Joining the conversation started by Jonny Baker and continued by Darren Rowse and Si Johnston

UPDATE: It appears the topic is being touched on by Jason Clark and Phil as well.

Quick Background as I Understand It: The community, moot, has been turned down for a denominational grant, forcing them to re-think their plans, such as bringing on one (or more) paid staff member. This opened the discussion: Why pay staff? What about the priesthood of all believers? Doesn’t this just perpetuate the institutionalism from which some are trying to escape? Does this betray a desire among emerging church leaders to simply slap a fresh coat of paint on the same old house?

At its core, the issue isn’t money. The issue is time. Speaking for myself, I have no interest in setting up a new institution in order to sit on top of it. I do, however, want more time to pursue mission, to equip and encourage my fellow priests to do the same. I’d love to take the 40-50 hours each week I spend working in the office - like now - and devote it to things I cannot do from here. This is why money is important.

Paid clergy (or whatever term you prefer) is not inconsistent with the priesthood of all believers. Paul says a worker is worth his pay. (Granted, Paul did not chose to earn his own keep, but not because he thought it was wrong to accept payment; quite the contrary.) The NT seems to acknowledge that there are benefits gained by freeing some believers from their vocation in order that they might use that time to pursue mission.

While I hesitate to use a business analogy, imagine the church is a business. (Pick the most admirable business you can think of.) Can you imagine that business using only volunteer labor? Sure you can; it’s called a start up. The entrepreneurs devote massive amounts of time into launching the enterprise. They reinvest every penny into the company. They subsist off personal savings and venture capital, aka denominational grants. They sell their possessions. They may even take jobs at other companies in order keep things afloat. Ideally, the business succeeds, and our entrepreneurs can begin to draw a salary. It isn’t extravagant, but it does allow them to quit their other jobs, stop writing grant proposals, and focus on the business.

Can you see the parallels to church? Paying staff isn’t necessarily a perpetuation of the “paid-holy-man-does-all-the-work” mentality. It certainly isn’t an inherent contradiction of NT ecclesiology. (Am I using this word correctly?) It’s an acknowledgement that time is the limiting factor, and money can buy time. Denominational grants, personal savings, etc. are all important to get churches started on their mission. Ideally, those churches will attract/draw/create/whatever, enough members - enough individuals who believe in the mission and are willing to support it - to become self-sustaining. For many churches paid staff is part of the plan to pursue the mission on an increased scale.