful steward, thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will enlarge that stewardship,” providing he had anything to enlarge it with. “You have gained other talents; you have increased upon that entrusted to your charge; you have not squandered it away foolishly for that which would not profit you.”

There would be no desire on the part of stewards to steal, “For, says one, If I go and steal from another steward, it is all the Lord's, and it would do just as much good in the hands of that steward to whom it was entrusted, as if I were to possess it by stealing it from him.”

How much every Saint ought to be interested for this order of things to be brought about, realizing that all the property of the Church is for his own good as well as for the good of the whole body.

But in regard to these inequalities in stewardship: I will show you another principle where men may have equal judgment, and yet there may be an inequality of stewardships; it is in consequence of the various branches of business in which they may be engaged. It is well known that for farming purposes, it does not require the same skill as for manufacturing many articles, nor the same capital. And the ingenious mechanic, who understands the nature or construction of machinery, might have to be entrusted with a stewardship of one hundred thousand dollars worth of property to establish his manufactory, and work it so as to have it prove a benefit to the whole Church; and without this amount being put into his hands, as a steward, he might not be able to accomplish anything needed in the particular branch of manufacturing with which he was familiar. The stewardships, in such cases, would be different, not only in kind, but in the amount or value of the stewardship.

Let me illustrate this in another way; not but what I suppose all the Saints understand it, but you only want to be put in mind of that you have understood for years, but have not perhaps practiced upon it; and unless a people practice upon that they do understand, it does not benefit them much. Suppose a man have twelve sons, and he had according to the laws of the land 78 acres of ground; he gives to his oldest son twelve acres as a steward; he gives to his next son eleven acres, and to the next ten, and so on down to the youngest, which he gives one acre; and he says unto them, “Manage these different inheritances that I have set off to you, and gain all you can;” would those sons have any right or title to call that property their own? No: they would say, “It is father's property, and he has told us to go and occupy it, and he has given us rules by which we are to be governed; that the youngest may not encroach upon the oldest, nor any one encroach upon another, but that each stewardship may be managed and controlled according to the regulations he has given, and at the end of the year each of us must render a strict account to our father of every iota of our business transactions, of our losses and gains in trading, etc.” Now all this property, we see, belongs to the father, but it is all for the benefit of the twelve sons; they are all to be made joint heirs with the father in the possession of it. In due time, when they have learned the law the father has ordained, they will be prepared to enter as joint owners upon the grand inheritances, not only of 78 acres, but to possess all things that the father has.

Temporal things are a type of heavenly things, as the Lord says, in one of the revelations, “All things have their likeness, both things which are temporal, and things which are spiritual.” Does this order of things—the equality of property—have its likeness? Yes, in the heavens, and it is typical of that celestial order that we are all praying for, that we all desire the Lord to bestow upon us. We all feel very anxious to enter into the fulness of celestial glory, and inherit thrones and dominions, principalities and powers, and to have kingdoms appointed to us, and to receive crowns and to sway a scepter over kingdoms, as wise rulers. If we want to get there, we must begin here, and learn the order that is to be there. If we should have a division of property here, as we have had heretofore, and continue this order of things, as has been for many years back, and never should begin to practice upon this equality of things which God has ordained in His law, when we come to enter the courts above, we should be ignoramuses; we could say, “We read in your law something about it, but the people did not practice it, they were careless, and did not keep the law.” And now we do not know how to manage this celestial glory, and these kingdoms, and these worlds placed under our charge; for we are to give an account, not only in time, but in eternity, of our stewardship; consequently we must improve upon the true order of things here, which is typical of that which is hereafter; and if we learn the lessons here, everything there will be plain before us, and we will be able to enter into the very things we have been practicing years before. There will be an inequality, no doubt, in some respects in the eternal worlds, in proportion to the eternal things that will be entrusted to the servants, as in temporal things; but there will be a perfect equality in another respect; the revelation says, “He maketh them equal in might, and in power, and in dominion.”

Did you ever think of that? It is only in one respect. Each one will be made joint heir of all things in heaven, and upon earth. What more can a person want, if he is made a joint heir of all things; and one revelation says, he that is a faithful and wise steward in time shall inherit all things; consequently they are equal in dominion, and in power, and in might, as the Vision states. This don't say that each one shall actually control, and govern, and manage all things; that is a very different thing; just as it is here in temporal things, though each person may be considered as the inheritor of all the properties of the Church; yet when he comes to the management of property, he has only a share; so in heavenly things, a person may have the management of only one world, or of two, or of three, or of as many as there are particles of dust that compose our globe, yet, after all, each can proclaim himself as the inheritor of all things, being a joint heir of the grand universal inheritance.

There is no division of celestial glory, imparting to each one an equality of dominion, and might, and power; it is not to be divided, but there is an equality in the union of all these things. That is what we want to get at here; we want to learn the alphabet of it here, and advance to the a, be, abbs, and get over into two syllables, and keep on until we understand all about the celestial order by practice in this world, and then we will learn the laws that are to govern the different individuals that control and manage certain portions of the great joint stock inheritance; we will learn the laws that are to rule and govern between man and man; and we will not be ignorant of it when we go into the next world, we will find there that one kingdom will not have the right to encroach upon the royalty of another and take away its right, but each one will be governed by true and holy laws. Upon this principle, and this only, can we understand those revelations which so often speak of the principles of equality in the eternal worlds. Equality of dominion we cannot understand, by supposing each person that comes into the celestial glory is going to have the same number of worlds, and of kingdoms, and thrones set off to him that those have who have been in the celestial glory millions of ages—that he is going to have the same number of principalities and powers, and servants or angels to wait upon him to carry out his commands. An equality of dominion is that that I have already explained, each one inheriting all things, according to the laws God has ordained for celestial beings, but not directly or personally controlling only that which is placed under his management.” Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses 2:99-103

[Trucker]

Church schools. Online education. Doesn't even have to be religious, just not totally crazy like a lot of school are now.

[JK4Woods]

Here’s a really quick apologist essay published in
Public Square:

https://publicsquaremag.org/editorials/ ... -analysis/

Splits hairs on legality and smacks of pharisical adherence to the body of law in the US Code.

Yes while it will remain to be seen if what Ensign Peak Advisors did is within the law, aren’t we supposed to live not by the law, but by the higher example of our Savior Jesus Christ?

So a BYU professor whips out this essay lambasting the whistleblowers report, without reviewing said report, and point by point says the church and EPA adhered to the law, yet, you and I both know the law can be interpreted in many different ways.

Still, that’s not the point. The point is... in spreading the Gospel and the message of the restoration across the whole earth, what is an appropriate reserve for the church to keep?

Maybe $100 BN is, as the income via tithing is approx $300 million a month. Obviously the church has evolved into a very expensive gospel centered business model.

Long gone are the days of spreading the gospel without purse or script.

[Summerwind]

All I want is for the church to use the funds and properties it has as Jesus Christ determines they should be used. I don't know why there would be any other answer.

[Michelle]

.

[Lord of my dogs]

I think they should declare a Jubilee year and payoff all debt of all members, and set them all free.

[JohnnyL]

Nothing. How many times did Jesus spend giving charity (which is a good thing)? Not much. That was part of who he was, but not his purpose.

It's the same with the Church. The purpose of the Church is not to give $1K to every living poor person (which might be a good thing). It is to do the Lord's work. To do that, especially in the last days, will, IMO, actually require more than what it already has.

Which do you prefer: the Church succeeds in its mission, or the world made richer?