Upward mobility in Mormonism?

[_Mercury]

Whoops! posted pic to wrong thread

[_William Schryver]

I noticed that in every stake that I have lived in, the SP came from the highest socio-economic class available in that stake.

For fun, you can read in the Church news the bios when the call new mission presidents. These men are not the salt of the earth, they tend to be very successful in profession fields and have the degrees and accomplishments to show for it.

Interesting.

In my stake, a new president was called this past Sunday. I stood in the circle as Elder Ronald A. Rasband, probably the most wealthy of the general authorities, set him apart to his calling. The new stake president is one of the most humble men I know. He is the coordinator of the local cattle auction house. For lack of a better term, he is a hick. I'm sure his income is considerably less than $50,000 per annum. Of those interviewed for the position, he was most certainly among the least educated and the least wealthy. Elder Rasband had his choice, in addition to the man selected, of several well-to-do businessmen with six figure (or more) incomes, a general surgeon, and a pharmacist -- among others.

The outgoing stake president, with whom I served for the past several years, is a similarly humble man. He recently retired as a local BLM office coordinator. I imagine his annual income was also considerably less than $50,000.

The stake president prior to that is another man I know quite well. He is also a paragon of humility and guileless service. He was a high school teacher. I don't think anyone needs me to elaborate on his wealth.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are areas in the church where the stereotype you describe is the general rule. And I consider that unfortunate. But it is not a universal rule. I would personally prefer to see a greater variety of men selected as general authorities, with greater inclusion of artists, musicians, scientists, and farmers.

[_Mister Scratch]

It seemed as if being well-to-do was a qualification for a perceived higher spirituality and interaction between the classes was discouraged. Case in point, I and a handfull of colleagues were starting a business. We needed a lawyer to draw up papers for incorporation. When I inquired with my grandparents for the contact information for someone in their old ward who was in that field by name, I was told that that is not how this is done and to find someone else more "on our level". Several other incidents like this were experienced by myself throughout my life.

Does/did anyone else see this attitude?

A couple of points.

1) Quinn, in the second volume of The Mormon Hierarchy, gives quite a detailed account of nepotism amongst the general authorities. This notion of providing favors to your family members, friends, and close associates has its origins (within Mormonism) in Joseph Smith. Recall that his male family members all held prominent positions in the early priesthood.

2) Today, there is almost nary a GA who came from a "salt of the earth" background. Virtually every last one of them has come from a high-paying, upper-level position of some kind.

3) Members have long been discouraged from writing to or "pestering" the GAs. While it is perfectly OK to write your congressperson, or your governmental representative, apparently the Lord's Anointed are too busy to bother with such "fluff" from the unwashed masses.

Conclusion: Yes, there is an obvious hierarchy, and yes, it has its basis in nepotism. Have I, personally, witnessed very much of this? No... not really. But I have seen enough evidence to recognize that it exists. Mormonism, as a culture, is quite clannish.

[_Moniker]

I noticed that in every stake that I have lived in, the SP came from the highest socio-economic class available in that stake.

For fun, you can read in the Church news the bios when the call new mission presidents. These men are not the salt of the earth, they tend to be very successful in profession fields and have the degrees and accomplishments to show for it.

Interesting.

In my stake, a new president was called this past Sunday. I stood in the circle as Elder Ronald A. Rasband, probably the most wealthy of the general authorities, set him apart to his calling. The new stake president is one of the most humble men I know. He is the coordinator of the local cattle auction house. For lack of a better term, he is a hick. I'm sure his income is considerably less than $50,000 per annum. Of those interviewed for the position, he was most certainly among the least educated and the least wealthy. Elder Rasband had his choice, in addition to the man selected, of several well-to-do businessmen with six figure (or more) incomes, a general surgeon, and a pharmacist -- among others.

The outgoing stake president, with whom I served for the past several years, is a similarly humble man. He recently retired as a local BLM office coordinator. I imagine his annual income was also considerably less than $50,000.

The stake president prior to that is another man I know quite well. He is also a paragon of humility and guileless service. He was a high school teacher. I don't think anyone needs me to elaborate on his wealth.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are areas in the church where the stereotype you describe is the general rule. And I consider that unfortunate. But it is not a universal rule. I would personally prefer to see a greater variety of men selected as general authorities, with greater inclusion of artists, musicians, scientists, and farmers.

I don't equate wealth or education with humbleness, there is no correlation in my mind. Yet, that's nice to know that there is some diversity in who is called to be stake president.

[_Mercury]

I noticed that in every stake that I have lived in, the SP came from the highest socio-economic class available in that stake.

For fun, you can read in the Church news the bios when the call new mission presidents. These men are not the salt of the earth, they tend to be very successful in profession fields and have the degrees and accomplishments to show for it.

Interesting.

In my stake, a new president was called this past Sunday. I stood in the circle as Elder Ronald A. Rasband, probably the most wealthy of the general authorities, set him apart to his calling. The new stake president is one of the most humble men I know. He is the coordinator of the local cattle auction house. For lack of a better term, he is a hick. I'm sure his income is considerably less than $50,000 per annum. Of those interviewed for the position, he was most certainly among the least educated and the least wealthy. Elder Rasband had his choice, in addition to the man selected, of several well-to-do businessmen with six figure (or more) incomes, a general surgeon, and a pharmacist -- among others.

The outgoing stake president, with whom I served for the past several years, is a similarly humble man. He recently retired as a local BLM office coordinator. I imagine his annual income was also considerably less than $50,000.

The stake president prior to that is another man I know quite well. He is also a paragon of humility and guileless service. He was a high school teacher. I don't think anyone needs me to elaborate on his wealth.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are areas in the church where the stereotype you describe is the general rule. And I consider that unfortunate. But it is not a universal rule. I would personally prefer to see a greater variety of men selected as general authorities, with greater inclusion of artists, musicians, scientists, and farmers.

I doubt this story.

[_solomarineris]

It is my observation that those in certain social classes within Mormonism stay in the social class they were born into. Not only that they stay in said social class but there is, in the lower and middle class Mormon mindset a "peasant" attitude of reverence for the upper classes, reinforced by said upper classes being predominate in leadership roles.

It seemed as if being well-to-do was a qualification for a perceived higher spirituality and interaction between the classes was discouraged. Case in point, I and a handfull of colleagues were starting a business. We needed a lawyer to draw up papers for incorporation. When I inquired with my grandparents for the contact information for someone in their old ward who was in that field by name, I was told that that is not how this is done and to find someone else more "on our level". Several other incidents like this were experienced by myself throughout my life.

Does/did anyone else see this attitude?

I have to disagree with you on this. The good old Mormon boys might have have their own social circles, country clubs but which entity doesn't?
This is Good old US of A; If you have something valuable to sell, it is gonna happen.
You might not get their help but you have a very good chance to be successful.

[_John Larsen]

I noticed that in every stake that I have lived in, the SP came from the highest socio-economic class available in that stake.

For fun, you can read in the Church news the bios when the call new mission presidents. These men are not the salt of the earth, they tend to be very successful in profession fields and have the degrees and accomplishments to show for it.

Interesting.

In my stake, a new president was called this past Sunday. I stood in the circle as Elder Ronald A. Rasband, probably the most wealthy of the general authorities, set him apart to his calling. The new stake president is one of the most humble men I know. He is the coordinator of the local cattle auction house. For lack of a better term, he is a hick. I'm sure his income is considerably less than $50,000 per annum. Of those interviewed for the position, he was most certainly among the least educated and the least wealthy. Elder Rasband had his choice, in addition to the man selected, of several well-to-do businessmen with six figure (or more) incomes, a general surgeon, and a pharmacist -- among others.

The outgoing stake president, with whom I served for the past several years, is a similarly humble man. He recently retired as a local BLM office coordinator. I imagine his annual income was also considerably less than $50,000.

The stake president prior to that is another man I know quite well. He is also a paragon of humility and guileless service. He was a high school teacher. I don't think anyone needs me to elaborate on his wealth.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm sure there are areas in the church where the stereotype you describe is the general rule. And I consider that unfortunate. But it is not a universal rule. I would personally prefer to see a greater variety of men selected as general authorities, with greater inclusion of artists, musicians, scientists, and farmers.

I think Church leaders tend to be selected for the business acumen, and wealth is simply a byproduct of that. I also think local status is key. If he is running the local cattle auction house he would be well known and influential from his business dealings, thus adhering to my model.

[_Jason Bourne]

It is my observation that those in certain social classes within Mormonism stay in the social class they were born into. Not only that they stay in said social class but there is, in the lower and middle class Mormon mindset a "peasant" attitude of reverence for the upper classes, reinforced by said upper classes being predominate in leadership roles.

It seemed as if being well-to-do was a qualification for a perceived higher spirituality and interaction between the classes was discouraged. Case in point, I and a handfull of colleagues were starting a business. We needed a lawyer to draw up papers for incorporation. When I inquired with my grandparents for the contact information for someone in their old ward who was in that field by name, I was told that that is not how this is done and to find someone else more "on our level". Several other incidents like this were experienced by myself throughout my life.

Does/did anyone else see this attitude?

No

Wow Jason, thorough as always. Care to elaborate or will you return another one word response?

I am not sure I want to elaborate. Every time I do you dismiss it as either distorted, contrived or parochial.

But here you go. No because I associate with people all across the board. Our last bishop was a carpenter, the two before business men, the one before that a teacher and the one before that a farmer. I have friends at all levels. Two of my best are not college grads but have managed to do ok in their chosen field. I am college grad. I have never ever seen such and attitude that you say your GPs communicated. never. not once.

[_Tori]

I'm not sure if this is relevant, but I know that in Utah County, being a "good Mormon" will get you further in business than being a non-Mormon or an inactive Mormon.
For some reason, other Mormons believe you will be more trustworthy if you are a good Mormon.

Also, I think it is just human nature to group with those that share a similar lifestyle. I don't judge those that are less or more fortunate than myself, but as a general rule, I don't enjoy hanging out with them. I prefer to hang out with people that are in more in my class.

I know that Rick has said that when he was called to be in the Bishopric, it greatly helped his practice. Then, when he was a Bishop....all the better. He said it was a great business move. :-)