When the Church Becomes the "Market"



Religion and my field of economics have been competitors since way back. We are competitors because each of us thinks we know best who should decide how money is used. Adam Smith published "The Wealth of Nations" in 1776. He was a professor but had been a preacher. His message upset those in religion. He said national wealth comes from individual people making decisions in their own best interests. Religion had always taught God was the source of all wealth and the church knew best what money should be used for. 

An interesting article appeared today by a nun who lives in a religious order. She explained how those who live in her order "buy" things. Actually, they do not buy things but request personal items from the chief nun who decides if it is really needed or not. It reminded me of Amish women who make videos of Amish life after the have left that community. Husbands hold all the family's money in conservative branches and hand over to the wife only what the husband, after prayer, thinks she really needs.

The Mormon church, now known as the Latter Day Saints, believes the men at the top of its hierarchy are the ones God has entrusted with its money. The amount of money is kept secret as well as its investments. Mormons have been lectured over its lifetime about the duty to tithe. As a result, it is rumored the denomination has amassed close to $100 billion. The message for decades has been Mormon leaders used the money to start churches. Now it is known it speculates on real estate and of other big time investments. Leaders feel, I'm sure, money is best managed by God appointed leaders appointed like themselves rather than left in the pockets of members.   

Variations of this are some, maybe most, megachurches. When a talented preacher starts a church he/she often is the owner. There might be a token Board of Directors but the church does not belong to those who become members.

We have all heard of good things done by religious groups. Government also does some good things with our tax money. But for most of the money in the U.S., I remain an Adam Smith fan.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ancient God, Bel (Baal), the Main Character in an Ancient Play

Image
In a British museum is a preserved stone tablet from Babylon. It dates to about 2,000 BCE. Someone labored patiently to inscribe an entire passion play featuring the god Bel. I reiterate this is a stone tablet, not a recopied papyrus. The play begins with the god Bel arrested by soldiers and taken off the stage. He reappears at a trial in the Hall of Judgement. Bel is innocent but is sentenced to death. In the next scene Bel is accosted by a mob. He is despised and rejected. The actor playing Bel is then taken by guard to a hilltop in a sacred grove. Two criminals are taken with him. One of these is released. The the audience then leaves the theater and follows the actor Bel and his guards to the top of a hill where the death scene is enacted by hanging from a tree. The audience returns to the theater for the dramatic final scenes. The dead Bel is stripped and prepared for burial. On a theatrical hill to the side of the stage is a tomb where the body is placed. A stone is rolle...
Read more

Will We Ever Know How Accurate Current Bibles Are

Image
When I discuss the many times the Bible was copied and recopied by scribes over a couple of thousand years, the reply is often, "I have a book by this (or that) expert who says the Bible is 99% accurate to its original writers." The 99% claim appears in various places defending the Bible. There is one thing we know absolutely: There is no surviving original copy of the Bible. Even the oldest surviving material is a generation or two after the time some of the Bible was written. This means no one can claim he has, or ever will, compare the current Bible to the original Bible and find the two are 99% the same. We cannot claim either that it is not 99% accurate. For the sake of discussion, however, assume the current Bible is 99% accurate. That would mean the one word out of every 100 was inaccurate. It could still mean an important misreading of the original text. An example is the passage referring to punishment for a man who kills a fetus. In the oldest know materia...
Read more

What Was the "Argument" in the Election

Image
I hate to add my blog to the piles of blogs and pundits analyzing and pondering the meaning of the just passed election. But that's what I feel like doing today. I've always like Senator Ted Cruz's summary of politics. He once said, "First, win the argument. Then, win the election." I think there is a way of applying that to anti abortion Catholics and Protestants. The link talks of Catholics who now feel they have no political home because Republicans let them down with Trump but they remain against abortion rights. Taking Cruz's win-the-argument thesis, I'd call the past election about an argument between two groups. One group's argument was, "Trump's a jerk." The other's argument was, "Abortion is wrong." The group, "Trump's a jerk," won the argument and then the election.  While one can argue the election, or any election, it about more complex issues, I believe in the end elections hinge on very simple ar...
Read more