well said SoonerDave...

My problem with the situation is that Osteen sends a message that "health and wealth" comes from being right with God. His McSermons are great to make people feel good about themselves and look forward to "prosperity", but there's little theology to them. He's leading people astray.

I have not heard an entire Osteen sermon, but if Osteen is, indeed, preaching a "health and wealth" gospel, then there's certainly nothing scriptural about it. That's too bad.

It's so easy to demonstrate biblically that health and wealth were the LAST things to necessarily follow someone who became a Christian. Heck, Solomon is just about the exception that proves the rule. Were some Christians wealthy? Yes. Did God give wealth to some believers? Yes. But there are also instances of Christians who had nothing (the woman who gave the oil to anoint Christ's feet, another who gave her last coins), and Christians who endured personal persecution and turmoil (most of the Disciples).

It's easy to misappropriate scripture to wrap up a health, wealth, and prosperity church. The missing link in most of those cases is that each of those things is meted out in accordance with God's sovereign will, not necessarily in response to one's "rightness." Sadly, the reason that kind of church resonates with so many is precisely because of that misconception combined with a "me-first" presumption of how God operates, rather than a "God-first." When people can make that shift to a God-first, Christ-centric notion, the fallacy of a health-wealth-and-prosperity church is infinitely easier to discern.

-SoonerDave

Yes, unfortunately most church-goers have a "me-first" attitude, when it should be God first, others second, me third. That is why people leave perfectly good churches that they may have been attending for years over silly things like a particular music style or a program that they think brings in the "wrong" kind of crowd.

All people in that tax bracket are penalized. The Democrat's system is to progressively tax the wealthy more than the poor. Some rich people pay as much as 50% of their income in taxes. That isn't right, when a poor person is only paying 6%. It should be the same percentage across the board. Liberals penalize the rich for their success. Why should a person that has to work hard for his or her money, have to pay for welfare for the poor guy that made poor choices in life?

I love that this guy posts this statement with his username one a thread about being rich or poor. I wonder if ChristianConservative would consider himself more of an American, or a conservative or a Christian?

Or since you said that the higher tax actually is used to give money to the poor and needy ... and since Jesus told us to do just that ... then isn't the 'liberal tax system' really achieving Jesus request?

I'm curious to all the critics of Christian success and wealth, how come it's okay for a "non-Christian" to be wealthy but as soon as a Christian, pastor, or otherwise has money they are scrutinized by a double standard.

I'm curious to all the critics of Christian success and wealth, how come it's okay for a "non-Christian" to be wealthy but as soon as a Christian, pastor, or otherwise has money they are scrutinized by a double standard.

Shouldn't Christians spend there money different than non-belivers? Aren't we called to be the salt and the light... to renew our mind and have different passions and pursuits than those of non-believers.

I don't think its a double-standard. I think its a question of how does having private jets, McMansions and McHugeCars line up with the tenants of Christ's Gospel. Not the "20th Century Gospel of Greed" or the "American Gospel of Christian Materialism" or the "Conservative Gospel of Damn the Poor and Forget the Hungry"

Shouldn't Christian ministers live, earn and spend by a different standard of success than that of worldly entertainers.

I'm curious to all the critics of Christian success and wealth, how come it's okay for a "non-Christian" to be wealthy but as soon as a Christian, pastor, or otherwise has money they are scrutinized by a double standard.

You don't become a pastor to become rich; you become a pastor to help those who need it. Your focus should be on the "flock" not your wallet size or your bank account or what kind of car you drive. That's not to say you shouldn't earn a living, you should, but you should never put money ahead of the well being of those who trust you because of the position you hold. Priests take vows of poverty to not get caught in the snare of money over parishioners.

Shouldn't Christians spend there money different than non-belivers? Aren't we called to be the salt and the light... to renew our mind and have different passions and pursuits than those of non-believers.

I don't think its a double-standard. I think its a question of how does having private jets, McMansions and McHugeCars line up with the tenants of Christ's Gospel. Not the "20th Century Gospel of Greed" or the "American Gospel of Christian Materialism" or the "Conservative Gospel of Damn the Poor and Forget the Hungry"

Shouldn't Christian ministers live, earn and spend by a different standard of success than that of worldly entertainers.
:congrats::congrats::congrats:Well said...

Yes, I agree we are called to be the salt and light if you will and set an example. But I still find it a double standard in how most people judge others including "christians" judging other "christians" as well as non-believers judging Christians who have wealth. It is one thing to have wealth it is another to worship it. Who are we to judge one's heart. I believe someone can be a believer and have wealth and nice things as long as their heart and lifestyle is right with God. Yes some including prominent pastors, etc. worship the wealth, but I think some of the time it is "judging" more than it is those same people getting to know the people's hearts. So if I'm a CEO of a huge corporation and I'm a Christian, I can't make 7 figures a year with an 8 figure a year incentive package just like every other major CEO? But if I'm not a Christian, then it's okay.........

I think of it this way:

There are a lot of other people out there who provide invaluable services to the community...ahem teachers and such...and they are not compensated properly for what they do. But pastors, who provide a service, are sometimes given huge, inflated salaries. They aren't regulated by anyone.

My only hope to not live in near poverty as a teacher was to marry someone who has or will have more money than me, because it takes forever to get a substantial raise as a teacher.

And no, my school did not receive the $3K raise for teachers...somehow it didn't work out, because we're a charter or something...just so you know, before anyone says something about that raise.

It just depends on where you put your priorities.

Mark 10:21 (New International Version):

Jesus looked at him and loved him. "One thing you lack," he said. "Go, sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me."

The pastoral vow of poverty has always been based on this - and many other verses just like it. It's inconvenient, to be sure, but for many churches who preach the 'literal truth' of the Bible, it's (for $ome rea$on) certainly not a biblical command to be taken literally. In fact, just the opposite with some of the 'prosperity' megachurches. I wonder why$...err....?

---------------------

I just never thought that people became ministers so they could become rich...I thought it was some sort of "calling," am I wrong?

So if I'm a CEO of a huge corporation and I'm a Christian, I can't make 7 figures a year with an 8 figure a year incentive package just like every other major CEO? But if I'm not a Christian, then it's okay.........

Just for discussion... doesn't most of the money that goes to the preachers come from the people, the church members, from tithing?

Many of which are living in poverty yet still sending and believing their money is going for a good cause, to help others?

We've all seen stories and watched television where the preacher is imploring anyone to listen to send in money.. then to find out later he's a mega-millionaire and these poor saps have no electricity.

Google is so cool

Unlike so many, we do not peddle the word of God for profit. On the contrary, in Christ we speak before God with sincerity, like men sent from God. 2 Cor 2:17

Now the overseer must be above reproach, the husband of but one wife, temperate, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not given to drunkenness, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. 1 Tim 3:2,3

Easy, you beat me to the punch. I was just looking for that scripture reference. I think that verse alone is a stinging indictment for many ministries today.

I am going to buck the trend here and say YES, God wants everyone to be rich and prosperous, including Joel Osteen.

Its not $$$ that is bad, but the love of money. The Bible teaches that God desires for His people to become storehouses, so that they can be a blessing to others. So, yes, God wants Joel Osteen, along with you and me, to be rich.

in order:

bandnerd, so are you saying teachers provide invaluable services to the community but pastors don't?

karried, I can agree on the pastor thing and a FEW making a ridiculous un-Godly amount of money. however, I do believe once the money is "tithed" it is God's money and not the church members, etc. I still don't think that excuses exorbant salaries. On another note, most churches are ran by elders, deacons, members, etc. and pastor's salaries are typically dictated by these people. So if that's the case, what is to be said of the ones who approve the pastor's salaries? My comments however were not just geared for the pastor, but to anyone who is a follower of Christ. Is it not okay for a Christian to be a CEO of a multi-national corporation and make 7 figure salaries and 8 figure incentives and a non Christian has the right to do so without scrutiny? Also, another step to look at, what about a Buddhist, Muslim, Atheist, etc. and their ability to make such money.

How come it's always Christians that get scrutinized and singled out when it comes to such issues. You don't hear people singling out Buddhists, Muslims, Atheists, Kabbalaists, Hindu's, etc. I'll tell you why, because Satan has one mission, to steal kill and destroy everything that is dear to God (as in the Christian God). What name would you choose to tarnish and ruin if you were Satan? God, Jesus Christ (the only other name that doubles as a curse word).

jbkrems, I think you hit it right on the money (for lack of a better term). It's not money that is wrong, it is the LOVE of money. Too many people judge and assume because a person is a "Christian" and has money, that they automatically LOVE that money instead of looking at their hearts.

Is it not okay for a Christian to be a CEO of a multi-national corporation and make 7 figure salaries


That's perfectly acceptable because he is doing a job and getting paid a salary from the company .. not the congregation. Doesn't matter what religion he is.. he's doing a job he was hired to do as a CEO of a company ... not using false pretenses to get money from people for good causes and then going out to buy a McMansion for himself and his family.

And aren't church donations exempt from taxation?

I honestly don't think that when people give to churches they know that their money is going to supporting these lavish lifestyles.

I doubt they would knowingly send in money and endorse these outrageous displays of wealth and greed.

I'm not trying to pick on Christianity.. I'm just tired of the hypocrisy.... of all religions - but the Tammy Fayes and Haggertys have sort of ruined the warm fuzzy feeling I used to have regarding churches.

that's just the thing, I'm not denying that this isn't a problem or doesn't exist, but none the less there is a double standard when it comes to religion, particularly Christianity. Any other religion and it's okay to talk about it, but when it comes to Christianity, it becomes, hypocritical, stereotypical. Yes I know there are some preachers out there who are con artists, but some are stereo-typed against.

I know first hand my pastor is one most people think is probably one of the spokespersons for the McMansion Health and Wealth pastors. To most on the outside that would be the impression, however those who know him and his heart, would know he barely makes anything of a salary at all, far less than he deserves and plans to quit making any salary at all here in a few years so that the church can use it for other things. He actually made the majority of his wealth in the business sector, primarily investing in rent houses since he was a sophomore in college. he relies very little on the church and has invested far more of his own personal money into the church. Other pastors may not live as lavishly as they appear, yet I guarantee you they are judged as so. I'm willing to bet that some megachurch pastors make a honest salary less than $50,000, however they may have things donated to them by wealthy members, say houses, cars, vacations, etc. Is it not okay, taking that bless others in need mentality, and give the pastor a car, house (rent or own despite it's value), etc.? Either way you look at it, the pastor can still be doing their job, just like a CEO is hired to do, the pastor is the CEO of the church congregation if you will, and most are NOT using false pretenses. As with anything, its the few who do use them, that create the stereotypes for the majority that aren't the exception.

There are quite a few mega-church pastors that made good money in the business world, and gave up those jobs as they were called to be pastors. The reason some of their churches became mega churches, was their business sense and thinking outside the box. Traditional churches simply do not have an aggressive growth mentality.

. I'm willing to bet that some megachurch pastors make a honest salary less than $50,000, however they may have things donated to them by wealthy members, say houses, cars, vacations, etc. Is it not okay, taking that bless others in need mentality, and give the pastor a car, house (rent or own despite it's value), etc.? Either way you look at it, the pastor can still be doing their job, just like a CEO is hired to do, the pastor is the CEO of the church congregation if you will, and most are NOT using false pretenses. As with anything, its the few who do use them, that create the stereotypes for the majority that aren't the exception.



The problem I have is many of these mega church pastors are also taking donations from the less wealthy...And the idea of them making less than $50K is laughable...Unless they are already independently wealthy as it seems your pastor is

Just for discussion... doesn't most of the money that goes to the preachers come from the people, the church members, from tithing?

Many of which are living in poverty yet still sending and believing their money is going for a good cause, to help others?

We've all seen stories and watched television where the preacher is imploring anyone to listen to send in money.. then to find out later he's a mega-millionaire and these poor saps have no electricity.
That is true, Karrie. People who tithe their 10% to the church are not only furthering the minstry of the church, but they are paying the utilities of the church and the salaries of the ministers and secretaries.

One thing I have learned is that I have to have trust in our church treasurer that the money that members give, is going to the right places. That's why, once every two months, we have a business meeting where the treasurer brings a report. That report breaks down ALL of the expenditures of the church, and also breaks down how much we pay our church staff. There are never any secrets....and our deacon body makes sure of that.

Our church is located in a very low income part of town, in a gang infested neighborhood. Needless to say, we do not have any "rich" people that attend our church. We have many low income families that attend, and many of them don't tithe, but they are welcome anyway and we do our best to minister to them.

One other thing.......over a year and a half ago, our church got a new pastor. He left a good paying position with the Baptist Foundation, and took a large cut in pay to become our pastor. He drives a 2004 Dodge (I think).Plus, it has been over three years since our staff has had a pay raise, and they continue to serve God in a cheerful manner.

Metro:

Thanks for your kind words. I wonder, where do you go to church?

I go to Faith Church in Edmond (near 15th and Bryant).

I'm willing to bet that some megachurch pastors make a honest salary less than $50,000...
I'm willing to take you up on that bet...

It is one thing to have wealth it is another to worship it. Who are we to judge one's heart. I believe someone can be a believer and have wealth and nice things as long as their heart and lifestyle is right with God. Yes some including prominent pastors, etc. worship the wealth, but I think some of the time it is "judging" more than it is those same people getting to know the people's hearts.
Agreed. But if the question is whether pastors should make all this money ... and its not just money, its the McMansion, the jets, the cars, the everything else that is lavish and expensive.


So if I'm a CEO of a huge corporation and I'm a Christian, I can't make 7 figures a year with an 8 figure a year incentive package just like every other major CEO? But if I'm not a Christian, then it's okay.........

I know several Christian CEO's of fairly successful corporations that make huge salaries. They go out of their way to make sure they are not living lavishly and that they find ways to feed the hungry, help the poor and bless others.

You have to be honest and admit that someone with that kind of money must safeguard his/her heart.


On Edit: I wonder for sake of argument, if Joel Olsteen or any of the other mega-hyper-super-ridiculously-wealthy 'ministers' would give it all up and move to Africa or Central America if the Lord called them to it?

I wonder for sake of argument, if Joel Olsteen or any of the other mega-hyper-super-ridiculously-wealthy 'ministers' would give it all up and move to Africa or Central America if the Lord called them to it?
I doubt it very seriously. I can't see them giving up their high class living, to go somewhere where they would not have anything. Unfortunately, sometimes the materialistic things in life overshadow the spiritual things in life. They have it made in the shade here.......I can't see them giving it all up.

IMHO, I feel that those that are Christians and want to financially support a ministry, need to financially support their local church. Most local churches have no problems allowing their members to look at the financial reports to see where God's money is being spent. If you give money to your church, and you have questions about how it is spent, they should be able to show you...without hesitation.

If you give to an out of state ministry, or a TV ministry, try asking them to let you see where your money is going that you send to them. Chances are, they will just laugh.

mega-hyper-super-ridiculously-wealthy 'ministers'


Keith, these are the ministers (above) that I am referring to.. Your church doesn't come anywhere near to the type of affluence that some exhibit.

metro--

I never said that pastors don't provide a service. I can't say it's invaluable because not everyone goes to church or is religious. But everyone needs an education...yeah, I know some are home-schooled...but more are put into public/private education and they need teachers.

Also, my pay doesn't come from the pockets of the parents of my kids.

I'm not scrutinizing ALL Christians here...but it does raise some eyebrows when pastors/ministers make SO much money.

You're trying to defend these people. Do you get what we're all trying to say here?

The pastor is not paid by some state fund. They are paid by the church, and the church makes money through donations from its parishioners. And I'm sorry, but i I, as a teacher, were going to a church where my pastor was driving around a $50k Escolade, I'd have a problem with that as I drive around in my beat-up, 10 year old Honda.

jbkrems, thanks for asking. I have attended lifechurch.tv (Before they added the .tv) for a little over 8 years now.

bandnerd, I never accused you of saying that pastors don't provide a service, I simply asked to clarify to give you the benefit of the doubt. On the contrary, you didn't mention that they do provide a service in your post either. Giving your rebuttal, not everyone has/or attends school locally either. IMO everyone needs God before they need an education.

Again, I'm willing to buck the trend and say most pastors including mega-church pastors don't make the exorbant salaries that most are referring to. It's mainly a few tele-evangelists that have created that stereotype. As Keith said, most churches are transparent enough to show you the financial statements if you are a member, however you probably won't find that with tele-evangelists, TBN, Daystar, etc.

I do get what you are trying to say here, the state pays teachers (through taxes, etc. which one must pay whether they want to or not) so that SHOULD BE regulated.

I'm not trying to necessarily DEFEND these pastors as much as I am trying to play devil's advocate and thinking of the other side of the issue. Most like to do that to anything I post that deals with religion, so I'm taking the initiative this time to think about the other side. I don't think that a pastor should make 6 figures no matter the size of the church, however it's private money (that is willfully given), so that SHOULD NOT be regulated by the state or government. I do agree that teachers should be paid more, but that is a problem you should take up with the State, your School Board, etc. not the local church, despite the pastor's salary. That's why we have the 1st Amendment, separation of Church and State.

"But pastors, who provide a service, are sometimes given huge, inflated salaries. They aren't regulated by anyone. "

Yes, I did say they provide a service.

It's your opinion that everyone needs God before they need an education. I do not share that opinion. Frankly, I feel that an academic education is more important...because no matter how much you feel you have Jesus in your heart, your religious beliefs will not magically put food onto your plate, or a roof over your head...unless you're living in a church-made shelter.

Again, I'm willing to buck the trend and say most pastors including mega-church pastors don't make the exorbant salaries that most are referring to. It's mainly a few tele-evangelists that have created that stereotype. As Keith said, most churches are transparent enough to show you the financial statements if you are a member, however you probably won't find that with tele-evangelists, TBN, Daystar, etc.
Since this is an OKC board, I know of atleast 2 maybe 3 OKC-area pastors that live in well over 700K houses. And this is OKC not California and 700K is well above normal... to the point of McMansion style. I'm sure that munber might be higher.



I don't think that a pastor should make 6 figures no matter the size of the church, however it's private money (that is willfully given), so that SHOULD NOT be regulated by the state or government. I do agree that teachers should be paid more, but that is a problem you should take up with the State, your School Board, etc. not the local church, despite the pastor's salary. That's why we have the 1st Amendment, separation of Church and State.

Good to hear you explain that you think that the salaries are too high. And even if it is only a minority of pastors that receive these high salaries, then that is too mcuh. It's time the pastoral profession stops being a profession and returns to the status of a calling. Christians should spend their money differently and should have different lifestyles than that of the rest of the world.

And I would add that the Seperation of Church and State is not a 1st Amendment clause... nor a Constitutional Clause. It's a Jeffersonian Idea. But that is basically splitting hairs because a majority of people think it is a 1st Amendment idea. No harm, no foul.

so metro, what kind of house does craig groeschel live in? $700,000+? -M

Christians should spend their money differently and should have different lifestyles than that of the rest of the world.

They should differ only to the extent God calls them be different. If God has a purpose for Person X to have what you would call a "lavish" lifestyle, and Person Y not to, then that's something that ultimately comes under the heading of the sovereignty of God. He doles out resources in accordance with the way He wants them doled out, because they're His resources to begin with. If you want to discuss that from a moral perspective, then I would agree completely that there should be a marked difference in what a Christian might spend money on versus what a secular individual would spend.

Remember that Solomon was wealthy - wealthy in earthly, material terms - beyond anyone's imagination because God opted to grant him wealth. Maybe someone else resented that; maybe someone thought it was "too much" wealth. But it was God's discretion that prevailed, not man's.



don't think that a pastor should make 6 figures no matter the size of the church, however it's private money (that is willfully given), so that SHOULD NOT be regulated by the state or government.

Therein lies a serious problem with the relative value assigned to salaries of a certain size. A six-figure salary in Oklahoma is tremendous, but a six-figure salary in California or New York might not be enough to buy even a modest home. That's also why it's so important we never let the government on a wholesale level decide what constitutes "too much" income (although there are many socialist types who try very desperately to do precisely that).

The point here is that this discussion really centers around man's perception of wealth, which is entirely subjective. Are some pastors losing sight of their calling in the midst of abundant wealth? Very possibly. On the other hand, however, am I going to tell a pastor he's making too much if God chooses to give it to him? Nope. I'm much more concerned about the manner in which he chooses to lead his flock, and if the manner in which he accomplishes that is consistent with Biblical principals of servant leadership, I'm not sure I have much of a point from which to launch a contrarian argument.

I know of one church (not my own) from several years ago that hired a pastor at a given salary and benefit package, all defined up front, but wasn't there for a month until he started asking for more money and more revenue sources that the church had advised him up front they didn't have and couldn't offer. That led to tremendous strife within the church and staff, until he finally just left. I was told by someone in that church who said they had a tough time finding pastors who weren't being trained to run churches "like CEO's" rather than "shepherds," and found that to be a very troubling trend...

-soonerdave

"But pastors, who provide a service, are sometimes given huge, inflated salaries. They aren't regulated by anyone. "

Yes, I did say they provide a service.

It's your opinion that everyone needs God before they need an education. I do not share that opinion. Frankly, I feel that an academic education is more important...because no matter how much you feel you have Jesus in your heart, your religious beliefs will not magically put food onto your plate, or a roof over your head...unless you're living in a church-made shelter.

Well said bandnerd...Thinking just listing Christian under education may not get ya that exec job you are applying for no matter how hard you pray

unless you're living in a church-made shelter.

...... Funded by the congregation.

Who probably in their wildest imaginations didn't think their 10% of their poverty level paycheck was going to purchase an executive luxury home with all the the bells and whistles while their kids have no health care...

I've seen TV evangelists imploring viewers, practically crying and begging for money and it just sickens me to think of these poor families or elderly people sending in their pension checks.

ugh, sorry, it upsets me.

I don't think that a pastor should make 6 figures no matter the size of the church, however it's private money (that is willfully given), so that SHOULD NOT be regulated by the state or government.
Who said that they believe that pastors' salaries should be regulated by the state or government?



Good to hear you explain that you think that the salaries are too high. And even if it is only a minority of pastors that receive these high salaries, then that is too mcuh. It's time the pastoral profession stops being a profession and returns to the status of a calling. Christians should spend their money differently and should have different lifestyles than that of the rest of the world.
:congrats: Amen!

SoonerDave,

I think you and I are typing the same thought just with different words.

I personally find it appalling that a minister would shepherd his congregation like a CEO and not like a shepherd. Churches should not be and are not businesses. They are networks of people that are called to accomplish the things that the Lord has asked them to accomplish.

The fact that many churches in America more closely resemble country clubs, shopping malls and self-help seminars is a sign that the American church is currently in a dangerous state of affairs.

so metro, what kind of house does craig groeschel live in? $700,000+? -M


just to clarify again, he was independently wealthy due to him investing in rent houses before lifechurch.tv became one of the nations largest megachurches or a megachurch at all for that matter. he makes a very modest salary as I've mentioned before and plans to not make one at all in a few years, maybe sooner.

so his house would be in his own name and would show up on tax records, right? -M

"But pastors, who provide a service, are sometimes given huge, inflated salaries. They aren't regulated by anyone. "

Yes, I did say they provide a service.

It's your opinion that everyone needs God before they need an education. I do not share that opinion. Frankly, I feel that an academic education is more important...because no matter how much you feel you have Jesus in your heart, your religious beliefs will not magically put food onto your plate, or a roof over your head...unless you're living in a church-made shelter.

I understand your point. But for the sake of no more arguing we'll have to agree to disagree. Everyone has their own OPINON and its just that OPINION. No one can prove which is right or wrong in this lifetime, because there will always be someone who wants to argue.

I understand an education is important. But let's just think for one moment. Nowhere in the Bible can I find that it is important to have an education so you can provide shelter for yourself, food, a good paying job, etc. No where does it say any of those things are important. I can find numerous scriptures and have experienced personally, that God will provide your EVERY (not some) need. Here's just one of many examples:
"But my God shall supply all your need according to his
riches in glory by Christ Jesus."
Philippians 4:19, KJV

SoonerDave, thanks for speaking Godly words of wisdom when we often get sidetracked!

so his house would be in his own name and would show up on tax records, right? -M
No... none of the homes of the senior pastors of Lifechurch show up on the tax rolls. It's that whole transparency thing, you know.

and why would that be, pugalicious? -M

You'd have to ask them. I have my personal opinion on why that would be. Do they have something to hide? Transparency must not be that big of a priority.

Most don't live in Oklahoma County but Logan County or another.

pugalicious,
ask them? can someone actually choose to have their property tax records hidden? even though they probably live in different counties, i can look up... say... bob stoops and find out info about his properties and what he pays in taxes... so how do the independently wealthy senior pastors of lifechurch stay hidden?

oh, metro...
they don't show up in logan, canadian or any other nearby county, either.

how could they possibly stay hidden? -M

Most don't live in Oklahoma County but Logan County or another.
Then Craig must have built a new McMansion recently because he used to live in Oklahoma County.


pugalicious,
ask them? can someone actually choose to have their property tax records hidden? even though they prbably live in different counties, i can look up... say... bob stoops and find out info about his properties and what he pays in taxes... so how do the independently wealthy senior pastors of lifechurch stay hidden?
I've been trying to figure that out for a couple of years now. All I can say is they must have good attorneys who have found a loophole... maybe classifying those houses as parsonages? Just a guess... I don't know... you'll have to ask them!

parsonages? no way... i'm shocked. so it's possible and likely that these independently wealthy senior pastors are having their churches pay for their fancy digs and are getting out of paying pesky property taxes like the rest of us suckers? why would they do that? aren't they independently wealthy?-M

Surprised they just don't show up as

Modest Home - No Need For Specifics

on the property tax records

so it's possible and likely that these independently wealthy senior pastors are having their churches pay for their fancy digs and are getting out of paying pesky property taxes like the rest of us suckers? why would they do that? aren't they independently wealthy?

Is there an icon for hitting the nail on the head?

What happened to parsonages, anyway? Do churches really still do that?

One of our Baptist churches back home had a modest little old home for the pastor...had a sleepover with the pastor's daughter once way back when...didn't know if churches still did this, though.

I know Catholic churches do for the priests....at least at St. John's in Edmond (got married there) has them, from what the hubby showed me.

What happened to parsonages, anyway? Do churches really still do that?

I think some Methodist churches have parsonages

with better lines of transportation and communication parsonages aren't as common as they used to be, but i don't think they're a terribly uncommon practice... one that is probably more common in smaller towns and in churches that have more say as to where their ministers/priests live and work. i'd say that the term 'parsonage' has loosened up from being a residence that is on the church grounds, but to any church-owned residence set aside for ministers/staff.

me? i'm satisfied with just the creature comforts and would only want a modest little 10,000 square foot parsonage-chalet. -M

Is there an icon for hitting the nail on the head?

:hammer: Not quite, but I think this one is pretty appropriate considering the subject at hand.. most likely they are listed under LLC's or something similar :hammer:

What happened to parsonages, anyway? Do churches really still do that?

One of our Baptist churches back home had a modest little old home for the pastor...had a sleepover with the pastor's daughter once way back when...didn't know if churches still did this, though.

I know Catholic churches do for the priests....at least at St. John's in Edmond (got married there) has them, from what the hubby showed me.
See this thread > http://www.okctalk.com/faith-values-open-discussion/9347-megachurch-pastor-cheating-city-out-property-taxes.html

with better lines of transportation and communication parsonages aren't as common as they used to be, but i don't think they're a terribly uncommon practice... one that is probably more common in smaller towns and in churches that have more say as to where their ministers/priests live and work. i'd say that the term 'parsonage' has loosened up from being a residence that is on the church grounds, but to any church-owned residence set aside for ministers/staff.
To be fair, I don't know that's how they've done exactly (i.e. designating the homes as parsonages), but they've done it nonetheless. And it certainly raises some transparency questions...

I can offer that some churches do not offer parsonages as many of us here probably think of them, but allow for part of a pastor's salary to be designated as a "housing allowance."

This is often mutually advantageous to the church and the pastor, because it relieves the church of an ongoing maintenance responsibility and it allows the pastor some latitude in the selection of a home. The amount declared as the allowance is deducted from the salary amount reported to the IRS on his W-2. So, a pastor might have a gross salary of (for the sake of discussion) $25,000, but he (in a contract and/or via church designation) might declare $5,000 of it as a "housing allowance," so his "net" salary for tax purposes is $20,000. The big provision is that the allowance doesn't exceed the fair market rental value of the home (per the Clergy Housing Allowance Clarification Act of 2002).

-soonerdave

wow, soonerdave... way to know your taxes! i didn't know clergy could do that. i have heard that they have the option of opting out of paying social security... sure wish i could.

where i go to church we don't have parsonages set up for the ministers... they own and pay for their own homes out of their own salaries. that's not to say that i think the idea in itself is wrong... just when it's used for a luxury home.

of course there's not enough info to say that's what's happening here beyond a reasonable doubt. just as karried pointed out, the homes could be owned by an llc or even a trust that doesn't bear the name of the pastor... but it does look fishy, especially for people who claim to operate out in the open.

that said, i think it's likely that the church owns and pays for their homes... all on the backs of those who donate in order to spread the word of a cause they believe in. -M

Then Craig must have built a new McMansion recently because he used to live in Oklahoma County.


I've been trying to figure that out for a couple of years now. All I can say is they must have good attorneys who have found a loophole... maybe classifying those houses as parsonages? Just a guess... I don't know... you'll have to ask them!

I am sure they use the LLC shell.

--------------

In case you missed it, he was independently wealthy through real estate primarily as well as investments, stocks, etc. prior to preaching. FYI, he lives in the country. I've seen his house on video and it doesn't look more than 3,000 sq. ft by the naked eye. Much more than I have but less than most Edmonites, but I think that is reasonable considering he made his own money in real estate in the first place. Especially since he has 6 kids.

In case you missed it, he was independently wealthy through real estate primarily as well as investments, stocks, etc. prior to preaching. FYI, he lives in the country. I've seen his house on video and it doesn't look more than 3,000 sq. ft by the naked eye. Much more than I have but less than most Edmonites, but I think that is reasonable considering he made his own money in real estate in the first place. Especially since he has 6 kids.

I've actually heard he has a modest house in comparision to other pastors in the area. And he was not one of the 2-3 pastors I know of that have 700K + homes.