Got called back into ministry today…

[Amargosa]

I’m a retired worship director at my church. Two years ago, I asked the elders (of which I was one) for permission to retire. I gave them 1.5 years notice. They said okay and hired someone else relatively quickly. Normally, when a worship pastor leaves the position, they leave the church and both… “move on”. But my church is my family. When dad retires, he doesn’t leave his family, does he? No.

After church today, I got an unexpected phone call From the head of the elder board. They want to hire me back. So, it looks like God is calling me back into ministry. It was totally a random event. Of course, God has a plan. So, I’m going to take the offer at least temporarily. What is hard is I’m no youngster. What is easy is I love worshipping The LORD. This is of Him and I trust in Him. The Lord is my strength. He was Moses’ strength when Moses was called at 80 years old.

So, please pray for me as I step out once again to serve the church of Christ.

 

[shittim]

Experiencing His move in this as I pray, will continue.
The end time revival needs all hands on deck.
blessings,

 

[Amargosa]

Thanks @shittim

i guess it’s like the old saying, “There is no such thing as retirement for a Christian.”

On the plus side, I’m younger than Keith Richard’s.

 

[shittim]

And not near as rough looking?
Bless you, friend

 

[Howdy]

I still cannot understand people being hired and paid to do the Lord's work.
Every place of teaching or leading in our congregation is a volunteer position.
This includes those who mow the grass and clean the bathrooms.
No one gets paid. They do it out of love for our Lord and each other.

 

[shittim]

I believe I understand this and have always been taught the other apostles were supported by local congregations as they understood supporting their Rabbi.
Paul supported himself by his tent making as he was sent to the non-Jews.
blessings

 

[Avery]

Im just wondering if any of you have ever been in full time ministry? No condemnation, just wondering…

 

[shittim]

Aren't we all?

 

[Avery]

Aren't we all?

right. But I mean as a vocation. military chaplains are paid. Hospital and prison chaplains are paid. Do you think they should give back their salaries, get a full time job and minister on the side? I agree we are all called to minister, but I’m thinking it’s not bad that some pastors receive a salary. I think some may abuse that but not all.

 

[shittim]

"The workman is worthy of his hire", is the verse I believe applies to paying our clergy.
blessings

 

[Gideon300]

right. But I mean as a vocation. military chaplains are paid. Hospital and prison chaplains are paid. Do you think they should give back their salaries, get a full time job and minister on the side? I agree we are all called to minister, but I’m thinking it’s not bad that some pastors receive a salary. I think some may abuse that but not all.

It depends on the workload. I was part of a fellowship where the leader was a contractor who earned good money. He was always giving, never taking. When he retired, the fellowship supported him and his wife. God honoured his giving. One of the fellowship was given a lot of money by his family. He bought a home for the leader. We met in the leader's home so there was no expensive building to pay for.

Paul worked to support himself but there were times when the church supported him. It's not a hard and fast rule.

 

[Gideon300]

I still cannot understand people being hired and paid to do the Lord's work.
Every place of teaching or leading in our congregation is a volunteer position.
This includes those who mow the grass and clean the bathrooms.
No one gets paid. They do it out of love for our Lord and each other.

It depends on the workload. 1 Timothy 5:17 & 18
"Elders who lead effectively are worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, “Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain,” and, “The worker is worthy of his wages.”…

In this context, "double honour" plainly refers to financial compensation. However, if a fellowship agrees to go unpaid, fine.

I've tried to hold down a full time job and have a bible study, youth group meetings and prayer meeting as well. I added a part time Bible course as well. It was stupid. I was exhausted, my job suffered and so did my spiritual life. Too busy for God? Too busy!

 

[Howdy]

It depends on the workload. 1 Timothy 5:17 & 18
"Elders who lead effectively are worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, “Do not muzzle an ox while it is treading out the grain,” and, “The worker is worthy of his wages.”…

In this context, "double honour" plainly refers to financial compensation. However, if a fellowship agrees to go unpaid, fine.

I've tried to hold down a full time job and have a bible study, youth group meetings and prayer meeting as well. I added a part time Bible course as well. It was stupid. I was exhausted, my job suffered and so did my spiritual life. Too busy for God? Too busy!

I agree it depends on the work load, and I do not judge a pastor who is
fully supported by a local church. But, in my opinion, if he is paid a full salary by a local church he should spend all his time working for that church and not work at a job for extra money.
But in my experience only a few pastors spend more time in fulfilling his ministry that the average person spends working at a job.
I cannot accept that a person who is not a pastor expects to be paid or accepts payment for leading a song service, playing the piano, teaching a Bible class or cleaning the bathrooms.
That money would be better spent on those in need in the community.
I spent over 40 years serving as a pastor, teaching a Bible study on Sunday morning, Sunday night, and Wednesday night while working 50 plus hours a week at a job. I never had a problem doing both. I enjoyed every day of my work for my Lord and the company I worked for and thanked God for all the opportunities He gave me.
I never received payment for my work with the church.

 

[Amargosa]

I agree it depends on the work load, and I do not judge a pastor who is
fully supported by a local church. But, in my opinion, if he is paid a full salary by a local church he should spend all his time working for that church and not work at a job for extra money.
But in my experience only a few pastors spend more time in fulfilling his ministry that the average person spends working at a job.
I cannot accept that a person who is not a pastor expects to be paid or accepts payment for leading a song service, playing the piano, teaching a Bible class or cleaning the bathrooms.
That money would be better spent on those in need in the community.
I spent over 40 years serving as a pastor, teaching a Bible study on Sunday morning, Sunday night, and Wednesday night while working 50 plus hours a week at a job. I never had a problem doing both. I enjoyed every day of my work for my Lord and the company I worked for and thanked God for all the opportunities He gave me.
I never received payment for my work with the church.

Thank you for serving The Lord without pay.

If a church needs a plumber, electrician or roof repair, should that worker be paid? How about paying someone to tune the piano every 6 months?

The WL/piano player does more than tickle the ivory. They lead a team (sometimes it's like hearding cats), schedule, plan and rehearse. They put together sheet music books for the team and lead the tech. They lead technical, like audio, video and online streaming. All our first time visitors found us online.

 

[Amargosa]

From Should churches pay their pastors a salary

The short answer is yes. The Bible specifically states that pastors should be paid a salary. First Corinthians 9:13-14 says, "Do you not know that those who are employed in the temple service get their food from the temple, and those who serve at the altar share in the sacrificial offerings? In the same way, the Lord commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel."

The confusion as to whether a pastor should be paid a salary may arise from the ministries of Jesus and Paul. Jesus didn't seem to request money from those He taught and healed. Instead, He slept where He could (Matthew 8:20) and accepted whatever food people offered (Matthew 9:10; Mark 14:3). In 2 Corinthians 11:7 and 9, Paul explains that he took no money for his personal expenses from the church in Corinth. Should pastors follow in his footsteps?

The problem with basing that belief on the 2 Corinthians 11 passage is that the situation was very specific. Paul had a hard time with the Corinthians—getting them to understand and live out the gospel. Verse 8 shows that in order to concentrate on his efforts to teach the Corinthians the basics, he did not ask them to support him. Instead, he "robbed other churches by accepting support from them." Paul didn't literally "rob" the churches in Philippi, Colossae, and Thessalonica, but he did live off their donations when he ministered in Corinth.

A somewhat common belief in modern days is that if salvation is by grace, ministry should be free. After all, the pastor only works two hours a week. This is a matter of what a church wants and needs in a pastor. If they want someone who is available for counseling, directing volunteers, immediate emergencies, and shepherding, that is a full-time job, and it is stealing to pay less than a full-time salary. If a church cannot afford a full-time salary, they may need to find a pastor who is flexible enough to take a second job. Everyone involved, however, will have to approach the situation with grace, realizing that a part-time pastor will not be able to accomplish as much or be as involved as a full-time minister.

But even if a church merely wants pulpit-supply—a pastor who only preaches on Sunday and does nothing else—you still get what you pay for. Education costs, as does taking the time to write good, applicable sermons. This also goes for Christian education and ministries. Sometimes such things can be found free online. Sometimes a church is fortunate enough to have an educated teacher who can lead a class. But when anyone works in ministry as a vocation, compensating for their time and allowing them to provide for their families is only fair.

 

[Amargosa]

From Should pastors be paid a salary?

A church should definitely provide for the financial needs of its pastor(s) and any other full-time ministers. First Corinthians 9:14 gives the church clear instruction: “The Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.” We pay people to prepare and serve our physical food; shouldn’t we also be willing to pay those who see to our spiritual food? And, honestly, which is more important—physical food or spiritual food—based on Matthew 4:4?

First Timothy 5:17–18 says, “The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, ‘Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain,’ and ‘The worker deserves his wages.’” There are several points made in this passage. Church elders should be honored, and this honor includes wages. Those elders who serve the church well—especially teachers and preachers—should receive double honor. They have earned it. It would be cruel to work an ox while denying it grain, and we should take care not to treat our pastors cruelly. Let them share in the material blessings of the congregation they serve. Our pastors are worth more than many oxen.

There is nothing spiritual about making a pastor “suffer for the Lord.” Yes, a pastor has been divinely called to his ministry, but it does not follow that a congregation should say, “Let God take care of him.” God says the local church is responsible to take care of him and his family. Caring for the spiritual needs of a congregation is an important work—probably more important than other things we normally spend money on, such as meeting our physical needs, maintaining our vehicles, and entertaining ourselves. See 1 Corinthians 9:7.

It is true that the apostle Paul supported himself as he ministered in Corinth (1 Corinthians 9:12). He drew no salary from the Corinthians. But he made it clear that he did this as a voluntary sacrifice on their behalf, “that in preaching the gospel I may offer it free of charge, and so not make full use of my rights as a preacher of the gospel” (verse 18). Paul did take wages from other churches (2 Corinthians 11:8). His arrangement in Corinth was the exception, not the rule.

Sometimes a church is just not able to provide sufficient finances for a pastor. The pastor in such cases is forced to be bi-vocational, having no choice but to work outside the church to support his family. This is regrettable but sometimes necessary. It is usually better for a pastor to be paid full-time so he can fully dedicate himself to the Lord’s work of ministering to and shepherding the congregation God has entrusted to him.

 

[I_am_Canadian]

From Should pastors be paid a salary?

A church should definitely provide for the financial needs of its pastor(s) and any other full-time ministers. First Corinthians 9:14 gives the church clear instruction: “The Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.” We pay people to prepare and serve our physical food; shouldn’t we also be willing to pay those who see to our spiritual food? And, honestly, which is more important—physical food or spiritual food—based on Matthew 4:4?

First Timothy 5:17–18 says, “The elders who direct the affairs of the church well are worthy of double honor, especially those whose work is preaching and teaching. For the Scripture says, ‘Do not muzzle the ox while it is treading out the grain,’ and ‘The worker deserves his wages.’” There are several points made in this passage. Church elders should be honored, and this honor includes wages. Those elders who serve the church well—especially teachers and preachers—should receive double honor. They have earned it. It would be cruel to work an ox while denying it grain, and we should take care not to treat our pastors cruelly. Let them share in the material blessings of the congregation they serve. Our pastors are worth more than many oxen.

There is nothing spiritual about making a pastor “suffer for the Lord.” Yes, a pastor has been divinely called to his ministry, but it does not follow that a congregation should say, “Let God take care of him.” God says the local church is responsible to take care of him and his family. Caring for the spiritual needs of a congregation is an important work—probably more important than other things we normally spend money on, such as meeting our physical needs, maintaining our vehicles, and entertaining ourselves. See 1 Corinthians 9:7.

It is true that the apostle Paul supported himself as he ministered in Corinth (1 Corinthians 9:12). He drew no salary from the Corinthians. But he made it clear that he did this as a voluntary sacrifice on their behalf, “that in preaching the gospel I may offer it free of charge, and so not make full use of my rights as a preacher of the gospel” (verse 18). Paul did take wages from other churches (2 Corinthians 11:8). His arrangement in Corinth was the exception, not the rule.

Sometimes a church is just not able to provide sufficient finances for a pastor. The pastor in such cases is forced to be bi-vocational, having no choice but to work outside the church to support his family. This is regrettable but sometimes necessary. It is usually better for a pastor to be paid full-time so he can fully dedicate himself to the Lord’s work of ministering to and shepherding the congregation God has entrusted to him.

Actually the Mennonites have a different view on this subject, they believe that a pastor has to self sustaining and can't take anything from the church, and consider that a pastor taking a salary from the church is a pastor that is greedy of filthy lucre.

 

[Aaron56]

Actually the Mennonites have a different view on this subject, they believe that a pastor has to self sustaining and can't take anything from the church, and consider that a pastor taking a salary from the church is a pastor that is greedy of filthy lucre.

+1 for the use of lucre.

 

[Howdy]

Thank you for serving The Lord without pay.

If a church needs a plumber, electrician or roof repair, should that worker be paid? How about paying someone to tune the piano every 6 months?

The WL/piano player does more than tickle the ivory. They lead a team (sometimes it's like hearding cats), schedule, plan and rehearse. They put together sheet music books for the team and lead the tech. They lead technical, like audio, video and online streaming. All our first time visitors found us online.

We only pay for service we cannot do ourselves.
What you are talking about in the last paragraph sound like you are putting on a stage show, not leading the church in singing hymn that praise the Lord and brings joy to the heart of the people.
I believe that a church service should be all about the people singing praises to the Lord and the sound teaching of the word, not a stage show to entertain.
The old fashion way has worked for generations and is still bringing souls to know Jesus as Lord and Savior.
Too many people are looking to be entertained in a church service, not to hear the Gospel proclaimed and too many churches are giving them what they want.
I will not be a part of such worldly events disguised as a worship service.
What you are doing is a waste of money that could be better spent helping the needy.
That is my belief.

 

[Amargosa]

We only pay for service we cannot do ourselves.
What you are talking about in the last paragraph sound like you are putting on a stage show, not leading the church in singing hymn that praise the Lord and brings joy to the heart of the people.
I believe that a church service should be all about the people singing praises to the Lord and the sound teaching of the word, not a stage show to entertain.
The old fashion way has worked for generations and is still bringing souls to know Jesus as Lord and Savior.
Too many people are looking to be entertained in a church service, not to hear the Gospel proclaimed and too many churches are giving them what they want.
I will not be a part of such worldly events disguised as a worship service.
What you are doing is a waste of money that could be better spent helping the needy.
That is my belief.

“What you are talking about in the last paragraph sound like you are putting on a stage show, not leading the church in singing hymn that praise the Lord and brings joy to the heart of the people.

I will not be a part of such worldly events disguised as a worship service”

Those two statements create a “straw man” argument. Create a fictitious and objectionable scenario, then condemn it.

You have no idea what is going on.