How wealth relates.....

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by Kamakiri

I have to say I'm thoroughly enjoying the other thread in this particular forum

Today's topic for discussion....when wealth relates to politics and religion, do you personally find it more difficult to accept a rich career politician, or a rich representative of God? Or both? At what level of sustainance do you draw the line for credibility?

It's always nice to learn some perspective to understand Bible verses. The phrase we have often heard - that's it is harder for a rich man to go to heaven than for a camel to pass through the eye of the needle - does not describe an impossible task. Apparently, the ranchers of the day used a gate to the pens that was very low and narrow, called the eye of the needle. The Camels had to get to their knees to pass through it. It was a matter of some difficulty, but with the right effort and focus on the task, it was done.

Similarly, the rich person, with all of the doors that are opened by money, faces untold temptations in life. Such person also faces the risk that the wealth takes precedence over everything else in life. When the desire for greater wealth overcomes a person, it is difficult to follow the golden rule. I sincerely doubt that there are many people who reached positions of wealth or influence without giving themselves a boost on the back of other people, and probably stepping on a few faces along the way. The focus on obtaining wealth interferes with the focus on other things that might be expected of an adherent to a particular religion (beyond keeping one's pants zipped).

EDIT: OK, looking back at the question, it looks like I didn't answer it. I believe the level of compensation paid to a pastor should reflect the level of training required to hold the position (a Doctor of Divinity, roughly equal to a PHD); the responsibility for managing an organization that serves from 25 to 2500 individuals; and the visitation and counseling demands placed on the schedule. A pastor should make what a CEO of a similar size organization SHOULD make (which, for most, is considerably less than they actually make).

Regards,

D-Ray

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

OK, looking back at the question, it looks like I didn't answer it. I believe the level of compensation paid to a pastor should reflect the level of training required to hold the position (a Doctor of Divinity, roughly equal to a PHD); the responsibility for managing an organization that serves from 25 to 2500 individuals; and the visitation and counseling demands placed on the schedule. A pastor should make what a CEO of a similar size organization SHOULD make (which, for most, is considerably less than they actually make).

In a market economy, there's nothing other than supply and demand of particular skills/abilities that should dictate what one makes. I just don't buy the pastor/CEO analogy. If the guy can walk on water (literally) or mass produce loaves and fishes, OK. But talking about walking on water and loaves and fishes is another thing altogether.

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by finnbow

In a market economy, there's nothing other than supply and demand of particular skills/abilities that should dictate what one makes. I just don't buy the pastor/CEO analogy. If the guy can walk on water (literally) or mass produce loaves and fishes, OK. But talking about walking on water and loaves and fishes is another thing altogether.

Finn, you just contradicted yourself. You indicated that you have a problem with a religious leader whose exorbitant lifestyle is drawn from contributions by his congregation. (So do I.) But to be consistent with the market-based analysis you set forth above, if the religious leader puts on a show and presents a message that results in contributions at a high level, isn't the market for that particular service at that level?

If the salary of a CEO is based on a market manipulated by cronyism, which artificially inflates executive compensation, it that really permitting market forces to limit executive salaries?

My point with respect to pastors was not to suggest that they should be getting million dollar bonuses and huge salaries. I was merely suggesting that when a salary approaching six figures fits within the budget of the organization, the educational background, duties, and skills justify it (in my example, the pastor did much more than preaching) I was also suggesting that the actual contribution by the CEO of a similarly sized commercial enterprise should be valued in the same ballpark.

Regards,

D-Ray

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

Finn, you just contradicted yourself. You indicated that you have a problem with a religious leader whose exorbitant lifestyle is drawn from contributions by his congregation. (So do I.) But to be consistent with the market-based analysis you set forth above, if the religious leader puts on a show and presents a message that results in contributions at a high level, isn't the market for that particular service at that level?

Perhaps so. But what I was first referring to was the type of tele-evangelist (or radio-based) that sells salvation. To me, that reeks of hucksterism/Elmer Gantry. Despite the appeal of the free market system, financial success derived from marketing snake oil isn't a laudable enterprise, IMHO.

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Perhaps so. But what I was first referring to was the type of tele-evangelist (or radio-based) that sells salvation. To me, that reeks of hucksterism/Elmer Gantry. Despite the appeal of the free market system, financial success derived from marketing snake oil isn't a laudable enterprise, IMHO.

I don't think we really disagree here. Whether one purports to be preaching the Gospel, or a get rich quick scheme, a huckster is a thief. I was suggesting that it is not wrong for a pastor to be paid a comfortable living, when what he earns is probably below the market value for one in private industry who has similar training and similar responsibilities. Look at how much motivational speakers make - unless they live in a van down by the river.

Regards,

D-Ray

[Grumpy]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

I was suggesting that it is not wrong for a pastor to be paid a comfortable living, when what he earns is probably below the market value for one in private industry who has similar training and similar responsibilities. Look at how much motivational speakers make - unless they live in a van down by the river.

Regards,

D-Ray

Your point is not even apples to pineapples. No I am not suggesting they not get paid, but having ones own country, bank and religion is ludicrous.

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by Grumpy

Your point is not even apples to pineapples. No I am not suggesting they not get paid, but having ones own country, bank and religion is ludicrous.

My post was referring to Finn. When I said that what a pastor of a large church makes should compare to what a CEO should make, I was suggesting that, for the value many CEOs bring to the world, their salaries should shrink to something closer to what a minister makes.

I agree with you that churches should not be like businesses. I assume that you're referring in your post to the Vatican and it's various arms and branches. During the time of the Holy Roman Empire, the church had become a very political institution and political power. The institution was rife with corruption. I have observed that the more a church is run like a business (or a government), the more it moves away form its spiritual purpose. My wife worked in an administrative position in a church for awhile, but left very disappointed. Apparently you don't want to see the business operations of a church any more than you want to see sausage being made.

When a church is really fulfilling its purpose you see more stories like Kam's. My experience in the church I grew up in was that it was more like an extended family than a separate organization. People do watch out for each other and help each other. That is my experience in the church I attend now, as well, but it would more so if I stayed as involved as I would like to be.

To go back to the point of my earlier post, I have always appreciated having a church leader who has had doctoral level training. That allows him or her to bring a much deeper meaning to things we might have learned in church before. I have mentioned before how much I got out of attending a Sunday school class taught by a pastor who had previously been a Greek instructor in the seminary. IMHO, pastors' compensation should reflect the level of expertise they bring to the position. However, because I don't see a pastor's job as a salesman, like the others here, I consider most televangelists to be snake oil salesmen.

Regards,

D-ray