Would not trade my charcol grill for any kind of gas grill..

The big deal here for me is not so much that Rev. Braxton’s compensation package was excessive (which I do think it was, especially since it was at least twice that of Rev. Forbes). It’s that the church can’t afford it. The Rockefeller endowment is for the maintenance and care of the building only. Even though that restriction has been violated from time to time, it’s not there to support the ongoing ministry of the church – salaries for clergy and staff, social programs, worship, etc. Giving at Riverside, partly due to misperceptions about the endowment, has not been what it should be, especially in recent years. There are six clergy on staff in addition to Rev. Braxton, not to mention the rest of the staff to maintain the social programs, education programs, the music program, etc. The compensation package offered to Rev. Braxton would have necessitated cuts to clergy, staff, and/or programs. That’s problematic.

I think Rev. Braxton made the right decision for himself and his family, and ultimately for Riverside, by resigning. Independent of the compensation, he was not the right fit for this church, with its proud progressive tradition and complicated and sometimes downright nasty church politics. Riverside is not nondenominational, as some media have incorrectly reported. It’s affiliated with both the United Church of Christ and the American Baptist Convention. Rev. Braxton’s style in worship didn’t fit, which is not to say that it could not have evolved to fit with Riverside’s diverse and multifaceted congregation over time – but the hostility he was met with from the day of his arrival would have made that difficult. I have a lot of respect for his scholarship, but from what I’ve heard about the ways he was changing the worship service (the length of the service, the altar call, etc.), I can well imagine that did not calm fears in the congregation about possible fundamentalist tendencies. I wish he’d had more of a chance to evolve towards more harmony with the congregation and its traditions. Riverside does need to be challenged – but not in an autocratic way.

Underlying all of this – and really the fundamental flaw here – is exactly what Rev. Braxton pointed out in his resignation letter. The church is divided against itself, and must heal its divisions before calling another senior minister. The search process was very flawed – the Senior Minister Search Committee (admittedly elected by the congregation) engaged a search firm to narrow down the candidates, reviewed the 200 finalists, and presented one (yes, only one) candidate to the congregation. The congregation heard one sermon by Rev. Braxton before voting to confirm him. If they had voted not to confirm, the search process would have started all over again, and unconfirmed estimates of the cost of the search range from $600,000 to $1,000,000. The congregation trusted the search process and the search committee, and we shouldn’t have. There I do think we all bear responsibility. If the average member had known more about Rev. Braxton’s style and practices, I don’t think he would have been confirmed. I also fault the Church Council (also elected by the congregation), which especially in recent years has been less than transparent and less than thorough in carrying out their governance and oversight duties. For what it’s worth, I have very good friends on both sides of this divisive mess, and Rev. Braxton’s supporters and detractors are not at all divided along racial lines. The press has been eager to jump on this situation as racially-based, but from my perspective, that’s just not true. Some of Rev. Braxton’s most vocal opponents are African American, and some of his fiercest supporters are white. And as for the argument that Rev. Braxton made folks uncomfortable by talking too much about Jesus, well, that’s just plain silly. The single question members are asked when they join the church is, “Do you accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior?” Riverside is most definitely liberal, progressive, and inclusive, but it is a Christian church. All forms of worship are welcomed there, and I’ve been witness to wonderful collaboration by Jewish, Muslim, and Buddhist guests in the chancel, but I don’t think it’s reasonable to criticize Rev. Braxton as a minister because he embraces Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior.

Riverside will only heal itself if all of its members are willing to step up to the plate and take responsibility for the church’s decision-making process. Ultimately I think Rev. Braxton’s departure is the right thing for the church. I wish him Godspeed in his future endeavors, and I regret that Riverside was too tolerant of such a deeply flawed search process that put him in this impossible situation.

I cannot see Jesus accepting it, Paul, John … maybe Peter, but he’d end up repenting and giving to the Gentiles.

When in comes to clergy compensation, there are problems on both ends of the pay scale. Most make too little (once you factor in that most clergy are considered self employed by the gov’t and must therefore fund all their taxes as opposed to a split between employer and employee), some make way too much. I think 450k+ is definitely too much. I think paying a youth minister with a master’s degree 24k a year is too little. Somewhere in between those extremes is a balance, and I’d love to find it.

The fortnightly allowance is increased slightly every three years and there are other increases at (I think) 10 and twenty years of service. Our HQ puts money aside for retirement, and most health requirements are also covered.

This sounds like a lot—it is, really—yet compared to most ‘professionals’ it’s really a pittance. Still, it’s more than enough to live on comfortably and there are absolutely no negotiations to worry about. We know exactly how much we will be getting when we sign up.

1) It’s laughable that someone would call Dr. Braxton a “fundamentalist” (in the linked video). This is despite his “views on Scripture” (I assume he’s no inerrantist by that comment) and his endorsement of same-sex marriage. Like the Dr., I simply have no category for a “Christian church” that doesn’t feel comfortable with calling people to faith in Jesus and preaching from the Scriptures. It’s tragic that Dr. Braxton felt he had to defend himself because of these basic, hum-drum, orthodox, albeit specifically Christian, convictions (Jesus, Bible, faith, etc.) “Fundamentalism” is sadly just an ad hominem to be used whenever you find someone more theologically conservative than yourself.

2. I’m a seminary student as well, but I strongly disagree with those who make appeals to pastors being “professionals.” I think such a vision of the pastor is based on modern corporations, not the biblical witness or the life of the Apostles. I agree w/ John Piper: “We pastors are being killed by the professionalizing of the pastoral ministry. . . professionalism has nothing to do with the essence and heart of the Christian ministry. The more professional we long to be, the more spiritual death we will leave in our wake. For there is no professional childlikeness, there is no professional tenderheartedness. There is no professional panting after God.”

3. At this point, so far as I can discern my heart, if for some asinine reason a church offered me such a salary, I would ask them to lessen the package to something more reasonable and divert the rest to direct ministry opportunities. (Prov. 30:8-9).

4. To give sooo much money to a pastor who has just been hired reminds me more of the NBA Draft than the ministry of Jesus and the Apostles.

5. Yet, if such a gift was given by a congregation to a pastor (or me) who had already loved and served the congregation for 5-10 years, then that’s a glorious, gracious, loving gift to give that pastor (not a signing bonus or payment for services rendered).

6. And still, since God owns all, the pastor would have to give an account to God for every dollar spent of that gift. I would hope it would primarily be used to bless others (sending his children to college, assisting the needy among the church / community, funding mission and church planting efforts, etc.)

7. A pastor should be well compensated, not because his sermons are worth $5,000 each, and his prayers worth $250 each, etc., but because the Church trusts him so much that they want him to be free from financial concerns so that he can be more free to serve and minister among the body and the community.

2. I heard that in New Zealand pastors are paid by the denomination by seniority, regardless of the size or wealth of the church. Whether that’s true or not it’s still a better idea.

3. The compensation gap between pastors is an obscene caving in to Capitalist values and hence evil.

4. The Rockefeller money is probably more of a curse than a benefit.

Interesting post. Thanks for sharing it!

Pastors are professionals (at least PCUSA pastors are). They are required to attend professional school in order to be ordained, making $250,000 plus benefits in NYC is (I would guess) common for doctors and lawyers, why not for pastors?

I agree with several other commenters that there should be fair compensation for all, I’m not sure that means everyone gets paid the same (ie administrators, youth directors, etc.) but your compensation should be commensurate with your gifts and skills.

Finally, I’m not sure what the fuss is about, I’m pretty sure Rod Parsley, Joel Osteen, and others make a butt-ton more money.

Greg

It seems like a lot of money, but in my experience it is so hard to judge the adequacy of another’s compensation. Also, pastor’s compensation is noteriously decieving. In some denominations, some 35-40% is paid to the denomination to for pension/medical/etc. These are real benefits, but not cash in pocket compensation.

Still, in my experience, compensation only becomes an issue when other issues or problems are present.

Good post. Good questions.

Why aren’t churches compensating staff with equal pay for each staff member? Why does senior pastor with 3 kids needs paid more than the youth pastor with 3 kids? Isn’t compensation in the church different than compensation in the marketplace? It’s the most awkward thing on earth graduating from college – pumped about serving God – and having to negotiate a contract with a church….

First off, you have to have a theology of compensation and I think – right now – in most american churches – that theology is getting in the way of ministry…..

I would have more of a complaint if he were a pastor in Detroit or Cincy or Dallas because the cost of living is astronomical in NYC, as it is in California. Moving out here, I am breaking even with what I make but I am still never going to be able to buy a house at my current salary. If I were living in Michigan and making what I currently make, I would be owning a pretty nice house and other amenities.

While pastors may be underpaid, I feel that administrative people get the shaft in the long run. They run the church and keep it going daily, while the spiritual leaders are busy praying, counseling, etc. I think if I were ever to be an advocate for social justice, it would be how little administrative people get paid compared to the rest of the staff.

Good post Adam.

Beyond that we are simply making judgment calls based on our perceptions of what was going on. Do we know how much he gave away? How his family allocated the money? What of that money was spent on personal ministry (you ever had dinner out in NYC for 4-6 people? $$$!).

I would just encourage those of us to look at this situation and believe the best in our brother. This doesn’t meant that we have to agree with the figure of the compensation, but believe that it was a sensible amount for his services (however the church decided that).

http://www.ucc.org/news/letters-the-riverside-church.html

This letter specifically states that the $600,000 figure is erroneous. I am not sure that it changes your central point, but you should probably begin the conversation with the correct figures.