Money and the Church

[_ktallamigo]

A question:

All across the internet I continually read comments referring to the church as The Corporation (which I realize it is) and how wealthy the church is (which it certainly must be). What I don't understand are the insinuations that individuals are benefitting financially from the church.

I know that the top 15 have their living expenses paid, and write books, but other than that, other than paid employees, all leadership positions are volunteer - no pay.

I do see a lot of chapel and temple buildling for the purpose of worship, but I don't see any individuals personally profiting from this. I see missions and mission home expenses, but no individual profit from this. There is much prestige in high positions, but you can't deposit prestige in a bank account.

The church is building the huge new mall and apartments, but what individuals are personally profiting from this venture? (Other than contractors who get paid for the work they do.) Won't the proceeds simply be used to build more chapels and temples?

Okay, help me out here. How does this work? Why all the indirect allegations of people enriching themselves through the church, through tithing contributions or business? What don't I know?

What evidence is there that certain individuals are enriching themselves off tithing money, and who are they?

ktall

[_Tchild]

The church labels payments to its senior executives...er, excuse me, its general authorities, apostles and prophet as stipends. In fact, these stipends constitute salaries. Such "stipends" do not constitute high wages compared to the corporate sector to be fair to church leaders, and these leaders dedicate an inordinate amount of time traveling, exhorting and providing "leadership".

That being said, the first presidency, the quorum of the twelve and all eight quorums of the seventies (195 members) receive renumeration in the form of stipends, business reimbursements, pension and full insurance coverage. The seventies are put to pasture (emeritus status) at age 70. http://www.lds.org/ldsorg/v/index.jsp?vgnextoid=f318118dd536c010VgnVCM1000004d82620aRCRD&locale=0&sourceId=ade77fae6f3eb010VgnVCM1000004d82620a____&hideNav=1

It is true that no single individual gets rich serving the church and the organization is extremely conservative. However, the absolute security of benefits, pay and pension do constitute motivations to keep the engine running. It is not individually motivated, but has acquired institutional momentum.

Kind of like when a goverment agency is about to get shut down, no one person makes millions, but there is institutional momentum and they fight tooth and nail to preserve their livelihood, security and jobs. That is how I see the church corporation.

I have a good friend whose father is in the first quorum of the seventy. He is set to retire within a year or two. Once he does, he will have lifelong security in the form of pension and benefits. Does knowing that you have absolute security to live out ones retirement and old age motivate? It does for most of us. Even the corporate sector can cut pensions and benefits. The church is more financially secure than all the corporations in existance and has (and will) outlive almost all of them.

[_SoHo]

Is it altruistic when rich people get into politics? Mike Bloomberg, mayor of NYC, doesn't even take a salary. Why do they do it? Power, prestige, desire to change the world? I would think motivations of church leaders are similar.

GA's used to be able to sit on church-owned company boards, and were able to earn some decent cash doing so.

[Guest]

As Tchild said, it's not just the top 15. All of the Seventies are paid.

I'm gonna re-post here a comment that I left on another blog:

-----------------------------------------------

Regarding how much LDS General Authorities make:

Back when I first began studying Mormonism and posting on the Answering Mormonism discussion forum, there was a really interesting guy posting there. Lived in one of the historical towns in Utah, had been excommunicated from the church a few years previously because (according to him) he believed the church should be practicing polygamy and teaching Adam-God. Not a fundamentalist Mormon in practice, just a fundamentalist Mormon at heart. I saw him posting online and corresponded with him from 1998-2000 (I know his name, but I’m not going to give it).

He had previously worked as an auditor for the church, and he claimed that the Apostles were all paid a high five-digit figure and Gordon B. Hinckley was paid a low six-digit figure. Whatever his strange ideas, the story of his excommunication was consistent and never changed. He always struck me as sincere, if a little melodramatic. In 2000 the LDS leadership in his town changed hands and he was offered a shot at re-baptism, and he took it. He stopped posting after that.

I’ll be the first to admit, it’s a story I was told by a guy from the Internet, and how accurate can that source be? But consider this: according to the Tanners, it was reported in the Nov. 9 1983 Wall Street Journal that a Seventy gets paid $40,000 a year (I haven’t checked the Wall Street Journal myself). If they still get paid the same thing today adjusting for inflation, that means a Seventy got paid $85,378 in 2008.

Go back to the numbers that the guy I knew gave me in 1998. Let’s estimate that in 1998, an Apostle got paid $90,000 and the Prophet got paid $105,000. If you adjust for inflation, that means that in 2008, the Seventies got paid $85,378, the Apostles got paid $118,368, and the Prophet got paid $138,096. I think those are reasonable ballpark numbers.

I’ve heard that these “modest stipends” are in addition to travel expenses and some of the top leaders are also put up in nice condos in Salt Lake City free of charge.

By comparison, the average salary for full-time senior pastors in America is $81,113 per year. Executive and administrative pastors make an average of $60,777 – $76,671. Pastors of worship make $51,954 – $64,781.

I realize there’s a lot of guesswork involved in my numbers (out of necessity), so take it all with as much salt as you want.

-----------------------------------------------

An LDS commentator on the blog who had personally known someone who had been in the presidency of the Seventy agreed that my numbers are in the ballpark.

[_bcspace]

It don't see any evidence of GAs living high on the hog. In fact, instead of enjoying all this money, they wear out their lives in service to the Church.

[_ktallamigo]

So.. vested financial interests by the brethren, including seventies.

Sort of like getting your salary, pension and benefits "made sure" so to speak.

And I agree that the prestige factor is huge.

But no real evidence of personal enrichment.


I am close to two men (extended family). They are both about the same age. Both are extremely dedicated to the church, have perfect families, and are considered "spiritual giants" by all who know them.

They were both bishops at about the same time. They have both been stake presidents.

The only difference between the two was that one was poor and the other was rich.

Guess which one was called to serve as mission president?

(Not the poor one!)

[_Tchild]

It don't see any evidence of GAs living high on the hog. In fact, instead of enjoying all this money, they wear out their lives in service to the Church.

BC is right. No individual is richly compensated, and surely most if not all of the general authorities serve, believing they are in service of God.

Back some years ago, at a BYU football game, Steve Young was having his number retired in a half time ceremony. Steve Young was greeted to a loud standing ovation. Next, the then current prophet, Gordon B. Hinckley also entered the field to speak. The crowd went absolutey nuts and the standing ovation was nearly deafening, easily outdoing the applause given to Steve Young. The prophet was more of a "star" than was the honoree, Steve Young.

Is it the money? Not exactly, but the money makes the institution, and the institution is protected by all those whose livelihoods depend on it. Not only money, but security, prestige and honor for the top leaders.

When an IRS auditor goes after money of a tax dodge, they aren't in it for the money, but the institution comprising the IRS bureau needs to validate and earn its keep, and the whole organization is geared to survival and continuance.

[_Phouchg]

You mean I earn more than a seventy does?

And I don't have to give a dime to the corporation?




fook

[_DarkHelmet]

I don't know where all the money goes. Obviously the GAs aren't getting rich. They're taken care of, and have a comfortable life, but they aren't driving Ferraris. So even if we consider the top 15 and the seventies are compensated like corporate managers, there are no other labor costs. Consider a large corporation has to pay all their employees, plus all the benefits they provide, the LDS church has very minimal costs associated with paying the GAs, but they are raking in tons of tithing money. If we consider just the US Mormon population, which is about 5 million, half of them are active, that's 2.5 million, and maybe half of the active members pay tithing, that's 1.25 million tithe payers. The average salary is about $48,000. That's $4800 per tithe payer x 1.25 million = $6 billion. That might be a little high because membership records counts kids over 8 and moms that don't work, but I also didn't count tithing from non-US members, so $6 billion dollars sounds about right. That $6 billion is tax free. Nobody is getting rich off of it, so where is it going? The manuals are all outdated. The buildings are cleaned for free. The ward budgets can't be very big since the activities are fairly cheap. Could it be all the temples they've built lately?

[_bcspace]

No. It's that big spaceship being made ready to take us all to Blisstonia.