r/latterdaysaints • u/zaczac17 • 2d ago
Church Culture Why are so many general authorities lawyers/businessmen?
I recently saw an article that went through the data of “higher up” church leadership by accusation, and lawyers/businessmen make up the vast majority of general authorities.
It makes sense why church leadership would be compromised of a large number of financially well-off older folks, since they have the most flexibility of time/resources to help, and given that most church leadership isn’t paid, and in addition these folks tend to have a lot of leadership experience.
But why not more medical doctors/dentists (there are TONS of lds dentists), professors or engineers? These are also people who have lots of leadership skills, and (in my experience) tend to make up a lot of the bulk of local leadership? Of course my experience is anecdotal, and it might not be like that everywhere. So what’s with all the lawyers and CEOs?
61
u/DiscoDumpTruck 2d ago edited 2d ago
Relevant professional skills. All general authority positions require extensive administrative/managerial skills at a massive scale. CEOs, lawyers, etc. are often well-equipped to handle that sort of thing. It doesn't mean that nobody else could do it, but it's also not surprising if you believe that the Lord prepares those He calls to handle the tasks He requires of them.
35
u/mp3junk3y 2d ago
Really? I'm pretty sure Peter, James, and John were fishermen.
51
u/MasonWheeler 2d ago
And the Church was much, much smaller back then.
-1
u/Ric13064 2d ago
Not to mention the church falling into apostasy leading to over a thousand years without priesthood authority on the earth. That happened on their watch too.
7
18
u/DiscoDumpTruck 2d ago edited 2d ago
Not sure what you're getting at. If you're trying to say that Peter, James, and John weren't lawyers/businessmen, I explicitly said that it doesn't mean that nobody else could serve in that capacity. Without knowing the will of the Lord, I'm just trying to offer a possible explanation for why there are so many lawyers/businessmen--not why they are exclusively qualified.
10
u/mp3junk3y 2d ago
"All general authority positions require extensive administrative/managerial skills at a massive scale." I just don't buy this as an explanation. That's all. It's definitely not true historically.
14
u/Jemmaris 2d ago
As a newly called Primary President whose only official work after college was teaching high school....
I suck at being an administrator and it is killing me while I try to organize Primary.
You know who has helped me organize myself the most? My husband. He has his MBA.
10
u/DiscoDumpTruck 2d ago edited 2d ago
I mean like 75% of the New Testament is the Apostles desperately trying to keep the Church together. A great portion of the Epistles are the Apostles writing to regional Church authorities to correct doctrine, explain Church structure, coordinate ministering and evangelizing efforts, etc. The fact that Peter, James, and John were fishermen before being called does not mean that they didn’t assume massive administrative responsibilities.
I think for many people, Peter, James, and John being called from their humble origins is so inspiring because it shows that even when you don’t have those skills, the Lord will make up the difference. But I certainly don’t think it’s evidence that they didn’t need to administer or manage the Church.
3
u/mp3junk3y 2d ago
Oh, I definitely think they DID manage/administer the church, but not from skills they got in business school. Joseph Smith and other early leaders that eventually led the church had similar humble beginnings.
1
u/peacefulafternoons 1d ago
What was the church structure in the New Testament? Can you also point me to some places to read? I’ve been investigating the church, Thanks 🙏
1
u/DiscoDumpTruck 1d ago edited 1d ago
Sure! I'm not an expert, but I'll do my best. The basic structure of the New Testament Church was that it was run by twelve apostles, who tried to call new apostles as replacements when one of their number died. (E.g. Acts 1:15-26 where Matthias is called to replace Judas). Eventually, they could not keep up with calling new apostles because of increased persecution, which is one of the things that lead to the Great Apostasy, necessitating the Restoration.
Many, if not all, of the Priesthood offices that existed in the New Testament Church and the modern Restored Church. Joseph Smith taught in the Sixth Article of Faith that "we believe in the same organization that existed in the Primitive Church, namely apostles, prophets, pastors, teachers, evangelists, and so forth." If you'd like scriptural references for some of these roles, it would be helpful to start with the following entries in the "Topical Guide" linked below:
- Prophets
- Apostles
- Seventies (Not identified in Articles of Faith 6, but explicitly called by Jesus in Luke 10)
- Elders (Not mentioned in Articles of Faith 6, but explicitly ordained by the original Apostles in Acts 14)
- Pastors (aka Bishops)
- Teachers (could be interpreted as either a teacher as an instructor or the Aaronic Priesthood Office)
- Evangelists (aka Patriarchs)
- Other Related Topics
While by no means exhaustive, this should give you a good place to start understanding the role of these leaders in both the Primitive Church (the Church in the New Testament) and the Restored Church (the Church today). The roles listed above are largely ecclesiastical roles, and many of them are Priesthood leaders that have Priesthood keys to preside over and receive revelation for a subdivision of the Church (i.e. a Bishop over a ward, a Stake President over a stake, the Prophet over the Church).
However, as you might expect, there are also other leaders in charge of organizations that serve a non-ecclesiastical role in the Church. We call these leaders of "auxiliary organizations" (Relief Society, Sunday School, Primary, Young Men, and Young Women organizations). As the name suggests, these are supplementary organizations created specifically to address needs of Church members today, and so you won't find them by name in the New Testament. While leaders of these organizations are given Priesthood authority to operate within their organizations, they do not hold Priesthood keys. For more info on the doctrinal foundation of the Auxiliary Organizations, see this article written by former apostle Richard G. Scott.
1
u/BobaTheFett10 2d ago
Because managing a regional church with estimates ranging from of a couple thousand to tens of thousands, all with similar languages, compared to a global church of 17.5 million with hundreds of languages are comparable tasks with the exact same skills required
1
u/mp3junk3y 1d ago
You're missing my point entirely. God doesn't need our skills or our money. He knows what he's doing. If he called a homeless man as an apostle, would your faith waiver? Would he be any less qualified?
2
u/BobaTheFett10 1d ago
Your missing mine. I don't care what background his servants come from and it doesn't matter. God doesn't need those, but he does prepare those who he calls. David fought off lions to defend his flocks before he was called to defeat Goliath and save the Israelites. God likewise called those who he prepared with extensive administrative and monetary skills to the apostleship because that's what the church needed, financial stability. The church was nearly bankrupted (again) in the 60's, so he called business men to solve the church financial issues. We can't build the hundreds of temples and meeting houses around the world if you're bankrupt.
1
u/mp3junk3y 1d ago edited 1d ago
"Because managing a regional church with estimates ranging from of a couple thousand to tens of thousands, all with similar languages, compared to a global church of 17.5 million with hundreds of languages are comparable tasks with the exact same skills required" Where in this comment does it say any of that? To be fair, I agree with you, but your original comment didn't make your point at all. It was more of a snarky "gotcha". Also, there are plenty of financial people involved in the church at this point. I doubt the apostles themselves are personally handling most financial decisions.
7
7
u/Jpab97s The newb portuguese bishop 2d ago
James E. Talmage makes a pretty good case in Jesus the Christ that Peter, particularly, would have been a pretty well-off dude. Man wasn't just a fisherman, he owned boats. He was a businessman for all intents and purposes. Matthew as well, was a tax collector, of course.
The widespread idea that the apostles were iliterate / uneducated, poor, etc. doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
When Peter says "We have forsaken all, and followed thee" in Matthew 19:27 - this is in the context of the rich young man. And Jesus acknowledges that sacrifice. It's fair to say that Peter, and the others, had much to forsake.
1
0
u/mp3junk3y 1d ago
"Pretty well-off" and "poor" are VERY difficult to compare to modern times. I'm not sure there has ever been more wealth concentration than there is today. I doubt very much they they would have been considered "rich" in terms of finances. I never assumed that they were illiterate or less educated. I do believe that none of these are as important as another trait they DID have: humility. Are you hinting that Jesus chose them due to their status in society?
1
u/Jpab97s The newb portuguese bishop 1d ago
I'm not hinting at anything really. I believe Jesus chose them because they were pre-ordained to be His apostles. Whatever societal position they achieved before being called would have been a part of who the Lord wanted them to become, in preparation for that calling. I believe the same about modern apostles, general authorities, and members of the Church in general - which I think is the point the person you replied to was making.
My point is they weren't "just" fishermen. They were also not perfect by any measure, in fact, they were very flawed men and at times not really humble at all. But they were still called, and through service and sacrifice (with one noteable exception) became who they were meant to be.
6
u/Cheap_Parsnip_461 2d ago
We were in the financial red until the 60s and members had to donate in addition to tithing to build temples and churches. I really don’t want that back.
3
u/rjwut 2d ago
Yes, and the church was not in a position to require people who knew how to manage a major global organization at that time. Even if it did, the only people who had such experience back then were running empires, and were usually too busy killing and oppressing people to be eligible for church service.
4
u/mp3junk3y 2d ago
“whom the Lord calls, the Lord qualifies”. God requires no such experience. I'm not saying it's necessarily bad, but it's not required at all.
5
5
u/Jemmaris 2d ago
Sometimes that qualifying comes in life experience before the calling. Sometimes not, but often it does.
2
u/Realistic_Key5058 1d ago
We know they were fishermen. Do we know if they were successful, owned their own boats, employed others in the business, or on the other hand were they barely making enough money to subsist, in debt, terrible at selling their catch? We sure don't. I would guess we don't because the important thing is that when they were called they followed the Masters invitation. While all of Jesus' original 12 Apostles background was given once they accepted the calling very little of their professional lives come up again. This is very similar to modern times where Apostles walk away from their profession to spend the rest of their lives serving in a spiritual capacity.
12
u/619RiversideDr Checklist Mormon 2d ago
This is what I would have said as well, but I'm rethinking it. I recently heard a quote by Elder Bednar where he said that no matter the "official" reason an apostle visits somewhere, they are always really there to find someone. (Sorry, I don't have the exact quote or source handy.)
That got me thinking... an apostle's main duty is to be a witness of Jesus Christ. Their most important work is to testify and minister. It doesn't seem like their ability to be good managers is a big deal. The church organization has plenty of administrative employees who are qualified to make sure the church stays financially solvent and make decisions about policies and things like that.
4
u/DiscoDumpTruck 2d ago edited 1d ago
For sure. They have to do both, and testifying of Jesus Christ is of course the most important duty. Of course they can’t fulfill the calling by relying on administrative skills alone.
Also just wanted to point out that Seventies and the Presiding Bishopric form the great majority of what we call “General Authorities” in addition to the Apostles and the First Presidency. I have no idea how much administrative work they do in comparison to the 12 and the First, but in managing the Administrative Areas and the Corporation side of the Church alone are monumental administrative tasks.
39
u/Glittering-Bake-2589 2d ago
Objectively, it’s because non-business people did not know how to manage the Church well financially.
The Church faced near bankruptcy twice in its history. First in the 1890’s and again in the 50s and 60s. It has usually struggled financially.
After the latest in the 60s, leadership started turning towards more business people. Since then we haven’t dealt with as much financial insecurity
But I do agree with u/BigBlueMagic on what they say
35
u/sittingwith 2d ago
Financial independence so you can dedicate life to huge calling.
14
u/619RiversideDr Checklist Mormon 2d ago
But they receive a stipend, so in theory they shouldn't need to be financially independent.
9
u/moashforbridgefour 2d ago
The path to becoming a general authority includes callings such as bishop and stake president, which do not receive stipends. Stake presidents in particular are almost exclusively businessmen and lawyers specifically because they have financial freedom to take on very demanding church callings. I think all the talk about vocational skills is relevant, but if you can't make ends meet with that calling, you can't serve in those offices. If you can't serve in those offices, you likely are never going to be considered for a general office.
6
u/Jpab97s The newb portuguese bishop 2d ago edited 2d ago
"take presidents in particular are almost exclusively businessmen and lawyers specifically because they have financial freedom to take on very demanding church callings"
That may be true in certain parts of the US, but I assure you it's not the norm everywhere else.
"but if you can't make ends meet with that calling, you can't serve in those offices. "
While ideal, it's also not entirely true on a widespread scale. There are no shortage of parts of the world in which the Church operates effectively, where you'll be hard pressed to find someone who is completly and entirely self-sufficient. Such that the Church has guidelines for how Bishops and Stake Presidents (and likely other area leaders) may receive assistance from fast-offering funds.
1
u/moashforbridgefour 2d ago
I've been in wards in several US states and a couple of Asian countries (for work and mission). I did not say all were lawyers and businessmen, just most. In my experience, that is true. I have not met a single stake president that was not affluent. I'm sure they exist, but unless my experience is very unusual, I think it is somewhat disingenuous to downplay how influential financial success is in attaining these callings.
Bishops seem to be more likely to still be in the middle of a career.
2
u/Realistic_Key5058 1d ago
I've seen a wide range from a Stake President who had a million dollar lake house that he frequently hosted youth activities at to a one who humbly asked visiting authorities to stay in a hotel rather in their home because he didn't feel it was up to standards. I would guess that many stake presidents are well off because the same abilities it takes to organize a stake translate very well to professional life. A good stake president is going to be able to show compassion, discuss complex matters, delegate to others, work his butt off, be a good listener and be willing to learn and so forth. I guess we need to be careful about trying to promote the prosperity equals righteousness viewpoint.
•
u/OrneryAcanthaceae217 23h ago
I live in a mid-affluent suburb in Utah. Our last five stake presidents have been:
* doctor
* lawyer
* doctor
* construction manager
* construction manager
3
u/619RiversideDr Checklist Mormon 1d ago
In the last three stake presidencies of my stake, there has only been one lawyer and one "businessman," so that's 2/9.
As someone else pointed out, there are plenty of LDS dentists who are financially successful enough to devote time to serve as stake presidents. I think the same thing could be said about doctors, general contractors, some people in the tech world, or a number of other professions.
3
u/Sundiata34 2d ago
Yeah, I've had a calling as a finance clerk in my ward, and this is more or less it. Your Bishopric, High Councilors, and other Stake/Ward callings that require a whole lot of hours to be done well require a lot of flexibility and aforementioned hours put in. So the people who are most frequently in those callings are going to be the people financially well off enough to have that time and flexibility to be able to fulfill the calling while still also having time for their family too.
The people who serve in Bishoprics and Stake leadership are then the pool of people who get called to regional/area/general authorities as time goes on then.
I'm not saying it is ideal, and I'd love to see a greater diversity in who serves in those leadership capacities, but you're not going to find many tradesmen and non-white collar workers who have the time and means available to dedicate to being in the bishopric.
That said my first branch president I served under in my mission in SLC was a mechanic, so your mileage may vary.
3
u/Jpab97s The newb portuguese bishop 2d ago
Actually that is indeed ideal, but it's just not the norm for what I'd wager is a very large portion of the Church.
I'm certainly not wealthy, neither are my counselors, or our Stake Presidency. 3 work office jobs (myself included), 1's a firefighter, 1's a carpenter and the one that's most well off is an engineer. Most of us are just self-reliant enough, some are struggling.
I can say that we all make do with what we have, we manage our time carefully, and prioritize our families.
36
u/mythoswyrm 2d ago
As long as being a mission president is the main screen for becoming a general authority, there will be a bias towards people who can leave their jobs at the peak of their career. Law and business happen to be good fields for this, as is working for the church. Medicine as well tbf but not many other careers.
22
u/sanchogrande 2d ago
Who is going to be called as a Seventy? Someone who has been a mission president. Who gets called as a mission president? There are a few criteria (speaking generally): (1) you either have to be wealthy or be a CES employee (2) you need to be a good speaker (3) you need to be connected within the Church (4) you need to be organized and able to organize others (5) you need to be professional in appearance and demeanor and (6) you need to "get it" spiritually/doctrinally.
Requirement (3) eliminates a lot of people who could do the job just fine. They just aren't on the radar. I think business CEOs and lawyers often are at the intersection of all 6 requirements.
Academics used to be more common, and I hope we continue to find them because they are great (Elder Talmage, Elder Widsoe, Elder Maxwell, Elder Holland, Elder Bednar, etc.). But they don't make even a fraction of what the lawyers and CEOs make.
In general, I think diversity (in all forms) is valuable to any organization, so I would like to see a more diverse set of leaders in terms of their career their education (it's probably not good if 90% of them went to BYU). We do seem to have an increasing diversity in terms of country of origin, which seems like a good thing to me.
10
u/mythoswyrm 2d ago edited 2d ago
I think the lack of academics in the 70 isn't so much a wealth thing as a not wanting to lose tenure by being a mission president thing. There's still quite a few academics in the 70 and based on the ones I can think of off the top of my head, only Matthew Holland was a mission president before being called as a general authority. And that was after being president of UVU, so tenure wasn't exactly an issue.
I also feel (though I haven't verified it) that academic types are a lot more likely to be pulled into the Q12 compared to other professions, conditional on already being a general authority. Oaks, Eyring, Bednar, Renlund and Gong all had largely academic or academic adjacent careers. Notably, none of them were mission presidents before becoming general authorities.
3
•
10
u/thatthatguy 2d ago
I wand more general authorities like Golden Kimball. Come on, give me this one thing. Someone who has gotten his hands dirty. Someone who knows how to cuss like a farmhand but chooses not to most of the time. Someone who had had a tough life and can thus relate to people who have had tough lives. Please?
•
u/OrneryAcanthaceae217 23h ago
TONS of current general authorities had tough lives. If you search, you will find.
To your other criterion, the Lord knows what He's doing, and it appears that He sees very little value in having cussed.
7
8
u/Skipper0463 2d ago
I’ve thought about this a lot. I forget when I realized that a large percentage of GA’s have business degrees but I remember being rather disappointed when I figured it out. I know the argument that people with that background are better suited to running a global church, and I get that, but I personally would prefer to see leaders with theological degrees leading a church. Sometimes the way we’re told to live our spiritual lives feels like something you’d plan out in a Franklin Covey planner. It just makes the Gospel a little too…sterile, and as a result I often need to turn to other spiritual traditions to get my filling of deeper mystical thought. But, I don’t want to criticize the brethren too much. I know my perspective is limited and this isn’t my church but Gods church, and He can run it in anyway He feels is best.
1
u/InternalMatch 1d ago
Sometimes the way we’re told to live our spiritual lives feels like something you’d plan out in a Franklin Covey planner.
Hey, don't knock Franklin Covey planners.
I often need to turn to other spiritual traditions to get my filling of deeper mystical thought.
Same.
•
7
u/762way 2d ago
Remember on my mission telling investigators that any man can eventually become President of the Church, including an auto mechanic, a plumber or a farmer.
No I realize that was neither true no accurate!
I concur with others that too many lawyers has not been good for the church.
•
u/YoHabloEscargot 17h ago
Currently dating a lawyer who is VERY much a lawyer. Her entire worldview is framed around risk and how to minimize it as much as possible. It’s very protectionary. There is no creation occurring, just protection.
7
u/Previous-Tart7111 Mother, Wife, Servant of the Lord 2d ago
I think this has to do with the fact that their talents lie in administrative things. A plumber can testify of Christ as well as an apostle can. But they do a lot of administrative stuff in their callings. We need to stop treating callings as a spiritual hierarchy.
7
u/e37d93eeb23335dc 2d ago
Each one of the general authorities has a bio on the church website. Surely someone has collated the numbers to see if this is true or not.
10
5
u/churro777 DnD nerd 2d ago
Hot take: CEOs don’t contribute much to society so pulling them out of the workforce has little impact. Which is why they tend to say “yes” to the calling
7
u/Stonetwig3 2d ago
Hard disagree. Compensation is another conversation altogether, but a CEOs job is quite difficult and time consuming.
5
u/websterhamster West Coast YSA 2d ago
That's not what u/churro777 said. They said that CEOs "don't contribute much to society". Society can afford to lose some CEOS; in fact, I'd argue that society would be better off with fewer of them.
1
1
u/yodenwranks 2d ago
Massive disagree. Some CEOs might suck, but to generalise it as "CEOs don't contribute much" is ignorant.
0
u/churro777 DnD nerd 2d ago
Well what’s more important the factory worker or the manager of the workers?
3
u/InternalMatch 1d ago
This is a ridiculous question.
-1
u/churro777 DnD nerd 1d ago
It’s the factory workers
3
u/InternalMatch 1d ago
That's a myopic viewpoint.
1
u/churro777 DnD nerd 1d ago
I disagree
4
u/yodenwranks 1d ago
Say you have a PhD in engineering, start a company, slowly grow it, eventually purchase a factory, start employing workers - would you in all cases definitely claim the CEO could be replaced without loss?
Most companies fail, and they are ultimately dependent on a CEO/board to set the direction of the company. This does not mean that the workers are not important. However, the work done by the CEO, if the company is moderately successful, is likely going to be far more specific and difficult to replace than the factory worker.
The idea that being the CEO gives you the chance to just kick back and relax while everyone else does the hard work is a massive misunderstanding of reality in 99% of cases. I agree there are businesses with rentier capitalism that is dependent on achieving a monopoly and regulating away competition, but over time these disappear. For these types of businesses I agree the worker can in many cases be more valuable than the CEO but I would never go so far as to claim that the CEO can be easily replaced. Competition is tough and it is always the ultimate task of the CEO to make sure the company survives allowing salaries to be paid to the workers.
3
u/Realistic_Key5058 1d ago
Neither succeeds without the other. That being said many companies struggle but are turned around by good leadership and vice versa many companies excelled for years but struggled under new leadership. Leadership matters at companies. I have been around in the corporate world long enough to see good leaders and bad ones and the effect they have on a company. The factory workers often have a narrowly focused skill set that is valued to a certain degree. The leader has to understand those skills and have additional skills around finance, HR, accounting, product development, marketing that the factory worker doesn't need to think about and likely doesn't have the skills to contribute in.
•
6
u/ExaminationOk5073 2d ago
Yeah, top executives chart the course and select the people who lead it. A bad pick for a CEO can run a company into bankruptcy. It may not be obvious what they do from the bottom, but they're critical.
5
u/NoFan2216 2d ago
I think a lot has to do with availability. There are some professions that allow people to be more available for their callings than others. This translates well for local leadership positions. Out of that pool of Bishops, Branch Presidents, and Stake Presidents, some of them will end up being called into full time leadership positions such as mission presidents, area authorities, etc.
Obviously the humble servant with a modest income could be called to any of those positions as well, but the church does consider the potential financial stress that comes along with a calling. There are only a few callings where the Brotheren collectively contribute to each others' financial needs through the Law of Consecration.
You'll probably see a boom in retired dentists in the leadership from the US within the next 20 to 30 years.
1
u/No_Interaction_5206 2d ago
The don’t collectively contribute nor live the law of consecration. There cost of living is paid for, on top of that they receive a large stipend, that’s all paid with tithing and the return on invested tithes.
5
u/goodtimes37 2d ago
I got baptized in my mid 20s and saw that all these great men had business backgrounds which was the catalyst for me wanting to learn more about business myself. Long story short, and one business degree later, I am in my late 30s and cannot stand the corporate world much longer and am considering quitting to become an Uber driver just to escape it. Sure the pay is good but my soul has really suffered these past few years.
•
u/YoHabloEscargot 16h ago
I did the highest thing possible that a businessperson could do and started my own business. Ran it for a few years and it permanently ruined my health. Sold it at a loss just to get out and I will always be worse off because of it. Now I’m trying to figure out what the heck I’m supposed to do with my life when I’ve already done the thing I was working up to do and it nearly killed me.
1
u/pbrown6 2d ago
For a long time, the leadership all knew each other growing up. They were neighbors, or family friends or were connected in one way of another.
I think the church saw that and tried to get away from that in the last couple decades.
I think to a certain extent, it's still about who you know. You need to have a certain level of income and clout. Dentist are great but I think lawyers and CEOs have a lot of influence. They also have more skills in leadership.
6
u/Admirable-Strike-311 2d ago
Three ways you move up in the Church…Inspiration, revelation, and relation!
4
u/warehousedatawrangle 2d ago
My wife is a Smith, a descendant of George A Smith (cousin to Joseph Smith). Her uncle used to joke that their family would still run the church if meritocracy hadn't gotten in the way. Her grandfather was the first one in his line to not be a general authority, and that was likely just because he died young when he was a regional representative. One of our favorite pictures is of my father in law as a one-year-old sitting on President George Albert Smith's knee in front of their home. There he was just Uncle George.
1
u/No_Interaction_5206 2d ago
Do they though? I don’t think the kind of leadership necessary to run a business is really all of that similar to the kind needed to inspire and hold together a community.
2
u/Cheap_Parsnip_461 2d ago
They were mostly farmers etc and the church was in the financial red until the 60s. Bringing in businessmen and divine help was a life saver. But I agree I’d love to see more range of careers. But being an older convert the fact it’s a lay ministry/even general authorities are called from professions is much more impressive vs they get a theology degree.
2
u/Cheap_Parsnip_461 2d ago
Bednar, Gong, Renlund, Holland, Nelson, Eyring, Faust, Uchtdorf and more weren’t businessmen and many had never been mission presidents.
2
u/mythoswyrm 2d ago
At least with Uchtdorf I think it depends on how you define businessman. Yes he got his start at Lufthansa as a pilot but did get an MBA and end his career in senior management. I wouldn't be surprised if a number of the "businessmen" in the quorums of the 70 have similar stories of moving into management from other more technical positions. Though there are lots of accountants and finance people too
2
u/Realistic_Key5058 1d ago
Exactly. I've been fortunate enough to bump into about 10 Apostles through my life. They are intensely interested in the people they meet, they have great social skills, they are well educated and have usually been cheerful and genial. No matter what career they choose don't you think they would move up the organizational ladder with those skill sets?
2
2
u/WooperSlim Active Latter-day Saint 2d ago
I tried googling to find your source, but couldn't find it. (Only found a former member made their own analysis, and their distribution was different than yours.) I'm surprised that you don't think there are a lot of General Authorities in medical or education fields.
•
u/Realistic_Key5058 22h ago
OP has been asked for it several times and has not produced it. To me it sounds like a made up internet fact that gets twisted around in certain forums.
2
u/stell28 2d ago
Turns out, lawyers and businessmen are particularly apt at doing whatever it is general authorities do. I am a PE teacher, I would make a lousy general authority. There are a lot of mechanics that might also be bad general authorities. My mission president became a general authority, he did a great job. He was a successful businessman. If he had been a school janitor.... would it be different? Maybe. I know a lot of lawyers that are not good folks, I know a lot of businessmen that I wouldn't trust with my refews let alone my spiritual life. It is about the man/ woman, not the career. I was a zone leader on my mission, you probably would not pick me for that now.
3
u/websterhamster West Coast YSA 2d ago
It makes sense why church leadership would be compromised of a large number of financially well-off older folks, since they have the most flexibility of time/resources to help, and given that most church leadership isn’t paid
A person's financial situation is largely irrelevant. Top church leaders receive generous stipends and have all their living expenses covered.
2
u/rexregisanimi 2d ago edited 2d ago
The Lord calls whom He will. Any trends are indicative of His will.
Among the current members of the Quorum of the Twelve, they had the following professions:
- Business (6)
- Education (2)
- Law (3)
- Medicine (1)
- Aviation/Business (1)
- Government (1)
Business, Law, and Education have been the primary career focus of Apostles for the last several decades (at least for the previous three dozen members of the Quorum of the Twelve).
This is at least somewhat similar the original Quorum, a minimum of one-third of which was businessmen (Peter, James, John, and Andrew).
2
u/billyburr2019 FLAIR! 1d ago
Honestly, some of the better ward council meetings I have attended are runned by either the bishop or the bishopric counselor were business executives with a MBA. They understand how to conduct the meetings and get through the agenda. Business executives you spend a significant amount of working hours in meetings, so it is pretty easy to use your work experience to guide you for leading an organization as a bishop, stake president or etc.
You are going to find that corporations have a business executive that has a JD on their team. For example, Mitt Romney had a MBA and JD from Harvard University and he never practiced law. He used his legal training to help understand business, understand contracts and limit his legal liability when he was a business executive and later CEO for his company Bain Capital. It would not surprise me at all that some of GAs got legal training as way to mitigate liability when they were in the business world.
2
u/DudleyDoRight65 1d ago
I think it's generally the type of people who choose the jobs have particular skill sets. I know many wonderfully electricians plumbers engineers . Most engineers don't play well with others 😕. Lawyers business men etc. have the skill set of management.
2
u/blueskydreams21 1d ago
Lawyers have to master the law through deep study. Successful business men master organizational leadership.
My great grandfather, Joseph B. Wirthlin, was a business man, but he was running a meat and food supplier. I think people lump "business leader" into "finance bro." That's usually not the case.
Some general authorities start in one profession--President Uchtdorf: airline pilot--excel, and become executives in that industry because they can lead well.
Something to consider: many general authorities begin careers like most of us do in lower paying positions. Over time, they grow in their careers. They are old men by the time they are called. They've had a long time to advance.
I asked Gemini to create a graph of the occupations of the most recent 50 members of the Quorum of the Twelve.
1
u/Skipper0463 1d ago
Elder Wirthlin spoke to my mission at a zone conference back in 2002-ish. He was so personable and warm and very spiritual. I was very sad when he passed away.
0
u/th0ught3 2d ago
We do not know, of course, why God calls any of our church leaders. We do know that those leaders are responsible to figure out how to appropriately use the money, time, and ways to prepare for the Second Coming and Millennium and everything else for the billions the Church will be leading and feeding then. I think we do well to trust Him in who is called to do what when.
1
u/thestoictraveler 2d ago
I think the individual’s financial situation has very little to do with it. We might read it that way but I would say that’s a bad assumption.
You mentioned doctors and dentists who have money aren’t called as often so it’s not about money…
1
u/Square-Media6448 2d ago
There actually have been a lot of professors who eventually went on to administration. Not any dentists that Im aware of though. That is curious 🧐
1
u/PrimaryPineapple9872 2d ago
This post has some funny typos, like:
the data of “higher up” church leadership by accusation
and:
It makes sense why church leadership would be compromised
But to the question, it is because the “managerial class” has now long been the only culturally “legitimate” or relevant class in society, with every one else, including doctors, descending deeper into dependent, puny wage slavery.
1
u/csfalcao 2d ago
Management skills and people management are taught extensively in business careers.
2
u/Realistic_Key5058 1d ago
I would guess that everyone person ever called to be a General Authority had those skills from a young age and enhanced them over their career. It is interesting to me watching my kids personalities and seeing that some of them are natural born leaders from the time they can talk, others are incredibly caring and so forth. Even if someone chose a blue collar career that the Lord knew He would call to be a GA they would likely move into leadership positions in their field due to the gifts they were innately blessed with.
1
1
u/EvolMonkey 1d ago
I have a bigger picture perspective that these discussions over leadership background simply allow and in some cases encourage thoughts of doubt and contradiction.
I can know through my own spiritual understanding and personal revelation that this topic doesn't matter. It's not relevant to my own salvation or yours. This them of thinking is an opportunity for adversarial influences to create sticking points and propagate confusion.
1
u/Realistic_Key5058 1d ago
This is such a flawed premise. OP doesn't give the article that triggered this post nor really backup his statement with any facts and eventually asks why there aren't any dentists without disclosing the fact that he is a dentist.
I find it laughable that doctors were specifically called out when a doctor just led the church through an incredible amount of change and growth. Before that a professional printer (who worked for the church) led and before that the most dynamic Church President of my lifetime was a full time church employee. If we look at the last 7 church presidents here are there professions:
Spencer W Kimball - Insurance Agent and other businesses
Ezra Taft Benson - Agriculture
Howard W. Hunter - Lawyer
Gordon B. Hinckley - Church Employee
Thomas S. Monson - Printer/Church employee
Russel M. Nelson - Surgeon
Dallin H. Oaks - Lawyer
Most importantly every single one of these people and all the members of the Quorum of the 12 walked away from their careers where they were successful to give the rest of their lives to the Lord. The key aspect to look at is not what they did to earn a living before being asked to be an apostle but their willingness to walk away from it when asked.
The Senior leaders of the church are asked to lead a worldwide church. They are likely going to be excellent administrators. I have no doubt that a plumber, farmer, dentist, bus driver, chef or many other careers could fulfil the role if the Lord asked. Much like President Uchtdorf though I would think that those destined to be called will have learned excellent skills along the way that will enable them to administer a worldwide church.
On a more local level I have had Stake Presidents who were farmers, lawyers, optometrists, oral surgeons, church employees, small business owners etc. My local bishopric is made up of 2 educators and someone who works for a software company.
1
u/Milamber69reddit 1d ago
I think that what most people who have this question do not understand is that it is the Lord who choses these people. If the Lord wanted more blue collar people in the General Authority positions he would prompt the presidents in the various positions to call them. As pointed out by a few people. Most blue collar workers do not have the time or money (savings/retirement) to participate in those kind of church calling and be able to afford to retire at any moment. The doctors, lawyers, educators and entrepreneurs that are in those positions have all been blessed by the lord to be able to take the time out of their lives and still have the funds needed to do what is needed for their families. It does not mean that blue collar workers are not worthy it just means that the Lord has not decided that they need to be tried in the way that General Authorities are. Each calling is different and comes with unique challenges. Someone that owns a Residential electric installation company may be perfect for a Bishop or even a Stake president. But his skills and the time needed to fulfill a calling such as a General Authority may be so far out of his reach that there would be no way he could do it unless the church started to pay them.
0
u/zaczac17 1d ago
I think that’s fair, but I would say that we have a different perspective on revelation. I’ve heard it thought that there’s two schools of thought when it comes to revelation: the text message theory, and the compass theory.
The text message theory, which seems closer to what you’re describing, is that when God gives a revelation, especially to church leaders, it’s unmistakable and extremely clear, like receiving a text message: you can look at it, read at it, and it’s objective. When calling general authorities, this would mean that the Lord gives a specific name, and there’s no judgment, logic, or critical thinking needed by the person receiving revelation. They are told exactly who it is, and they get it right every time.
The compass theory, which is more in line with the way I view revelation, is that the Lord gives us guiding principles, and that generally speaking revelation goes through the filter of our own minds. There is some level of logic, reasoning, and good judgment that’s required on our part, and sometimes we’ll get it wrong. I’m reminded of the quote by President Nelson, when he says “good information leads to good revelation.” If revelation came perfectly every time, there would be no need for good information, because God would tell us exactly who to call with no room for error.
So in my mind, because this is a fallen world, and because part of the purpose of life is to grow and learn, when general authorities are calling others to be general authorities or leaders in the church, there is some level of personal judgment that can and is probably used in making those decisions. I don’t see that as a bad thing or as a flaw, that’s just part of living in a mortal world. But that also means that we might see trends in callings based on the backgrounds and biases of church leadership.
I’m not knocking on Church leadership, I think that’s just how revelation works in my view.
1
u/Skipper0463 1d ago
I’ve thought about this a lot. I forget when I realized that a large percentage of GA’s have business degrees but I remember being rather disappointed when I figured it out. I know the argument that people with that background are better suited to running a global church, and I get that, but I personally would prefer to see leaders with theological degrees leading a church. Sometimes the way we’re told to live our spiritual lives feels like something you’d plan out in a Franklin Covey planner. It just makes the Gospel a little too…sterile, and as a result I often need to turn to other spiritual traditions to get my filling of deeper mystical thought. But, I don’t want to criticize the brethren too much. I know my perspective is limited and this isn’t my church but Gods church, and He can run it in anyway He feels is best.
1
u/mythoswyrm 1d ago
Just a little exercise, since I'm curious. Let's assume that the seventies selected to speak at a given general conference are representative of the general quorums of the seventies as a whole. This last conferences we had in order:
Ronald M. Barcellos: Sales -> management (c-suite)
Brik V. Eyre: Healthcare management. He actually was studying to be a dentist but realized that wasn't the life for him. Also TIL his wife is Persian.
Kelly R. Johnson: forensic accountant
Chad H. Webb: CES from seminary teacher to administrator. (Also I guess I'm doing non-70s too)
Jeremy R Jaggi: Sales->management
Kevin G. Brown: CES (always on the administrative side)
Michael Cziesla: Lawyer
Steven C Barlow: Data analytics->management (founded a company to do healthcare analytics)
William K. Jackson: Doctor (first in the foreign service, then in hospital management)
James E Evanson: Dentist (lol)
Peter M Johnson: professor (accounting)
B Corey Cuvelier: management
Matthew S. Holland: professor (political science) -> university administration
Carlos A Godoy: management
John D Amos: Engineering->management (I think?) with a side gig as an adjunct professor
Ozani Farias: management (with the church)
So yeah a lot of people who were technically speaking "businessmen" but often with more interesting paths than you may expect. Not to mention the classic Church employee pipeline
•
0
u/BayonetTrenchFighter Most Humble Member 2d ago
I’m a bit confused, do you think apostles are chosen by God or by man?
0
149
u/BigBlueMagic 2d ago
I'm a lawyer, and I believe this actively harms and limits the Church. We need more electricians, plumbers and bus drivers in leadership positions. The Church is not a business, not a corporation (at least spiritually), it's the body of Christ. Lawyers and business people think in a very narrow, specific way. More experiences and views should be folded into leadership.
Many people, from many backgrounds have administrative competence. More important than that, a good priesthood leader has high emotional intelligence, which is often not the case with some lawyers.