rongo Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 2 hours ago, smac97 said: 3. A strong, stable marriage is definitely taken into account. A lot. This is very true. Not only the stability of the marriage, but the make-up of the wife (not that type of make-up). I know of men (who otherwise would have been outstanding) who were "disqualified," at least as far as consideration, because of their wives' temperament, issues, or baggage. I have taken that into consideration when recommending as well. One of the men I would otherwise recommend when we're interviewed about the next stake president I won't recommend, precisely because of his wife.
stemelbow Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 2 hours ago, smac97 said: A few thoughts: 1. I am not sure "wealth" per se (or "affluence" or "high annual income" or "sizable discretionary income" - whatever) is taken into account. Financial stability, on the other hand, is probably a factor in some/many decision-making processes. I can see the wisdom of this. Bishops and stake presidents are expected to contribute quite a bit of their time to service in the Church. This amount of time can be quite a stressor on the man and his family. When financial instability is added to the mix, then it can become a real challenge. 2. Leadership, organizational skills, perseverance, and other attributes are probably also taken into account. 3. A strong, stable marriage is definitely taken into account. A lot. 4. Men are often called to be bishops and stake presidents later on in life, when they are more likely to have achieved higher levels of success in their vocation. Hence a stake president who, at the time of this calling at age 55, is a VP of Finance or a CEO or whatever, would have had a less prominent-sounding job title had he been called when he was 28 or 35. 5. Critics of the Church like to point to a purported lack of "salt of the earth"-type professions that used to be held by bishops and stake presidents of yesteryear. Farmers, ranchers, etc. But these jobs have largely disappeared, having been replaced by "Agribusiness" corporations. There just aren't that many self-employed "farmers" anymore. Many of the salt-of-the-earth-type jobs have gone the way of all the earth. Moreover, as discussed further below, there are plenty of "salt-of-the-earth"-type modern professions represented in recently-called stake presidents. 6. Rather than speak anecdotally about stake presidents and their vocations and whether Bro. Arrington's "highest tithe payers are called to be stake presidents" assertion is presently accurate, I think we can look at published announcements in the Deseret News to get a pretty clear account as to current trends pertaining to this issue. "New Stake Presidents" are announced several times a year. Here are the results which I could find for the last few years (emphasis to job titles added): 7. Some observations about the foregoing data: There are plenty of medical/dental folks, lawyers/judges, finance/banking, and senior executive/vp/corporate president/CEO types (what I will call the "Arrington Stereotype"). These would be the types of jobs that would seemingly yield the most number of wealthy/affluent members, and hence would seem to pertain to Bro. Arrington's "pay-to-play" assertion. There are also plenty of where-the-rubber-hits-the-road "middle management" types of jobs represented here. Also plenty of small business owners and self-employed types. And men who are employed by Church-affiliated organizations. And teachers/academics and academic administrators. And law enforcement. And blue-collar types. Each of these seems to be as much or more represented in the ranks of stake presidents as the "Arrington Stereotype" folks. Places where the Church has been well-established for quite a while (IOW, the Intermountain West and West Coast), or places where there are larger numbers of affluent/wealthy members of the Church (SoCal, parts of Salt Lake County, etc.) seem to be more likely to have the Arrington Stereotype as a stake president. 8. I can't speak to the accuracy of Bro. Arrington's assertion. Frankly, I'm skeptical, but I'm open to data from the timeframe during which he made his assertion (circa 1992). I don't know if his assertion is based on data, or anecdote and personal observation, or what. However, I think it would be difficult to maintain the viability of his assertion now. Thanks, -Smac Well of course we'd have to be able to compare any or all of these to those active worthy male members in their stake to make an actual adjustment. See if I were listed here and my title was there, it'd probably sound pretty good. But, in my ward I'm towards the bottom of how much I get paid. But I acknowledge if I were in a different ward, I might be pretty average or high. Now, granted a lot of local leaders cant' stand me, so I wouldn't be considered anyway, but it's fair to say just listing titles doesn't really address what Arrington said. Looking at the list I'm guessing quite of few of these pull quite a healthy income. Whatever the case, as low paid as I am in my area, I'm still somewhere near the very top in the world of how much I get paid.
jkwilliams Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 1 minute ago, stemelbow said: Well of course we'd have to be able to compare any or all of these to those active worthy male members in their stake to make an actual adjustment. See if I were listed here and my title was there, it'd probably sound pretty good. But, in my ward I'm towards the bottom of how much I get paid. But I acknowledge if I were in a different ward, I might be pretty average or high. Now, granted a lot of local leaders cant' stand me, so I wouldn't be considered anyway, but it's fair to say just listing titles doesn't really address what Arrington said. Looking at the list I'm guessing quite of few of these pull quite a healthy income. Whatever the case, as low paid as I am in my area, I'm still somewhere near the very top in the world of how much I get paid. I don't think there's necessarily an overt correlation between wealth/success and leadership positions, but I do think there's always been an unconscious equation of material success with goodness or righteousness, particularly in the US. The Book of Mormon tells us we'll prosper in the land if we keep the commandments, and I think a lot of people have that underlying belief that financially well-off members are prospering because they keep the commandments. Sure, there are exceptions, but for the most part, leaders tend to be more successful in their careers than the average member. 2
Jeanne Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 31 minutes ago, rongo said: This is very true. Not only the stability of the marriage, but the make-up of the wife (not that type of make-up). I know of men (who otherwise would have been outstanding) who were "disqualified," at least as far as consideration, because of their wives' temperament, issues, or baggage. I have taken that into consideration when recommending as well. One of the men I would otherwise recommend when we're interviewed about the next stake president I won't recommend, precisely because of his wife. I was pretty good friends with a Bishop's wife..though she was supportive, she had her moments! Her biggest concern was that he was progressing faster than she was. It was that important to her that they stayed on the same level of spirituality in the marriage and in the hereafter. She was afraid for some reason. Now...she would have made a great Bishop!
Scott Lloyd Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 50 minutes ago, rongo said: This is very true. Not only the stability of the marriage, but the make-up of the wife (not that type of make-up). I know of men (who otherwise would have been outstanding) who were "disqualified," at least as far as consideration, because of their wives' temperament, issues, or baggage. I have taken that into consideration when recommending as well. One of the men I would otherwise recommend when we're interviewed about the next stake president I won't recommend, precisely because of his wife. Fortunately that didn't seem to work in the opposite direction when my wife was called as Primary president.
Calm Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 4 hours ago, Rain said: So if I I don't want a calling, maybe I should ask for it... Maybe it depends on how you ask/demand. Every new ward we were in I would tell the bishop I know it can at times be hard to find Primary teaches, I love being one so keep me in mind. Generally the following month, I got a call. 20 years in Primary. After that I started suggesting ward libraian would be great since I couldn't sit down. Got called three times there. Offered to be Akela and a SS teacher of the 14 year olds when I saw they were having a hard time keeping teachers. Lasted in both a year and a half, the first took them that long to find someone who was not only available and committed like I was, but knew what they were doing being in the Scout program themselves (cubmasters/Akelas are generally men up in Canada, I believe, which makes much more sense, imo, until we have a comparable program for girls and young women); the SS calling I had to be released from due to health. In fact looking back, every calling I have had for the last 30+ years is one I volunteered for save the last one as bulletin person. Oh wait, I was a building coordinator for a year or two as well.
jkwilliams Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 19 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Fortunately that didn't seem to work in the opposite direction when my wife was called as Primary president. My wife has had some pretty important callings, so it must not be contingent on the qualities of the spouse.
Calm Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 (edited) 4 hours ago, ksfisher said: I wouldn't mind spending the rest of my life as the ward family history consultant. Oh, I volunteered for that one too on top of being a Primary teacher. Didn't know much, but they couldn't keep the center open without one LDS there...I had to nonLDS as helpers who knew tons more and were 35 years older than me so I didn't push the 'boss' thing, lol. They didn't think much of LDS beliefs but loved genealogy. Edited July 18, 2016 by Calm
ksfisher Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 5 minutes ago, Calm said: Oh, I volunteered for that one too on top of being a Primary teacher. Didn't know much, but they couldn't keep the center open without one LDS there...I had to nonLDS as helpers who knew tons more and were 35 years older than me so I didn't push the 'boss' thing, lol. They didn't think much of LDS beliefs but loved genealogy. Sometimes the best thing a supervisor can do is stay out of the way 1
stemelbow Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 9 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: My wife has had some pretty important callings, so it must not be contingent on the qualities of the spouse. Cool. But a man can't be a bishop with an unbelieving wife? Seems rather sexist, and this time it's against us men.
jkwilliams Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 1 minute ago, stemelbow said: Cool. But a man can't be a bishop with an unbelieving wife? Seems rather sexist, and this time it's against us men. I doubt she'd ever be RS president at this point, given my status. But I was still the same person when I was a believer, and it never affected her being called to anything.
cinepro Posted July 18, 2016 Author Posted July 18, 2016 6 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: But I need to stop saying how much I enjoy it. Not long ago, I read a comment from President Boyd K. Packer that if you're really enjoying a calling, it's probably time for you to be released from it. Did he also happen to mention how much he enjoyed being an apostle? 3
Scott Lloyd Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 (edited) 45 minutes ago, cinepro said: Did he also happen to mention how much he enjoyed being an apostle? Not that I recall. Has any apostle done that? A rather odd question, say I. Edited July 18, 2016 by Scott Lloyd
Rain Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 1 hour ago, Calm said: Maybe it depends on how you ask/demand. Every new ward we were in I would tell the bishop I know it can at times be hard to find Primary teaches, I love being one so keep me in mind. Generally the following month, I got a call. 20 years in Primary. After that I started suggesting ward libraian would be great since I couldn't sit down. Got called three times there. Offered to be Akela and a SS teacher of the 14 year olds when I saw they were having a hard time keeping teachers. Lasted in both a year and a half, the first took them that long to find someone who was not only available and committed like I was, but knew what they were doing being in the Scout program themselves (cubmasters/Akelas are generally men up in Canada, I believe, which makes much more sense, imo, until we have a comparable program for girls and young women); the SS calling I had to be released from due to health. In fact looking back, every calling I have had for the last 30+ years is one I volunteered for save the last one as bulletin person. Oh wait, I was a building coordinator for a year or two as well. I have never volunteered for a calling. I'm afraid it would be a be careful what you wish for kind of thing.
rongo Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 2 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said: Fortunately that didn't seem to work in the opposite direction when my wife was called as Primary president. That's an interesting thought, but it rings true. I think it's a lot easier to call a strong woman with a dud husband to a leadership position than a strong man with a wife with issues. When the wife is really struggling, the husband is kind of hamstrung. I think there are so many dud-men in society that we just kind of shrug it off and chalk it up to the status quo. My primary president's husband is Catholic. He's not a dud by any means, though. He wants the Catholic church to follow the law of tithing --- he thinks it's a great idea!
jkwilliams Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 41 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Not that I recall. Has any apostle done that? A rather odd question, say I. No odder than asking if I was agitating for change.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 (edited) 21 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: No odder than asking if I was agitating for change. I knew that you did not. It was a rhetorical question intended to make a point. In the future, I'll try to remember that you tend to take rhetorical questions too literally. Edited July 18, 2016 by Scott Lloyd
Scott Lloyd Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 18 minutes ago, rongo said: That's an interesting thought, but it rings true. I think it's a lot easier to call a strong woman with a dud husband to a leadership position than a strong man with a wife with issues. When the wife is really struggling, the husband is kind of hamstrung. I think there are so many dud-men in society that we just kind of shrug it off and chalk it up to the status quo. My primary president's husband is Catholic. He's not a dud by any means, though. He wants the Catholic church to follow the law of tithing --- he thinks it's a great idea! Thank you for implicitly agreeing that I am a dud.
jkwilliams Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 4 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: I knew you that you did not. It was a rhetorical question intended to make a point. In the future, I'll try to remember that you tend to take rhetorical questions too literally. Some people take things too seriously.
Scott Lloyd Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 (edited) 3 minutes ago, jkwilliams said: Some people take things too seriously. Yes, that's true. By the way, I agree with you about Cocoa Puffs. Where do you stand on Cap'n Crunch? Edited July 18, 2016 by Scott Lloyd
rongo Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 6 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Thank you for implicitly agreeing that I am a dud. That wasn't my intent at all. What you said simply led generally to my thought. If it's any consolation, my wife was a RS president while I was a youth SS teacher. So, I've been there, too . . .
Scott Lloyd Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 2 minutes ago, rongo said: That wasn't my intent at all. What you said simply led generally to my thought. If it's any consolation, my wife was a RS president while I was a youth SS teacher. So, I've been there, too . . . I happen to think there is great honor in being a youth Sunday School teacher.
Jeanne Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 7 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said: Yes, that's true. By the way, I agree with you about Cocoa Puffs. Where do you stand on Cap'n Crunch? Captain Crunch...don't even go there...!
Scott Lloyd Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 Just now, Jeanne said: Captain Crunch...don't even go there...! Meaning that you love it or that you hate it?
Jeanne Posted July 18, 2016 Posted July 18, 2016 Just now, Scott Lloyd said: Meaning that you love it or that you hate it? I love it! Just the regular stuff..No berries..no peanut butter ..just me and good'ol Captain. As a young girl living out on my own years ago..that is what I lived on!
Recommended Posts