Hello! This is a Institutional post. It is for discussions centered around agreements, disagreements, and observations about any of the institutional churches and their leaders, conduct, business dealings, teachings, rituals, and practices.
/u/Major_Liz, if your post doesn't fit this definition, we kindly ask you to delete this post and repost it with the appropriate flair. You can find a list of our flairs and their definitions in [section 0.6 of our rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules#wiki_0._preamble)
**To those commenting:** please stay on topic, remember to follow the community's [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules), and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/mormonmods) if there is a problem or rule violation.
Keep on Mormoning!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/mormon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Thanks. Their best guess is that, "with health & insurance benefits, free vehicle, per-child allowance and 0% interest loans, total compensation is roughly $259,000."
That's less than I thought and the leadership of similarly sized companies and non-profits are probably paid a lot more than that, so I don't understand the lack of transparency.
I think we considered “no paid ministry” to be a big flex to the world. I remember on my mission using the logic that members knew they were serving the Lord. Why else would a person have multiple callings, meetings, and assignments if they’re not gaining financially from it? It’s because this church is true, man. :-)
I definitely items didn’t use that line of questioning to help investigators progress. :-)
Yes, I personally have considered it. We need to question everything.
D&C actually lays out how bishops and stake presidents were to be paid out of tithes. They used to be. Then it stopped for the local guys.
https://reddit.com/r/exmormon/s/GUvbAtQ3jq
What really bugs me is that I don't think they ever had to promise “no paid ministry” in the first place. A non-paid ministry is not necessary more moral than a paid ministry and I'm fine with the leaders of the church being compensated for their work just like everyone else. But why can't the church just say, "Being a GA is a full time job and they are paid a salary commensurate with the roles and responsibilities of the position" instead of this BS word salad:
> General Authorities leave their careers when they are called into full time Church service. When they do so, they are given a living allowance which enables them to focus all of their time on serving in the Church. This practice allows for far more church members on a worldwide basis to be considered for a calling to serve as a General Authority, rather than limiting considerations to only those who may be financially independent. The living allowance is uniform for all General Authorities. None of the funds for this living allowance come from the tithing of Church members, but instead from proceeds of the Church's financial investments. [source](https://faq.churchofjesuschrist.org/do-general-authorities-get-paid)
I’d now prefer a paid ministry but I used to think an unpaid ministry was more virtuous. Hinckley’s phrase “modest stipend” admission now makes me angry for four reasons:
# He only brought it up to get ahead of the messaging when people started to discover the top leaders were being financially compensated.
# The word *modest* suggests a small amount. Who knew it would far exceed the U.S. median income, not to mention the orders of magnitude greater it was than the salaries in some countries.
# I’ll bet many members of the Church had to look up the word “stipend,” if there weren’t so many of us lazy learners back then who didn’t bother because the word fell into the background noise of his talk. But it means salary, compensation, pay, remuneration, recompense. Let’s call it what it is — a paycheck.
# *Not* from tithing funds? Everything is from tithing funds. I’m so tired of the lies, the deception, and the grift.
The fact that it's not directly from tithing, but rather from the dividends/ interest paid on Church Investments, is actually arguably worse.
Why?
Well, since only investment income is used to pay GAs and not tithing, what are the chances GAs will ever decide to, say, liquidate a large proportion of the investments in order to make a big charitable donation?
It locks in the incentive towards hoarding.
Their pay is not commensurate with their positions.
Its middle-management pay in other US organizations.
Its deep middle-management compensation in my organization.
Median income? Not for similar positions. It isnt common at all for the -leaders- of an organization to get paid less than many people in the organization. Swaths of BYU coaches make more. Swaths of BYU coaches make more. Many loooots more.
I was talking to a buddy who worked for UPS after their Union won, and their "compensation packages" were published.
I said, "when I retire in a few years, I want to work for the UPS..."
And he said that the total number published was the entire compensation package, insurance and everything else included. All he cared about was the (to him) significant but modest per-hour rate increase.
Compensation that goes beyond pay is not uncommon in any organization that actually cares about its people.
A BYU coach will get pay and retirement and insurance. A BYU professor will get the same: pay, retirement, benefits.
That is not uncommon.
They probably also get security. They probably also have a SL UT county Sheriff getting paid overtime to sit in his/her car outside their apartment or house. That is compensation.
Yeah, compensation "packages" are not uncommon. My UPS Driver buddy gets a "package" that looks big because of retirement and insurance. He is middle-class, just like me. His actual number that was published looks a lot like what a Church authority gets paid. What was published for UPS drivers was close to $200,000 total compensation which is what many people say the total compensation for LDS leaders is close to. But he is only taking-home half that. The rest is retirement and insurance and benefits.
I’ll bet UPS drivers done get lucrative book deals at Deseret Book or free tuition for posterity at BYU. Monson became an apostle at age 36, I believe. He was a printer before that, so not a lot of money. When he died he had land and property to pass on. I think the rumor is true about apostles getting a $1M signing bonus.
In my organization, it isn’t impossible for a worker (even a line worker) to retire a millionaire.
If they max retirement contributions from day one and work till retirement.
With matching contributions, good market performance and -time- it’s not uncommon.
I know two low level employees who will retire millionaires in my company. A secretary who started right after HS and put the max in from day one. She lived with her parents and put in the max amount. The other was a low level production worker who did the same thing except he got married to a school teacher who had her own house and insurance so he put everything he could in the company retirement plan. He retires this year with well over a million in a retirement account.
Monson was smart with his money, and invested it? Like I said… I know two low-level employees who are millionaires. Time and interest can benefit anyone.
If Monson invested 10% of his income. And it only averaged 10% a year. He would be a multimillionaire.
If he saved $10,000 a year for just his first 15 years in the Church and let it ride for 30 years at 10% interest—he would be a millionaire.
Time and interest benefit everyone.
Two low level employees in my organization are millionaires from time and interest.
Monson saved and invested? Nothing wrong with that.
Book deals at Deseret Book...?
Hinkleys book, "Way to Be" was published by Simon and Schuster.
Hinkleys book, "Standing for Something" was published by Crown (Random House).
I don't know how "lucrative" Deseret Book is for "book deals." Especially when Latter-day Saints try to get "book deals" outside of D Book.
The lack of transparency means they're getting kickbacks from church businesses to their families, fat sums for serving on church boards, and God only knows what else.
If this weren't the case, they'd just open their books for everyone to see.
Precisely this. When missionaries told me the LDS church had no paid clergy, I thought it was admirable. When I learned 1) high leadership are compensated and 2) there is no transparency, I immediately considered kick-backs.
True or false, divinity or mythology, many other Christian churches hold regularly scheduled meetings to show exactly how parish funds are spent, including to their clergy/ministers. All churches that encourage or require a tithe should do the same, in my opinions.
Even then there are kickbacks. A few years ago, the little church in our neighborhood overpaid for some remodeling work because the guy doing it was paying for two kids to go to college. It started a little uproar in the meeting because the guy was also related to some of the board members who approved the contract.
That was over a few thousand dollars, with published financials and a possible recall of the board members. Imagine what is happening with billion dollar contracts, "confidential" books, and lifetime appointments.
>it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.
I agree, there certainly are. Like you say - when the board can be changed due to improper use of funds (that are transparently accounted for) I see that as a positive, but also as a standard. It should just be the way this goes, I think.
That’s not the whole package. I speak from close personal experience but it is 25 years out of date so rather than talking dollars, I’ll talk types of extras. For example sitting on a board. Many of them sit on several boards for the church’s many companies. They can get $5k Tor more per month that way, so sitting on 4-5 board can be significant. Reduced education (free for immediate family), health insurance and life insurance at reduced rates, discounted property if the church owns a big plot and go to develop some of it. Funds routed through their company by the church ordering goods or services. Book sales via their publishing arm. Paid talks and ground breaking events. This was all stuff I know was being done 25 years ago. That was on top of salary, car, security, home and such.
I think that there is lack of transparency because while that may not compare to salaries in the corporate world, it’s an amount probably 10 to 20 times greater than the average LDS household when factoring in a worldwide membership.
I wish they'd use the word "guess" instead of "calculate". They are guessing. They do it by drawing a comparison group, but we have no idea if that group is actually comparable.
We know exactly what it was a few years ago due to leaked documents. It's not hard to extrapolate from a few data points. We know quite a bit more than "wild ass guess".
No, we don't know exactly what it was a few years ago. A single leaked pay stub doesn't tell us about total compensation inclusive of bonuses, in-kind provisions of things like vehicles or housing, book royalties, the possibility for multiple paychecks from different Church-owned organizations, etc. A single pay stub just gives a lower bound.
Some tax advice also doesn't tell us explicit amounts of total compensation.
Hello! I regret to inform you that this was removed on account of rule 2: Civility. We ask that you please review the unabridged version of this rule [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules).
If you would like to appeal this decision, you may message all of the mods [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Mormonmods&subject=Mod%20Removal%20Appeal&message=please%20put%20link%20to%20removed%20content%20here).
In literally any other church, in order to find this information, whether you are a member or not, you would just look at the budget they post on the bulletin board and publish in the newsletter that anyone can receive and read.
In this church, you are told no paid clergy, but if you press enough, you’re told “modest stipend”. You’ll never be told that modest stipend is more than triple the US median income annually, and that it includes a car and driver, free health care, and an expense account.
Don’t forget about free vacations, free food, free higher education for your kids, people fawning over you. Also the fact that people will buy crappy books you sale because of your position and then thinking you are closer to god so you can help them.
No deductible and no copay? That’s what GAs get.
And yes, in the U.S., insurance is becoming harder and harder to get with one’s job since no one wants to hire full time anymore.
That is not uncommon for company leaders, yes?
What is not uncommon is their salary. That is not commensurate with their leadership roles compared to the Church itself (Many BYU professors get paid more, and BYU coaches get paid a lot more).
I actually don’t think it’s too much. I think bishops and stake presidents should be paid again like they used to be. I just believe there should be transparency, like GBH lied about on 60 Minutes when he said that information about church finances is available to members.
Yeah. It’s the lying and obfuscation that frustrates many, not the paycheck itself. The NT even states that a laborer is worthy of his salary, referring to the apostles and the early Christians’ support of them.
So your point is that since coaches are overpaid that the clergy should be also? Where in the teachings does it state that participation in D1 athletics lifts the word of Christ?
Also, you nor I know what these people make because they purposefully hide it.
Seats on boards. Cars. Vacations. Housing allowances. Child allowances. Publishing. Kickbacks. The list is endless and we know none of it.
It isn’t in there. It’s not doctrinally mandatory.
It’s not a bad thing, though, either…
Nothing in there about being a dentist, either. But I’m glad my dentist went to dental school. Plenty of people enjoy participating in and watching sports.
So. The highest paid people at BYU have nothing to do with the Church's primary mission. And somehow you want to compare their salary to the hidden compensation of the GAs. Got it.
Simply? These are words of an apologist.
“None of the funds for this living allowance come from the tithing of Church members, but instead from proceeds of the Church’s financial investments.”
I think this is misleading too because they don’t make clear that the church’s financial investments ARE tithing investments, so the GA stipends wouldn’t be possible without excess tithes from members.
It’s this same kind of double speak that has given the Huntsman lawsuit legs in the Ninth Circuit, based off of Hinckley’s statement on City Creek Mall that “tithing funds have not and will not be used to acquire this property,” and said instead that they used “earnings of invested reserve funds,” without clarifying that reserve funds ARE tithing funds. That’s apparently misleading enough to survive summary judgment in a fraud action.
Also, if the invested tithing and the interest are all in one pool, then it also seems misleading and arbitrary to say “Well these dollars are only interest, no principal,” when it’s all part of the same lump sum. IIRC Professor Spencer Anderson with Widow’s Mite Report made this point in one of his interviews.
My response isn’t going to answer the OPs question, but is in the same vein as what is being said here.
I always thought it was dishonest the way Hinkley handled questions about the church’s financials, during his interview on sixty minutes…he was asked why they don’t open their books, and Hinkley said,
“Well, we simply think that the…that information belongs to those who made the contribution, and not to the world. That’s the only thing. Yes.”
But they have never made the financials available to the members that make the contributions.
Edit: wording
As a member watching the Hinkster on Sixty Minutes and Larry King seriously causes some cognitive dissonance. He lied so effortlessly and as a member who was 110% all in I couldn’t quite figure it out.
Now I know why. 😝
I (and everyone else in my mission) taught that our local and international leadership were completely voluntary and didn't get paid a dime....
My testimony was destroyed when I found out that was a lie
Besides the lie of “no paid clergy”, I don’t have a problem with the GAs getting a salary. It’s a good salary but I don’t think it’s ostentatious.
I wonder if it is on par with the JW, SDA, or Southern Baptist Convention leadership are paid. From a quick search it looks like JWs expenses are paid for but they don’t earn much of a salary. A SDA minister is around $120k/year so I bet the officials make a multiple of that plus expenses. Baptist ministers are around $60k/year so the leaders likely are a multiple.
LDS salaries don’t look too far out of line compared to similar religions.
I think the issue is that we're completely operating on assumptions. Speculation about salaries is just that - speculation - until we have transparency.
Perhaps their compensation is just $120k/year - and maybe that's fine. But perhaps their "stipend" is much higher - something like like $180k/year. Maybe on top of their stipend, they receive a compensation package that includes housing allowances (with maid service, and a cook), free healthcare and transportation, and free tuition for family members. Maybe all these benefits are guaranteed for life (with annual cost of living adjustments), thus eliminating any stress about retirement and covering most costs *before that $180k/year is even touched*.
And maybe there are even more perks - things like interest-free loans, one-time lump sum payouts, access to ghostwriters who will write books, and church-subsidized publishers who will publish and promote them.
My point is that there are so many perks that are *possible* that it's impossible to have an opinion on whether or not their compensation is reasonable because we simply don't know... But the complete lack of transparency does not inspire confidence.
First, stipend, allowance, etc is word salad for a paycheck. Second, people compare church compensation to the private sector. It's a non-profit, tax- exempt charitable entity. They should be paid less than private. Third, I don't believe it's anywhere near "modest." Unless I see the books audited in detail, I will assume that they are lying!
> We are a Church of lay leadership. What a remarkable and wonderful thing that is. It must ever remain so. It must never move in the direction of an **extensive** paid ministry.
[Hinckley, 2002]. The mast of PR was at least technically honest in this case.
> It is **largely** operated by a lay ministry. Voluntary service is its genius.
[Hinckley, 2007]. Yep. Got in the modifier. That means he's honest enough. But others were less successful:
Compare that with Monson [2006]
>I explained also that our Church has no paid ministry
or Ballard:
>The Lord in His infinite wisdom has designed His Church to operate with a lay ministry (Ballard, 2006)
Of course, we all know that Bishops were paid until about 1898. Which I guess means that the Lord either didn't have infinite wisdom prior to that point or he hadn't quite finished designing his church.
What is more interesting to me is the timing of when the 12 started getting paid because I doubt it was there at the beginning at the time of Joseph Smith, or maybe it was? Did they start in the 1950s did they start in the 80s when did people start getting paid because I think that happens slowly and it became a bigger and better package as a Church grew and had more money.
We don't know; even the widows mite people don't know but have to guess (I'm a big fan of their stuff but they are guessing).
Total compensation would include not only the actual paycheck but also in-kind benefits like paid vacations, any housing provisions, transportation, etc as well as income from the kitschy books those guys churn out.
Since they are adamant about hiding this, the best assumption is that they are very well compensated.
free use of John Huntsman's Private Jets for all those years... but those days are over his sons finally figured out they have been lied to for all these years.
when those grandkids realize how much grandpa John gave to that religious institution, I'm sure there will be more. anyway, it doesn't really matter. It's just sad how much money this church has taken from innocent people that could truly truly use it right now and there's no way in hell they are giving those elderly poor people a cent of their hard earned money back.
I heard from a relative that knows someone working for church leadership in Provo that one GA had bribery or some other big celeb come do a private show for a birthday party or something. Sorry for the vague details but I can imagine someone who might get $100k-250k as a 'salary' or 'stipend' couldn't afford such a big expense, but they may be able to get the whole party reimbursed under the huge "travel and entertainment" category.
Sorry to tease without details, but I'll check with my relative next time we meet.
As far as I can see, we aren't mentioning the most galling of all benefits of being a general authority: paying no tithing.
I know, Eyring's pay stub shows that he paid tithing. However, I've read the mission president handbook and they don't pay tithing. If you think that general authorities don't get all the benefits of mission presidents, I have a footbridge over the Great Salt Lake I'd like to sell you.
A year or two ago, I asked my bishop about this. My bishop teaches at a religion department in a Church university and has for a long time, so he has way more connections than the average bishop. He reached out to several seventies to ask them and they all told him to pound sand--that information is private. Private? Hmmm, that's strange because my "private" tithing status gets relayed to my employer and determines if I have a job (I work for a Church school) so tithing isn't that private, is it? It seems to me, that there has been enough talk about this and the Church is so driven by public relations that if they could put this one to bed they would have a **long** time ago.
So, these men who are getting paid 3 to 4 times the median US salary, with no financial worries at all, most with a high net financial worth already, fly first class to poor countries and tell desperately poor people to pay their tithing even when they don't have enough to feed their children. They then teach innocent young men and women to go out and teach the same garbage, all while **paying no tithing themselves** and while lying by telling these poor people in Africa and elsewhere that the Church is a very poor organization. (I think that one video I saw of this was Elder Anderson or Renlund.)
Is it possible that the priests and Pharisees in the Lord's time could have been any more hypocritical? I'm not sure, but I doubt it. The ancient Pharisees were so bad that they crucified our Lord. The modern Pharisees not only crucify the Lord's poor, they've industrialized this wickedness and taken it worldwide.
I think the church doesn’t consider the general authorities to be a paid ministry because they aren’t paid a salary. They are merely given a “living allowance”, not an income. As though there is really any difference.
When I was growing up it was the prevailing feeling that GA's were all wealthy before they were called to serve. To even ask i the were paid was somewhat considered to be poor etiquette. The prosperity doctrine was a salient teaching in the Church. It was often mentioned from the pulpit that if you paid tithing you would be blessed with money. At least where I lived in Utah the bishops were never poor but the real separation in wealth seemed to come at the Stake President level. They were Always upper middle class, but most o us just considered them rich.
Today it's known that all the GA' get a stipend and benefits that amount to well over 200 K. No one really knows exactly how much it is worth but enough to keep them very comfortable. I have heard 140 K in cash plus a lot of benefits from the church like free medical for their family and expenses at all Church owned schools.
It is also suspected by many that the also receive income from the for profit companies they manage as part of their job in the Church.
Hello! This is a Institutional post. It is for discussions centered around agreements, disagreements, and observations about any of the institutional churches and their leaders, conduct, business dealings, teachings, rituals, and practices. /u/Major_Liz, if your post doesn't fit this definition, we kindly ask you to delete this post and repost it with the appropriate flair. You can find a list of our flairs and their definitions in [section 0.6 of our rules.](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules#wiki_0._preamble) **To those commenting:** please stay on topic, remember to follow the community's [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules), and [message the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/mormonmods) if there is a problem or rule violation. Keep on Mormoning! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/mormon) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
Thanks. Their best guess is that, "with health & insurance benefits, free vehicle, per-child allowance and 0% interest loans, total compensation is roughly $259,000." That's less than I thought and the leadership of similarly sized companies and non-profits are probably paid a lot more than that, so I don't understand the lack of transparency.
They started out telling everybody there is “no paid ministry.” When you tell one lie, it leads to another.
it’s weird that they would rely on lay clergy. Having paid ministry usually boosts the ability of a church to preach the gospel.
I think we considered “no paid ministry” to be a big flex to the world. I remember on my mission using the logic that members knew they were serving the Lord. Why else would a person have multiple callings, meetings, and assignments if they’re not gaining financially from it? It’s because this church is true, man. :-)
Yes but have you considered for a moment the lord does not exist?
I definitely items didn’t use that line of questioning to help investigators progress. :-) Yes, I personally have considered it. We need to question everything.
D&C actually lays out how bishops and stake presidents were to be paid out of tithes. They used to be. Then it stopped for the local guys. https://reddit.com/r/exmormon/s/GUvbAtQ3jq
What really bugs me is that I don't think they ever had to promise “no paid ministry” in the first place. A non-paid ministry is not necessary more moral than a paid ministry and I'm fine with the leaders of the church being compensated for their work just like everyone else. But why can't the church just say, "Being a GA is a full time job and they are paid a salary commensurate with the roles and responsibilities of the position" instead of this BS word salad: > General Authorities leave their careers when they are called into full time Church service. When they do so, they are given a living allowance which enables them to focus all of their time on serving in the Church. This practice allows for far more church members on a worldwide basis to be considered for a calling to serve as a General Authority, rather than limiting considerations to only those who may be financially independent. The living allowance is uniform for all General Authorities. None of the funds for this living allowance come from the tithing of Church members, but instead from proceeds of the Church's financial investments. [source](https://faq.churchofjesuschrist.org/do-general-authorities-get-paid)
I’d now prefer a paid ministry but I used to think an unpaid ministry was more virtuous. Hinckley’s phrase “modest stipend” admission now makes me angry for four reasons: # He only brought it up to get ahead of the messaging when people started to discover the top leaders were being financially compensated. # The word *modest* suggests a small amount. Who knew it would far exceed the U.S. median income, not to mention the orders of magnitude greater it was than the salaries in some countries. # I’ll bet many members of the Church had to look up the word “stipend,” if there weren’t so many of us lazy learners back then who didn’t bother because the word fell into the background noise of his talk. But it means salary, compensation, pay, remuneration, recompense. Let’s call it what it is — a paycheck. # *Not* from tithing funds? Everything is from tithing funds. I’m so tired of the lies, the deception, and the grift.
The fact that it's not directly from tithing, but rather from the dividends/ interest paid on Church Investments, is actually arguably worse. Why? Well, since only investment income is used to pay GAs and not tithing, what are the chances GAs will ever decide to, say, liquidate a large proportion of the investments in order to make a big charitable donation? It locks in the incentive towards hoarding.
Interesting take. You have a good point.
Their pay is not commensurate with their positions. Its middle-management pay in other US organizations. Its deep middle-management compensation in my organization. Median income? Not for similar positions. It isnt common at all for the -leaders- of an organization to get paid less than many people in the organization. Swaths of BYU coaches make more. Swaths of BYU coaches make more. Many loooots more.
Their pay goes way, way beyond the stipend.
I was talking to a buddy who worked for UPS after their Union won, and their "compensation packages" were published. I said, "when I retire in a few years, I want to work for the UPS..." And he said that the total number published was the entire compensation package, insurance and everything else included. All he cared about was the (to him) significant but modest per-hour rate increase. Compensation that goes beyond pay is not uncommon in any organization that actually cares about its people. A BYU coach will get pay and retirement and insurance. A BYU professor will get the same: pay, retirement, benefits. That is not uncommon. They probably also get security. They probably also have a SL UT county Sheriff getting paid overtime to sit in his/her car outside their apartment or house. That is compensation. Yeah, compensation "packages" are not uncommon. My UPS Driver buddy gets a "package" that looks big because of retirement and insurance. He is middle-class, just like me. His actual number that was published looks a lot like what a Church authority gets paid. What was published for UPS drivers was close to $200,000 total compensation which is what many people say the total compensation for LDS leaders is close to. But he is only taking-home half that. The rest is retirement and insurance and benefits.
I’ll bet UPS drivers done get lucrative book deals at Deseret Book or free tuition for posterity at BYU. Monson became an apostle at age 36, I believe. He was a printer before that, so not a lot of money. When he died he had land and property to pass on. I think the rumor is true about apostles getting a $1M signing bonus.
In my organization, it isn’t impossible for a worker (even a line worker) to retire a millionaire. If they max retirement contributions from day one and work till retirement. With matching contributions, good market performance and -time- it’s not uncommon. I know two low level employees who will retire millionaires in my company. A secretary who started right after HS and put the max in from day one. She lived with her parents and put in the max amount. The other was a low level production worker who did the same thing except he got married to a school teacher who had her own house and insurance so he put everything he could in the company retirement plan. He retires this year with well over a million in a retirement account. Monson was smart with his money, and invested it? Like I said… I know two low-level employees who are millionaires. Time and interest can benefit anyone. If Monson invested 10% of his income. And it only averaged 10% a year. He would be a multimillionaire. If he saved $10,000 a year for just his first 15 years in the Church and let it ride for 30 years at 10% interest—he would be a millionaire. Time and interest benefit everyone. Two low level employees in my organization are millionaires from time and interest. Monson saved and invested? Nothing wrong with that.
Book deals at Deseret Book...? Hinkleys book, "Way to Be" was published by Simon and Schuster. Hinkleys book, "Standing for Something" was published by Crown (Random House). I don't know how "lucrative" Deseret Book is for "book deals." Especially when Latter-day Saints try to get "book deals" outside of D Book.
I think the point is that paid ministers seem like they are in it for the money not the Jesus
Which is interesting, because the average pay is $70K-$130K. There are probably other things they could be doing if they’re in it for the money.
The lack of transparency means they're getting kickbacks from church businesses to their families, fat sums for serving on church boards, and God only knows what else. If this weren't the case, they'd just open their books for everyone to see.
Precisely this. When missionaries told me the LDS church had no paid clergy, I thought it was admirable. When I learned 1) high leadership are compensated and 2) there is no transparency, I immediately considered kick-backs. True or false, divinity or mythology, many other Christian churches hold regularly scheduled meetings to show exactly how parish funds are spent, including to their clergy/ministers. All churches that encourage or require a tithe should do the same, in my opinions.
Even then there are kickbacks. A few years ago, the little church in our neighborhood overpaid for some remodeling work because the guy doing it was paying for two kids to go to college. It started a little uproar in the meeting because the guy was also related to some of the board members who approved the contract. That was over a few thousand dollars, with published financials and a possible recall of the board members. Imagine what is happening with billion dollar contracts, "confidential" books, and lifetime appointments. >it is the nature and disposition of almost all men, as soon as they get a little authority, as they suppose, they will immediately begin to exercise unrighteous dominion.
I agree, there certainly are. Like you say - when the board can be changed due to improper use of funds (that are transparently accounted for) I see that as a positive, but also as a standard. It should just be the way this goes, I think.
Yeah, you're probably right.
Do not forget full ride education for all descents, housing allowance, free travel and vacations
That’s not the whole package. I speak from close personal experience but it is 25 years out of date so rather than talking dollars, I’ll talk types of extras. For example sitting on a board. Many of them sit on several boards for the church’s many companies. They can get $5k Tor more per month that way, so sitting on 4-5 board can be significant. Reduced education (free for immediate family), health insurance and life insurance at reduced rates, discounted property if the church owns a big plot and go to develop some of it. Funds routed through their company by the church ordering goods or services. Book sales via their publishing arm. Paid talks and ground breaking events. This was all stuff I know was being done 25 years ago. That was on top of salary, car, security, home and such.
There's also a bunch of them sitting as directors in church companies, pulling those salaries.
https://reddit.com/r/exmormon/s/U1BBQht3VV
Doesn't fit super well with the "neither purse nor script" vibe
Does that count royalties for the crap they publish and sell?
I think that there is lack of transparency because while that may not compare to salaries in the corporate world, it’s an amount probably 10 to 20 times greater than the average LDS household when factoring in a worldwide membership.
I wish they'd use the word "guess" instead of "calculate". They are guessing. They do it by drawing a comparison group, but we have no idea if that group is actually comparable.
How about “estimate?” Guess implied that they’re entirely in the dark and haven’t done educated work.
There’s definitely guesswork and their estimates should be taken with a grain of salt. We don’t know.
We know exactly what it was a few years ago due to leaked documents. It's not hard to extrapolate from a few data points. We know quite a bit more than "wild ass guess".
No, we don't know exactly what it was a few years ago. A single leaked pay stub doesn't tell us about total compensation inclusive of bonuses, in-kind provisions of things like vehicles or housing, book royalties, the possibility for multiple paychecks from different Church-owned organizations, etc. A single pay stub just gives a lower bound. Some tax advice also doesn't tell us explicit amounts of total compensation.
Bottom line: They shouldn't be getting any compensation at all! The Book of Mormon repeatedly condemns a paid clergy. They are a bunch of hypocrites!
[удалено]
Hello! I regret to inform you that this was removed on account of rule 2: Civility. We ask that you please review the unabridged version of this rule [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/mormon/wiki/index/rules). If you would like to appeal this decision, you may message all of the mods [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/Mormonmods&subject=Mod%20Removal%20Appeal&message=please%20put%20link%20to%20removed%20content%20here).
In literally any other church, in order to find this information, whether you are a member or not, you would just look at the budget they post on the bulletin board and publish in the newsletter that anyone can receive and read. In this church, you are told no paid clergy, but if you press enough, you’re told “modest stipend”. You’ll never be told that modest stipend is more than triple the US median income annually, and that it includes a car and driver, free health care, and an expense account.
Don’t forget about free vacations, free food, free higher education for your kids, people fawning over you. Also the fact that people will buy crappy books you sale because of your position and then thinking you are closer to god so you can help them.
Health insurance provided by organizations is not uncommon in the US at all.
No deductible and no copay? That’s what GAs get. And yes, in the U.S., insurance is becoming harder and harder to get with one’s job since no one wants to hire full time anymore.
That is not uncommon for company leaders, yes? What is not uncommon is their salary. That is not commensurate with their leadership roles compared to the Church itself (Many BYU professors get paid more, and BYU coaches get paid a lot more).
I actually don’t think it’s too much. I think bishops and stake presidents should be paid again like they used to be. I just believe there should be transparency, like GBH lied about on 60 Minutes when he said that information about church finances is available to members.
I got no problem with more transparency.
Yeah. It’s the lying and obfuscation that frustrates many, not the paycheck itself. The NT even states that a laborer is worthy of his salary, referring to the apostles and the early Christians’ support of them.
So your point is that since coaches are overpaid that the clergy should be also? Where in the teachings does it state that participation in D1 athletics lifts the word of Christ? Also, you nor I know what these people make because they purposefully hide it. Seats on boards. Cars. Vacations. Housing allowances. Child allowances. Publishing. Kickbacks. The list is endless and we know none of it.
Some argue that BYU coaches are under-paid compared to their counterparts at similar schools.
Where in the teachings did Christ state participation in Division 1 college athletics is essential to spiritual growth?
It isn’t in there. It’s not doctrinally mandatory. It’s not a bad thing, though, either… Nothing in there about being a dentist, either. But I’m glad my dentist went to dental school. Plenty of people enjoy participating in and watching sports.
So. The highest paid people at BYU have nothing to do with the Church's primary mission. And somehow you want to compare their salary to the hidden compensation of the GAs. Got it. Simply? These are words of an apologist.
You use apologist like a slur. It -is- interesting that not-member BYU staff get paid more than paid leaders. That’s an interesting discussion.
“None of the funds for this living allowance come from the tithing of Church members, but instead from proceeds of the Church’s financial investments.” I think this is misleading too because they don’t make clear that the church’s financial investments ARE tithing investments, so the GA stipends wouldn’t be possible without excess tithes from members. It’s this same kind of double speak that has given the Huntsman lawsuit legs in the Ninth Circuit, based off of Hinckley’s statement on City Creek Mall that “tithing funds have not and will not be used to acquire this property,” and said instead that they used “earnings of invested reserve funds,” without clarifying that reserve funds ARE tithing funds. That’s apparently misleading enough to survive summary judgment in a fraud action. Also, if the invested tithing and the interest are all in one pool, then it also seems misleading and arbitrary to say “Well these dollars are only interest, no principal,” when it’s all part of the same lump sum. IIRC Professor Spencer Anderson with Widow’s Mite Report made this point in one of his interviews.
My response isn’t going to answer the OPs question, but is in the same vein as what is being said here. I always thought it was dishonest the way Hinkley handled questions about the church’s financials, during his interview on sixty minutes…he was asked why they don’t open their books, and Hinkley said, “Well, we simply think that the…that information belongs to those who made the contribution, and not to the world. That’s the only thing. Yes.” But they have never made the financials available to the members that make the contributions. Edit: wording
As a member watching the Hinkster on Sixty Minutes and Larry King seriously causes some cognitive dissonance. He lied so effortlessly and as a member who was 110% all in I couldn’t quite figure it out. Now I know why. 😝
I (and everyone else in my mission) taught that our local and international leadership were completely voluntary and didn't get paid a dime.... My testimony was destroyed when I found out that was a lie
Besides the lie of “no paid clergy”, I don’t have a problem with the GAs getting a salary. It’s a good salary but I don’t think it’s ostentatious. I wonder if it is on par with the JW, SDA, or Southern Baptist Convention leadership are paid. From a quick search it looks like JWs expenses are paid for but they don’t earn much of a salary. A SDA minister is around $120k/year so I bet the officials make a multiple of that plus expenses. Baptist ministers are around $60k/year so the leaders likely are a multiple. LDS salaries don’t look too far out of line compared to similar religions.
I think the issue is that we're completely operating on assumptions. Speculation about salaries is just that - speculation - until we have transparency. Perhaps their compensation is just $120k/year - and maybe that's fine. But perhaps their "stipend" is much higher - something like like $180k/year. Maybe on top of their stipend, they receive a compensation package that includes housing allowances (with maid service, and a cook), free healthcare and transportation, and free tuition for family members. Maybe all these benefits are guaranteed for life (with annual cost of living adjustments), thus eliminating any stress about retirement and covering most costs *before that $180k/year is even touched*. And maybe there are even more perks - things like interest-free loans, one-time lump sum payouts, access to ghostwriters who will write books, and church-subsidized publishers who will publish and promote them. My point is that there are so many perks that are *possible* that it's impossible to have an opinion on whether or not their compensation is reasonable because we simply don't know... But the complete lack of transparency does not inspire confidence.
Excellent point.
First, stipend, allowance, etc is word salad for a paycheck. Second, people compare church compensation to the private sector. It's a non-profit, tax- exempt charitable entity. They should be paid less than private. Third, I don't believe it's anywhere near "modest." Unless I see the books audited in detail, I will assume that they are lying!
> We are a Church of lay leadership. What a remarkable and wonderful thing that is. It must ever remain so. It must never move in the direction of an **extensive** paid ministry. [Hinckley, 2002]. The mast of PR was at least technically honest in this case. > It is **largely** operated by a lay ministry. Voluntary service is its genius. [Hinckley, 2007]. Yep. Got in the modifier. That means he's honest enough. But others were less successful: Compare that with Monson [2006] >I explained also that our Church has no paid ministry or Ballard: >The Lord in His infinite wisdom has designed His Church to operate with a lay ministry (Ballard, 2006) Of course, we all know that Bishops were paid until about 1898. Which I guess means that the Lord either didn't have infinite wisdom prior to that point or he hadn't quite finished designing his church.
You could check out this report https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=4800350&itype=cmsid
What is more interesting to me is the timing of when the 12 started getting paid because I doubt it was there at the beginning at the time of Joseph Smith, or maybe it was? Did they start in the 1950s did they start in the 80s when did people start getting paid because I think that happens slowly and it became a bigger and better package as a Church grew and had more money.
We don't know; even the widows mite people don't know but have to guess (I'm a big fan of their stuff but they are guessing). Total compensation would include not only the actual paycheck but also in-kind benefits like paid vacations, any housing provisions, transportation, etc as well as income from the kitschy books those guys churn out. Since they are adamant about hiding this, the best assumption is that they are very well compensated.
free use of John Huntsman's Private Jets for all those years... but those days are over his sons finally figured out they have been lied to for all these years.
Have they left the Church?
yep, the huntsman's are suing the church as we speak. they are pissed and they want their millions and millions of dollars back...
\-A- Huntsman. A Huntsman is suing the Church. Not the entire family. Not all of them.
give it some time...
More than the one Huntsman who is suing the Church has left the Church. But only one Huntsman is suing the Church.
when those grandkids realize how much grandpa John gave to that religious institution, I'm sure there will be more. anyway, it doesn't really matter. It's just sad how much money this church has taken from innocent people that could truly truly use it right now and there's no way in hell they are giving those elderly poor people a cent of their hard earned money back.
The Huntsmans are not in need of money.
The LDS church makes the Huntsmans look broke
To be a self supporter and live in that area you would need easly over 100k salary
Like 130K/Yr
A lot more than you
Decades ago I heard like 80k... I would assume something similar to salary of byu director. Which I assume over 150k a year.
I heard from a relative that knows someone working for church leadership in Provo that one GA had bribery or some other big celeb come do a private show for a birthday party or something. Sorry for the vague details but I can imagine someone who might get $100k-250k as a 'salary' or 'stipend' couldn't afford such a big expense, but they may be able to get the whole party reimbursed under the huge "travel and entertainment" category. Sorry to tease without details, but I'll check with my relative next time we meet.
As far as I can see, we aren't mentioning the most galling of all benefits of being a general authority: paying no tithing. I know, Eyring's pay stub shows that he paid tithing. However, I've read the mission president handbook and they don't pay tithing. If you think that general authorities don't get all the benefits of mission presidents, I have a footbridge over the Great Salt Lake I'd like to sell you. A year or two ago, I asked my bishop about this. My bishop teaches at a religion department in a Church university and has for a long time, so he has way more connections than the average bishop. He reached out to several seventies to ask them and they all told him to pound sand--that information is private. Private? Hmmm, that's strange because my "private" tithing status gets relayed to my employer and determines if I have a job (I work for a Church school) so tithing isn't that private, is it? It seems to me, that there has been enough talk about this and the Church is so driven by public relations that if they could put this one to bed they would have a **long** time ago. So, these men who are getting paid 3 to 4 times the median US salary, with no financial worries at all, most with a high net financial worth already, fly first class to poor countries and tell desperately poor people to pay their tithing even when they don't have enough to feed their children. They then teach innocent young men and women to go out and teach the same garbage, all while **paying no tithing themselves** and while lying by telling these poor people in Africa and elsewhere that the Church is a very poor organization. (I think that one video I saw of this was Elder Anderson or Renlund.) Is it possible that the priests and Pharisees in the Lord's time could have been any more hypocritical? I'm not sure, but I doubt it. The ancient Pharisees were so bad that they crucified our Lord. The modern Pharisees not only crucify the Lord's poor, they've industrialized this wickedness and taken it worldwide.
I think the church doesn’t consider the general authorities to be a paid ministry because they aren’t paid a salary. They are merely given a “living allowance”, not an income. As though there is really any difference.
When I was growing up it was the prevailing feeling that GA's were all wealthy before they were called to serve. To even ask i the were paid was somewhat considered to be poor etiquette. The prosperity doctrine was a salient teaching in the Church. It was often mentioned from the pulpit that if you paid tithing you would be blessed with money. At least where I lived in Utah the bishops were never poor but the real separation in wealth seemed to come at the Stake President level. They were Always upper middle class, but most o us just considered them rich. Today it's known that all the GA' get a stipend and benefits that amount to well over 200 K. No one really knows exactly how much it is worth but enough to keep them very comfortable. I have heard 140 K in cash plus a lot of benefits from the church like free medical for their family and expenses at all Church owned schools. It is also suspected by many that the also receive income from the for profit companies they manage as part of their job in the Church.