Renumeration of pastors and making money off religion

[SkyWriting]

But the pastor still occasionally got dragged by some parishioners for "being rich". His critics never publicly announced their salaries the way the pastor did. But judging by their Lexus and/or Audi cars, I'll go out on a limb and suggest that they made considerably more than the pastor did. Honestly, a wealthy Christian leader is not a bad thing, ipso facto. At least, I don't think so. But I do acknowledge that it's not a good look. Still, what's better: Getting rich from being a Christian leader or getting rich from purely secular employment?

A secular company is much easier to sell and cash out. That's my recommendation.

 

[archer75]

I hear what you both are saying here, @FireDragon76 and @Paidiske.

I think it's ridiculous for a congregation to be sharpening their teeth (is that a set phrase where you're from, Paidiske? I like it) on earrings or anything of the kind.

My main difficulty is the American (?) phenomenon of "pastors" (salesmen) of these super-mega-churches who literally, as Firedragon said, have multiple mansions on large estates. They offer nothing but their car-sales personality with a little Jesus sprayed on and they take quite a lot from people who can't afford it. Joel Osteen's net worth is $50 million. Now, I'm not saying he's a criminal. But as a society, we should do better. If people want religion, they should be able to get it (we have a fair bit of variety available in the US!). Yet we have gone down this well-trodden American path of just putting all our faith in a carnival barker.

The people who get swindled by Osteen need religion. And comfort (who doesn't?). But they part with their money and don't get either. I am just not sure why Osteen and Peter Popoff and their kind get the same financial breaks as a struggling Espicopal parish whose priest works full time to get thread to touch up the Paschal vestments.

 

[FireDragon76]

I hear what you both are saying here, @FireDragon76 and @Paidiske.

I think it's ridiculous for a congregation to be sharpening their teeth (is that a set phrase where you're from, Paidiske? I like it) on earrings or anything of the kind.

My main difficulty is the American (?) phenomenon of "pastors" (salesmen) of these super-mega-churches who literally, as Firedragon said, have multiple mansions on large estates. They offer nothing but their car-sales personality with a little Jesus sprayed on and they take quite a lot from people who can't afford it. Joel Osteen's net worth is $50 million. Now, I'm not saying he's a criminal. But as a society, we should do better. If people want religion, they should be able to get it (we have a fair bit of variety available in the US!). Yet we have gone down this well-trodden American path of just putting all our faith in a carnival barker.

The people who get swindled by Osteen need religion. And comfort (who doesn't?). But they part with their money and don't get either. I am just not sure why Osteen and Peter Popoff and their kind get the same financial breaks as a struggling Espicopal parish whose priest works full time to get thread to touch up the Paschal vestments.

It's worse than that. The Osteens and Joyce Meyer's of the world actually get more breaks, due to the way tax laws are set up. Certain groups fought very hard to keep 1950's era clergy housing tax exemptions on the books, for instance- almost all of them were the kinds of religious groups represented by the mega-church superstar pastor model. They fought it despite the objections of secularist groups who feel deeply offended by those sorts of religious set-asides (meaning that the Gospel is potentially being scandalized in the eyes of people predisposed to see religion as smoke and mirrors anyways).

My church filed an amicus brief a few years ago in our Supreme Court and said that discrimination is not a religious right. Perhaps we should also find a way to articulate that greed is not a religious right, either.

 

[FireDragon76]

BTW, the comment about a carnival barker is spot on. The same glittering generalities and lack of nuance of a politician or salesman are typically on display in this type of preaching.

I am doing more research and apparently the ADF, the Alliance Defending Freedom, was involved in alot of the legal work fighting for the clergy housing tax exemption. This is the same group that also fought Colorado's anti-discrimination laws, and which our church filed an amicus brief in opposition to. So I think its safe to say they do not represent mainline Protestantism.

It's troubling how conservative evangelicals are rallying around what amounts to confidence men. Is this really about religion as St. James understood it, or about defending a privileged empire built on cultural conservativism with a generous portion of New Thought on the side?

New Thought - Wikipedia

 

[Tigger45]

Well, I'm not really advocating for religious individualism, either. Just socially responsible religion. I really do believe that we need each other, as the Bible says, as iron sharpens iron (Proverbs 27:17).

Which triggers my thinking. This phenomenon is almost exclusively isolated to independent church bodies. Its normaltive for traditional denominations to have bi-laws and safe guards in place to avoid these abuses.

 

[FireDragon76]

Which triggers my thinking. This phenomenon is almost exclusively isolated to independent church bodies. Its normaltive for traditional denominations to have bi-laws and safe guards in place to avoid these abuses.

That's a good point. The phenomenon seems like something that could only have been birthed in America, with a religious culture torn from historical roots. But of course now its spreading around the world. In Latin America this type of religion is growing, for instance, at the expense of traditional patterns of religion. In particular it taps into pre-existing ways that people relate to God and the spirit world, transactionally.

The title is a bit of misnomer but I think Rev. Wanda Deifet's presentation here covers well what makes this kind of religion tick. Whether it's in São Paolo or Tulsa, Oklahoma, I think the essence is similar, only the externalities are different (skip to 7:30 to see the actual presentation). This kind of religion seems to also feed off social disruption and crisis.

 

[seeking.IAM]

A full time job deserves a full-time wage. Many Christian branches require a seminary education (i.e., graduate degree). Clergy who have paid for a Bachelor's education followed by a graduate seminary education deserve a fair wage equivalent to others who have earned a Master's degree. I understand opposition to jet planes and $3,000 suits, but that's the exception not the rule.

 

[archer75]

A full time job deserves a full-time wage. Many Christian branches require a seminary education (i.e., graduate degree). Clergy who have paid for a Bachelor's education followed by a graduate seminary education deserve a fair wage equivalent to others who have earned a Master's degree. I understand opposition to jet planes and $3,000 suits, but that's the exception not the rule.

I don't disagree that full-time clergy can be supported by their parish or jurisdiction, but to be fair, there are plenty of people with a bachelor's and MA or even a PhD who are working for minimum wage (or less).

 

[FireDragon76]

I don't disagree that full-time clergy can be supported by their parish or jurisdiction, but to be fair, there are plenty of people with a bachelor's and MA or even a PhD who are working for minimum wage (or less).

My brother gets turned down from jobs all the time because he's overqualified, having two bachelors degrees.

 

[archer75]

My brother gets turned down from jobs all the time because he's overqualified, having two bachelors degrees.

Yeah. And if you pretend not to have the degrees, you can't account for years of your life.

So, people who work full-time (including clergy) should not be living in a sewer, but let's not let ourselves think that having a BA, MA, or PHD is some kind of meal ticket.

 

[Tigger45]

I don't disagree that full-time clergy can be supported by their parish or jurisdiction, but to be fair, there are plenty of people with a bachelor's and MA or even a PhD who are working for minimum wage (or less).

Not within their respective fields, so that’s not quite a fair comparison.

 

[archer75]

Not withtheir respective fields, so that’s not quite a fair comparison.

What do you mean? I just didn't follow. How do you mean "not with their respective fields"?

 

[FireDragon76]

I guess alot of good pastors are willing to settle for a somewhat unfair wage just for the joy of helping God's people. I know our pastor probably should get more like 80,000 a year, but truthfully we just don't have the money.

 

[Tigger45]

What do you mean? I just didn't follow. How do you mean "not with their respective fields"?

Sorry I had to edit my reply to read properly.

 

[archer75]

Not within their respective fields, so that’s not quite a fair comparison.

Oh - I see what you mean. You mean someone with a Master's in theology working as a priest or pastor is in their field.

But that's not true (edit: that IS true, but it's not true that people in other fields can't end up working for peanuts in their fields). I know people personally who are qualified professionals with the degrees in question who work in their field for what comes out to minimum wage or less. It may not look like minimum wage on paper, because it's usually set up as dollars per classroom hour or something, but once you look at the actual work that's required, you realize they'd be signifcantly better off mopping the floors at the same institution (that of course won't hire them to do so).

 

[Tigger45]

Oh - I see what you mean. You mean someone with a Master's in theology working as a priest or pastor is in their field.

But that's not true (edit: that IS true, but it's not true that people in other fields can't end up working for peanuts in their fields). I know people personally who are qualified professionals with the degrees in question who work in their field for what comes out to minimum wage or less. It may not look like minimum wage on paper, because it's usually set up as dollars per classroom hour or something, but once you look at the actual work that's required, you realize they'd be signifcantly better off mopping the floors at the same institution (that of course won't hire them to do so).

I’m sure that can happen but that isn’t the norm for the majority of persons working within the field of their graduate degree but more like the exception?

 

[archer75]

I’m sure that can happen but that isn’t the norm for the majority of persons working within the field of their graduate degree but more like the exception?

I don't have numbers on this and it's a rather large question under the umbrella of "everyone with an academic degree from Bachelor's to doctorate," but if we're talking about humanities degrees, it is really quite common these days. The situation has been bad for 40 years but has been getting worse that whole time.

This article is ten years old now, and the situation is worse, but it's still a good starting point: https://www.chronicle.com/article/Graduate-School-in-the/44846

Especially relevant quote:

"It can be painful, but it is better that undergraduates considering graduate school in the humanities should know the truth now, instead of when they are 30 and unemployed, or worse, working as adjuncts at less than the minimum wage under the misguided belief that more teaching experience and more glowing recommendations will somehow open the door to a real position."

So, again, I don't say this to suggest that clergy with relevant education (or even without?) should not be able to live, but only to say that if some can't, they have plenty of non-clergy in the same boat.

 

[Tigger45]

I don't have numbers on this and it's a rather large question under the umbrella of "everyone with an academic degree from Bachelor's to doctorate," but if we're talking about humanities degrees, it is really quite common these days. The situation has been bad for 40 years but has been getting worse that whole time.

This article is ten years old now, and the situation is worse, but it's still a good starting point: https://www.chronicle.com/article/Graduate-School-in-the/44846

Especially relevant quote:

"It can be painful, but it is better that undergraduates considering graduate school in the humanities should know the truth now, instead of when they are 30 and unemployed, or worse, working as adjuncts at less than the minimum wage under the misguided belief that more teaching experience and more glowing recommendations will somehow open the door to a real position."

So, again, I don't say this to suggest that clergy with relevant education (or even without?) should not be able to live, but only to say that if some can't, they have plenty of non-clergy in the same boat.

Now that you mention it it reminds me of all teachers in our educational system that are woefully underpaid so I’ll concede the point recognizing we both see this situation as a shame and needs to be corrected.

 

[Paidiske]

I guess alot of good pastors are willing to settle for a somewhat unfair wage just for the joy of helping God's people. I know our pastor probably should get more like 80,000 a year, but truthfully we just don't have the money.

I don't know about unfair. I also don't know how things tend to be structured in America.

Here - ok, so my stipend is a benchmarked proportion of the average wage. It's enough for a modest but comfortable standard of living. But I'm housed; my utilities are paid by the church (electricity, gas and water; I pay for the mobile and the internet); and there's a car allowance. So the value of the total package, when I think about what I'd have to pay for housing, for example, is a lot more than what actually appears in my bank account.

Could I make more in a comparable secular field (for less hours and less stress)? Sure. But is it enough so that I can dedicate my time and attention to the life of ministry without needing to seek outside income, and without worrying what we will eat or how I'll afford school clothes? Sure. So on balance that seems fair to me.

 

[Dave-W]

The problem is when this flows into then thinking they have a right to control or police what the pastor does with his or her own money, whether it's what the church paid them or they came by it another way. It's very common for this to become a useful tool for those who bully their clergy.

I have seen it go farther than that. “THe church owns the house so we can come and go in it any time we please, even 3 am if we want to.”

So nosy congregants can go thru the refrigerator and shelves looking for whatever, walk in on the pastor and spouse when they are sleeping (or whatever) and then report back all they saw to the rest of the congregation.

Housing allowance (if the congregation owns the parsonage/manse) is deducted from the wages of the pastor, which makes finding alternate housing without the untimely intrusions, an economic impossiblibility.