Must a congregation support a preacher who was hired by an eldership that later dissolved?
Question:
Many years ago, an eldership hired a preacher. Upon hiring the new preacher, the eldership promised the preacher a certain amount of pay, pay raises, and other perks. A few years later, the eldership dissolved due to elders moving away, death, etc. From when the preacher was hired many years ago to the present time, membership has fallen a lot. Only a couple of dozen members are left, with about 85% being aged and on fixed income. The preacher still demands that the congregation keep the promises made to him by a dissolved eldership from when he was hired many years ago, putting financial strain on some members of the congregation.
Does the congregation have a moral responsibility to keep the promises made by the dissolved eldership years ago? Does the dissolution of the eldership dissolve the promises made? I am presently a member, but was not a member when the preacher was hired all those years ago, and had nothing to do with the hiring or any promises made. I do not even know the details of the promises made to the preacher. No hiring contract was involved, as far as I know. If need be, I can leave this congregation and place membership elsewhere, removing myself from the problem.
I would appreciate your thoughts on this situation.
Thank you.
Answer:
I want to adjust some of your terms so that the problem becomes clearer.
Elderships don't "hire preachers." Congregations decide if they want to support a preacher's work in their area. Elders help lead the congregation in making a good decision about who they should support. Since it is a congregation's decision, it doesn't matter if the elders change or the eldership folds due to a lack of qualified men.
If the congregation no longer has the funds to support the local preacher, that is again a decision by the congregation regarding what they can supply. A congregation does not go into debt to pay for things it cannot afford. For example, if looking at the contributions, expenses, and savings, a conclusion can be made, such as saying, "In three months, we will no longer have funds to continue supporting the preacher at our current amount. We can continue at a reduced level." It is then the preacher's choice whether to stay and live on less income, find a second job, find another congregation willing to support him in his work in that area, or move to another area to work.
As an example, the congregation where I serve the Lord is unable to pay enough for me to live in this area. I teach at a community college to make up the difference. Except for a few years, I've been doing this for the last 30 years -- sometimes with outside support or often without it. I know many preachers who drive school buses or work some other part-time job.
Agreements are good, but circumstances change, and everyone must adapt to the realities of the situations they find themselves in.
Response:
Thank you so much for your time. I completely agree with your point about a new preacher being a congregational decision. In our case, the former eldership alone chose the current preacher.
They have been having men's business meetings (MBMs) since there is no eldership. I have informed some that I would no longer attend the MBMs since there is no scriptural support for them. I believe in the idea of the congregation meeting over issues that need to be dealt with (Acts 15:1-6; 1 Cor 16:3), as you pointed out, choosing a preacher is a congregational decision.
Some claim women should not be present in such business meetings. I do not know where they get that idea from, since the New Testament does not even mention MBMs, much less who can or cannot be in attendance in such meetings. I do not believe that a woman's opinion or idea usurps the authority of men. The men can make the final decision, but I believe the entire congregation should be informed about what is happening. If women can speak in Sunday school class and give an opinion or idea without usurping the authority of men, I see no reason why they cannot have opinions or ideas on other matters without usurping the authority of men.
Again, thank you so much for your time
