How Would Jesus Vote?: A Review

Politics and religion tend to form a witches brew of toxic commentary, often bringing out the worst from both fields. But as a devoted Christian, you may wonder “How would Jesus vote on the issues in this year’s elections? I’m glad you asked.

The 2008 election is shaping up to be one of the most important political contests in American history. In fact, Dr. D. James Kennedy believes it will be a watershed moment that could impact our very survival as a nation under God.

Values voters—people whose political views and votes are based on their faith in God—are being targeted as never before. As the campaign season moves forward, the significant players will debate terrorism, radical Islam, nuclear threats, global warming, social issues, gay marriage, immigration, education, health care, and many other essential issues that can create sharp ideological divisions.

Into this overwhelmingly complex political situation, Dr. Kennedy and Jerry Newcombe bring an application of what God’s Word has to say on these critical matters. How Would Jesus Vote? isn’t intended to tell readers which candidates to support, in fact it mentions no specific political figures. But the way it evaluates issues let’s people know precisely where the author’s stand.
And so Kennedy offers straightforward views on a variety of issues and how Jesus would vote.

Briefly, Jesus would vote as follows:
Abortion: Jesus is Prolife
Death Penalty: Jesus supports the Death Penalty
Warfare: Jesus would (on occasion) support a Just War
Education: Jesus supports prayer in schools, and would oppose taxes on parents whose kids go to private schools.
Economics: Jesus supports private property, would be opposed to governmental welfare programs
Healthcare: Jesus would favor care for the uninsured, but would not support eh government mandating a universal health care policy.
Environment: Jesus loves the environment, but would spend money on sewage plants, increased sanitation, and clean water for the poor of the world, rather than cap and trade emissions policies
Immigration: Jesus would oppose racism in all forms, vote for enforcement of immigration laws, but also respect and care for the strangers among us
Marriage: Jesus favors heterosexual marriage. He would oppose same-sex marriage, pornography, and no-fault divorce
Judges: Kennedy doesn’t promise that Jesus opposes judicial activism, but does remind judges that they too will be judged by God for their actions.

There is a final section of a collection of thoughts on religious liberty and the dangers of political compromise.

Some thoughts:

Kennedy helpfully offers some biblical perspectives on these issues. None of his conclusions are without problems however. Which leads me to my concerns about this book.

The primary problem I have with Kennedy’s work is not only its self-confidence in declaring Jesus’ position on numerous political issues, but how unfailingly they fall along the traditional Republican perspective. Repackage this book and you could have the Republican platform in place. Putting the Divine imprimatur on our political perspectives cheapens our faith. When the kingdom of God conforms itself to the political instincts of Man, we trade silver and gold for straw and chaff.

Second, there is a tension in this work on the relationship between the church and state. Although he works hard to insist that church and state be separate, Kennedy admires such reformers as Calvin (p. 42) who as a magisterial reformer, operated in the context of a theocratic state in Geneva. But on the other hand (when arguing that the individual, not the government needs to be accommodating to immigrants) wrote “We should make sure that we distinguish between personal ethics and national policy.” (159) So which is it?

Finally, I would suspect that Jesus would have a perspective both more radical and more conservative than our own. I agree, for instance, that Jesus would be pro-life in his outlook. But I suspect he would travel with those who oppose abortion, but also those who oppose the death penalty and war. Jesus might vote for candidates who are radically egalitarian, to the point that they not only reach out to the poor, but move into low income neighborhoods and live incarnationally with the poor and downtrodden, instead of visiting them for a short term mission trip.

The church has much work to do.

The more election cycles I live through, the more I see that the government will continue to be ineffective. That is the main reason for my passion for the church. It is up to the church, not to the government, to reach the dispossessed who have fallen through the cracks of society. But the government makes for a poor tool in the hands of the church.

Kennedy offers little help in that direction.

W: A Review

W is an entertaining movie, but not a good one. It is entertaining in the same sense that a Will Ferrell DVD of SNL’s greatest Bush skits would be. Humorous, funny, and lacking any coherent plot.

The film is about the run up to the war in Iraq and the “debate” going on in the Bush White House. I put debate in quotation marks because it’s quite clear from the outset what the result will be. The president has already made up his mind. Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice, et al are each manipulating him toward a predetermined outcome. Only brave Powell opposes their plans, but his opposition is quickly overcome as he is portrayed as brave, if overly loyal footsoldier. Vice-President Cheney in particular is remarkable (Richard Dreyfus in an Oscar caliber performance). Cheney is the driving force behind the invasion plans and gives a powerful speech in favor of world domination to the assembled group of advisors. But his speech is so diabolical that it seemed more appropriate to a Bond (or Austin Powers) enemy. All he needed was, as one critic noted, a cat to stroke.

Throughout the film there are flashbacks (and at times flashbacks within flashbacks) about Bush’s life. The one recurring motivation for Bush in the film is that he is constantly trying to overcome his father (played by James Cromwell in an excellent performance) and to demonstrate his superiority. From his frat boy days at Yale to (literally) fighting with his father in the Oval Office, he’s constantly up against Bush 41. Poppa Bush opposes W at every turn. He dismisses Junior when he wants to run for governor of Texas, when he wants to run for president, and in one of the final scenes merely shakes his head at his son’s decisions in the Middle East.

But the central focus on the film is always Bush the Younger. Many of Bush’s infamous malapropisms (misunderestimated, “Fool me once, shame on you” etc) are here, though not in the context in which they were originally uttered. Although the common anti-Bush tropes are covered in “W” (Bush was motivated by competition with his father: check, God told Bush to run for president: check, the US invaded Iraq for oil: check), Stone eases up on the most left-leaning criticism of Bush. Some of his opponents have claimed that he deliberately used imaginary WMD weapons as the causus belli for the Iraq war (with the brief “Bush lied, people died” mantra). But Stone does not endorse this view and instead "credits" incompetence instead of malevolence. George Tenet (CIA director) summarizes the mistake by simply saying "We were wrong when we thought there were WMDs."

Ultimately, the problem with W is not that Stone aims too high, but too low. By portraying Bush as a self-confident dunce, he gives no insight into Bush the man. He provides no understanding on some basic questions that the narrative suggests: What did a demure wall flower like Laura see in him? Other than affecting his alcohol consumption, how did Bush’s religious conversion change him? And the ultimate question of course: How did someone so stupid end up as a President?

In the end, W is a failure as a narrative film. It is a disorganized mess with neither a coherent plot nor structure.

And yes, I recognize that that description is exactly what many critics apply to Bush’s eight years in office.

Pastor Support Committee

Some of the concerned comments to my last post indicate that I need to explain a bit more about the new role for the Pastor Search Committee. In the last few weeks before he came in view of a call, I mentioned to Brother Rick that the committee would be dissolving after his arrival unless he wanted to keep us around as a Pastor Support Committee. (In other churches I’ve seen this referred to as the “Barnabas Committee”). He indicated that he would like us to remain active for a period of time.

On two occasions in these least four months he has called us together for an hour or so and Brother Rick has bounced some ideas off of us. Both times we’ve met, we've gathered at his request. It’s been an opportunity for him to get some feedback on planned changes for the church. He’s listened to our feedback; has accepted it on some occasions and rejected it on others.

In return, it has allowed an open opportunity for getting our perspective on how things have been progressing. We’ve also taken the lead on such things as asking him hard questions such as how he’s balancing work and family. Another item we addressed (fearful it might get overlooked) was making sure that the appropriate ministry groups worked on plans for minister appreciation month.

What we do in the future depends on Brother Rick. I could see that over time he would call us together to meet less and less frequently. Or if we continue to meet, I could see some original committee members rotate off and other church leaders rotate on. But the focus of the committee is up to him, not initiated by the committee.

And I would have concerns about operating the committee any other way.

(Back to main Pastor Search Committee Menu)

A Few Loose Ends....

• Brother Rick has done well in his first few months as pastor at Lakeview. If numbers can ever be used to gage the spiritual vitality of a church, they bear out that the church has responded and the Lord has been blessing. Almost every Sunday that he has been pastor, we've had someone join the church. In addition we've had more baptisms in the last three months than in the last few years combined. One of our goals as a committee was to extend his honeymoon as long as possible. His honeymoon is ongoing.
• The Pastor Search Committee has morphed into the Pastor Support Committee (we kept the acronym the same so could keep using the same letterhead). Once a month or so we sit down with the pastor to provide an opportunity for accountability and for him to bounce ideas off of us. We've given him feedback, both positive and negative of his time with us.
• Brother James has stopped attending the church. He quit coming the week after we called Brother Rick and he hasn't been to a service since. Efforts to contact him have proven ineffective (phone calls and emails not returned). Brother Rick has contacted him to arrange a time for a visit and no time has been convenient. Through the grapevine (I'm sure you're stunned to hear that a Baptist church has a grapevine) I've heard that he disagreed with the procedure of our committee.

In another day or two I'll post some final thoughts about this process and mercifully this series will come to an end...

(Just joking about the PSC letterhead, but you knew that already).

(Back to main Pastor Search Committee Menu)

Unchurched: A Review and Interview

(Note, at the end of this review is an interview with the author and a chance to win a free copy of Unchurched)

The word “churched” has at least two meanings: First it is an archaic religious term usually used in the negative which refers to someone who has either not accepted the gospel or is not going to church. “Well, this basketball league is primarily for the unchurched.” A second meaning refers to the act of church discipline, primarily the expulsion of someone form the community as in “He was churched from the congregation”. (See usage 17 here).

In his book Churched: One Man’s Journey Toward God Despite a Holy Mess, Matthew Paul Turner walks the edges of each of these meanings. In this memoir, he narrates what life was like for him to be raised in a fundamentalist church. Matthew Paul Turner is a blogger, speaker and author of The Coffeehouse Gospel, Provocative Faith, Beatitude: Relearning Jesus, the What You Didn’t Learn from Your Parents About… series, and several other popular books. He has written for Relevant, HomeLife, Christian Single magazines and was the former editor of CCM magazine. Matthew and his wife, Jessica, live in Nashville, Tennessee. He can be found online at http://www.matthewpaulturner.com/.

Turner's memoir contains story after story about growing up in an environment where the unusual was the norm. For example, a typical Sunday morning might contain: the pastor getting into a boxing match with Satan, the worship service being hijacked by a Christian Pirate, a Barbie doll incinerated in Sunday school (as an example of the perils of hell) and getting baptized multiple (5 maybe?) times. Turner is an entertaining writer who does an excellent job of either reminding the reader of, or introducing the reader to, life in fundamentalist churches.
And he’s funny. The book is a series of disconnected, humorous stories. His sense of humor reminds me of David Sedaris and he has Garrison Keillor’s talent for drawing portraits of people with his words. I every much enjoyed this work. In an age when most memoirists take a tire iron to the kneecaps of their childhood, Turner is always respectful of his influences. As he depicts it, his church seems more a collection of strange religious eccentrics than of judgmental and angry legalists that I tend to associate with fundamentalist upbringings.

While I liked reading a memoir that wasn’t too critical of the influences on the author’s life, I found myself wondering what stories were omitted. There are hints of some scars he’s carried from his childhood (he mentions for example, that he has trouble talking alone with a pastor). (Note: See interview below). Regardless, that is more a criticism of what the book is not rather than what it is. And what it is, is a funny, funny book that offers a non-judgmental look at fundamentalism.

Since I've had ummmm unplanned interviews with authors before, I decided to be proactive and sent an email to Turner asking if he would consent to an interview. He graciously agreed to answer a few questions about his most recent work.

Taran: I've always thought it took a healthy ego to write a memoir ;). Why did you decide to write Churched?

Turner: Well, I certainly have an ego--not sure it's a healthy one--but I certainly try to keep it in check. :) I wrote Churched because I thought it was a good story that for some, may be an introduction to fundamentalism, and for others may offer a little bit of healing from the spiritual abuse they endured. And while I hope it's an entertaining and hopeful read, I certainly wrote it for me and for anybody else who has been hurt by other Christians.

Taran: In your book, you describe your upbringing in a fundamentalist Independent Baptist Church. How would you describe fundamentalism?

Turner: I think that "Independent Baptist" is CHRISTIAN for scary beyond all reason. Whenever leadership of any church, mosque, or temple takes on the role of God and uses it to control, manipulate, indoctrinate--that is a fundamentalism. Of course, there are varying levels of Christian fundamentalism out there.

Taran: In many memoirs, the author's work out a great deal of antagonism toward their childhood. But one thing that appears different in this work is that you don't seem particularly hostile to fundamentalism. As your portray it, fundamentalism seems to be primarily an eccentricity Is that how you view your church's brand of fundamentalism?

Turner: In some ways, yes. But that doesn't make it "innocent." It was my hope to present my childhood story to reflect on the "Christian issues" of today. The 17 essays serve as a mirror to some degree, one that all of us as Christians need to look at so we can see how we are presenting Jesus to the community of people around us. In order to do that effectively, I didn't want to be guilty of what I am pointing out. Does that make sense? If you're angry and mean-spirited, I don't believe you can effectively paint a good picture of the experience. And that was my goal... to paint a picture of what I experienced and let people come to their own conclusions.

Taran: You share at one point that fundamentalism doesn't take a high view of imagination. Were there any parts of being fundamentalist that helped you to develop your skills as a writer?

Turner: Well, it certainly gave me something to write about, I guess. But I inhereted my creativity from my mother and my grandmother.

Taran: From looking across your website, I see that you have a new son. Congratulations! Every parent wants to raise their child in a better way than they were raised. In the area of faith, how will Elias' childhood differ from yours?

Turner: It's my hope that Elias will learn about God in a hope-filled manner, that God will always be apart of his life's solutions and not apart of his problem. I'm gonna make mistakes along the way, but I hope he will experience the hope that comes from engaging the story of God and to not be overrun with fear.

Taran: You close with a story indicating that you have difficulty sitting down one on one with pastors. Do you see a bit of Pastor Nolan (the pastor of his church growing up) in a lot of ministers that you meet?

Turner: I do to some degree. They may not yell and scream and boast about the number of souls their churches are "winning," but the pastoral ego is often there. And it's the ego that made Pastor Nolan dangerous. He was just interesting and talented enough to make him dangerous. A pastor should never use scripture as way to manipulate or control--the truth should always set us free. And that's the kind of truth that pastors should be presenting. Pastors don't have to make us think they're perfect. Because we know they're not. Just tell us God's story with hope, that's something Pastor Nolan rarely did.

Taran: Reading your work I thought of people as diverse as David Sederis and Garrison Keillor. Who are some of the writers (aside from Matthew Mark, Luke and John) who have influenced you?

Turner: I love David Sederis, Elizabeth Gilbert, Chuck Klosterman, Augusten Burroughs, Brennan Manning, Phillip Yancey, GK Chesterton, Donald Miller, Anne Lamott--all of these writers have influenced to some degree or encouraged me to tell my story with passion and zeal.

Taran: Thanks for giving your time and may the sales of this book fully fund Elias' college of choice.

Turner: Thanks so much for this interview!

I have two free copies of Unchurched. My favorite Christian music artist was greatly influenced by Brennan Manning, one of the writers that Turner mentions above. In fact, the title of Manning's most popular book appears in the title of the musician's best CD.

The first two readers who can tell me which musician gets a free copy of the book!

Installation Service

The last task for the committee was to supervise the installation service of the new pastor. Baptist churches generally undersell the ceremonial occasions. But just like families, churches need to acknowledge significant times of transitions in their lives. Brother Rick’s arrival was big and we needed a corresponding celebration. So the committee shifted our focus from calling to preparing an important service.

We wanted to involve as many in the church as possible. So one of the first things we decided is that we would engage certain committees (like the special events committee) to plan a meal for the church following the Sunday morning installation service. We also involved the men’s and women’s ministries to provide for the pastoral family a pounding. Poundings are more common in small rural churches (I’ve received a few of them in the past myself). Traditionally, poundings are when the various church members would each bring a pound of food (flour, canned goods, lard, etc) to the new pastor and his family. (It was at one pounding that I received a can of “Potted Meat Food Product”. It still sits on a shelf in my library lo, these 14 years later).

We altered the idea a bit to include more than just the provision of foodstuffs. We divided the various Sunday school classes according to areas of responsibility. Thus the children’s classes took up money for a gift card to various toy stores in the area for the Pastor’s kids. Other classes took up money for a gift certificate to a local clothiers for new pastoral duds. The senior adults gathered food supplies while another class got together a card from a local home improvement store. Some classes took up money for a gift card to a boutique store (whatever that is) for the pastor’s wife. The church took the idea and ran with it.

The committee turned its attention to the installation service itself. (And yes, we endured numerous jokes like “Doesn’t the new pastor come preinstalled?”) We divided the service into two parts, one focusing on the responsibilities of the church and another focusing on the responsibilities of the pastor. We planned to have two “servotionals,” one for each portion of the service. We wanted to get Brother Rick’s mentor to deliver a charge to the pastor and then get our Associational missionary to deliver a charge to the church. Unfortunately due to a denominational meeting that same weekend, we could get neither. We considered getting our interim to be involved in this process, but he (and I) felt that he needed to be scarce on this special day.

The committee decided that our lone staff member would deliver the charge to the congregation and that I would give the charge to the pastor. Not ideal, but it still allowed us to explicitly state the purpose of the service.

So we shared scripture and sang hymns that touched upon both pastor and church throughout the service. We also wanted to emphasize how special the occasion was and so we secured letters of greeting from many officials. We read letters of welcome from: a few previous pastors at Lakeview, our state convention president, and from Dr. Frank Page (President of the SBC). We also read letters of welcome from a city councilman, from our city’s mayor, from our Congressional Representative and from each of our state’s Senators. (I found politicians quite eager to court the electorate).

All in all an exciting day of celebration.

(Back to main Pastor Search Committee Menu)

The Vote

The Sunday following the business meeting was a normal Sunday. The only sign that there might be something unusual going on was that along with a ministry guide, church members received a small colored slip of paper as they entered the sanctuary. After the beginning of the service, our chairman of deacons announced that the deacons would be taking up the ballots for the vote. He also announced that 80% of the church must be in favor of the candidate for him to be voted in as our new pastor.

As I sat in the choir, I saw them making their way through the congregation and I prayed for our church and tried to swat away the flies of doubt that buzzed around my head. It was difficult to keep focus on worship as I tried not to take account of who was at church and who was absent that day. (I had two families during the week say: “We love the new candidate…but we’re going to be out of town this weekend.” I wondered if their votes would matter.) I saw the deacons walk out of the sanctuary while the music minister led in worship. Some time later I saw a few deacons return to the worship service and I knew that they had completed their tabulation.

Following the initial part of the service, the choir recessed from the choir loft and moved down the hallways to sit among the congregation. As I walked down the hall, I saw two deacons huddled together in discussion. One of them was on the Search committee and when he saw me he didn’t say anything.

But he grinned.

I knew at that moment that we had a new pastor. At the end of the worship service, the deacon chairman stood up and announced that the church had voted and voted to call Brother Rick as our pastor by a vote of 186 to 2. The church erupted in applause. And, despite being the cynic that I am, my eyes teared up at the tabulation of the vote.

Following the service, the committee gathered to call brother Rick and let him know the results of the vote. Before we called, I commended them on their hard work and sacrifice of time away from their family. I also shared with them that they had no idea where God was going to take the church based on their obedience to Him throughout the process. Brother Rick was three generations younger and vastly different in his mindset regarding ministry than our previous pastor. Plus he had spikey hair. Changes would be coming to Lakeview because of the committee’s work.

We called brother Rick and shared with him the exciting news. It was the first time we got to call him pastor and everyone enjoyed it. After the phone call we prayed, thanked God for his goodness, and then prepared to leave. But before we filed out of the room, I got their attention and said “Friends, we still have one important task left…”

(Back to main Pastor Search Committee Menu)

The Business Meeting

As the Pastor Search Committee we prepared for the business meeting on the Wednesday before the vote, we decided to involve the entire committee in our report to the church. I asked each of the committee to share the moment that they became convinced that God was calling Brother Rick to be the next pastor at Lakeview. We also discussed a bit about Brother James. He had announced that he would not serve as moderator of the business meeting because he wanted to address the committee directly during the meeting. We tried to anticipate some of the objections that he might have and discussed how to respond.

On Wednesday evening we met beforehand, prayed, and then began the business meeting. I’m very glad that the entire committee spoke. It took a while (around 40 minutes) for each of us to share for a few minutes, but it really helped the church to see the candidate from our perspective. Plus it confirmed our decision to take a unanimous recommendation to the church. This was the only time that the entire committee had an opportunity to address the church. We made sure that none of us told the same story and several people told me during the following days that they appreciated hearing from the rest of the committee (besides just from me!)
The committee did a great job. The only statement that made me wince was when one of the committee members compared the previous pastor to the new candidate very unfavorably. No malice was intended, but our previous pastor was loved and supported by many in the church. Following our opening statement (motion) the questions began.

As committee chair, I addressed most of the questions. From time to time, my colleagues on the committee would step in and answer or clarify some issue. Some my answers were lousy, quite frankly, and many of them were only satisfactory. But the committee stepped in from time to time and handled things well. Here were the major topics that the church asked about:

The first person to ask a question, really didn’t ask one at all. Mr. Farmer, long time teacher of one of the senior adult Sunday School classes simply offered his thanks to us and said “Ya’ll have done a really good job for this church. We think that he’s gonna work just fine.” Farmer’s support right off the bat was encouraging for us all. We were still concerned about the senior adults, but for one of their primary spokesmen to share that certainly set the tone for the rest of the conversation.

Next Mr. James slowly walked up to the microphone and expressed his primary concern. He said that the candidate had shared in his testimony that he laid our fleeces to help him decide if God was calling him to be our pastor. Such an approach demonstrated (to Mr. James) a clear example of spiritual immaturity. In addition, the candidate didn’t cite any scripture that he used to make his decision. These oversights, according to Brother James’ were glaring. How could we expect that he was spiritually mature enough for this position?

My first response was that he spoke with the committee in great detail about his calling to ministry and how he felt God leading him to Lakeview. I had no response to the fleece comment, but essentially said that while we did have some questions throughout the process for him, a lack of spiritual maturity was never an area of concern. Almost all of our concerns were how the church would receive him, not about any lack of ability on his part.


Brother James then sat down and after a brief pause, the questions continued. We shared with the church many of the theological questions we asked (and provided a complete list for anyone who wanted one). I wanted to provide a list because I didn’t want to go through all of the questions and have people interrupt to ask “How did he answer that one?”

After the questions ended, we then presented the financial and benefits package to the church.
Before we presented it, I spent several minutes explaining how pastor’s salaries differed from those of normal ;) people. I then took questions before passing out the amount. Unexpectedly, several in the church felt that the package wasn’t generous enough and that we should increase it! So I was in the contorted position of saying that it was deemed enough by the three committees, even though as chair of the PSC committee I had pushed for a higher salary. And certainly to Brother James' credit he did add "This is only a motion. We can certainly amend it." We did make a point to say that it was a joint recommendation from three committees and that we could revisit it in next year’s budgeting process. Others wanted to know what the candidate’s current salary was (at his home church) to try to decide if we were offering a competitive amount. Although we had that information, we didn’t feel it was relevant to the discussion. But no one, not a single person, thought the package amount was too high. (Clearly a sign that it was too low!)

The meeting took a draining two and a half hours and was pretty stressful. But overall, the committee felt very encouraged by the church’s response. Now everything was done except for the voting on the following Sunday.

(Back to main Pastor Search Committee Menu)

Setting a Pastor's Salary

The salary for the position was negotiated among the Pastoral Search, Stewardship, and Personnel Committees and reflected all of the strengths and weaknesses of a multi-committee approach. Practically, the PSC advocated for a highest salary while the Stewardship committee advocated for a more affordable (from the church's perspective) amount. We knew that the amount of the salary would be quite a bit less than our previous pastor's package. This reduction was necessary for a couple of reasons. First, as I've noted, the experience level of the candidate was substantially less than our previous pastor. Our candidate had two years of experience verses the four decades of pastoral experience that his predecessor had. Second, the size of our church had contracted substantially. We averaged around 450 in attendance when our previous pastor was called compared to around 200 today.

So I sat down with the chairs of the two other committees. The Personal Committee chair was on the Pastor Search Committee, and the Stewardship Chair was Brother James. After an extended conversation, we settled on a salary that we felt we could take before the church. We based a good deal of our decision based on the salary range that the Kentucky Baptist Convention had developed. It’s gone now, but a similar comparison is located at the Lifeway website. There’s still an outstanding site on all these issues located at the Kentucky Baptist Convention.

(I’m intentionally leaving out the candidate from this discussion. When we raised a general salary figure for him he said “I trust that the church will be fair and compensate me at a level where I can support my family in your community.” Words that every PSC chairman hates to hear!)

So as a PSC, we then recognized that the challenge would be in educating the congregation about the strange beast that is the pastor's salary.

Most workers pay only ½ of their social security taxes with their employers paying the other half. But because pastors are self employed, they have to pay both sides of their Social Security taxes. In addition, when employees of a company pay for their own health insurance they are subsidized in part by their employer. That's why when you leave your job but must maintain your insurance, your COBRA payments are so substantial. For the first time you are paying for this insurance unsubsidized by your employer.

So when we presented the package it to the church, the first number we emphasized was the salary

Salary $XX,XXX

+ social security taxes *
+ a portion of insurance **
+ matching a portion of retirement benefits ***
+ car allowance (mileage)


Total Package: $XX,XXX


*We emphasized that the candidate was responsible for paying his taxes.

**We didn't feel it was wise to commit to paying for all of his health insurance, because the insurance rate continues to rise.

***We wanted to encourage him to set aside a portion for retirement, so as a church, we committed to match his funds up to a specified percentage of his salary.


So by listing salary first, instead of package, we tried to emphasize to the church that they should focus on the salary total, not the package total.

We also specified time for conducting revivals, for taking vacations, time for conference travel. We gave him flexibility in these, but require him to take 2 weeks of vacation a year. (So for example, he could take more than 2 weeks vacation, but have one less week of revival for the year.)

Some thoughts on pastoral compensation:

1. Get comparative numbers based on churches the same size. Use associational resources to help you with this. It also helps for the associational missionary to come in and discuss compensation with the appropriate committee.
2. Have a couple of committees put the package together. The more people you have invested in the process, the more voices you will have to explain the result when it comes up for a vote.
3. Commit to revisit the package every year. Some salaries are set when a pastor first arrives and then never get revisited. Then things continue until either he must bring it up, or he leaves because he could no longer afford to stay. The Personnel committee should examine the compensation of all church ministers every year.


Other thoughts??

(Back to main Pastor Search Committee Menu)

In View of A Call

We had a busy few days when brother Rick came in view of a call. (The phrase "In view of a call" simply means the Sunday when a pastoral candidate meets the church).

Thursday evening: Dinner Fellowship with Deacons

I was not in attendance for this meeting. But from what I later learned, the meal went well. After a meal, the deacons began asking him numerous questions, most of them surrounding his views towards the deacons. Brother James asked him a couple of questions about his philosophy of ministry. It was an auspicious beginning to the weekend.

Friday morning: Breakfast with Ministerial staff and wives
This was the only meeting scheduled where there would not be any Pastor Search Committee members present. I had great confidence that the candidate and the two other ministers who were on staff would have a productive meeting. I didn’t see any need to have the PSC represented and thought that they might talk a little more freely in our absence.

Saturday morning: Candidate and Wife at Ladies Brunch
Probably the topic that engendered the most impassioned discussion was the candidates role in the Ladies Brunch. We already had a guest speaker for the event (our interim pastor’s wife) and didn’t want to steal any of her limelight. But we did want to invite the candidate’s wife to come and eat with the ladies. As a part of this luncheon, the men of the church were going to serve the ladies and bus tables.

Much committee debate surrounded whether or not we wanted the candidate to be seen for the first time, clearing plates off tables. To his credit, Brother Rick thought that would be a perfect setting to meet the people. But the committee decided (against my preference) to have him stay in the kitchen and work there. Which he graciously did.

Saturday evening: Fellowship with the Pastoral Search Committee This was a nice event that included our spouses who got to meet the candidate for the first time. Much fellowship and we spent a lot of time recounting the search process for our spouses, unfettered by our self-imposed gag order.

Sunday morning: Senior Adult Breakfast

This was the event about which we had the most concern. Due to Rick’s age, we anticipated the most friction from the senior adults. Consequently we thought it would be a good idea for Rick to attend this meeting. And they fell in love with him immediately. I had given him a church directory during an earlier visit and he had memorized the names of almost every active adult in the church. They were stunned at his ability to remember their names. (The committee was also stunned). By eating with them, sharing coffee and just loving on them, he made a real impact. He then shared a few appropriate words to the gathered group and they enjoyed it tremendously.
Initially, a couple of committee members and myself hovered around a bit anxiously. After we observed him for a few minutes, as he laughed and chatted with the Senior Adults, one committee member tugged on my arm and said “C’mon Taran, let’s leave and let him do his thing.”

Morning worship: The morning worship service went exceptionally well. Right before the sermon, I briefly introduced the candidate and his wife. He then preached and it was the best sermon our committee had heard from him. Once again he rose to the occasion and God used his words to encourage and to convict.

Following the service we scheduled a lunch with the staff. Although I was not present, the personnel chairman (and PSC member) was. We had hoped that the staff would use it as an opportunity to talk with Brother Rick about his philosophy of ministry, his approach to working with staff, and some of their concerns from the previous week.

But no one said anything. Finally, the Personnel Chairman stood and asked: “Don’t any of you have any questions for the guy who could potentially be your supervisor?” Still no one said anything. Finally, one of the secretaries asked him “What do you expect out of the church secretaries?” He answered that question, but then added “Let’s talk about the elephant that’s in the room that no one wants to talk about. I heard that there was some question of whether or not I’m bringing in my own staff. First of all, I’m the only paid staff member at my current church. And second of all, I’ve heard about the job that you are doing and I’ve heard of no reason to come in and make changes. See? We’ve now discussed that elephant in the room and it’s no longer here!” And things relaxed from that point forward.

Sunday Evening: For the PM service he shared his testimony for a few minutes, then took questions for about 45 minutes. The questions were rarely theological (although Calvinism came up) and were focused more on pastoral issues. I’ll never forget the first question. One of the senior adults stood up and tentatively asked the question “Do you love the old people and will you bury us when we die?”

I didn’t get a sense that there were any trap questions and the only question he answered poorly was one he misunderstood. After the service his wife brought it to his attention and he found the questioner, apologized, and addressed her question directly.

Surprisingly to me, Brother James didn’t ask any questions.

Following the service, the PSC sat down with him and we were down-right giddy. Everything had gone exceptionally well and we were hearing from all reports that everyone loved him. He shared that the day had gone well and that he had experienced an encouraging day of worship.I met with he and his family on Monday morning before they headed back home. I wanted to see if he had any concerns that he wanted to address directly to me. There were none. All in all the weekend exceeded immeasurably beyond all I could ask for or even imagine. God is good.

One last major task awaited us before the vote the following Sunday. Our bylaws stipulate that the PSC must bring a candidate’s name in a formal nomination to the church a motion at a business meeting the Wednesday before the vote. It gives an opportunity for the church to directly ask us questions about the candidate in a public setting.

So we began to gear up for Wednesday, the evening that for me was the most stressful of the entire process.

(Back to main Pastor Search Committee Menu)

Preparing for the Candidate's First Sunday

One of the tremendous benefits our search committee had was the skill set provided by the individual members. For example, we had the personnel chairman as well as a former staff member who could talk with the staff about their concerns. Throughout the week in between our announcement and the candidate’s arrival, we spent a great deal of time communicating with the staff about their concerns.

The personnel chairman spoke with the secretaries and attempted to placate their worries. He assured them that the candidate had no plans to remove them from their jobs. I sat down with the director of the pre-K program and reiterated to her that there was no package deal with the pastor for his wife to come in and run the children’s programs.

In the meantime, throughout this week, Brother James began calling other people on PSC to ask more detailed questions about the search process. He was never inappropriate or combative, but it was clear that he was staking out a position in opposition to the candidate. My only aggravation in his position was that he had not actually met the candidate.

When the Pastor Search Committee met that Wednesday night, we made sure that everyone was up to speed on all these ongoing discussions. I shared with them that they should be completely transparent in talking with the church about the candidate. It was an odd experience of whiplash to go from keeping everything in confidence to sharing every element of the search process with the church.

We also put the finishing touches on the candidates visit. His busy itinerary looked like this:


Thursday afternoon: Arrival

Thursday evening: Dinner Fellowship with Deacons

Friday morning: Breakfast with Ministerial staff and wives

Friday afternoon: Look at area neighborhoods with a realtor

Friday evening: Free time

Saturday morning: Candidate and Wife at Ladies Brunch

Saturday evening: Fellowship with the Pastoral Search Committee

Sunday morning: Senior Adult Breakfast
Meet with PSC and deacons to pray for service

Sunday afternoon: Lunch with entire staff and spouses

Sunday PM: Testimony and Question and Answer time; Ice Cream Social
Last Meeting with Pastor Search Committee

Monday morning: Exit Breakfast With Pastor Search Chairman


It was a rigorous schedule, but a good one. (Another friend in the ministry said it “Looks like the Bataan Death March). But our feeling was that the church would benefit greatly from spending as much time as possible with the candidate. We worked around three events that serendipitously happened to be scheduled that weekend already (the Ladies Brunch, the PSC fellowship, and the Senior Adult Breakfast).

A lot would be riding on that visit.

(Back to main Pastor Search Committee Menu)