In the 1970s, Salt Lake City had died. There was a lot of debate, but most people thought that all that was left was a rotting carcase, doomed to go the way of Detroit and other failed metroplex areas and downtown areas. Streetwalkers dominated Second South. The free flow of drugs had just started and no one thought it was going to end (and it got much, much worse before Salt Lake ceased to be a major clearing house in the drug trade). So what happened?
We used to joke that the only Democrat in Utah happened. I know, that isn’t fair. There were other democrats (there was even a Democratic governor). But there was Eugene Jacobs, a law professor and a land finance/government redevelopment expert. Before he was finished more than 50 Utah government units were developing projects he was consulting on and the downtown Salt Lake area was saved, the core did not rot out.
Now Utah has some real disadvantages. For example, while the citizens tax themselves more than the average to pay for schools, they manage to spend towards the bottom per student. A combination of low average wages and much larger families makes for results of that sort. Lowered income happens because people don’t want to leave the state, and keep migrating into it. Salt Lake is one of the few cities with an anesthesiologist to CRNA ratio higher than San Fransisco’s (where CRNAs are actually paid less than some “regular” nurses). That sort of trend exists across professions.
But what happened was more than Jacobs and his pragmatic approach. The LDS Church also decided that it did not want the City where the heart of the Church was found to fail and wasn’t going to just move out to the suburbs or down to Provo.
My best guess is that it took a loss of about six million dollars on the projects, but the net effect was that the city turned completely around. I did not see the internal documents, I’m just guessing from what I know and looking at it from the outside as to what it cost.
Now that change hasn’t been just a one time cure, and all the movement has not been just one way. Like many cities, the efforts have had their ups and downs. There has been a serious consideration about how to make the transformation stick and how to do it in a way that does not cost money (i.e. where the Church doesn’t have to lose money on the deal in order to make the transformation occur). From what I can see, it appears that there is a well considered solution in line with implementing some Parisian style housing and other projects.
It is interesting, because most of the people I read in the bloggernacle who are commenting on the Church’s latest project seem to assume that saving the city center is a mistake and that instead it should go back to the drug gangs and prostitutes. Well, they aggressively criticize the project, which if it (or something else beyond what the City can do itself) were not implemented would result in the same end. I’m all for thinking that the ends and the means are part of each other (so I oppose torture, but approve of the recent project to revitalize Salt Lake, seeing it in the historic context of the last 40-50 years).
So, what do you think? Do you think:
- Urban renewal and such are fine — for Democrats and other socialists, but not for Utah.
- Sure, redevelop, just don’t let it cost any money or attract anyone with money. Got to stand tight for class warfare.
- Whatever. If someone in Utah wants to do it, I’m for it.
- Hey, I’m a neo-calvinist. Money is a sign of God’s grace. The more, the better.
- It can’t be that serious a problem or that worthwhile. We should send the money to where it is needed, like Somalia.
- Letting Democrats on the law school faculty at BYU was a mistake and it is time to fix that trend now.
- Temples, urban renewal, etc., you are just talking trickle down economics, give the money straight to the poor instead.
- Steve, you should have done that post on how Mormon women can negotiate their public identities instead.
- Steve, you should have gotten straight to Zion, why people don’t recognize the working Utopias we have, and skipped all the side trips.
- ….
I’m looking for your thoughts.
Stephen,
Democrats and other socialists? Really? That’s just lame. But yeah, if you put it this way, then it is fine for any place other than Utah.
Jon wouldn’t love that. Somalia is is paradise. Can’t infect it with outside influence and corruption…
I think urban renewal is great. There are many cities throughout the country who have experienced this on different time scales. Run-down areas get filled with trendy lofts. Edgy restaurants are established. They renew.
2 comments on this:
1) I think the Church is part of the problem in the first place. I’ve been in bands that played in clubs in Salt Lake City, so spent a lot of time downtown. I’ve also been to clubs other places. Downtown Salt Lake is a sterile place. There are rules from the LDS-dominated legislature which limit the number of bars and clubs per block. Because things are so spread out, a lot of the dynamism that occurs in many other cities is lacking. There isn’t really anything to draw people downtown for “fun” or to hang out.
2) While I am absolutely in favor of urban renewal, in-filling, etc., I don’t know that it’s the function of a religious organization to do this. I picture churches talking of Christ, serving in and among the poor, building wells, improving lives, etc. But perhaps that is naive. Perhaps the role of churches really is to invest billions of dollars in commercial businesses. I could be wrong.
We always hear about “…the gold, and the silver, and the silks, and the scarlets, and the fine-twined linen, and the precious clothing, and the harlots, are the desires of this great and abominable church.” OK. Take out the harlots. And we hear about “great and spacious buildings”. On the continuum of being focused solely on the poor (ie. St Francis of Assisi) to being a commercial company developing billion dollar projects and expecting them to make a profit, where are we? At what point does “enough” become “too much”? When Bishop Burton gets a community award (Giant in Our City) because “…as a businessman he has overseen the unprecedented investment in our capital city”, have we lost sight of what a church should be?
I feel we have, but obviously many feel we haven’t. It seems I’m in the minority here, but I’m fine with that.
Oops. Forgot closing tag after “capital city”. Could anyone fix it?
What IS there to do in Salt Lake City?
What IS there to do in Salt Lake City?
Going to catholic mass for Christmas (at midnight) is nice. I went to a orchestra concert there too. Temple. Mormon historical museums. Displays at the library for organizations (my wife went there for La Leche League). That’s all I ever went there for.
Love ya Dan.
love ya jon, but you’re merely confirming dan’s question. really, how many people are dying to go to la leche league meetings. can’t you do better than that?
mh,
My purpose wasn’t to defend that SLC might or might not be a dying city. It was just to say that there are a few things for Mormons at least there. There’s a really good raw vegan restaurant there too. I don’t live in UT any more so there is no draw for me to go to SLC. But when I did live there I found myself going to SLC occasionally, of course, my wife has family in the area too. If it wasn’t for my wife’s family living up there, frankly, I wouldn’t ever go to UT.
Well, again let’s look at Jesus example. He went among the poor, the sick, and the sinful, and bound up their wounds (metaphor – he really just spoke words and healed by miracle), preached them, and forgave them. Let’s not forget, he had already established as per the NT that he could have built a financial empire with the economic power of “saving Jerusalem”. He could have bought the properties where this class of “undesirables” dwelt, and turned it into a middle upper class development – thereby driving out the poor, sick, and sinful. Yet, the only group he ever drove out were the money changers in the Temple?
From an economic perspective, I get it. I don’t have practical real world solutions for breaking down the class systems (in a beneficial way) that society seems to gravitate towards. I don’t know that simple ministries can “save” souls that don’t want to be saved. Frankly, I’m not even certain that these stories about Jesus are based on fact. I could be wrong, I hope I’m wrong, but think I might not be. So, I understand inherent predicament that “you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs”. Still, and again, I haven’t built a Church under the assertion that I am directly led by that same Jesus even now. I don’t claim to have the key’s of salvation that will be intrinsically recognized by all through “the light of Christ”. So when I see a Church that preaches Jesus, but solves problems financially – I see an imposter. This imposter is empowered by selling a message that is not true. I don’t agree with all of the specifics surrounding government spending and various social programs – but I do agree with the concept of government and accept the general premise of taxation for collective services. I disagree with the Church as secondary taxing agent that can arbitrarily redistribute unearned money (both tithing and taxes are based on income, not production directly) according to their whims, in contradiction to their theology, and without accountability.
Really? That’s just lame — darn, it was supposed to come across as silly.
Cowboy, from what you are saying is that if you do anything but talk you are an imposter.
Some problems, I would suggest, take tools beyond talk. That fits the doctrine, which is consistent with the theology.
hmm the close tag doesn’t seem to be working no matter what I try.
I guess Solomon should not have built the Temple with the finest materials known to man, but instead given the money to the poor.
Stephen,
to fix the italics, you need to edit Mike’s comment #2. That’s where the error is.
Jeff,
Yes. Remember, Solomon was not known to be a very righteous guy…600 harlots or something…kinda prided himself on his earthly possessions. Remember also that the Lord didn’t need a spectacular building of the finest materials to appear to either Moses or Joseph. Moses needed a tall mountain, Joseph needed a grove.
“In the 1970s, Salt Lake City had died. There was a lot of debate, but most people thought that all that was left was a rotting carcase, doomed to go the way of Detroit and other failed metroplex areas and downtown areas. Streetwalkers dominated Second South. The free flow of drugs had just started and no one thought it was going to end (and it got much, much worse before Salt Lake ceased to be a major clearing house in the drug trade”
That is total B.S. Total, absolute, B.S. This tells me one of two things 1) You have never been in Detroit, or 2) Salt Lake City must be another name for Detroit.
Sure, we had (and still have) some problems in SLC; and, we had a down turn in the late 70’s. But, the problems in SLC are minor in relation to Detroit.
Amazingly I agree with Will.
Dan,
Given the conservative principles in Utah, we will have a stable economy. Up and downs for sure, but we will always have an economy.
No offense, but I was at the law school when Deem and Jacobs were debating whether or not Salt Lake City could be saved.
Second South was a mess. That got cleaned up (followed by the later brothel that got cleaned up).
Then came the federal judge who decided that the jails were overcrowded and ordered all drug arrestees who were not armed released on the same day they were arrested. That led to Salt Lake being seen as safe as a place for drug transit.
It became, for a while, a major clearing house in the drug trade.
I’ve been in harsh locations. I’ve walked Slauson Avenue in Watts at night in the summer.
I’ve been worse places (at night, during a sleet storm, when it is actually pretty safe).
The issue was not that Salt Lake had become a collapsed city, but whether that process could be stopped. Deem thought it could not and that the efforts to stop it were futile.
Disco (Professor Eugene Jacobs’ nick name, I doubt he knew it) thought the city could be saved.
Just because urban rot can be genteel, and not violent, does not mean it has not set in.
The over all economic situation, combined with the suburbs and economic shifts, were cause for significant and substantial concern.
I would agree that the people debating it were right that there was a reason for concern. Jacobs was a successful profesional in the area, with a history of many, many successful interventions up and down California.
He was right.
But to say that it is utter B.S. to think that the city had hit a tipping point where it was going to rot out, in a genteel manner or an ugly one, shows only a lack of analytical ability, knowledge and professioanlism.
Though I should say instead of “most people” “Most people with an understanding of the situation and a professional background in analyzing and administering or utilizing real data with proper tools” — I mistakenly subsumed in “most people” “most intelligent people who understood the facts and had the ability to analyze them” …
I’m willing to exclude some people from that category, provisionally or permanently.
Clear enough?
Will,
What kind of silly stupid answer is this? Even freaking North Korea will “always have an economy.”
Will,
I recall a lot of Utah’s economy based on federal handouts, like the space program and defense. Not all of it is based on handouts but a lot of it is. Utah is socialist just like the rest of the nation. Just look at their socialist schools.
hmmm, maybe now the conservatives on here will denounce Jon’s stupidity…I’m not gonna hold my breath.
Dan,
I love how you can understand my point of view and can sympathize with it. When I was listening to a podcast I thought of you here’s what Ludwig says, though it is not necessarily what I think of you. But I thought you would enjoy it since you like name calling so.
The Psychological Roots of Antiliberalism
http://mises.org/liberal/isec6.asp
There’s more but I’ll let you read that at Mises. Dan, I think you might have a Fourier complex and maybe you should go see a psychologist and ask them why you have so much hate and anger in your heart.
Stephen – What I am saying is that if you are going to pretend to be Christ’s church, you ought to familiarize yourself carefully with his doctrine.
When confronted by the self-assumed righteous rich man, Jesus made his doctrine clear:
“sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.”
When the dissapointed rich man walks away unable to follow this injunction, Jesus observes:
“For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle’s eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.”
He didn’t tell the rich man to offer aid to the poor, but to sell ALL that he had, and give it away. I won’t pretend to completely understand the gospel writers intent here, but I do note the order of Jesus instructions:
1) sell all though has; 2) Administer it unto the poor; 3) Come follow me; 4) Jesus declares “How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!”
In other words, why would Jesus arbitrarily require this of the rich man, and yet head a Church that does just the opposite. What distinguishes the poor among us, from the poor among the rich man, from Jesus perspective (entertaining the Mormon proposition for a Moment)? Interestingly Jesus said nothing of tithing.
Quite to the contrary, Christ was teaching that a person must divest themselves of wealth if they are to enter the Kingdom of heaven, and wish to obtain the “treasures” of heaven. Nowhere is this more explicitly stated than in the Sermon on the Mount:
“Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.”
It is very clear that the Church is far, far, from not laying up treasures in heaven. Jesus argued that we should sell our riches, all of them, and administer to the poor. Even the lame the defense that City Creek is a “restoration project” implies taking action that fails to administer to the poor. In fact, it simply drives them away for the purposes of improving property values, driving business, and it does this by advancing the class systems – not by breaking them down.
As a final word, and reiteration. I’m not an idealist. I don’t know how plausible Christian idealism is – but it is absurd to to collect tithing under the premise of restored Christianity, establish a financial empire, all while trying to convince people that somehow Jesus Christ is actually the one pulling the strings here. It is a contradiction to his stated doctrine.
Furthermore Stephen – your response seems to imply that all Priesthood is, is talk. The same for Jesus’s sermons on finding the Kingdom of heaven. Therefore we require a greater tool than Priesthood, Salvation, etc, and that tool is money?
I recall in the 70s that the Church’s critics suggested that downtown’s decline was the Church’s problem to deal with (being the inevitable cause of the decline in the first place). So the Church dealt with it. I suppose they never really expected any acknowledgment for their efforts.
Steve,
SLC was a small town (it still is) in the 1970’s, but it is a stable economy. Fairly well diversified. Highly skilled workforce. Highly educated workforce. It doesn’t have a port, or extremely good weather, so it will never be a major player. It will never really experience high-highs or high-lows, it will remain stable.
With this in mind, your comparison to the decay in a major city will never happen. It is ran by conservatives.
Dan,
Forgot to add stable in front of economy. It was illuded to in the previous statement.
Jon,
Your comments are in-founded. The large defense contractors in Utah are just that, contractors. They produce something in exchange for what the U.S Government and other Governments pay them for. They provide a valuable service in exchange for the money they are paid. It’s not like it is a Government give-away program.
Will,
Considering the US Department of Defense is bloated I don’t know how you could consider them not giveaway programs. Also, considering that we are supposed to renounce war and not participate in offensive war and that is 99% of what the US government does, I would think it immoral also.
Also, the space program is unconstitutional, so that is another bloated program that shouldn’t even exist among others.
Don’t get me wrong, I think Utahns are great people, just pointing out that Utah, with is supposed conservatism truly isn’t, we’re all socialists now, even if we don’t want to be.
Ok, found the problem. It was a mistyped close tag.
I really wish some people could step off the soapboxes. injecting politics into non-political posts is really tiring.
of course, if I was spending my leisure time at la leche league meetings, I.d want to discuss something different too, but I would hope I didn’t view everything through the narrow prism of socialism and anarchy.
mh,
And the name calling gets tiring too.
mh,
I thought you were tired of talking politics but then bring it up again. And then you start the “name calling”/slandering again.
I think you must have Fourier complex too, you can’t seem to use logic and reason in your arguments and can seem to only make fun of other people and name call instead.
jon, come back to reality. it’s better than your imaginary world of make believe. seriously.
Stephen,
It seems like most of the complainers are men. Is this because men don’t like to shop in malls and therefor think that the mall is a huge waste?
My personal opinion is that 3 Billion dollars would have made the world’s finest botanical garden. That’s something I would pay to be next to. A giant garden fits better thematically with the temple next door.
Last Lemming — 😉
Cowboy — no, you don’t have it correct at all. What I stated was that it seems that what you are stating is that all the gospel consists of is talking.
Solomon — got your complaint that you don’t appreciate your various status wives being called harlots. Realize that you were following the consolidation routine where you marry into every influential family.
Cowboy — Therefore we require a greater tool than Priesthood, Salvation, etc, and that tool is money No. Your time, talents and everything with which the Lord blesses you or may bless you is required.
I am an idealist.
Solomon — that is why just because God approved of your temple, I’m not letting you off the hook for later actions.
Dan — remember, though, that God had Moses build the tabernacle afterwards.
Paul 2 — ah, the things I would have liked. /Sigh. Too bad that would probably not have gotten other investors and would have probably lost money.
City Creek it brings up such mixed emotions for me I’d love to live in one of the Promenade condos with a view of Temple Square but if I had the $1.5 to 2 million entry price it takes to live there I would find even their largest three bedroom unit much too small. With The Gateway Mall just a few blocks away is a new mall what SLC needs to revitalize? I don’t know the demographics, stores or financial numbers but I never had any trouble finding what I wanted to buy last year in SLC. But mostly I think of how long it took for blacks to be given the Priesthood and the violence and disruption of the Civil Rights movement that must have finally motivated our prophets to seriously pursue it and I think of the Gold Coast African missions vs the lack of clean drinking water and sanitation that exists in central Africa and as I walk to a public drinking fountain i question and i pray and i ask dear God is this the right way?
Cowboy,
We get it. You are tired off the Church. You are opposed to the Church. You are expressing your frustration. Your discontent. Your bitterness. That is definitely your right.
This post is tied to Mike’s post. It is similar. Thus, my comments are similar. I think you need a healthy organization if you really want to do good for others. The Savior also asked us to cleanse the inner vessel. It is not justification. It is the truth. A broken organization can’t provide assistance. Not real assistance. It can’t pay someone else’s bill, if it can’t pay its own. It can’t provide food for someone else, if it has no food to provide. It can’t provide shelter for someone else without the resources to provide that shelter.
The Church has made some wise investments. It has created a lot of income producing properties and businesses. Properties and businesses that not only create wealth, but they create jobs. After all, the best social program of all is a job and the LDS church is creating jobs. Good paying jobs. Stable, benefit providing jobs. Family feeding jobs.
mh,
There’s not much I can say to you. I guess I’ll just ask you to stop the name calling/slandering/harassing or whatever you want to call it. I guess I’m just asking you to act like a Christian instead of the cattle prodder keeping all of us on the farm and enslaved.
I would expect this type of behavior from other commenters but I would expect someone who actually posts on the blog to be more mature than you are. You act like a child. Please, lay off already and grow up.
Stephen M (Ethesis):
I don’t recall stating that all the Gospel was about was talking – of course, I did say that Jesus spent his ministry in two functions:
1) teaching – I think you call this “talking”, and don’t seem impressed by it?
2) Comforting and healing – your Church claims the rights to this very power, but I am asserting that the Church demonstrates its strength financially. For those wishing to follow Jesus (at the bare minimum) the price was “all that thou hast”. However, rather than collecting that sum for his Church, Jesus required that the proceeds be for administering unto the poor.
As the previous article states, the current Church follows this policy no better than Wal-Mart.
As for the time, talents, garbage – Jesus again in another instance stated that for service rendered to another:
“Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.”
These Stephen, are the treasures layed up in heaven. It should also be noted that your vows of consecration – time, talents, and anything with which the Lord may bless you – are oddly paired with the building up of the Kingdom of God on the earth, and intrinsincally paired (as per the purpose of the endowment) with the idea of what one must do prepare for exaltation. In your endowment, one must give all they possess to the Church. I find this interesting because the scripture I have quoted above (inasmuch as…) is from Matthew 25:40. This is also a section of scripture specifically dealing with the Second Coming of Jesus Christ. In those verses however, we are not charged to give unto the Church, but rather the “hungered”, the “thirsty”, the “stranger”, the “naked”, the “sick”, the “prisoner”. For doing so, earns us the privilege of standing on the “Right hand of the Father”.
According to the New Testament, those who fail in this command, God declares:
“Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels: For I was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat: I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me not in: naked, and ye clothed me not: sick, and in prison, and ye visited me not. Then shall they also answer him, saying, Lord, when saw we thee an hungred, or athirst, or a stranger, or naked, or sick, or in prison, and did not minister unto thee? Then shall he answer them, saying, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye did it not to one of the least of these, ye did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment: but the righteous into life eternal.”
So long as the Church amasses wealth, it is not of the Kingdom of God, at least not the Kingdom of God spoken of in the New Testament. Perhaps that issue could become a little more “muddy” or unclear were the Church to have a substantially higher track record for humanatarian aid – but as of now, that doesn’t seem to be a problem.
“A broken organization can’t provide assistance. Not real assistance. It can’t pay someone else’s bill, if it can’t pay its own. It can’t provide food for someone else, if it has no food to provide. It can’t provide shelter for someone else without the resources to provide that shelter.”
Will, again you are placing mortal constraints on an organization allegedly endowed with Priesthood – and run by Jesus Christ himself. If he needs your money, perhaps you are his God?
Hey, I was hoping for a Hawkgrrl poll I could actually vote in…
Here’s how I see it: The Church wants its temples to be located in beautiful, thriving neighborhoods. Since temples can’t be moved (logistically and theologically, it presents problems) the ONLY solution is to invest in the neighborhood around the temple to keep it thriving and beautiful.
The Ogden and SLC projects both fit this category.
Why a shopping mall? Because it will yield some return on investment, where a botanical garden–or even expanding the temple block to cover a 9-block area–would not. So, in that sense, it is wise stewardship of resources.
If the area around the Manhattan or Hong Kong temples start to slip, would they be covered by this philosophy? I don’t know. But I have noticed that the Church now builds very few temples in urban centers.
Jon,
Love ya bud, I really do. I encourage you to read and UNDERSTAND Shenpa Warrior’s post from yesterday. You always talk about slander, but you seriously don’t know the definition of the word. Where have I slandered you? I’ve questioned your intelligence MANY times, because it seriously deserves questioning. Seriously, you need to get a handle on reality.
You act as if you don’t name call, but let’s look at some of the derisive names you use, just in this post: socialist, cattle prodder, enslaved, Fourier, liberal; I’ll stop there. Of course the term “socialist” applies to every U.S. citizen, so I guess I shouldn’t take it personal that you really don’t understand what socialism is. When you used the term, it was meant in a spirit of love, right? After all, you love socialism.
Maybe you should practice what you preach, and you’ll avoid the name-calling. Cut the hyperbole and exaggeration, and I’ll quit questioning your intelligence. Deal?
Cowboy,
“Will, again you are placing mortal constraints on an organization allegedly endowed with Priesthood – and run by Jesus Christ himself. If he needs your money, perhaps you are his God?”
He doesn’t need my money, he needs my faith. He needs my devotion. He needs to build me up and the way to build me up is to serve others. He doesn’t need to do it, he is already perfect. I am the one that needs to grow. I am the one that needs to part of my substance to help others. I am the one that needs to devote my time.
The priesthood is an expression of Love, more than it is an act of power. It is an act of service. It is service. It is intended to help others. I can’t put my hands on my own head and give myself a blessing.
mh,
I’ve read the post. So does that mean you are going to start “It’s about kindness. Patience. Meekness. Charity.” Calling my ideas weird all the time and strange and questioning my intelligence because I believe something that makes logical sense doesn’t make any logical sense on your part because your ideas have no basis in principles. Even the gospel of Christ bases its ideas on principles that can be logically deduced. The ideas I have presented us logic and reason, you have not combated one twit the ideas themselves but make fun of the messenger instead by name calling etc. You’ve offered nothing to the discussion of the ideas I’ve presented. You just call them strange and different and me unintelligent. Yet you are not intelligent to even combat the ideas with logic and reason. This is why I stick with it, because it does make logical sense and it is of reason and is good because it leads to freedom and liberty no more being a slave to the state.
I try not to name call and in the past when I’ve slipped I’ve apologized but you and Dan, etc continue to name call and slander, etc. I’ve become fed up with it today and decided that I would give some of your “love” back to you. If you don’t like my ideas then ignore them or come back with logical and rational arguments against them. Saying that I’m not following the crowd is not a logical argument. Saying that history has never seen such a society isn’t a logical argument (since we would still have black slaves today if that were true).
You and Dan have confirmed Mises’ ideas on the Fourier complex. Prove him wrong, that’s all I ask. Well, I also ask that you be civil instead of combative all the time. Your pride has never led you to apologize for the name calling etc but makes you continue it. I’ve had enough. If you have the Fourier complex, then please, get some help already.
Re: There isn’t really anything to draw people downtown for “fun” or to hang out.
I haven’t been to SLC for 9 years or so, but as a non-Utahn tourist, things that I find nice are convenient parking to Temple Square, places to eat near Temple Square, stores to stroll in near Temple Square.
Eating in the basement food court of Crossroads was rather dank. The Crossroads parking garage was ok, but old. Moving from one department store outside into another department store was a bit confusing.
I didn’t miss not having a cluster of pubs to choose from, but I know my non-member friends who live in Draper and Sandy have their favorite places. They also talked about how great it was when the Olympics were downtown and how they just went downtown to hangout during that time.
I live out of the culture of businesses being closed on Sunday, so if the church is hurting businesses by requiring the tenants to not operate on Sunday, then others would have to say whether or not that impact is true. I’ve eaten in restaurants in Provo on Sunday and their business seemed to be just fine…so I assume other businesses in SLC will pick up more business on those days.
My community is taxing business and home owners extra on property to generate an urban renewal fund. It will never generate enough to do the type of comprehensive renewal that City Creek is doing. I can’t imagine but that City Creek will be a draw and that formerly skeptical people will be there patronizing its shops and restaurants and enjoying its beauty.
Stephen,
#35,
Are you referring to Solomon’s Temple, or the Tabernacle in Moses’s time?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourier_complex
This Fourier complex?
holy schneikies! That’s some harsh language. Dude, you’re totally delusional if you think either I or MH are in any way envious of either you or the mises idiots you parade around in your links. Rather, we think you guys unfortunate for how dumb y’all are. That’s all I’ll say on that.
The Other Clark — I would have if I could have figured it out.
Dan — I’m referring to the Tabernacle that God directed Moses to build, the traveling tent, etc. Solomon’s temple is another story.
The Tabernacle, as designed by Moses was essentially a tent. Certainly they didn’t use fancy materials for its construction. What followed was Solomon’s temple.
Dan,
“The Tabernacle, as designed by Moses was essentially a tent. Certainly they didn’t use fancy materials for its construction. What followed was Solomon’s temple.”
First of all, you really don’t know what material they used and, second, if they were wandering in the desert, it is not likely they had material at all and probably sacrificed what they had to build the Tabernacle.
Will:
If what the NT says is true (as suggested by Hawkgrrl over in Mike’s other piece), in that what Christ was advocating was not a heavily organized, hierarchical, top-heavy organization, but rather a vagrant service oriented mission, why do we focus so heavily on the organization and needing to support the organization? Why do we focus on, as you suggest, the differences between a “broken” and “vibrant” organization?
As FireTag has likewise discussed in some of his recent posts, what if our focus on an organization that compels obedience to rules/laws that restrict the flow of the Spirit, or at the very least prescribe rules/regulations by which one must act in order to be deemed “worthy”, what if that focus is entirely misplaced?
And, what if that focus is misplaced in an organization that compels obedience all the while ignoring (either on purpose or accidentally) the gospel of Christ as we read about it in the scriptures?
I’m of the mind that we place way, way too many mediators between man and Christ. We place the Church (i.e. What does the Church say?), we place local leaders, we place general leaders, we push many, many mediators by which members (and non-members) must act in order to approach the Savior – the old “reverential barrier” advocated by McConkie has become more than a barrier it seems.
If he doesn’t need your money – and Cowboy is right in that Christ spoke very, very little about tithing [in fact, the only references Christ himself makes in the BoM refers to these passages, elaborated upon in this article] – then why does the organization that purports to be His place so much focus not only on the money, but more importantly on the money given being a sign of worthiness?
Jon, email me at mormon heretic at gmail dot com if you want me to show you some of the problems I see in you and mises logic. We’ve side-tracked this and other discussions too much already. Love ya!
Dan,
You prove the point. Fourier complex. No logic, no reason. Just pride on your part.
MH,
Will do but it better be actual arguments and no more name calling etc.
I tell you, the socialist democrat bloggers are the most hateful bunch out there, especially when you bring up individualism and individual rights.
Homer,
“in that what Christ was advocating was not a heavily organized, hierarchical, top-heavy organization, but rather a vagrant service oriented mission”
Hogwash. Total, absolute, hogwash.
Christ called the 12. He called 70’s. He put Peter in charge after he left. He set them apart. He sent them out to teach. He created an organization. After he was resurrected, he then went to the America’s. One of the first orders of business was to call 12 Apostles. He lived in Jerusalem, not America. He did not have the rights we do. He did not have the liberty we do. He did not have the freedom we do. The Romans and Sadducees were in Charge. They were oppressive. They put people to death that did not follow their rules. Remember Herod, he killed babies to keep himself in power. In Matthew 22, the Sadducees tried to pit him against the government, with Caesar. They put Jesus to Death. They killed him for what he taught. He was crucified for what he taught. He was crucified for what he organized. Remember, they came after Peter. He had to deny Christ to protect himself. That tells the level of oppression.
“And, what if that focus is misplaced in an organization that compels obedience all the while ignoring (either on purpose or accidentally) the gospel of Christ as we read about it in the scriptures?”
More hogwash.
The pre-mortal Christ, Jehovah set rules for the Israelites. He expected compliance. When he received a body, he created a higher law. He established higher obedience, not lower. The law was do not commit adultery, when he came it is now don’t even look upon a woman with lust in your heart. The law was do not kill, when he came it is now don’t even have anger with your brother. He required obedience then. He requires it now. He had Prophets then. He has Prophets now. He instructed them then, he instructs them now.
Not hogwash, Will. Jesus called his disciples and sent them out FORBIDDING them to take most possessions. It was later, after the apostasy had begun, that later writers ret-conned later theological developments of offices into the original, limited written records. Someone, maybe at Pure Mormonism, said that the early church spent centuries arguing about what the church had ALWAYS believed, so obviously not everyone had ALWAYS believed it.
Mark 1:35-38 even seems to paint an interesting picture of the contrast between Jesus and Peter as part of a story in which Peter first tries to establish a centralized place of healing to which people can come. It’s more efficient for people to come to Jesus than for Jesus to go to them, so Peter gets everything arranged — and Jesus responds by leaving town without the disciples knowledge, leaving them scrambling to catch up
In the BofM we repeatedly see prophets telling people to worship the Father around remote natural settings without concern about their temples. Try counting how many times prophets restarted the church among various tribes that had fallen away — even among fleeing refugees.
And of course when Jesus appeared at Bountiful, he ministered among the earthquake rubble and volcanic ash that was all the survivors had left. He commanded that the church be built, but doesn’t seem to have had in mind church BUILDINGS when He said it.
As I’ve said in recent posts, if you invert the order so that you seek support in order to bring miracles rather than bringing miracles whether or not support is forthcoming, the apostasy has probably already begun.
#56: FireTag – I like this comment.
Also, a number of comments had to do with Solomon using the finest materials to build a temple.
I’m not sure what that has to do with spending billions of dollars to build a commercial center.
I tought in a school where students would occasionally “play the dozens.” Instead of “your mama is so. . .,” many of the responses in this post are a Bloggernacle version ot the dozens. I can easily see sentences starting with “you socialist swine are so” or “you Mises idolators are so.”
I suggest buy a copy of Eric Hoffer’s The True Believer and a mirror. Read one and look into the other.
Last time I checked the downtown Crown Burger was a draw, and that place is a filthy wreck! But the gyros and onion rings are good. I think downtown SLC isn’t so bad: Gateway Mall area is very nice, Jazz games and concerts nearby. I’ve seen much better and much worse.
Having said all that, I’m not sure it’s the job of the church to revitalize the city, any city. I don’t live in Utah, so how do I have a dog in this fight? The church doesn’t run the city, right? We’re just a church. Nobody voted us into political office, did they? SLC isn’t the Vatican, after all.
Jeff, err, there are chapters of material on what the tabernacle was built of and such.
Mike S — a number of people criticized temples for having any expense put into them at all (though note our chapels are pretty bare bones for the expense that goes into them). That is why the response.
Stan — “Eric Hoffer’s The True Believer” I think I still have the copy I picked up in the 60s around the house. Well worth reading for adults, though great reading for children.
hawk — there is a long standing internal discussion about just what the role of a Church is going on in Salt Lake. It is why the Church divested itself of Intermountain Health Care, for example. Probably a complex enough topic for a post of its own.
A link to an article about the tabernacle (which tosses in some basic neoprotestant thinking about the symbolism as well):
http://www.thebiblestudypage.com/taber_main.shtml
And a simple blog post, with lots of pictures:
http://thewordin365.wordpress.com/2011/02/09/gods-crib-the-wandering-years/
The Salt Lake Tribune updated March 22, 2011
City Creek Center Retail: Competition aplenty • There’s only so much business to go around — and so many tenants to lure. Rivals include The Gateway, just four blocks to the west, which debuted in 2001 and is next to EnergySolutions Arena, a key venue for concerts and shows. The Gateway has many restaurants, the Clark Planetarium, The Discovery Gateway children’s museum and one of the most successful movie theaters in the state. One test The Gateway poses for City Creek Center is that many retailers will not want to be in two malls in such close proximity, commercial brokers say. The two may be “fighting for the same tenants,” said Clark of Commerce Real Estate Solutions. Though farther away, Fashion Place in Murray is one of the most successful regional malls in the West — if not in the country — drawing from a customer base throughout the Salt Lake Valley and beyond. Owner General Growth Properties has put a lot of money into Fashion Place in recent years. In 2009, General Growth completed an overhaul of the interior of the main mall property, and a new 138,000-square-foot Nordstrom store opened on the mall’s north side. Soon, Fashion Place also will be home to Utah’s first Crate & Barrel store, in an expanded area of the mall that also is home to California Pizza Kitchen and Coldwater Creek — both of which are in The Gateway. East of downtown, Trolley Square has undergone a face-lift and soon will debut will debut a Whole Foods store, which makes the mall even more attractive from a leasing standpoint.
City Creek Center Condos: Since City Creek construction began in late 2008, Utah’s once-booming economy and real-estate market have taken their hits, with the latter remaining mired in a downturn marked by falling prices and foreclosures. The church doesn’t list its condos on the area Multiple Listing Service, so it’s hard to know exactly how that component of the City Creek development is faring, said veteran downtown real estate broker Babs De Lay. But there are hints, based on the overall market, with De Lay characterizing the downtown condo market as sluggish in all price levels. Many finished units remain unsold. Last summer, the church acknowledged that condo prices in City Creek were being “re-evaluated.” Under construction at 35 E. 100 South, units in the 20-story Regent development were originally priced from around $300,000 to as much as $1.7 million. Prices in the 150-unit project, set for completion in mid- to late 2011, were lowered to the mid-$100,000s. Ninety-five have been reserved with deposits. The twin 10-story Richards Court towers already have opened across from Temple Square at 45 and 55 W. South Temple. But two-thirds of the 90 units, priced from the $200,000s to more than $2 million, are still for sale. Two other condo projects are in development, the 30-story, 185-unit Promontory tower at 99 W. South Temple, also across from Temple Square, and a fourth tower that will not be built until demand warrants.
BTW, what I meant about dedicating time, talents and assets is best typified by a friend I was talking to.
He came home this week to discover that the pulled pork burritos they were having for dinner were going to be short. In order for everyone else in the family to have enough, he had half his usual meal. He was surprised since the amount of pork they had cooked up is enough for 3-4 meals.
Turns out someone who is rather unpopular needed a meal taken in, so his dinner was going off to feed them that night. Over dinner his wife broke it to him that his vacation was going to be cut in half because they needed to be in town so she could help someone else with a wedding reception.
Oh, and btw, the “help” included paying for a good part of it, not just the work.
That is the sort of thing I was referring to.
Otherwise, I checked “like” to Howard’s post. Seems those condos won’t be so expensive after all 😉
“A link to an article about the tabernacle (which tosses in some basic neoprotestant thinking about the symbolism as well)”
Interesting, the most expensive building of it’s kind…..
Thanks for the pointer.
To some people, shittim wood overlaid with gold hung with embroidered tapestries by silver taches, is just a tent. Camping with them most be quite the life.
John,
Were any of the Israelites starving, or were they all fed and clothed before putting their best into the tabernacle?
Dan,
There were times that they had no water or food, until they pleaded with God for sustenance. Just like today we need to plead to God for sustenance (and thank Him for it).
Dan, it doesn’t appear that the ills of poverty had been eliminated among the Israelites prior to erecting the tabernacle. For example, the tabernacle was to be financed with a regressive assessment of half a shekel per man, with the express direction that the rich should not pay more, nor the poor less. So there would seem to have been poverty and inequality when the tabernacle was undertaken.
For the earth is full, and there is enough and to spare; yea, I prepared all things, and have given unto the children of men to be agents unto themselves Therefore, if any man shall take of the abundance which I have made, and impart not his portion, according to the law of my gospel, unto the poor and the needy, he shall, with the wicked, lift up his eyes in hell, being in torment. D&C 104:17-18
Dan,
“Were any of the Israelites starving, or were they all fed and clothed before putting their best into the tabernacle?’
A better question is how much money and goods did they ship off to other peoples who might have needed it before they started the Tabernacle?
The church was involved in IHC? Consider my mind blown! Growing up entirely outside of Utah, I never imagined the church would be so wrapped up in civic affairs. They certainly are not elsewhere, and we are supposed to be a global church.
Hawk, that is why they transferred the hospitals to a charity in the 70s. They used to have a number of hospitals, when no one else was building them, but did not consider it appropriate to be “so wrapped up in civic affairs” and when it became possible, got out of that business.
Stephen,
Thanks for this post and for the follow up comments. Although at times it is difficult for me to form an opinion of how things are vs. how they SHOULD be, I appreciate hearing your insights. There are more than two sides to a story such as this, and thoughts such as yours help me see that there’s just more to it.
I’m glad that I am no longer a member of a church that sees real estate development as one of its core functions, does not advertise this fact to its lay membership, and has apologists willing to play devil’s advocate I’m defending it.
*in defending it
Curse you, spellcheck.