Purpose: Self Sufficiency for Some But not Others?

The various handbooks instructing Bishops and Stake Presidents on administering church welfare are clear in explaining that the purpose of the church welfare program isn’t about alleviating suffering: “The bishop provides welfare assistance to members to help them develop spirituality, become self-reliant, and learn to provide for others.” Self-reliance, or the ability of a member to provide for the needs of himself and his family without outside intervention, is the keystone of modern church welfare.¹ However, the necessary precondition for self-reliance is the economic possibility of supporting yourself and your family. Unknown to most U.S. members, including far too many in church leadership, is the fact that in many developing nations, sufficient employment does not exist—no matter your training—to meet the needs of your family. For example, in most of Guatemala, even the most industrious may only be able to find work 3 days of the week, while one day’s wages are insufficient to purchase one day’s food.² The same is the case in many parts of Mexico.³ In Zimbabwe, there are no real employment opportunities.⁴ These situations stress the limitations of the church welfare program under the current guidelines that instruct church leaders to avoid the situation where the church is being relied upon to provide the staples of life.

Of course, the doctrines provided by God to alleviate the poor are not limited by local economic circumstances. God instructed the Saints to physically gather into one place specified by revelation. They were instructed to buy up land and donate it to the church. The church then allowed the poor to work the donated land to feed themselves. The only resource that had to be provided by the church was limited training on how to farm and welfare for those very few who were physically or mentally disabled and did not have family that could provide for them. The system as prescribed cannot be fully implemented in modern Mormonism, since the gathering was ended by fiat in the early 1900s. However, buying farms in the developing world and allowing the poor to work them in exchange for the food that is produced on them would be a much closer approximation to the Lord’s instructions that the US-centric modern welfare system. It would certainly alleviate the concerns of the Brethren who have reservations about creating a system where members are not self-reliant.

Beyond the mechanical limitations of the program in the realities of economies outside of the first world, a deeper philosophical problem exists: Why is it acceptable for church leaders to receive a comfortable and guaranteed living while it is not acceptable for the poor to do the same?

The First Presidency, Quorum of the Twelve, all other General Authorities,⁵ and mission presidents receive money as a result of their callings. General Authority Seventies who have reached the age of 70 continue to receive benefits until death, despite a release from their duties, despite the church’s insistence that “There is no paid or professional ministry.”⁶ Until 1995, General Authorities’ salaries came not from their ecclesiastical work, but from their membership on the boards of churchowned businesses.⁷ After 1995, when General Authorities ceased to sit on such boards, there are only two possible ways of describing the money given to them.⁸ Either they are being paid for the ministry, which is priestcraft, or they are being paid for doing nothing, which would present an awfully hypocritical situation given the persistence of avoiding giving handouts to the poor. Why is it acceptable to stress that the poor not be given assistance without working for it, when we freely give many times the welfare budget of entire stakes in each paycheck to a seventy or apostle without any work requirement?⁹

The scriptures, particularly the Book of Mormon, teach plainly that ecclesiastical officers should support themselves. Alma “...commanded them that the priests whom he had ordained should labor with their own hands for their support.” (Mosiah 18:24.). We are also told that the priests received power and authority in their teaching as a result of their not being paid to do it:

And the priests were not to depend upon the people for their support; but for their labor they were to receive the grace of God, that they might wax strong in the Spirit, having the knowledge of God, that they might teach with power and authority from God. (Mosiah 18:26.)

King Mosiah also adopted this law: “Yea, and all their priests and teachers should labor with their own hands for their support, in all cases save it were in sickness, or in much want...” (Mosiah 27:5.) Leaders in the Book of Mormon did not use their many ecclesiastical responsibilities as an excuse not to support themselves. Alma explained how he supported himself despite his litany of responsibilities as the presiding officer of both the church and the government,

...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. (Alma 30:32.)

Neither workload nor physical age was used as an excuse worthy of earning the people’s support by King Benjamin, who not only led the church, but ruled the secular kingdom:

And even I, myself, have labored with mine own hands that I might serve you, and that ye should not be laden with taxes, and that there should nothing come upon you which was grievous to be borne... (Mosiah 2:14.)

Arguments supporting the church’s paying clergy it found in the Book of Mormon, but unfortunately they are offered up by apostates and anti-Christs. Nehor, for example,

had gone about among the people, preaching to them that which he termed to be the word of God...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. (Alma 1:3.)

These behaviors are described by Samuel the Lamanite as becoming only a false prophet:

Yea, ye will lift him up, and ye will give unto him of your substance; ye will give unto him of your gold, and of your silver, and ye will clothe him with costly apparel; and because he speaketh flattering words unto you, and he saith that all is well, then ye will not find fault with him. O ye wicked and ye perverse generation; ye hardened and ye stiffnecked people, how long will ye suppose that the Lord will suffer you? Yea, how long will ye suffer yourselves to be led by foolish and blind guides? Yea, how long will ye choose darkness rather than light? (Helaman 13:28-29.)

Even if church leaders will not support themselves with their own hands, couldn’t they at least reduce their standard of living? Does the average member of the church get a new luxury car every year, have multiple homes, have personal assistants, have a cook, a gardener, or expensive suits? The royalties they receive for their books should be sufficient alone to maintain an affluent standard of living. Why do they need lavish salaries to have sufficient for their needs?

The discrepancy between the living situation of many members and the poverty of other members is reminiscent of the description Amos gave of leaders at his time living in opulence while others lived in squalor:

Woe to them that are at ease in Zion, and trust in the mountain of Samaria, which are named chief of the nations, to whom the house of Israel came! Pass ye unto Calneh, and see; and from thence go ye to Hamath the great: then go down to Gath of the Philistines: be they better than these kingdoms? or their border greater than your border? Ye that put far away the evil day, and cause the seat of violence to come near; That lie upon beds of ivory, and stretch themselves upon their couches, and eat the lambs out of the flock, and the calves out of the midst of the stall; That chant to the sound of the viol, and invent to themselves instruments of musick, like David; That drink wine in bowls, and anoint themselves with the chief ointments: but they are not grieved for the affliction of Joseph. (Amos 6:1-6.)

How can we live so opulently when billions of the inhabitants of the earth and millions of church members live in dire poverty? How can modern Mormons not be repulsed by the contrast between the fineries of church leaders and the poor half of the church?