Mormon WikiLeaks (MormonLeaks)

[Jeff Lebowski]

MPs are given a monthly budget for the mission, which includes their own personal items. It's not large but covers gas, groceries, clothes and other personal items. Their homes are paid for and furnished by the church. They also usually have the use of two mission cars, although I know many in the US will drive to their mission so they have another (nicer) car available for use at all times by the wife/family.

My dad served as a MP and his mission home was nice and big enough to host many missionaries. It was also in a nice neighborhood.

That being said, MP is probably the hardest calling in the church and I wouldn't wish it on anyone. Not only are you not paid, the plethora of problems that constantly come up are definitely not worth the adulation or deification by the 19-22 year olds. Plus, many MPs are called before they are ready to retire and taking that hiatus does serious damage to job/future income potential.

I have a friend who was called on a mission in his 50's. Was a BYU employee (staff) and said he was given certain assurances on his position and pay before he left. When he got back those assurances were somehow forgotten. He is back at BYU, but circumstances have changed. I feel sorry for him but he has handled it remarkably well.

[taekwondave]

Suck it ALUFs.

This we agree on.

[jay santos]

Yeah and I don't think you're the only one. Probably why so many people are leaving the church.

Hah, I see what you did there. No, I agree with you generally that I do think the church needs to be more transparent--on history, on finances, everything.

[Northwestcoug]

No. Estimated. I've heard that number floated around a lot and it seems about right. Half bil of that goes to BYU. Suck it ALUF's.

OK. I heard before that 250 million goes to BYU annually, but that was many years ago. I'm sure it has increased.

This raises my question again: if it's fine for the Y to get tithing funds, why not pay GA salaries from tithing? Isn't their work fall under the same mission of the church? Would any of the tithe-payers on this board feel uncomfortable having their offerings go to the GAs? I honestly don't get why they are paid from the business side of the church.

[New Mexican Disaster]

I have a friend who was called on a mission in his 50's. Was a BYU employee (staff) and said he was given certain assurances on his position and pay before he left. When he got back those assurances were somehow forgotten. He is back at BYU, but circumstances have changed. I feel sorry for him but he has handled it remarkably well.

My father was a BYU employee when he was called as an MP and he was explicitly told that he could not have the same position back. I was present during that conversation. He did go back to a lesser job, but died shortly thereafter.

[taekwondave]

OK. I heard before that 250 million goes to BYU annually, but that was many years ago. I'm sure it has increased.

This raises my question again: if it's fine for the Y to get tithing funds, why not pay GA salaries from tithing? Isn't their work fall under the same mission of the church? Would any of the tithe-payers on this board feel uncomfortable having their offerings go to the GAs? I honestly don't get why they are paid from the business side of the church.

I would reply but I'm trying to be less cynical around JL.

[jay santos]

OK. I heard before that 250 million goes to BYU annually, but that was many years ago. I'm sure it has increased.

This raises my question again: if it's fine for the Y to get tithing funds, why not pay GA salaries from tithing? Isn't their work fall under the same mission of the church? Would any of the tithe-payers on this board feel uncomfortable having their offerings go to the GAs? I honestly don't get why they are paid from the business side of the church.

I'm guessing they've been preparing for quite a while for the point where they would be more transparent about financials. Probably when GBH had all GA's removed from the boards of various church owned companies. They probably started configuring things in a way that would be easiest as possible to explain once it gets out. Also, I see a reasonable explanation being something like this: GA's fulfill two distinct duties 1) spiritually administer the church--this is done without pay 2) serve as committee members and advisors to the church's business arm--this is for pay.

[Green Monstah]

There may be some that didn't know this or think the number is high, but it's hard for me to think anyone has a problem with this unless they have a very immature view of the world.

The only reason I've had some pause in the past is because my leaders and seminary teachers growing up turned "paid ministry" into the boogie man. These days, I'm all for paying bishops and other local leaders something for their time.

[byu71]

The only reason I've had some pause in the past is because my leaders and seminary teachers growing up turned "paid ministry" into the boogie man. These days, I'm all for paying bishops and other local leaders something for their time.

I personally would be fine with that. That would be a lot easier for me to take than women getting the Priesthood.

[Jeff Lebowski]

OK. I heard before that 250 million goes to BYU annually, but that was many years ago. I'm sure it has increased.

This raises my question again: if it's fine for the Y to get tithing funds, why not pay GA salaries from tithing? Isn't their work fall under the same mission of the church? Would any of the tithe-payers on this board feel uncomfortable having their offerings go to the GAs? I honestly don't get why they are paid from the business side of the church.

I heard 180 million.

[Northwestcoug]

I'm guessing they've been preparing for quite a while for the point where they would be more transparent about financials. Probably when GBH had all GA's removed from the boards of various church owned companies. They probably started configuring things in a way that would be easiest as possible to explain once it gets out. Also, I see a reasonable explanation being something like this: GA's fulfill two distinct duties 1) spiritually administer the church--this is done without pay 2) serve as committee members and advisors to the church's business arm--this is for pay.

But they aren't on those committees anymore, if it's true Hinckley removed them. And even if they do have some 'business' responsibilities, your possible explanation would come across as a lame excuse IMO. The only time GAs are visible to the general membership is when they are serving in their 'spiritual' positions.

At any rate, it's been known for some time that BYU receives tithing funds. If that's been transparent for awhile, I don't understand why the church would use non-tithing funds to pay GAs to gradually 'innoculate' the members about their salaries. I must be missing something. Then again, I was pretty naïve about what a 'lay clergy' meant for a long time

[Green Monstah]

No. Estimated. I've heard that number floated around a lot and it seems about right. Half bil of that goes to BYU. Suck it ALUF's.

If you're talking all sources of income, I can probably get on board with that. Maybe I'm naïve, but it seems really high for tithes alone.

[Northwestcoug]

I heard 180 million.

I'll trust you on that one

[Goatnapper'96]

The only reason I've had some pause in the past is because my leaders and seminary teachers growing up turned "paid ministry" into the boogie man. These days, I'm all for paying bishops and other local leaders something for their time.

I still believe that the no paid clergy, at least locally, is one of the hugest benefits within the LDS Church. We sacrifice a great deal of efficiency with this model - but I genuinely believe it is worth it. The purpose of the Church is to bring people unto Christ, not make every kid in Seminary with the 17 points of the true church pasted inside their Book of Mormon fell better about whatever propaganda they bought into, and one of the best methods to accomplish that is through selfless service. Now, if there are cultural attitudinal adjustments or other organizational changes that the LDS Church and individual units can do to lessen the unfair burden that Bishops and other local leaders carry so that that sum of selfless service experiences are better spread out, my ears are as perky as Jenna Jameson's secondary mammory glands on a San Fernando Valley shoot with the temperature in the 40's. But trying to make this equal or using arguments about the Board of Red Cross or yadda yadda yadda bores me. I understand the complexities of the real world and so I am very much at peace with this stipend but if it is too generous or not generous enough that is between the dudes taking the money and the Almighty. But from my perspective keeping all stipend extensions to a minimum better accomplishes the fundamental role of the gospel of Christ - bringing souls to Christ.

[Green Monstah]

I still believe that the no paid clergy, at least locally, is one of the hugest benefits within the LDS Church. We sacrifice a great deal of efficiency with this model - but I genuinely believe it is worth it. The purpose of the Church is to bring people unto Christ, not make every kid in Seminary with the 17 points of the true church pasted inside their Book of Mormon fell better about whatever propaganda they bought into, and one of the best methods to accomplish that is through selfless service. Now, if there are cultural attitudinal adjustments or other organizational changes that the LDS Church and individual units can do to lessen the unfair burden that Bishops and other local leaders carry so that that sum of selfless service experiences are better spread out, my ears are as perky as Jenna Jameson's secondary mammory glands on a San Fernando Valley shoot with the temperature in the 40's. But trying to make this equal or using arguments about the Board of Red Cross or yadda yadda yadda bores me. I understand the complexities of the real world and so I am very much at peace with this stipend but if it is too generous or not generous enough that is between the dudes taking the money and the Almighty. But from my perspective keeping all stipend extensions to a minimum better accomplishes the fundamental role of the gospel of Christ - bringing souls to Christ.

I guess I have enough friends who are Christian clergymen to know that receipt of salary and ministering God's children in a sincere manner are not mutually exclusive, but I respect your opinion to the contrary.