PCA's Ministerial Glut

[greenbaggins]

As a PCA minister working out of bounds, I think I sympathize most with the statement of Pergamum. Send them out into the other denominations. The CRC classis I work with is grateful for this. In fact, some of them are saying, "What couldn't we do with 500 PCA men in our pulpits to reverse the trend of liberalism in the CRC?" I was the first in our Presbytery to work out of bounds. But there are now two, and soon to be three. There are loads of country churches in the Midwest who would love a pastor to death, and actually pay a very livable salary (the cost of living is often minuscule in country settings), but cannot get any pastors interested because the best and the brightest all want to go to the city. Sad.

 

[Romans922]

As a PCA minister working out of bounds, I think I sympathize most with the statement of Pergamum. Send them out into the other denominations. The CRC classis I work with is grateful for this. In fact, some of them are saying, "What couldn't we do with 500 PCA men in our pulpits to reverse the trend of liberalism in the CRC?" I was the first in our Presbytery to work out of bounds. But there are now two, and soon to be three. There are loads of country churches in the Midwest who would love a pastor to death, and actually pay a very livable salary (the cost of living is often minuscule in country settings), but cannot get any pastors interested because the best and the brightest all want to go to the city. Sad.

Um, I'm game Lane (HA!). I'm graduating seminary in May, seeking a call, my wife and I want to go North, and I don't necessarily want to be in a city. Any help Lane?

 

[greenbaggins]

I'll work on that one for you, Andrew. I will especially research churches in my area. ;-)

 

[Kevin]

OK, I know that you OSP guys will not like this economic analogy but...

Supply (of seminary grads) only exceeds demand AT THE CURRENT PRICE.

I have been a deacon long enough to have heard from several men that they should be paid more because of their EDUCATION. Sorry (& no offence intended) but NO ONE is paid based on how long they have been in school. Your dentist does not make 200k a year because he went to school for 7 years but because people want his services.

If you are looking for a church that can pay you the salary that you "deserve" because of your education, then you will likely still be looking next year. Rather, find a church that needs YOU and grow it till it can pay more.

In other words, cut the price (first year salary expectations for seminary grads) and the market will clear the surplus!

 

[ReformationArt]

OK, I know that you OSP guys will not like this economic analogy but...

Supply (of seminary grads) only exceeds demand AT THE CURRENT PRICE.

I have been a deacon long enough to have heard from several men that they should be paid more because of their EDUCATION. Sorry (& no offence intended) but NO ONE is paid based on how long they have been in school. Your dentist does not make 200k a year because he went to school for 7 years but because people want his services.

If you are looking for a church that can pay you the salary that you "deserve" because of your education, then you will likely still be looking next year. Rather, find a church that needs YOU and grow it till it can pay more.

In other words, cut the price (first year salary expectations for seminary grads) and the market will clear the surplus!

Kevin, although I don't disagree with your point entirely I have a couple of notes to add:

1. The church does need to be concerned with the wellbeing of her pastor. In most calls today, the phrase " to free you of worldly care" is normally included. However, most pastors are not so freed from worldly care by their salaries. I know many pastors who either work second jobs, or their wives work full time so they can afford to live. In addition, the church wants men who have gone through 7-8 years of schooling (4 years of college and 3-4 years of seminary), and so many of these men will have 7-8 years of debt! I have a good deal of student loans, and not as much as many men I know. I do know men who have labored in churches for 20+ years, and have never been able to afford their own home, or put any money away for retirement. I admire these men greatly for their selflessness and sacrifice! However, that is shameful for the church (in my opinion).

2. It is not up to the man to grow the church. The Lord builds His body! We do everything we can to be an instrument of the Holy Spirit, but it is the Lord who brings the growth. Just because a church doesn't grow numerically, does not mean there is something wrong with the man, the message he preaches, or the methods he uses.

 

[KenPierce]

People hear a preacher who is not flamboyant and energetic, and not working to keep their attention focused on him with stories and power point technology, and they say that he is a bad preacher, even though he exegeted the text well and presented nourishment for the flock that week. I agree, the ability to proclaim the truth of the scripture is what preaching is about. And, it is necessary for believers to give affirmation to the call of one who has an ability and a desire to do such.

My main point behind the Edwards reference, was to note that preachers have different styles, and that substance is to be valued in place of it. Though I cannot deny your statement regarding the history of his ministry style, I'd like to see your reference for the story of such being "bunk." All I find in my reading are the opposite, like the quotes below.

“Although Edwards had none of the dramatic gestures of a Whitefield or a Tennent and was said to preach as though he were staring at the bell-rope in the back of the meetinghouse, he could be remarkably compelling. An admirer described his delivery as ‘easy, natural and very solemn. He had not a strong, loud voice; but appeared with such gravity and solemnity, and spake with such distinctness, clearness and precision; his words were so full of ideas, set in such a plain and striking light, that few speakers have been so able to demand the attention of an audience as he.’ Through sheer intensity he generated emotion. ‘His words often discovered a great degree of inward fervor, without much noise or external emotion, and fell with great weight on the minds of his hearers. He made but little motion of his head or hands in his desk, but spake so as to discover the motion of his own heart, which tended in the most natural and effectual manner to move and affect others.’ The combination of controlled but transparent emotion, heartfelt sincerity both in admonition and compassion, inexorable logic, and biblical themes could draw people into sensing the reality of ideas long familiar.”

- George M. Marsden, Jonathan Edwards: A Life (Yale: 2003) p. 220

"Though it wasn't done at the time, and Stoddard had publically frowned on it, Edwards in his early years of his ministry preached from a manuscript. He wanted to be sure he said precisely what he meant to say, for he had no patience with slovenly ramblings. So he stitched together his pages of used shopping lists, making tiny books that he held in his left hand. (One, the size of a wallet, may be viewed at Princeton.) He used few gestures, and spoke in a low voice, with 'great distinctness in pronounciation'." - Elisabeth D. Dodds, Marriage to a Difficult Man, pp.70,71.

Blessings!

I think our problem is, mainly, we agree, but are talking past one another. I would agree with you on the preference of many for the "show", anthropocentric preaching, and technological gimmick. Yet, I think men like Piper, and others in his train, show that plain Puritan preaching can still command the faithful remnant.

As to Edwards, I think Marsden proves my point rather than refutes it. It is hardly the popular image of Edwards squinting to read a manuscript held close to his nose in a barely audible mumble --the portrait painted by Perry Miller.

But, if your point is mainly that style is not the major considerationin making a great preacher, you will find absolutely no argument from me. I know men who are loud and dynamic who are great preachers; I know men who are soft-spoken who are great preachers; I know a few men with rhetorical polish who are great preachers, though they are few in number.

 

[BJClark]

greenbaggins;

There are loads of country churches in the Midwest who would love a pastor to death, and actually pay a very livable salary (the cost of living is often minuscule in country settings), but cannot get any pastors interested because the best and the brightest all want to go to the city. Sad.

I honestly don't understand why one would want to live in the city...other than they might think that is the only place evil hearts dwell...

Okay, gentlemen, how many here are in Seminary now?? Maybe you can get something started here, to at least contact some churches and say "Hey, we have some young reformed men in need of a pulpit..and we understand you have a vacant pulpit, can we send a few of them up your way to preach at least temporarily so as to meet the needs of both?"

If God is calling them to preach, does it really matter where they preach??

Just because they 'want' to be in the city, doesn't mean God 'want's' them in the city..

 

[KenPierce]

The best cure for wanting to live in the city is, In my humble opinion, living in the city.

We moved from the country to the city, and greatly miss the bucolic splendor of the Blue Ridge.

But, it is nice not to have to drive 45 minutes to Target, too!

The point is an important one: YOu go where you are called, even if its Timbuktu. Wanting to live somewhere doesn't really enter into the equation. Jonah had a strong aversion to NIneveh, thought he could serve God in Tarshish.

We see how God thinks about such things!

 

[moral necessity]

Brother Pierce,

No disagreement here either. As a side note, I haven't read of such a severe description of Edwards before, as you describe Miller as painting, and had no similar view of Edwards myself.

Good thread! What do you think of option (D) mentioned above? Guess you answered the question before I could even ask it...what talent!

 

[BJClark]

KenPierce;

The point is an important one: YOu go where you are called, even if its Timbuktu. Wanting to live somewhere doesn't really enter into the equation. Jonah had a strong aversion to NIneveh, thought he could serve God in Tarshish.

This is my understanding too..which is why it doesn't make sense for one to turn down a preaching job, just because they want to go some where else...

I live close to a fairly large city and try my best to avoid going there..it's too crowded, the traffic is horrific, it's a mess and it's easy to get turned around on all the new roads they are building..and I really hate that the 'city' is moving in on us..the funny thing is, my kids, through they like going to the city to shop occassionally at certain stores, they wouldn't want to live there...

 

[ChristopherPaul]

There's a reply on the HB

I concur with Dr. Clark that a greater emphasis on Church Planting should be considered.

In a discussion with one of the officers at my church regarding planting more churches the conclusion was we (i.e. the OPC) simply lack enough Teaching Elders.

Personally I think no church should have more than one primary service (i.e. do away with 9:00 and 11:00 services) and target a manageable ratio of communicant members to overseeing elders (such as 30 members to one elder or similar). When it appears the numbers will begin to exceed this ratio plan to either appoint more elders (if any are called thereunto) or plan a church plant.

Take these congregations within the PCA that are established and have multiple clone services and spread them out into the world. Lets not create a Babel where all nations are to come to us, but appoint elders in every city and thus go out to all the nations.

Small congregations where the entire flock can partake at one table is not a bad concept. If there are a surplus of teaching elders than there must be a lack of church plants or an unwillingness within some congregations to go out to all the nations.

 

[tcalbrecht]

I posted this thought on the Warfield list:

I might add that the glut of PCA TEs might also be due in part to the notion of the various sub-classes of pastors in the PCA (senior/associate/assistant). The fact is there seems to be a vast number of “pastors” without regular pastoral duties. The existence of these sub-classes perhaps encourages men to entertain entering the “pastoral ministry” when what they really want to be is some sort of pastoral adjunct.

 

[DavidGGraves]

OK, I know that you OSP guys will not like this economic analogy but...

Supply (of seminary grads) only exceeds demand AT THE CURRENT PRICE.

I have been a deacon long enough to have heard from several men that they should be paid more because of their EDUCATION. Sorry (& no offence intended) but NO ONE is paid based on how long they have been in school. Your dentist does not make 200k a year because he went to school for 7 years but because people want his services.

If you are looking for a church that can pay you the salary that you "deserve" because of your education, then you will likely still be looking next year. Rather, find a church that needs YOU and grow it till it can pay more.

In other words, cut the price (first year salary expectations for seminary grads) and the market will clear the surplus!

Kevin, although I don't disagree with your point entirely I have a couple of notes to add:

1. The church does need to be concerned with the wellbeing of her pastor. In most calls today, the phrase " to free you of worldly care" is normally included. However, most pastors are not so freed from worldly care by their salaries. I know many pastors who either work second jobs, or their wives work full time so they can afford to live. In addition, the church wants men who have gone through 7-8 years of schooling (4 years of college and 3-4 years of seminary), and so many of these men will have 7-8 years of debt! I have a good deal of student loans, and not as much as many men I know. I do know men who have labored in churches for 20+ years, and have never been able to afford their own home, or put any money away for retirement. I admire these men greatly for their selflessness and sacrifice! However, that is shameful for the church (in my opinion).

2. It is not up to the man to grow the church. The Lord builds His body! We do everything we can to be an instrument of the Holy Spirit, but it is the Lord who brings the growth. Just because a church doesn't grow numerically, does not mean there is something wrong with the man, the message he preaches, or the methods he uses.

Thank you Reformationart for your post. For someone who has been seeking a call, with no geographical limits to the search. I found those statements about going for less money okay providing there was the ability to live. I know one young man who came to seminary with $30K school debt for undergrad and after 7 years of school loans for his MDiv and PhD his debt load has to be over $100K so I think that the cost of the education must needs be brought into the equation.

By God's grace I made it through seminary and my PhD without any debt, but that is the exception to the rule. So instead of giving debt laden men who desire to serve the Lord and shepherd his flock a guilt trip perhaps the whole seminary tuition should be reexamined.

I know of only one church during my 7 years at TEDS that paid for those whom they recognized as called from their congregation to go to seminary. The bulk have had to either take out massive school loans or work multiple jobs on top of church responsibilities, family responsibilities...so perchance there is more than a simple A, B, or C to this. Last years graduating class from TEDS placed fewer than 10% in churches within 6 months after graduation.

 

[SolaScriptura]

I posted the following to the BB Warfield discussion group after reading a post by Dr. Sean Lucas...

Sean (and group)... I don't doubt the accuracy of the statistical information presented here by Sean. However, I can't help but lament the reality of what these stats represent, which is nothing short of an apparent "career" understanding of the ministry by many pastors in our day.

I was first challenged to think about the issue of the professionalization of the Christian ministry when I read Piper's "Brothers, We Are Not Professionals" some years ago. Then, while I was deployed I took that opportunity to read David Wells' masterful series starting with "No Place For Truth." In that book Wells (among other things) discusses how the professionalization of the ministry has led pastors to viewing it as a career, with certain positions being the requisite "check the block" jobs on their way to up the ministerial career ladder.

Your point 6 - and to some extent your 2nd point - I think reflects this understanding amongst ministers. I remember, while I was at Moody and working with TEDS students how we would joke about the path to becoming a senior pastor. It pains and agrivates me that many associate/assistant pastors REALLY want to be a senior pastor and yet they take this "entry" position instead. This results in speedy turn over (they leave as soon as they get enough experience under their belt) and the sheep are ultimately harmed.

This, I think explains the glut: like in any corporation there are continually open "entry level" positions because those who are in those positions leave or move up, but as you move higher up the ladder the competition for those jobs becomes greater due to their relatively small number of openings. (Note how the corporate illustration fits so smoothly? I think this is sadly indicative of what is happening in the church.)

Oh, how I wish that folks would be content to go to some church and minister faithfully there until they die. There are too many wannabe celebrity pastors. Churches need someone who will live and die with them.

I am in agreement with the many brothers who have commended church planting. Those who REALLY want to be senior pastors should be discouraged from taking on associate/assistant positions and should instead cut their teeth by planting a church.

When it comes to church planting I speak as one who was first an EFCA guy than an SBC man and finally PCA... I am repeatedly SHOCKED by how much money it takes to plant a PCA church compared to what it costs to start up a church in these other denominations. I think that more churches would be able to be planted if a few things happened:

1. Quit targeting the "pretty people." That is, in the words of one of my SBC profs, "The PCA is a yuppie denomination." The questionable accuracy of his words aside, I think he has an incontrovertible point: our churches are mostly fairly well-off white people. We plant churches in expensive places and this costs a lot.

2. Divert MNA funds from administrative costs so that more can actually get to the field.

3. Lastly, and most significantly, PCA ministers should be more willing to accept a lower standard of living. How is it that a PCA man needs to raise $300k for 3 years of church planting support (this number includes start up operational costs for the church), when I know (and used to support) church planters in other denominations for over $100k less for the same period to cover the same types of things??


A final way we can solve this glut would be to encouarge more folks to become military chaplains. The changing climate is such that the liberals are all dying out or vacating the service and evangelicals are finding their way higher and higher into the ranks. I am now in my second chapel and I work with another Reformed chaplain... we are able to teach the doctrines of grace (last week I preached from Eph 2:1-10) and people are responding. We can potentially change the institution if we flood it with good Reformed chaplains.

 

[SRoper]

greenbaggins;

There are loads of country churches in the Midwest who would love a pastor to death, and actually pay a very livable salary (the cost of living is often minuscule in country settings), but cannot get any pastors interested because the best and the brightest all want to go to the city. Sad.

I honestly don't understand why one would want to live in the city...other than they might think that is the only place evil hearts dwell...

Well, men like Tim Keller argue that as the city goes so goes the culture (see, for example his message at the 2006 Desiring God seminar). They argue that the strategy of the early church was to go to the cities and the surrounding pagan (which means "country-dweller") countryside would follow suit. I think this is largely a reaction against the practice of planting churches in the exurbs and ignoring the city.

 

[Pilgrim]

greenbaggins;

There are loads of country churches in the Midwest who would love a pastor to death, and actually pay a very livable salary (the cost of living is often minuscule in country settings), but cannot get any pastors interested because the best and the brightest all want to go to the city. Sad.

I honestly don't understand why one would want to live in the city...other than they might think that is the only place evil hearts dwell...

Well, men like Tim Keller argue that as the city goes so goes the culture (see, for example his message at the 2006 Desiring God seminar). They argue that the strategy of the early church was to go to the cities and the surrounding pagan (which means "country-dweller") countryside would follow suit. I think this is largely a reaction against the practice of planting churches in the exurbs and ignoring the city.

Yeah, the yuppie thing again.

 

[tcalbrecht]

Thinking out loud -- I’m wondering if it is also possible that the simple existence of a denominational seminary in any way contributes to the glut. The expectation is on production, even over production, to meet the expenses of running a seminary.

 

[Barnpreacher]

Yeah, the yuppie thing again.

What do you mean?

 

[Pilgrim]

Yeah, the yuppie thing again.

What do you mean?

I was referring to what Ben wrote in post #44

1. Quit targeting the "pretty people." That is, in the words of one of my SBC profs, "The PCA is a yuppie denomination." The questionable accuracy of his words aside, I think he has an incontrovertible point: our churches are mostly fairly well-off white people. We plant churches in expensive places and this costs a lot.

 

[Barnpreacher]

Yeah, the yuppie thing again.

What do you mean?

I was referring to what Ben wrote in post #44

1. Quit targeting the "pretty people." That is, in the words of one of my SBC profs, "The PCA is a yuppie denomination." The questionable accuracy of his words aside, I think he has an incontrovertible point: our churches are mostly fairly well-off white people. We plant churches in expensive places and this costs a lot.

I'm certainly not familiar enough with the PCA to get in on this conversation. However, I am familiar enough with Tim Keller's ministry to say that I don't believe he promotes a yuppie mentality. Just because he believes more churches should be planted in the city does not mean that he's talking about having churches full of "well-off white people".

 

[Pilgrim]

What do you mean?

I was referring to what Ben wrote in post #44

1. Quit targeting the "pretty people." That is, in the words of one of my SBC profs, "The PCA is a yuppie denomination." The questionable accuracy of his words aside, I think he has an incontrovertible point: our churches are mostly fairly well-off white people. We plant churches in expensive places and this costs a lot.

I'm certainly not familiar enough with the PCA to get in on this conversation. However, I am familiar enough with Tim Keller's ministry to say that I don't believe he promotes a yuppie mentality. Just because he believes more churches should be planted in the city does not mean that he's talking about having churches full of "well-off white people".

I'm not that familiar with Keller at all (and am only just beginning to get some first hand knowledge of the PCA as well) but nevertheless most of our churches do tend to be at least middle to upper middle class and white. My understanding is that many of those focused on urban ministry are trying to break that mold. But of course the SBC is overwhelmingly white as well, although maybe to a lesser degree. And a lot of their larger congregations are "yuppie" churches too, so this is by no means isolated to the PCA.

 

[greenbaggins]

I have nothing against planting city churches. We should be planting city churches. And I agree that there have been way too many yuppie church plants in the suburbs. But city churches focus exclusively on the city. I remember hearing a sermon where the entire point was to get people to come to the city. To put it mildly, this rubbed me the wrong way. Every place needs a church that will be faithful. The pioneers/rancher/farmers who feed the city-dwellers need a church too. In my two churches that I serve, each church is about 125 years old, and each church has had about 40 pastors. Why? Because most pastors used these churches as "stepping stones." The result? No one was there long enough to get a real ministry going. Hey, a pastor doesn't really earn the trust of the congregation until the 5 year mark is up, and most of them never stayed that long. They all want bigger and better churches (read, more money). Come to the country, folks. Shepherd these people. They feed you.

 

[KenPierce]

Kudos to Lane.

There are a lot of joys to pastoring a country church --sometimes only realized after one departs to the city church. One noticeable thing is that country people make you part of the family, and are often embarrassingly generous. They have an inherent understanding of what it means to be the family of God.

The PCA does tend to target the rich, young, educated and pretty, and to do so intentionally. I see this getting worse, not better. The current push among the avant-garde in our denomination is to be, well, avant-garde. Read By Faith, for instance. I am all in favor of the arts, etc., but the arts aren't our focus, folks.

Being part of the "great cultural conversation" isn't our goal. Being ambassadors for Christ, and fools for Christ's sake, and the offscouring and refuse of the world, aliens and strangers --that's our goal.

What are we lacking? Gospel appeals. Preaching the Law and Hell. Fiery preaching. No, we want polite conversations on topics of religious, and increasingly, cultural, interest.

The sad thing? The "old-time" are precisely the type of preachers who are preaching where the spiritual life is: Piper being the prime example. We are running from the very things that will give us life.

Many of our efforts even to do mercy-type ministry smack of noblesse oblige.

How do we beat this attitude? This is a question we are asking ourselves in our rich, white, city (but with suburban commuters) church. I believe we really want to beat it --at least most of us do. May God show us how.