Why aren’t Bishops paid as instructed in the Doctrine and Covenants?

Question

 

Gramps,

Why aren’t Bishops and their counselors paid as instructed by the Lord in D&C 42:71-73?

Kathryn

 

Answer

 

Kathryn,

One question that occasionally comes up in discussions about The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is why local bishops are generally unpaid, even though the Doctrine and Covenants contains scriptures that seem to indicate that Church officers should receive support for their labors. At first glance, it may seem there is a contradiction between modern Church practice and early revelations. However, when viewed in context—historically, doctrinally, and practically—the issue becomes much clearer.

The short answer is that the Church does support financially those whose full-time service prevents them from earning a living elsewhere. At the same time, the Church also strongly values lay ministry and voluntary service whenever possible. Bishops today are typically not paid because their role is intended to serve as a temporary lay calling rather than a full-time profession.

The Doctrine and Covenants does contain passages discussing financial support for Church leaders. One of the clearest examples is Doctrine and Covenants 42:71:

“And the bishop, also, shall receive his support, or a just remuneration for all his services in the church.”

Another passage says:

“The laborer in Zion shall labor for Zion; for if they labor for money they shall perish.” (2 Nephi 26:31)

Some readers see these scriptures and conclude that all bishops should receive salaries. But understanding the historical setting of the early Church helps explain why the revelations were given.

In the early days of the Restoration, bishops often had responsibilities that were very different from those of modern bishops. They were not simply congregational leaders overseeing Sunday worship and counseling members. Early bishops frequently managed Church properties, distributed consecrated goods, administered storehouses, handled financial matters for entire communities, and sometimes devoted nearly all their time to Church administration.

Under the early law of consecration, many Saints sought to live in a system in which property and resources were dedicated to the Church and redistributed according to need. In that setting, bishops could not always maintain normal employment while fulfilling their duties. Because of this, the revelations instructed them to receive support so they could continue their work without neglecting their families.

Doctrine and Covenants 72:11–12 adds additional context:

“For it is the duty of the Lord’s clerk, whom he has appointed, to keep a history, and a general church record of all things that transpire in Zion… and also there shall be a bishop appointed unto the church.”

The early Church was still developing organizationally, and many leaders served in demanding administrative capacities. Supporting them financially was both practical and compassionate.

As the Church grew, however, the structure and responsibilities of bishops evolved. Today, bishops usually oversee a local ward while maintaining regular careers and family lives. Most bishops are dentists, teachers, mechanics, engineers, business owners, military personnel, physicians, accountants, or workers in countless other professions. Their service is considered a sacred volunteer calling.

This pattern reflects an important principle in LDS theology: the value of lay ministry.

One of the distinguishing characteristics of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is that local congregations are led almost entirely by unpaid volunteers. This includes bishops, Relief Society presidents, youth leaders, teachers, musicians, and many others. Members serve because they believe discipleship involves sacrifice and consecration.

Dieter F. Uchtdorf once explained:

Because we have no paid local clergy in our worldwide congregations, our members perform the work of ministry themselves.

This system creates a Church culture where service is shared broadly rather than concentrated among career clergy. A bishop is not viewed as someone entering a permanent religious profession. Instead, he is usually called for a limited period of years and then returns fully to ordinary congregational life.

The Apostle Paul taught a principle that is also relevant to this discussion. In 1 Corinthians 9:14, he wrote:

“Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.”

Yet Paul himself sometimes chose to support himself through tentmaking rather than rely entirely on the Saints’ financial support. His example shows that receiving compensation for ministry is permitted, but not always required.

Modern LDS practice follows a similar balance.

Some Church leaders do receive financial support today. General Authorities who serve full-time often leave careers and dedicate all their time to Church service. Because of this, they receive what the Church calls a “living allowance,” not a commercial salary designed for wealth or profit. This allows them to care for their families while serving full-time.

In contrast, bishops are usually able to continue employment while serving. Since they are not expected to abandon their occupations, there is generally no need for the Church to provide financial support.

This distinction actually aligns fairly closely with the Doctrine and Covenants. The principle is not necessarily that every Church leader must always receive payment. Rather, the principle is that those who devote substantial labor to the Church should not be neglected temporally.

Doctrine and Covenants 24:3 teaches:

“In temporal labors thou shalt not have strength, for this is not thy calling.”

Some leaders in the early Church were specifically called away from ordinary employment into nearly full-time ministry. In those cases, support became necessary. But where leaders can reasonably support themselves while serving, volunteer ministry becomes both possible and spiritually beneficial.

There are also practical blessings that come from unpaid local leadership.

First, it reduces the possibility of priestcraft. The Book of Mormon repeatedly warns against preaching for riches or worldly status. While financial support for ministry is not automatically priestcraft, the lay ministry system helps minimize the risk that people seek leadership positions for financial reasons.

Second, it helps bishops remain closely connected to everyday life. Because bishops continue working regular jobs, they often better understand the struggles members face with employment, parenting, finances, stress, and time management. A bishop who spends his weekdays working alongside others may relate naturally to the experiences of his ward members.

Third, the volunteer structure enables the Church to operate worldwide across vastly different economic conditions. In many places around the world, maintaining paid clergy for every congregation would be financially difficult or impossible. The lay ministry model enables wards and branches to function in both wealthy and developing nations.

Still, some people wonder whether unpaid service places too much burden on bishops and their families. That concern is understandable. Bishops often devote enormous amounts of time to interviews, counseling, welfare assistance, meetings, youth support, and spiritual guidance while also balancing careers and home responsibilities.

LDS theology generally views this sacrifice through the lens of consecration and discipleship. Leaders are not expected to carry these burdens alone. Counselors, quorum leaders, Relief Society leaders, ministering brothers and sisters, and other ward members are all intended to help share the work of caring for the congregation.

President Russell M. Nelson has frequently emphasized that Church service is centered on ministering as the Savior did. In that spirit, a bishop’s work is not meant to elevate him above the congregation but to help him serve within it.

In many ways, modern bishops reflect the New Testament pattern of local Christian leadership more than a professional clergy model. Early Christians often relied heavily on ordinary believers serving voluntarily within their congregations.

Ultimately, the Doctrine and Covenants is not being ignored. Rather, the Church applies the underlying principle to the circumstances. When Church service requires full-time devotion that prevents normal employment, financial support may be appropriate. When leaders can continue ordinary employment while serving, a volunteer ministry is often preferred.

So why aren’t bishops generally paid today?

Because, in the modern Church, they are intended primarily to serve as lay shepherds rather than as professional clergy. Their calling is temporary, local, and rooted in voluntary consecrated service. The revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants addressed real needs in the early Church, especially during periods when bishops carried extensive temporal responsibilities that could prevent them from engaging in normal employment.

Both principles—supporting full-time servants and encouraging voluntary ministry—coexist in LDS theology. Rather than contradicting one another, they reflect different applications of the same broader goal: building Zion through willing sacrifice, wise stewardship, and care for both the spiritual and temporal needs of God’s children.

 

Gramps