Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Pastor’S Salary Cap


The Glory Land

Recommended Posts

  • Members

Sure guy, the issue is you ignore the Scripture folks provide cause you have to be right in your wrongs every time regardless. Look inside yourself clearly and then you will see the problem. I call myself wretched cause I know who I am.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 131
  • Created
  • Last Reply
  • Members

I left a church because I didn't feel the pastor's heart was in it.  We had an evangelist come in and do a financial "revival".  During it, he mentioned that we did not pay our pastor enough.  After he left, the trustees made motion to give our pastor a $600.00 a month raise. (If it was a 40 hour work week that would be equivalent to $3.75 an hour raise, WOW)  A little more than a month later, our pastor put finances on the church prayer list and asked us to pray for at least 2 more tithing families to join because we were not hitting budget. 

 

Facts:  the pastor has a wife and 3 kids.  The kids were home-schooled.  The pastor now owns 3 or 4 houses for rental income.  He bought a small, one-man business that employs himself.  I asked him why he needed the business and the houses, and he said he had to provide for his wife if anything should happen to him (this was also counsel from the evangelist).  I talked to him for about 2 minutes about how HE had to do this and HE had to do that.  God never came up once during the conversation.  I actually asked him what his 3 sons would do if he passed and left his wife alone.  Wouldn't they help their mom out?  He looked so shocked at me for asking that question and said it was NOT his kids responsibility to provide for their mother, but it is the parents responsibility period!  That pretty much ended our conversation about his need to work extra and buy up houses.  And now the kids are in private school and mom has a part-time job too. 

 

Sounds like he set up the financial "revival" trying to bring shame on the members of that church.

 

It should have been just a plain revival, leaving off the financial part. If the heart is right in the church members, & the pastors is feeding the flock properly, everything will fall in place.

 

Yet it sounds like that man trusted in money, & had lack of faith in God to provide.

 

When reading your post I thought about this devotional by Spurgeon I read recently in my Sword Searcher, the pastor you spoke of sounds much like the ones that Spurgeon's was referring to.

 

Spurgeon's Morning and Evening Devotional
Jeremiah 51:51
08/18/AM
"Strangers are come into the sanctuaries of the Lord's house." 
--Jeremiah 51:51
In this account the faces of the Lord's people were covered with shame, for it was a terrible thing that men should intrude into the Holy Place reserved for the priests alone. Everywhere about us we see like cause for sorrow. How many ungodly men are now educating with the view of entering into the ministry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I'm not misinterpreting Scripture at all Steve. 

It is obviously you who are either misinterpreting Scripture, or just ignoring its instruction altogether. 

*edited to add: Matter of fact, since Revelation does not say that Ephesus became a "dead" church, I know it is you who is doing the "misinterpreting."

:ROFL:  :laff cry:  :nuts:  :lfpop:

 

(PS - I used the term "dead" not as a QUOTE but as a DESCRIPTION, for what is a church that has lost its love for Christ?)

 

(And this from the guy who thinks Melchisedek was a pagan, idolatrous priest!!!!)

 

 

 

:beatdeadhorse:

 

We have been over all of this ground multiple times - and the Scriptures have been given.  It is clear that SFIC has an axe to grind over money matters for what ever diabolical reason.  Clearly his understanding of Scripture is highly inaccurate on the subject of tithing and supporting of pastors, and CLEARLY nobody here will be able to convince him otherwise....thus my posts are not directed at him, but more for edifying the others.

 

:wave:

 

In Christ,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I wanted to add that I don't know any IFB churches that give the pastor an "outrageous" income. I think a "comfortable" income is more than fair for an older, experienced, educated, godly man. As far as an IFB pastor who is "rich"....I may only know a few, and in general they are rich because they are pastors and also presidents of Bible colleges. But as far as just regular old churches...unless the actual church is full of rich people (in which case no fair making the pastor a pauper)....I think an "overpaid pastor" is more often a straw man than not.

To me an "overpaid" pastor are like those tv ministries and scam ministries...but to me those don't count because I thought we were talking about IFB ministries.

I know of a church where the Pastor's salary + perks adds up easily to near 100K per year, but the same guy demands that any new "staff" who go "full time" take a 12K salary.  A lot of inequity there.  There were certainly SOME wealthy people in the church, but only a handful - the rest of us were struggling to make ends meet.  I know of several families that had several children, and it was all they could do to put food on the table and pay their rent and utilities. 

I consider it outrageous because I don't really think the Pastor understood the value of all the perks he had - He used church members to babysit his kids, but didn't pay them.  He used members to do many things without paying them.  The church bought his vehicles (2), gave him a housing allowance and actually bought a huge house for him complete with indoor swimming pool, gave him a clothing allowance (??? - who gets a clothing allowance anyway!), cell phones, etc., etc., etc., while his staff members were literally living in poverty on church property,driving jalopes. 

Furthermore, the emotional manipulation to wring money out of people for everything was deplorable - but again, I believe this particular man was simply doing what he was taught to do naively - most unfortunate indeed!

I don't think this particular pastor was greedy - just clueless.  Basically his "salary" was "icing on the cake" because the church paid for everything else he had, needed or wanted, so his salary was money in the bank - to the tune of 60K a year. 

In my view, that was over the top.  Not the salary as much as everything else the church did for him -especially considering the median income of the church. 

I will give him credit for being a hard worker though - he was definitely not a slouch.  He was an avid soul-winner, and very busy. 

 

I have always been of the opinion that a Pastor is better to take LESS than MORE for testimony's sake - to prevent any false accusations about "being in it for the money."  In this case, 60K was a livable salary for that area - a comfortable salary, as you say.   All the other perks were just too much, in my view.

 

Philippians 4:5 Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord is at hand.

 

Hopefully that clarifies things for you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Steve, thanks for your post....I'm not in the position to judge that pastor but what you describe may sound a bit much. I knew a similar pastor and he ended up being found to be stealing money from the church. However if your pastor that you mentioned is a hard worker and the church volunteered those things....more power to them.

I just get tired of the idea that a pastors finances seem to be up for public scrutiny so I tend to defend before I criticize. I figure the laborer is worthy of his hire, and God will deal with a greedy pastor. Some pastors also may give more back to the church than you would ever know, so that his salary may look like more on paper than it really is due to his giving practices. I figure the benefit of the doubt is best, let God deal with the rest.

A small example of the benefit of the doubt.....a nice lady in our church who doesn't have a lot of money came in recently with a brand new Coach bag. I complimented her on it and she quickly explained that it was a gift from a family member. But how many people would rather gossip about her having a $300 handbag rather than being thankful God blessed her with it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Steve, thanks for your post....I'm not in the position to judge that pastor but what you describe may sound a bit much. I knew a similar pastor and he ended up being found to be stealing money from the church. However if your pastor that you mentioned is a hard worker and the church volunteered those things....more power to them.

I just get tired of the idea that a pastors finances seem to be up for public scrutiny so I tend to defend before I criticize. I figure the laborer is worthy of his hire, and God will deal with a greedy pastor. Some pastors also may give more back to the church than you would ever know, so that his salary may look like more on paper than it really is due to his giving practices. I figure the benefit of the doubt is best, let God deal with the rest.

A small example of the benefit of the doubt.....a nice lady in our church who doesn't have a lot of money came in recently with a brand new Coach bag. I complimented her on it and she quickly explained that it was a gift from a family member. But how many people would rather gossip about her having a $300 handbag rather than being thankful God blessed her with it?

Trust me!  I understand! 

One of my co-workers at my secular job told me one day, "All of you preachers are in it for the money!"

I simply started laughing.  He said, "What's so funny?  It's true!"

I said, "Look, if I were in it for the money, why am I WORKING HERE???  If I were in it for the money I would be at __________ church!"

 

He got the point!

 

Seriously, I think it takes a lot of wisdom, humility, and sound judgment from the Pastor and the church to come to REASONABLE and moderate agreement.  The decision should meet his financial needs, not only for the present, but also for the future, but it should be REASONABLE and MODERATE, for testimony's sake. 

If individuals in the church are led of the Lord to give a love offering on top of that, then so be it. 

 

It is a touchy subject, and a difficult one to manage.  I think it all boils down to the ATTITUDE of both the church and the preacher.  The preacher should have an attitude of humility, and a willingness to do more with less.  The church should have the attitude of doing its utmost to go "above and beyond" to provide for their shepherd and minister.

 

The problem is that human nature, greed, pride, and power all enter into the equation, and men on both sides (preacher and congregation) have gone too far either way. 

Too many young men coming out of Bible colleges today look at the ministry as a CAREER instead of a calling, and make demands before they even have experience.  They clearly are not interested in the Matthew 20:28 viewpoint on the ministry!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Our pastor is very loved, he gets cooked plates of food for him and his wife, pies, cakes, things from the gardens as in fresh green beans, corn, potatoes, sweet potatoes, beets, cabbage, onions, etc, apples, peaches, black berries, strawberries, etc, in the fall hams, parts of a beef, deer meat, squirrels, rabbits, and I’ve seen eggs going into his car. No one tells him a word, he comes out the church and there it is in his car. He has passed some of it on to the needy, and gave some to the old members in “old folks” home. He gets suits, and dress shirts and pants, dress shoes, religious ties. He gets gifts of money too. Now that is just members doing something Jesus laid on their heart.

 

He can’t serve God and the church properly if he has to care for his earthly mammon. Our church takes in enough to do that for him. I’m a backup usher and I know for a fact he puts a lot of his pay back in the plate. He takes the pay so we can get the big blessing of being the giver. The church pays what you are calling perks, his used car, tires, filling his fuel barrel, insurance for him and his wife. If he refused payment, how could we get the blessing of being the giver?

 

We have 20 missionaries we are giving some monthly support to. It was 22 but one died last year and wasn’t replaced and one got sick this year and died just a couple of months after retiring. The rest goes out to local people in need. Jesus is blessing us and we don’t want to bury any talents. What we take in we pay out except for a small reserve the ungodly will get after the rapture. There will be no dollars in heaven.

 

We do these things cause we love him and want to be a help in the ministry that Jesus called him to. We can all see his hard labor in the church and outside the church. There is no time of day or night he can't be called. He will get out of the bed and pray, unless his elderly wife is sick he will come walking into the hospital room.

 

Matthew 10

42 And whosoever shall give to drink unto one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, verily I say unto you, he shall in no wise lose his reward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

I know of a church where the Pastor's salary + perks adds up easily to near 100K per year, but the same guy demands that any new "staff" who go "full time" take a 12K salary.  A lot of inequity there.  There were certainly SOME wealthy people in the church, but only a handful - the rest of us were struggling to make ends meet.  I know of several families that had several children, and it was all they could do to put food on the table and pay their rent and utilities. 

I consider it outrageous because I don't really think the Pastor understood the value of all the perks he had - He used church members to babysit his kids, but didn't pay them.  He used members to do many things without paying them.  The church bought his vehicles (2), gave him a housing allowance and actually bought a huge house for him complete with indoor swimming pool, gave him a clothing allowance (??? - who gets a clothing allowance anyway!), cell phones, etc., etc., etc., while his staff members were literally living in poverty on church property,driving jalopes. 

Furthermore, the emotional manipulation to wring money out of people for everything was deplorable - but again, I believe this particular man was simply doing what he was taught to do naively - most unfortunate indeed!

I don't think this particular pastor was greedy - just clueless.  Basically his "salary" was "icing on the cake" because the church paid for everything else he had, needed or wanted, so his salary was money in the bank - to the tune of 60K a year. 

In my view, that was over the top.  Not the salary as much as everything else the church did for him -especially considering the median income of the church. 

I will give him credit for being a hard worker though - he was definitely not a slouch.  He was an avid soul-winner, and very busy. 

 

I have always been of the opinion that a Pastor is better to take LESS than MORE for testimony's sake - to prevent any false accusations about "being in it for the money."  In this case, 60K was a livable salary for that area - a comfortable salary, as you say.   All the other perks were just too much, in my view.

 

Philippians 4:5 Let your moderation be known unto all men. The Lord is at hand.

 

Hopefully that clarifies things for you!

 

I fear that is true for many pastors.

 

One church I was a member of they were harping for more money nearly at every Sunday morning service, the pastor was well paid, & they had several older couples on fixed incomes who were doing without many things, even medicine that was needed. Yet they had many who were living high on the hog & the older couples were not getting any help.

 

Strange thing in this world, most everyone is living on what they bring in, & have little to spare if any, whether they make little or lots of money. The main differences is the ones with more money just satisfy a few more of their wants while buying more & more expensive wants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

 

Our pastor is very loved, he gets cooked plates of food for him and his wife, pies, cakes, things from the gardens as in fresh green beans, corn, potatoes, sweet potatoes, beets, cabbage, onions, etc, apples, peaches, black berries, strawberries, etc, in the fall hams, parts of a beef, deer meat, squirrels, rabbits, and I’ve seen eggs going into his car. No one tells him a word, he comes out the church and there it is in his car. He has passed some of it on to the needy, and gave some to the old members in “old folks” home. He gets suits, and dress shirts and pants, dress shoes, religious ties. He gets gifts of money too. Now that is just members doing something Jesus laid on their heart.

 

He can’t serve God and the church properly if he has to care for his earthly mammon. Our church takes in enough to do that for him. I’m a backup usher and I know for a fact he puts a lot of his pay back in the plate. He takes the pay so we can get the big blessing of being the giver. The church pays what you are calling perks, his used car, tires, filling his fuel barrel, insurance for him and his wife. If he refused payment, how could we get the blessing of being the giver?

 

We have 20 missionaries we are giving some monthly support to. It was 22 but one died last year and wasn’t replaced and one got sick this year and died just a couple of months after retiring. The rest goes out to local people in need. Jesus is blessing us and we don’t want to bury any talents. What we take in we pay out except for a small reserve the ungodly will get after the rapture. There will be no dollars in heaven.

 

We do these things cause we love him and want to be a help in the ministry that Jesus called him to. We can all see his hard labor in the church and outside the church. There is no time of day or night he can't be called. He will get out of the bed and pray, unless his elderly wife is sick he will come walking into the hospital room.

 

Matthew 10

42 And whosoever shall give to drink unto one of these little ones a cup of cold water only in the name of a disciple, verily I say unto you, he shall in no wise lose his reward.

 

Sounds like you got a keeper!  Praise the Lord!  I enjoyed reading this post - it is always exciting to hear how the Lord is working amongst His people!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

"Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock? Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also? For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? Or saith he [it] altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, [this] is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope. If we have sown unto you spiritual things, [is it] a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things? If others be partakers of [this] power over you, [are] not we rather? Nevertheless we have not used this power; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ. Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live [of the things] of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel."

 

Now, I am having a real hard time seeing this applying only to evangelists and missionaries, but not pastors. Do pastors labour in the work of the gospel? So pastors sow spiritual tings to those of their church/community? If so, then they are eligible to live of the gospel and reap carnal things of the church. Just because Paul speaks of himself and Barnabas in the context, does not mean it applies ONLY to them-the clear context would be anyone who labors in the work of God.

 

The comparison is also given of the priests-when working in the temple, they lived off the things given to the temple-a portion was commanded, by God, for the priests to receive-they were not missionaries nor evangelists;they specificallt remained at the temple to do the work of God and to serve the people-so do Pastors.

 

Also, the same example, of not muzzling the oxen treading out the corn is used in relation specifically to elders who rule well, in 1Tim 5:17 & 18, in a letter written to a new pastor, Timothy, so again, the implication is clear-it is the right and ordination of God that an elder, or pastor, should live off the gospel. And in fact, if we understand the context clealry, that it would be his right to partake of it as he has need, or sees fit, as an ox would, as he was hungry, reach into the corn that he is treading out, and eat of it. The owners were not to muzzle him, or control him so he can't take of it at will. If we had more honest pastors out there, perhaps it would be right for them to just give them a credit card to draw from as they need, and perhaps give acount at the end of each month or quarter-it would more fully fit the mandate, I believe. 

 

So again, the context in no way even implies that this is for missionaries or evangelists, but for all whose labor is in the gospel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Moderators

Believe it or not, it is about missionaries and evangelists. 

I suggest you check out a book on amazon called Freedom to Give by Daniel Mynyk.  He explains perfectly with enough Scripture that the context of 1 Corinthians 9:14 reveal it is not speaking about pastors.

 

 

Well, since I have the entire Bible to work from, I don't really need someone else's writings to see the context-the Bible must be compared with the Bible. 

 

The point I made above, concerning not muzzling the mouth of the oxen that treadeth the corn being used in both contexts, in 1Cor 9, as well as 1Tim 5, shows that the same concept applies both to evangelists and missionaries, (as Paul and Barnabas), other apostles, AND elders/pastors-the concpet has a clear meaning in both places: they that labour in the gospel have a God-ordained right to live of the gospel, to receive sustenance and maintenance directly from the labour of the gospel. You MIGHT make the argument that 1Cor  9 refers only to evangelists and missionaries, as Paul is referring to himself and Barnabas, (as well as the other Apostles, who, by the way, were all in Jerusalem, not out travelling), though I disagee that it MUST only refer to him, but  1Tim is clearly speaking to pastors/elders.

 

So, no, it still doesn't wash. I see and understand your point, and I applaud any pastor who is not in the work for the money-I, myself being bi-vocational, but there is a clear mandate, from back into the Old Testament following into the new, that those who labour in the work of God have a right to live off the work of God.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Believe it or not, it is about missionaries and evangelists. 

I suggest you check out a book on amazon called Freedom to Give by Daniel Mynyk.  He explains perfectly with enough Scripture that the context of 1 Corinthians 9:14 reveal it is not speaking about pastors.

 

 

 

Sorry, I've got a book that is much better than that book you refer to, its the one that says "Holy Bible" on the front cover.

 

So my suggestion is to follow Jesus & stay int he Bible & not follow a man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

Well, since I have the entire Bible to work from, I don't really need someone else's writings to see the context-the Bible must be compared with the Bible. 

 

The point I made above, concerning not muzzling the mouth of the oxen that treadeth the corn being used in both contexts, in 1Cor 9, as well as 1Tim 5, shows that the same concept applies both to evangelists and missionaries, (as Paul and Barnabas), other apostles, AND elders/pastors-the concpet has a clear meaning in both places: they that labour in the gospel have a God-ordained right to live of the gospel, to receive sustenance and maintenance directly from the labour of the gospel. You MIGHT make the argument that 1Cor  9 refers only to evangelists and missionaries, as Paul is referring to himself and Barnabas, (as well as the other Apostles, who, by the way, were all in Jerusalem, not out travelling), though I disagee that it MUST only refer to him, but  1Tim is clearly speaking to pastors/elders.

 

So, no, it still doesn't wash. I see and understand your point, and I applaud any pastor who is not in the work for the money-I, myself being bi-vocational, but there is a clear mandate, from back into the Old Testament following into the new, that those who labour in the work of God have a right to live off the work of God.   

 

Amen, I did not read your reply till after I posed mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...