I have no doubt that the church’s enemies as well as the professionally curious are busy finding out what they can. Wouldn’t it be better to be upfront from the beginning rather than have half-truths leaked out in some scandal?

All that said, I have no reason to think that significant money is being misused. The cost of the church’s education system has to be incredible, buildings aren’t cheap (and neither do they produce revenue), and missionaries cost money.

And one thing that has only been touched on here briefly is the cost of maintaining the church in places such as Latin America. I remember once attending a church in the Andes, and while it was simpler than what I’m used to, it was still one of the best buildings in town. Considering that a typical salary in that town was about $40 per week, I can’t imagine that the members had anywhere near the resources to build the building on their own. I’ve been told by someone who might know (although I can’t verify it) that only in the United States and Canada is the church self-supporting; everywhere else it is subsidized.

Basically, I’ve donated a lot of money in tithing and I care because it’s a lot of money. A few recent expenditures of the church really cause me to question the way the money is spent. The money spent on the malls in SLC, and the new conference center are my prime examples. I feel like some accountability is appropriate. I know some people feel the church is very careful with the money and that there isn’t any fraud happening, and I expect that this likely is the case, but without a reasonable open disclosure of the finances, we are all really just guessing. After a while I’ve started to wonder, what is being hidden.

And I would answer your question “Why do you (Joe Member) need to know?” with the question slightly reworded.

Why do you (Joe Member) need NOT to know?

Seriously, why not when given the choice between open disclosure and secrecy just go ahead and disclose.

Alright, now it’s your turn to answer the question that has been dodged from the start of this thread. Why does the church maintain an almost complete secrecy about it’s finances? What are they hiding?

Keep in mind also that the church keeps an extensive self auditing department and the chances some “fallible men” are misusung sacred tithing funds are very small. I also have an extremely hard time believing an Apostle, that is, a special witness of Christ wouldn’t use tithing money (i.e.–HIS money) with the most serious and stern thought.

Mark,
This is why I think, yes technically all money goes to the same organization, but those in charge of it make a point to go out of their way to differentiate so that they don’t misuse the most sacred funds they have. (or rather, the Lord has)

It’s more than a technicality, it’s more of a practicality. Money is money. Once its all put into a bank account it is imposible to tell the difference between the source of one dollar to another. Now of course for accounting purposes it is crucial to track the sources.

And it still is a case of “trust me”. I think that Ronald Reagan put it best, “trust but verify”. I would really like to know what the church has to hide. What is in the church finances that would damage my testimony, that it is necessary to not provide financial statements?

first, the IRS. If the Church used tithing funds, even “old” tithing funds, to buy commercial real estate, it would lose its tax-exempt status in a flash — and don’t think there aren’t people out there sharpening their knives, waiting for such a chance.

See, the problem is, that isn’t true. Non-profit organizations with tax free status can (and regularly do) use the money contributed to invest in things that will make money. To keep 501(c)(3) status an organization can not distribute profits to shareholders or members of the organization. They can be engaged in ventures that make money as long as the money made is invested back into the organization or spent towards the organization’s stated goals.

Keep in mind also that the church keeps an extensive self auditing department and the chances some “fallible men” are misusung sacred tithing funds are very small. I also have an extremely hard time believing an Apostle, that is, a special witness of Christ wouldn’t use tithing money (i.e.–HIS money) with the most serious and stern thought.

Mark,
This is why I think, yes technically all money goes to the same organization, but those in charge of it make a point to go out of their way to differentiate so that they don’t misuse the most sacred funds they have. (or rather, the Lord has)

And in reference to the malls being purchased from non-tithing dollars is rather silly. Money is an extremely fungible commodity. To say it comes exclusively from non-tithing funds is merely accounting tricks. And in the end every asset the church owns can be traced back to a donation of goods, funds, or labor from the members of the church.

Preston, I think you meant Randall, not me. That being said, I think Randall is right that transparency could be good for all the reasons he’s mentioned, I just don’t think that those advantages outweigh the bigger disadvantages that have been discussed here.

“And despite this we have members who want ‘transparency’ so they will have more data to make more arguments about how the church should be spending money that isn’t theirs” –

Whose money is the $2+ billion for a downtown retail shopping mall? And how do you know?

Members give money to the church so that the Lord’s work is done.

Do you think God wouldn’t want those who consecrate their funds to know that it is being put to its fullest use?

Men, working in the temporal realm, are fallible. The sums involved are staggering. No one is asking for a line by line vote on how funds are spent. A simple summary accounting will do.

Kirtland taught us that money has a way of playing with men’s souls. We need to learn that lesson. And respect those that have consecrated it.