I haven't been to a ward building outside of the US before but from comments I read here, it sounds like they aren't as nice as the ones in the US. Are American ward buildings nicer than the ones in, say, Latin America, Africa or Asia?

I don't know if they were just new buildings or what but I could have sworn that the wealthier neighborhoods in Utah had nicer chapels.

For those of you who have been abroad and/or been to different ward buildings in affluent AND poor neighborhoods, does the LDS church make crappier buildings and amenities for the poorer wards throughout the world?

Maybe I'm just being paranoid. But if that is the case, doesn't that go against one of the main reasons for the centralization of church funds? I thought the reason they stopped local fundraising, and had all funds get sent to SLC, was so that they could redistribute the money throughout all the world where it is really needed and the poorer wards didn't have to go through these fundraising activities or struggle coming up with money.

And the church claims that its the "the same" everywhere in the world. I guess that doesn't include their houses of worship?

Not only are there better meeting houses in the richer areas, the Mormon church has a very strict rule that members must attend the ward IN THEIR ASSIGNED AREA. This prevents the less fortunate from belonging to and attending the higher class wards.

There is definite class discrimination in Mormonism. During my mission in Texas where many meeting houses were shared between the "anglos" and "latinos" there was constant complaining by the "anglos" against the FORCED sharing. One prominent member remarked to me that "if THEY had THEIR way, THEY would be burning candles in the foyer"! Another added "we built and paid for it" and THEY get to use it!

Templar Wrote:
the Mormon church has a very strict
> rule that members must attend the ward IN THEIR
> ASSIGNED AREA. This prevents the less fortunate
> from belonging to and attending the higher class
> wards.
>

That policy backfires beautifully in third world countries like Brazil, where there's always slums located inside wealthy neighborhoods- usually the house servants for those same wealthy people live in those slums.

During my time as a missionary in Brazil, I saw the upper class people of one ward where I served choosing to attend some distant ward because they couldn't stand the idea of attending the same meeting as the poor people living just down the street from them. Nobody did a thing about it, which made me think that the Stake president approved the idea.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/02/2015 08:41PM by foolmoon.

As you said, the upper class either didn't need one or were given a waver to attend meetings wherever they desired. Yes, class distinction is alive and well in the CULT.

BTW My wife's Catholic family was shocked to learn the Mormons are actually assigned to designated meeting houses. Catholic's can attend mass wherever they wish. They thought it strange, but, of course, almost everything they learn about Mormonism is strange to them. They kid me about having been "a little preacher man" and claim I must have a couple of wives hidden away in Utah. Of course, it's all in fun and I laugh right along with them - usually the hardest!

Actually, Catholic parishes DO have official boundaries, but attendance at your "designated" parish is never enforced. I remember in high school (late 70s) that a classmate had to change parishes in San Diego because her parish was overcrowded and a neighboring parish, due to demographic changes, was underpopulated. Their entire neighborhood was switched to attend the second parish after a change in the parish boundary lines. The new parish was actually closer to them than the old one. They followed the rules, but voluntarily as their compliance was not enforced.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/03/2015 04:27AM by PtLoma.

My wife's family, who told me they could go to any parish, haven't been in years. Perhaps it was open years ago or it wasn't enforced as you suggest.

In any case, thanks for the correction.

Templar Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
]During my mission in Texas where many
> meeting houses were shared between the "anglos"
> and "latinos" there was constant complaining by
> the "anglos" against the FORCED sharing. One
> prominent member remarked to me that "if THEY had
> THEIR way, THEY would be burning candles in the
> foyer"! Another added "we built and paid for it"
> and THEY get to use it!

Yep. That's Texas all right. Our branches in the Rio Grande Valley were SEGREGATED in the 1960s. I went to the "Spanish" branch once, taken by the Branch President, so I could show off that I (a little anglo kid) had learned all of the Articles of Faith in Spanish.

The missionaries were segregated as well. I was in the English speaking mission and would naturally run into the Spanish speaking missionaries who worked the same area but were assigned to a different MP. We were forbidden to have any interaction with them other than just saying hi.

I thought it was kinda strange, but after all it was the Mormon Church.

Try though I might, I cannot remember the chapels in Mexico City when I was in Colonia Roma and Colonia Idustrial! I'm drawing a complete blank as to where we went Sundays!

When I was in Colonia Campestre Churubusco, we attended the Ermita Chapel. I remember it as being small, with the basketball court outside, with a the baptismal font being next to it, so we'd have to set up chairs for baptismals.

The chapel I liked the most was in Cuautla, Morelos. It had been dedicated by David O. McKay, in 1929. It was very much like what I thought of as the 'standard' chapel. Next door to it was a little two bedroom house, where two pairs of missionaries lived. It was just the four of us in the entire town. No cars, no bikes, so that poor little town got tracted out like four times a year, including the block long red light district, where you'd get invited in without even saying a word!

In Guadalajara the church rented a house and they'd jury-rigged a baptismal font. But it was way cooler to rent a car and go baptize in Lake Chapala.

The house rental was what was done in my other postings, Silao and Lagos de Moreno. And also Leon, Gto, which we visited often, like three days a week, because Lagos de Moreno was just too damn boring! There were just the two of us in Lagos, while Leon had two sets of elders and a set of LMs.

(I wonder how the change from calling them LMs, Lady Missionaries, to Sister Missionaries, took place? LM rolls right of the tongue. SM, not so much.)

Yeah, your right, back then (in my past life) we referred to them as "lady" missionaries, and always addressed them as Sister Brown or Sister Smith, etc. Some of the elders seem to resent having them around, but as a supervising elder I had several in my district. Frankly, they were a lot less trouble than many of the elders possibly because they were older and definitely more mature. Also, most were there because they wanted to be there rather than be forced to serve resulting in them having a better attitude. They were always very supportive and seldom complained.

As an aside, I actually "dated" a couple of them back at BYU, but fortunately for me, it never was anything other than mutual respect. At BYU, as a returned missionary, it was always "too many co-eds, too little time".

I dated one, whom I'd been sweet on, when I first met her in Guadalajara. We went to a movie after the 1967 Oct. priesthood session. We saw Hawaii, and there were nekkid boobies!! I was inflamed!! But she quickly cooled me by asking me to marry her.

True story...

Until 40 years ago, local congregations designed and built the buildings. There was a lot of variation, depending on the wealth and sensibilities of the congregation.

Now buildings are cookie cutter, when a congregation gets big enough to build a building (which is done in three phases, each adding amenities, determined by the average attendance at sacrament meetings). And they are also furnished the same (though the SP's wife and/or the RSP gets to select carpet colors and decorations/pictures from limited options).

And unless the entire stake is located in an upscale area, each of the ward boundaries will be set specifically to include a variety of economic and other demographics. It is a local committee from the high council that does this.

But it is true that new congregations can meet in rented buildings and even in purchased repurposed buildings for years before a church designed building is built.

...My big question, which may seem prejudiced, is are those wealthy people taking care of cleaning the toilets, dusting blinds, vacuuming carpets, washing windows? Or are they sending in live in maids, nannies, gardeners (whom they may be sponsoring for work visas)???

Most all church buildings look alike now. SOme might be a little bigger than others according to membership numbers. As far as amenities go, ward budgets are funded according to how many attend sacrament meeting. If attendance is high you eat better at ward parties.

I'm sure a lot of us have had relatives who were moved from one ward to another by means of gerrymandering. It happened to my parents once that I know of.

P.S. When they were moved into the other ward, they simply exchanged their companions for the new set of assigned peers. Can you say Stepford?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/02/2015 07:39PM by donbagley.

To succinctly answer the OP's question. Yes.

Technically everything is equal. Our building is from the 70s.We went through 2 summers with a malfunctioning HVAC unit. The stake refused to replace it and had it continually jury rigged with it still failing all the time. Also we froze in the winter and had to use portable heaters and still froze. The demographic is depressed rural.
They finally replaced it with the cheapest unit and contractor available.

I just cant believe this would happen in the Chevy Chase Md ward.

Two rules in the church: What should be should be but what is IS!

Chevy Chase is not rural, and it enjoys one of the highest median per capita incomes in the US.

You misunderstood me. I meant that it would not happen in a more affluent ward. The Chevy Chase ward being a good example of affluent.

100% absolutely.

This would probably have been sometime in the early 1980's.Almost all of the wealthy church members in Fresno, CA (wealth is relative; the wealthy Mormons in Fresno would have been considered the underprivileged Mormons in La Jolla)decided they shouldn't share a building with the peons. Someone in power allowed them to build their own chapel, which was smaller than the other chapels since it was just for their ward, but was probably a bit nicer, and they didn't have to share it with the filthy unwashed masses.

I don't think that sort of thing would fly now.

From what I've heard, the "wealthy" Fresno-area Mormons no longer live in Fresno. They've all moved east to Clovis.

I used to work reupholstering LDS church benches a long time ago. My brother still does it today. It doesn't matter so much about the wealthiness of the members as much as who "knows" whom in the area. I personally watched chapel lights get pulled and ones ordered thousands of dollars of more value because one of the 12 frequented that building in Salt Lake. IMHO, most decisions are made because of who, not what. It just so happens that wealthier wards tend to frequent the GAs, so there's your correlation.

Know

Just look up the stake center at Thousand Oaks, California. It was often jokingly called the Thousand Oaks temple it was so large. This for one of the richest areas in California.

Many years ago in Seattle, the wealthy Bean family members (a group of retail outlets) got their own attendance variance from the FP. the elder Bean lived in a downtown condo that was in First Ward, but I never saw them attending there, I lived there for about 5 years...

When the condo was featured in the Times real estate section, I asked the Bp about it, he told me.

30 years ago we attended a wealthy ward and they had their own interior design company decorate the entire building with a heavy emphasis on extravagance in the Relief Society room. Nothing was spared and the seat cushions in all the rooms were some of the finest, softest, seats with a cotton/silk blend I believe?(jk)

This company was noted for decorating only the biggest homes in the area and had 15-20 top notch designers, all of them made a fantastic living, especially from wealthy LDS families and new church buildings.

The basic theme: "Money, it does a body good."



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/03/2015 02:59PM by frackenmess.

Haunted Wasatch...I was just going to say the Thousand Oaks Temple...er um...ward/stake..

That thing is massive...all dark wood...cherry I believe...

I tried to move into that stake, but couldn't afford it...the housing costs prohibited it...

Anyone in Utard County, Utah can drive down Main Street Mapleton and see the copper-topped steeple just down the street from a ward house in not-as-nice or wealthy Springville with the white steeple. Yes the locals insisted upon the copper steeple, it wasn't a required deviation by the City, who'd let them build what ever they want if it came down the line.

A new stake center had been built on the 'bench' in Cache Valley. It was MUCH, MUCH nicer than any building in the lowlier wards.

The stake center I attended (and they still attend) had mauve carpet and orange sofas for quite a while. They replaced the carpet, but not the sofas.

When I was twelve we had a branch in Pottstown, PA. We met in a rickety rental hall that had no air-conditioning. The stuffy, sweltering heat was brutal, but there was no money coming in from the greater church to help out. Most of the local members were working class, and money was tight.

My father made me and my brothers work Saturdays to raise money for the branch. We cleaned high school football fields, which took all day. Also we did magazine recycling.

I thought it was all wrong, and I said so. My opinion incited scorn and contempt. There were plenty of Christian chapels in the area, so I knew it wasn't about Jesus.