Wealth or Debt are Not Qualifications for Ministry
Friday, August 7, 2009 at 10:11AM I don't know what the future of the Church Herald Blogs are, but I thought we needed something new to chat about. I'm cross posting this with my personal blog which, I'm sure, none of you read :-)
One of the best things about the Reformed tradition, in my opinion, is the fact that, throughout the ages, it has placed a heavy emphasis on educated pastors. This emphasis has become less and less important over the past several decades, yet the normative preparation for a minister in the Reformed Church in America still requires a bachelor’s degree and a master’s degree, and this - to at least a certain degree - helps prevent (at least to some degree) churches from putting idiots in the pulpit. It also has allowed ministers to sit at the table with other professionals, like social workers, psychologists, lawyers, doctors, etc.
This professional collegiality becomes less of a reality as the qualifications for being a minister diminish (for example, up to 10% of a seminary’s students in a master’s program aren’t required to have a bachelor’s degree — we don’t want doctors who didn’t bother with college, but apparently it’s ok to have ministers who aren’t willing to take the time....) [For the record, I understand that this is meant as an "exception" but I've yet to see it invoked with someone who couldn't get a bachelor's degree.]
Having said all of that, I also understand the key problem with our system. To even candidate for a position as pastor, one needs to have completed (or be very close to) a master’s degree. That means that for the privilege of even applying to be a pastor (one of the lowest paying “professional” positions in the country), one needs to have figured out how to pay for at least seven years of education following high school. In short, to be a pastor in the RCA you either need to be independently wealthy (you can pay for it with family money), really lucky (someone, for some reason, decides to pay for it), or enter into your gloriously-low-paying job with debt dripping from your ears.
In my case, it’s student loans. I don’t come from money and no one graciously offered to pay for my seminary education. Add my student loans and my wife’s and we pay a mortgage-worth of school debt every month... this, merely to reach the most basic qualifications for our jobs.
This is a problem.
Wealth (or debt) should not be qualifications for ministry. On the other hand, neither do I believe lowering our expectations is a good option (although I’d argue it’s the one we’ve flirted most intently with in the RCA).
Yet, let’s be honest, we are never going back to the days where seminary tuition is denominationally covered (as it was when my grandfather went through).
What are we to do?
Let me offer two ideas:
- The "Pay if you Quit" Approach
- The "University of the People" Approach
The “Pay if you Quit” Approach
I actually think this is immediately do-able. Essentially, you put an individual’s seminary tuition costs into a 10-year loan (or 15). If they stay in a local church for that period of time, their seminary tuition costs are forgiven; if not, the costs are pro-rated and payed back at a normative student-loan interest.
For example. Let’s take the 10-year plan. If it costs $20,000 worth of tuition per student (some are more, others less), that’s $2,000 a year. If you minister in a local church for 10 years, you don’t pay any of it back. If you only stay in church-based-ministry 5 years, you pay back $10,000 (with interest set at normative student-loan rates). If you never work in the church, the entire $20,000 becomes a student loan - no big deal.
Why working in a local church? Because I believe it’s ministers preparing for local church ministry that seminaries ought to be focusing on not pre-PhD students or people preparing for denominational positions.
The “University of the People” Approach
I actually love this idea! The University of the People is a free university (albeit, yet unaccredited). Cool huh?! Read about it in the NY Times. I’m not sure how well it’d work for a general university degree; after all, tuition and salaries are part of how we pay for professors’ education, etc. However, I am convinced this would work for a seminary. It would only require two things: (1) scholarly-proven pastors to teach a course once in a while, and (2) theological professionals to do a tiny bit of pro-bono work once in a while.
There are hundreds of doctorally-educated pastors serving in local churches. Many of whom would both love to teach an occasional course and be highly qualified to do so. Add to that, theological professionals (of which there are many!) who could do a bit of pro bono work here and there. I’m not talking about a class a semester, I’m talking maybe 1 course a decade... really.. that’s all. Lawyers do pro-bono work... doctors do pro bono work. If pastors and theologians are professionals, a bit here and there wouldn’t hurt us either.
Make it a distance-learning system (like Western Seminary’s DL Program); use Open Source software; demand excellence from high-quality students, professors, and education (making no exception on any of them).
In the long run I don’t believe it does us well to lower the expectations of those we put in the pulpit - and no, as important as “life-experience” is (and as much as many seminary students need more of it), I do not believe it is an adequate substitute for education. And yet, there is a problem with the way we pay for theological education. Wealth or debt ought not to be basic qualifications for ministry....
Grace and Peace,
`tim
Reader Comments (22)
Excellent and worthy suggestions. I like them both, and agree the "pay if you quit idea" could be put to use right away. In most cases it wouldn't be a problem to have congregations paying to support the seminary education of her pastors.
I'm guessing the average debt load of seminary trained pastors will grow under this plan though, and I'm guessing the average debt load on exiting seminary is currently much higher than $20,000.
There are other considerations as well, such as what happens if an M.Div graduate with a certificate of fitness for ministry goes to one of the "Formula of Agreement" denominations, or one of those partners has folks who are called to serve in the RCA.
I'm one of those persons with "real-world" experience, though I had three Bachelor's degrees as well. I used up funds set aside for retirement to move to Holland, MI for three years, with a family of five--but I came away without educational debt. Distance learning would have worked well for me, but it simply wasn't available in the RCA at the time.
I received quite a bit of support from family and friends, as well as some scholarship funds. Without that assistance I would have had educational debt. The people who gave to support my education were certainly an encouragement to me - which I would not have had if I knew that I could get what I would consider free money (paid by simply serving 10 years - which I would be glad to do, even if it was an unpaid, part-time position).
I could have borrowed $20,000 per year at a minimum--perhaps leaving with $70,000 worth of debt for three years. But I can imagine some folks on the ministry track who would need a full seven years of college debt, perhaps with $150,000 debt on average. If a congregation has to pay an additional $15,000 per year to call a pastor, they are more likely to seek someone without a seminary degree - someone with life experience who can speak well. If all congregations were required to support this initiative, then it would likely add $5000 per year to their budgets. It would also require some folks to be hired to take care of all the details, and a way to cover the expected support that some congregations would refuse to pay.
I like the idea of "pay if you quit". Figuring out the details of borrowing limits, and where the money will come from, will likely be rather challenging in the implementation.
Do you have a suggestion regarding where the money will come from, and how the borrowing can be kept to a minimum?
I'm glad at that at least someone is not only interested in discussing
this issue but that Tim actually had some suggestions to deal with it.
It's really the only reason I haven't piped up before this. I recognize
the issue but haven't been able to come up with any kind of
meaningful response.
It is very frustrating to have "joined" a system where an educated
pastor was expected and in the few short years since my ordination
have seen this criteria diminished. This isn't to dismiss the fact that
a variety of people have a variety of gifts but I am beginning to wonder why
I was expected to go through the process when at this point it doesn't seem
to matter. Of course I benefited personally but that wasn't and isn't the point.
As a pastor who has not been in the service of a congregation for over a year,
in the 2nd lowest paying tier in our denomination, I have to say that the issue
is compelling. My husband is also a pastor who serves 2 congregations
"part-time", yet I think he actually spends more hours at times than a full-time pastor as there are no "staff" people to support the work of ministry. (This is not meant to ignore the dedicated volunteers who give of their time, talent and finances).
My school loans have yet to be paid off and are worth over $25,000.00, not to mention
the debt incurred just by returning to school - seeking to fulfill what I believe God called me to.
It's also interesting to hear about those whose unemployment benefits are running out.
We in the ministry don't have them so therefore, I guess it's not something we get to be concerned about.
I also feel that the use of retired pastors is driven not so much by the desire to allow people to continue serving in specific circumstances as it is to save on "costs."
By "hiring" retired pastors, the congregation is then no longer responsible for attendant costs (i.e. support) such as health care, social security payments, etc.
There is nothing covenantal about this system.
It may be in part a cultural issue but it seem sthat the clergy do not
receive the same level of respect as previously seen. This is in part perhaps
some of our own doing. Could some of this be because we don't take seriously
our own level of commitment, training and education needed for this position - no, this
calling?
This isn't to say that everyone who ever earned an M.Div and was ordained was perhaps the best person for the pulpit but the issue of education and wealth /or debt should not be ignored.
I don't have all the answers, of course, but there are a couple of things I'd probably add to what I posted earlier...
*Either of the two plans I put up are, essentially, meant to deal with tuition costs. I realize that room & board is another whole issue. Without tuition costs to deal with on top of everything, I'm thinking that room & board would be more manageable.
*Where does the money come from? I don't know that either. I can say this: if the tuition for a seminary degree (spread out over 3 years) were $20,000, I would think you could easily pay for the training of a dozen ministers for the cost of one denominational staff person over that same three years - probably more.
*Finally, call me a curmudgeon, I'd limit either program to people serving in RCA congregations. I don't mean to belittle chaplains or formula of Agreement people, etc., I guess lines just need to be drawn somewhere. My only real concern with that is that, quite frankly, it's difficult for women and non-majority graduates to get calls in the RCA - somehow this needs to be dealt with or mitigated against.
I'm sure there are brighter people than I out there... hopefully we'll hear from some of them!
Grace and Peace,
`tim
Well, Tim your additonal comment could start a whole 'nother tangent - that of women pastors.
My husband Dave, noted when he came back from GS, that the issue of "not enough pastors available for congregations" had been brought up. The response to that was,, "well, actually there are enough, except for the reluctance to call women pastors." And while not scientifically proven, there seems to be enough anecdotal evidence re: women pastors and unequal pay parity. For instance, not too long ago both I and another female pastor who had quite a number of years of life experience, in addition to our seminary training still received less of a financial package than a younger, recent seminary grad.
People ask me if this bias really still exists and I have to answer, "sadly, yes."
Joanna --
I get what your saying, having made my pro-women-in-ministry stance ad nauseum on these boards. It is one of my key concerns with the "pay if you quit" approach. As I said, I don't know how to mitigate against it....
I don't see that as a fundamental obstacle though.
Grace and peace,
`tim
I think that something has to be attempted. The system as it is really isn't working.
So, perhaps with the ideas that have been suggested, a vehicle to implement them
can be found. I suppose there would have to be an initial willingness to make the
attempt.
A proposal made to the seminaries?
The denomination?
A protest?
Something?!?!?
So, any thoughts - anyone!?!?
that's an easy one...........how about 3 years of denominational wide dialogue.....
Well since we are throwing Ideas against the wall to see if any stick:
What if instead of focusing on covering the cost of those attending seminary, we focused on paying the salaries of those that teach at seminaries. Often, the largest part of cost is in staff salaries. If we covered the cost of all seminary prophessors at Western and New Bruinwick, that could substantially reduce the cost to attend Seminary. And if more students went the on-line route the facities cost as well would be low.
Now before you through out that that excludes half of our seminarians, I know. I didn't go the RCA Sem route. In fact I went the 4 year degree over the 3 year and added the MFCA classes every summer. But, it was my choice to seek my degree outside of the denominational schools, and I do not feel that my choice to do so, should demand everyone pay my way.
And perhaps unlike other my financial mess is one I created before seminary. So, should we look to help any minister with any debt then?
hmm.....
Tim, there is something in my gut that is bothering me with this post. Admittedly, I recognize that I am probably hearing things that aren’t there, but that I do hear is a type of educated haughtiness. I have been asked recently about what my thoughts are concerning seminary and why I never finished. I have found this to be a very polarizing subject where people put me in the camp of those who think that seminary is unnecessary or put me into the other camp that thinks scholarship isn’t important for the pastorate. The truth is I think most men (and women those those egalitarians) need to go to seminary and scholarship is extremely important.
There is a recent trend of really sharp, entrepreneurial, driven men skipping seminary all together and planting churches. I don’t have a problem with this at all if those people have picked up the tools they need in other places and are continuing to grow theologically and philosophically. If a person can handle the Greek and Hebrew, knows at least at the cursory level Christian history and can wrestle through and find answers for deep, difficult theological questions then he (she) might not need a degree from a seminary. These people are usually driven, avid studiers and readers by nature. If they could, they would spend their whole day with the scriptures as well as with men like Calvin, Luther and Spurgeon. I said might because seminary then becomes an obedience issue between him and the Lord and may still be a very good idea.
On the other hand, if you don’t have the tools, have a tendency to be lazy in study, can’t navigate through the languages, know nothing of how to find answers to deep, difficult theological questions except to quote John Piper or Marva Dawn and know nothing of our rich history then you need to go get some tools. If you are lazy in study and continue to get in front of people and teach, you have much more courage than I do. I would strongly recommend seminary for its accountability and plan to educate you in doctrine, language and history.
I have one year at Trinity Evangelical Divinity School under my belt as well as three years through Western Theological Seminary's Distance Learning Program. Honestly, both were poor fits for the type of learn that I am. Seminary felt to me like I was laying a foundation in a house I was already living in. Any good educator knows that there are many different ways to learn and often higher education institutions focus on only one or two ways to learn. After a great deal of prayer and seeking wise counsel, my wife Laura and I decided that I would continue to study and learn but not to seek a degree until the time is right or that the patience of our classis grows weary.
In my humble opinion and observations, seminary education does not necessarily equal quality, theologically astute, biblical pastors, nor does a lack of training necessarily equal unbiblical and/or unqualified pastors .
Paul,
I don't know exactly what to say about your response, I don't know that there really is much to say except this... I think perhaps you've read something into my post that I wasn't trying to say (although, I'm not denying there's some truth to it). While I do believe seminary is important and I do believe that pretty much anyone can make it through if they set their mind to it, and I also believe that seminary is important even besides whatever scholarly skills and resources are developed, I say all of this not as someone who enjoyed seminary.... at all.
I found seminary to be an exceedingly dark and unfulfilling time. I didn't enjoy it. I wasn't encouraged by most of the professors, and I had to figure out how to learn despite the fact that much of what I was learning was presented in ways that were as fundamentally different from my personal learning style as possible. And yet, I still think it was important and still believe seminary should be part of the normative preparation for ministers. Exceptions? Sure, I suppose there are exceptions. But if you ask me they should truly be exceptions.
The answer, from my perspective, is not to get rid of seminary (even though the process, like any, will always have it's problems), but to help fix it and to help it become something better, healthier, and more effective at preparing people for ministry.
I keep coming back to the fact that, even thought there are obviously some differences between ministers and other professionals, there are (and should be) some similarities too. I don't care how good of a learner someone is, I don't want a surgeon who didn't go to medical school. A lot of bright people represent themselves in court, but they're never as good as a well-trained lawyer.
Grace and Peace,
`tim
Tim, an idea that is in the works right now (to some degree) at Western Theological Seminary is the "Free to Serve" initative. WTS is trying to build an endowment fund of at least $5 Million that is used for educating RCA pastors. Meaning, that if you plan to go into pastoral ministry in the RCA, your tuition (not other expenses) will be covered by this endowment. I'm not sure what the criteria are for how long you must serve as a pastor, but I believe there are some. Also, I know that if you do not finish out your degree you will have to pay for the schooling that you did do. This fund was just getting off the ground when I graduated in '08 and our graduating class donated to this fund as a graduation gift - so I know its real, but it won't pay for students education until they get to that $5 million or more if they've upped it.
Wow - how wonderful to see this conversation taking off.
In response to a comment made in a recent post,
perhaps it does seem as if ideas are just being thrown out to
see what sticks. But I think the zeitgeist of our community
is indicating there is something that needs discussion and
issues that need to be addressed. (And no apologies for the
$10.00 word...my parents expected me to use my education
& I paid enough for it - do NOT mean to be arrogant but tired
of being expected to DUMB down as well.) (And isn't that
another issue that could really get some conversation going...) :)
Anyway - so we are engaged in conversation around the concerns
initially posted by Tim, and I suspect addressed elsewhere.
Any possibiltiies for taking it to a larger forum?
Yes, I am in many things an advocate for doing. I realize
that there needs to be preliminary discussion, calibrating
the issues and responses to them and then detail work for implementation.
But I think there is enough to get going on this. The idea of a 3 year denominational
dialogue (while perhaps made tongue-in-cheek but don't know for certain)...has some
merit.
This is serious. It may be the case for some people, the exceptions that God will provide
the means for their seminary education via some wonderful unexpected gift but for most of us - this isn't the answer that we receive and pursuing ordained ministry w/all attendant costs knowing that the financial reparation will be minimal is not responsible or faithful.
It's funny how there are those consistory & congregation members who have certain expectations of their pastors ( & not always in line w/what the terms of the call originally were) but they forget the promises that were made at the installation service - of the support - including financial - that they promised to uphold. The economy certainly has something to do with it -but alot of it also seems to have to do w/lack of understanding about the role of the pastor & what we were actually called to do. (For ex. I was told - by an elder, that the "job of the pastor was to do P.R. for the church and fund raise." I didn't respond but thought to myself that those weren't the courses I took at seminary and even if they had been offered, they wouldn't be the focus of what I understand my call to be centered on.) Now, financial education wouldn't hurt but we also seem to have forgotten what someone said once at a gathering I was at (and unfortunately I can't remember who said this so can't properly credit) but the point was that pastors now have "offices" to work in - not studies to study in. As in study the Word, be in dialogue w/God for more rather than less hours in the week etc. (And pls don't suggest I wake up 2 hours earlier to do that -it's not going to work for me.) :)
Anyway - I hope more people join the discussion and that out of this something comes together to promote work being done to address the issue.
Thanks again.
As you evaluate how to lower the personal investment needed for a career in ministry, watch out for repercussions from those folks that work 2, 4, 6, 10hrs per week along side the ministry staff.........for FREE. Perhaps the next movement will be elder/deacon pay.
Mike...
You're point is well taken, but it's apples and oranges. I'm not talking specifically about ministry, I'm talking about being allowed to do ministry. No one is requiring Elders and Deacons to spend 3 years of full-time schooling in order to be eligible for election.
Related to your topic though, while I can't speak for all ministers, I can speak for those of us who serve as solo-pastors in the "small" category of our Classical pay scales - like the volunteers in our congregations, we put in a LOT of time and energy doing things around church that we aren't paid for.
As for Elder & Deacon pay. The unfortunate trend in the church is to pay for practically everything... I'm sure it's already being done somewhere.
Grace and Peace,
`tim
Mike,
You are assuming that ministers and their families don 't volunteer time and resources above and beyond their job description, which I would say is a dangerous assumption. My husband is a minister in a small RCA church. He preaches at least two times per week (which does not include the preparation and prayer time that goes into that process), writes the order for worship, contacts the organist/pianist with worship info, answers the church phone (we have no secretary), teaches adult Sunday School every Sunday (Sept. through May), leads adult Sunday School, meets with people as needed for individual counseling, is a youth leader (Sept.-May), maintains our church's website and types up a calendar of church events every year, visits people in their homes and hospitals, conducts weddings and funerals, serves on consistory, and I'm sure many other things that aren't coming to mind right now (including basically being on-call 24/7). That does not include his responsibilities at the Classis level and beyond. As a minister's wife, I help in the nursery, have taught Sunday School and served as Sunday School superintendent, youth group leader, and answer church calls at home 24/7. As a family we also take our turn greeting for Sunday services, providing refreshments for coffee time, and cleaning our church.
And we do all of this joyfully, being so glad that we are part of a church family where so many others volunteer their time for the greater good of the church. But there is no way that my husband is able to accomplish all of these things without volunteering numerous hours of time on a weekly basis, and since you brought up the topic of minister's pay, he receives meager wages for the work he is actually paid for.
It appears the point of the original post is to remove the financial barrier for those who feel called to become ministers in the RCA without drowning them in financial debt before they actually begin their service within that role while maintaining our historical standard that ministers attend seminary and be properly trained before serving.
I fully understand the point of the original post and I also appreciate the non-compensated work the pastors and their families contribute to their local congregations. Sadly my experience and exposure has been that my previous pastors did ministry too often in the compensated roles only. When asked to do other things in a broader perspective, "time constraints" was the reason given. (and that in reality was questionable.) My point about recognizing what elders and deacons do is because everyone in ministry makes sacrifices.
Right or wrong, some laypersons see pastors as having a generous salary and benefit package already. Reducing their investment of being a pastor may cause some concerns from the volunteers.
Mike, are you suggesting that the people in the pews seriously believe ministers either ought to be independently wealthy or somehow deserve to either be laden with debt in order for the privileged of even candidating for a call? OK.. that's a bit disingenuous, I don't actually think you're suggesting that! Although I have heard people say "they chose to be ministers, so they should just suck it up." Seriously... I've heard that.
Ministers in the RCA are paid better than those in many denominations, however, we are not - by any stretch of the imagination - paid on a par with many our colleagues in other professions with similar and often less education (in other words, they make more with less need for wealth or debt.)
I realize there are some lazy ministers out there. (I could easily name a few of them for you.....) On the other hand, even my elders (with whom I have a pretty decent and open relationship) simply don't "get" everything I do. I sometimes don't show up for things that some people think I "ought to" simply because once in a while I need to spend time with my wife and/or my daughter. Sure there are some 35 or 40 hour weeks in my life... but for me (and I would bet most ministers) they are offset by equally-as-many 65-75 hour weeks.
Grace and Peace,
`tim
As I follow the discussion I am once again reminded of the
somewhat "invisible" nature of what pastors do.
It can't always be quantified in typical measurement.
And it appears that there is the missing link in understanding
the difference between living our lives as faithful followers of
Christ - v. our culture. However, that isn't to say that we don't
live - in - this - world.
We are instructed, biblically, to be sure that the pastor/preacher
is fully compensated so that their attention to ministry need not
be compromised.
Although Paul was a tent-maker he too was able to rely on others,
"the people in the pew" so to speak to carry out the day to day
work of the church. And I am pretty sure that they did this,
as "volunteers" understanding that it was a privilege, it was just
integral to their way of life to participate - while seeing to it
that their pastors could still engage in life responsibily.
Of course that was a different culture but it's the priniciples that
I aim to highlight here.
Of course the early church wasn't a perfect institution as we well know.
But if someone is called into ministry & the call is confirmed by the Body,
then we need to find a way to make sure that in being faithful to that call,
an individual &/or family is not so overwhelmed by debt, gaining the qualifications &
education it takes to become a pastor that it becomes a burden.
And lest we think that education isn't necessary, I'll share what an instructor
reminded me of when I was taking a class years ago while still in the UMC system.
I made a comment that the disciples hadn't had to go to seminary for 3 years - why is it something we were expected to do?
And the instructor - a pastor as well - reminded me that they had spent
3 years with Jesus himself. If that wasn't an education, then what was?
And then he said that if we were able to spend 3 years w/Jesus in the way
that they did, then perhaps we wouldn't need seminary but since that wasn't
the case, then - well, basically - "deal with it!" :)
Yep - 3 years. I don't doubt that anyone who truly follows Christ doesn't have some sacrifice to make - that almost goes w/out saying. But I believe our financial picture and ability to actually provide for ourselves shouldn't be it. At least not in this context.
(Another context might be in the call to certain mission fields where the comforts of home aren't quite what we are used to).
Peace, prayers and blessings to all who care enough to engage in this discussion.
Joanna
Regarding the issues of debt and low pay, I am wondering if we are viewing and evaluating the fruits of the labor, meaning...how are the recently retired pastors doing financially?
Certainly there is debt to pay off in the 1st decade or so, but the pastors I see who are 55+ in age with 25 years of ministry pay and pension, seem to be heading into a very comfortable realm of semi retirement or retirement.
Mike... You make an interesting point; my grandfather was a minister in the RCA and, I agree, my grandparents (although older than the mid-50s you're referring to) seem to have had (and in the case of my Grandma, still have) a pretty comfortable retirement. I'm not an expert on such things, but the current pension plan is essentially the same kind of thing that many people have. It's a 403b (I think that's what it's called) which is essentially the same thing as a 401k.
Put bluntly, I will be paying for my education for longer than the first decade of ministry and I don't expect to have nearly as comfortable of a retirement as many who are currently retired from RCA ministry.
I've said before, ministers in the RCA (in general) are better paid than in many denominations. That's great. The truth is, the fact that any changes made in the way we pay for the education of ministers won't help me. I am where I am. My key concerns are that others not be forced into debt merely because they're called to ministry (or even worse, that only the rich be welcomed!) and that cost of seminary be eliminated as an argument against expecting pastors to be well-educated.
Great conversation!
Grace and Peace,
`tim
I suspect that there are some who are comfortable but I've seen a number of pastors who at age 70+ continue to preach, not just because it's what they love, but it is supplemental income. )With no accruable benefits since they are retired, not able to add to the funds). I wonder if those who are doing well financially are those who
a) live in areas where income isn't a major problem (should say lack of income) for parishioners and b) didn't go into ministry in the latter part of life. Since I didn't begin seminary until I was 35, then took a break and then returned, my debt wasn't accumulated until then. It will be some time before that amount is paid off. And on the other end - my pension fund will not have accumulated as much as it would had I started in the ministry earlier.
And I have no pension/retirement fund from a previous position since my work history didn't include those kind of jobs. Except the 8 months I was a police officer, in NJ. But I only have SS from that. (Thank goodness for my husband who did have a retirement fund from his "previous, pre-clergy life). ;)
Have we given up? Is this too "hot" a topic to continue with.
Perhaps it doesn't seem necessary but I think it will be for our
future (if we have any) pastors.