The church is really trying to assert itself by building a temple in Rome.They seem to really want attention attracted to the temple there.Could the Mormon temple have been built in Italy away from Rome as to not be seen competing with the the dominant Vatican?

Is any person here familiar with the current situation with regards to church activity rates among members in Italy?Is there really enough active mormons there to warrant such an expensive temple?

I know from a source who used to work in the department that did cost analysis for new temples that they decide where to put temples by how much projected revenue it will bring in. They also know that every new temple is another pitch to the American TBM that the church is growing by leaps and bounds so they'd better not jump ship. It has to be God's work. In most areas of the U.S. a small temple took about a year to pay for itself. Then it just sat there bringing in revenue and they had a tax-free asset they could leverage. They don't pay for upkeep or cleaning or groundskeeping.

They call people to do those jobs as well as "working" in the temple. They'd rather call a bunch of people to work one day a week than one person to do it full time. Because all those things require a temple recommend, i.e., require you to be a full tithe payer. They are encouraged to call people to those positions who haven't been keeping up their recommends. If you have to drive 3 hours to the temple, it's easier to brush it off. But if it's in the back parking lot of the stake center and in your face, wards will have temple nights all the time so that it's obvious who isn't there and who might not have a recommend, and who they need to put pressure on.

So it will take more time for the Rome temple to pay for itself, but I'm sure they figure in how many rich Americans will travel there just to brag about attending the Rome temple. Mos will actually be more impressed by that than by someone who visited the beautiful St. Peters. They'll call every semi-active person in the area to work in the temple. They'll use it all the freakin time in their propaganda. And for the rest of the world's TBMs it's an icon of the fabulous growth (as long as they can hide how many Italian missions have been closed).

Other than tithing, how does building a temple in Rome bring revenue?

There are now those Mormon guided tours of Rome that emphasize being able to go to the new, miraculous Rome temple.*

*NOTE: Remember that the Romans now call the new temple "the toaster." It's a blight on the local landscape.

How can it be a blight. Its really quite beautiful. I get the toaster remark, which is kind of funny. But to call it a blight is a bit hyperbolic, don't you think?

I'm re-thinking that a sec. Hmm. No,... It's still a blight no matter how I look at it, having been very familiar with that spot before there was a temple. But it is far better than the Swiss or Frankfurt temples, I'll give you that. And can there be anything more ugly than the Freiberg temple?

Guy3 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How can it be a blight. Its really quite
> beautiful. I get the toaster remark, which is
> kind of funny. But to call it a blight is a bit
> hyperbolic, don't you think?

I just checked it out. Beautiful marble work on the inside and the chandeliers were made in Venice and the furniture is Italian as well. Some really great craftsmanship went into the Rome temple and I'm sure most the artisans were not church members. So I raise my hat to the wonderful artisans who did a great job but thumb my nose at the cult for playing silly games with people's minds.

Rubicon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Guy3 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > How can it be a blight. Its really quite
> > beautiful. I get the toaster remark, which is
> > kind of funny. But to call it a blight is a
> bit
> > hyperbolic, don't you think?
>
> I just checked it out. Beautiful marble work on
> the inside and the chandeliers were made in Venice
> and the furniture is Italian as well. Some really
> great craftsmanship went into the Rome temple and
> I'm sure most the artisans were not church
> members. So I raise my hat to the wonderful
> artisans who did a great job but thumb my nose at
> the cult for playing silly games with people's
> minds.

Yes, the artisanship is truly beautiful.
I was struck by how small the celestial room was.
Also, the area that it's in? Is it prone to earthquakes? I know some areas of Italy are. Couldn't help but wonder about some of those chandeliers and the staircase (I am no expert on earthquake proof architecture)

I am sure the temple was built in Rome on purpose, independently from the size of membership in the area or in Italy. The church wanted to make a statement with it, being able to build exactly in Rome, so close to the Vatican. It took the church years, a lot of PR work and a lot of money to find the right place and secure the necessary building permits.

Now Italian members will travel to the Rome temple rather than to the Swiss temple, which I imagine will see attendance decline.

The last time I went to the Swiss temple, in 1994, there were members from Italy, Spain, France, southern Germany. Now these countries all have their own temple. So the question is also "are there enough members in Switzerland to still maintain that temple?"

"The church wanted to make a statement with it, being able to build exactly in Rome, so close to the Vatican."

So did Saudi Arabia when it bankrolled a lavish mosque there.

that I think most local people would not consider it as being "close to the Vatican". It's close to the Vatican in the same sense that the Marriott Rome airport hotel is "close to the Vatican."

It really is far away from the city center and is located in a suburban area with standard suburban outlets, office blocks and stores. People seeing it as they pass by on the beltway and who don't know much about Mormonism could easily mistake it for a fancy carpet outlet (Moroni being the carpet outlet's trademark mascot (like Ronald Macdonald).

It's far from the historical area and less relevant to the Vatican than the LSD Washington DC temple (which is actually in Maryland) is to the Capitol building or Washington Monument in downtown DC.

haha ha ha . . . . good stuff

Right. It's as far away from the Vatican as you can be and still be inside the beltway, the part that is considered "Rome." It's actually part of the Settebagni municipality. It's like people saying "the Bern temple," or "the Frankfurt temple." Many Mormon temples are miles from where they say they are. But the Rome temple is at least in Rome. Sort of.

in 2016, the LDS Church reported 25,956 members and 103 congregations.

I'd guess that means maybe 5,000 active members with an average unit attendance of around 50. I think I'm being slightly generous, but it's a ball park figure.

Some of those church "units" are tiny, and a congregation is not an actual congregation. The word can be a real stretch. But the church has lately re-defined, at least for Italy, what constitutes a stake. You used to have to have so many active members, so many tithe payers, so many high priests, etc. But that's greatly relaxed now, at least in some places.

Going on the rates from the leaked 2017 Europe Area Presidency report, there are likely less than 2,500 temple recommend holding adult members in Italy.

pettigrew Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Going on the rates from the leaked 2017 Europe
> Area Presidency report, there are likely less than
> 2,500 temple recommend holding adult members in
> Italy.

I'd suggest less than 2,500 TR holders

My ball park figure of 5,000 active people includes children and somewhat less devoted adults too.

If they had 1,000 adult TR holders I'd be surprised.

The Church report on European membership showed figures of 20% activity and of the claimed membership number a rate of 10% adult tithe payers.

What is your ball park estimate based on?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/17/2019 02:38AM by pettigrew.

pettigrew Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Church report on European membership showed
> figures of 20% activity and of the claimed
> membership number a rate of 10% adult tithe
> payers.
>
> What is your ball park estimate based on?

Just based upon what you wrote:

20% activity.
10% ADULT tithe payers.

so from 26,000 claimed members.
20% activity would be about 5,000 - which includes children.

so maybe 2,000 adults active?

There is just no way all 2,000 active adults pay a full tithing and have TRs. My experience from the UK says not even close to all adults have a TR.

Edit: I can believe that 10% of ACTIVE adults pay a full tithing. So from 2,000 active adults we are down to about 200 full tithe payers. Of course a few people lie and claim to be full tithe payers to get a TR.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/17/2019 08:47AM by Darren Steers.

Fact 1 - The Church in the UK claims circa 190,000 total members.
Fact 2 - The Church in the UK receives circa £31-32 million a year in tithing donations.

If 10% of the 190,000 (using the leaked report numbers) were adult tithe payers - that would work out at an average annual tithe per person of circa £1,700 a year.

I'd say that's in the ballpark of where it actually might be.

But activity in the UK might be more or less than in Italy.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/18/2019 02:51AM by pettigrew.

pettigrew Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> But activity in the UK might be more or less than
> in Italy.

Activity rates in England are about 20%

Activity rates in Scotland are about 10%, reportedly the lowest in Western Europe.

Edit: and again, I think the 10% full tithe payers is 10% of the active membership. Not the full number claimed by SLC. That number would jive with my experience as a financial clerk in the UK.

Edit 2: The UK church runs at a net loss, even if it does generate $31 Million in tithing. The Utah church has to financially support it, like SLC has to do for every European country. But I agree, it is good to have a number to help with comparisons between European countries.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 01/18/2019 11:07AM by Darren Steers.

The 10% of membership fact comes from the leaked European Area Presidency report which listed membership in Europe at 500,000 and adult recommend holders (tithe payers) as 48,000 (from memory but it was about that).

That report also listed Sacrament attendance as around 100,000 (20% activity rate).

Edited to add link to leaked report:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/rkrzewzliwbsrvl/2014%20Europe%20Area%20Plan%20Executive%20Version%20-%20English.pdf

Yes, the Church in the Uk runs with an operational loss each year of between £5 and £10 million which is offset by SLC chucking in cash to cover the loss. But the UK Church is sat on £275,000,000 of tangible assets, so the odd £10 million here and here is chicken feed.
http://apps.charitycommission.gov.uk/Accounts/Ends51/0000242451_AC_20171231_E_C.pdf



Edited 9 time(s). Last edit at 01/23/2019 09:03AM by pettigrew.

CNN's article this morning quotes the church's claimed figures: 16 million worldwide (ha!), 6.5 million in the US (double ha!), 4 million in South America, 500,000 in Europe, 6,000 in Italy. So realistically, cut those in half and then some to get the number of active members.

Activity rates in Europe run at 20%. Globally it's less than 40%.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/23/2019 09:05AM by pettigrew.

Maybe the temples are the Achilles heel, well besides the obvious fraud, BOM, BOA, etc. What happens if during Conference they say...no new temples scheduled. That alone would cause murmurings and gnashing of teeth...lol

operation than anything else, aimed at funneling tithing proceeds into the pockets of well-connected families and businesses, while building up the church's land holdings. The temple buildings themselves (of the past 3 decades or so) appear to be very cheaply built compared to the older temples and the building costs are likely highly inflated.

There is no obvious demand from the members for the number of temples that are being built and that have been built in the past few decades. There are already way too many of these little handshake club houses.

I suspect you are correct.

It is a vanity temple, pure and simple, and will rely heavily on LDS tourists, just like the rebuilt Nauvoo Illinois temple, which is not only out in the middle of nowhere, but has a membership base that is so marginal that a temple of its size would not be practical under any other set of normal circumstances.

for thoroughly brainwashed Mormons. The Mormon temple experience is to true spirituality what the Disneyland "It's a Small World" ride is to actually traveling around the world.

Mormons get their annual pass to the "Temple ride" at a price of 10% of their annual income. They then get unlimited access to the ride, where they can dress up in costumes, make weird chants and generally pretend that they are in God's special clubhouse. The value added by the LSD Church (using tithing money) is to design and build the "God's special clubhouse" rides and put them in various locations. But what is provided definitely does not justify the cost of the yearly pass, since the experience relies heavily on the customers imagining that God would really have a special clubhouse where the main event is people dressing up in ridiculous costumes and exchanging goofy handshakes. The clubhouses are themselves trending toward smaller and smaller and more cheaply built structures. The costumes are paid for separately by the customers and the handshakes are a gimmick that costs the LSD Church nothing to produce.

In a way, the Mormon temple experience is exactly like the crappiest examples of post-modern art (turds on a canvas and stuff like that). The art is not in the objects on display. It's in the interpretation that manipulates people into thinking that crap is something special.

except in this case LDS, Inc has already pirated the loot!! Arrr

If I went to Rome with some TBM family, they would pick the temple over St.Peter's, the Colosseum, the Forum, the museums fountains and the Pantheon put together. In fact they would be happy just to see the temple. Me, I wouldn't go out of my way to see it at all.

bona dea unregistered Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Me, I wouldn't go out of my way to
> see it at all.

They built it for Mormons to come. Really, it is a building built in a place where to go see it instead of other buildings seems like eschewing going and seeing a glorious natural wonder to go to a Walmart.

Anyone visiting Italy is most likely to start off or end up in Rome which gets most of the foreign tourists.

A plus/minus is that the temple is on the outskirts of the city off the A90 freeway, mainly accessible if you have a car. Backpackers who stay in the old central city may have a tough time getting out there and probably won't make the effort.

I would think the church should be more interested in making a "statement" in Independence, but they made a point of putting the Kansas City temple well away from Independence.

Every time I took a train to the city from the airport and then on to my next destination. Based on descriptions of where this LDS, Inc buidling is located I don't think the trains I took (common for tourists, to Florence, for example) goes by it.

They had to put the Kansas City temple well away from the church sites. If they had built one in Independence, it would have been an implied acknowledgement that there was no way they'll build one on the Temple Lot. That would be very damaging to the brand and their bottom line.

Yes their temple here is in a bit of the sticks. Not in a primo neighborhood though it is an area being developed and LDS Corp will benefit greatly - they are the developers.

I've looked at the numbers in Italy and never felt like they were high enough to justify a temple. My feeling is that this is more of a vanity project for the church. The Q15 wanted a temple in one of the major European capital cities. They also wanted a temple in the city that is pretty much owned by the Catholic church -- poking the bear, as it were. I'm guessing that the temple will mainly serve as a tourist destination for Mormons traveling in Europe. They will be able to tour St. Peter's and the Sistine Chapel, and then their own large temple complex. Personally I think the Rome temple will suffer by comparison, but TBMs won't feel that way.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/18/2019 10:43AM by summer.

Was curious, so looked it up on Google Maps. Literally the Italian Revenue Agency - Rome Office is right next to the LDS, Inc Temple!!

According to Google, its an hour by public transportation, with at least one transfer, from the city center.

I think the European temples are just fun destinations for the GA's, their families and other rich LDS members. They can righteously return and report on how strong the spirit was on their vacation.

It gives the impression that the work is continuing...stone cut out without hands and all that.

Personally, I would rather visit Chef Boyardee's kitchen than spend a single minute at the Rome temple.

"Personally, I would rather visit Chef Boyardee's kitchen than spend a single minute at the Rome temple."

And that would be in Cleveland, Ohio.

Still, you have a valid point. :-)

is about as Italian as the Rome temple.

Of course there will be. But it will be tourists to Italy that make up the numbers, I'd guess?