I heard that the Mormons only have volunteers, no paid staff, from top to bottom. That includes anyone speaking in a pulpit, managing the books, music directors, administrative assistants (formerly known as secretaries), set-up people, custodians, sound people, lighting people, etc. etc.
Larger churches already have scores of volunteers, which the paid church staff are always clamoring for people to do, yet they themselves aren't willing to work for free. We know this, cause if you asked them to continue as a voluneer, they'd leave and go to another church that was paying, and had your church been volunteer to begin with, they never would have applied for the job.
Larger churches have volunteers on stage for traditional choirs, contemporary praise and worship teams, and teaching Bible study classes, some with graduate degrees from a seminary. Trained counselors are around who could volunteer a few hours per week. Many volunteers are perfectly capable of teaching or leading in worship just as well as the paid people do. Churches want volunteers to lead youth or singles groups, but not the main services.
Paid staff hours also seem rather cushy. Sunday may be their most important day, but it's not 8 or more hours. The doors are locked around noon and the rest of the day/evening is at home. They get Mondays off, and many show up later in the mornings during the week, and leave early, especially on Friday. Lots of people have been attracted to the ministry at least in part because they like that cushy lifestyle.
One prominent pastor I know admitted to teaching some youth as a volunteer and asking the group, "None of yall want to get saved do ya?" (not expecting any hands to go up) and several kids, to his surprise, raised their hands. He thought it so easy, he thought to himself, "Hey, I could make a living at this!"
Obviously, having all volunteers would mean all the usual salary and benefits could be spent on other things, if you could just find people who are not only capable but willing to be the one directing the choir, orchestra, main praise team, or preaching the sermon, instead of just being IN the choir, orchestra, praise team, or teaching a small class.
If you're going to bring up all the behind the scenes preparation that has to be done during the week to get ready for services, which is a valid point, I still would resort to looking at all the volunteers who volunteer for 1000 other things in a large church. It would just be an extension of what people have proven they're able and willing to do when asked, or when they step-up without even being asked. If that's not enough, then again, I would ask, if the Mormons can do it, why can't all the Christian churches? Surely there are some out there that are all-volunteer, but I don't know of them, presumably cause they're small and few and far between, if they exist at all (even in many large cities there are none.)
If you are a paid staff member, please don't respond to this post cause I already know your bias, which is to protect and justify your position and self-interests cause you get a paycheck that pays your mortgage, car, bills, groceries, etc, all supporting you and your family. This question is being posed to all the laypersons, whether or not they already volunteer in their churches. I'm basically asking them, "Why can't WE do it?"
Even if we started a small all-volunteer church, who knows that it wouldn't grow into something big like the Mormons if we just learned more about their model and how they attract so many more people who are willing to volunteer however many hours per week? If everyone chips in, it's less work for all, which is the only way I can see that they do it.
There are small one-room churches that stay locked up all week, led by a 'pastor' who has a regular job during the week. We all know the stories of newer start-up churches who lease space in a school or other venue. But eventually, they decide to have bylaws, a constitution, deacons, new salaries, and otherwise become 'institutional.' It shouldn't have to be this way.
Capable people who are all around and often formally trained can do it, delivering sermons and directing music, but for some reason we'd all rather donate money to pay someone else than to divide up responsibilities ourselves. It's a different mindset than the Mormons for some reason. I'm trying to figure out the reason.
If by some small chance you have been part of an all-volunteer church, I'd be especially interested in hearing of your experience and perspective, since you have first hand knowledge of any obstacles that kept you from growing to the size of the mega-churches, some of which have literally hundreds of people on the payroll, most of them part-time under 25 hours, cause at 30 hours, all kinds of benefits have to kick-in under our labor laws. If you go over 20 hours in a given week, the personnel person starts getting nervous and makes sure you don't get anywhere near 30. They can't risk that.
Larger churches already have scores of volunteers, which the paid church staff are always clamoring for people to do, yet they themselves aren't willing to work for free. We know this, cause if you asked them to continue as a voluneer, they'd leave and go to another church that was paying, and had your church been volunteer to begin with, they never would have applied for the job.
Larger churches have volunteers on stage for traditional choirs, contemporary praise and worship teams, and teaching Bible study classes, some with graduate degrees from a seminary. Trained counselors are around who could volunteer a few hours per week. Many volunteers are perfectly capable of teaching or leading in worship just as well as the paid people do. Churches want volunteers to lead youth or singles groups, but not the main services.
Paid staff hours also seem rather cushy. Sunday may be their most important day, but it's not 8 or more hours. The doors are locked around noon and the rest of the day/evening is at home. They get Mondays off, and many show up later in the mornings during the week, and leave early, especially on Friday. Lots of people have been attracted to the ministry at least in part because they like that cushy lifestyle.
One prominent pastor I know admitted to teaching some youth as a volunteer and asking the group, "None of yall want to get saved do ya?" (not expecting any hands to go up) and several kids, to his surprise, raised their hands. He thought it so easy, he thought to himself, "Hey, I could make a living at this!"
Obviously, having all volunteers would mean all the usual salary and benefits could be spent on other things, if you could just find people who are not only capable but willing to be the one directing the choir, orchestra, main praise team, or preaching the sermon, instead of just being IN the choir, orchestra, praise team, or teaching a small class.
If you're going to bring up all the behind the scenes preparation that has to be done during the week to get ready for services, which is a valid point, I still would resort to looking at all the volunteers who volunteer for 1000 other things in a large church. It would just be an extension of what people have proven they're able and willing to do when asked, or when they step-up without even being asked. If that's not enough, then again, I would ask, if the Mormons can do it, why can't all the Christian churches? Surely there are some out there that are all-volunteer, but I don't know of them, presumably cause they're small and few and far between, if they exist at all (even in many large cities there are none.)
If you are a paid staff member, please don't respond to this post cause I already know your bias, which is to protect and justify your position and self-interests cause you get a paycheck that pays your mortgage, car, bills, groceries, etc, all supporting you and your family. This question is being posed to all the laypersons, whether or not they already volunteer in their churches. I'm basically asking them, "Why can't WE do it?"
Even if we started a small all-volunteer church, who knows that it wouldn't grow into something big like the Mormons if we just learned more about their model and how they attract so many more people who are willing to volunteer however many hours per week? If everyone chips in, it's less work for all, which is the only way I can see that they do it.
There are small one-room churches that stay locked up all week, led by a 'pastor' who has a regular job during the week. We all know the stories of newer start-up churches who lease space in a school or other venue. But eventually, they decide to have bylaws, a constitution, deacons, new salaries, and otherwise become 'institutional.' It shouldn't have to be this way.
Capable people who are all around and often formally trained can do it, delivering sermons and directing music, but for some reason we'd all rather donate money to pay someone else than to divide up responsibilities ourselves. It's a different mindset than the Mormons for some reason. I'm trying to figure out the reason.
If by some small chance you have been part of an all-volunteer church, I'd be especially interested in hearing of your experience and perspective, since you have first hand knowledge of any obstacles that kept you from growing to the size of the mega-churches, some of which have literally hundreds of people on the payroll, most of them part-time under 25 hours, cause at 30 hours, all kinds of benefits have to kick-in under our labor laws. If you go over 20 hours in a given week, the personnel person starts getting nervous and makes sure you don't get anywhere near 30. They can't risk that.
Last edited:
