MormonLeaks publishes docs on GA pay, meetings

[california boy]

Pay them what they want.  For the amount of hours they put in and the amount of travel away from home, I personally think they are underpaid.  They aren't monks for heavens sake.  I wouldn't be a bit surprised if there are others working for the church that make much more than the apostles.  It is a billion dollar organization.  Managing that requires attracting talented people.  You can only pull the "this is your duty" card so far.

[Jeanne]

4 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Especially the consumers of "mormonleaks" who have little-to-know association with the Church of Jesus Christ and wish it ill.

 

You would be so surprised.

[california boy]

44 minutes ago, Jeanne said:

Church members volunteer their little hearts out...funny that they can't pay for janitors anymore..but 1st class flights and pay increases are a definite must.

Solve the missionary problems by not making it such a requirement to go in the first place.  You want to serve..go   Those who don't won't be such a horrible influence  on others.

While the church does rely on members to do the janitorial duties, no one is forced to volunteer.  I think one of the great things about the church is that so much of it is done without paid clergy. When I talk to people about the church, one of the things I actually like to tell them about is how the bishop, stake president and so many others volunteer their time and serve when asked for no money.  I like how members from the audience give the sermons.  I don't agree with everything the church does, but this issue is not something that I think is a problem.

[Scott Lloyd]

15 minutes ago, rockpond said:

You just asked for mine.

Only to test the consistency and depth of your commitment to the demigod of transparency. Actually I don't care about your income -- or that of the apostles and prophets. You, apparently, do.

[Avatar4321]

15 minutes ago, rockpond said:

I'm assuming that the entity providing that stipend is either the same entity or owned by the same entity to which our tithing gets sent.

which does not mean I'm the boss, shareholder, employer or any other such person that entitles me to know much someone's salary is.

[Avatar4321]

3 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Only to test the consistency and depth of your commitment to the demigod of transparency. Actually I don't care about your income -- or that of the apostles and prophets. You, apparently, do.

which was completely obvious

[Scott Lloyd]

The Church of Jesus Christ is not a government entity or a commercial business. Those who seek and are given membership in it should be expected to know that already.

 

[Scott Lloyd]

1 minute ago, Avatar4321 said:

which was completely obvious

Thank you.

[CV75]

34 minutes ago, rockpond said:

And you're going to ignore the stark differences.

As I said, those who provide my income have complete transparency.

Who do you think provides the Lord's servants' incomes? The Man you give your tithing to, of course, in which case, it is no longer yours.

Tithing is a covenant between the member and the Lord. As with all covenants, it is administered by those with the keys. In some cases our covenants are transparent (baptism) and in some cases not (endowments and sealings). While it is easy to witness the transparent covenants (baptism), witnessing nontransparent covenants (sealings) require some qualification.

So the Lord is not always transparent, and does not always require transparency from His servants, and in cases like those above, forbids it. Transparency is not a spiritual principle, but revelation is. How are Church fiscal activities to be revealed? Who has the keys of revelation for that?

We sustain those with the keys to act in behalf of the Lord, by common consent. We do so by faith, not necessarily by temporal knowledge (such as that which comes through transparency). While consent is an act of faith, it still often has a relationship with spiritual knowledge, as described in Alma 32.

[Duncan]

Just now, rockpond said:

Grant Palmer's assertion is that they get $1m when they become an apostle... as a one-time payout so that they can resolve any/all debts that they have.  Or something like that -- I'm not expert on Palmer or his claim.  But he didn't ever suggest, to my knowledge, that they get an annual salary of $1m.

If the doc is accurate, $90k was Pres. Eyring's annual stipend in 2000.  I would imagine (hope) that apostles have access to a larger stipend now.  Although, we don't know what other benefits might not be shown on that paycheck that could help.

 

well, that's true maybe one day we'll see if what Palmer said has any factual basis

[Scott Lloyd]

4 minutes ago, CV75 said:

Who do you think provides the Lord's servants' incomes? The Man you give your tithing to, of course, in which case, it is no longer yours.

Tithing is a covenant between the member and the Lord. As with all covenants, it is administered by those with the keys. In some cases our covenants are transparent (baptism) and in some cases not (endowments and sealings). While it is easy to witness the transparent covenants (baptism), witnessing nontransparent covenants (sealings) require some qualification.

 

So the Lord is not always transparent, and does not always require transparency from His servants, and in cases like those above, forbids it. Transparency is not a spiritual principle, but revelation is. How are Church fiscal activities to be revealed? Who has the keys of revelation for that?

 

We sustain those with the keys to act in behalf of the Lord, by common consent. We do so by faith, not necessarily by temporal knowledge (such as that which comes through transparency). While consent is an act of faith, it still often has a relationship with spiritual knowledge, as described in Alma 32.

 

In some instances that we can know about, the Lord has specifically not been transparent, as for example when he enjoined his three chief apostles to "tell no man" of what happened on the Mount of Transfiguration.

Edited January 9, 2017 by Scott Lloyd

[Duncan]

Just now, california boy said:

Pay them what they want.  For the amount of hours they put in and the amount of travel away from home, I personally think they are underpaid.  They aren't monks for heavens sake.  I wouldn't be a bit surprised if there are others working for the church that make much more than the apostles.  It is a billion dollar organization.  Managing that requires attracting talented people.  You can only pull the "this is your duty" card so far.

I know that when Dr. Kim Clark was asked to be President of BYUI and leave the Dean of the Harvard Business School, President Hinckley called him and probably only President Hinckley could have been the only one to ask someone to go from the top of the academic world, pretty much to to BYUI Pres. is a leap, that's tough! hahahha! I would imagine he would have gotten a huge pay cut because who knows what Harvard was paying him but man alive! hahahahha! Harvard to BYUI. So, if I heard he got a ton of cash, I wouldn't be be surprised at all really

[CV75]

3 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

In some instances that we can know about, the Lord has specifically not been transparent, as for example when he enjoined his three chief apostles to "tell no man" of what happened on the Mount of Transfiguration.

Good example. And 1 Nephi 14:28; 3 Nephi 26:16; 27:23; 28:14; Ether 4:1; 5:1,,, I could go on and on!

And some of what was forbidden was written on plates of precious ore which were no longer under the control of those who made them!

[JulieM]

32 minutes ago, Avatar4321 said:

which was completely obvious

Of course, but still not relevant to this discussion.

[Scott Lloyd]

47 minutes ago, rockpond said:

And you know all the consumers of mormonleaks and their tithe status?  Talk about transparency and journalistic diligence... well done!

I didn't say I knew all of them. I was talking about the subset of mormonleaks consumers who do detest the Church of Jesus Christ and wish it ill, of which there surely must be many.

 

[Jeanne]

35 minutes ago, california boy said:

While the church does rely on members to do the janitorial duties, no one is forced to volunteer.  I think one of the great things about the church is that so much of it is done without paid clergy. When I talk to people about the church, one of the things I actually like to tell them about is how the bishop, stake president and so many others volunteer their time and serve when asked for no money.  I like how members from the audience give the sermons.  I don't agree with everything the church does, but this issue is not something that I think is a problem.

Thank you for your perspective and giving me something to think about.  My grandparents cleaned our church for many years.  That little extra amount of dollars meant so much not only monetarily..but to fulfill that need..to be needed. 

[Scott Lloyd]

47 minutes ago, rockpond said:

And you know all the consumers of mormonleaks and their tithe status?  Talk about transparency and journalistic diligence... well done!

I didn't say I knew all of them. I was talking about the subset of mormonleaks consumers who do detest the Church of Jesus Christ and wish it ill, of which there surely must be many.

 

[Avatar4321]

as a customer of WalMart should I be entitled to look at their books and all their expenses and how much they employee bob the cashier?

it ceases to be my money when I consecrate it to the Lord. I give Him my tithe. He pours out the windows of heaven in return. The money is His to do as He sees fit.

I have no obligation to the Lord about how His money is dispersed. I am not seeking such an obligation. Nor is He obligated to consult me on how His money is spent. I trust Him.

[Avatar4321]

44 minutes ago, JulieM said:

Of course, but still not relevant to this discussion.

how is it not relevant? We are being told we should be entitled to know what others are paid by people who know quite well that that isn't something that anyone including those requesting the information would submit to public scrutiny. Why should we encourage a double standard?

[The Nehor]

3 hours ago, HappyJackWagon said:

I don't see much here. I'm a bit surprised apostle compensation isn't higher. This biggest problem I have is that there is no financial transparency. We shouldn't have to see this through leaks.

1- I would really like more information on decisions that are affecting missionaries. If there is a change in approach to how problem missionaries are treated- "desirability" of sending them home so they can' influence others I think it should be well known. I've seen many more missionaries come home early over the past 5 years and it would be great to know what kind of policy determines whether or not they'll be sent home early. Being sent home can be an emotionally traumatic experience that can be difficult for a missionary to bounce back from.

2- I just find this interesting. Is the ability to touch a temple really some kind of a holy privilege? This line of thinking sounds like idol worship. Yes- I do believe the temple can be an idol. Also, I wonder who they blame for the increasing disrespect; parents or ward leaders not teaching the kids? Groundskeepers or missionaries? I suppose they could put up a gated perimeter so that children don't touch the temple disrespectfully.

 

To be fair you didn't have to see them at all.

The information is from 2000. They discontinued stake missions that year shortly after I got home from my Mission. Any information related to this is very dated. This was around the time the bar raising was announced.

There was a bit of a fad back then in some LDS circles that was, as far as I know, not supported by the Apostles that kids would go to the Temple on their baptismal day and walk around the grounds and touch the temple walls, see the foyer, etc to instill a desire to go one day.

2 hours ago, Jeanne said:

Church members volunteer their little hearts out...funny that they can't pay for janitors anymore..but 1st class flights and pay increases are a definite must.

Solve the missionary problems by not making it such a requirement to go in the first place.  You want to serve..go   Those who don't won't be such a horrible influence  on others.

First class flights for the elderly who are travelling all week are not really a privilege, more a health concern.

If you don't want to serve now then don't go.

2 hours ago, rockpond said:

I'm assuming that the entity providing that stipend is either the same entity or owned by the same entity to which our tithing gets sent.

True, but the money comes from the Church's business interests, many of which never came from tithing money. Most of the seed money for the early church businesses came from the sale of land in Utah.

2 hours ago, juliann said:

Considering their responsibilities and what these heavy hitters have given up in the private market, that seems on the low side. 

I agree. When you live a life that busy (and it often involves your spouse being busy too) basic cost of living goes up as you have little time to maintain your home, keep it clean, take care of errands, cook food, etc. They also mostly live in Salt Lake which has a higher cost of living then most (though not all) areas.

[jcake]

Wasn't it about 1950 when the transparency ended?  Up until that time, I believe that the finances of the church were available for anyone to see. If that isn't the case, please respond accordingly.

[The Nehor]

2 hours ago, california boy said:

Pay them what they want.  For the amount of hours they put in and the amount of travel away from home, I personally think they are underpaid.  They aren't monks for heavens sake.  I wouldn't be a bit surprised if there are others working for the church that make much more than the apostles.  It is a billion dollar organization.  Managing that requires attracting talented people.  You can only pull the "this is your duty" card so far.

There was once an LDS temp job posted in my area performing a job in my area of expertise. I was a contractor at the time and decided to see if we were a fit. The job was doable and I think I impressed them with some of my previous work. Then the time came to talk pay. It was laughably small (factoring in costs I would get about $15 less an hour then usual). I declined. I was tempted to ask if I could write off the rest of the fair market value of the work against my tithing but I bit my tongue for once.

[The Nehor]

2 minutes ago, jcake said:

Wasn't it about 1950 when the transparency ended?  Up until that time, I believe that the finances of the church were available for anyone to see. If that isn't the case, please respond accordingly.

No, it was in the 60's.

Edited January 10, 2017 by The Nehor

[mfbukowski]

2 hours ago, california boy said:

While the church does rely on members to do the janitorial duties, no one is forced to volunteer.  I think one of the great things about the church is that so much of it is done without paid clergy. When I talk to people about the church, one of the things I actually like to tell them about is how the bishop, stake president and so many others volunteer their time and serve when asked for no money.  I like how members from the audience give the sermons.  I don't agree with everything the church does, but this issue is not something that I think is a problem.

They do not only serve for free- they are also full tithe payers who pay dearly just for the privilege of working their tails off!  

[mfbukowski]

First of all, cut all those salaries by at least 11% because those individuals give back at least that much to the organization which pays them!

The salaries are low to start with, but even with the low salaries the quotes are at least 11 or 12% or more higher than reality

And no one is counting the time away from families, time writing sermons, articles, other meetings which other executives might take care of as part of their usual 9-5 jobs with Wednesdays off for golf and 3 hour martini lunches.