Seems like this question should be ask in a non-LDS forum... The Bible says that Church workers such as Priests or Pastors are allowed to earn their living as such. Their is nothing wrong with this. I have heard the argument from LDS members that paying someone to Pastor a Church is not right because money can corrupt this person... well, this argument doesn't hold any water. Money is not the only thing that corrupts people... As a member of a Christain Church (non-LDS), it is a great blessing to have someone that knows Hebrew and Greek AND who has dedicated several years of Study of the Bible, leading and teaching our congregation. He would not be able to dedicate his life to teaching about God's saving grace to us if he had to also have a full-time job outside of the Church. As for the Priesthood... you should read up on it from the Bible. Christ is a Christain's Eternal High Priest. Read Hebrews. Why do we need another high priest here on earth? One of the main roles of the High Priest in the old testament was to enter the Holy of Holies once a year to provide a sacrifice for the sins of the Children of Israel. An unblemished lamb was provided and sacrficied so that God would forgive their sins. Guess what... the ultimate sacrifice was made once for all... THE unblemished sinless God-man, Christ, was sacrificed for the forgiveness of all of our sins and as THE Eternal High Priest entered the enternal temple into the Holy of Holies. Giving himself as the unblemished lamb. This sacrifice tore open the veil separating us from God the Father so that we can have direct communion with Him Through His Son Jesus Christ, our Eternal High Priest.

Not all clergy are paid. Most are laypeople or volunteers. There are several classifications of 'clergy'. There are the pastors, who are classed as the overseer of the church. There are the Elders, who are the spiritual leaders, and Deacons, who are 'servants', for lack of better word. Now I'm not saying that these are correct, but I'm just saying this is the current situation. In this world we need to earn a living. Clergy are usually people who have devoted their time to God and the church. They work full time in overseeing the church itself (as in the entity, the infrastructure etc, and not just the 'congregation'. Therefore their time is taken in administration to keep the house of the Lord operating. Think back to the Levites. They were responsible for keeping the Temple running. They had no inheritance in the land - they lived of the Tithes of the other tribes. That was their work, and their income. Paid clergy are no different. As Christians, we are not saying that they are any better than us - or anything like that. Rather, we appoint them to look after the church on our behalf, and we pay them for their work. There are others who serve voluntarily. Often they do not have to put in as much time as the full-time clergy, but serve in their spare time. They are appreciated just as much. ------------- As requested, I shall endeavour to post at least some biblical references to paid clergy. There is not a lot that I know of in the New Testament, but in reference to the Levites being paid, I'll refer readers to the bible, in the book of Numbers. Chapter 18 deals with the Levites and priests, that out of the tribes of Israel they have no inheritance in the land (vv 20 - 23), and that their inheritance came through the tithes of the nation (v24). Paul did speak in the NT of the offerings given by the churches to support him and other Apostles in their ministries, so it can be seen that the churches supported people whose lives were in the ministry. As for whether it is scriptural to have this pattern of paid clergy, there really is no definitive statements regarding it. However, if a modern day clergy member devotes their life to ministry, I don't see why they should not be paid - in a way they have no inheritance in the land because they work in the 'temple' - or the house of God. So you could argue that it is good to pay them. You could also argue that it's not scriptural... For right or wrong, it happens. Hopefully this has been at least of some help.

SHORT ANSWER: This is a myth - the LDS Church ALSO has a paid clergy. After a certain level in the LDS Church they are PAID a stipend so they are, in fact, PAID clergy. In addition many GA members receive "gifts" from the Church and are placed on the boards of Church Owned businesses. This too is a form of payment. So this is classic LDS double speak - they use the same words as other Churches but change the meaning. THEN they turn around and use their double speak to attack non-LDS Churches (while claiming that they DON'T attack other Churches!) with an arrogant, "We thank God that we are not like other men!" (to paraphrase Luke 18:11) attitude and spirit. Nice! LONG ANSWER AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE: http://www.concernedchristians.com/index.php?option=com_fireboard&Itemid=42&func=view&id=71359&catid=512 http://www.concernedchristians.com/index.php?option=com_fireboard&Itemid=42&func=view&id=71768&catid=10 Mormon Financial Empire Rises -- Report Tells Of Steady Investments In Real Estate, Securities, Businesses AP PHOENIX - The Mormon Church, which does not disclose its finances, collects at least $4.3 billion a year from its members and another $400 million from its many enterprises, a newspaper reported. Nearly all that $4.7 billion is spent furthering religious goals, but the Utah-based church also invests several hundred million dollars a year in real estate and securities, and in expanding its businesses and investments, The Arizona Republic reported in today's editions. The newspaper said the figures were conservative estimates based on an eight-month investigation. Accurately assessing the church's finances from the outside is impossible, however, because Mormon leaders in 1959 stopped releasing financial reports even to their own members. Instead of a financial report, church officials assure members that their contributions are managed "prayerfully and with inspiration." Worldwide membership is 7.7 million, including more than 1 million in Utah. The diversified corporate organization built by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is apparently free of financial fraud or personal wealth-building among top officials, the newspaper said. Compared with sales of publicly traded companies, the church's $4.7 billion would place it about 110th on the Fortune 500 list of industrial corporations. The church's business subsidiaries generate an additional $4 billion a year in sales, which, if counted in the total, would make the Mormon Church an $8 billion-a-year corporation, comparable with Union Carbide and Borden Products, the Republic said. The Republic said it was unlikely it had identified all the church's companies, business names or affiliated holdings. Financial data are incomplete, partly outdated and sometimes contradictory. But the newspaper was able to conclude the Mormon Church: -- Controls at least 100 companies or businesses that generate about $400 million a year through direct contributions, dividends, trusts or investment income. -- Never borrows money to finance its acquisitions. It pays cash, out of its members' contributions and its business income. -- Has become one the nation's largest private landowners, with holdings in all 50 states. -- Has a stocks and bonds investment portfolio in excess of $1 billion. -- Appoints spiritual leaders who double as business leaders. (Copyright (c) 1991 Seattle Times Company, All Rights Reserved.) http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/PrintStory.pl?slug=1292008&date=19910630 QUOTE: From John Dehlin's now defunct Mormon Stories Blog "A profile of the corporate responsibility of the general authorities as of June 1984 helps to assess its impact on their time and attention "in building the kingdom" spiritually. Exactly nine years after Kimball's business withdrawal, this was about midway toward the decision of the entire hierarchy to accept the same inevitability. It was also seven months after the Wall Street Journal's front-page headline: "Leaders of Mormonism Double as Overseers of a Financial Empire." From a variety of public documents, this was the business world of the general authorities in 1984, beginning with the First Presidency. Despite his public withdrawal from corporate responsibilities, President Spencer W. Kimball (who had been physically incapacitated since 1982) remained a director of Bonneville International Corporation. His first counselor Marion G. Romney (also physically incapacitated for years) was still chairman of the board of Beneficial Development Co., of Beneficial Life Insurance Co., of LDS Social Services, Inc., and director of Bonneville International Corporation and of Deseret Management Co. The only functioning member of the First Presidency in 1984, second counselor Gordon B. Hinckley was chairman of the board of Deseret Management Corporation Foundation, and director of Bonneville International Corporation, of Deseret Management Corporation, of KIRO, Inc. of Seattle, of Utah Power and Light Co., and of Zion's First National Bank. The Quorum of Twelve's president Ezra Taft Benson was a director of Beneficial Life Insurance Co. Apostle Howard W. Hunter was president of the Polynesian Cultural Center (Hawaii), and director of Beneficial Life Insurance Co., of Continental Western Life Insurance Co., of Deseret Federal Savings and Loan, of First Security Bank of Utah, of First Security Corp., of Heber J. Grant & Co., of PHA Life Insurance Co. (Oregon), of Watson Land Co. (Los Angeles), and of Western American Life Insurance Co. Apostle Thomas S. Monson was president and chairman of the board of Deseret News Publishing Co., vice-president of LDS Social Services and of Newspaper Agency Corp, and director of Beneficial Life Insurance Co., of Commercial Security Bank, of Commercial Security Bankcorporation, of Continental Western Life Insurance Co. (Iowa), of Deseret Management Corp., of IHC Hospitals, Inc., of Mountain States Telephone and Telegraph Co., of Murdock Travel, of PHA Life Insurance Co. (Oregon), of Pioneer Memorial Theater, and of Western American Life Insurance Co. Apostle Boyd K. Packer was chairman of the board of Utah Home Fire Insurance Co., while also director of Murdock Travel and of Zion's First National Bank. Apostle Marvin J. Ashton was president of Deseret Book Co., chairman of the board of ZCMI, and director of Beneficial Development Co., of First Security Bank of Utah, of First Security Corporation, of Laie Resorts (Hawaii), and of Zion's Securities Corporation. Apostle L. Tom Perry was director of American Stores Co. (which operated Skaggs Drugs and Alpha Beta supermarkets), of ZCMI, of Zion's First National Bank, and of Jewel Companies, Inc. (Chicago), and trustee of LDS Social Services and of Nauvoo Restoration. Apostle David B. Haight was director of Bonneville International Corporation, of Deseret Management Corporation, of First Security Bank of Utah, of First Security Corporation, and of Valtek, Inc., while also a trustee of Deseret Management Corporation Foundation. Apostle James E. Faust was vice-president of Deseret News Publishing Co., director of Commercial Security Bank, and of Commercial Security Bank Corporation, while also a trustee of Ballet West and of LDS Social Services. Apostle Neal A. Maxwell was director of Mountain Fuel Resources, Inc., of Mountain Fuel Supply Co., and of Deseret News Publishing Co. Apostle Russell M. Nelson was director of Zion's First National Bank. Apostle Dallin H. Oaks was chairman of the Public Broadcasting System (national), while also director of O.C. Tanner Jewelry Co. and of Union Pacific Railroad. Franklin D. Richards, senior president of the First Quorum of Seventy, was president of Laie Resorts, chairman of the board of Deseret Trust Co. and of Richards-Woodbury Agency, was director of Beneficial Development Co., of Deseret Management Corp., of Utah Home Fire Insurance Co., and of Zion's Securities Corp., while also trustee of Deseret Management Corporation Foundation and of Wasatch Lawn Cemetery Association. Seventy's member J. Thomas Fyans was trustee of LDS Social Services. Carlos E. Asay was director of Laie Resorts, while M. Russell Ballard was director of Deseret Book Co. Seventy's member Royden G. Derrick was chairman of the board of UI Group, Inc. (formerly U&I Sugar) and director of Utah Home Fire Insurance Co. Paul H. Dunn was director of Consolidated Capital Corporation. Robert D. Hales was president of Deseret Management Corporation and trustee of Deseret Management Corporation Foundation. Adney Y. Komatsu was a director of Laie Resorts. Vaughn J. Featherstone was director of Utah Home Fire Insurance Co. Hugh W. Pinnock was director of First Interstate Bank of Utah. Ronald E. Poelman was director of Consolidated Freightways and of Deseret Trust Co. Robert L. Backman was chairman of the Deseret Gymnasium. Presiding Bishop Victor L. Brown was president of Deseret Title Holding Corporation, vice-president of LDS Social Services, chairman of the board of Deseret Trust Co. and of Utah Hotel Co., and director of Deseret Farms (Utah), of Deseret Farms of Texas, of Deseret Management Corporation, of Deseret News Publishing Co., of Deseret Ranches of Florida, of O.C. Tanner Jewelry Co., of Pioneer Memorial Theater, of the Utah Symphony, and of Western Airlines. His first counselor H. Burke Peterson was vice-president of Beneficial Development Co., director of Zion's Securities Corp., and trustee of LDS Social Services. The Bishopric's second counselor, J. Richard Clarke, was chairman of the Board of Deseret Mutual Benefit Association, director of Deseret Healthcare, and trustee of LDS Social Services. Emeritus general authority Bernard P. Brockbank was trustee of Wasatch Lawn Cemetery Association. John H. Vandenberg was trustee of Nauvoo Restoration, and emeritus O. Leslie Stone was director of Utah Opera Co. That was the corporate world of the LDS hierarchy in 1984. Why would the First Presidency's two counselors (sometimes with only one or two able to function) and the twelve apostles (often with one or two incapacitated) continue to shoulder such enormous burdens of business administration while church membership tripled in the twenty years after 1975? There seemed to be three considerations - financial, personal, and administrative - which jointly operated to delay the hierarchy's surrender of corporate management. One factor may have weighed more heavily with an individual leader than another. Those who had corporate positions did not want to give up the money. A general authority's 1992 biography stated that such management positions, even if honorary, "provided him with extra income to help augment the slender living allowance he received from the Church." The unspoken inequity involved general authorities who had to support their families on "the slender living allowance," without the financial windfall of a corporate assignment. Thus the hierarchy's financial inequality continued on another basis for decades after the decision to give standardized allowances, regardless of quorum or seniority." (post date/time stamped April 13th, 2007 at 8:32 pm) And I think that this is the most balanced analysis that I have seen so far. Once again, this is from a faithful, practicing Utah Mormon (who just so happens to live next door to a Seventy): "Check Elder LeGrand Richards' talk in the October 1979 General Conference where he spends half of the time talking about the living allowances General Authorities receive. Check The Encyclopedia of Mormonism's entry on General Authorities and the one on Mission Presidents to see that both groups of men are given these allowances (mission presidents have a much smaller allowance as they are provided with a house, something only President Hinckley is provided with among the General Authorities). Check President Hinckley's October 1985 Conference address where he states that the living allowances come not from tithing (which pays church employees' salaries, curiously) but from the profits of church-owned businesses. The interesting thing about this is that church employees are expected to pay tithing on their salaries, while the living allowances given mission presidents and General Authorities are tithing-exempt (like the funds you received as a missionary, you pay fast offering once a month but that's it). Check SLC area newspapers in 1996 for President Hinckley's announcement that he directed all General Authorities to resign from their positions on business boards, church-owned or otherwise. Check the additional notes in the CD-ROM included in Lengthen Your Stride, the recent biography of President Kimball by his son published by Deseret Book, where his son states that having filed his father's tax returns in the late 1950s, his allowance from the Church was $8000 annually, an amount which with inflation would be equivalent to $57,000 annually now. This source is also great for letting us know that members of the Second Quorum of the Seventy typically do not receive an allowance (but receive the other benefits accorded General Authorities) and that members of the First Quorum continue to receive the allowance as a retirement benefit when they are emeritized. When you look at the backgrounds of those called to both quorums, you begin to see the truth of this claim. Check Michael Quinn's book Extensions of Power for documentation that President McKay adopted uniform living allowances for all General Authorities, regardless of position, during his ministry. None of the auxiliary presidency members are asked to devote their full-time to their callings, and are therefore not paid. This has nothing to do with gender! The Young Men and Sunday School presidencies are in the same boat, but they are reimbursed for travel expenses the same way a ward calling often would be. The Ford Elder Holland was seen driving must have been his own car, because the Church maintains a fleet of Toyota Avalons for the use of General Authorities (they are much easier to maintain and resell after a few years than Fords!) They are also provided audited credit card accounts to charge all of their Church-related expenses to (like when they stop at a burger joint on a stake conference trip or mission tour). My neighbor is a Seventy and sold his business when he was called to serve a number of years ago. He maintains a discreet, unflashy lifestyle as far as I can tell, but he has expenses which need to be met, and I am sure uses his living allowance as any of the rest of us would use our salaries. We often see each other on the way to and from our respective offices, and I know he works very hard and travels a lot in his calling. One difference between him and me is that for the most part, my job stops when I leave the office. He is always a General Authority, which means he is constantly in demand for firesides, temple sealings, ad nauseam. He deserves every penny of his current modest middle-class salary for the scrutiny his life receives every day as he does simple things like jog or grocery shop. There is ample scriptural provision for all of this in the D and C anyway. I don't understand the reluctance to accept that the "laborer is worthy of his hire." As a kid, I wondered how Joseph Smith provided for his family while he was president of the church? Common sense tells us the above is a reasonable facsimile of the truth. It is reasonable to suppose the Lord will call whom he wants to serve as General Authorities, and it is reasonable to expect a certain level of financial sacrifice for those who accept, even most church employees called as GAs were making much more than $60,000 a year when called. It is not reasonable to expect either only the very wealthy to serve or to thrust those less financially independent onto the welfare rolls either." (post date/time stamped April 13th, 2007 at 7:35 am) http://johndehlin.com/?p=170

If being a member of the clergy is a full-time profession, then they should be compensated for it. Most LdS clergy have other gainful employment, so they don't receive monetary renumeration. General Authorities and Mission Presidents are employed full-time by the LdS Church, so they receive a living stipend.

If you are expected to be avaiable full time - they may still have to eat.

There is a huge difference between paid clergy in the Protestant faiths versus the LDS Church. In most Protetant churches you get paid for doing everything like playing the organ, choir, or other activities in the church. Furthermore, the local clergy in the most Protestant churches get paid along with being provided with a house,etc. This doesn't happen in the LDS church at a local level. The Bishop, counselors, elders, teachers, relief society president, etc,etc don't get paid a red cent. There time and effort in their calling is often times overwhelming but they love what there doing and love serving others. You rarely find this in other churches being everyone wants to be compensated. The 12 Apostles, Seventy, and other individuals who work full time for the church get paid or a stipend. They work a 9-5pm job and much more and they have expenses, mortgages, bills, etc and they get paid for that service but that makes up a tiny, tiny fraction of the entire church membership. There are roughly over 200 General Authorities including the 12 Apostles and they get paid a modest salary for the work they perform to cover basic expenses. No one in the church is getting rich from church salaries. If you look at leaders of other Protestants faiths including televangelists their is a vast difference. You see other leaders in other churchers all the time living lush lifestyles and spending church funds on vain things of the world. That is pretty much accepted and known to most people. To compare the paid positions in the LDS church to other Protestants faiths is like comparing apples to oranges. If there is an issue in the church to do with money and deception its a rarity but we see this all the time in Protestant and other churches.

Clergy must house themselves, provide for their families, eat, etc. just like anyone else.

its all to do with money side by side with faith and always will be c of e arent the richest land owners in britain for nothing

Jesus' instructions to his disciples were this: (Matthew 10:8,9) 8 Cure sick people, raise up dead persons, make lepers clean, expel demons. YOU received free, give free. 9 Do not procure gold or silver or copper for YOUR girdle purses, The apostle Paul apparently worked as a tent maker to cover his expenses. - (Acts 18:3) and on account of being of the same trade he stayed at their home, and they worked, for they were tentmakers by trade. - (Acts 20:34) YOU yourselves know that these hands have attended to the needs of me and of those with me. - - Paul did not want to place a financial burden upon the congregation. (1 Thessalonians 2:9) Certainly YOU bear in mind, brothers, our labor and toil. It was with working night and day, so as not to put an expensive burden upon any one of YOU, that we preached the good news of God to YOU - However, you may be surprised to learn that not ALL non-LDS religions have a paid clergy. - Jehovah's Witnesses are not paid,... all witnesses share in the preaching work,... and those with responsibilities of oversight fulfill these duties in addition to working secularly to provide for their families. - Neither do they tithe,... No collections are ever taken at their meetings. - If members would like to donate they do so anonymously using contribution boxes located within the building. There is no "system" to track WHO gives,...or HOW MUCH they give. (I know this because my husband was the 'account servant' for our local congregation for several years.) - (Matthew 6:3-4) But you, when making gifts of mercy, do not let your left hand know what your right is doing, 4 that your gifts of mercy may be in secret; then your Father who is looking on in secret will repay you.

the workman deserves his wages read the book of Timothy and that explains why. LDS and JW have gone far outside of scripture.

Matt 10:9Do not take along any gold or silver or copper in your belts; 10take no bag for the journey, or extra tunic, or sandals or a staff; for the worker is worth his keep. 11"Whatever town or village you enter, search for some worthy person there and stay at his house until you leave

Because they gotta eat too? ;-)