Should pastors be paid a salary?

Now, the question may here be asked, What has all this to say to us? What has the church of God to learn from Deuteronomy 18:1-8? In order to answer this question, we must turn to 1 Corinthians 9 where the inspired apostle deals with the very important subject of the support of the Christian ministry — a subject so little understood by the great mass of professing Christians. As to the law of the case, it is as distinct as possible. "Who goes a warfare any time at his own charges? who plants a vineyard, and eats not of the fruit thereof? or who feeds a flock, and eats not of the milk of the flock? Say I these things as a man? or says not the law the same also? For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treads out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? or says he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written; that he that plows should plow in hope; and that he that threshes in hope should be partaker of his hope. If we have sown to you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things? If others be partakers of this power over you, are not we rather? Nevertheless" — here grace shines out, in all its heavenly lustre — "we have not used this power; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ. Do ye not know, that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? Even so has the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel. But" — here, again, grace asserts its holy dignity — "I have used none of these things; neither have I written these things, that it should be so done to me; for it were better for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying void. For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of; for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is to me, if I preach not the gospel! For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward; but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed to me. What is my reward then? Verily that, when I preach the gospel, I may make the gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the gospel." (1 Cor. 9:7-18)

Here we have this interesting and weighty subject presented in all its bearings. The inspired apostle lays down, with all possible decision and clearness the divine law on the point. There is no mistaking it. "The Lord has ordained that they that preach the gospel should live of the gospel;" that, just as the priests and the Levites, of old, lived on offerings presented by the people, so, now, those who are really called of God, gifted by Christ, and fitted by the Holy Ghost, to preach the gospel, and who are giving themselves constantly and diligently, to that glorious work, are morally entitled to temporal support. It is not that they should look to those to whom they preach for a certain stipulated sum. There is no such idea as this in the New Testament. The workman must look to his Master, and to Him alone for support. Woe be to him if he looks to the church, or to men in any way. The priests and Levites had their portion in and from Jehovah. He was the lot of their inheritance. True, He expected the people to minister to Him in the persons of His servants. He told them what to give, and blessed them in giving; it was their high privilege as well as their bounden duty to give; had they refused or neglected, it would have brought drought and barrenness upon their fields and vineyards. (Haggai 1:5-11)

Paul was thus forced to speak of his own case. But the Holy Spirit who inspired him took occasion to lay down what is the Lord's will and pleasure as regards those whose whole time, by His call, is devoted to the Gospel, and the service of God's holy things. It is ordained that "they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel." That evidently is the normal thing. If any who thus labour have means of their own and do not need such help, or if any are found who though needing it are great enough, like Paul, to do without it, that is another matter. Only there is just this difference, that there is no virtue in the declining of help by those who have enough: the virtue is when those who have nothing forego their rights.

A. There ought to be no doubt as to the principle. Those who labour in the word, whether among those without or among those within, are entitled to the care of the church of God. The saints are bound to see that they should be supported without anxiety on their own part. The law itself lays it down, and this, the apostle's twofold citation of Deuteronomy 23:4 shows, as regards not merely the wandering evangelists, but the stationary elders who labour in the word and teaching. It is mischievous to make it a question of poverty. Divine love has its privileges, especially in honouring those who are its chief witnesses and workers. This no doubt is an appeal to the loving compassion of the saints; but no circumstances should hinder the privilege of loving respect and grateful care for those who give themselves up to serve in the word. Hence says the apostle (Galatians 6:6), "let him that is taught in the word communicate to him that teacheth in all good things." There is such a thing as the activity of love, not the need of poverty only; and it would be a loss indeed and shame to the saints, if, because the teacher was not actually poor, there was to be no room for love in the taught. Were such ideas to supplant or enfeeble plain scripture, the saints would be demoralized.

It cannot then be fairly doubted that the English version is justified, and that salary or pay is not the prominent or even true idea, but "honour." Still that there is included every loving consideration of the elders taking the lead or presiding well seems plain from what follows, but this is rather as honorarium than as stipendium. On the one hand it is degrading to the service of Christ when it is made a question of the earning of a trade or profession; but on the other it is a dishonour to the saints who reap the fruit of unremitting and unselfish care in spiritual things if they do not mark their sense of it, not merely where the servants are needy, but in the reciprocity of loving regard where no such want exists. The payment of "honour," nay, "double honour," might be questioned where there was not the apparent desire to prove it. The apostle had enjoined on Timothy, in the preceding verses, to "honour widows;" here he claims honour doubly for elders that take the lead well. That "double" was used for indefinitely great in good or evil, one sees in Matthew 23, Revelation 18:6, as in Isaiah 40:2. The "especially" (μάλιστα) is incompatible with a fixed salary, as indeed is all scripture. The general principle is equally true of those who teach (Galatians 6:6), and of those who preach. (1 Corinthians 9.) Acts 28:10 seems to distinguish the attentions paid during the stay at Melita from the provision of requisites on departing.

Verse 17. Clearly, an elder may be thoroughly reliable in qualities of leadership, even though he may not be a capable teacher of the Word of God; and if so, he is entitled to double honor, but specially if he labors in the giving of the Word, and teaching. True spiritual qualifications should earn the respect of saints: a mere formal appointment would not do this. The ox not to be muzzled would teach us that a laborer is entitled to partake of the fruits of his labor; and in this case, if one devotes such time to the work of the Lord that other regular employment is not sufficient to support him, then the saints of God are to consider themselves responsible for this: "The laborer is worthy of his reward."

The labourer is indeed worthy of his food, and of his hire for there are other necessities beyond food; and the Lord forgot none, as is plain from this twofold statement (Matt. 10:10, Luke 10:7, as cited in 1 Tim. 5:18): so the apostle declares (1 Cor. 9:14), the Lord ordained that those who preach the gospel should live of the gospel, as the law had done before for those that ministered about holy things. But, while insisting on a title so just and true for others, we see the blessed man foregoing it for himself in the same context: 'But I [emphatically] have used none of these things; and I write not these things that it may be so done in my case; for it were good for me rather to die than that any man should make my glorying vain. For if I preach the gospel I have nothing to glory of; for necessity is laid upon me; for woe is to me if I preach not the gospel. For if I do this willingly, I have a reward, but if not of mine own will, I have a stewardship entrusted to me. What then is my reward? That in preaching the gospel, I make the gospel without charge, so as not to use for myself [or, to the full] my title as to the gospel' (1 Cor. 9:15-18). Here was not letter but spirit, not self but Christ, in the full stream of that love which displayed itself to sinners in Christ sent that we who were dead might live through Him and that He might die a propitiation for our sins. It was meet that the highest witness of grace among men should be a manifest giver in his measure as God is infinitely.

But is not a regular, paid ministry sanctioned in Scripture? "Do ye not know, that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? Even so has the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel" (1 Cor. 9:13-14). And so again — "Let him that is taught in the Word communicate unto him that teaches in all good things" (Gal. 6:6). This undoubtedly authorises, what no godly person would ever object to, contributions from those who possess means for the support of those who are labouring in the Lord. A person thus labouring is justified in receiving such gifts as from the Lord, and he is not a true servant if he feels humiliated by so doing. But does this provision justify setting aside God's order of ministry altogether, and substituting for it an organisation of man's? It may be urged that unless a gifted person is confined to a certain congregation or circuit, unless the number of times he exercises his gift is prescribed, and unless the salary received is duly arranged, neither side has any certainty; the congregation may receive too little for its money or the minister too little for his labour. This is quite true, and what does it show? That the moment we depart from God's order, a low fleshly standard of thoughts, reasonings, and motives comes in. Not that I would for one moment imply that all, or nearly all, of those in what is called the "stated ministry" are actuated by the commercial motives here suggested. Thank God, there are and have been multitudes to whom the bare idea of bartering gift for gold, measuring salary by service, would be as abhorrent to their own thoughts as it is contrary to God's Word. But this does not alter the system. If what is called a regular, paid, professional ministry is to be introduced in the place of God's order, this commercial argument is what is urged in its defence; only showing to what poor, low thoughts we descend when we leave God's principle to bring in our own.

This ministry is man's ministry, and receives not a shadow of foundation, but direct condemnation, from Scripture. It was before any such human systems were devised that the words above quoted were spoken. Their application, therefore, was to something quite different from what is called the stated or professional ministry of our day. We see how it was meant to be applied in the case of the apostle. Though for special reasons he would receive nothing from the saints at Corinth, he did from other Churches. When he was in Thessalonica, the Philippians "sent once and again unto his necessity." When he was at Corinth, he says, "I robbed other Churches, taking wages of them, to do you service" (2 Cor. 11:8). But how different this from what is called a paid ministry. Here was one led of the Spirit to give up his time entirely to the Lord's work. The Lord would not let him want, and He supplies his lack by putting it into the hearts of individuals or of Churches to contribute to his necessities. Does anybody say — But how can an ordinary servant trust the Lord? If his faith is not equal to the occasion, it is manifest that the Lord has not called him to go forth in that way, and he will simply make a mistake, to his own grievous injury, and that of others, if he attempts it. In such cases — and they are the vast majority — the Lord's direction is, that he should work for his living, and honest work will not in anywise interfere with the proper exercise of his gift.

(c) It is not said that Philip received salary for preaching, nor any pay whatever; indeed, he could not expect it from the church, for he was not its servant but the LORD'S, who supplies His servants bountifully. Paul — than whom, I suppose, none worked more hard for the Lord — worked with his own hands (Acts 20:33-35) as a tent-maker; Luke as a physician; and even our blessed Lord, to set an example, was not ashamed to be a carpenter (Mark 6:3). So much for the positive evidence against a paid-ministry. For negative testimony, I may say that I do not find one example in all the New Testament to support the practice. We must, however, bear in mind that it is the privilege of saints who are competent to help forward anything that is for the glory of the Lord, and to encourage those — whether evangelists, pastors, or teachers — whom He permits to labour in His word. The principle is plain enough in the word — "They that preach the gospel should live of the gospel;" thus the Apostle Paul assured the Corinthians. But he never used that power: he would be free from all men; and as to the Corinthians, they were too carnal to be permitted to have fellowship with so holy a work. However, when he was in need, the offering of the Philippians was "an odour of a sweet smell, a sacrifice acceptable, well-pleasing to God;'' and he regarded it less as that which he desired, than as that which was "fruit abounding to their account" (Phil. 4:14-19).

God's servants need to live; and "the Lord ordained that they who preach the gospel should live of the gospel" (1 Cor. 9:14). "Let him that is taught in the word communicate to him that teacheth in all good things" (Gal 6:6). "If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things?" These and other scriptures show that the servant of the Lord is to be ministered to by those who have received the Word through him, and by other Christians. From the unsaved they were to take nothing. (See 3 John 5-8.) Think of the incongruity, to say the least, in preaching to a company of unsaved persons, telling them of God's gift, beseeching them to accept it, assuring them they can give nothing to God till they receive Christ, that God will accept nothing from His enemies, then taking up a collection! Does it not make the ungodly scoff? Does it not belie the solemn truth that has been preached?

But to return. While the servant of God is to share in the temporal things of the saints, there is not a hint of a bargain between them. To fix and take a salary is to degrade the whole service, and to make the laborer not a servant of Christ, but of man. He is to look to the Lord who has employed him for support — not to the world, nor even to his brethren. Deep may be the exercises through which he may pass to learn to trust his blessed Master, but precious and real are the results. He is free from all, that he may the better serve all; and his ministry has none of the savor of a bargain, the work of a hireling, but the freshness and spontaneity of love. While the ministrations of the saints are given not grudgingly, as under compulsion, but in the sweet constraint of love as unto Christ.

While the servant looks to his Lord for support, the Lord looks to His people to be the channels of that supply which is as unfailing as His love and care. From the form of the expression it is evidently expected that the Lord's servant should live in the same comfort that is enjoyed by those among whom he ministers. The Lord would not have His saints burdened beyond their means that His servants may be in affluence; nor would He have their appearance or circumstances to be a reproach at once to Himself and His people.

Verse 13 refers to the Levites who served in connection with the temple, and the priests waiting at the altar. The Levites received the tithes of the people (Num. 18:21); and as well as sharing in this, the priests received part of the sacrifices that they offered (Lev. 6:26; 7:6,14). In this way provision was made for their support. And similarly God had ordained that the gospel preacher should "live of the gospel." This does not mean that the preacher himself is at liberty to take collections or to make any charge for his preaching. This is written, not to the servant, but the assembly, to stress the assembly's responsibility of willingly providing such support, not as a salary, but entirely by voluntary exercise. The servant in preaching is to practice the principle, "Freely ye have received; freely give." And the saints are to practice the same principle in their temporal care for the servant.