Can a Church Worker Be Paid On Commission?
Seth Godin posted this not too long ago:
In a digital world where everything can be measured, we all work on commission. And why not? If you do great work and it works, you should get rewarded. And if you don’t, it’s hard to see why a rational organization would keep you on.
My question to all of us who work in a church is this: Can someone who works in ministry be paid “on commission”? If so, how? If not, why not?
As our society integrates more fully into the digital world, how might the “commission” principle apply to digital pastors and evangelists? What would be some respectable, faithful ways that a church or ministry might implement this?
- A certain percentage of online giving goes towards a bonus?
- Online bookstore sales become part of a commission?
- The more hits on ones blog the higher the salary?
- Would the amount of Twitter followers and Facebook friends factor in?
Godin raises an interesting point, but I’m not sure if it translates into the church world. I think it would be worth a shot. Why? As the Church evolves inside of the modern framework, compensation packages will necessarily need to be diversified. Simply put, the money won’t be in the offering plates that same way that it used to be.
The days of wealthy congregants tithing a majority of the church budget are fast coming to a close. What you’ll see is more people giving, but the amount they give will be less. The Church will soon enter the world of “microfinance” and she will find a way to do ministry around it.
Which is why, I think, commissions may just become a part of the church worker’s pay structure.
Don't Christian musicians fall into this category with album sales and concert sales?
Why … I suppose they would! Brothas and sistas gotta eat, right?
Isn't the deeper issue here not so much how ministry workers are paid but instead what appears to be a lack of tithing on the part of the church family? I know giving is down due to the economy, but this was an issue even during good economic times. People look at their budget and say, "We can't tithe because won't have enough to pay our bills." Of course, they forget we serve a God who has all abundance. I've had people tell me they don't tithe because "they can't afford it."
Maybe it's just me but I think if we had more open and honest discussions with people about tithing and the biblical direction on giving, we wouldn't need to be concerned about perhaps having to pay ministry workers on a commission basis.
I think you're onto something with the tithing. If everyone tithed the 10% that we consider to be the Biblical norm, a whole BUNCH of problems would get fixed.
However, as you pointed out, this ain't happenin'. What's worse, it seems to be going in the opposite direction. In that case, churches will have decisions to make in the face of this reality.
Do you think commissions would be a feasible route?
hmm, i have never thought about it, but i think it is good to do this forward thinking on the issue. i was on staff at churches for 13 years, and now i lead a non-profit ministry, and i have never really been comfortable with the way churches pay their staff. i will have to think about this some more. thanks for the thoughts!
What's the nature of your non-profit? Also, what made you uncomfortable about the pay structure at the church you were at?
here is info about the non-profit i lead – http://www.parkviewclc.com
my problem has been more philosophical. it bothers me that so much of a church's budget goes to staffing which seems to create a special class. if pastors were able to generate income, directly or indirectly, while still allowing the church to be able to focus funds on their mission, it would make me feel a lot better.
here is info about the non-profit i lead – http://www.parkviewclc.com
my problem has been more philosophical. it bothers me that so much of a church's budget goes to staffing which seems to create a special class. if pastors were able to generate income, directly or indirectly, while still allowing the church to be able to focus funds on their mission, it would make me feel a lot better.
here is info about the non-profit i lead – http://www.parkviewclc.com
my problem has been more philosophical. it bothers me that so much of a church's budget goes to staffing which seems to create a special class. if pastors were able to generate income, directly or indirectly, while still allowing the church to be able to focus funds on their mission, it would make me feel a lot better.
It's not the way churches pay staff, or the amount of the budget that goes to staff that causes the gulf between the ministerial and lay classes. It's the tendency to think of ministers as "the pros", who do all the work for the church. In wealthy areas they are thought of like hired help, and in poor areas they are the people in charge. But rarely are they thought of as regular people who serve alongside the congregation. That is the source of the "special class" problem.
Pastors getting paid by their congregations is a good thing. It places their financial livelihood in the hands of the people they serve, rather than elsewhere. That way their loyalties can remain undivided.
1 of 2 — in my old ministry days i initiated dialogue on the commission principle, albeit not individual commissions but rather in the context of the whole, collective butts-in-the-seats and money-in-the-bank goals. these are the two real goals of a good share of houses of pseudo-worship, as if that growth automatically represents godly fruitfulness. that to me is the danger of the commission idea. as much as i believe some motivation/accountability is needed for a "fruit-bearing" focus, i also believe it's a trap to equate increase of cash and/or butts as proof of commission-worthy godliness.
peace, tina
ps–congrats on your sweet new baby boy!
2 of 2 — another old idea was to specifically design budgets w/line items tied to goals, values, mission, etc.; to eliminate the disconnect that always exists between reality and rhetoric. then analysis would naturally happen based on this, and it would potentially be like a commission situation, only from the back end, lending itself to the most productive areas & people being rewarded accordingly. but then again, it's a slippery slope to think of ministry with personal outcome $ goals in mind, to keep the godly aspects of this while avoiding the potential pitfalls. also there's not enough space here to talk about the development of additional revenue streams both as a church body and as individuals which could, and actually MUST, contribute to future ministry revenue. but basically this paragraph was my way of saying, i get where you're coming from, and it almost clicks, but could maybe stand a tiny dose of perspective. good luck processing it all through…
peace, tina
ps–congrats on your sweet new baby boy!
My main problem with the commission idea is that, rather than encouraging pastors to speak the truth even when it's difficult or devisive, it will encourage them to say what needs to be said to keep the money coming. And if we're talking real commission based pay, then it won't only affect the greedy, but the regular guy who has to feed his kids.
If the traditional support model is on the way out, which I find unlikely, then the best option left will be bivocational ministers. New methods will arise, but as long as they're tied to performance, the church should look elsewhere.
Thanks Tina!
Thanks Tina!