Last week, there was two big donations to fight the COVID-19 pandemic.
Bill Gates pledged “a few billion“, and Jack Dorsey (Twitter) pledged $1 billion. For Gates it will only be 2-3% of his net worth, for Dorsey if will be about 25%!
What kind of publicity would the church get if they stepped up and donated $1 billion? If we assume the $ 124 billion is now only worth $100 billion, the Church could spend 1% of its “rainy day fund” and get the best publicity it has got since giving blacks the priesthood!
I could see a news article like this:
12 April 2020 – Salt Lake City
Today at a news conference at the headquarters for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, church President Russel Nelson announced that the church would be giving $1 billion to help with the COVID-19 pandemic.
He said “The Lord had blessed us tremendously over the past few years, and in keeping with our Christ centered values, we will be donated $1 billion toward the fight of the COVID-19 pandemic.” He further explained that they would be distributing the funds through the Bill and Malinda Gates foundation. “We are a world wide church” he continued “and the Gates foundation has the international infrastructure to help distribute theses funds in an equatable and low cost way.”
But maybe the church has already given $1 billion for fighting the COVID-19 pandemic and they are just using their normal financial secrecy, or maybe they are not telling the world because they are taking Matthew 6:1 to heart?
Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.
Matt 6:1
So what do thou think? Should the church help in this time with a large monetary donation? If they did, would they keep it a secret in following Matthew or would they have a press conference (following Matthew 5:16)? How would it give the money, through a Non-Governmental Organization (NGO) like the Gates Foundation, or some other way? Is the Church’s own Presiding Bishopric organization capable of administrating the distribution themselves?
Wheat & Tares 
The church should absolutely do that and not because of the good PR. It is a travesty they have not been frontrunner in donating. Very disappointing. Only a meagre fast, which will not make any difference whatsoever.
We were visiting our adult child in SLC. Flour, sugar and oats were hard to get in the local grocery stores. I called the Bishop’s Storehouse in SLC and asked if they had flour, sugar and oats for purchase. “Yes” was their over-the-phone answer. So, we drove the 40 minute trip to get there.
We went in through the wrong door. We went through the welfare side. We asked about sugar, flour and oats. They were emphatic that without a bishop’s order, they would give us one loaf of bread and a jar of peanut butter. Nothing else. We would have to go through a local bishop from where-ever we were from if we wanted anything more than that.
I explained that we were looking for their Food Storage items for purchase. They sent us to the side of the building where that is handled. The same gentleman who had answered the phone was working. I asked about flour, sugar and oats. Nope. They had been sold out for weeks on the For Purchase Side and did not expect to have any more until probably Christmas as they had so many online orders that they were still filling. They only had those items on the welfare side of the building.
Over the years, I have volunteered with some community food banks and homeless shelters. I had always heard at church that the Bishops Storehouse was available to anyone — not just LDS church members. I had wondered how that actually worked in practice. Showing up and being mistaken for someone who had basic food needs, it saddened me to find out that they did not have a Bishop-volunteer on site to help the local poor. There was no real way for a anyone, non-member or member, to show up and ask for a food order. A loaf of bread and a jar of peanut butter was as good as it would be if a person was not embedded into the church system.
That situation of being mistaken for an impoverished person keeps playing through my head. Someone they thought was poor and in need of sugar, flour and oats showed up. They had those items and refused to share.
Do I expect the LDS church to give financially at this time? No. They might give the equivalent of a single loaf of bread and a jar of peanut butter. They will not give what is needed or asked for — even when they have it.
The Church should donate billions to research and to making medical equipment. When I read the New Testament, a great deal of Christ’s time was spent tending to medical needs. They should do it because it is the right thing to do. If they want to announce it from the rooftops, I would have no problem with that. Just do the right thing.
The problem with donating to great causes is is that so often the money goes through so many hands that take their cut that what’s left can often leave the original donor disillusioned. The Church eliminates that, which is why I feel more comfortable donating to it than any other organization. As I’ve gotten more discerning and financially well off, I’ve reserved money for other organizations besides the Church, but deciding when and where can be quite tricky.
I think the Church leans more toward Matt 6:1. It’s second or third hand story for sure, but my Dad knew of a guy who worked in some distant corner of church offices who said the Church does more to help soup kitchens stay open than anyone realizes. I’ve no idea if it’s true, but it wouldn’t surprise me in the least. I doubt they’d trust anyone with the money other than the Presiding Bishopric and who they’ve come to trust, and I think they’d be pretty justified in that decision. They may very well have donated some by now to an organization that has met their standards.
Many are calling right now a rainy day. I’m no expert, but my gut says things could be so, so much worse. If I feel that way, I’d make an educated guess that church leadership might feel likewise. Say they do donate a ton–most of it actually, and next year the west is ravaged by earthquakes, creating even worse problems. It would be bad for the Church in more ways than one. No one can know which rainy day they’re experiencing will end up being the “rainiest” in their time, but they can reason it. I also believe Church leaders are close enough to the Spirit to get that extra nudge to proceed when the rainiest actually occurs. I’m pretty confident this will work out in the end.
“There was no real way for a anyone, non-member or member, to show up and ask for a food order. A loaf of bread and a jar of peanut butter was as good as it would be if a person was not embedded into the church system.”
And yet, you were in fact offered sustenance with no other act required. Getting more requires working with your local bishop, and you were counseled how to do that. If you did not know your local bishop, they would have looked it up for you. I know for a fact that local bishops do provide aid to non – members. Sounds like a malcontent moment to me.
This brings to mind the famous quote “In the long run we are all dead” by John Maynard Keynes. The rainy day is today. Probably 10-15% of church members are now unemployed because of Covid 19, depending on location. Now would be a good time to help.
It seems like bishops could distribute money to ward members who lost their jobs fairly easily. If you wanted to distribute good instead of money I bet the church could partner with local reputable food pantries – St Mary’s is open and functioning in my area. In the past the church has talked about how much it has helped the poor; I don’t see why it wouldn’t this time.
Where I live we don’t have bisshops warehouse. As a RS pres I have been doing shopping for three or four poor families in our tiny spanish branch with a two year old in tow and while 8 months pregnant. Would have been nice not to have to do all that. Maybe first make sure all the children in church are always fed and clothed, esp. or also outside of the mormon corridor!
I saw an interview with Bill Gates the other day and felt such a relief to finally hear a quiet, intelligent reasonable voice coming from the USA. All the loud-mouthing from mr. Trump is very worrying to see.
Maybe Gates should run for president, I will vote for him if I could!
In January I attended a meeting featuring Warner Woodward, a retired BYU professor, who has formed dozens of NGOs and mentored hundreds of others (Google him). Many of his projects throughout the world are done in conjunction with the Church and church members – to one extent or another. The Church is much more active in “micro” activities than I would have expected. Their recently released summary of what they do around the world (in response to the $100B + revelation) gives an idea of what has been going on but has not been extensively disclosed.
I mention this to note that they have an extensive network of providers that they regularly work with and through which they could quickly and efficiently channel funds. They don’t need to identify partners and programs – they need the will to start writing checks for this cause.
The possibility that 20% of their donations will be wasted through administrative inefficiencies or corruption does not, to me, justify inaction. There is tremendous good that the remaining 80% could do.
Give a Billion dollars and tell the world for all I care. Convert the Beehive Clothing factories from sewing garments to face masks for a month.
Stewardship over these resources is the question. Following their narrative, I find it hard to imagine that when the King of Kings comes to reign, He won’t be able to rustle up the means to run his kingdom. That a measly trillion-dollar corporation is the cornerstone of His eternal empire for planet earth.
I think the stewards are much more likely to be on the receiving end of his braided whip for not relieving the very real pain and suffering today.
The back and forth in the comments about how charitable the church is emphasizes to me how little we know. To the OP’s point about ‘doing alms to be seen of men’, to me that means the church should not be making public-facing self congratulatory press releases about their charities. It does *not* justify a lack of transparency to donating members! Accountability remains a basic standard to meet in the handling of sacred funds. Goodness knows the church is very insistent that members be accountable and transparent for their income, tithes and offerings. The church has never minded if this accountability creates a very public dynamic given that someone’s temple recommend status rarely remains private information. The institutional-level version of accountability to God for use of sacred funds should look like accountability to members.
OP has also suggested a 1% surge donation of assets in a time of duress, which sounds good to me. But if we’re trying to pick threshold numbers, I’d like to point out that there should be at least 10% donations to direct relief efforts on an ongoing basis. 10% of all annual increase, including gains in stock value, including in cloistered holdings like ensign peak. I’d be happy with more! But anything less is hypocrisy.
The Church needs to do a lot more than it is doing in regards to humanitarian aid. The 4th mission of the Church is to assist the poor. (Thank you President Monson.) Half the current Church membership lives in developing countries. Help to those in need is a no-brainer.
The excuses, some mentioned above, don’t hold water. The Church has the human resources and financial capital to make a significant effort. All we need is the will. Luckily, may members have recognized the need and are working on their own. But the Church needs to set the example.
Two things are evident to me: the COVID-19 pandemic is the worst world-wide crisis of my 60+ years, and the church has vast resources it can access to provide material help. The world is watching and I hope the First Presidency does the right thing.
The world is not watching outside members, and perhaps the mountain west. The church is irrelavent everywhere else. I agree the church should contribute, but to the poor.
Experts here are saying there has never been an immunization against a covid virus, and may not be for this one.
In a situation like this charity will not cut it. You need a compassionate government. You government is spending trillions, but whether it is distibuted evenly or compassionately?https://www.usa.gov/coronavirus
Our stake president donated $10,000 to a hospital on behalf of the Church last week. (Dayton, OH). Too bad it wasn’t the hospital that is actually spearheading the disaster management and relief.
Geoff-Aus: I hate to agree with you on this point but you are absolutely correct. The Church is a non-factor in most of the world and a very small factor even in the US. There’s virtually nothing the Church can do to overcome its reputation related to polygamy and to a lesser degree racism. People think we are generally good and solid family folks but also that we are strange. Remember the polls in 2012 when Romney was running? Likely voters were more suspicious of Mormons than even Muslims or any other religious group.
I agree that the Church should give more. But I’m pretty sure that it will never overcome it’s reputation. So if the Brethren decide to give more they better be doing it out of love and charity, not PR advantage.
A Late Night Thought:
Over the last few years, I have noticed that when the LDS church does a donation of food, labor or other resources on a local basis in my region, that donation is handled through the Public Relations Committee. There is no regional or stake board or committee set up for charitable giving by the LDS church.
Once I noticed that, I have been unable to un-see that fact.
Local ward members go through the bishops for food orders and assistance. Those needs are paid for out of fast offerings. Tithing money is rarely involved. JustServe.org is focused on individual members volunteering their time, personal money and efforts in the community.
The actual entity of the LDS Church is rarely involved in charitable giving on a local basis.
So, where does the money go? There is no local church committee or liaison set up to give finances or material goods that come from the actual church corporation. Everything locally or regionally that is donated or given is given by generous individual members.
When local giving by the actual church is so rare and sparse that the church PR department handles it, there is a problem.
The comment written earlier, by BeenThere, about the retired BYU professor, Warner Woodward, is a perfect example. Woodward has put together numerous NGOs. He works with many generous LDS people. I am certain the LDS church provides volunteer labor and connections. The church is excellent at using volunteer labor to organize and commit more volunteer labor. I am less certain that the LDS church provides cash.
At some point, the church will be in jeopardy of losing their non-profit tax status over these practices. Donating the time and money of individual members is not the as donating the actual funds of the church organization.
Isn’t it also a requirement that to get any food from the Church one has to do some type of work in return?
What I could have said better in my prior post is that, putting aside questions of relevance and reputation, the church has enormous financial resources yet proportionality has done little to address humanitarian issues like poverty, homelessness, medical needs, etc. Now is the time for the church to use some of its financial reserves to address human suffering around the world. Even temple-building activities in places like Russian, China, and the UAE could be delayed so those funds could be used for the less fortunate. I love the idea of the church using the Gates Foundation to place funds where they’re most needed.
“The excuses, some mentioned above, don’t hold water.”
Definitely a matter of perspective. If the Church donated most of its money only to have a worse disaster one, two, or even ten years from now with no financial resources to combat it, I have a hunch many of the same critics accusing it of hoarding would then be reveling in its uninspired lack of preparation. Like 90% of all conversations on W & T, I think a lot of this comes down to whether one believes this is the Lord’s true Church, how active a role He plays in its leadership, and what understanding we have of His nature as He seeks to help us temporally and spiritually and to become as He and His Father is.
Additionally, nearly every “100 billion” conversation here, as far as I’ve read, has never gotten past the assumption that money is automatically the answer. I don’t think it is, at least not entirely. My sister is much more moderate or liberal than I am in many areas of life and the Church. Despite that, time volunteering for inner city organizations has made her somewhat of a fiscal conservative. She summed it up once by saying “The rich receive money and ask ‘How best can I invest it to make it grow?’ The middle-class receive money and ask ‘What do I need to save for with this?’ while poor people receive money and ask ‘How can I spend this before it disappears?’ ” I realize this isn’t true of everyone, and that there are multiple factors to consider, but I think education and attitude are as much or greater a factor for those receiving charity than the monetary aspect is. There is a definite balancing act. No one is going to care about becoming a better steward of money or a better person if they’re wondering where their next meal is coming from, so help with that is needed, but teaching a man to fish strikes me as much more compassionate than handing him daily fish.
Programs like the PEF, the self-reliance classes, and others show the Church is trying to take a more long-term, sustainable approach. Part of Moroni 60:23 comes to mind ” . . .remember that God has said that the inward vessel shall be cleansed first, and then shall the outer vessel be cleansed also.” I think this applies to the “lowliest” of people as much as it does potentially corrupt leaders. Yes, the Church currently has a full shed of sharpened, honed, and well calibrated financial tools at its disposal, but it’s not about to hand out chain saws until it’s sure the receivers know how to use them. I know there are plenty of short-term things that can be done, and the Church can be found to do many of them if one does a little digging. Doing everything short-term defeats the purpose, however.
The natural man in me wants to gloat as I watch my suspicion that the Church knows what it’s doing play out. The Saint in me says I probably need to study this week’s Come Follow Me lesson a little more closely.
David Bednar at conference last week (quoting Ezra Taft Benson): “The world would take people out of the slums. Christ takes the slums out of people, and then they take themselves out of the slums.” There is no indication that the church is going to part with that $100 billion anytime soon. How convenient (and appalling) (and really outrageous) for church leaders, who live comfortably on the “modest stipend” they receive from members’ tithing, to imply that the poor can take themselves “out of the slums” if they are righteous enough. There’s clearly no intent at this time to do anything with that money except watch it accumulate.
Go ahead and gloat, Eli. The church certainly does know what it’s doing. But building up an obscene financial portfolio under the guise of teaching a man to fish is not compassionate by any stretch of the imagination.
Where should the money go? I would cringe if it went to big pharma and medical R&D, even with a stipulation that any patents be open. Maybe it’s possible through the U or the Y. Every discovery should be completely free- for humanity. I’d rather see us provide services or resources that are essential, but ignored due to a low stigma, e.g: :
-food/clothing for children
-food for the poor/recently unemployed
-PPE for custodians, grocers, “essential” personnel
-jobs for the unemployed
-delivery services for at risk people (elderly, sick)
-hygienic burial/cremation services for the deceased (It’s morbid, but things like coffins, body bags, and other mortuary resources are needed).
We do NOT need to put out press releases when we do our charitable works, communicating with the members via our own communication conduits is enough (our own website, letters, app, etc.). The national news will watch and print what they want, it is no concern of ours. We won’t be guilty of rooting our horn, only communicating with the saints.
Dot,
It’s a minor but very real point, but my understanding is that the stipends do not come from tithing, but from interests of Church investments. There is a real difference there.
Is it really appalling to imply that the poor can take themselves out of the slums if they become more righteous? To not see at least some truth to that statement feels like a lack of faith in both humanity and the Lord (Isn’t inward change a fundamental part of the Gospel?). I wasn’t just referring to righteousness, but also developing good money habits and breaking cyclical thinking that life is exclusively controlled by circumstance. You see story after story in the U.S. of people who break the cycle. Outside the U.S. I’d agree this can be a little more difficult, depending on various governments. As many more nations start to make freedom a bigger priority, and allow missionaries in, I think you’ll start to see the inward vessel of more nations become cleansed as well, making it easier for individuals to do likewise.
I originally wrote a lot more, but realized I’m going against my own mission of coming here to understand others. Although I enjoy giving others a similar opportunity of understanding, I need to stop writing as much and simply ponder what I read more. I understand where you are coming from. I truly feel like I do. But I also can’t help but come away feeling it lacks faith, optimism, and an attempt to understand long-term and more encompassing solutions to the world’s problems. On that we’ll have to agree to disagree.
I have noticed, Eli, that very conservative people lack empathy. It has to happen to them. I wonder how many Republican politicians I’ve seen over the years who were vehemently anti-gay until their child came out.
Eli
I used to love that quote about the slums, until I really thought about it and realized how deeply offensive it is.
It doesn’t reference the slums in the hearts of the wealthy.
Implies that the poor are poor because they have slums within.
It doesn’t acknowledge the fact that they have suffered from systemic injustices.
The poor are too often born to mothers who didn’t have adequate prenatal nutrition.
The poor are too often educated at schools where less money is spent per child than wealthier schools across town (even within the same district–the schools on the wealthy side of town have experienced educators who are paid double what the first- and second-year teachers are paid at the schools full of underprivileged students–do the math). Far too many injustices to detail here, but it’s heartbreaking to see how much some people have the deck stacked against them from day one and continuing throughout their lives.
I hope church leaders will think about the slums quote more deeply and abandon its use. I like to hope that Elder Bednar is well intentioned but just hasn’t really thought about the implications of the quote.
Many conservatives mock social justice, but I don’t know how one can read the Bible and Book of Mormon and not see messages mandating followers of Jesus to work toward social justice.
It really upsets me when people say they can’t donate to anyone but the church because overhead.
Dude. The overhead is people who work for these organizations. They have devoted their livelihood to working in the not-for-profit sector. Most of them take major pay cuts to accomplish this, and because of their years of experience, are very adept at getting the money where the need is greatest. Yes there are exceptions. So you won’t donate to a not-for-profit because they pay their people? Sounds extremely harsh. Not every organization can exploit their retired members to work for free like the church does.
To the question at hand (and also to reply to a commenter here), yes the church could give generously to this cause and still have money leftover for future causes. That’s literally the operating model of all charitable organizations.
p,
We must not be hanging out with the same conservatives.
Although it took me a while to articulate it, I remain conservative because I feel it is more compassionate and moral than progressivism. Dot spoke earlier of things seeming obscene. There are things that seem obscene to me. It’s going 16+ trillion dollars into debt and expecting my children to pay for it. It’s believing that it’s moral to vote to take money away from one group of people and give it to another, rather than emphasizing the freedom for me to give of myself. It’s allowing too many people to fall prey to the lazy idea that they can go on living life knowing less about the struggling family down the street than a government system of application and bureaucracy does. That’s obscene. I chose conservatism because it seemed the most compassionate, optimistic, and most likely to let the light of Christ lead to greater things. The more I study progressivism, the more it leaves me feeling pessimistic. My father-in-law was once unemployed. During that unemployment he was faced with a hefty hospital bill after three of his sons decided to experiment with an explosive device. The bill was paid from a fund made up of private donations. Once my father-in-law was employed again, he paid back every penny to that fund and then never stopped making monthly payments. The conservatives I know want to help people. The just want to eliminate the incompetent, greedy, and occasionally corrupt middle man (government).
I’m slightly less versed in social matters. I have both a childhood friend and a mission companion who are gay. I generally maintain the same sort of contact with them as I do all my other friends (lacking across the board if I’m honest). I’ve never been able to get far in that discussion without being accused of ignorance and hate (undeserved in my humble opinion) but I see a lot of ignorance and willful ignorance from social liberals as well. We usually both can agree on at least a certain level of compassion.
Math Nerd,
Jesus asked us to help the poor needy. I don’t think He asked us to have Caesar do it for us (though we do render to Caesar for roads, military, etc.). I think that’s the aspect of social justice conservatives mock. Yes, I don’t think you can read the Book of Mormon without feeling the call to help the poor and needy. I also don’t think you can read it without being warned of corrupt governments. Give government enough power to help everyone and it also has the power to take from everyone. It also warns of riches, and many a prophet have warned of those types of slums in the heart r. More so, I’d bet, than Bednar-type quotes. I’m not saying the Church can’t do anything either. I just think many are overestimating the lasting effect of throwing money at people and underestimating the role personal agency plays. With all the missions of the Church eventually pointing men and women toward Exaltation (the ultimate agency), it would make sense agency would be their emphasis. Money is just a tool at that point.
Well ok, Eli, then why give money to the church at all? And then why does the church need to stockpile $100 billion—in a fund supposedly designated for humanitarian purposes? Why not just emphasize agency and the elimination of those pesky slums of the heart? They don’t need money to do that. Why do church leaders need that “modest stipend” (whatever fund it comes from)? Isn’t that also just throwing money at people? Or is it ok to throw money at people who are not in the slums? Why not eliminate the middle man (the church) and let people use their money as they need or choose?
Eli
Teddy Roosevelt talked about the need to have a government strong enough to stand up to the power of large corporations. There are dangers in having a strong government, but there are also dangers in *not* having a strong government. Power vacuums attract corrupt humans. We can have a strong government with protections in place against corruption. If we have a weak government, other strong governments and/or corporate forces will seek to exploit the power vacuum.
Why is it okay to render to Caesar for roads and military but not healthcare? Perhaps because roads and military help protect and expand the wealth of the already wealthy? The. US military protects the wealth of the richest Americans. It’s an extraordinarily expensive welfare perk given to the richest, and much of the burden of a strong military falls on the backs of the poorest Americans.
Do you dispute what I said about the deck being stacked against the poor?
If conservatives want so badly to believe that the poor have an equal shot at succeeding in life, why do they work so hard to ensure their own children go to the best schools and to ensure that the wealthy can transfer assets without penalty to the next generation?
That’s wonderful that your father in law received help from a fund to pay off medical bills. The experience of most, however, is that they do not have access to such funds and instead too often find themselves in bankruptcy and even homelessness after facing devastating medical bills.
You are correct that the scriptures condemn the excesses of the wealthy. That’s my point–the slums quote is not consistent with our scriptures. Where do the scriptures condemn the poor? They generally condemn the wealthy.
Hugh Nibley pointed out that the scripture condemning the idler for eating the bread of the laborer is actually condemning the *wealthy* idler who is eating the bread produced by laborers.
I used to buy into conservative ideology. As I looked at issues more deeply I saw serious flaws in some of the views I had held and over time began to abandon them. Notice how many times the Book of Mormon uses the word inequality. It’s stunning.
Eli, There is an assumption that Democrats create more debt than republicans? https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296apart from Obama with the GFC I am not sure that is true. Trump so far $8.3 trillion.
You also infer that people should be able to pull themselves up by their bootstraps.
Basic wage in USA $7.25/hour
Basc wage AUS $21.50/hour
46 milliom americans live in poverty. The poverty line for a family of 4 is $24.250 or $466/week.
Do these people living in poverty have health insurance?
70% of the abortions in America are from those poor people who can’t afford birth control.
When republicans are in abortions reduce at a lower rate than when democrats are in in America, https://qz.com/857273/the-sharpest-drops-in-abortion-rates-in-america-have-been-under-democratic-presidents/
When republicans are in the cut funding to ngos providing womens health services. Here is one ngo in Nigeria https://www.mariestopes.org/where-we-work/nigeria/ they believe they have prevented 1.7 million unwanted pregnancies, and 710,000 unsafe abortions. Nigeria is 20% of people in sub saharan africa. So millions of abortions more and tens of thousands of womens lives lost., because of republican policies.
Universal health care (more likely under democrats) would help hundreds of millions of americans and reduce the cost to government by at least half of the one trillion.
You seem to believe that a conservative society, where those in need are helped by charity, rather than the state regulating, is better. Do you still believe this when more than half the covid deaths in America are african american?
I live in a country where we have a conservative government, that supports universal healthcare, a basic wage of $21.50 an hour.
Caring for the poor?
Just some reasons I think you are wrong.
A basic difference is that conservative in America seem to believe, every man for himself. The alternative is we are in this together, lets supprt each other to all thrive.
“Definitely a matter of perspective. If the Church donated most of its money only to have a worse disaster one, two, or even ten years from now with no financial resources to combat it, I have a hunch many of the same critics accusing it of hoarding would then be reveling in its uninspired lack of preparation.”
A different take on the old, “When do I buy a new graphics card for my computer?” problem. Should I buy a new graphics card now? No, because the next card comes out in just 4 months and it’s going to be so much better. I’ll wait because it would be a waste to buy the one that’s currently available. Four months go by and I still don’t buy that graphics card because you know what? Another card is coming out in just 4 months and it’s going to be so much better.
What’s the line going to be when some theoretical worse disaster happens one, two, or even ten years down the road? Better continue to hoard the money because there could be an even worse problem in the future. Does the graphics card ever get purchased for want of the latest card? Does the money ever get spent for fear of the rainier day?
Besides, the church doesn’t have to donate most of it’s money. The church could donate a billion dollars and I think that would still fall well short of the “most if its money” threshold.
I don’t recall Jesus telling the multitudes that he wasn’t able to feed them because he was saving up to feed an even bigger multitude sometime in the future. He fed hungry people with what was available, and there were leftovers. As others have pointed out, spending now doesn’t preclude saving for the future. It’s a weird conundrum because we’re supposed to have faith that God will provide for us in our times of need. So saying that we’re not going to spend liberally and generously now isn’t exactly trusting in God. It’s talking out both sides of your mouth to say, ‘yeah, I trust God and Jesus but I trust my ginormous bank account more.’ For heaven’s sake, let’s bless and break the loaves as quickly as we can!
Just got this email from the Church – Great news.
Dear Brothers and Sisters,
We gratefully acknowledge those who have joined with us in prayers and fasting for Heaven’s help to address the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. We know that God will hear and answer our prayers. We have been taught to be “anxiously engaged” in relieving suffering and caring for those in need (see Doctrine and Covenants 58:27).
To that end, we are joining with other organizations around the world to address specific needs related to the pandemic. For example, our Beehive Clothing facilities in Brazil, Mexico, the Philippines, Paraguay, and Utah are temporarily shifting their operations from the manufacture of religious clothing to the sewing of masks and gowns needed by local health care professionals and communities. In Utah, the Relief Society is leading our participation in a partnership between Latter-day Saint Charities, Intermountain Healthcare, and University of Utah Health. Church members, in their homes, will help sew 5 million clinical face masks, which will be donated to healthcare workers.
To date, we have approved over 110 COVID-19 relief projects in 57 countries. Most of these are done with trusted partners from humanitarian agencies, health ministries and hospitals, which allows us to use our resources—including food, hygiene products, personal protective equipment, medical equipment, cash and other commodities—in places where they can do the most good.
We invite our members to participate in these and other relief projects in their areas and communities as opportunities arise and as local government directives and personal circumstances allow. May we be blessed in our efforts to care for others and provide hope and help to our Heavenly Father’s children everywhere.
Sincerely yours,
The First Presidency
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
View this article to see all Church updates related to COVID-19. It will be updated as new changes are announced.
Dot,
Like I said, I believe the Church is what it says it is. I wasn’t trying to preclude the function of all organizations. I was trying to get across my view that government isn’t always the help so many want it to be and individuals are more capable than many give them credit for. I don’t want to minimize cooperation, whether that comes in the form of neighborhoods, religious groups, or small business. When I look at government, there few things I can think of that it does that the other three groups can’t do better. I give to the Church because I believe in the cooperation it organizes. Also, please allow me to re-emphasize my point that some sort of balance is required. Again, no one is going to care about changing if they’re immediate worry is where their next meal is coming from. Help can come in multiple forms at multiple steps. I just hope all the right notes are hit. I think the Church gets the tune right more often than not. The email today is further evidence of that.
Math Nerd,
I’m not sure I’ve disputed anything you’ve said, and actually agree with a most of it. I actually hinted earlier many have the deck stacked against them. I just wanted to point out that in America, many have the ability to overcome that should they choose. Re-emphasizing what I just said to Dot, there does need to be a balance of some sort in helping them along the way.
Most conservatives I know really aren’t all that rich, and don’t send their kids to expensive schools (many homeschool actually). I think we’re talking about a very small portion of the population that much of the media portrays as the poster child of conservatism (that along with three-tooth redneck hillbillies).
I’ll admit a small amount of gratitude for government keeping corporations at bay. It may be a pipe-dream, but I feel like that can be done on a grassroots level as well. At the same time, the one organization I’ve belonged to and have seen do more good firsthand than many others, other than the Church, happens to be the corporation I work for.
I’m well aware of Inequality as it;s discussed in the Book of Mormon. Nowhere do I remember reading it was the government’s job to end it, except at times of theocracy. Allowing people to legislate their own views and dictate how resources should be allocated from one group to another group is its own form of inequality. In order for inequality to disappear, we need to take the slums out of the hearts of the wealthy, exactly as you said. I simply don’t think government is capable of that.
Geoff-Aus,
I actually didn’t mention Republicans or Democrats. Technically I am the former, but mainly in name only. I’m not very pleased with the party right now. The difference between the two is much slimmer than I’d like. We could get into a ton of specifics with regards to regulations, but I think much of it would become a chicken/egg discussion.
I don’t believe conservatism is every man for himself. It’s just the belief that other forms of cooperation can and should be superior to government.
Fred VII
When it comes to new graphics cards, I think the prophet probably has some insider information. I don’t think that precludes the possibility of getting earlier versions from time to time as needed.
Returning to the OP, did you see the recent FP announcement describing the church’s COVID relief efforts? I think a follow-up
Post would be extremely interesting.
The vagueness of the announcement left me bereft. Why all the secrecy? Why not share the rationale and anticipated impact of the chosen strategy? How is $100b being leveraged? Who knows!?! They sent out the most nebulous announcement that could possibly have been crafted. Essentially, it was just enough to satisfy those members ready to pat themselves on the back, while sharing zero details. Perhaps we’re not supposed to worry our pretty little heads about it.
They reported 3 major initiatives:
1) converting garment factories to produce PPE.
Great! Are the workers safe? Where are the masks and other PPE going?
2) supporting 119 undefined “projects” In 57 countries through various unnamed entities (of which “governments”” was auspiciously missing).
-which “health ministries” and religions have we partnered with and why?
-how much was spent?
-which countries? Why?
3) The General RS is producing 5 million masks with home sewers (in Utah) to support the Utah-based healthcare system IMHC. Incidentally, IMHC (a ridiculously wealthy entity) recently pulled a totally lame move and cut frontline healthcare workers’ salaries during this crisis due to profit loss from the cancellation of high revenue services (surgeries, etc.).So, sure- let’s continue to help IMHC. I have dozens of active family members in the RS across the state of Utah and not one of them had heard about or been included in this project. I highly suspect it is much less grassroots-based (as the announcement claimed) and that the church’s converted clothing factories are actually the major source for spitting out the 5 million masks. (One mask takes a home sewer approximately 20 minutes to create. So if there are about 25k active RS women in Utah, each one needs to work 80 hours (no wrench time included) to meet that goal. For every woman who already has an essential job, is busy with schooling kids, who doesn’t have sewing skills/equipment, etc., someone needs to pick up another 40 hours. I highly doubt that’s happening. The numbers just don’t add up.) As a church member outside of Utah, I’m not pleased that the focus of our General RS and it’s resources are likely being focused in Utah. The smoke-screen makes the sting of it even worse.
Furthermore, people can’t make N95 masks at home. Basic sewing factories can’t make them. Hospitals aren’t using home-sewn masks, they are rationing professional PPE. Who needs home-sewn masks? The general public! These masks aren’t protective, but containment tools.
I understand that LDS Charities is associated with staff in the COB who work on philanthropic activities. Are there any non-Utahans who have any input? Any members who sit in advisory committees? Who makes all these calls and what are the guidelines? I guess as a non-Utahan, I won’t benefit from the church’s efforts, or Ever have any input.
While I would agree it would be nice for the church to be more transparent, and I would love to be able to learn more about what exactly the church is doing in those 119 “projects”, I do believe that no one (with the exception of some people on this site who love church news) would want the church to detail the budget and goal of each project in the general email sent out. That is just too much to read. The email had to be vague since it has to be short. It is a mass email sent out to everyone.
It would be nice to have a list of projects on the church’s website with more information, and a way to see what we can do to help.
Also a lot of the church’s effort will be centered in Utah because that is where church headquarters is and where the members are. As many have stated the church is quite marginal outside of the mountain west. Thus I expect most of the church’s work to be done where it is strongest and has its own to take care of. We all know the church loves to take care of its own.
Mortimer, I had the exact same thoughts, but you expressed them so much better than I would have. Hurray, of course, that the church is doing something, but it’s really just more of the same, isn’t it? More style than substance, well-publicized. And even if there is grassroots involvement in the mask-making, that is not the church—that is members donating even more of their time and money on top of what they have already given to the church (which then counts these hours and materials as a church donation, all without dipping into their $100 billion).
Eli says “Like I said, I believe the Church is what it says it is. I wasn’t trying to preclude the function of all organizations. I was trying to get across my view that government isn’t always the help so many want it to be and individuals are more capable than many give them credit for. ”
Dude. The Government is made up of people. Not robots or demons. People. Trying their best. Perhaps they could be more successful at their jobs if they had your support and not your derision. I have family members that are school teachers, principles, Utah Highway Patrol officers, and employed by the BLM/Forest Service. I can assure you they are normal people just doing their best and have no intention to put anthrax on your bagel or control the chemicals in your tap water.
And your notion that the poor can choose to overcome their obstacles shows a complete lack of understanding and compassion. Please try harder.
Chadwick,
Calm down please. Have you even read what I’ve written? More than once I’ve emphasized that some type of balance has to be maintained. I agree people need help. Ultimately, I’m advocating for a balance of handouts vs. hand-ups. I think the Church does well with that, regardless of how much it decides is monetary, educational, or where to involve PR. Government not so much. Because my brand of compassion is deemed inferior (or non existent) than yours is probably one of my greatest hang-ups with liberals. I feel it shows a real lack of understanding or even any effort to obtain that understanding.
There are good people in government. I’m glad you have relatives fulfilling these services. My Dad was a social worker. If more neighbors were willing to stand up to neighbors who abused their kids rather than simply ringing it in and forgetting about it, his job would have been a lot easier. The ones you listed usually aren’t the problems. I noticed you didn’t mention any congressmen or senators, though there are some good ones there as well. They worry me more. America has a lot of good people, and therefore one of the best governments.
Yes. It’s made of people. In general, these people don’t become accountable to anyone but the majority (though judges do step it from time to time). When the majority and government believe the same (or at least the former is convinced by the latter they do), and start to inflict their agenda on the minority, then problems can begin. American could be a lot worse (and it may very well be in the next few weeks). It could be a lot better too.
I was on a forum once with a woman who said she preferred receiving welfare from the government rather than charity because ultimately she didn’t have the same embarrassment with government that she did repeatedly returning to charities. In essence, she was implying it was a faceless entity that cared not how she received nor any real head of which could take notice of any potential embarrassment or reflect those emotions back. Okay, fine. But when that same entity starts to do truly terrible things in the name of good it makes it so much more difficult to make it accountable when no face is present, nor a head to pinpoint. That’s my concern. I think history has shown that concern valid more than once.
The pushback, Eli, is because you respond to everything w/ standard Republican tropes & talking points – IOW not a real conversation.
And the responses to Eli are likewise standard Democrat party talking points. All you progressives believe come across as know-it-alls.
Guilty as charged, blame it on grad school. BTW Dems are considerably more educated than GOP.
Eli. Please don’t ask me to calm down when the world is on lockdown and a deadly virus is spreading through our community. Especially when I did not talk in an un-calm manner. I did not use all caps, or expletives, or exclamation points. This is an example of why I believe you are lacking compassion in at least this one area.
As to your other points, I guess agree to disagree. I just don’t automatically assume the worst of people, institutions, and programs that weren’t created by the church. Your life experiences may vary.
Getting back to the main topic of the OP, I think we can all agree that the Church can and should do more to help the global poor. It is one of the 4 missions of the Church. Now would be a good time for the Church to step up its actions and donations (and I’m not talking fasting and prayer). This would set a wonderful example for both members and nonmembers alike.
The actions described in the press release noted above is a start, but only a start. Besides being devoid of hard facts, it appears to be a minimal effort considering the Church’s overall wealth.
I live 2 months each year in Uganda, one of the poorest countries in Africa. Some of the places I work are among the poorest in the country. I think we can all agree that the children in this environment have little chance of escaping their conditions. Their families are subsistence farmers who grow coffee beans to provide a little cash for their monetary needs. Education is only available under the crudest of conditions, makeshift buildings (constructed by the parents) and poorly paid teachers. Many don’t have desks for the students and their only visual aid is a crude blackboard. I mention this only to point out there is a need.
The Church can’t solve all the issues related to poverty, but it can certainly do more, a lot more. If the Church refuses to open its purse strings, then concerned members should consider placing some of their tithing money directly with reputable humanitarian organizations. That way they can avoid the Church’s overhead and bureaucracy, and choose which group they wish to support. What happens at TR interview time is up to them and their bishop.
We need to be a lot more concerned about the living, and perhaps a little less about the dead.
Chadwick,
I’m sorry I misinterpreted you, but when I feel my effort to understand others isn’t matched at least somewhat in return,regardless of whether they agree with me, some of that compassion does indeed go out the door. I’ll try harder. And if I’ve missed the effort to match that understanding, I’ll try harder to see that as well. Thanks for pointing it out.
Is it really assuming the worst in people when trying to emphasize how much (though certainly not all) can be done when people are shown what they can do themselves? Seems the opposite to me. Again, your brand of compassion is different. I can certainly see why you feel it’s superior. We can agree to disagree.
The Gospel of Jesus Christ and the scriptures taught me to see the best in people and help where I can. My caution with government comes from five to ten minutes of cracking open most any history book I come into contact with (not to mention Helaman and half of 3 Nephi).
p,
If you can’t see these points as any more than Republican talking points then we are indeed wasting each other’s time. And education is a great thing. I just hope less will seek to get it exclusively from the arm of flesh and branch out a bit.
It appears rogerdhansen has done what I could not and has gotten the thread back somewhat. I’ve thoroughly derailed it. BB does a great job of getting the wheels in my head turning even if they don’t always go the right direction and especially if I don’t always agree. I’ll try to be more mindful of that from now on and maybe step back a bit.
P
More educated does not mean more intelligent.
Intelligent people understand the value of education. There’s a reason the Church devotes such large sums to (the) BYU(s) ‘85.