General Authorities??? Living expenses???


brown67
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

That's true, regular members do not know how much is given to a GA as a "stipend" of "living allowance". But when you think of the words used like "stipend" or "living allowance" I'm going to guess that a lot of members would assume it's a relative amount to what's necessary for living. For example, 80K is reasonable because that seems to be a normal living income. In other forums, some have speculated that GAs receive as much as 400K. But the truth is regular members do not know, because GA's or the church have not shared that information. If they do decide to share it sometime in the future, it would be interesting to see how members respond to that information, whether the amount is anywhere between 80K and 400K, or even if it is less.

M.

Sure; but for an octogenarian, free health care could be worth over $100K per year in and of itself.

If, in 2012, Tom Monson had a Church-financed back surgery worth $80K, his wife has a heart procedure worth $45K, the two of them enjoy the use of a Church-owned apartment in downtown Salt Lake and one vehicle with driver, plus $20K in petty cash - that's a package worth nearly $200K; but still not a particularly high standard of living.

Getting old can be expensive (so I'm told - Pam can fill in the details, of course).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somehow I dont think the GA are much interested in profit from their callings. If they are then they are in the wrong job or are being tested. If God calls them and they need to be able do their callings without worrying about starving then it matters nothing to me that they receive a good living allowance or not. They deserve to have treats same as anyone along with the necessary expenses of staying alive. Who deserves them more?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if there is a living expense for General Authorities any more, since most, if not all of the newly named Authorities are retired, and don’t need to make a choice to quit a job to ‘work’ for the Church. They might get an expense account, so they don’t have to use their own money to travel, but as far as living expense, I really think they are on their own.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if there is a living expense for General Authorities any more, since most, if not all of the newly named Authorities are retired, and don’t need to make a choice to quit a job to ‘work’ for the Church. They might get an expense account, so they don’t have to use their own money to travel, but as far as living expense, I really think they are on their own.

...a small number of Mormon Church leaders who are called to full-time service receive a “living allowance.” They did not obtain any special training or degrees and did not apply for a position. When called by Mormon Church officers they leave their full-time employment and generally move to a new location to fulfill their new assignment as directed by their leaders. Those called to full-time service include about 350 mission presidents, who serve for a three-year period and, about 100 General Authorities, who serve full-time from Mormon Church headquarters for various lengths of time. Of this last group, fifteen prophets, seers, and revelators serve until they die. Some General Authorities are independently well-off financially and do not need an allowance. The current practice of providing an allowance to a limited number of individuals for a specific period allows the Church to call people from a larger pool than those who are well-off financially. Once mission presidents and some General Authorities are released from their callings, they return to their employment or move wherever they choose. Upon their return, they are often called to serve as lay leaders in the local Mormon Church organization.

Money for living allowances comes from the income produced by businesses in which the Mormon Church has an ownership interest. To this point, at least, tithing has not been used for this purpose. The amount of mission presidents’ stipends depends on needs and circumstances (missions in New York City and London are more expensive than other places). Interestingly, all General Authorities receive the same allowance: the President of the Mormon Church receives the same as a member of the First Quorum of the Seventy. That said, there is a little extra for the few who have dependent children (x dollars per child). The living allowance is intended to permit a comfortable but modest lifestyle.

The Church’s living-allowance model is based on various scriptural references to “the laborer being worthy of his hire,” a principle that applies both to spiritual and temporal matters (see Doctrine and Covenants 24:3, 7,9; 41:7; and 42:70-73).

Does the Mormon Church Have a Paid Clergy? | Mormon Church

M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure; but for an octogenarian, free health care could be worth over $100K per year in and of itself.

If, in 2012, Tom Monson had a Church-financed back surgery worth $80K, his wife has a heart procedure worth $45K, the two of them enjoy the use of a Church-owned apartment in downtown Salt Lake and one vehicle with driver, plus $20K in petty cash - that's a package worth nearly $200K; but still not a particularly high standard of living.

Getting old can be expensive (so I'm told - Pam can fill in the details, of course).

That's why they call them the golden years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont really have a problem with GA receiving allowances. Im sure some of them like Dallin H Oakes ( lawyer) Russell M Nelson ( Doctor ) probably took massive pay cuts when called to be Apostles.

One of our local Baptist churches runs a dynamic youth group. They have paid leaders of course, but their program runs like clockwork and they have over 100 youth attending every friday night.

I sometimes compare that to our Ym program and see our leader tired probably just commuted home from work and is doing his best to throw together an activity that the youth will hopefully enjoy.

In saying that if Pres Monson turns up to next General Conferance in a red lamborghini then i might change my mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont really have a problem with GA receiving allowances. Im sure some of them like Dallin H Oakes ( lawyer) Russell M Nelson ( Doctor ) probably took massive pay cuts when called to be Apostles.

One of our local Baptist churches runs a dynamic youth group. They have paid leaders of course, but their program runs like clockwork and they have over 100 youth attending every friday night.

I sometimes compare that to our Ym program and see our leader tired probably just commuted home from work and is doing his best to throw together an activity that the youth will hopefully enjoy.

In saying that if Pres Monson turns up to next General Conferance in a red lamborghini then i might change my mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In saying that if Pres Monson turns up to next General Conferance in a red lamborghini then i might change my mind.

What if he showed up in a limo with a driver? Would you have a problem with that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's funny but some would have a problem with that which I just don't get.

A lot of these men are very well established in the careers or businesses. I know CEO's who have left their position's to serve the lord full time. My own Mission President owned a very well off business he moved millions of dollars worth of stock every week.

How is a petty mission home allowance going to subsidize him any?

Serving the Lord full time is certainly not a financial move. Never has been, never will.

Im sure none of them thought when the call came. " yah great im going to live off the church for the rest of my life"

I figure if im not wealthy, worthy, righteous, good looking enough to serve in the capacity, least i can do is provide what i have for those who are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My mom and I had a discussion about this subject years and years ago.

She said..he is the Prophet of God...would you want anything less for him?

Granted we aren't talking about palaces and jet planes and the sort. I don't think any one of the First Presidency or any of the general authorities for that matter would expect that to be provided to them or for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure; but for an octogenarian, free health care could be worth over $100K per year in and of itself.

If, in 2012, Tom Monson had a Church-financed back surgery worth $80K, his wife has a heart procedure worth $45K, the two of them enjoy the use of a Church-owned apartment in downtown Salt Lake and one vehicle with driver, plus $20K in petty cash - that's a package worth nearly $200K; but still not a particularly high standard of living.

Getting old can be expensive (so I'm told - Pam can fill in the details, of course).

That is the reason they call it the "Golden Years". Health cost takes all the gold you have.:D

Edited by zippy_do46
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's funny but some would have a problem with that which I just don't get.

I think stipends are used as a barb against us because so many members take pride in the lay ministry (to the point that it's one of the 17 points on a popular list in our favor). I can see this shaking someone who either tacitly accepted such as a doctrinal point of the Church (she may or may not even realize that she has) or perhaps someone who feels like his trust has been violated because the facts don't line up with what he was told.

The point being that those who say probably don't really have a problem with it in principle (they may classify our leaders as frauds, charlatans and pretenders, and have a problem with such receiving stipends), but like to drop this bomb in hopes of shaking something loose.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

...a small number of Mormon Church leaders who are called to full-time service receive a “living allowance.” They did not obtain any special training or degrees and did not apply for a position. When called by Mormon Church officers they leave their full-time employment and generally move to a new location to fulfill their new assignment as directed by their leaders. Those called to full-time service include about 350 mission presidents, who serve for a three-year period and, about 100 General Authorities, who serve full-time from Mormon Church headquarters for various lengths of time. Of this last group, fifteen prophets, seers, and revelators serve until they die. Some General Authorities are independently well-off financially and do not need an allowance. The current practice of providing an allowance to a limited number of individuals for a specific period allows the Church to call people from a larger pool than those who are well-off financially. Once mission presidents and some General Authorities are released from their callings, they return to their employment or move wherever they choose. Upon their return, they are often called to serve as lay leaders in the local Mormon Church organization.

Money for living allowances comes from the income produced by businesses in which the Mormon Church has an ownership interest. To this point, at least, tithing has not been used for this purpose. The amount of mission presidents’ stipends depends on needs and circumstances (missions in New York City and London are more expensive than other places). Interestingly, all General Authorities receive the same allowance: the President of the Mormon Church receives the same as a member of the First Quorum of the Seventy. That said, there is a little extra for the few who have dependent children (x dollars per child). The living allowance is intended to permit a comfortable but modest lifestyle.

The Church’s living-allowance model is based on various scriptural references to “the laborer being worthy of his hire,” a principle that applies both to spiritual and temporal matters (see Doctrine and Covenants 24:3, 7,9; 41:7; and 42:70-73).

Does the Mormon Church Have a Paid Clergy? | Mormon Church

M.

Maureen, this detail is fascinating but how do you know it is accurate? It is not an article published by the church and the church itself will not confirm or deny any financial arrangements (aside from that one simple quote from Pres Hinckley). The information regarding all getting "the same allowance" is also in conflict with historical (and "insider") knowledge regarding the operation of church finances.

I don't see why the institutional church should get any benefit of the doubt in this matter. If it just reported its expenses like it used to, there wouldn't be any need for speculation. Money can corrupt and transparency in the handling of money is the best way to avoid that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maureen, this detail is fascinating but how do you know it is accurate? It is not an article published by the church and the church itself will not confirm or deny any financial arrangements (aside from that one simple quote from Pres Hinckley). The information regarding all getting "the same allowance" is also in conflict with historical (and "insider") knowledge regarding the operation of church finances.

I don't see why the institutional church should get any benefit of the doubt in this matter. If it just reported its expenses like it used to, there wouldn't be any need for speculation. Money can corrupt and transparency in the handling of money is the best way to avoid that.

Hi roytucker, I don't know that it is totally accurate but based on other articles I've read regarding this topic and the fact it is a pro-LDS site made it easy to choose as a source. I agree that speculation would cease if the LDS church would be more up front regarding how they support their GA's and Mission Presidents.

M.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share