“When I left seminary and took my first church, I discovered my pay was to be determined by the base salary of a used car salesman. It seemed that the chairman of the board owned a used car lot, and felt that “If it’s good enough for my salesmen, it’s good enough for our pastor.” Except, the salesmen also made commissions-I didn’t. Without something more than a base salary, my wife and I just couldn’t make it, even though we tried. Foolishly, I allowed us to get $4,000 in the hole before I quit the church a year later. My feelings? To be perfectly honest, If felt bitter and disappointed-physically abused.”
¥ A true story? Yes. A typical story? Not likely. Horror stories about how the average minister and spouse are forced to live have been around for years. Likewise, there are stories about the preacher who counts a bushel basket full of cash every Sunday morning in a small room off the sanctuary. The assumption that preachers are “fleecers” like Elmer Gantry, or “fleecees” like the hapless parson who preaches on Sundays and shoes horses on weekdays, has become a part of American folklore.
We were intrigued by the idea of the “typical story,” and we decided to involve you, the LEADERSHIP reader, in a compensation survey. We selected a thousand names at random from our subscription list, which naturally divides into 75 percent clergy and 25 percent laity. Your response was a solid 33 percent.
Clergy respondents are 99 percent male, while lay respondents are 80 percent male and 20 percent female. The average male respondent is between thirty and fifty years of age, holds a seminary or postgraduate degree, and serves in a small town or suburbia. Ninety-five percent of the respondents are married and have dependents living at home- 37 percent have one or two dependents, and 63 percent have three or more.
As you will read, results included numerous “good surprises.” We had expected an outpouring of woes from a fairly high percentage of respondents. Were LEADERSHIP readers different from a broader cross section of clergy and laity?
“Well, probably so,” we concluded. We’ve all heard the slogan, “Readers are leaders.” Those who read are more likely to be in positions of larger or more effective leadership. We have been learning- much to our amazement-that a great many pastors don’t read at all. It’s a reasonable theory that those pastors are generally under greater financial stress.
So, LEADERSHIP readers, most of you are rather fortunate in many ways, according to the survey, so read on:
PART ONE:
GOOD NEWS
Most pastors feel good about what they’re being paid.
Six out of ten ministers do not feel they are, or ever have been, financially deprived, mistreated, or exploited by a ministry situation. And more than half of the remaining 40 percent said financial abuse was something that occurred only during their first ministry experience. They made it clear that a situation of exploitation no longer exists.
Like everyone else, ministers and their families are concerned about the inflationary erosion of their incomes; but over and over again, the majority confirmed in specific fact as well as in nuance that they do not feel their commitment to Christian ministry has resulted in financial mistreatment.
In fact, a rather large number of pastors wrote thoughtful, articulate notes about how the Lord faithfully provides for their physical needs.
“In more ways than I can recite in this brief context, God has proved his faithfulness to me in financial matters.”
Others, though gracious, seemed a little miffed at our suggestion that it might be possible for a minister of the gospel to be financially abused. One pastor expressed it this way:
“I really don’t like your questions about how money is affecting my ministry, because it implies that more importance should be given to money than I believe it deserves. One of my deep concerns about the contemporary church is what seems to be a preoccupation with salaries, as though the church ought to be competing with the world.”
Regardless of viewpoint, we think it’s remarkable that 80 percent of the ministers polled- remember, we are talking about homes of four or more persons-feel so positive about their current compensation. This outpouring of response confirms what has been demonstrated in other clergy surveys. Almost all persons who enter the Christian ministry do so because they have received a specific call from God. They believe he is ultimately responsible for their needs, and their real compensation comes from serving him.
Even among pastor respondents who feel financially abused, there is clear indication they love the ministry:
“There’s been a real temptation to tear up this survey after I completed it, simply because I can see that many people outside the ministry might view my comments as ‘sour grapes.’ They might conclude, ‘Well, if he doesn’t like the pay and is dissatisfied with his work, why doesn’t he get out?’ Or possibly, ‘Well, that’s the way it is in the ministry- nobody ever said you were going to make a million.’ It just so happens I love the ministry and receive great satisfaction in carrying out the many responsibilities connected with it.”
Forty percent of our respondents say they are or have been exploited. As stated, half no longer feel this way, since their only negative experience occurred in their first church. The other half feel they are forced to live on less: they are mainly pastors in their first church (apparently some churches do exploit young pastors), associate ministers serving on multiple staffs of large churches, and pastors serving small, rural churches with limited resources and strong traditions. From each of these groups we received a number of notes:
“During my time as an associate pastor, the district superintendent told the church they would need to keep my compensation from growing too quickly or I would have to accept a salary cut when I moved into a church that required only one pastor.”
-United Methodist
“When our church decided to give us a Christmas bonus, they called a meeting right after one of the services and started to debate how much they should give. My wife and I sat there not knowing what to do, since we had not been told the purpose of the meeting. We listened in embarrassment as a motion was made for $300, and then saw it defeated because one of the lay leaders thought it was too much money. Finally, and as graciously as we knew how, we interrupted the proceedings, excused ourselves, and left for home.”
-Christian and Missionary Alliance
A great deal could be said about the perils of the first ministry experience for the young pastor. Dr. Lyle Schaller, of the Yokefellow Institute, estimates that 15 percent of seminary graduates do not survive the first pastorate, and one of the primary factors contributing to their demise is inadequate compensation. Our survey consistently confirmed that where exploitation occurs, it is most likely to be found in a first ministry situation.
However, sprinkled through the responses was evidence that some churches work very hard to help the young pastor or associate staff member get off on the right foot:
“I am currently employed as an assistant in a parish of about two hundred active families. This is my first parish out of seminary. I began on a level of compensation considerably above many of my contemporaries. For that, I felt blessed. Now I’m beginning my second year of ministry and have just received a $4,000 increase over last year’s salary. Not only do I feel I’m receiving compensation appropriate with my education, but I feel it’s comparable with many professionals in my community. The congregation obviously appreciates my work and cares about my family. Their love for me has made a great difference in my attitude toward them as well as toward myself.”
-Episcopalian
The average minister’s salary is $22,100 per year. Since ministers are usually considered selfemployed (primarily for social security reasons), we looked in vain for a simple, uniformly accepted way to compute clergy compensation. Finding no answer that covered all contingencies, we arbitrarily added the averages of the following categories, after removing a few extremely high and extremely low numbers:
Cash salary $14,225
Housing allowance/ Parsonage equivalent $ 6,000
Utility allowance $ 1,875
Total Salary $22, 100
At first we weren’t sure it was fair to equate the parsonage with a housing allowance. No doubt some readers will legitimately say, “The parsonage I live in isn’t worth any $6,000 a year!” Probably true. But in most communities of any size, it’s very difficult to rent a three-bedroom home for under $500 per month. Since the majority of our respondents come from small towns or suburbia, it seemed reasonable to us to equate the two.
Although everyone knows numbers can be cast in a way to prove anything, we think it’s important to make a distinction between salary, compensation, and direct costs. The more we dug into the survey data, the more we began to suspect that some of the differences in how lay leaders and pastors viewed the minister’s compensation lies in the confusion of terms such as “cash salary,” “housing allowance,” and “transportation allowance.” We have personally been party to conversations in which a lay leader has said, “Yes, but I think our pastor gets a free house and car, special tax breaks, and keeps his honorariums from weddings and funerals.” The average lay leader thinks his pastor is receiving $1,300, or 6 percent more per year than actually shows up in the pay envelope. Might a compensation format that gives easily understood comparisons between clergy and lay salaries help? Many of our respondents think so:
“Travel allowance is an area of contention between me and the laity. In our church, allowances are included in total compensation. This is misleading to most lay persons, who see compensation as the pastor’s personal pay. Wouldn’t it be better if churches included these allowances under operating expenses rather than ministerial compensation?”
-Baptist General Conference
“When my congregation sees salary, benefits, and allowances rolled into one figure, it gives them an inflated opinion of what I’m paid, especially when they compare this number to their own salary number (which doesn’t include the liberal benefits they receive in addition to their salary). My spendable salary (including housing allowance) is, in reality, only about two-thirds of what the congregation thinks it is.”
-Southern Baptist
Situations like these need a remedy-a uniformly accepted means of computing the pastor’s pay that is readily understood by any congregation!
Pastors average over $2,700 in yearly benefits. The basic package provided for over 70 percent of our respondents looks like this:
Health/Life Insurance $1,200
Pension/Social Security $1,500
Total Benefits $2,700
The percentage of respondents who received other allowances included:
(79%) Transportation allowance $2,100
(41%) Continuing education allowance $ 375
(42%) Book allowance $ 380
Twenty-three percent of our pastors list $575 worth of unique benefits that cannot be averaged for comparison purposes.
However, only 40 percent receive help with continuing education. Frankly, we don’t understand how a minister can stay on top of his task without fresh training. Apparently the laity doesn’t fully realize how spiritually, intellectually, and emotionally draining the ministry can be. We think all churches should provide funds for continuing education-at least for conferences, retreats, seminars, and cassette tapes.
We feel the same way about books. They are to the minister what hammer and nails are to the carpenter-indispensable tools for preaching, teaching, counseling, and ministerial leadership. Fifty-two Sundays of good sermons can come only from possessing the right tools, and as one pastor puts it, “Every time I turn around, tomorrow is Sunday.”
Ministerial compensation is almost the same as that of comparable professionals. We asked, “How do you compare your level of compensation with similarly experienced professionals in your community?” We used the following rating scale:
Much lower Much higher
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Ministers ¥ ¥ Lay leaders
Pastors rank themselves at 4.2, or 8 percent below the average wage. Lay leaders rank their pastors at 5.0. In contrast, we found that ministers think they can make 25 percent more money by working in the business community. Lay leaders disagree; they think their pastor could make only 10 percent more.
It doesn’t quite track that a pastor would view himself as only 8 percent below the average wage of a comparable professional, unless he is comparing himself with a local educator. Our survey indicates ministers are quite comfortable with this comparison. This means the pastor thinks his teaching counterpart-all things considered-makes an additional $1,700, or $23,800 per year. He also thinks if both of them would move into business and industry, their education and experience would be worth an additional $5,500, or $27,600 per year. On the other hand, lay leaders think it would be a $2,100 increment.
Let’s compare the average salaries of “similarly trained and educated professionals”-meaning educators with postgraduate degrees. Our staff secured the following data from a variety of reputable sources:
Associate professor, Christian college $18,600
High school principal, under 200 students $21,300
Associate professor, university $21,400
LEADERSHIP survey respondent $22,100
Associate professor, seminary $26,900
High school principal, over 2.000 students $34,500
It should be pointed out that many educators are paid for less than a twelve-month year and can earn additional income. Obviously, this skews the salary comparison. Only three out of ten ministers earn an average of $1,800 additional income through items such as pulpit fill, preaching missions, evangelistic crusades, and royalties.
The key question seems to be, “Why is there such a difference in viewpoint between the pastor and the lay leader?” Our hunch is that in most cases, neither party really knows what comparable professionals are paid. Seeping through the responses was the implication that many compensation decisions are based on “an opinion offered by someone’s brother-in-law.” Apparently, compensation decision making is shrouded in subjectivism.
If ministers are happy to be compared with local educators (and our respondents are), it shouldn’t be too difficult to find a format for determining salary ranges that allow for factors of credentials, experience, merit, cost of living, and length of service.
PART TWO:
MORE GOOD NEWS
Most pastors feel good about their ability to cope financially.
Ministers feel their compensation is equal to the average income of their congregations. We asked, “How would you rate your compensation with the average income of the people in your church?” The rating scale appeared as follows:
Much lower Much higher
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Ministers ¥ ¥ Lay leaders
In response, ministers ranked their comparative income at an even 5.0. Lay leaders ranked their ministers income at 5.6, or 6 percent higher. These numbers indicate some differences of perception about the minister’s compensation; but the important fact is that ministers feel their pay equals the average lay salary.
We were surprised when 30 percent of our ministerial respondents said they were keeping up with inflation. Four percent actually claim to be “getting ahead.” Fifty percent said they were slipping, but “not critically,” and only 16 percent said they were “falling far behind.”
Frankly, we think it would be difficult to find many professions today in which only 16 percent felt they were slipping badly.
This positive response raised the question of careful money management. We were intrigued by the number of thoughtful comments several pastors shared with us. Apparently a sizable number of ministers take money management very seriously. One United Methodist pastor wrote:
“Wise money management and financial discipline go a long way to ‘making it’ on whatever a pastor receives. I have taken seriously the questions asked of a ministerial candidate before being admitted into probationary membership of the annual conference:
Mismanagement of personal finance may detract from your effectiveness as a minister. Are you presently in debt so as to interfere with your work, or have you obligations to others that will make it difficult for you to live on a salary you may receive?
“A pastor and spouse should establish mutually agreed-on priorities-and stick to them! The pain only lasts for a little while.”
A majority of lay leaders think low compensation can be remedied. In situations where the minister is underpaid, 62 percent of lay leaders thought it was possible to remedy any inequity between pastor and people, as well as pastor and comparable community professionals. Sixty-five percent of the underpaid pastors agreed. With this much agreement, we couldn’t help but wonder, “What’s holding up the raise?”
The laity responded as follows:
1. “We need more teaching on stewardship” (United Presbyterian).
2. “Tithing isn’t understood by the congregation” (United Methodist).
3. The pastor and lay leaders must increase their level of communication and commitment to each other” (Lutheran Church of America).
4. “We need better homework and reporting on the pastor’s salary” (Southern Baptist).
5. “Present the congregation with the evidence” (Episcopal).
6. “Face it. Do it” (Independent Baptist).
8. “We need a church awareness seminar” (Christian and Missionary Alliance).
By and large, the clergy agreed. They said things such as:
1. “I need to raise the level of stewardship consciousness among the people” (Disciples of Christ).
2. “Our people need to be educated about the biblical principles of giving” (Independent Baptist).
3. “I long for an open session with the lay leadership in which I can honestly share my financial pressures” (Church of the Nazarene).
4. “I would like to distribute an anonymous survey and average the incomes of the congregation” (Presbyterian Church of America).
5. “The committee on equitable salary recommends only a minimum. Local churches can go above that figure if they are able and willing. I need to talk to my church” (United Methodist).
6. “The deacon board needs a nudge to give more prayerful concern to my salary. Perhaps they should research the salary scale of other pastors in churches our size” (Southern Baptist).
7. “I need to request it. And yet I went into the ministry at midlife, knowing I would have to take a pay cut” (Mennonite).
These representative responses seem to fall into three categories: 1) more teaching about stewardship, 2) better communication between pastor, lay leaders, and congregation about salary, and 3) the better use of existing systems and procedures. There’s remarkably little difference in opinion about what should be done. Why, then, does there appear to be reluctance, especially on the part of the clergy, to do something so vital about their own financial welfare?
There are many reasons for the lack of candid communication. Salaries are very personal. They starkly focus on matters of worth-personal worth-and spell it out in cold, lifeless numbers, although valiant efforts are made to deny that. Even in churches where communication flows freely, some awkwardness often develops when it comes time to talk about the pastor’s pay.
This natural reluctance to discuss personal Bnancial matters often is carried to extremes. In some of the examples we read, it seemed that each party expected the other to read its mind and then act accordingly. The implication was that if the other party didn’t figure out what was wrong and take corrective action, it had failed to live up to its Christian responsibility. Maybe our friend from the Christian and Missionary Alliance church is right on target suggesting a “church awareness seminar.”
Greater awareness and better communication (based on objective data) will go a long way to help solve this problem. A Church of the Nazarene minister wrote:
“There’s a tremendous need for effective dialogue between laity and clergy. We pastors listen week in and week out to the needs and problems of our congregation. Since they think of us as servants of the Lord, they don’t seem to realize we have similar needs and problems. Finding a time and place where we can openly share would be such a lift to my wife and me. That lift would benefit them, for we’d be able to minister much more effectively.”
But we hear something else bleeding through these responses. It’s more obvious in the Mennonite pastor’s comment above: “I went into the ministry knowing I would have to take a pay cut.” Apparently it’s possible for him to receive a pay raise if he asks for it, but he might feel it’s out of character to ask or to share his financial needs. Although a majority of clergy agree that low compensation can be remedied, they sometimes indicated that the price included putting the “servant of the Lord” into the embarrassing position of asking for more personal money for spiritual services. To press the issue might be seen as not being content with what he has been given. Thus, many pastors seem to lapse into (first choice) an attitude of passive acceptance-I knew what I was getting into; the Lord will take care of me, and somehow we will make it on what we receive. Second choice: We must have more income. My wife must get a job. Or, third choice: We must find a new ministry situation in which the income is reasonable.
Our survey forms had notes scribbled all over them about the first choice-the attitude of passive acceptance:
“Being the son of a minister, and associating with preachers all my life, I accept the situation we are in without being overly concerned. Furthermore, many of my preacher brothers are in worse straits than I am.”
-Southern Baptist
“God has been faithful to keep us going, and I trust his all-knowing ability to change hearts. Any action on my part to change my salary would be viewed as subversive. God will handle the situation better than I could.”
-Assembly of God
“The reason I’ve determined not to ask for a raise or to insist on another level of compensation is a fear of being thought of as a ‘hireling.’ People are so sensitive about preachers wanting money, and I don’t want to add to this problem.”
-Missionary Church
“Sometimes I think I should call the board’s attention to the difference between the raise they gave me and the rate of inflation, and ask them to give more thought and prayer to this matter before they make a decision; but I’m not sure that I should.”
-Independent Baptist
“I did real battle with the issue of compensation (hours expended versus pay) nearly twenty years ago, early in my ministry experience, until I realized what it was doing to the inner man. Since then, I’ve allowed the Lord to fight my battles, and I’ve learned to be content. My family is far from rich in material goods, but both my family and the church have found me easier to live with.”
-United Methodist
These responses point to one more problem- maybe it’s the root problem. Could it be that underneath the layers of misperception, communication breakdown, reluctance to make the first move, passive acceptance, and justified stalemate there is an unharmonized theology of ministry and money? To what degree have the clergy or laity faced into the theological questions?
Lay leaders and ministers agree on what factors should determine ministerial compensation. There were only two major differences in these perceptions: the importance of budget size (and/ or size of congregation) and the importance of the minister’s length of service. Using a rating scale of Not lmportant (1) to Very Important (10), we asked both groups to assign ranking values to evaluation factors, with the following results:
Clergy Values/ Evaluation Factors/ Laity Values
10/ Amount of responsibility/ 10
9/ Ability to relate to wide range of problems/ 9
8/ Strength of pulpit ministry/ 8
7/ Ministry results/ 8
6/ Length of service/ 4
5/ Education credentials/ 5
5/ Financial need/ 6
5/ Median income of congregation/ 5
4/ Size of congregation/ 6
4/ Size of budget/ 7
3/ Expertise in specialized ministry/ 4
2/ Size of staff/ 3
2/ Compensation of fellow clergy in denomination/ 3
1/ Age/ 1
The greatest difference of opinion was in the importance of budget size. This perception reinforces the dichotomy of ministry and money. Pastors think the people don’t put enough priority on ministry concerns, and the people don’t think the pastor puts enough emphasis on numbers (size) and money.
With regard to length of service, Lyle Schaller points out (see page 12) that pastors’ compensation is losing its greatest ground in experience and tenure. He says, “Twenty years of pastoral experience is worth somewhere between $2,000 and $6,000.” Our responses confirm this. It appears that lay leaders often compute length of service on the basis of their local church rather than the combined tenure and experience the pastor has gained by serving many churches.
PART THREE:
PROBLEMS TO WORK ON
Many lay persons have some misconceptions about the pastor’s financial condition.
Only three out of ten ministers have written position descriptions. And only 16 percent have them reviewed and/or revised annually. We weren’t sure how to interpret this statistic since a rather large number of both ministers and lay leaders are opposed to superimposing classical business and management systems on the local church. Perhaps at another time we can explore the different schools of thought on this matter.
What our data strongly suggests is that most of the time, objectives, goals, understandings, and working relationships are worked out between pastor and people informally and subjectively. There’s little evidence of up-front agreements. The result seems to be grave misperceptions between pulpit and pew about what should be done, and how.
John Alexander, of Inter-Varsity Christian Fellowship, says in his book Managing Our Work, “It is my conviction that a major cause for frustration in Christian organizations is the morass of ambiguity: dedicated workers who yearn to serve the Lord are bogged down by the uncertainty about what they are supposed to be doing, what is expected of them, and how to perform their work most effectively.”
In matters of financial compensation, some of our clergy respondents readily agreed:
“My problem is knowing how the people view my ministry in relationship to financial compensation. Is my salary determined by 1) That’s all they ever paid anybody; 2) They believe it is adequate; 3) It indicates a careful evaluation of my ministry; 4) They would like to pay more but don’t believe they can; 5) They couldn’t care less and are too lazy to find out if it’s adequate; or 6) They believe poor preachers are more humble and godly? Is my pay to provide, punish, reward, or something else? What do they intend for it to mean?”
-Independent Baptist
“Financial compensation usually reflects the ‘feeling level’ of the congregation toward the pastor. I’ve had to struggle to help lay leaders on the pastor-parish relations committee define ministry goals so we could determine the impact of our ministry on the church and community. That struggle has included learning how to deal with conflict and criticism. But it’s been worth it. Without these goals, I would be at the mercy of feelings.”
-United Methodist
Once again the laity sees it a slightly different way. Almost half of our lay leader respondents think the pastor has a written job description, and of that group, 70 percent think it is reviewed every year. These differences in perception are consistent with what we’ve already observed about reluctance to communicate. But this misperception goes far beyond financial compensation. We wonder how a church can fulfill its biblical mission if the pastor and people do not have clear, upfront understandings about how they are to work together.
A few respondents spoke to the positive side of this issue. A Christian and Missionary Alliance pastor wrote, “My people respond so much better now that we both understand and agree about what I’m supposed to be doing. It’s made a great difference in my attitude, and I’m excited about the growth of our church.”
We also couldn’t help but wonder if young ministers fresh out of seminary might not avoid the pitfalls of a negative, first ministry experience if there were more clear, clean, up-front agreements. Seminarians, beware!
Sixty-two percent of ministers live in a church-owned manse. This number alarms us. It suggests that the minister, like every other non-home owner, faces serious financial disadvantage in an overheated economy. Most money experts agree that home ownership is the best hedge against inflation. A rather convincing case can be built by the fact that ministers who own homes average an equity of $35,000. The pros and cons of manse versus home ownership have been around for some time: factors such as being stuck with a home in a slow real estate market, the white elephant parsonage, real estate taxes, and the problems of maintenance. (See the article by Manfred Holck, Jr., “A Parsonage or a Housing Allowance: Which Is Better?” in LEADERSHIP, Volume I Number 2.)
We think runaway inflation, in many cases, has tipped the scales to home ownership. Three rather recent developments lend weight to this point of view:
1. The rapid appreciation of real estate. In many places home values are rising more than 10 percent a year.
2. New legislation allows a person fifty-five years of age who has lived in the home for three out of the last five years to sell it and exempt the first $100,000 from capital gains tax.
3. Bracket creep. Almost everyone has moved into a higher personal income tax bracket because of inflated dollars. Since the home-owning minister is able to withhold a housing allowance from his taxable income, while still deducting real estate taxes and interest, this double deduction is worth more than ever now.
Most formal retirement plans assume the eventual existence of a paid-for home. No equity at the end of a lifetime of ministry can be a serious problem, unless one has made extensive alternate plans. Unfortunately, many pastors do not think that far ahead, or find themselves caught in the parsonage system and face inner panic and external hardship as retirement approaches:
“It was a mistake not to allow me to purchase my own home. I have no equity after fifteen years.”
-Church of Christ
“The parsonage is often held over one’s head as a big giveaway, Most people do not realize the position this leaves the pastor in at retirement.”
-United Methodist
As these responses suggest, many congregations must have very strong, legitimate feelings about the parsonage. Those feelings are rooted in history, sentiment, and/or the church’s net worth. However, in today’s economy, it might be exploitive to assume that the pastor should live in the parsonage rather than building financial equity of his own. We encourage pastors to seek financial counsel from a qualified expert about the various ways to effectively manage their personal assets.
One of the saddest stories we’ve heard in a long time was sent in by a lay leader about the problem of pastor, people, and parsonage:
“Our former pastor was responsible for building a good ministry over a period of twenty-five years. As a result, the elders agreed to give him the manse as a retirement benefit; but this stirred up division in the church, particularly among the trustees, and they voted it down. A year later the pastor left us.”
We wonder how much hurt continues to exist in the hearts of these people, as well as in the heart of their friend and former pastor, because of the insensitive and inept way this matter was handled.
Almost one-half of ministerial spouses work outside the home. Twenty-eight percent work at parttime jobs and add an average of $3,300 per year to the family income. The 19 percent employed full time average $9,250 per year. It’s interesting that the number of full-time spouses is almost identical to the number of ministerial families who expressed feelings of being underpaid and mistreated. Although we couldn’t directly cross-tabulate these two numbers, there’s reason to believe that next to passive acceptance, the first solution to inadequate clergy income continues to be a spouse who is employed outside the home-a home that probably has two or more dependent children.
The part-time number, 28 percent, surprised us. We wondered why three out of ten spouses are employed on a part-time basis if, in fact, pastors received a wage commensurate with the average of the congregation. Four possible answers came to mind:
1. Historically, when a minister’s spouse worked outside the home it was for subsistence reasons. That is no longer true. Our survey shows that 10 percent work for career reasons, and another 15 percent work for a combination of career reasons and financial need. Personal growth and achievement outside the home is becoming increasingly important to the minister’s spouse.
2. Two-income families are becoming a way of life. Robert Runde, writing in Money Magazine (November 1980), says that 50 percent of American families with children under eighteen are bringing home two incomes in order to support their chosen lifestyle. This factor affects the local church in many different ways. When the pastor steps into the pulpit, he looks out over an increasing number of families who are curtailing their time commitment to the 1 ministries of the church in order to keep up with 1 inflationary pressures. The pastor’s own family is q not immune to these problems. j
3. Less skill at money management. Remember, X many spouses do not work outside the home, even s though they average the same number of dependents and are being measured by the same average 3 lay salary. Perhaps money management isn’t the ] most applicable term to describe the unmeasurable S factors of creativity, handiness, ability to organize and plan, skill at shopping, and so forth. Within any local church, similar families achieve amazingly different levels of lifestyle with approximately the same amount of money. One pastor wrote, “Every person, clergy or laity, is a steward of his income. With my income, I can do almost whatever my family wishes: world travel, new car, dining out, benevolent support. At the same time, I’m aware of other families who cannot make ends meet on the same salary as mine.”
4. The question of a lifestyle and its financial implications might affect a minister’s family more than any other family in the church. We feel these statistics-35 percent of spouses work to bolster a family income already comparable to the average lay income-suggest that the pastor’s family might feel pressures to live beyond the means provided by the church to meet leadership expectations. Can it be that while the average lay family struggles to keep up with inflation, the minister’s family struggles to maintain higher standards of hospitality and good taste? Although the pressures generated by the congregation are very subtle, they can be very threatening. For instance, embarrassment over not being able to reciprocate can affect one’s ability to minister. A Southern Baptist pastor wrote: q
“Many of the people in our church live in expensive homes: we rent a modest apartment. They enjoy fine clothes, furniture, and entertainment we can’t afford. We don’t begrudge their lifestyle, but we’re being embarrassed as the recipients of more gifts and services than we can return.”
This matter of personal expectation versus congregational expectation needs further study, for apparently the average lay leader doesn’t see it this . way. Remember, half of the lay leaders think the 8 minister is keeping up or getting ahead of inflation, 0 while the other half think he is no worse off than themselves-slipping, but not critically. These conclusions are reinforced by this specific statistic: Ninety-six percent of lay leaders think that a pastor’s spouse should not have to work outside the home to supplement family income. Whether they think that is true in principle or true in fact, we’ll never know. But we do suspect that many ministers’ families work very hard to project an appropriate lifestyle becoming of a minister, while inadvertently reinforcing in the layman’s mind that the pastor is doing “very well.”
Four out of ten ministers have seriously considered leaving the ministry. This number is striking in that it so closely resembles the percentage of pastors who feel they are or have been financially abused. However, when we asked for specifics, very few of them talked about money. Rather, they said things such as:
“I struggle with constant pressure. The only time I feel off the job is when I’m out of town. A minister’s life is a ‘fishbowl,’ and I’m occasionally discouraged about the disparity between what I’m doing and what I think I could be doing.”
-Lutheran
“I get discouraged over the reactions of the church to the needs of our community.”
-Independent Bible
“Sometimes I think it would be a good idea to get out of the way and let another pastor try this situation. Because I fail to see concrete results, I question my own ability and wonder why the Lord doesn’t use me as I wish he would.”
-Evangelical Covenant Church of America
Please note that none of these representative responses talk about money. They confirm other studies about why people resign. Dr. Frederick Herzberg, writing in the Harvard Business Review, lists six factors that must be present to keep people highly motivated about sustaining responsibility: 1) Achievement, 2) Recognition, 3) The task itself, 4) Responsibility, 5) Advancement, and 6) Opportunity for growth.
Although financial remuneration does influence motivation, it is not in the top six. In contrast, the above statement that “I’m occasionally discouraged about the disparity between what I’m doing and what I think I could be doing” seems to be a common denominator for resignation.
The lay leader-93 percent-thinks that his pastor has never seriously considered leaving the ministry. We wrestled for some time to find what is behind these different perceptions. Two things stand out:
1. In many cases, both clergy and laity feel the minister is called to his profession for life by God, and to leave the ministry is a matter of spiritual failure.
2. The minister is viewed as “set apart” by virtue of his divine calling. This posture, often assumed and reinforced by both pastor and laity, prevents the pastor from taking off his robes and becoming one of the people. It also screens the layman’s perception of the pastor’s humanness. Perhaps pastors need to occasionally show lay leaders a slice of their souls, even if that glimpse conflicts with lay leader’s expectations.
Although portions of this survey highlight certain negative aspects and attitudes, the majority of respondents 0 percent-are happy, healthy, and hard at work in local church ministry. They consider themselves very fortunate to be called of God to a unique vocation, and they seldom find themselves ever thinking of doing anything else.
The minority–40 percent-is divided into two groups: the first group is made up of those who began in a disadvantaged situation, but with each successive move began to build a lifetime of ministry accomplishment.
The second group is experiencing difficult times. They are either new members of a multiple staff, pastors serving in their first parish, or rural ministers with few people and limited resources. They think a lot about leaving the ministry; many of them never make it past their first church.
Though our hearts go out to these pastors, we are thankful they’re in the minority. Frankly, when we conceived the idea of the survey, we expected many more pictures of restless pastors, showing us their empty wallets, to crowd through the pages of the completed questionnaires. Instead, the message is generally one of contentment-not affluence, but a willingness to work with what God has given.
Copyright © 1981 by the author or Christianity Today/Leadership Journal. Click here for reprint information on Leadership Journal.
