Time for a Pastoral Pay Check?
- Posted by: Todd
- Posted on: Wed, October 22, 2008
- Viewed 55
- (4) comments so far
Not to worry… Jack then goes to scripture for some answers:
1. Support is required. (see I Tim. 5:17) and that support should be ‘generous’ (double honor)
2. Acquisitiveness is prohibited. There can be no greed involved. Think Balaam.
3. Restraint is modeled. There should be no preoccupation with income, possessions, or material resources (Matt. 6:24-34)
You can read more of Jack’s thoughts here...
So… how much is enough? And how much is too much? How does your current salary match these guidelines; and what are you hoping for in 2009?
Get current updates from MMI and me here: http://www.twitter.com/toddrhoades
Jack Hayford has a pretty intense article this month at MinistryToday. Have you ever looked at your church paycheck as a means to an end? Jack thinks it should be. Here's his thesis: "From a biblical perspective, a pastor's salary is to be recognized as a means to an end--unencumbered ministry."
Jack minces no words, and asks hard questions, like...
"How much of a church's increase should be apportioned to its leadership?"
Is the church's success to be administrated like that of a secular corporation, with "rewards" being given to the executives who were "key" to its success? Or, is the fruitfulness of a church presumed to be the manifestation of God's grace alone, making the undue acknowledgment of any individual's role an act of idolatry?
And what about this statement?
Low salaries are generally due to the limited resources of small congregations; however, they too often represent an inequity administrated at the hands of controlling, ungrateful boards, indifferent to the biblical salary directives that not only limit excessiveness but also prohibit stinginess...
Comments
if you want a Globally Recognized Avatar (the images next to your profile) get them here. Once you sign up, they will displayed on any website that supports them.
Brent on Wed, October 22, 2008
I’m in full time ministry, but I have to find other work to pay all of the bills. I certainly don’t feel “unencumbered.”
Andy Wood on Wed, October 22, 2008
The operative word here is “unencumbered,” which I think is a valid principle.
Proverbs 30:8-9 speaks to this: “Keep deception and lies far from me, Give me neither poverty nor riches; Feed me with the food that is my portion, That I not be full and denyYou and say, “Who is the Lord?” Or that I not be in want and steal,
And profane the name of my God.”
I have been and have seen other encumbered by too little and too much. When pastors spend excessive time monitoring their investments, juggling their bills, digging in the money pit, or managing and maintaining their “stuff,” they have traded the freedom of the gospel for material bondage, regardless of how much they make.
The corporate model, whatever else it does, does NOT reward executives on the basis of performance. That’s part of the problem with those who are furious about the economic quagmire.
I know that Jesus said, “To whom much is given, much is required.” Did he also say, “To whom much is required, much should be given?”
Either way, I don’t have a problem with somebody who has twice the people responsibility making more money than I do, so long as they remain true to their mission and calling and remain unemcumbered.
It is instructive to me that at the Catalyst conference, Franklin Graham noted that when he took over the BGEA for his father, the ministry had $100 million in the bank, and his father had famously been given a meaningfully middle-of-the-road salary.
Brian L. on Wed, October 22, 2008
That was probably one of the most balanced presentations on this subject I’ve ever seen. I may not agree with Jack Hayford on everything, but this is spot on, in my opinion.
I am bi-vocational, because the church is small and my family is big (5 kiddos and a frail mother-in-law!). I bring home $578.00/week from the church, out of which comes everything from the mortgage to the groceries to toilet paper and life insurance. Thankfully the church pays for my health insurance and required conferences and stuff. I couldn’t do it otherwise. But even with that, I work part-time away from the church.
He states that there is a false perception that the salary needs to reflect the incomes of the congregation. One of the battles I still fight is that “few people in our church make (what you make), so giving you a big raise wouldn’t look good.”
But as Pastor Jack says, the issue isn’t comparison, it’s being able to do the ministry to which God called me and to which He called this church.
I used to be bitter about this, but God has really been showing me how blessed I am. I am hopeful of not being bi-vo someday, but in the meantime I’m thrilled to be doing what I do.
The only thing I wish Pastor Jack would have mentioned was that while the apostle Paul did, indeed, work to not be a burden at times, he was not a pastor. He was a missionary/church planter. And there were times that he was able to focus on the ministry full-time. I can’t remember the references, but it’s either in Acts or 1 or 2 Corinthians (I think! http://www.mondaymorninginsight.com/images/smileys/smile.gif)
Anyway, I’m thinking of sending this to my District Superintendent so he can use it to encourage congregations to adopt the right mind-set about salaries. I won’t change the financial situations of the churches (unless adopting this attitude helps their faith and dependence on God to provide for their ministry, which would be a good thing), but it could sure help them see how to approach this from a Scriptural standpoint.
Randy Ehle on Wed, October 22, 2008
The enduring timeliness of Hayford’s words is telling: I see that the article was published in 2004, had been previously published in 1997, and even then was an excerpt from a book he’d written. Apparently “there is nothing new under the sun”!
From a pragmatic standpoint, Hayford doesn’t offer much assistance to the church leaders honestly trying to determine the most appropriate compensation for their pastor(s)...which I think would be quite helpful. Some churches have relied on the bi-ennual Church Compensation Survey to set a benchmark, but that needs to be done with extreme care because of the breadth of the survey. I served on the board of a church that thoroughly analyzed that tool, determined what data were needed to most accurately reflect a reasonable benchmark comparison for our own situation, then set a target range of 95-105% of that benchmark. By doing that, we could go back to the survey every two years, pull the same data to find the current benchmark, and compare where we were in relation.
Another thing I heard recently was a new concept. One of the elders in our church draws his view from the tithe for the Levites. Looking at the number of Israelite tribes (11) whose tithes (10%) supported the one priestly tribe, he says that simply “doing the math” suggests that the Levites received 110% of the average income of the other tribes. By that principle, the pastor should be paid 110% of the average income of the congregation. [Please note, this elder DOES NOT believe that we are any longer under the tithe rule; he simply uses that as his guide.] I haven’t thought this through enough to see if it holds up in the plethora of church situations we have today, but it is at least food for thought!
Page 1 of 1 pages
Post a Comment