Pastor's Salaries

[The Martins]

You are VERY RIGHT in that it doesn't matter if you have 10 members or 150 members, the job is the same.

That's not what he said. He said:

A man or woman pastoring a church with 200 does not have to work as hard as one pastoring forty.

[Ilovebigcats]

Try reading ALL of his post instead of pulling out one comment...

Let me help....
We Pastor 8 members, fixing to be 10. We CAN get about $1000.00 a month. We are going to need that for our new building. 5 of our soon to be 10 members live out of state. So with 5 members here... My husband, myself, and our 9 year old daughter make up 3 of the 5 here in Dunn. The other 2 are running our International Headquarters 6 days a week almost 10 hours a day sometimes more. When my husband and I moved here we knew (not complaining one little bit, we are VERY happy) that it would all fall our lot to do it all in the church. The 2 the run IHQ don't have time to plan a service and help out that way, but they have agreed to do what they can til we get going good. They have helped as much as they can. They also need our help at IHQ. So now my husband who works a full time job, helps at IHQ when he can (usually 3 or 4 days a week after secular work), and get the ball rolling on our new building that God is helping us with, PLUS have a family with 4 almost 5 children, teach a Sunday School class, and plan all the services (except my 2) and preach.... you gonna tell me that he don't have a big job? He don't deserve as much as the 150 member pastor?

However.....
We could go into a 150 member church and receive all the tithes of about $10,000. Needless to say, he wouldn't have to work and we would be doing better than we do on our $2200.00 a month now. However we have a 150 members (is there time to reach out to others?) and those 150 members have children and parents and family they want you to meet and talk to and pray for and visit when sick... plus the 150 members. Though one easier thing is you can ACTUALLY MAKE APPOINTMENTS!!! There are enough people that the pastor would only have to do Sunday's in planning. The Pastor could actually BE FED HIMSELF! WOW! Danny would be thrilled! Usually though outta the 150 there are 50-70 problems amongst the members that the Pastor has to work through in counselling etc... The Pastor's wife has to divide her time up with all the ladies cause she wouldn't want them to think that she had favorites... that would be 20-30 more problems.

See they are both equally hard. The smaller church has more burdens and the larger church has more responsiblity and delegation. And like Razer said if you have a 150 member church where the people think the pastor is the one that does it all anyway then I would say that is the harder job, but at least you wouldn't have to worry about finances like we do now.

BUT, If you took that $10,000 from the 150m church and $1,000.00 from us we could each get $5,500.00 each and one not covet or politic for the other job. They are both GOOD paying jobs. You still get your love offerings. It would even be nice if the church with 150 could send there members close to the 10 a few members. Our church could really grow if Danny could be fulltime. That is our desire. Not the money but to be able to do everything for the church. We have grown by 6 since we organized a month ago. Danny works his hiney off. He deserves more than we can give. We need a new system.

I think that is what razer was getting at, the jobs are the same. Each has it's own hardships. You can't put one above the other because of numbers.

[PastorP]

There should be no "limit" system to work within. It should be up to the local body.

Just my opinion.

I would like to mention that the COGOP has not been in a limit system for several years. The amount set by the executive committee in Cleveland is a "base" amount. The local church has the right and/or responsibility to compensate their pastor in any amount over the base that they desire too. This "extra" is not just salary increase, but housing, car expense, retirement, health insurance, vacation pay and etc.

It has helped many of our pastors greatly, but we still have a long way to go. If the State Overseers would be more agressive in teaching the local churches to compensate the pastors better, it would only increase what is being paid to the State Office.

[The Martins]

That's great - long overdue. Glad to hear it.

[THE RAzEr]

You are VERY RIGHT in that it doesn't matter if you have 10 members or 150 members, the job is the same.

That's not what he said. He said:

A man or woman pastoring a church with 200 does not have to work as hard as one pastoring forty.

Ray writes,

I said this. However, the next sentence and the following paragraphs place it in context. If you have qualified people to help you (and the 200 church should give you a more people from which to find, or at least more money to get some help brought in), you can delegate. also you can have more personal finance so you will not have to be bi-vocational. The pastor that works a full-time job besides the church has two jobs. Both of them are full-time. I have been there also.

When all is said and done, it resides in the person. Some pastors are going to work. Some will reach out to the community, some will not. The local church needs to decide what they are excpecting and let the pastor know. Then, the pastor should be paid accordingly.

I remember a Clerk of a church who once toldme he knew how my job was. sometimes he thought a pastor was busy and sometimes a pastor had nothing to do. In my opinion this man didn't know much about a pastor's job at all. A pastor always has something to do. he is always on call. Hey if his car is home, he may be praying for you or you family. Or he may have his phone attached to his ear trying to,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

I did not mean to state in a way which said that all pastors of 200 member church work less hard than pastor's of 40 member churches. I was trying to bring forth the idea of delegation. However, that is work also. It is differant than doing it all oneself. However a person who can get others to work is worth a lot. it was my experience that i had to physically do more myself in the smaller churc. the other duties were basically the same.

I do feel the great divide in the COGOP is in the smaller churches. Since most of the churches are small (the last I heard was an ave. of about 50 members) most of the pastors are in small churches. I know in Kentucky there are just a few who get the suggested allotment. Even less who get extra.

Still there are God called people who go, not for the finance, it is certain! I admire all the ministry. I pastored good churches and was well paid when compared to many of my peers. However, not being a pastor now, I can say anyone who thinks our pastors are rakinging the dough have got to be out of their mind.

I suggest to anyone wanting to go into the ministry (especially a young person), work a job or career and pastor a small churc. Perferably start one. Be bi-vocational for twenty years ( I am talking about a retirement deal here.) If the church you started has grown, and you want to stay, stay. If you want to leave and start another or go elsewhere, you have something to fall back on for finance.

I am lucky. I did not know why, but I felt an urge to get a good education. I can now support myself well. If I had to depend on the retirement I was provided from my life as a pastor, . ...

Being a pastor is not the only vocation for a minister. I am in a ministry here at the school. I preach as often as I can in churches and witness on the streets, as well as, preach on the stump.

Hats off to all of you pastors. I do not envy your job. You are very responsible people. I have noticed that people think you are more responsible for things not going well than they make you responsible for when things are going good. I see most pastors are responsible enough not to run when the thief comes. God bless you! In my opinion there is not enough money in our churches to pay a good pastor's worth.

Sometime the pastor job is nothing but rewarding; the rest of the time it sucks!

Any pastor that thinks it is rewarding all the time---- god bless you 'cause you are just plain weird!

Ray

[Pastor Bill]

There should be no "limit" system to work within. It should be up to the local body.

Just my opinion.

I would like to mention that the COGOP has not been in a limit system for several years. The amount set by the executive committee in Cleveland is a "base" amount. The local church has the right and/or responsibility to compensate their pastor in any amount over the base that they desire too. This "extra" is not just salary increase, but housing, car expense, retirement, health insurance, vacation pay and etc.

It has helped many of our pastors greatly, but we still have a long way to go. If the State Overseers would be more agressive in teaching the local churches to compensate the pastors better, it would only increase what is being paid to the State Office.

They pushed this in our State Convention last year, but unfortunately we have alot of small churches that just can't do much more.

I know many have made comments that we should shut down the smaller churches and combine them with others, and that may work in some areas, but we aren't talking about CoGoP churches on every corner, this is a fairly rural area, without the small churches, we probably would not have many. Most people do not wish to drive 45-60 minutes to get to church, and when they do, it's hard to be very active.

I believe my church was originally an outgrowth of the Stanton church (about 30-40 minutes away) because there were a few members having to drive, and at the time the roads in the area were horrible (that is improving). It's easy to look from outside small churches and say "just close them down", but you have people there working hard that you are basically telling "just give up, we don't want to bother with you" Is it easy to pastor these smaller churches, at times it gets hard, but I don't think the problem is with the churches, it's the fact that we just don't have people willing to step up and do the work like we used to. Church used to be a big part of people's lives, and it showed in the communities, schools, ect. We are now getting to the point where those that grew up in this type of society are the older generation, and the main workers today grew up with the big pushes to take God out of our communities and schools, and it is showing, I would say it's showing in the big churches too, it's just alot more noticeable in small churches.

[THE RAzEr]

Is it a 'base, amount or is it a suggested amount. I think it is one of those "if funds are availiable" type things. Most pastors in the COGOP do not recieve what is the "base" amount. Yet, such things as you have mentioned is past by an assembly which is supposed to represent them also. I am not saying I think there should not be a "base' on the upper end. I also think there should not be a cap. Hower the word 'base' seems to indicate a bottom (as in basement). The pastors of the small churches have no 'base' amount.

A man I affectunately called Papaw once said, "You have 50 member Pastors and you have 100 member Pastors. If you send a 50 member Pastor to a 100 member church, He'll make 50 members out of it. If you send a 100 member Pastor to a 50 member church he'll make 100 members out of it." This statement was used many times in BTC and later BTI.

I urged the Assembly to put it in practice. Send all the 100 member pastors to 50 member churches. Send all the 50 member pastors to 100 member churches. In judt a little while the COGOP would be the same size with qa couple of differences. The pastors who had struggled financially would now know what it was to live with more finacial freedom (at least until the church became 50). The 100 member pastors would learn what it is to struggle and have to depend a little more. As, for the churches, the 100 member churches would learn better giving or fund raising, since they would no longer be able to pave their parking lot from surplus tithes (God forgive us for the use of such words). These churches might have to learn how to have chicken dinners. The 50 member churches would be 100 member churches and would learn what it means flourish off the surplus that would soon accumulate. In five years, we could do it all over again and every one could abound, and every one could be abased. Everyone could have opportunity to be content in whatever state they find themselves in. The smallest churches should be given of course to International Officials and State Cverseers since they are the ones who know how to get the work done.

I know it would CUT certain peoples salary for a while, but the old theory is these 100 member pastors (and certainly these who have risen to lead us) would bring it up again.



So says ****************************
THE RAzEr

[pastorables]

http://www.crosswalk.com/family/finances/

The article "Preachers are Paid to be Good" at the above link is worth the read.

pastorables

[rjjunior]

A man I affectunately called Papaw once said, "You have 50 member Pastors and you have 100 member Pastors. If you send a 50 member Pastor to a 100 member church, He'll make 50 members out of it. If you send a 100 member Pastor to a 50 member church he'll make 100 members out of it." This statement was used many times in BTC and later BTI.

I urged the Assembly to put it in practice. Send all the 100 member pastors to 50 member churches. Send all the 50 member pastors to 100 member churches. In judt a little while the COGOP would be the same size with qa couple of differences. The pastors who had struggled financially would now know what it was to live with more finacial freedom (at least until the church became 50). The 100 member pastors would learn what it is to struggle and have to depend a little more. As, for the churches, the 100 member churches would learn better giving or fund raising, since they would no longer be able to pave their parking lot from surplus tithes (God forgive us for the use of such words). These churches might have to learn how to have chicken dinners. The 50 member churches would be 100 member churches and would learn what it means flourish off the surplus that would soon accumulate. In five years, we could do it all over again and every one could abound, and every one could be abased.

I understand your theory, but I hope you weren't serious about trying to prove it this way. It would be the most ridiculous reasoning for appointing pastors I've ever heard of. It would not doubt guarantee a crumbling of many churches. If you were kidding, you got me. If you weren't, God help us.

[THE RAzEr]

you have to excuse THE RAzEr. I have kept him caged for a while. He just wanted to show the absurdity by which these pastoral appoints were made for a long, long time. The thoughts that it is the person of pastor who makes or breaks a church, have been with us for a long time. I hear it even in this thread. I mean the thought of if growth happens, the man should be paid more. That puts the growth in the hands of the man. I think there are tremendous pastors who do not see numeric growth, but the quality of there discipling is seen in the lives of those they effect/affect.

I think if a man is incompetent or lazy, he should be treated with dignity, but he should not be pastoring. If he is dedicated and works, he should be paid. The Bible says he is worthy of his pay.

However, if the idea THE RAzEr expounded were used, there may be some churches injured, but some would be blessed. THE RAzEr is an idiot! So, don't pay any attention to him!

Ray (aka THE RAzEr)

[THE RAzEr]

This is good stuff. One thing my dad taught me when I entered the ministry. He said, "If you are going to be a preacher, pay you bills." He asked me to promise him. I did, and I did. A sociological surveyI read was made among lending institution. They rated 25 professions as to how the lenders rated the trust they had in whether they would be paid back. Minister came in next to last. the only one below ministers was used car salemen.

I do not have that survey today. It was made in the early 1980's. I hope we are better today. We need some practical teaching in our churches.

This guy seems good!

Ray

[The Martins]

When I was in the car business years ago, three categories of professions you knew you'd have trouble getting financed:

Policemen
Plumbers
Preachers

[THE RAzEr]

Communism.



Ray writes,

What do you want? Capitalism? what about a program where if one member (PASTOR?) suffer, all members (Pastors?) suffer with him. Capitalism is not a New Testament concept, is it? In the early Church those who had property sold it and laid it at the feet of the Apostles, and they "had all things common. that is an interesting choice of word COMMON. What would be a good word for the ideaolgy of a group of people having all things COMMON. COMMUNISM? Was it a practice in the Jerusalem church. Certainly it seems so. Did it work? Not in the long term. Paul and others had to recieve funds to help the church in Jerusalem. Since they had sold or given a way there means of producing, and great persecutions had come upon them, they needed money from the rest of the church to survive. As we can see today the strenght of the church is not in Jerusalem.

If the worth of a church existing is its buildings and finace, we should all close our doors and head for Rome. The church is commanded to all the world. The highways and hedges. Certainly cammanded to the top of the mountain. There are people there. How can they hear accept trhere be a preacher. How can they preach unless they be sent. the rich churches of Asia who said I am rich and have need of nothing were seen by god to be poor. The responsibility of God called, willing to go, willing to sacrifice preachers turning around and going home, because they have no support of there fellow brethren is going to be judged. I do not known how god will feel when the tithes that was for the harvest, is left setting in CD<S for the devil's use after the Rapture. I don't even know how hwe feels about the church putting his money to the speculation (gambling) of the stock market (Money changers). I don't know how he feels about one preacher being rich while another struggles.

I do know that when the loaves and fishes were distributed, there were twelve baskets left over. 12 disciples=12baskets=Communism?

The the story of the talents and cities, however indicate something differant. 5=5 more;2=2more=CAPITALISM?

Then I get even more confused. The men who worked a day for a penny.
All day=0ne penny=COMMUNISM?or CAPITALISM?; 1/2day=One penny;
1 hour=One penny=COMMUNISM? or CAPITALISM?

As a sciologist, I would like explain something. the ideology of Communism is not what failed to work in the USSR. It was the politics of the Communist party that failed to work. The Communist Party practiced Socialism and Capitlism. Socialism in that the people were pproportions of the wealth of the production. It was a "limit" system. they practiced Capitalism, the Communist Party decided what was the "limit" the people individuall could receive. The remaider was used at the discretion of the Communist Party. Never did they have all things common.

The Bible route is that we be like Jesus. The church is Body of Christ. When the day comes in finaces that Pastors and churches care more about other Pastors and churches than they do themselves, we will have the answer to this dillema.

Ray

[The Martins]

I notice it's the Pastors and spouses of small churches with small church mentality that are for the Communist way of paying the Pastors. (Equal for all.) Let's hear from the Pastor of a medium or large congregation (500+) and see what s/he has to say.

Now, let me make one thing clear before you blast me: I'm not against large churches helping small, struggling ones. If it were not for the help my local church has received from our "Mother Church" (a church of about 1,000 members), we'd have never gotten off the ground. In our first year, 2003, we received $180,000 assistance from Church of the Holy Spirit - Roanoke. In 2004, we'll receive a total of $95,000. After that, we're on our own. However, with hard work, we are already self-sufficient, bringing in about $8,000 per week, and are beginning plans to plant a daughter church ourselves; one we'll have to help support in the beginning.

I've ministered in a small church with small church mentality. If the congregation doesn't want to grow, it won't. But, it's the Pastor's JOB to plant that desire and to water it - weekly. Many of you know how quickly CHS - Orchard Hills has grown. It's not because of a dynamic preacher. It's not because of over-the-top music. It's because our PEOPLE want to reach a lost and dying world with the Gospel - the Good News - of Jesus Christ and His saving grace! A vision that was placed in the membership by the Pastor.

So, although it's not entirely, or mostly, the Pastor's job to grow the church, it IS a reflection on the Pastor when it does not grow (IMHO). It's a reflection of HIS vision.

God Bless You.

[panhandler]

I am in a profession now where I deal with credit apps on an almost daily basis. My biggest area of credit turn-downs is Christians. Why do you think that is?