Paul’s personal finances intrigue me and cause me great angst. The man who traveled extensively throughout the Roman world preaching and teaching also worked a day job. The man who wrote the book of Romans—arguably the greatest theological treatise ever written—did so free of charge while he earned money through manual labor. So what exactly were Paul’s views on material compensation? And what does it mean for ministers today?
Material Compensation for Spiritual Work
To begin with, Paul believed in material compensation for spiritual work: “If we have sown spiritual things among you, is it too much if we reap material things from you?” (1 Cor. 9:11 ESV) and “the Lord commanded that those who proclaim the gospel should get their living by the gospel” (1 Cor. 9:14 ESV). To the Galatians, Paul wrote, “One who is taught the word must share all good things with the one who teaches” (Gal. 6:6 ESV). In keeping with that principle, Paul received “gifts” from the church in Philippi.
And you Philippians yourselves know that in the beginning of the gospel, when I left Macedonia, no church entered into partnership with me in giving and receiving, except you only . . . I am well supplied, having received from Epaphroditus the gifts you sent (Phil. 4:15-18 ESV).
So the matter is simple: Those who minister should be compensated for their work of ministry.
Paul’s Refusal of Material Compensation
Unfortunately, things are rarely simple with Paul. Immediately after acknowledging his right to receive compensation from the Corinthians, Paul states,
Nevertheless, we have not made use of this right, but we endure anything rather than put an obstacle in the way of the gospel of Christ . . . I have made no use of any of these rights, nor am I writing these things to secure any such provision . . . What then is my reward? That in my preaching I may present the gospel free of charge, so as not to make full use of my right in the gospel (1 Cor. 9:15-18 ESV).
Why did Paul refuse compensation and work a day job? First, Paul (and at least one other person, notice the we) refused compensation because he wanted to have the greatest possible impact. Instead of clinging to the principle “the laborer deserves to be paid,” Paul was thinking, “How can I be most effective?” And specifically, Paul pondered this question: Is it most effective to preach for free or for pay? Much of the time, Paul conscientiously chose to preach for free. And that meant, Paul had to work a day job. Fortunately, since Paul was trained by the ancient rabbis who taught the Torah out of love and not for profit, Paul was skilled in a trade and that trade was tentmaking (Acts 18:1-3).
Paul’s Income from Manual Labor
For Paul, earning money through manual labor wasn’t a second-tier way to make a living. Instead Paul’s statements display a certain pride in his hardworking lifestyle,
For you remember, brothers, our labor and toil: we worked night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you, while we proclaimed to you the gospel of God. (1 Thess. 2:9 ESV)
For you yourselves know how you ought to imitate us, because we were not idle when we were with you, nor did we eat anyone’s bread without paying for it, but with toil and labor we worked night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you (2 Thess. 3:7-8 ESV).
Those statements give us a second and third reason why Paul worked a day job. Second, Paul genuinely cared for the financial welfare of the believers he ministered to and therefore didn’t want to be a financial burden on them. He writes, “nor did we eat anyone’s bread without paying for it, but with toil and labor we worked night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you.” As the context shows, Paul sought to avoid being a financial burden to those he ministered to. He didn’t enter new cities with a plan to rely on his ministry as his means of material support. He entered new cities with a plan to work with his own hands. And those hands, which probably became calloused over time, enabled Paul to stand in line and buy his own food with his own hard-earned money.
Third, he wanted to serve as an example of diligence. He states, “you yourselves know how you ought to imitate us, because we were not idle when we were with you.” Paul didn’t preach and then expect to get paid for it. He preached for free and he made tents for a living. Those he preached to would have recognized him as the same man who made tents in the marketplace with sweat-soaked brow. Certain things are caught rather than taught and Paul wanted his audience to catch his work ethic.
Paul practiced his trade for a fourth and final reason. In his farewell speech to the elders in Ephesus, where he stayed for two years (Acts 19:1, 10), Paul declared,
You yourselves know that these hands ministered to my necessities and to those who were with me. In all these things I have shown you that by working hard in this way we must help the weak and remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he himself said, ‘It is more blessed to give than to receive’ (Acts 20:34-35 ESV).
Fourth, Paul worked hard so that he could provide for those in need. This is incredible because it’s almost a complete reversal of how some view ministry today. Instead of preaching and then expecting, he preached and then gave. Paul’s gospel—the message of God’s sacrifice—was displayed in his lifestyle of sacrifice: “by working hard . . . we must help the weak.”
In summary, Paul didn’t make a living from his spiritual work in Corinth, Thessalonica, or Ephesus. In fact, he refused to do so. And he refused to do so out of a desire to be most effective, to avoid being a financial burden, to serve as an example of diligence, and to personally provide for those in need.
Paul’s Example and Ministers Today
What does Paul’s approach mean for ministers today? Should we require ministers to work for free? Should we encourage ministers to practice a trade? Should we stop raising money for spiritual work and start earning money to support such work?
First of all, receiving material compensation for spiritual work is acceptable. There’s nothing wrong with getting paid for legitimate work. As we saw, Paul accepted gifts from the church at Philippi. Of course, the difference is that Paul received “gifts” from the Philippians and not a salary with full-time benefits. But the point is that Paul didn’t refuse all expressions of gratitude on the basis of a particular principle. In general, we can say that if people value our work enough to pay us for it, and if our work is both legal and moral, there’s nothing wrong with accepting remuneration.
Second, we should consider the difference between Paul’s situation and our situation. Paul was a single man called by God to spread the gospel. In other words, he was flexible. He could set sail for a new city at a moment’s notice. For those with families, attempting to follow Paul’s example may not be the wisest course of action.
Third, we should consider the enormous difference between ministry roles in Paul’s day and ministry roles today. The positions that we take for granted as being a normal part of ministry, such as full-time youth pastors and senior pastors, didn’t exist in first-century churches. Youth pastors today serve as counselors, teachers, social event organizers, community service facilitators, and volunteer coordinators. (Okay, some youth pastors fill those roles, while others focus on playing video games.) Combining these functions into one job could not have been imagined in Paul’s time. It may be argued that one person shouldn’t fill so many roles, but that wouldn’t change the fact that youth pastors are serving in these ways and therefore should be compensated. Likewise, if we want one person to officiate at weddings, conduct funerals, preach every week, counsel, and visit the sick, we’re probably going to have to pay that person. There are pastors who serve for free, but they’re difficult to find, perhaps because they’re busy working their day jobs. The bigger issue to consider, then, is whether we should continue structuring ministry in the way we’ve been. We need to ask ourselves, “Do we really want one person to serve in all these ways?”
Fourth, we should consider the difference between Bible study in Paul’s day and Bible study today. In many ways Bible study is more cumbersome and time-consuming for us than it was for Paul. Think of it: Paul was fluent in Hebrew and Greek, and he simply preached and wrote from his understanding of the Scriptures and from his understanding of God’s revelation to him. And since he lived in the ancient world, he didn’t need to study it. Instead of spending five years writing a dissertation on two verses in Galatians, he simply wrote the letter to Galatia perhaps in a couple hours. Today, Bible scholars spend a life-time studying ancient Hebrew and Greek, the ancient manuscripts, and details of the ancient world so that they can properly understand what Paul was saying and then attempt to apply it to our modern-day world. In summary, our study of the Bible often involves climbing mountains—a two-thousand-year history filled with ancient manuscripts and commentaries—that Paul never had to set eyes on. The point here is that if we want someone to study the Bible in that way—informed on the history of Bible interpretation and adept at Bible application—they will probably need to receive formal training. And if we want them to continue to study the Bible in that way, they will probably need financial support because they will be engaged in a time-consuming endeavor.
While I think those caveats are important to consider, I still have a nagging suspicion that Paul’s refusal to receive compensation for his work of ministry means something for today. At the very least it raises a host of challenging questions for those in full-time paid ministry. On a personal level: How does receiving a paycheck for this work affect me? Am I serving primarily for the paycheck? Would I be willing to serve free of charge? (Of course, we wouldn’t have the same amount of time to devote to teaching, counseling, etc., but would we still do so to some extent if we weren’t getting paid for it?) On a ministry level: How does receiving a paycheck impact the effectiveness of my ministry? Are there times when I should bypass my right to be compensated for the sake of effectiveness or for the sake of not being a financial burden? Relating to work: How do I feel about secular work? Why? Would I do whatever it would take to make my spiritual work most effective?
While we’re not required to follow Paul’s career path, it stands as a challenge of sacrificial service and full engagement with the world. Paul’s ministry reminds us of something that we’ve all learned by experience: There’s great joy and freedom in serving voluntarily.
Paul’s concern was to be most effective, his ministry was not a financial burden, his life was an example of diligence, he interacted with the general public, and he provided for the weak. I wonder how different things would be if Christian leaders had followed Paul’s example more closely down through the ages.
