Former church member launches ‘Mormon Wikileaks’

Discuss political news items / current events.
User avatar
Separatist
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1150

Re: Former church member launches ‘Mormon Wikileaks’

Post by Separatist »

Is 120k modest? I figure I've lived a pretty simple, modest lifestyle, and don't come close to 120k,

We can't get around the fact that this is paid priesthood / clergy, which seems problematic for a variety of reasons to me.

Is there a "+ benefits" to this package as well?

Lizzy60
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 8520

Re: Former church member launches ‘Mormon Wikileaks’

Post by Lizzy60 »

Separatist wrote:Is 120k modest? I figure I've lived a pretty simple, modest lifestyle, and don't come close to 120k,

We can't get around the fact that this is paid priesthood / clergy, which seems problematic for a variety of reasons to me.

Is there a "+ benefits" to this package as well?
Yes, there is a +benefits to this salary. It includes health care, automobiles, a housing allowance, college tuition, travel, etc.
Pres Monson owns 3 homes (moderate, but still, three) and lives in a condo provided by the Church.

Onsdag
captain of 100
Posts: 798

Re: Former church member launches ‘Mormon Wikileaks’

Post by Onsdag »

Sad, really.

Revelation from the Lord, Jesus Christ, to the Prophet Joseph Smith:
D&C 24:
15. And in whatsoever place ye shall enter, and they receive you not in my name, ye shall leave a cursing instead of a blessing, by casting off the dust of your feet against them as a testimony, and cleansing your feet by the wayside.
16. And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall lay their hands upon you by violence, ye shall command to be smitten in my name; and, behold, I will smite them according to your words, in mine own due time.
17. And whosoever shall go to law with thee shall be cursed by the law.
18. And thou shalt take no purse nor scrip, neither staves, neither two coats, for the church shall give unto thee in the very hour what thou needest for food and for raiment, and for shoes and for money, and for scrip.
19. For thou art called to prune my vineyard with a mighty pruning, yea, even for the last time; yea, and also all those whom thou hast ordained, and they shall do even according to this pattern. Amen.
The Lord has obviously commanded the Church in the latter-days to supply for the wants and needs of the Prophet and the Apostles - including monetary needs - so that they may labor unimpeded in the vineyard. Jesus Christ himself is the one who set the pattern for us. I ask you all now, has this command ever been rescinded? Why then are we disputing and arguing over the fact that current Prophets and Apostles receive monetary compensation from the Church? I'll tell you why - because Satan has great hold upon your hearts and is stirring you up in anger against the Lord's anointed servants. Indeed, as the scriptures tell us, unless you quickly repent you will find that you will receive "a cursing instead of a blessing" because you are not receiving His chosen servants in the name of Jesus Christ.

Good luck with that. =;

Edit: I might add for all those who have commented - that it's really a sign of your faith (or lack thereof) in the Lord Jesus Christ, His Church, and the Prophets and Apostles. This isn't about whether or not the Prophets and Apostles receive money from the Church - it's about where you stand and where your hearts are. Your hearts have been bared for all to see. The wheat and the tares continue to grow together until the time of harvest...

User avatar
Robin Hood
Level 34 Illuminated
Posts: 13110
Location: England

Re: Former church member launches ‘Mormon Wikileaks’

Post by Robin Hood »

Col. Flagg wrote:
kittycat51 wrote:For those outside of Utah, thought you might want to see this. But then again nothing bothering me here. Move along Michael Alison Chandler and get a life. I just read this news article but I will continue to refuse to STAY AWAY from Mormon Wikileaks website.

http://www.ksl.com/?sid=42827128&nid=14 ... lds-church" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
The $120,000 annual salary given to the GA's is in addition to a very large and substantial financial 'gift' that is given to them when they are first called as a GA. I won't reveal what that is as it would cause great uproar here on the board.

So here's my question... many Stake Presidents and Bishops (and their Counselors) also give a LOT of their time to serve in the church - why aren't they compensated financially for their time? I know of some Bishops who serve up to 15-20 hours per week in their callings - where's their $60,000?

15-20 hours? It's more like 25-30 hours most weeks.

Many years ago bishop's could keep 10% of the tithing receipts as compensation for the time they spent administering it. Then it was reduced to 8%, and at some point it was dropped altogether.
30+ years ago a bishop could claim an allowance based on the size of the congregation and the distance to the stake centre.

All of this has stopped.

Analyzing
captain of 100
Posts: 101

Re: Former church member launches ‘Mormon Wikileaks’

Post by Analyzing »

Onsdag wrote:Sad, really.

Revelation from the Lord, Jesus Christ, to the Prophet Joseph Smith:
D&C 24:
15. And in whatsoever place ye shall enter, and they receive you not in my name, ye shall leave a cursing instead of a blessing, by casting off the dust of your feet against them as a testimony, and cleansing your feet by the wayside.
16. And it shall come to pass that whosoever shall lay their hands upon you by violence, ye shall command to be smitten in my name; and, behold, I will smite them according to your words, in mine own due time.
17. And whosoever shall go to law with thee shall be cursed by the law.
18. And thou shalt take no purse nor scrip, neither staves, neither two coats, for the church shall give unto thee in the very hour what thou needest for food and for raiment, and for shoes and for money, and for scrip.
19. For thou art called to prune my vineyard with a mighty pruning, yea, even for the last time; yea, and also all those whom thou hast ordained, and they shall do even according to this pattern. Amen.
The Lord has obviously commanded the Church in the latter-days to supply for the wants and needs of the Prophet and the Apostles - including monetary needs - so that they may labor unimpeded in the vineyard. Jesus Christ himself is the one who set the pattern for us. I ask you all now, has this command ever been rescinded? Why then are we disputing and arguing over the fact that current Prophets and Apostles receive monetary compensation from the Church? I'll tell you why - because Satan has great hold upon your hearts and is stirring you up in anger against the Lord's anointed servants. Indeed, as the scriptures tell us, unless you quickly repent you will find that you will receive "a cursing instead of a blessing" because you are not receiving His chosen servants in the name of Jesus Christ.

Good luck with that. =;

Edit: I might add for all those who have commented - that it's really a sign of your faith (or lack thereof) in the Lord Jesus Christ, His Church, and the Prophets and Apostles. This isn't about whether or not the Prophets and Apostles receive money from the Church - it's about where you stand and where your hearts are. Your hearts have been bared for all to see. The wheat and the tares continue to grow together until the time of harvest...
Onsdag, Why do so many members of the LDS Church fervently believe that GA's do not receive financial benefits? I was told this by non members for years and did not believe it until President Hinckley's General Conference talk. Then I did not know what to think. Even after that talk. when I was seeking to understand. I was repeatedly told by local leadership things like... they have their travel and hotel and meals paid for etc. Never a honest forthright answer. As I said previously..
I came to peace with the subject long ago. However, If I were to mention this subject in Sunday School or Priesthood meeting I would be excoriated.
Why are people put in a situation of, as this thread demonstrates, not knowing and then if they ask being told that in some way their heart is not in the right place? This is an institutional problem. Not a members hate the Brethren problem. Why do you and others not help rid our Church of this stumbling block instead of coming after the question arises to chastise and shame? Where is your heart letting Mormon myth have a place in the Gospel?
Edit: spelling.

Onsdag
captain of 100
Posts: 798

Re: Former church member launches ‘Mormon Wikileaks’

Post by Onsdag »

Analyzing wrote:Onsdag, Why do so many members of the LDS Church fervently believe that GA's do not receive financial benefits? I was told this by non members for years and did not believe it until President Hinckley's General Conference talk. Then I did not know what to think.

I don't know. Maybe you should ask them. Maybe it's just an assumption on their part? Maybe they read the scripture where Christ tells his disciples to take neither purse nor scrip when they go proselyting and assume the same is to be applied now as well? I can see how such might be assumed, but I don't ever recall being taught as gospel that the General Authorities don't ever receive any financial compensation.
Even after that talk. when I was seeking to understand. I was repeatedly told by local leadership things like... they have their travel and hotel and meals paid for etc. Never a honest forthright answer.
That sounds like a pretty honest and candid answer to me. They receive help to cover living expenses as they travel and perform their callings. How is this not clear? What is being hidden or secretly covered up?
As I said previously..
I came to peace with the subject long ago. However, If I were to mention this subject in Sunday School or Priesthood meeting I would be excoriated.
Why are people put in a situation of, as this thread demonstrates, not knowing and then if they ask being told that in some way their heart is not in the right place? This is an institutional problem. Not a members hate the Brethren problem.


I'm not sure what to say. I specifically worded my statement to be both vindicating to the righteous, and to call out the wicked to repentance. If you go back and read my post you'll notice that I didn't call anyone specific out in this thread - yourself included. Perhaps if someone is pricked in their hearts then they should do some serious self-examination as to why that would be. As Nephi taught: "I had spoken hard things against the wicked, according to the truth; and the righteous have I justified,.. wherefore, the guilty taketh the truth to be hard, for it cutteth them to the very center."

How is it an institutional problem? I showed, in scripture, where the Lord has set forth (or instituted) the commandment for the Church to take care of the needs of the Prophet and the Apostles - including financial needs. If there is a problem it's not with the institution, but rather with the people who take issue with the practice the Lord has instituted or established.
Why do you and others not help rid our Church of this stumbling block instead of coming after the question arises to chastise and shame? Where is your heart letting Mormon myth have a place in the Gospel?
Edit: spelling.
Excuse me? I am stepping forth to help address this "stumbling block." You are bothered that I'm coming forward now, after the question arises? Well when is the best time to answer a question? After the question is asked, of course! I'm really left scratching my head on this one - as soon as I become aware of an issue I try to address the issue, but you rebuke me for not coming sooner before I was even aware of the issue? :-?

Dlight
captain of 100
Posts: 143

Re: Former church member launches ‘Mormon Wikileaks’

Post by Dlight »

Onsdag wrote:Sad, really.



The Lord has obviously commanded the Church in the latter-days to supply for the wants and needs of the Prophet and the Apostles - including monetary needs - so that they may labor unimpeded in the vineyard. Jesus Christ himself is the one who set the pattern for us. I ask you all now, has this command ever been rescinded? Why then are we disputing and arguing over the fact that current Prophets and Apostles receive monetary compensation from the Church? I'll tell you why - because Satan has great hold upon your hearts and is stirring you up in anger against the Lord's anointed servants. Indeed, as the scriptures tell us, unless you quickly repent you will find that you will receive "a cursing instead of a blessing" because you are not receiving His chosen servants in the name of Jesus Christ.

The thing is I don't want to judge. I am in a place where I would prefer not to judge, and hope the Lord will offer me grace in my weakness. I do have some thoughts, but I am still undecided. I think of Korihor however. He accused Alma of this very thing:

31 And he did rise up in great swelling words before Alma, and did revile against the priests and teachers, accusing them of leading away the people after the silly traditions of their fathers, for the sake of glutting on the labors of the people.

32 Now Alma said unto him: Thou knowest that we do not glut ourselves upon the labors of this people; for behold I have labored even from the commencement of the reign of the judges until now, with mine own hands for my support, notwithstanding my many travels round about the land to declare the word of God unto my people.

33 And notwithstanding the many labors which I have performed in the church, I have never received so much as even one senine for my labor; neither has any of my brethren, save it were in the judgment-seat; and then we have received only according to law for our time.

34 And now, if we do not receive anything for our labors in the church, what doth it profit us to labor in the church save it were to declare the truth, that we may have rejoicings in the joy of our brethren?

So if the brethren were confronted by Korihor they would not be able to answer the way Alma did. Now you can argue, "but the brethren aren't being paid for their church service they are being paid for there stewardship as CEOS of the corporate arm of the church." But should a corproate for profit arm really exist? And if so shouldnt a different set of people head it and be paid like regular jobs, and let the brethren focus entriely on spiritual matters?


Or you could say that, "today's finances and situations are much different than in the past, and require greater funds."

But we also know they they Get 120K + all travel expenses, + healthcare, Housing food allowances and more...So maybe 120 is too much? That doesn't include all their book deals either?

There was another person in Alma 1 who first did something like this.

2 And it came to pass that in the first year of the reign of Alma in the judgment-seat, there was a man brought before him to be judged, a man who was large, and was noted for his much strength.

3 And he had gone about among the people, preaching to them that which he termed to be the word of God, bearing down against the church; declaring unto the people that every priest and teacher ought to become popular; and they ought not to labor with their hands, but that they ought to be supported by the people.

Later Alma says

12 But Alma said unto him: Behold, this is the first time that priestcraft has been introduced among this people.

I don't want to judge. I kind of feel wrong about it the same way I've never felt right about being paid to teach institute or seminary. IT always felt off to me, but in the end I will live my life the best I can, and let the Lord decide how to judge this. I can still learn and feel the spirit at church and the brethren still seem to give inspired messages.

User avatar
Separatist
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1150

Re: Former church member launches ‘Mormon Wikileaks’

Post by Separatist »

Onsdag wrote: Jesus Christ himself is the one who set the pattern for us. I ask you all now, has this command ever been rescinded? Why then are we disputing and arguing over the fact that current Prophets and Apostles receive monetary compensation from the Church? I'll tell you why - because Satan has great hold upon your hearts and is stirring you up in anger against the Lord's anointed servants. Indeed, as the scriptures tell us, unless you quickly repent you will find that you will receive "a cursing instead of a blessing" because you are not receiving His chosen servants in the name of Jesus Christ.

Good luck with that. =;
Were the early saints casting stones at Joseph and Sidney who rejected the High Councils decision to pay them a salary?
After negotiations, they agreed to offer Rigdon and Smith an annual contract of $1,100 apiece, more than three times what the average worker of the day could earn. Ebenezer Robinson, the High Council's clerk, later wrote that "when it was noised abroad that the Council had taken such a step, the members of the Church, almost to a man, lifted their voices against it. The expression of disapprobation was so strong and emphatic that at the next meeting of the High Council, the resolution voting them a salary was rescinded." (Richard S. Van Wagoner, Sidney Rigdon, Pg 230.)
I would suggest the true pattern is full disclosure/transparency from the outset, and then accepted or rejected by the members. NOT something that is hidden that needs to be leaked out via Mormon wikileaks.

ebenezerarise
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1585

Re: Former church member launches ‘Mormon Wikileaks’

Post by ebenezerarise »

I don't know why this is so hard for people.

If you don't like how the Church handles its money then don't be a member of the Church and certainly don't give them money.

The Church has plainly said for DECADES the upper leadership of the Church gets paid a stipend and that those funds come from the businesses the Church owns NOT the tithing of the people.

Imagine that -- those same people who rail on Church owned things like malls and real estate are also the same people who think that highly educated, experienced professional people will give up outside opportunities at positions and income to be paid much less as church leaders and yet INSIST they give up all their time and outside pursuits FOR FREE.

Get real.

Better yet, get a clue.

There is one reason and one reason only for Mormon Wikileaks and it is only to sow discord through dissemination of information they should never have for the purposes of creating confusion and misunderstanding.

The Church is a private organization, not a public entity. It owes no explanations to anyone. If you don't like that, don't join it.

It always gets back to agency. Yours.

tribrac
captain of 1,000
Posts: 4367
Location: The land northward

Re: Former church member launches ‘Mormon Wikileaks’

Post by tribrac »

So, with the news that the CIA is capturing and hacking data from all computer systems and all kinds of devices, and their hacking tools make it look like others did it.... you don't suppose this MormonLeaks is a setup by the CIA to maintain leverage over the church do you?

It is not hard to imagine the CIA through one of its many minions, asks the church to support __________ (pick a candidate or position), the church hesitates and the next week the unwitting Ryan McKnight gets an anonymous email with a few pay stubs from Elder Eyring.

Just a 'friendly reminder' of what is at stake.

User avatar
gruden2.0
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1465

Re: Former church member launches ‘Mormon Wikileaks’

Post by gruden2.0 »

Robin Hood wrote: January 11th, 2017, 4:42 pm 15-20 hours? It's more like 25-30 hours most weeks.

Many years ago bishop's could keep 10% of the tithing receipts as compensation for the time they spent administering it. Then it was reduced to 8%, and at some point it was dropped altogether.
30+ years ago a bishop could claim an allowance based on the size of the congregation and the distance to the stake centre.

All of this has stopped.
Interesting, I never knew that.

One thing I do know is Mission Presidents get some pretty hefty benefits for their work. As a missionary I was financial secretary for a while and it was evident that my Prez had a nice deal going.

User avatar
gruden2.0
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1465

Re: Former church member launches ‘Mormon Wikileaks’

Post by gruden2.0 »

ebenezerarise wrote: January 12th, 2017, 7:20 am The Church is a private organization, not a public entity. It owes no explanations to anyone. If you don't like that, don't join it.
You're right, the LDS Church is an entity wholly owned by the Corporation of the First Presidency as a corporate sole, the same financial structure used by the Catholic church. Brigham Young first incorporated the church in 1851, if memory serves, and had everyone re-baptized into it. After the Supreme Court anuled the corporation, it was re-incorporated again in the early 1900s. Being as it is a corporation owned by only 15 men that is not publicly traded, it is under no obligation to disclose finances to the unwashed masses. Given that it markets itself as a church, it would seem a good gesture to open the books to show it's doing good deeds and other churchy things with its money. Yet they do not.

Interestingly, MormonLeaks would not exist if the Church made public disclosures of it's finances as it did until 1959. Question is, why did they stop? If they're being smart with the money, of what harm is it?

ebenezerarise
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1585

Re: Former church member launches ‘Mormon Wikileaks’

Post by ebenezerarise »

gruden2.0 wrote: March 9th, 2017, 8:01 pm
ebenezerarise wrote: January 12th, 2017, 7:20 am The Church is a private organization, not a public entity. It owes no explanations to anyone. If you don't like that, don't join it.
You're right, the LDS Church is an entity wholly owned by the Corporation of the First Presidency as a corporate sole, the same financial structure used by the Catholic church. Brigham Young first incorporated the church in 1851, if memory serves, and had everyone re-baptized into it. After the Supreme Court anuled the corporation, it was re-incorporated again in the early 1900s. Being as it is a corporation owned by only 15 men that is not publicly traded, it is under no obligation to disclose finances to the unwashed masses. Given that it markets itself as a church, it would seem a good gesture to open the books to show it's doing good deeds and other churchy things with its money. Yet they do not.

Interestingly, MormonLeaks would not exist if the Church made public disclosures of it's finances as it did until 1959. Question is, why did they stop? If they're being smart with the money, of what harm is it?
Why don't you bear your finances to all the world and show what good you're doing?

Stupid, huh?

The Church has nothing to prove. They are entitled to the same level of privacy as anyone else. If you're uncomfortable with that, don't join the Church and don't give them money.

And spend a little time learning some history. BY didn't have everyone get re-baptized. That happened in 1856-57, during the Mormon reformation and it was an effort led by Jedediah Grant, a member of the FP, not BY. Some were rebaptized. Many others were not.

And what, by the way, does that have to do with financial disclosure by the Church?

The Church is doing nothing that causes MormonLeaks to exist. It exists because you've got a disgruntled, former member who can't leave the Church alone tilting at windmills nobody cares about.

Really. Honestly. Truly. Nobody gives a rip about how much money the Church has or how it gets it. You see, the Church has been engaged in building businesses for most of it's history and it has done so legally. And yes, many of those businesses got their beginning off the donation and industry of early Church members. But I would venture that most new businesses the Church gets involved in today like are grown from profits and those funds are used for a variety of purposes that serve the Kingdom.

The Church doesn't flaunt what it does. It does not pay alms.

Don't like? Fine. Go away, leave it alone, move on. It's all pretty simple.

User avatar
gruden2.0
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1465

Re: Former church member launches ‘Mormon Wikileaks’

Post by gruden2.0 »

ebenezerarise wrote: March 9th, 2017, 8:11 pm Why don't you bear your finances to all the world and show what good you're doing?

Stupid, huh?
Not really. If I were accepting a lot of money from people as part of some kind of faith-based activity, then yeah, I would feel obligated to show them what is being done with it.
ebenezerarise wrote:The Church has nothing to prove. They are entitled to the same level of privacy as anyone else. If you're uncomfortable with that, don't join the Church and don't give them money.
1. You're buying into the modern corporate notion that a corporation is treated by law as a person, not an organization. That is a Babylonian philosophy, not a spiritual one.
2. It's becoming increasingly evident people are joining the church in decreasing numbers, so maybe they're following your advice.
ebenezerarise wrote:And spend a little time learning some history. BY didn't have everyone get re-baptized. That happened in 1856-57, during the Mormon reformation and it was an effort led by Jedediah Grant, a member of the FP, not BY. Some were rebaptized. Many others were not.
I am not conflating the two. Additionally, the leadership was re-ordained as well after the incorporation.
ebenezerarise wrote:And what, by the way, does that have to do with financial disclosure by the Church?
:)
ebenezerarise wrote:The Church is doing nothing that causes MormonLeaks to exist. It exists because you've got a disgruntled, former member who can't leave the Church alone tilting at windmills nobody cares about.

Really. Honestly. Truly. Nobody gives a rip about how much money the Church has or how it gets it.
That's a silly comment. Money matters are inherent to any corporation, public or private. There will ALWAYS be people who care about that.
ebenezerarise wrote:You see, the Church has been engaged in building businesses for most of it's history and it has done so legally. And yes, many of those businesses got their beginning off the donation and industry of early Church members. But I would venture that most new businesses the Church gets involved in today like are grown from profits and those funds are used for a variety of purposes that serve the Kingdom.
According to the Parable of the Talents, it's all supposed to be the Lord's money.

User avatar
inho
captain of 1,000
Posts: 3286
Location: in a galaxy far, far away

Re: Former church member launches ‘Mormon Wikileaks’

Post by inho »

gruden2.0 wrote: March 9th, 2017, 8:01 pm ...if the Church made public disclosures of it's finances as it did until 1959.
In my opinion, the public disclosures of 1950's and earlier were pretty useless. People often say that church should disclose its finances, but they seldom explain what they mean with that. Read Sam Brunson's article The Present, Past, and Future of LDS Financial Transparency in Dialogue. It tells the history, goes through some alternatives for disclosure, and gives possible reasons for why the church does not disclose its finances.
Last edited by inho on March 13th, 2017, 3:03 am, edited 2 times in total.

ebenezerarise
captain of 1,000
Posts: 1585

Re: Former church member launches ‘Mormon Wikileaks’

Post by ebenezerarise »

Anyone who has a problem with how the Church handles its own money is obviously not a member of the Kingdom and is out of step with the Lord's way of working.

User avatar
investigator
captain of 100
Posts: 689

Re: Former church member launches ‘Mormon Wikileaks’

Post by investigator »

2 Nephi 28: 9 Yea, and there shall be many which shall teach after this manner, false and vain and foolish doctrines, and shall be puffed up in their hearts, and shall seek deep to hide their counsels from the Lord; and their works shall be in the dark. 10 And the blood of the saints shall cry from the ground against them. 11 Yea, they have all gone out of the away; they have become corrupted.

Post Reply