More overtones to Pres. Uchtdorf's talk

Public forum for topics that don't fit into the other categories.
Roy
Posts: 6178
Joined: 07 Oct 2010, 14:16
Location: Pacific Northwest

Re: More overtones to Pres. Uchtdorf's talk

Post by Roy » 08 Oct 2013, 15:36

Good points Ray. There are no easy answers. How about we just pay the janitor and call it good? :mrgreen:
"It is not so much the pain and suffering of life which crushes the individual as it is its meaninglessness and hopelessness." C. A. Elwood

“It is not the function of religion to answer all the questions about God’s moral government of the universe, but to give one courage, through faith, to go on in the face of questions he never finds the answer to in his present status.” TPC: Harold B. Lee 223

"I struggle now with establishing my faith that God may always be there, but may not always need to intervene" Heber13

Jazernorth
Posts: 78
Joined: 05 Sep 2013, 06:15

Re: More overtones to Pres. Uchtdorf's talk

Post by Jazernorth » 08 Oct 2013, 15:38

Roy wrote:Good points Ray. There are no easy answers. How about we just pay the janitor and call it good? :mrgreen:
Agreed! I do not like cleaning the church.
Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness!
I will fight for all of them, will you join me?
http://www.jaynorth.net

User avatar
Life_Journey_of_Matt
Posts: 92
Joined: 11 Feb 2013, 12:23
Location: Kansas

Re: More overtones to Pres. Uchtdorf's talk

Post by Life_Journey_of_Matt » 08 Oct 2013, 15:48

Roy wrote: How about we just pay the janitor and call it good?
:clap:
"So oft in theologic wars / The disputants, I ween, / Rail on in utter ignorance / Of what each other mean / And prate about an Elephant / Not one of them has seen." -- from "The Blind Men and the Elephant" by John Godfrey Saxe

"The faith that stands on authority is not faith. The reliance on authority measures the decline of religion, the withdrawal of the soul." - Ralph Waldo Emerson

My ongoing story: http://precariousironrod.com/

User avatar
SilentDawning
Posts: 7341
Joined: 09 May 2010, 19:55

Re: More overtones to Pres. Uchtdorf's talk

Post by SilentDawning » 08 Oct 2013, 16:31

Good points here Ray -- when I have more time, I have a few counter-ideas that occurred to me immediately. But you've sparked a few things I hadn't thought of...later...
"It doesn't have to be about the Church (church) all the time!" -- SD

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. No price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself."

A man asked Jesus "do all roads lead to you?" Jesus responds,”most roads don’t lead anywhere, but I will travel any road to find you.” Adapted from The Shack, William Young

Curt Sunshine
Site Admin
Posts: 16842
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 20:24

Re: More overtones to Pres. Uchtdorf's talk

Post by Curt Sunshine » 08 Oct 2013, 17:56

How about we just pay the janitor and call it good?


I wouldn't mind that at all. It could be a part-time, minimum wage job for someone who is retired and wants to continue to work - or for someone who is out of work and receiving church welfare assistance.
I see through my glass, darkly - as I play my saxophone in harmony with the other instruments in God's orchestra. (h/t Elder Joseph Wirthlin)

Even if people view many things differently, the core Gospel principles (LOVE; belief in the unseen but hoped; self-reflective change; symbolic cleansing; striving to recognize the will of the divine; never giving up) are universal.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken

User avatar
SilentDawning
Posts: 7341
Joined: 09 May 2010, 19:55

Re: More overtones to Pres. Uchtdorf's talk

Post by SilentDawning » 08 Oct 2013, 19:31

Ray Degraw wrote:
Personally, I don't want full-time Bishops working in that position as a career - and it would have to be as a career, since it would be cruel to ask someone to quit a job, work for 5 years or so as a Bishop and then make them try to return to the work they did when they quit to become a Bishop.
Kind of like the person who leaves their job to raise children, and then returns to the work force at a disadvantage....on the other hand, there are lots and lots of people who are unemployed who would willingly make that sacrifice, particularly if they felt it was something they wanted . Many people make sacrifices to have something they enjoy.
First, I oppose making people get college degrees to qualify as ministers, and there would have to be some way to "qualify" Bishops and Stake Presidents if they were paid as full-time employees. The debt alone it wrong, in my opinion, for the purpose - as is the elitism I have viewed in many situations, including while taking classes at an East Coast Divinity School.
I don't think there would have to be a college degree involved...we don't require that now do we? Why would that change simply because the position is paid?
Second, I've seen WAY too many examples of abuse, conceit, extravagance, etc. in congregations of non-Mormon friends to want it happening in the LDS Church (when the leader feels unaccountable to the membership), and I also have seen wholesale abandonment of doctrine in other cases (where the leader feels beholden to preach only what the majority of the membership - or even only a few highly influential members and families - want to hear).
I don't think that would apply...the church would continue to enforce supporting local leaders and keep placing 99% of the onus on members to keep a stiff upper lip and support their leaders.
Also, if we decided to pay our Bishops and Stake Presidents, what about their counselors - and the Relief Society Presidents, Elders Quorum Presidents, High Priests Group Leaders, Ward Mission Leaders, Young Women and Men Presidents, High Council, etc? Some of them put in almost as much time as Stake Presidents and Bishops, especially the ones who are retired. How do we determine who gets paid and how much they receive?
You could level that argument against the GA's who are currently paid. This sounds like a slippery slope argument. The church could simply claim its inspired that it should be this way and everyone would have to accept. And its common in other churches to have a paid minister and unpaid volunteer leaders. I don't see it creating a slippery slope or problem with precedent -- the precedent has already been set by having GA's paid.
! also can hear critics (inside and outside the Church) wailing about how that money should have been spent helping the poor and for humanitarian aid.
I don't see that one as a big concern either -- for the same reason that we don't complain about GA's being paid when they have to do it full time. The role of a Bishop is pivotal -- so having someone paid to really focus could be perceived as a positive thing by many people. And we will always have naysayers with us ...always. I don't see that as a deal stopper.
"It doesn't have to be about the Church (church) all the time!" -- SD

"The individual has always had to struggle to keep from being overwhelmed by the tribe. No price is too high to pay for the privilege of owning yourself."

A man asked Jesus "do all roads lead to you?" Jesus responds,”most roads don’t lead anywhere, but I will travel any road to find you.” Adapted from The Shack, William Young

Featherina

Re: More overtones to Pres. Uchtdorf's talk

Post by Featherina » 14 Oct 2013, 19:41

Featherina wrote:
SilentDawning wrote:"What is the difference between top-level Mormon leaders receiving pay for their service, and priestcraft?".
[Admin Note: A section of this comment was deleted, because it included accusations against the Church that are patently untrue and because we have hashed out in other threads the idea that not following Old Testament standards is not a reason here to condemn the modern LDS Church. In those others threads, it was stated explicitly that such a stance is not consistent with our mission.]

As I tell my children, nobody's perfect, including all those who make up & run the church, so you have to take the good and leave the bad.

BTW - I liked Uchtodorf's talk - & actually "doubting your doubts" was inspiring to me.
I have lost so much faith - & I really need to regain it - even when intellecutally, I know I may be fooling myself.
We're all fools - as Moses & Socrates discovered... We might as well consciously decide how we'll fool ourselves (in functional ways).
Ray,
Chill out, please.
Even on LDS (TBM) forums, moderators give people freedom of speech, instead of silencing any negatively axiomatically true comments.
When you overreact as you have, it defeats the mission of this forum.

Curt Sunshine
Site Admin
Posts: 16842
Joined: 21 Oct 2008, 20:24

Re: More overtones to Pres. Uchtdorf's talk

Post by Curt Sunshine » 14 Oct 2013, 22:29

[Admin Note:] Featherina, this was not my decision alone. We have discussed that comment behind the scenes among us. The admins and moderaters are in agreement. We went over this exact issue with you previously, and you were told to drop that line of condemnation then. It was explicit instruction from the admins and moderators. We aren't going to "chill out" when someone repeats something they've been told to drop in the past.

If you notice, only the paragraph that included the part you have been told previously to drop was deleted. Everything else in the comment was left untouched.

You also have charged us with denying axiomatic truth, in those exact words, multiple times, when dealing with the exact topic you addressed again in that comment - and you were told to stop every time you did it, espcially since the charges in question are not axiomatic truth. Continuing to make that charge got one thread closed. That won't happen again, especially with a thread that isn't about the topics that were moderated.

Your input is valuable and appreciated in almost every case. I mean that seriously. The charge in your comment that was deleted (and previously moderated) is an exception, and this is the last time it will be mentioned. In the future, if you repeat that same charge, we simply will delete the entire comment without any moderation.

Now, this thread will return to the topic it was intended to address.
I see through my glass, darkly - as I play my saxophone in harmony with the other instruments in God's orchestra. (h/t Elder Joseph Wirthlin)

Even if people view many things differently, the core Gospel principles (LOVE; belief in the unseen but hoped; self-reflective change; symbolic cleansing; striving to recognize the will of the divine; never giving up) are universal.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." H. L. Mencken

User avatar
Sheldon
Posts: 454
Joined: 14 Aug 2013, 13:44

Re: More overtones to Pres. Uchtdorf's talk

Post by Sheldon » 15 Oct 2013, 08:57

Remember the “Know Your Religion” series. You would pay at the door of a church building to hear a CES employee who was getting paid to talk about religion. This always smacked of Priestcraft, and I like to believe that some of the 12 thought so too, and abandoned it some 15 years ago.

User avatar
Heber13
Site Admin
Posts: 7217
Joined: 22 Apr 2009, 16:37
Location: In the Middle

Re: More overtones to Pres. Uchtdorf's talk

Post by Heber13 » 16 Oct 2013, 13:23

Ray Degraw wrote:
if Bishops were paid, they could devote their time to being a full-time Bishop.

If we ever decide to pay local leaders, I favor a small stipend - perhaps the equivalent of minimum wage for 10-20 hours/week, although I haven't thought through that.
I could see being reimbursed for things like cell phone bills for church use, or travel. But not time paid. It would tempt people in the wrong way.

Besides, the church doesn't seem to have a shortage of volunteers. The reward for being "anxiously engaged" is more work to engage in, with a small stipend of people patting your back and saying they love their bishop.

If I ran a company and had a volunteer workforce motivated to work hard...I'd never introduce a pay scale, that's for sure.
Luke: "Why didn't you tell me? You told me Vader betrayed and murdered my father."
Obi-Wan: "Your father... was seduced by the dark side of the Force. He ceased to be Anakin Skywalker and became Darth Vader. When that happened, the good man who was your father was destroyed. So what I told you was true... from a certain point of view."
Luke: "A certain point of view?"
Obi-Wan: "Luke, you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to...depend greatly on our point of view."

Post Reply