A referral and a conversation starter
First, go check out Matt’s post on churches and businesses as there are some interesting and thoughtful comments there.
Second, I am going to steal two excerpts from his comments thread to start a new conversation here that has occasionally been hinted at. Lionfish says this:
I would agree that in some circumstances that skilled, high calibre people are required to lead large Churches. I believe these people have to be well remunerated (honoured). Biblically speaking, St Paul gave some guidelines – ‘worthy of double honour’.
I may be wrong, but I would take that to mean twice the average rate of pay…if the average man’s wage is say $60K, then I do not see a problem with a high calibre Pastor making twice that – straight salary. I know that many good Pastors in Churches make much less.
Rev responded, in part as follows:
Bro, I actually disagree. I don’t think he should be making $120,000 a year. It makes sense skills and requirement wise, but we are in an upside down kingdom. I think the pastor should make enough to live in a upper working class lower middle class lifestyle. But that is just my thoughts.
I could quote a couple of other perspectives that I have heard recently. I know of one guy who believes strongly that the concept of salaried ministers is out of date and no ministers should receive salary from churches. A couple of years ago we had an argument at a denominational AGM about salary guidelines and there was a general feeling that salaries and benefits should be limited because otherwise churches wouldn’t be able to afford them (with the obvious implication that ministers could more easily do without). And we have discussed often those in some churches who draw a substantially larger salary. Phil will reflect that when he was in the US for a tour of large churches, it was understood that many church ministers were paid the equivalent of business rates because otherwise why the hell would anyone want to be a minister?
As a personal reflection, in our denomination salary guidelines theoretically provide an income that is the equivalent of an ordinary highschool teacher (equivalent because the net effect is due to tax concessions rather than just dollars paid by churches). Our experience is that it is probably less than that. When the ‘average’ income figures came out during the latest round of tax cut debates, the ministry salary was definitely on the lower side of the fence.
Which is no drama for a family with a second income and no kids (except the furry kind). But I imagine it is quite a stretch for some.
So what do you think - how will new models be financially sustainable? Just by tent-making or should salary support from churches/denominations continue? And what sort of package is reasonable for a minister/missionary to accept and for a church to offer?
December 30th, 2005 at 11:30 am
I’m thinking of charging people that steal quotes from my blog to provide some extra income…;)
Seriously, I’ve been building my freelance cartooning business for the last ten years partly expecting that in the future it will be income I will need to rely on to survive. And that’s fine with me.
At the moment, I’m paid full time as an associate pastor in the Baptist denomination. The salary is based on 90% of the average wage in the area and is split into a stipend and allowances to make it more tax effective. My wife works two days a week (when she returns in Feb from maternity leave) and we have two boys.
We’re not struggling. We’re not doing it really easy either. Like everybody else, we’ve made conscious lifestyle choices so we have income to give away - even when it has been just me earning the dollars. That’s what I would expect all in my community to do. It’s no-brainer discipleship.
Anyway, if a church wants to employ somebody, then they need to pay them adequately. Advertising and placing somebody in a job, only to turn around and say we’re going to pay you next to nothing to keep you humble, sucks. No integrity at all.
I think in the future, though, more churches will need to find alternate ways of funding IF they are going to have paid staff. Rising debt levels and cost of living will mean giving will not be possible for a lot of people. Some won’t go down the alternate funding track and will either reinvent themselves or close.
But when it comes down to it - giving, alternate funding, closure or reinvention - I think there’s a place for all of them.
December 30th, 2005 at 12:09 pm
Hi, I read the thread over at Matt’s blog and this stuff too.
I can really comment from my experience. My Dad is a pastor and while my brother and I grew up my Mum stayed at home with us although she was a full time worker with Dad all be it unpaid. I still look back and wonder how they managed - and the simple answer that they gave me was that they budgetted - hard and gave up some things.
Now I fully admit I am one of the worst people to budget that I know and my parents still do it the same that they always have, even with no kids at home.
The wages that are generally paid to pastors (from churches that can even afford to pay for one) is still generally just below the average wage. And while they do have concessions, to have even 2 kids these days on only that wage would be very difficult, as it was when I was growing up.
On the other hand - to pay them what they are really worth - in a lot of cases will never happen for a couple of reasons. One is that it would be that a lot of churches are smaller these days and therefore have less disposable income which in many cases, and said churches would probably want to put it into some activities that would hopefully benefit the community around them.
Another is that, do you go into a profession such as this to make money or do you decide to become a pastor because you feel called to it? At the same time this is not saying that we should pay them a pittance and then expect to work 24/7.
Well, anyway these are some of my thoughts.
December 30th, 2005 at 12:09 pm
Hi, I read the thread over at Matt’s blog and this stuff too.
I can really comment from my experience. My Dad is a pastor and while my brother and I grew up my Mum stayed at home with us although she was a full time worker with Dad all be it unpaid. I still look back and wonder how they managed - and the simple answer that they gave me was that they budgetted - hard and gave up some things.
Now I fully admit I am one of the worst people to budget that I know and my parents still do it the same that they always have, even with no kids at home.
The wages that are generally paid to pastors (from churches that can even afford to pay for one) is still generally just below the average wage. And while they do have concessions, to have even 2 kids these days on only that wage would be very difficult, as it was when I was growing up.
On the other hand - to pay them what they are really worth - in a lot of cases will never happen for a couple of reasons. One is that it would be that a lot of churches are smaller these days and therefore have less disposable income which in many cases, and said churches would probably want to put it into some activities that would hopefully benefit the community around them.
Another is that, do you go into a profession such as this to make money or do you decide to become a pastor because you feel called to it? At the same time this is not saying that we should pay them a pittance and then expect to work 24/7.
Well, anyway these are some of my thoughts.
December 30th, 2005 at 12:11 pm
Wish you Happiness and Joy…
And Blessings for the New Year.
Wish you the best of everything…
That you so well deserve.
HAPPY NEW YEAR TO YOU !!!
December 30th, 2005 at 12:45 pm
it depends on where the church is situated.
I would expect a Pastor to earn more in Neutral Bay then at Cowra.
If you are paying a pastor substantially less than what you are earning then what exactly are you saying about God’s work
December 30th, 2005 at 1:14 pm
Phil/Dan,
May I ask a few of questions as part of the Pastors salary question before I comment and share my thoughts?.
What tax concessions do Pastors typically get that ‘Joe Citizen’ does not get (eg. No tax on cars)?
What is the historical context in which these tax- concessions have been granted?
Why are / should be / in what circumstances should Pastors entitled to these tax concessions?
December 30th, 2005 at 1:42 pm
The main one here is not paying FBT and being able to rebate GST.
For readers of the Economist a pertinent article to read is Jesus CEO.
December 30th, 2005 at 1:46 pm
Ministers can put a portion of their salary (the advice on % varies) into a tax free component. The intended purpose of this is to pay for things that are incurred in the cost of ministry - usually related to housing, phone, car etc. Essentially you can salary package these items. The money is held in an account owned by the church and payments are made by the church not by the minister.
I would suggest that the historic purpose was to allow Churches to employ more than what they would normally be able to do so. I would persume because it was felt that clergy offered something to society - spiritually and socially.
All non-profits are also entitled to this concession as well and not just religious organisation. In fact, I know that our denomination is much more strict in their interpretation of the act than non-profits are.
December 30th, 2005 at 3:18 pm
Lionfish, I should clarify that (at least in our denomination) the tax concessions do not mean that ministers are any better off. It just means that churches have to spend less to pay ministers the wage that people feel that they should earn (in effect the government picks up the balance).
A couple of years ago the government made noises about removing the FBT tax concessions for churches, charities and non-profits. And then someone did the sums about the impact on community services that this would cause and which, presumably, the government would have to step into the void for. So that died a quick death.
December 30th, 2005 at 3:37 pm
Phil,
Based on what you have alluded to:
-Rent/interest savings of (say) $15,000 per year
-Telecommunications of $1,500 per year
-Library allowance of $1,000 per year
-Car allowances of say $12,000 per year
Subtotal Tax-free benefit component of $29,500
Then a Minister can effectively be getting a fairly generous benefit under current laws that the ‘average Joe’ has to pay for in ‘after-tax’ dollars. Some people would have to earn $39K to 44K just to pay for those things…If the average salary is say $60K - that does not leave much after tax for average Joe citizen to live on.
Can you guys understand why people get really angry when they see Pastors using dubious theology / practices (Rev I will not mention the ‘T’ word – promise!) to raise funds earn non-disclosed CEO type incomes, utilise tax effective bodies to minimise their own tax and lead ‘rock-star’ / celebrity / travel-the-world-free lifestyles.
Whilst I believe in rewarding talent, and many. many ministers deserve better, I personally believe that the whole issue of faith and finances in modern society needs to be opened up for discussion, fully transparent and accountable to their congregations and to the tax payer who provides these benefits.
Churches are in a privileged position within society, and with privilege comes responsibility.
December 30th, 2005 at 3:44 pm
This is such an interesting dilemma. Clearly pastors/ministers needed to be paid in such a manner as that they can live with dignity and in reasonable comfort. It is unreasonable to expect them to minister to the needs of others when their own basic needs are not met.
Wealth is however extremely seductive and it is easy to identify instances where ministers have lost focus and, instead of money being something that enables them to effectively administer to their congregation, the congregation, as well as the broader community, is used as a pathway to wealth.
In our capitalist/materialist society this has to be one of the most subtle and incidious threats to true and meaningful spirituality within the ministry of the Church. One only has to consider the case of Darren at LivingRoom who once described himself as a Baptist minister and started his blog as an extension activity for his congregation. He now claims, with supporting evidence, to be earning US$14,000 per month from his blogging activities and describes his commitment to Christ as a “hobby”.
Darren is clearly happy with the choices he has made and his lifestyle is undoubtedly more materially rich than most ministers however a quick comparison between his religous blog (Livingroom) from its early days and the present shows that Darrens commitment to his religious extension activities via this forum has almost completely evaporated. When questioned on this he says, to paraphrase, he is too busy making money to spend too much time on it.
Fortunately Darren will probably never have to face the difficult choice between his “hobby” and his wealth but, from a distance, it seems that the Baptist church has lost much of the committment of this young minister.
December 30th, 2005 at 3:47 pm
Dan,
I just saw your comment. I would agree that society needs the services of these organisation - and providing tax-relief to community ’servants’ is essential…there needs to be more accountability across the board.
If Churches can’t regualate themslves, then the Government and media will need to step in to prtoect the interests of the ’spiritual’ consumer and also of the tax-payer.
The government is currently stepping in to moderate via a ‘code-of-conduct’ the content of sermons by muslim clerics….do they need to step in and monitor the fund raising theology, practices, and accounting/governance practices of Churches?
We are supposed to be a ‘light-to-the-world’ … we should not need external pressure or regualation - but it seems in many cases we do.
As a tax-payer I am demanding it.
December 30th, 2005 at 3:54 pm
There is money in blogging…?
December 30th, 2005 at 4:05 pm
Lionfish, I agree with your point (although not your calculations - Phil’s tax free component is not worth nearly that much). And I repeat that in our denomination, this is not a bonus to the minister - his discretionary (taxable) income is correspondingly low.
And I think a lot of ministers are in the same position. There are notable exceptions of course, but most paid ministers aren’t exploiting these things. So you need to work out a response which increases the accountability, transparency etc but without punishing the vast majority (numerically) who are behaving ethically within these guidelines.
Transparency is one solution. Another is simply the fact that we are frankly surprised at the amount of flexibility that is available to use these FBT concessions. That flexibility (which is largely unregulated and unscrutinised) is exactly the thing which may be exploited by people who are looking to get what they can finagle.
December 30th, 2005 at 4:12 pm
Agreed Lionfish. Greater transparency and oversight of the tax concession would likely not affect denominations like ours that have clearly defined policies in relation to this already, but it would rein in those that try to go outside what is right.
A while ago we received some information about a couple of christian organisations (aligned with the AOG from memory) who were running a car leasing company offering ministers the opportunity to lease brand new executive cars at a very cheap rate and then trade them in every 11 months or so. Basically the program (in our view) exploited the FBT concessions to give ministers very nice cars at a fraction of the cost. They even included suggestions on how you could smooth over the reactions from the congregation who queried you having a new car every time you turned around.
I don’t believe that is an ethical use of the tax concessions nor is it a particularly good use of resources in a stewardship sense.
December 30th, 2005 at 4:50 pm
The Church is not a business where it is selling a product to derive its income so it needs to depend on the offerings of its conregation .Yes it needs to be accountable to the people as to how this money is spent and YES the pastor is entitled to an income.He has to live and buy and support a famly just like anybody else.
Why do church people fight amongst themselves over issues that are divisive .Its not a good witness to the wider community. If a tax concession is legal and available is is not good stewardship to use it to minimise expenses.
What would Jesus be saying if he were to be here?
December 30th, 2005 at 6:00 pm
Allan, There is a big difference between the letter of the law and the spirit of the law - even when it comes to taxation.
Hypothetically speaking one might be eligible to establish an incorporated body and “justify” its objectives to a government office due to one’s profession and standing in the community…while using that same body for financial/pecuniary gain.
December 30th, 2005 at 6:25 pm
Allan,
Are you suggesting that we should not discuss these issues on a blog run by Christian’s - because some view them as devisive?
People have remained tight-lipped about the running of Churches for a number of reasons - including fear of annointed leadership- for far too long.
Sorry mate…but if you read the God’s Millionairres article in the BRW in Jun 2005 - and the coressponding “Letters to the Editor” which included responses from Pastors then you would feel that this whole thing needs to be open for public discussion and debate.
Personally I am sick of seeing ’spiritual consumers’ and tax payers alike being conned on the back of something that uses God and sells it like a product.
More people in society are turned of by Millionairre Pastors (read more souls are bloody lost) and their gimmicks, con’s, dodgy theology and lifestyles than any amount of frank and open discussion on the Internet.
December 30th, 2005 at 9:03 pm
The Church needs money to run its programmes and yes there are churches that are in the money making business.I’m not going to add to this post as I’m not in full knowledge of how churches run their finances .I will just say this.nobody is compelled to give .God loves a cheerful giver thou .If one gives out of fear or compulsion then God aint happy and would rather we not give to the Churches very important work .
The Church needs money to run , to pay its running costs etc .
I would be happy to be corrected but can you tell me what is all the “fuss” about ?
Moneny money money in a rich mans world .
It is the LOVE of money that is wrong but we need it .I dont have any . Happy New Year and may God bless you all richly .
I think my post is out of wack to the whole argument on money but ay its an open forum.Cheers
December 30th, 2005 at 9:32 pm
Transparency is essential if you are doing god’s work after all it is his money you are being Stewards for.
If it isn’t at the Church you are at the teaching is probably shonky a well.
go to one that is and give generously
December 30th, 2005 at 10:40 pm
The tax concessions that I get allow me to get payed far less and still be able to survive. So things that were included in old style churches are now made up for a bit. So rather than getting a parsonage, I get my rent paid tax free. Rather than getting a car given to me, I get a car allowance. This allows me to get paid about $38,000 a year, with a family of four, and extra expenses because I am not eligible for certain programs like medi-care. There is a cap on these, so someone making much more is still only allowed a certain dollar amount tax free.
The compulsion for people to give to support an institution that in a lot of ways is not using the resources responsibly is frustrating for me who worked a part time job and ministered full time without drawing a salary for years. Who figures ways to make things happen with no “budget” and so on. Now having to depend upon “support” in order to fulfill my visa and continue in my ministry where I belive God has called me, I find it even more frustrating that so many churches spend literally millions on buildings that are empty almost all week. The pay huge staff wages while the church sits on their ass and do nothing. That make token efforts to minister to the poor and marginalized, while paying huge ministers salaries.
When the church has no money, no buildings and no talented leaders it seems to rise to the occasion and become what we read about in Acts. I don’t know why we “need” so much money, I almost think we “need” poverty and persecution, these seem to propell the church more than anything else.
the rev
December 31st, 2005 at 12:06 am
I just did a web search on Yahoo under “God’s Millionaires”. The stuff you come up with is incredible. Here are 2 just for the fun of it
http://www.kingdomdistribution.com/site/693788/page/45030
http://www.millionairesforjesus.com/Blog/
The US has tax breaks for housing, etc. you can make close to 40000 and not be in a tax position, but still have to pay 15% Social Security Tax.
December 31st, 2005 at 11:02 am
Lionfish,
Take your figures in comment #9 and halve them - that’s about the ball park figure you’d see your average baptist, CoC pastor getting in terms of allowances.
The BUV has said that a Baptist pastor can only package up to 50% of their pay. Not becasue of any legal reason, but because of ethical ones. Everybody has to pay SOME tax, so the pastor should too. Some churches, however, abuse this privilege and allow pastors to package 100% of their pay and thus pay no tax at all. Then they have the gall to say, “I (the pastor)draw no salary from the church….”
A bit like when Clinton said he didn’t have sex with Monica if you ask me.
December 31st, 2005 at 12:19 pm
Lionfish, if 60K is the average mans wage, then I wish I was an average man.
I have never in my wildest dreams earned anything close to that.
Minimum wage is about $26,000
December 31st, 2005 at 2:38 pm
Nilmot, “The Australian Bureau of Statistics Average Weekly Earning (full time, adult, total earnings). Based on 100% of this Average Weekly Earnings figure, the gross salary from 1/1/2004 would become $51,289. This is a 6.2% increase over last year (i.e. $3,005)”.
Based on those stats the average wage would be $54-$56K at 1/1/2006.
That is average, though people with corresponding levels of education (ie. experience, degrees and professional skills/trade) would have to be slightly higher…perhaps even over the $60K mark.
Matt, I was working from memory and based my figures http://www.lutheran.com.au/Handbook/salary1.htm. Also conversations with a Teacher / friend on the Board of an Anglican Church.
In any case, I take my hats off to you guys who do work/Pastor for this level of compensation or even less – where there is no ‘mystique’ around what you people earn.
Regardless, the discrepancy between the average Church Pastor, average Joe and televangelists and mega/giga-church Pastors becomes only greater.
You are the type of people whom I would feel comfortable listening to, not fell used by, profited from, and getting spiritual direction from.
This from cultwatch.com
“No one would object to a pastor who has earned wealth through his business, with the caveat that he was not a lover of money. But no example can be found in Scripture of Jesus or the apostles gaining temporal wealth via the taking of gifts given to God. “Do not muzzle the Ox” these apostles retort, but they forget the other side of this biblical word picture, that the ox is a slave tethered to a pole. Christian leaders are slaves to the gospel, they deserve their due, but it is wrong for them to be gluttonous”.
December 31st, 2005 at 4:07 pm
I realise that 55-60K is technically the average, but that can be misleading, compared to minimum wage, 60K is a pretty damn good wage.
December 31st, 2005 at 5:05 pm
It is not such a good wage in Melbourne or Sydney, the cost of living is much higher.
And Lionfish, I agree with your quote.
As stressful as it is at times I like living on so little as you are always forced to depend on God, and the generousity of others.
the rev
December 31st, 2005 at 5:51 pm
Those links sent in by Kevin are funny.
Rev perhaps you need to check these books out: (Bad Joke )
“Becoming a Millionaire God’s Way will reveal practical biblical techniques to acquiring great wealth, explode the myth that Jesus was poor, challenge the belief that the Bible teaches poverty, help you become financially literate, define once and for all the prosperity message, and teach the body of Christ that wealth is God’s will”.
http://www.kingdomdistribution.com/site/693788/product/764-5668152
The Con goes on, and on, and on!
December 31st, 2005 at 10:15 pm
Lionfish - I thought Amway had run it’s course. Come on all you financial illiterates - get with the program.
I have two exercizes for you Now everybody repeat after me… If it is to be then it’s up to me … If it is to be then it’s up to me … If it is to be then it’s up to me
Now say … If I can dream it, I can achieve it … If I can dream it, I can achieve it… If I can dream it, I can achieve it
Finally - I want you all to dream up a NEW PRIME COLOR. If you don’t do then WHO WILL! YOU CAN DO IT!
December 31st, 2005 at 10:21 pm
We could expound on the Bible a bit - since the Bible is a collection of letters and books, let’s add ‘Think and Grow Rich” and insert it just before JAMES. The “Apostle” Napoleon wrote it and I am sure we can get some folks to cannonize it.