MormonLeaks publishes docs on GA pay, meetings

[Calm]

48 minutes ago, sjdawg said:

I've wondered that too.   Especially since my recollection is that about the time I was graduating from High School in Canada we were advised by Church leaders that to attend universities in Canada and leave the limited BYU spots to others.   There simply wasn't enough room to accommodate us at BYU.   My opinion is that positions at BYU for Canadians should be in proportion to the funding BYU receives from Canadians.   Why should my tithing have been used to subsidize BYU while I take out student loans to attend a more expensive University in Canada?

Should your ability to attend outside of Canada temples and chapels be dependent on the percentage you contribute to them as well?  Because it looks like Canadians don't donate anything to them by your standard.

Edited January 12, 2017 by Calm

[Ouagadougou]

On 09.01.2017 at 1:45 PM, rockpond said:

MormonLeaks (formerly MormonWikiLeaks) published a few more documents today:  https://www.reddit.com/r/exmormon/comments/5mysp0/leaked_q15_and_1q70_pay_information/

Here's a summary that someone posted at the top of that reddit page:

Again, as with previous leaks, probably not much here to surprise anyone.

I think this might be a surprise to certain members of the church who were told by missionaries that the church has no paid clergy or paid leaders.  Even on my mission, I remember telling poor members  and investigators, who were giving 10% of their income, that our church is different because our leaders don't get paid.  I guess I (along with numerous other missionaries) were mistaken (this was nearly ten years ago).  What we should have told these members of the church (and investigators) is that the church's apostles actually receive a living allowance (or salary) over two times higher than the average medium income (not including other benefits and expenses) in the US.  In certain areas of the world, $120K is more money than many will see in their entire lifetime.  IMO, $120K is by no means a "modest" amount, especially when other expenses are already taken care of for them.  The next time you are scrubbing a church toilet, just remember that God apparently wants you to do it for free; but at the same time, He apparently wants his apostles (most of which are already wealthy) to have extremely comfortable stipends/living allowances.   

How many full-time missionaries can serve missions on $120K?  

It seems like that $120K x 15 could be used in better ways instead making already wealthy men even wealthier, IMO.  

http://www.deptofnumbers.com/income/us/

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-17512040

[sjdawg]

12 minutes ago, Calm said:

Should your ability to attend outside of Canada temples and chapels be dependent on the percentage you contribute to them as well?  Because it looks like Canadians don't donate anything to them by your standard.

Sure Why not?  No one likes to attend services while on vacation anyway

[carbon dioxide]

20 minutes ago, Ouagadougou said:

I think this might be a surprise to certain members of the church who were told by missionaries that the church has no paid clergy or paid leaders.  Even on my mission, I remember telling poor members  and investigators, who were giving 10% of their income, that our church is different because our leaders don't get paid.  I guess I (along with numerous other missionaries) were mistaken (this was nearly ten years ago).  What we should have told these members of the church (and investigators) is that the church's apostles actually receive a living allowance (or salary) over two times higher than the average medium income (not including other benefits and expenses) in the US.  In certain areas of the world, $120K is more money than many will see in their entire lifetime.  IMO, $120K is by no means a "modest" amount, especially when other expenses are already taken care of for them.  The next time you are scrubbing a church toilet, just remember that God apparently wants you to do it for free; but at the same time, He apparently wants his apostles (most of which are already wealthy) to have extremely comfortable stipends/living allowances.   

How many full-time missionaries can serve missions on $120K?  

It seems like that $120K x 15 could be used in better ways instead making already wealthy men even wealthier, IMO.  

http://www.deptofnumbers.com/income/us/

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-17512040

Ok so say a man is called to be an apostle.  He has 5 kids and works as a lawyer and makes 200K a year. He has to quit his job and basically plan for the rest of his life for this calling.  So what should this man do.  Consume all the assets he has in his life and then once they are gone just let his family starve?  If the answer is no and an allowance is given how much is reasonable in your mind?  I figure he has to live in the Salt Lake area so based on the cost of living, how much would be reasonable to support his family, send his kids to school, and all the other stuff.   120K a year might be a little high but it is not that bad.  These are not 9 to 5 jobs 5 days a week and one might retire in a few years.  These are callings that go until they die.  I believe most people were offered a secular job with the same time commitments and other expectations that goes into these callings, most people would not accept such a job at 120K a year.  I know I would not even though that is twice what I make.  Money is only one factor I look at in employment.

 

As the the idea of no paid ministry.  Almost all callings in the Church are not paid.  They are also callings that are temporary and do not require a person to give up their career to fulfill.  There are only some callings that allow an allowance because their very nature is they are full time and require giving up one career.  We also don't know if all these general authorities accept this allowance.  Perhaps some are wealthy enough that they do not accept it.  It is offered for those that need it.  I see nothing wrong with it. 

It is also good to keep things in perspective.

Top 5 richest pastors in the US

1. Kenneth Copeland-- 760 million

2. Pat Robertson-- 100 million

3.  Benny Hinn -- 42 million

4. Joel Osteen -- 40 million

5. Creflo Dollar -- 27 million

 

 

 

Edited January 12, 2017 by carbon dioxide

[sjdawg]

18 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

Ok so say a man is called to be an apostle.  He has 5 kids and works as a lawyer and makes 200K a year. He has to quit his job and basically plan for the rest of his life for this calling.  So what should this man do.  Consume all the assets he has in his life and then once they are gone just let his family starve?  If the answer is no and an allowance is given how much is reasonable in your mind?  I figure he has to live in the Salt Lake area so based on the cost of living, how much would be reasonable to support his family, send his kids to school, and all the other stuff.   120K a year might be a little high but it is not that bad.  These are not 9 to 5 jobs 5 days a week and one might retire in a few years.  These are callings that go until they die.  I believe most people were offered a secular job with the same time commitments and other expectations that goes into these callings, most people would not accept such a job at 120K a year.  I know I would not even though that is twice what I make.  Money is only one factor I look at in employment.

I complain about a lot of things related to the LDS Church however I have no issue with the salary level.   I'm sure there are a lot of additional benefits not captured on the pay stub and I'm fine with that too.  Can we just stop bragging about our unpaid clergy though?  Can we stop expecting rank and file members to act as self-funded "missionaries" when in reality many of the roles have little to do with missionary work and are in reality just unpaid employees?   See below - do I dare ask how producing pasta is missionary work?

 

 

About Us

Church-service missionaries have an opportunity to assist the Deseret Mill and Pasta in the production of 200,000 pounds of grain in a single day and it is estimated that the pasta plant will produce 20 million pounds of foodstuffs each year.

 

 

Purposes

This Church-service missionary position exists to provide assistance to those rare and quite unique service opportunities that become available in Church operations. This position should be used when no other current job description is available. This Church-service missionary will help the Church fulfill its divinely appointed responsibility to help members live the gospel of Jesus Christ.

 

 

Responsibilities

Provides a very unique or highly specialized service need by a Church operation. These responsibilities may be guided by ecclesiastical authorities.

 

 

Edited January 12, 2017 by sjdawg

[Ouagadougou]

21 minutes ago, carbon dioxide said:

Consume all the assets he has in his life and then once they are gone just let his family starve?  If the answer is no and an allowance is given how much is reasonable in your mind? 

Well, first of all, what is the average age of each apostle?  Late 70's or maybe 80?  Their kids are in their 50's or 60's probably and they (apostles) are already retired.  It's not like these apostles are young men with no wealth and young children to feed.  Second, the $120k doesn't factor in other benefits they receive as well.  I can't even count how many young leaders (bishops, EQ Presidents and other callings) who have young children to feed but they make 1/4 or less than an apostle and still put in 40 plus hours for the church each week for free.  The idea that the apostles are struggling financially; therefore, they need $120k a year to feed their family or they will starve is ridiculous, especially considering poor members of the church I have met.  These members give 10% of their income as tithing and actually risk going hungry and not feeding their children.    

Edited January 12, 2017 by Ouagadougou

[Robert F. Smith]

On 1/9/2017 at 3:15 PM, 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.

............................................................    

I agree.  Non-Mormon historian Jan Shipps had  the same comment on the very low pay levels, as noted by Peggy Fletcher Stack, “How much do top Mormon leaders make? Leaked pay stubs may surprise you,” Salt Lake Tribune, Jan 9, 2017, online at  http://www.sltrib.com/lifestyle/faith/4800350-155/how-much-do-top-mormon-leaders?page=1 ,

Quote

Many university presidents and even some faculty make much more, said Shipps, who taught American religious history in Indiana for years. "Compared to their pay, this is small potatoes."

A Methodist pastor of a middle-class congregation in the Midwest, she said, "is paid a $138,000 base salary plus a parsonage allowance."

The parsonage is the house provided free by the local Protestant Church to the pastor and his family.  For these paid Mormon clerics, the parsonage allowance is equivalent to a housing allowance.

Edited January 12, 2017 by Robert F. Smith

[Calm]

51 minutes ago, sjdawg said:

I complain about a lot of things related to the LDS Church however I have no issue with the salary level.   I'm sure there are a lot of additional benefits not captured on the pay stub and I'm fine with that too.  Can we just stop bragging about our unpaid clergy though?  Can we stop expecting rank and file members to act as self-funded "missionaries" when in reality many of the roles have little to do with missionary work and are in reality just unpaid employees?   See below - do I dare ask how producing pasta is missionary work?

 

 

About Us

Church-service missionaries have an opportunity to assist the Deseret Mill and Pasta in the production of 200,000 pounds of grain in a single day and it is estimated that the pasta plant will produce 20 million pounds of foodstuffs each year.

 

 

Purposes

This Church-service missionary position exists to provide assistance to those rare and quite unique service opportunities that become available in Church operations. This position should be used when no other current job description is available. This Church-service missionary will help the Church fulfill its divinely appointed responsibility to help members live the gospel of Jesus Christ.

 

 

Responsibilities

Provides a very unique or highly specialized service need by a Church operation. These responsibilities may be guided by ecclesiastical authorities.

 

 

If I understand correctly, the Deseret Mill produces food for Bishop Storehouses and other humanitarian projects, they are helping to save bodies through their service.  Missionaries are those who have missions.  Missions can be different tthings, such as proselyting or service, welfare, genealogical.  Through each mission, they help others through some for of service.  Those who do what is probably mindnumbingly boring work deserve as much recognition for their love for their fellowmen as one who gets to travel far and wide to teach the Word of God.

Refusing to call them missionaries strikes me as much the same as refusing to call a woman a provider for her family because she never brings in money, only wisely saves it through doing the work herself that keeps her family healthy, safe, and well cared for...but she is not to be respected because she is "unpaid".

Edited January 12, 2017 by Calm

[Thinking]

3 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

But in the last 50 years, has there been a GA who didn't have a 6 figure income at the time he was being called?

Jeffrey R. Holland was called as a GA on April 1, 1989 while he was serving as President of BYU ( I was there at the time). It is my understanding that his entire professional life was in the church education system.

[Kenngo1969]

4 hours ago, Thinking said:

Jeffrey R. Holland was called as a GA on April 1, 1989 while he was serving as President of BYU ( I was there at the time). It is my understanding that his entire professional life was in the church education system.

CES employees are not highly paid, but, while BYU is part of CES (though I'm not sure what then-President Holland's salary was in 1989), I would imagine it was at least low six-figures.  (Still, that's peanuts compared to what other university presidents make in salary and other compensation, even at some state schools). See, e.g.: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/college-president-salaries/.

Edited January 12, 2017 by Kenngo1969

[Kenngo1969]

6 hours ago, sjdawg said:

I complain about a lot of things related to the LDS Church however I have no issue with the salary level.   I'm sure there are a lot of additional benefits not captured on the pay stub and I'm fine with that too.  Can we just stop bragging about our unpaid clergy though?  Can we stop expecting rank and file members to act as self-funded "missionaries" when in reality many of the roles have little to do with missionary work and are in reality just unpaid employees?   See below - do I dare ask how producing pasta is missionary work?

 

 

About Us

Church-service missionaries have an opportunity to assist the Deseret Mill and Pasta in the production of 200,000 pounds of grain in a single day and it is estimated that the pasta plant will produce 20 million pounds of foodstuffs each year.

 

 

Purposes

This Church-service missionary position exists to provide assistance to those rare and quite unique service opportunities that become available in Church operations. This position should be used when no other current job description is available. This Church-service missionary will help the Church fulfill its divinely appointed responsibility to help members live the gospel of Jesus Christ.

 

 

Responsibilities

Provides a very unique or highly specialized service need by a Church operation. These responsibilities may be guided by ecclesiastical authorities.

 

 

 

5 hours ago, Calm said:

If I understand correctly, the Deseret Mill produces food for Bishop Storehouses and other humanitarian projects, they are helping to save bodies through their service.  Missionaries are those who have missions.  Missions can be different tthings, such as proselyting or service, welfare, genealogical.  Through each mission, they help others through some for of service.  Those who do what is probably mindnumbingly boring work deserve as much recognition for their love for their fellowmen as one who gets to travel far and wide to teach the Word of God.

Refusing to call them missionaries strikes me as much the same as refusing to call a woman a provider for her family because she never brings in money, only wisely saves it through doing the work herself that keeps her family healthy, safe, and well cared for...but she is not to be respected because she is "unpaid".

Indeed.  See also James 2:14-17.

[rockpond]

8 hours ago, cdowis said:

For those unaware, it is a metaphor, hyperbola, with a touch of irony ==>> a rhetorical device.

I was quite clear on what you were doing. I'm responding to your point behind it... that apparently has no merit. 

Edited January 12, 2017 by rockpond

[rockpond]

8 hours ago, cdowis said:

If I gave the impression of questioning your worthiness, I apologize.  I was making an inquiry of your focus on things that matter vs things of lessor importance, perhaps even destructive.  I have my own gospel hobbies == I have devoted a great deal of time and focus on reading and understanding the Book of Mormon, and the world of apologetics.

I didn't know that asking a question rose to the level of "hobby".  

Outside of my calling and family I do have a hobby but I'm not going to lay my alms before men here to try to impress you. 

Perhaps your diligent study of the Book of Mormon could make you a little kinder and less judgmental of me.

[JulieM]

7 hours ago, Robert F. Smith said:

The parsonage is the house provided free by the local Protestant Church to the pastor and his family.  For these paid Mormon clerics, the parsonage allowance is equivalent to a housing allowance.

So, do the GA's get a parsonage allowance in addition to the $120,000 a year?  If so, does that mean they get their houses or housing paid for and also $10,00 a month?  (I haven't looked closely at the leak, so I'm just curious.)

Edited January 12, 2017 by JulieM

[JulieM]

Also, what portion of their income and perks do they pay tax on?  Is the parsonage (housing) allowance taxed?

Edited January 12, 2017 by JulieM

[rongo]

12 hours ago, sdc999 said:

lolololololololol.   I'm sorry sir, but you are not wealthy enough to represent the Lord in such a manner.  Off you go to your peasant abode. 

We only want the rich folks to represent us.   

I'm not saying that there is a checklist with minimum income or professional attainment levels. But, if you look at the backgrounds of every single one of the general authorities, you won't find a single one who had an income below, say, $50,000. Not one. The same goes for the area seventies, as well. It does appear to be an unwritten rule, even if not explicitly stated. A cultural one.

Quote

With that statement, you are declaring the church to be "not true".  So, God could not call a poor person to that position?  I think God has been represented by many poor people over history.

No, I'm not. I don't think this has a bearing on whether the Church is true or not. It's just a manifestation of where we find ourselves in this era with the corporate culture of Church leadership.

Quote

I rarely get riled anymore as I have aged but please tell me you were joking and don't believe for a minute that the proverbial stick up your butt elitist diatribe is really what you profess.

That's not at all what I profess, nor would I come close to expressing it that way.  

Edited January 12, 2017 by rongo

[Rain]

7 hours ago, sjdawg said:

I complain about a lot of things related to the LDS Church however I have no issue with the salary level.   I'm sure there are a lot of additional benefits not captured on the pay stub and I'm fine with that too.  Can we just stop bragging about our unpaid clergy though?  Can we stop expecting rank and file members to act as self-funded "missionaries" when in reality many of the roles have little to do with missionary work and are in reality just unpaid employees?   See below - do I dare ask how producing pasta is missionary work?

 

 

About Us

Church-service missionaries have an opportunity to assist the Deseret Mill and Pasta in the production of 200,000 pounds of grain in a single day and it is estimated that the pasta plant will produce 20 million pounds of foodstuffs each year.

 

 

Purposes

This Church-service missionary position exists to provide assistance to those rare and quite unique service opportunities that become available in Church operations. This position should be used when no other current job description is available. This Church-service missionary will help the Church fulfill its divinely appointed responsibility to help members live the gospel of Jesus Christ.

 

 

Responsibilities

Provides a very unique or highly specialized service need by a Church operation. These responsibilities may be guided by ecclesiastical authorities.

 

 

That was in one of my stakes and I volunteered there a few times and met one of those missionaries. He was a good young man and not able to serve in other ways.  He was called and set apart for that. 

Many missionaries from other churches serve to help the poor and the needy.  It is a common usage of the term "missionary". 

Missionaries in the pasta plant may not be directly working with the poor, but their work still helps them. 

[halconero]

14 hours ago, JLHPROF said:

Well since the endowment would have been revealed to Joseph Smith in English I will go with the English translation and consider any foreign differences to be translation errors.
In English your interpretation of the covenant leaves something to be desired.

What if it was revealed in Adamic? And then he took it upon himself to translate it to English?  I'm being fasicious.

Fair enough. Though I think you're tossing away the covenanting verb change a little too easily.

[stemelbow]

9 hours ago, Calm said:

Should your ability to attend outside of Canada temples and chapels be dependent on the percentage you contribute to them as well?  Because it looks like Canadians don't donate anything to them by your standard.

We have no clue what the moneys that go to charitable programs go to.  That could be to the Church itself, for things like temples and such.  I wouldn't get too excited about that. 

[stemelbow]

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

I didn't know that asking a question rose to the level of "hobby".  

Outside of my calling and family I do have a hobby but I'm not going to lay my alms before men here to try to impress you. 

Perhaps your diligent study of the Book of Mormon could make you a little kinder and less judgmental of me.

Your hobby is impressive?  hmm...maybe I need to rethink my hobbies. 

[CV75]

10 hours ago, sjdawg said:

I've wondered that too.   Especially since my recollection is that about the time I was graduating from High School in Canada we were advised by Church leaders that to attend universities in Canada and leave the limited BYU spots to others.   There simply wasn't enough room to accommodate us at BYU.   My opinion is that positions at BYU for Canadians should be in proportion to the funding BYU receives from Canadians.   Why should my tithing have been used to subsidize BYU while I take out student loans to attend a more expensive University in Canada?

Hopefully you and those having this question will take a look back at Calm's explanation over the last day or so.

[cdowis]

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

Perhaps your diligent study of the Book of Mormon could make you a little kinder and less judgmental of me.

I do not judge you at all   == >>>  I don't know anything about you.  Just proposing some things you might think about while you are judging me.

Edited January 12, 2017 by cdowis

[JulieM]

I have tried to find out more about the parsonage allowance given to the GA (housing allowance) and it does look like it's in addition to the $10,000 a month they get and is tax free (if I'm reading correctly).

Does anyone know more about this (or correct me if I'm wrong here)?

Are they getting other perks or expenses paid tax free?  That just seem odd to me!

Edited January 12, 2017 by JulieM

[stemelbow]

I will add...with the Canadian numbers posted a couple of times earlier in this thread, we see at the last year reported there were 344 employees (full time 162 and part time 182) in Canada. 

http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/haip/srch/t3010form22QuickView-eng.action?b=826344632RR0001&fpe=2015-12-31&r=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cra-arc.gc.ca%3A80%2Febci%2Fhaip%2Fsrch%2Fbasicsearchresult-eng.action%3Fk%3Dlatter%2Bday%26amp%3Bs%3Dregistered%26amp%3Bp%3D1%26amp

If you convert the money to US dollars we find that 3 of the 344 make somewhere between $120,000 - $159,999 for Canada or 91,200 - 121,599.24 in US dollars.

It may be that those three employees in that range make 91,000 or 121,000.  It is possible that 3 of the 344 employees (.9 percent) make as much as a GA, but probably not likely for all three.  But we'll be charitable and say all three. 

Again I'm fine if the GA's make more than other employees.  But again, let's dispense with the modest living expense stuff.  If the case of employees in Canada is any indication, the GA's make more than 99% of other Church employees.  Again, I'd be more than happy about that. But, let's be real.  That's a pretty good salary, on top of plenty of other benefits that other employees do not get, which again, I'm fine with that other than the messages given to us over the years about their pay have been misleading. 

[rockpond]

57 minutes ago, cdowis said:

I do not judge you at all   == >>>  I don't know anything about you.  Just proposing some things you might think about while you are judging me.

You are correct that you don't know me at all.  And I don't believe you were "just proposing some things might think about".

One thing for all of us to consider on these threads (and I'm including myself):  What does it say about our beliefs or thoughts on a particular issue being discussed when we feel the need to take someone who disagrees with us and put them "in a box"?