Submitting in the Church

“Who’s to say??  That’s none of anyone’s business but mine!”  It was said with ... emotion.  The business?  What she and other Christians should do with their money.  That’s what we were discussing and  then came something I heard more as, “It’s mine and I’ll do with it what I want.”

My answer to the question was going to be, “Christians praying together perhaps.”  We could say together that in our current community a $100k annual salary would be sufficient and we could give away the rest.  It was just an idea.  I thought Christians praying together could be a good answer to "Who's to say?"  I thought it was an interesting question for us to discuss.  But what I heard blowback-wise was something along the lines of I do what I want or what I think is best.  End of discussion.   

I got to wondering where we don’t insist on this as a natural, obvious right.  I do what I want and it’s none of your business.  Marriage?  Once in it, one person just doesn’t just do what one person wants.  Military?  What I do and where I do and how I do is my business and no one elses?  Nope, not in the military.  We accept that.  The Benedictine Order?  I think we go along with what the community says or what the abbot says or what the vows said.  So we surrender individual rights in that situation. We allow others to direct, even dictate.  

If you belonged to a church and you started having an open extra-marital affair, it’s no one’s business except yours?  Or did you when you became a part of that church surrender some part of your individualism to the community?  Do we vow to follow the session?  We say we do until they do something that we don’t like and then we go our merry way.  I am THE authority in my life.  But doesn’t it make sense that the church and the pastor would say to the church member having an affair, “Not as a Christian in our community you don’t”?  Get rid of that sin, walk with us in the way of Christ, listen to our “right” to speak into your life given by Jesus when he made his church and put us in them, and if you don’t, we need to excommunicate you.  

Our physical bodies do this?  Sick organ, sick cells … get right or die.  If that action doesn’t happen, then the whole body becomes sick and dies.  

Enough musing on this.  I’m not surprised that American Christians don’t submit their lives to an authority in terms of some form of church in their lives.  But it doesn’t seem completely right to me. Does it to you?

Success is ...

“Success is not what you have but who you have.”  That’s what he said.  And, in a sense, he is right, absolutely right.  But all week I had been thinking about another conversation.  There the person said, “You have to choose Jesus.”  And that’s right too.  But how does one choose for God if one is spiritually dead?  That's what Paul says we are in Ephesians 2.  Corpses don’t make a lot of choices.  

And when you do choose, then what?  How do we not think, “At least I was smart enough to make the smart choice of for Jesus rather than away from Jesus?”  It’s certainly possible, from that orientation, to think of God’s rescue as something we are a little proud about?  Maybe some, not a lot, not at all? 

Yet if you and I had absolutely nothing to do with it, becoming a Christian I mean, then aren’t we like quizzical?  Maybe we are even almost embarrassed to be saved standing next to someone who hasn’t “chosen” to follow Christ?

 

Back to the original phrase I opened with, “Success is who you have.”  I found myself, doing my Presbyterian thing, and this is a Presbyterian thing, just as the whole do-corpses-choose thing is a Presbyterian thing, … I found myself saying, “Not who YOU have.”  It’s true but can we say, “Who has you”?  Success is not what you have but who has you.  Then it isn’t even success.  It’s more like ... grace.

What Should We Pay a Pastor?

                It's money season at church.  Our Sunday School class entertained the question, "How do we come up with a pastor’s salary?"  Here are a couple of ideas.  Anybody know a high school teacher who is in it for the money?  Same is true for pastors.  A high school teacher has at least a college degree and gets considerable vacation time over the course of a year.  If your pastor’s salary is less than your local high school teacher’s, hmmmm. 

                A church can start by getting ten families together, having each family unit tithe, and putting that total amount of tithe dollars to a pastor’s salary.  We know that the pastor’s salary will then be the average of the ten families.  He or she won’t be an underling at the bottom of the scale nor an “overling” at the top.  (And take the pastor's tithe and make that the program money.)

                Sometimes we talk about pastors and call and if they have a call, if the Lord wants them there, then they go there without regard for salary.  The Lord will provide.  To this I say, “Amen.”  But I also say that everyone is in the priesthood of believers and this call thing is for every Christian, yes?  I usually hear it talked about with pastors however.  Usually I hear it associated with low salaries rather than high.  (“You’re paying really well but I feel called to be there anyway.”??) 

                Some of our calling is basic revelation.  We’re all called to work and glorify God in it.  It’s part of the Adam Covenant if you will.  Name the animals.  Manage creation.  Subdue chaos.  Be a blessing.  We really do not need to go on a prayer retreat to find out if we are to do this.  If anything, we’ll need a special revelation to exempt us from doing this.  Along with this comes a calling on a pastor’s part to manage both his or her own family and the flock of God.  In the community’s economy, if a pastor can’t operate the way the community does, can’t then provide for his family, or is stressed dollar-wise and is distracted from managing the flock, something is wrong.  He or she has a call also to basic maintenance of their families. 

                Congregation’s have budgets and can only do what they can do.  In the scenario above, with the ten families, the personnel costs were 100% of the budget.  As a church gets bigger the percentage changes.  It’s like parenting, once you go from two kids to three, the parents have to trade from man-to-man defense to zone.  A family of five lives more cheaply than five individuals because of shared costs.  And when a church gets bigger they can go to zone and shared costs and all that and the personnel part of the budget will take less of the whole pie.  

                Last week I considered who makes up a board and training being a necessity for the members to live effectively into their role – as helpers. 

                Today, many times we go to a secular model for our church boards rather than a biblical one, and we see the church board as a board of directors which has as a major part of its job to direct and evaluate the pastor.  Perhaps even more that than helping the pastor.  Moses enlisted the first elders and he asked them to be helpers.  There's no where in the text that they are appointed to be his Board of Directors evaluating him.  Not that he couldn't have used that.  Every leader should have this. 

                 Imagine all those boards above, comprised of those particular people, not helping the banker, dentist, and pastor but directing them and evaluating them.  Not that that couldn’t effectively happen or shouldn’t happen.  I’m not saying that.  But again it should not happen without real training in how directing and evaluating and how banking or dentistry or ministry really works. 

One very simple maxim for a board undertaking such a role is, “If you haven’t said clearly how it ought to be, you have less right to evaluate how it is.”  In other words, have the board members and, say, the pastor, ahead of time agreed to what the duties are, what the results desired are?  If not, then what can happen is that evaluation happens against whatever the desire de jour is or whatever the last performance gap was.  “You haven’t given us enough fellowship events.”  There may be a felt need for those events but was that actually asked for?  If no, it isn’t a fair evaluation.  

Usually, we find that our supervisors evaluate.  Sometimes it is peer review.  Sometimes it 360 degrees.  So a banking board, a peer group of dentists, and, in our case, a presbytery would be sane to have doing this role.  Don't you think?

A Board is a Board When ...

                Imagine a banker being given a board (as in Board of Directors) to help him or her with the bank.  The people are housewives, high school coaches, mechanics, and doctors.  They all say, “I’ve touched money.”  They say it with a sense of this qualifying them for being on the board. 

                Imagine a dentist being given a board to help him or her with the dental practice.  The people are plumbers, software engineers, and building contractors.  They all say, “I’ve got teeth and I’ve brushed my teeth.”  They say it with a sense of this qualifying them for being on the board. 

                Imagine a pastor being given a board to help him or her with the church ministry.  The people are lawyers, retired painters, and computer consultants.  They all say, “I’m a Christian.”  They say it with a sense of this qualifying them for being on the board. 

                In each case, the banker, the dentist, and the pastor, may truly be assisted by a perspective that is novice to that particular industry.   Indoctrination has its perils for the professionals.  Wasn’t it groupthink that had space scientists trying to invent a pen that could write without gravity when someone not caught in that suggested using a pencil?  There is always the value of fresh eyes.  There is a consumer and layman’s orientation that is invaluable. 

                But there is also a need for both training and differentiation.  Differentiation, the professional banker has a deeper and wider and more nuanced understanding of money generally than those who just have had dollar bills in their wallets.  Same thing with the dentist who has looked into hundreds of mouths.  Even true with a pastor.  And training those board  members to know some of what the 24x7 professionals know, will help them be real helpers. 

                Pastors, do elder training.  It’ll help you, them, and the whole church.  

What is a Good Pastor?

Albin Institute consultant and author, Roy Oswald, has an exercise in his book Making Your Church More Inviting in which he poses choice points.  They are choices between the good and the best in terms of what will help a church grow.  For example, if a pastor has only time to do one what should he or she do

·         Visit more shut-ins or prepare a better sermon?

·         Attend a wedding reception or go on a retreat with a parish staff?

·         Call on prospective members or conduct a training session for church officers?

·         Visit a bereaved family or help two church officers resolve a conflict?

·         Make a hospital call on a fringe member or attend a continuing education event?

·         Give pastoral counseling to members or attend a planning event with officers?

·         Call on parishioners or recruit leaders for church event?

·         Attend an activity with parish youth or critique a meeting with a church officer?

This is not a both/and but an either/or choice that is posed.  It is posed for both the pastor and the congregation.  It’s a problem  if the pastor chooses one and the congregation chooses another (and don’t think this doesn’t really happen). 

Most of the time, unless they are familiar with delegation, the church opts for that choice which is comforting and shows the pastor as, well, pastoral.  We invest in “pastoral” the meaning of social, relational, person-centered.  These are good and important.  “Pastoral” can also have invested in it the meaning of leader, trainer, maker of tough decisions, pulpiteer.  Typically, however, we instantly think, at least this is what I have found in my experience, of pastors as those who call on members and get to the hospital.  If you do this well, you are a good pastor.  If the church doesn’t grow because you don’t multiply yourself and deputize others, that’s okay, you’re still a good pastor because you called on shut-ins and noticed everyone who was sick.  It’s an approach, and not a bad one, but one that sees member care more naturally rather than organizational development.  However, at the end of the day it really is going to take both for a church to succeed.  Let’s stretch the meaning of pastoral so that this happens.

Strategic Value

If a custodian has been employed by a church for twenty years, and if he or she has been given yearly cost-of-living increases, his or her salary could be a good percent of the personnel budget (especially, if the church is small).  Bring in a new pastor with a fresh seminary degree and it’s conceivable that the new pastor’s salary is pretty close to the “tenured” custodian.   Someone could argue, with reasonableness, that the custodian’s strategic value to the organization is high.  Who else is going to turn on the furnace on cold mornings and chilled parishioners are no good, right?  But when we talk about the weightiness of decisions for the organization’s rise or fall, the issues of confidentiality, the interface with the public, the connection with the key mission of the organization, the number of dollars managed, … we can get a sense of how important a position is to an organization, apart from who is in the position or how long the post has been filled.  The higher the importance, the more pay there should be.  The lower, the less.  Have you weighted the positions in your organization by the seriousness and strategic value?