A Wrecked Church!

[RandyWayne]

Originally Posted by CC1

I remember way back in Bible College in the late 70's I was in a class where they talked about the importance of a pastor knowing when to retire. The sad truth at that time and even much later is that many Pentecostal churches were not funding any kind of retirement for their pastor and many pastors opted out of paying into Social Security because they could.

This meant for many pastors either no income or a significant drop in income if they retired. Sometimes churches who had not funded any kind of retirement for their pastor would find arrangements negotiated between his successor and him to give a portion of the tithes to the retired pastor for some period of time. Of course many smaller churches could not bear this burden as they could hardly pay the current pastor.

Pentecost has really changed as it has grown through the years. From preachers barely getting by to ones who now make triple digit incomes and use it to invest in real estate, income properties, etc.

Probably the strangest investment I heard about was when about 20 years ago a UPC pastor friend of mine told me of a conversation he had with a neighboring pastor who was so conservative he didn't even wear a watch. That pastor was sharing his investment portfolio with my pastor friend and mentioned that he had just invested in a movie video rental vending machine at a local factory! Of course none of his church members knew about it.

I am not sure when you define it changing but being in the UPC from the early 80's to about 90 I remember ALL pastors (who had churches of over 100) driving Lincolns. It is what Pentecostal Pastors Drove! Now at the same time, those who pastored smaller churches lived like paupers. They weren't part of the official royalty and you could even tell how uncomfortable they were when asked to sit behind the pulpit area when visiting the larger churches.

[The Lemon]

I do believe as Christians we should be liberal in our giving - be that to each other, the Pastor, various charities etc., etc.

Having said that, I can certainly see how a full time Pastor for many years who has opted out of Social Security, as well as having any kind of investment portfolio for retirement, would be in a very serious financial condition should they officially "retire".

At the same time, this scenario just causes me to be that more insistant upon really planning for retirement - and to take it a step further, I am a huge advocate of working a secular job in addition to pastoring or evangelizing etc.

I know there are sooooo many opinions on the above statement concerning secular work, but to me, Paul showed us the value of such in his own ministry. I had the privilege of serving uder a Pastor who also owned his own plumbing business and his business did NOT hinder his ability to be an effective leader and Pastor...not one bit. Now, he did not Pastor a HUGE congregation, but nevertheless, he was effective, personable, and most of all..annointed.

The bigger the church, and the more it is ran like a business, the more "business" responsibilities come with it.....I heard it said by a Pastor once..."big church, equals big problems". What makes this discussion even more sad to me is the lack of personal fiscal responsibility of ministers who in some cases totally neglect their own responsiblity to save and supply for their own. If you fail to plan, you plan to fail...

[StillStanding]

Originally Posted by The Lemon

I do believe as Christians we should be liberal in our giving - be that to each other, the Pastor, various charities etc., etc.

Having said that, I can certainly see how a full time Pastor for many years who has opted out of Social Security, as well as having any kind of investment portfolio for retirement, would be in a very serious financial condition should they officially "retire".

At the same time, this scenario just causes me to be that more insistant upon really planning for retirement - and to take it a step further, I am a huge advocate of working a secular job in addition to pastoring or evangelizing etc.

I know there are sooooo many opinions on the above statement concerning secular work, but to me, Paul showed us the value of such in his own ministry. I had the privilege of serving uder a Pastor who also owned his own plumbing business and his business did NOT hinder his ability to be an effective leader and Pastor...not one bit. Now, he did not Pastor a HUGE congregation, but nevertheless, he was effective, personable, and most of all..annointed.

The bigger the church, and the more it is ran like a business, the more "business" responsibilities come with it.....I heard it said by a Pastor once..."big church, equals big problems". What makes this discussion even more sad to me is the lack of personal fiscal responsibility of ministers who in some cases totally neglect their own responsiblity to save and supply for their own. If you fail to plan, you plan to fail...

It is my understanding that a wealthy member of this church offered to pay the former pastor a salary if he would retire, but the pastor refused. Maybe someone can confirm or deny.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by The Lemon

I do believe as Christians we should be liberal in our giving - be that to each other, the Pastor, various charities etc., etc.

Having said that, I can certainly see how a full time Pastor for many years who has opted out of Social Security, as well as having any kind of investment portfolio for retirement, would be in a very serious financial condition should they officially "retire".

At the same time, this scenario just causes me to be that more insistant upon really planning for retirement - and to take it a step further, I am a huge advocate of working a secular job in addition to pastoring or evangelizing etc.

I know there are sooooo many opinions on the above statement concerning secular work, but to me, Paul showed us the value of such in his own ministry. I had the privilege of serving uder a Pastor who also owned his own plumbing business and his business did NOT hinder his ability to be an effective leader and Pastor...not one bit. Now, he did not Pastor a HUGE congregation, but nevertheless, he was effective, personable, and most of all..annointed.

The bigger the church, and the more it is ran like a business, the more "business" responsibilities come with it.....I heard it said by a Pastor once..."big church, equals big problems". What makes this discussion even more sad to me is the lack of personal fiscal responsibility of ministers who in some cases totally neglect their own responsiblity to save and supply for their own. If you fail to plan, you plan to fail...

Yes, and what happens to his wife should he die? Does he just believe "God will provide?"

[The Lemon]

ILG,

I agree...sometimes we all can be a little "super spiritual", and sacrifice common sense. There is room in the body for diversity and application in the call, if someone feels to go in a direction and a huge building with a large congreation is the eventual result..so be it - as long as people are saved and growing in Christ...wonderful!

I do think also, that there is still merit in a smaller assembly. I also realize that different people have different capacity levels within their respective ministries. In all that, there still is a very real and very fine line between being a spiritual house and being profit center. If the focus is not on Jesus, it can easily turn to the pastor and or leadership, and then in my opinion it eventually cascades down.

As I have said before, I am not bashing the traditional church structure of bulidings etc., but at the same time I will argue the absolute necessity of such. If ministry is a blessing, then all of the five fold ministry should eat at the same alter, not just the pastor. Sometimes we fuel our own fire by design, and wonder why so many preachers seek so earnestly for a pastorate, called or not.

I remember awhile back in my old assembly, when the pastor resigned, I and another minister sat down with the board of directors and the comment was made to the effect that with a church of this size and income, if they broadcasted a need for a pastor, they would easily have canidates lined up for a mile. The point I got was that the income potential would be the main draw, and secondly the size or the power/ control would be another factor.

What was not said in that conversation was a person actually "called" by God to lead that flock. That was the beginning of my eyes being opened to the very real political side of ministry...

[ILG]

Originally Posted by The Lemon

What was not said in that conversation was a person actually "called" by God to lead that flock. That was the beginning of my eyes being opened to the very real political side of ministry...

Yes, I once had a very pristine view of ministry and the political side came as a shocker. But it is certainly there.

[tv1a]

Not the first time I used that line. Used that line on Charles Couch. A so-called faith healer who came to the conclusion I was gay after looking at my Facebook photos. He said God was homophobic. I mentioned God saves gay people. I told him Paul had a church with former gays. Still didn't deter his opinio that gay people can't be converted.

Originally Posted by Rapture 1

I will give you CREDIT today. You have made me laugh. I don't think you are as bad as you come across!!!!

[tv1a]

Politics was evident in the First Century Church. Started off with a business meeting to replace Judas. Paul constantly struggled with church politics in Corinth and Galatia. It is the nature of the beast.

[AreYouReady?]

Originally Posted by tv1a

Not the first time I used that line. Used that line on Charles Couch. A so-called faith healer who came to the conclusion I was gay after looking at my Facebook photos.

Did he explain how he can tell just by looking at pictures?

Originally Posted by tv1a

He said God was homophobic. I mentioned God saves gay people. I told him Paul had a church with former gays. Still didn't deter his opinio that gay people can't be converted.

This is in line with your signature lines.

[CC1]

Originally Posted by RandyWayne

I am not sure when you define it changing but being in the UPC from the early 80's to about 90 I remember ALL pastors (who had churches of over 100) driving Lincolns. It is what Pentecostal Pastors Drove! Now at the same time, those who pastored smaller churches lived like paupers. They weren't part of the official royalty and you could even tell how uncomfortable they were when asked to sit behind the pulpit area when visiting the larger churches.

RandyWayne / BillyBob,

I do think the late 70's and then the 80's is when it started changing. OP churches were just then starting to grow to the point they were no longer in survival mode. Where once a pastor receiving 100% of the tithe was really not enough to take care of him, his family and the church plant now churches were growing to be in the hundreds and some in the thousands of members with many pastors still receiving 100% of the tithe to parcel out between their personal income and what was spent on the church as they desired.

Of course a lot of ethical preachers moved to salaries or a percentage of the tithes as churches grew. I don't begrudge a pastor having an income enough to support a family. I also think it is every churches responsibility to have a retirement program in place for a pastor. A formal one that he could take with him if he ever leaves to minister elsewhere. Many of the problems in Pentecost have been because pastors pastor too long or insist on handing down a church to a family member both out of pride and financial consideration.