Comments about ‘Criticism follows Businessweek cover on Mormon Church finances’

Return to article »

Looking closely at LDS Church businesses, finances

Published: Thursday, July 12 2012 6:00 p.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Manti, UT

Hmmm. Maybe the government ought to try running it's business branches like business.

m.g. scott

What is it with these people. You'd think that the people who work for "Business Week" would be as anxious for Romney to be elected President as the people who work at the Newsweeks and Time magazines want Obama to be re-elected. I mean, can any clear thinking person who writes about American business issues really think that the re-election of Obama is going to be good for American business??? And let's face it, this seems to be an article attempting to smear Romney by using his church. Otherwise it likely would not have been written or published. P.S. If Obama gets re-elected, Business Week will need to change their name to Socialist Week.

Ogden, UT

To all those who say to us members, "Get a thicker skin", what if this was against your church? Or your race? What would you do. To me it is bigotry no matter what religion, race, ability. There is good and bad in every person. Learn to love people for who they are, not for their religion, race, beliefs, etc.

Park City, UT


" Learn to love people for who they are, not for their religion, race, beliefs, etc." Said the pot to the kettle.

Try being a non-mormon in Utah. Until then you will never understand. It seems those with the biggest persecution complex are in turn the biggest persecutors.

BYU Track Star
Los Angeles, CA

I am sorely wanting to purchase the Bizness week Magazine to read the article on the flight up to Salt Lake today. I remember the Arizona Republic did a Forensic Financial Article on the the Church some 15 years ago. Gee, the last time I checked. Temple Square was still there. People, lighten up! Prehaps the Church needs to do a better job of telling it's Financial story. We are, after all in the big league now.

Salt Lake City, UT

“What if this was against your church?” If any organization ever questioned my church’s finances, I could produce in a day, weekly reporting of contributions as compared to our monthly and yearly budgets. Monthly progress reports, bi-annual full disclosure church business meeting where members and non-members are welcome to listen. (only members can vote on the secret ballet). Want to know minutia, we were $7.00 over on our postage budget, and several thousand over on out building and maintenance budget. I as a participating member and giver can’t even imagine anything less. Most Christians can’t…anything less than full disclosure, well, is evil! To quote a favorite old conservative, in both theology and finances “trust but verify”

Sandy, UT

I'm wondering how many people who are criticizing the magazine for its tasteless cover actually took a look at the article. It wasn't perfect; my main criticism is that it narrowly defined the charitable mission of the church. But it did attempt to be fair and informative.

In my view, the best way to handle criticism of the church's finances is to be as transparent with them as most Christian denominations in this country are (the Catholics being a notable exception). Instead of criticizing the speculation and answering it with generalities, why not simply provide the information? Our secrecy only gives the impression, rightly or wrongly, that we have something to hide.

Look, I'm happy to pay tithing and support the church in other ways. But if we're really doing the Lord's work, and I believe we are, why not let the light shine on what we do?

Common Sense Czar
Sandy, UT

@ terlds

"To all those who say to us members, "Get a thicker skin", what if this was against your church? Or your race? What would you do. To me it is bigotry no matter what religion, race, ability. There is good and bad in every person. Learn to love people for who they are, not for their religion, race, beliefs, etc."

I'm one of the "us members" you refer to. And I'll tell you again...you better get thicker skin because this is a mid-July attack...come the end of October this will look like a pro-LDS...pro-Mitt article. Sorry to have to be the voice of reality.

Lehi, UT

The haters (anti-Mormons, DN activists etc)don't tell people that we Mormons were driven from our homes with cannons, and came to Utah, built the worlds first mall, started a paper, etc, all in the name of survival. We have done well, and that annoys some people. The mall needed a makeover, and it wasn't done with donations, it was done with money made from our businesses.

The LDS Church is focused on doing good in the world, and we are among the most charitable of people. So those who want to stir misunderstandings tend to try to manipulate numbers to make it look like we are all getting rich, but really, we seek to lead the world to Christ.

And that annoys some people....... : )

Utes Fan
Salt Lake City, UT

"Did you actually _read_ the entire article? I did. It is well-researched and respectful.

The magazine cover got your attention, sure, but the article itself is thorough and professionally written."

The article used carefully selected "sound bites" so to speak. Speculation was treated as fact, and they didn't give hardly any credit to the Church's charity efforts as a whole.

They made it look like the Church is only a corporation interested in massive profits. They didn't focus much on the people whose lives are changed and helped through charitable efforts of the Church.

If the agenda is to reinforce the idea that the Church isn't interested in truly helping people, but is like a "fat cat" interested in massive profits, then you might say the article was well-written.

On the other hand, active Latter-Day Saints spend a lot of time, money and effort truly helping people who are less fortunate. Because of the disconnect between the article's agenda, and this reality, I but would label it a propoganda piece.

Utes Fan
Salt Lake City, UT

Latter-Day Saints are not as much concerned about the hurt that criticism does to us personally. We are concerned that the since Church does good, that perhaps agendas will be formed against the Church to hurt those charitable efforts and people's lives, particularly those who are less fortunate. For example, the anti-Mormon agenda that the Church is a profit-hungry corporation could lead to taxing the Church which would hurt the Church's ability to help the less-fortunate.

Asking us to have "thicker skin" just avoids the real issues.

Eden, UT

Please quit the whining. You want the Church to be on the front page, but only under your conditions. Simply ask, "Was the information in the Business Week article truthful?" If there are false statement, go after the falsehood, but if it is just the fact that a bright light is shinning on the Church's finances, - grow up! The Church is getting exactly what is created by the limelight of American politics. As President Truman stated, "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen."

Bakersfield, CA

I don't read Business Week but from the online reaction it looks like the author and the editor hit a home run. Readership and profits are up. It is of only minor concern that the story misrepresents and insults. That is a small price to pay. Mormons are one of the last groups that it is still alright to slander. I can't wait to see the followup piece. Journalism is a lot more fun now that complete facts and objectivity are out of the way.

Mark from Montana
Aurora, CO

@ Don O

Business Week would never do an article like this on Islam because it would result in the author, Editor and staff going into hiding for the rest of their lives. A holy Jihad would be called for by the clerics and some misguided person would follow through on it.

The simplest approach is to not buy the magazine, plus call for a boycott of all advertisers in the issue. Create a backlash for the magazine and the next time, the Editors will consider their ethics for financial reasons if nothing else.

Wasatch Front, UT

To E:

re: "I'm wondering how many people who are criticizing the magazine for its tasteless cover actually took a look at the article. It wasn't perfect; my main criticism is that it narrowly defined the charitable mission of the church. But it did attempt to be fair and informative."

There was no attempt to be fair or informative. This was a hit job and character assasination of the church and it's leaders. The author selected quotes to paint a picture that is neither accurate or fair minded. The quotes used and the points made were an attempt to paint the church and its leadership as materialistic money-mongers, and failed to provide any balance with the MOST IMPORTANT points on how the church resources are employed: to build chapels and temples, to support its vast missionary and family history effort, to promote and support education, and to support the family as the center of society.

I am ashamed to have ever subscribed to Business Weak. That was not journalism. It was a hit piece with a specific political agenda.

American Fork, UT

I think the cover of the magazine does illustrate an interesting irony. After reading the article, I'm sure there are numerous inaccuracies. I encourage the LDS church to release comprehensive information about their finances to correct the misinformation in these articles. It is silly to tell a journalist that you got it wrong without telling them what the accurate numbers actually are.

Provo, UT


How do you know that tithing funds and other donations given by LDS church members weren't used to build the mall in SLC?

That is the point about the need for the LDS church to be audited if it isn't transparent. Its members are owed an accounting of their hard earned money

Montana Mormon
Miles City, MT

I appreciate the supportive response of other religious leaders. It brings to mind these words spoken by then-presidential candidate John F. Kennedy: "I believe in an America . . . where religious liberty is so indivisible that an act against one church is treated as an act against all."

Utes Fan
Salt Lake City, UT

The constant call for the LDS Church to release financial information usually comes from critics and from those who do not pay tithing. Personally, I don't believe that most of these people criticizing the Church for not fully releasing this information will be satisfied. The transparency would lead to uber-scrutiny by critics which could take up unnecessary time from Church members or leaders to respond, and the critics would never be satisfied and would only find more to criticize. It would be a win-lose situtation - win for the critics and lose for the Church. Of course, that is what the critics want. Don't think for a minute the Church leaders don't know this already.


Many people complain Businessweek got things wrong. On the other hand the church doesnt talk much about anything on its finances even when asked, which is their right. So that leaves a reporter on their own to try and get the best information they can thus they might get some things wrong or appear to quote critics to much but that is because they are the only ones talking. Sora a bit of a quandary for the magazine.

I think the question is a matter of focus and mission statement not how much money the church has or how they got it. An addition to my other post. Two billion for a mall at 5% interest a year equals $100,000,000 a year. I do think you can build a purdy nice homeless shelter for a million dollars. That means you could build 100 homeless shelters a year in a 100 different cities year in and year out forever. Or build 50 and use the rest to fund them. Again the question is focus of efforts in a world full of humatarian needs. Just saying.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments