{"id":21472,"date":"2012-07-11T19:22:19","date_gmt":"2012-07-12T00:22:19","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/?p=21472"},"modified":"2012-07-13T18:42:58","modified_gmt":"2012-07-13T23:42:58","slug":"business-weeks-erroneous-claim-about-lds-charitable-giving","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/2012\/07\/business-weeks-erroneous-claim-about-lds-charitable-giving\/","title":{"rendered":"Business Week&#8217;s erroneous claim about LDS charitable giving"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.businessweek.com\/articles\/2012-07-10\/how-the-mormons-make-money#p1\">Caroline Winter&#8217;s new article<\/a> is a must-read. She examines many facets of the church&#8217;s estimated income, its property ownership, and its use of funds. I thought many portions of it were very, very good. <\/p>\n<p>Readers seem especially focused on a few key portions of the article. However, one of her key fact claims is based on a factual error. Here is why. <\/p>\n<p>Winter writes that: <\/p>\n<blockquote><p>According to an official church Welfare Services fact sheet, the church gave $1.3 billion in humanitarian aid in over 178 countries and territories during the 25 years between 1985 and 2010. A fact sheet from the previous year indicates that less than one-third of the sum was monetary assistance, while the rest was in the form of \u201cmaterial assistance.\u201d All in all, if one were to evenly distribute that $1.3 billion over a quarter-century, it would mean that the church gave $52 million annually. A recently published article co-written by Cragun estimates that the Mormon Church donates only about 0.7 percent of its annual income to charity; the United Methodist Church gives about 29 percent.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>If true, this is pretty damning information. The LDS church takes in billions of dollars (Winter estimates about $8 billion annually) and gives merely $50 million a year to charity. But is that claim accurate? <\/p>\n<p>Winter&#8217;s &#8220;recently published article co-written by Cragun&#8221; with this estimate appears to be <a href=\"http:\/\/www.secularhumanism.org\/fi\/vol_32\/4\/cragun_32_4.pdf\">this article<\/a>, which was published in Free Inquiry, the quarterly magazine of the Council for Secular Humanism. Cragun is a co-author, and the Free Inquiry article indeed makes the monetary claims in question. <\/p>\n<p>Where does Cragun get this information? He draws from a single source: <a href=\"http:\/\/www.providentliving.org\/welfare\/pdf\/WelfareFactSheet.pdf\">This fact sheet<\/a>, published by the church. It&#8217;s a single-page document, well worth a look. In fact, you should go take a look at it right now. In particular, watch the nomenclature. <\/p>\n<p>The damning language is found in these lines: <\/p>\n<blockquote><p>Humanitarian assistance rendered (1985\u20132009)<br \/>\nCash donations $327.6 million<br \/>\nValue of material assistance $884.6 million<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>That shows that the church gave about $1 billion in total humanitarian aid over 25 years.  <em>Or does it?<\/em> <\/p>\n<p>Look at that sheet again. It highlights numbers of food storehouses, food production for the needy, employment training, church-run thrift stores, and so on. The sheet states _also_ discusses global work worldwide on disaster relief (such as responses to tsunami or earthquake victims).  It uses different nomenclature for each type of donation.  That is <em>donations to worldwide emergency response are classified under the humanitarian label. But the extensive ongoing infrastructure to feed the needy is classified under the church welfare label.<\/em>  I contacted the church today and was able to verify that this is correct.<\/p>\n<p>In fact, these paragraphs from the sheet show this usage: <\/p>\n<blockquote><p>The purpose of Church welfare  assistance is to help<br \/>\npeople to help themselves. Recipients of these<br \/>\nresources are given the opportunity to  work, to the<br \/>\nextent of their ability, for the assistance they receive.<br \/>\nThe Church <em>also <\/em>sponsors humanitarian relief and<br \/>\ndevelopment projects around the  world that benefit<br \/>\nthose of other faiths. These projects include emergency<br \/>\nrelief assistance in times of disaster and programs that<br \/>\nstrengthen the self-reliance of individuals,  families,<br \/>\nand communities.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>  (emphasis added)<\/p>\n<p>Another fact sheet also illustrates. Take a look at <a href=\"http:\/\/ldscharities.org\/bc\/ldscharities\/content\/english\/articles\/why-we-help\/pdf\/2011%20Humanitarian%20Summary.pdf\">this second short fact sheet<\/a> on the church&#8217;s humanitarian efforts. This breaks out what those efforts are: Emergency response. Clean water efforts, wheelchairs, and neonatal care in developing countries. Immunization projects. That&#8217;s what the church spends $50 million a year. <\/p>\n<p>The church&#8217;s extensive network of food storehouses, employment assistance, Deseret Industries thrift stores, are not included in the tally &#8212; because they are <em>not seen as church humanitarian assistance, but rather as church welfare assistance<\/em>.  (And even the broader church welfare numbers do not seem to include the extensive educational subsidies the church provides to students at BYU and other church universities.) <\/p>\n<p>Given this crucial misunderstanding of the fact sheet, Cragun&#8217;s factual claim is incorrect and in fact very misleading on an important point, and so is Winter&#8217;s use of Cragun&#8217;s claim.<\/p>\n<p>This is not to say that there are no potentially valid critiques of church finances or of church charitable giving. I would love to see more transparency here. In addition, I think valid questions can be raised about how to weigh church welfare. In particular, one could certainly argue that church welfare is &#8220;not really charitable&#8221; if it distributed in ways that tend to limit it to certain subsets of people. There are also complicated questions about how to value the volunteer hours involved. And so a variety of nuanced claims and arguments could be made about the efficacy and ultimate societal benefit of church welfare programs. But Cragun&#8217;s claim does not engage at this level. Cragun simply accepts at face value (but misunderstands) the initial church statement about humanitarian aid. In doing so, he inadvertently makes a highly misleading factual claim.  Winter&#8217;s uncritical reliance on Cragun&#8217;s erroneous fact claim then perpetuates the error.  <\/p>\n<p>I don&#8217;t want to overstate this conclusion, because I think Winters&#8217; article is part of an important conversation, and that observers can certainly still make critiques of church financial practices.  Such critiques, however, should be based on accurate statements of fact. <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Caroline Winter&#8217;s new article is a must-read. She examines many facets of the church&#8217;s estimated income, its property ownership, and its use of funds. I thought many portions of it were very, very good. Readers seem especially focused on a few key portions of the article. However, one of her key fact claims is based on a factual error. Here is why. Winter writes that: According to an official church Welfare Services fact sheet, the church gave $1.3 billion in humanitarian aid in over 178 countries and territories during the 25 years between 1985 and 2010. A fact sheet from the previous year indicates that less than one-third of the sum was monetary assistance, while the rest was in the form of \u201cmaterial assistance.\u201d All in all, if one were to evenly distribute that $1.3 billion over a quarter-century, it would mean that the church gave $52 million annually. A recently published article co-written by Cragun estimates that the Mormon Church donates only about 0.7 percent of its annual income to charity; the United Methodist Church gives about 29 percent. If true, this is pretty damning information. The LDS church takes in billions of dollars (Winter estimates about $8 billion [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":5,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-21472","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-corn"],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21472","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/5"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=21472"}],"version-history":[{"count":12,"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21472\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":21507,"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/21472\/revisions\/21507"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=21472"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=21472"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/timesandseasons.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=21472"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}