NOM

The Church has been building elaborate complexes worldwide with significant investments including some ego projects in Thailand, Rome, France and huge Temples in South America. This represents hundreds of millions of dollars invested in underused cost centres. Then again, with tithing requirements, they are probably significant revenue streams, it's difficult to substantiate.

At the same time Scientology are building similarly landmark ego projects all over the world spending hundreds of millions of dollars with impressive facilities.

https://www.scientology.org.au/churches ... our#slide1

There are some glaring similarities. Both are facing dwindling numbers with a high dis-satisfaction amoung those who leave over finances, transparency, historical issues and heavy handed disciplinary actions. Both use their developments as PR in those respective countries and use them as marketing lures to try and garner a) favourable press and b) to attract large numbers to open houses to try and direct market to potential adherents.

Is the Church going through an identity crisis? What does it represent anymore besides carefully staged PR moments? Just food for thought.

One of the biggest draws of a temple is the burst of excitement around the initial announcement, then the nearly year long process of finishing construction, having a public open house, and ending with a local celebration involving the wards that will use the temple. The Gilbert, AZ temple went through this process near my home a few years ago. The excitement was quite evident in my ward and stake.

It did result in a burst of interest, particularly in youth baptisms. Many friends and ward members are ordinance and shift workers. The current temple president is a guy I have known professionally. I suspect that this has resulted in greater devotion and (probably) tithing compliance.

I don't know what the long term results might be, but I am wondering what the financial return on investment actually turns out to be. Does the expense of a temple result in sufficient greater "financial" devotion to the church. I am not trying to by cynical about this, but an organization that ignores the bottom line will stumble and decline, some times catastrophically. I'm also not claiming that God is not supporting the LDS church, or any other church for that matter. But surely the real effects of economically viability plus divine assistance should result in objective, real world results.

Meanwhile, the Mesa, AZ temple just closed for a major renovation. I understand that another cultural celebration will be held once the temple reopens in two or three years. Will the expense of the changes be matched by the increased subsequent devotion? What about for the announced temples in Russia, India, and even Layton, Utah? Does this same strategy work similarly for the Mormons, Scientologists, or even Jehovah's Witnesses or another up and coming Evangelical organization?

Corsair wrote: ↑Wed May 09, 2018 9:10 am One of the biggest draws of a temple is the burst of excitement around the initial announcement, then the nearly year long process of finishing construction, having a public open house, and ending with a local celebration involving the wards that will use the temple. The Gilbert, AZ temple went through this process near my home a few years ago. The excitement was quite evident in my ward and stake.

It did result in a burst of interest, particularly in youth baptisms. Many friends and ward members are ordinance and shift workers. The current temple president is a guy I have known professionally. I suspect that this has resulted in greater devotion and (probably) tithing compliance.

I don't know what the long term results might be, but I am wondering what the financial return on investment actually turns out to be. Does the expense of a temple result in sufficient greater "financial" devotion to the church. I am not trying to by cynical about this, but an organization that ignores the bottom line will stumble and decline, some times catastrophically. I'm also not claiming that God is not supporting the LDS church, or any other church for that matter. But surely the real effects of economically viability plus divine assistance should result in objective, real world results.

Meanwhile, the Mesa, AZ temple just closed for a major renovation. I understand that another cultural celebration will be held once the temple reopens in two or three years. Will the expense of the changes be matched by the increased subsequent devotion? What about for the announced temples in Russia, India, and even Layton, Utah? Does this same strategy work similarly for the Mormons, Scientologists, or even Jehovah's Witnesses or another up and coming Evangelical organization?

Independently, the concept of Temples seems counterintuitive as the are costly to build and maintain. However, coupled with the temple focused people mantra that the Church has been pushing for a couple of decades now, which we know is intrinsically attached to tithing, you can start to see how temple zones could produce increased revenue. 10,000 members who pay a full tithe, or even a partial tithe to maintain their social status with a current TR, would surely produce more than one that doesn't have one within a reasonable distance. On top of that, only a small percentage would attend regularly, thus reducing the need to have a facility that actually has the capacity to host all TR members. It's win, win, win. A nice ego boost and promo building in the local community, stability in the membership as they see increased temples as a sign of sustained growth and a nice little revenue increase.

The other question I have is whether or not the assets has a positive flow on effect on the bottom line of the Church. The Italian and Thailand Temples are obscenely grandiose and over the top. The Rome Temple has been delayed as it was almost completed, then they found serious defects that had to be stripped back and redone. On top of that, because of strict Italian labour laws, the Church couldn't fly in contractors. However, to ensure a quality build, they sent staff to shadow workers on a 1 to 1 ratio. The entire complex was reported in the Italian newspapers as costing around 100 million Euros and is the biggest capital investment project in the country right now. That was before the rebuild, I would hate to think of the costs blow out.

These over the top expensive projects easily in the billions worldwide is an interesting tact for a Church who traditionally used to invest large sums of resources into agricultural projects. The corporate arm of the Church has to have a grander plan, I am not sure what it could be though.