Vetting Process And Contracts For New General Authorities?

[bluebell]

I don't put too much stock in the church's vetting of employees. They hired me, after all. 

 

They do generally assume people are good people, that's true.  

[ALarson]

I really don't have a problem if this is true (the vetting part).  But, I think many members believe these men are called by inspiration only.

 

I think both can be true, though.  The leaders receive inspiration to narrow down the name selection and then these names are vetted by that department in the church.  As much as the church is open to law suits, I think it's wise to do some background checks, and so on.

[jkwilliams]

They do generally assume people are good people, that's true.  

 

Working there is like working anywhere else. There are some really top-notch people there, and some who are not. It would surprise me, however, if one of the "vetters" leaked something like this, as it would be very easy for the church to identify the leaker and fire him or her. That's only one of the reasons I am extremely skeptical of this alleged "leak."

[pogi]

Thanks. I DID miss that.

 

So if you believe that part of the post do you also believe the rest about vetting the candidates?

 

I didn't say I believe any of it, I was just pointing it out to you because you seemed to have missed it.  It is an "alleged" leak that cannot be verified. 

 

Like you however, I don't doubt that they vet candidates.  We have always known that they do it to some degree or another.  Their life-long dedicated church service is a form of built-in vetting for example.  I think it is important to keep in mind that gathering information is an important part of searching for inspiration. 

 

We know the process among the brethren - they discuss things among themselves, they share information and look at things from every angle and perspective of each of the brethren.  Only after having gone through the process of examining information and praying do they come to a decision as a group.    

Edited September 25, 2015 by pogi

[Scott Lloyd]

I think the "vetting" (not sure if that is the best word for it) has been done throughout the individual's lifetime of service to the church.  Assuming, of course, that they choose someone who is already a general authority.

 

Offhand, I can recall three occasions when men were called to the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles who had not already been serving as General Authorities.

 

The most recent is Elder David A. Bednar. He had been president of BYU-Idaho, so I have to think the Brethren were already intimately acquainted with him.

 

The other two that come to mind are Elders Russell M. Nelson and Dallin H. Oaks.

 

Elder (now President) Nelson had served as Sunday School general president and, as a heart surgeon of some renown, had cared for President Spencer W. Kimball and perhaps others of the Brethren. Again, already an intimate acquaintanceship.

 

Elder Oaks had been president of BYU and, at the time of his call, was a Utah Supreme Court justice.

 

I should think that, as rockpond notes here, the Brethren, through the process of past Church service, have already taken their measure of the man before he is called.

Edited September 25, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Jeanne]

I think the "vetting" (not sure if that is the best word for it) has been done throughout the individual's lifetime of service to the church.  Assuming, of course, that they choose someone who is already a general authority.

 

If there are any types of contracts regarding employment & compensation, I think those would likely have to do with the positions that apostles may hold within business entities owned by the Church.

I will admit that I haven't had time to read all of this yet..but when "vetting" at least in church requirements and service, would this ever include anything in a repentance process?  Forgive me if this has been mentioned already.  I will check in later..a day off work is not a day off for me..

[Duncan]

Well, Elder Hamula did just speak at BYUI but those appointments are probably made a year in advance

[rockpond]

Offhand, I can recall three occasions when men were called to the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles who had not already been serving as General Authorities.

 

The most recent is Elder David A. Bednar. He had been president of BYU-Idaho, so I have to think the Brethren were already intimately acquainted with him.

 

The other two that come to mind are Elders Russell M. Nelson and Dallin H. Oaks.

 

Elder (now President) Nelson had served as Sunday School general president and, as a heart surgeon of some renown, had cared for President Spencer W. Kimball and perhaps others of the Brethren. Again, already an intimate acquaintanceship.

 

Elder Oaks had been president of BYU and, at the time of his call, was a Utah Supreme Court justice.

 

I should think that, as rockpond notes here, the Brethren, through the process of past Church service, have already taken their measure of the man before he is called.

 

Good point... I should have mentioned "GA or BYU president" since I knew that's where Elder Bednar & Oaks were called from.  But, that was interesting to read about President Nelson -- I was not aware of the history there.

[rockpond]

I will admit that I haven't had time to read all of this yet..but when "vetting" at least in church requirements and service, would this ever include anything in a repentance process?  Forgive me if this has been mentioned already.  I will check in later..a day off work is not a day off for me..

 

I don't imagine it would include any type of repentance process as that should have already been handled in most cases for a person who has been serving in church leadership positions.

 

Over the years, I've watched my dad be called as a stake president and then as a mission president.  In both cases, I wasn't aware of any particular "vetting" that was done.  In the case of calling a SP, the visiting GA gets recommendations from the outgoing stake leaders and then interviews people.  In the case of calling him as MP, he had already had interaction with GAs/AAs through his service as SP.

 

And none of these statements are meant to diminish the seeking of inspiration through fasting and prayer that I know goes on.

 

I guess I just don't imagine the process to be all that different from what happens at other levels of the church:  leaders get to know fellow members through church service and through interviews, they pray for guidance, and then follow the Spirit.  No vetting required (though I'm open to correction if there some evidence to the contrary -- it wouldn't upset me if vetting was being done).

[DJBrown]

With the liklihood of 3 new aposltes being called during this next week prior to the general sessions of conference, I'm curious if anyone has any inside information about the vetting process for new apostles, other General Authorities, and General Auxiliary leaders.

 

With any large organization I'd expect a significant vetting process and in the church I'd expect the vetting to include financial reviews, legal background checks, church service history, tithing paid, marital history, church disciplinary history, as well as any public statements or controversial activities. I think this is reasonable, to an extent, since these leaders represent the church publicly.

 

I have a couple of specific questions-

 

1-Would anyone being vetted for consideration be aware of that vetting process before this in depth search into their life? Would it be an invasion of privacy to dig into someone's life without their knowledge or consent?

 

2-When an apostle is called, do they sign something akin to an employment contract outlining their duties and compensation, perhaps with specific requirements like a morality clause?

 

Do we believe the call to be an Apostle actually comes from Jesus Christ.  Because if it does, why would a vetting process be in place?  Does the Lord do His own "vetting?"

[Scott Lloyd]

Good point... I should have mentioned "GA or BYU president" since I knew that's where Elder Bednar & Oaks were called from.  But, that was interesting to read about President Nelson -- I was not aware of the history there.

Here's a story I wrote a while ago about a remarkable gathering of current and past Sunday School general officers at which Elder (President) Nelson was the featured speaker.

 

I smiled at his reminiscence of the occasion when he was called as "superintendent" of what was then known as the Deseret Sunday School Union. He got the name changed by showing a newspaper clipping to President Lee with the headline "Union head called."

 

That really is a stinker of a headline, probably the worst I have ever heard. I'm glad that, for the most part, hack journalism like that is pretty much a thing of the past.

Edited September 25, 2015 by Scott Lloyd

[Scott Lloyd]

Do we believe the call to be an Apostle actually comes from Jesus Christ.  Because if it does, why would a vetting process be in place?  Does the Lord do His own "vetting?"

I'm not saying that I believe there is a formal "vetting" process, but if there were, so what? Why should the process of receiving revelation in this be any different than other instances when inspiration is given after "studying it out" in one's own mind?

 

Why didn't God and Jesus Christ just appear to the Prophet Joseph Smith alll of a sudden without requiring that he go through a period of deep thought and investigation, ultimately seeking the Lord in prayer? Why pray at all? Shouldn't we demand that the Lord just give it to us without any effort on our part?

 

The short answer, of course, is that the Lord does not work that way.

[bluebell]

Do we believe the call to be an Apostle actually comes from Jesus Christ.  Because if it does, why would a vetting process be in place?  Does the Lord do His own "vetting?"

 

Why did the original apostles cast lots to replace Judas?

[HappyJackWagon]

Do we believe the call to be an Apostle actually comes from Jesus Christ.  Because if it does, why would a vetting process be in place?  Does the Lord do His own "vetting?"

Are you suggesting that Jesus appears personally and tells the prophet who to call? I'd be interested to hear stories that validate that understanding but I don't believe that's how it happens. I think it is much more like how other callings are issued in the church. The Lord doesn't appear to the Bishop or Stake President to advise them about the appropriate appointment so would we expect it to be different at the general level? I don't think so. But at the general level there could less familiarity with the candidates than a Bishop with his ward members.

[pogi]

Does the Lord do His own "vetting?"

 

Of course he does, then he passes that information along to the brethren through the vetting process 

 

The Lord expects us to do His work, not because he is not capable, but because we need to learn to become like him.  He then gives us a confirmation after we have done all we can and have studied it out in our minds. 

[smac97]

Offhand, I can recall three occasions when men were called to the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles who had not already been serving as General Authorities.

 

The most recent is Elder David A. Bednar. He had been president of BYU-Idaho, so I have to think the Brethren were already intimately acquainted with him.

 

The other two that come to mind are Elders Russell M. Nelson and Dallin H. Oaks.

 

Elder (now President) Nelson had served as Sunday School general president and, as a heart surgeon of some renown, had cared for President Spencer W. Kimball and perhaps others of the Brethren. Again, already an intimate acquaintanceship.

 

Elder Oaks had been president of BYU and, at the time of his call, was a Utah Supreme Court justice.

 

I should think that, as rockpond notes here, the Brethren, through the process of past Church service, have already taken their measure of the man before he is called.

Another noteworthy example is J. Reuben Clark, who, as I understand it, was not only lacking in prior experience as a General Authority (or, for that matter, as a bishop or a stake president), he also skipped over the Quorums of Seventy and was called directly into the First Presidency as the Second Counselor in 1933 (and he was not ordained an apostle until 1934).

Thanks,

-Smac

[Scott Lloyd]

Another noteworthy example is J. Reuben Clark, who, as I understand it, was not only lacking in prior experience as a General Authority (or, for that matter, as a bishop or a stake president), he also skipped over the Quorums of Seventy and was called directly into the First Presidency as the Second Counselor in 1933 (and he was not ordained an apostle until 1934).

Thanks,

-Smac

Perhaps the most noteworthy example is Thomas S. Monson, who was called into the apostleship at age 36 without any previous experience as a General Authority, although he had served as a bishop at age 22 and a mission president at age 31.

 

Boyd K. Packer had some previous experience as a General Authority before becoming an apostle but had never been in a bishopric or stake presidency prior to that.

[Jeanne]

I don't imagine it would include any type of repentance process as that should have already been handled in most cases for a person who has been serving in church leadership positions.

 

Over the years, I've watched my dad be called as a stake president and then as a mission president.  In both cases, I wasn't aware of any particular "vetting" that was done.  In the case of calling a SP, the visiting GA gets recommendations from the outgoing stake leaders and then interviews people.  In the case of calling him as MP, he had already had interaction with GAs/AAs through his service as SP.

 

And none of these statements are meant to diminish the seeking of inspiration through fasting and prayer that I know goes on.

 

I guess I just don't imagine the process to be all that different from what happens at other levels of the church:  leaders get to know fellow members through church service and through interviews, they pray for guidance, and then follow the Spirit.  No vetting required (though I'm open to correction if there some evidence to the contrary -- it wouldn't upset me if vetting was being done).

Thank you so much for your reply. 

[Teancum]

If God is really in charge of the call to the office of apostle and revelation is involved why would the church. President even need to know or be acquainted with the person called? Why do they need to be familiar with the candidates resume? if God is in charge he could tell the prophet to call someone the prophet has no info about what so ever.

[bluebell]

If God is really in charge of the call to the office of apostle and revelation is involved why would the church. President even need to know or be acquainted with the person called? Why do they need to be familiar with the candidates resume? if God is in charge he could tell the prophet to call someone the prophet has no info about what so ever.

 

Because we don't believe that God functions that way.  

 

You might have forgotten if it's been awhile since you've studied this in a church setting or looked it up in LDS scriptures, but the teachings on gaining inspiration and revelation always begin with the concept of studying it out and doing everything we can do make the best decision possible, making that decision, and then going to God in prayer to get that decision confirmed (or not) before either implementing it or starting over.

[Scott Lloyd]

If God is really in charge of the call to the office of apostle and revelation is involved why would the church. President even need to know or be acquainted with the person called? Why do they need to be familiar with the candidates resume? if God is in charge he could tell the prophet to call someone the prophet has no info about what so ever.

I refer you to what Bluebell said in the post just following yours and to what Pogi said in Post #40 and what I said in Post #37.

[Duncan]

I suspect over time with all of the 100 plus apostles called, there have been variations in who knows what and when. We recall Pres. Grant hardly knew Elder Melvin Ballard and called him anyways but Pres. Young called his son Brigham Young Jr. as a member of the Twelve and so then everything in between. Funnily enough both Pres. George Albert Smith and Pres. McKay seemed to favour calling men as first council of the Seventy and assistants to the Twelve that had little or no leadership experience, i.e S. Dilworth Young, Hartman Rector Jr. Boyd Packer, Marion D. Hanks, Bruce R. McConkie, Theodore Tuttle, Marvin Ashton among others.

[Jeanne]

Is there a reason why perhaps not all..but most are relatively wealthy? 

[rongo]

Sounds like someone should have vetted your source.  He doesn't seem very trustworthy, considering the job he is claiming that he has with the church.  

And yet, Handbook 1 was immediately online the minute it was released, before any bishoprics or stake presidencies had ever gotten it. Which means that the leak had to have been from someone in the COB with access to it (someone pretty high up). 

 

There are moles, even highly-placed moles. I'm sure there are people in places we wouldn't like (if we knew) who don't believe and who at heart don't mean the church well. Who maintain cover to retain their jobs and social connections, but (in this day) leak and take anonymous potshots with social media. Like Grant Palmer for all those years with his Paul Pry paper . . .

[rongo]

My former 1st counselor in a different ward is wealthy and politically active (he has a high-profile state government job with finance and political implications). When a stake president was going to be called, the general authority called him in (despite not ever having been in a bishopric or higher at that time). He asked him if he would sustain this brother as stake president. He told him (the GA) that he knew of dishonest business dealings, and he detailed them. The GA asked him what he intended to do if he were presented for sustaining the next day, and he told him that he would sustain him because he had told him everything he needed to know and the calling was extended despite that knowledge. 

 

He was sustained and set apart as stake president.

 

A week later, he fled the country under investigation for business fraud. This anecdote came up in discussion of when it would ever be okay to vote "no" in a sustaining.

 

The point being . . . I think some vetting does take place even at the bishop/stake president level. The GA knew of potential or cause for concern (vetting), and asked knowledgeable people (non-priesthood leaders) for specifics.