How are/should preachers be paid

[MissBrattified]

Originally Posted by Titus2woman

So I have to ask, is that the financial model at your church?

Our church has a board which makes most of those decisions, and the congregation is informed on all financial matters at an annual meeting. Members are also free to inquire into the books at any time, with the exception of looking at individual giving statements which are kept private.

The only experience I have with pentecostal churches is the one man rules all model. It is my understanding that this man takes at least 1/3 of every dollar given to the church no matter how much money that becomes. In larger or more affluent churches that could be millions. Indeed the pastor of my former UPC church gave a million dollars to the building fund 'out of his own money' when he'd not had another job beside overseeing that church.

I've never heard of the "1/3" number before. That sounds fairly arbitrary to me. MOST of the churches I know of are dealing with the IRS and that alone requires some measure of financial transparency with church members.

The one man model I am familiar with does not stop with the 1/3 either but also allows for that same man to fully control the other 2/3. This church has no benevolent fund, food pantry, clothes closet, etc. The private school supports itself with tuition, the youth pay for their own activities with fund raisers and are even used for other money making enterprises like dipping chocolate strawberries for Valentines day that are sold for the same price as the local gourmet chocolate shops to the tune of thousands of dollars in profits. The biggest seller gets a $50 gift card, all the rest goes to the church. Balloons are sold on Mother's Day with the highest paying family winning a dozen roses and a good parking space for their mother, which usually cost them hundreds of dollars. Even the Ladies Auxiliary gives it's proceeds for bake-sales etc. to the church.

In fact most things seem to be geared to producing more money for the pastor and his family. He is more than a decade past retirement age and no longer serves in any real pastoral role but is simply a figurehead. Yet he keeps the reigns and control of the bank accounts. There is no disclosure that I am aware of, with him even doing the deposits from the offering personally. He has been known to question members if their tithe check goes missing.

So while the membership is following the principle of just leaving it up to the pastor I am not sure it's a good idea. I believe that the true 'robbing' can God come in just being content to give one's money to others and not see that the Kingdom's work is done with it. I don't think that giving money to a church that is not using it for God's purpose is any better than spending it at Walmart.

JMVHO

It varies from church to church, and really if you are interested in attending somewhere, you need to schedule a meeting and ask. I don't believe the UPCI has a standard way of handling this that all ministers must use, although I could be wrong about that. I'm pretty sure it's more of a "recommended" method.

Our pastor and his wife are good stewards of the money they receive, they both work for extra money, they live in a nice house, but it isn't a mansion. The pastor is transparent with the congregation about all finances and that breeds trust. He has also been know to refuse salary increases, which my husband gets very frustrated about, because my husband (who is on the board) is a very generous man and thinks our pastor and his wife should live more comfortably than they do. The current compensation is a modest salary, some bills paid, compensation for trips and a limited bonus if tithing income goes above a certain amount in a month.

I really understand where your coming from, with one exception:

If a congregation feels that its leadership deserves the honor of a large salary because the leadership has proven itself to be trustworthy and deserving, I believe that is between the congregation and the recipient[s]. It isn't for the outside observer to look on and criticize, IMO, unless there is some abuse of money, power or saints that needs to be examined.

I would have NO issue with my pastor receiving enough salary so the neither he nor his wife had to work outside jobs, and in fact I think it's a shame that they need to do that at all. There are some men who perhaps don't work as hard as they should on their fulltime salary, and maybe they don't deserve it. For the pastors who DO work hard and DO deserve it, the congregation should feel good about honoring their labour.

I also do not agree that the pastor's salary should be limited to the median income of the members. Again, it depends on whether someone is worthy of the honor or not.