Seminary was basically a request, with the note that it was not a calling (as others have discussed). Mormon Youth Symphony involved an audition, a “call” letter, and a setting apart. A friend of mine played with the group, and arranged an audition. I then received a letter with all the information and requirements for the “calling”, as did my bishop (who was told to keep this calling in mind when considering me for ward callings, and to place my missionary service first and not call me to any callings that would interfere with the symphony) and was set apart as a missionary. I’m guessing it is similar for the Mo Tab?

I did think it pretty interested to basically “apply” and audition for this “calling.” But I guess people “apply” for their missions in a similar way. Since pay was not involved, I guess it’s still different than the OP. But I have wondered what is so wrong with paid ministers (Yes, I’ve read the BOM. I think the same dangers of priestcraft exist without monetary compensation.) or with people receiving callings directly rather than by someone else “in authority” for them (which apparently does happen, as per above examples, though is not the norm within the church).

Not if they worship the oblong ball in the great and spacious building on North Canyon Road (or on Sundays at the altar of their television set, where the games begin too early to squeeze in even a quick service at the local church). That’s a completely acceptable alternative form of worship.

All the GA was trying to say to the MTC workers is lighten up folks, give us your best 20 hours each week, and get on with your life. No more. When I applied for my job at the LTM (that’s MTC with a foreign accent for you younger folks). I wasn’t called. And when they let me go because missionaries weren’t getting into Brazil, I wasn’t relieved; I was unemployed.

Two short stories to make my point. I served my mission when we had the six memorized “Mr. and Mrs. Brown” (I think it was them) discussions. Word for word was the only way to go, we were told. That admonition was particularly helpful to a missionary speaking a new language. As long as I stuck to the discussion, neither I nor the investigator got too lost. However, it didn’t take too long before missionaries were actually saying that the reason we recited the discussions word for word was because they were revealed. In my view, that was not a healthy development (see below).

Next story. Later in life, my former mission president was busy at work as an LA attorney, making the big bucks. He’d served as a bishop and a stake president after his return from Brazil if I remember correctly. He and his wife were and are very faithful, very good people. One day he gets a call from a GA in Salt Lake, wondering if he’d be willing to be the secretary to the area presidency in Brazil. “Is this a call?” my mission president asked. “Well, no it isn’t,” was the response. “Well, if it were a call, I’d go,” he said. “But if it’s not, I’d rather stay home, work, and support my family.” (Or some such.) The caller said he would get back to him. And he did. As I remember they talked two or three times, and each time my former mission president said that he’d go if it were a call; otherwise, he was staying put. In the end, Salt Lake called him to the position, and he and his wife returned to Brazil. And loved it.

The first story illustrates the fact that we can take the Church stuff too far, and in doing so we often treat the practical as an act of God. And when we attribute what we’re doing to God without warrant, we elevate something that doesn’t merit that elevation and thereby diminish that which does.

The second story illustrates the fact that not everything in the Church is a calling, and mature people understand that. There is, or should be, power or authority behind a calling. A calling should, in some way, be the revealed will of the Lord. A job? You apply for a job.

Welcome to Texas my Mormon friends.

So, to be a great professor at BYU, church attendance is a prerequisite? What about all the great professor at other universities? Granted, there are definite jobs that require such attendance (mtc teacher for example) but the vast amount of other jobs I would say should have nothing to do with church attendance.

“Anyone who is struggling spiritually is in a tough spot, and for a church employee probably tougher than for others.”

Right. And that’s why I make the point that such ties between religion and employment may ultimately rob the person of the free volition of church attendance, which can have serious detrimental consequences to one’s faith.

I’m not accusing the church of anything; i’m simply observing the fact that there seems to be a relationship between work and religion that should not be there (for the vary same reason we don’t employ our clergy). I don’t think the church is going out of its way to be coercive, it’s just the way it is.

As for the idea that you can just change jobs, that is really beside the point.

Sure, some jobs are (I think) handed out on a welfare basis. I know they used to be anyway. But in those cases, the people can’t get a job elsewhere because they are not very skilled or whatever. Thus they get a low salary that reflects their low ability. This is important especially if one wishes to preserve an incentive for them to pick up and get a better job so you can give the money to the next person down on their luck. Or whatever. Pay for those jobs probably depends on the local and individual circumstances.

My question would be why does the church pay less? Why can’t we pay what everybody else pays for similar jobs?

There are (at least) two reasons why Church employment might pay less:

1. Because people like working there and so will do so for less money.
2. Because people like giving to the Church.

The first is about a non-wage benefit of employment and is the same reason why lots of jobs pay different amounts– because some jobs are just more fulfilling or enjoyable than others and so the market clearing wage is lower for those jobs. The second is about sacrificing money to the Church just because you personally want to. I would guess that #1 is the reason Church jobs pay less. As such, there is no particular connection to offering business deals on the cheap, except that if lots of businesses like being kind to the Church, this competition drives down the prices of those services to the Church and so a business that didn’t would be priced out of the market. There need be no implied moral duty to lower prices; what we observe is just run-of-the-mill economics.