Be Rich, Be White, Be Male
Setting an Example
It was taught to me that Jesus led by example in all things. He says to get baptized, so he got baptized. He says to pay tithes, so he paid tithes. Etc. Etc. He says to get married and Rabis were not taken seriously unless they were married, so it's a good argument that Jesus was married.
In modern times, the Mormon church also tells its bishops and leadership to be good examples. Bishops are quite commonly married (I've never met one that isn't).
The rest of this article defines a few goals and a few qualifiers. Food for thought. Bon appetite!
So if leadership is setting an example, shouldn't we examine the economic class of the leadership? Take a peak at the apostles of the LDS church. They are all well-to-do. Every single one of them. To be fair, they are also optimistic leaders who have applied those leadership skills to commerce and have moved up in life. Not all of them were born rich.
Still: There's a very strong correlation of wealth and power in the upper management of the LDScorp.
American culture always cracks me up in a sadistic, ironic kind of way. I can see the irony and would think it's funny, except a bunch of people cannot see the irony and behave horribly because of it.
For example: the LDS church circulates a painting of Jesus that is considered the "close-enough" image to what Jesus actually looks like. He's white and has reddish-brown hair. He's got a long slender nose and his facial hair looks like he hasn't shaved in three months or so.
Problem: At the time of Christ, the only white people in Israel were Romans. People from that area of the world almost exclusively have black hair and darker skin. Thus the image of the white Jesus is clearly not accurate. This would be funny, except people are actually becoming quite bitter and angry about this. They insist that Jesus was white! They hold that painting up and dedicate their lives to this very white Jesus, shaming all who describe him as being dark with black hair.
Irony: I can't stand dipshits like that. I'll call them out on it. Then I get pointed at as the "one who makes Jesus' race an issue".
To be abundantly clear on this: I don't give a shit what race Jesus was. I only point out that he wasn't white to outline the social problems of today.
Believe it or not, that's a sidetrack from where I was going with this: Leadership by example. So if you look at the leadership of the LDS church (Mormons). Notice that EVERY SINGLE APOSTLE alive today is white. That includes the first presidency, who "technically" are apostles. That's fifteen people in the highest positions of church.
All apostles alive today are white. In fact, every apostle that's been around since I've been alive has been white. That's quite the disparity since more than half the church's membership isn't white! That's a bit startling to those who aren't expecting the LDS church to be racist. Please see my hub about racism for a more in-depth discussion on the church's racial preferences.
Jesus was male.
Every single apostle in the history of the LDS church (There have been over 100) have been male.
Just pointing out that if you want to be a leader in the church, you sure as hell need to be male. If you're female, then you should have thought of that in the pre-existence!
The priesthood is only given to worthy men in LDS culture. Women have been lobbying to change this for quite some time, lobbying to deaf ears. In fact, the leadership has instructed women to influence each other to silence the lobbying. It's a massive catfight with dudes pulling the strings. You should hear the ridiculous fallout from the LDS women's equality movement: wearing pants in church! Lifetime friendships getting destroyed because women are wearing... P..p...p...pan...pants to church!
One of the explanations for why women aren't allowed the priesthood is that women are given the power to create life. Men are given the priesthood to balance these gifts from god. However if a single woman stays chaste, her power to create is forfeited and she still doesn't have the priesthood. If a single man stays chaste, his power to create is forfeited but at least he still has his priesthood. Balanced? Equal? I think not. Nobody questions what men wear to church. I've seen rednecks track cow shit through church and no one acts like they even notice.
Long story short, unless you dream of being barefoot and pregnant in Mormonism, be male!
I haven't done my homework on the apostles in the late 1800s and early 1900s. I know some of the early apostles weren't American just because such a large fraction of the country's population wasn't born here. Take a look at the apostles since I was born in 1985: All but one have been American by birth. A cat by the name of Uchtdorf is the only one that was born outside the land of the free and home of the brave.
How strong is that correlation? Greater than 95%. Lesson to be learned: if it's your goal to lead the church, just give up if you're not American.
Quite a few of the apostles speak multiple languages. But note above how all but one of the apostles is American. That makes the language in leadership strongly correlated to English. And since Uchtdorf is the only non-American apostle, wouldn't it be fitting if he spoke primarily German?
Nope! He spends most of his time here in America, speaking to Americans. In English.
What's the correlation of leadership and English? 100%. If you can't speak English, don't make it a goal to lead the church.
Again, the irony! The majority of LDS membership can't speak English!