Example: we have a teenage guy who NEEDS individual care from a man (his father passed away 2 years ago). His mother (a widow) has 4 children and they ALL need individual care from a male.

I can’t tell you how many men in our church have approached me and told me that I need to be ministering to him. Lots of godly men – who could be doing the exact thing they’re asking me to do – approach me.

The Problem: because their tithe money goes towards my paycheck, their imaginations have been limited to thinking of a professional minister to do work that could be done by laypeople.

No one wants to plan retreats, or ski trips, or weekly teaching, or organizing small groups. I am paid to do that. I am not paid to do what laypeople ought to be doing.

However, my paycheck seems to wipe that idea from their mind.

That is the problem. The paycheck doesn’t hurt my mission as it frees me up to spend lots of time my calling. However, it cripples the imagination of those in the body.

And that problem might be big enough to justify me having less time to focus on my mission….

Ro – Iove that you’re “bi-vocational” yet only get paid by one of those vocations : ) Actually, I think I’ve landed in pretty much the same spot. Thanks for contributing your experiences.

Steven – I didn’t realize you were bi-vocational. I don’t know why…but I like how you’ve chosen to set your work within the context of the Daniel story. I’d love to hear more about that sometime.

Michael – Thanks for the link, I’ll add it to the body of my post.

JR – Great, thanks for pointing us to that interview!

Dave M – Thanks for your comments. I’m really glad to have the perspective of someone who doesn’t self identify as a “leader.” I think if more full-time pastors knew they sometimes appeared “somewhat disconnected from the context” they might rethink their weekly priorities. In all fairness, I know several full-time senior pastors who are aware of that and try to combat it. Thanks again Dave.

Rick – Ben’s pretty smart : )

snc – You make a great point about being careful regarding our other vocation. This isn’t talked about enough IMO.

Frank – Thanks for the transparency. Good thoughts, as always.

In the interest of transparency I am a pastor of what I would call a missional/emerging type congregation and although our board has decided a salary I should be paid I have not drawn a salary from the church in quite a few years now. But I do draw manse expenses and the church has gifted me small amounts of money in the past (to meet needs that arose – we do the same for other congregants who have found themselves in need).

I do think that a minister is worth paying. But I think that many, like myself, don’t do it for the money. If we had a larger financial base in our church I would probably draw the salary the church decided I should have. But we don’t and so I don’t, simply because I can afford not to.

But here is the other side of it. I don’t think that the minister of a missional model can afford to not be connected to the mission. So if their salary means they can seclude themselves in the church, then they might want to rethink that. Perhaps they could afford several paid ministers who were bi-vocational, or do what I have done – go back to school. School is not just a place of working out issues that come up in ministry but it is also part of where I practice being in our mission.

I’ve been bi-vocational much of my ministry life. So that is my bias.

From my experience of being a bi-vocational missional church planter, I would just add that one needs to be careful about what kind of work they perform on the other side. Distraction, busyness, losing focus and passion can all occur if the other job takes up too much time and energy.

geoff