This is a short reflection on a claim that has surfaced repeatedly over the years regarding ministers’ wages in churches such as the ICOC, the ICC, and more recently the RCW. The concern is often framed as a question of fairness: were ministers paid too much? At the same time, ministry staff have frequently responded that these congregations were not wealthy churches and that no one was or is becoming rich through church employment. Scripture itself acknowledges both the legitimacy of support and the need for integrity, reminding us that “the worker deserves his wages” (1 Timothy 5:17–18), while also warning against the love of money (1 Timothy 6:6–10).
As someone who has been part of these fellowships since 1990, I understand why the question arises. Sometimes it is voiced in an accusatory tone; other times it is asked sincerely, with concern for lower-income members and a desire for transparency. The apostle Paul himself anticipated financial scrutiny and gave a reasoned defence of ministry support in 1 Corinthians 9:7–14, concluding that “those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel.” What has struck me, however, is that certain balancing questions are rarely included in modern discussions.

How much did the evangelist give back?
In many of these churches, while the language may have shifted from “tithe” to “pledge,” the practical expectation has often remained around 10% of gross income. In many cases, evangelists gave/give more—sometimes significantly more—in order to lead by example. Galatians 6:6 teaches that those who receive instruction should share materially with those who teach, but that principle cuts both ways: leaders themselves model sacrificial giving. Any fair evaluation of salary should therefore consider not just what was received, but what was quietly given back. As this is generally private information for all members, is it reasonable to assume that ministry staff should disclose these details?

How many hours were worked?
Another often overlooked factor is time. Many ministry staff regularly worked 60 hours a week or more. In most professions, those additional hours would attract overtime pay. Within ministry, they are absorbed into the calling. Paul’s own description of ministry in 2 Corinthians 11:23–28 includes hardship, sleepless nights, and “the daily pressure of concern for all the churches.” If transparency is sought, and truly a goal, then hourly reality should be included in the calculation—not simply the annual figure.

What about special mission contributions?
Beyond regular giving, congregations (including ministry staff) are asked annually for special contributions to plant or strengthen churches. There are examples of evangelists giving above what was requested in order to set a tone of faith and sacrifice. This reflects Paul’s spirit in Acts 20:33–35, where he reminded the elders that he had not coveted anyone’s silver or gold and worked hard to help the weak. These additional gifts come from the same income, sometimes labelled excessive.

Personal generosity and shared responsibility
While private acts of benevolence are rarely recorded, the New Testament vision of the body in 1 Corinthians 12:24–26 reminds us that when one part suffers, all suffer together. In healthy congregations, stronger members support weaker ones. It would be inconsistent to assume that leaders preaching this principle would be indifferent to it personally.

Housing, privacy, and the unseen cost
Housing allowances are sometimes cited as evidence of advantage. Yet ministry homes frequently function as semi-public spaces—hosting Bible studies, counselling, and a variety of teaching and planning meetings. The practical effect is reduced privacy and constant readiness. Hebrews 13:17 calls believers to recognise the weight of responsibility leaders carry; that responsibility often extends into the walls of their own homes. If a house functions as ministry infrastructure much of the time, part of its cost resembles organisational overhead rather than personal luxury. Having lived in a ministry house for 10 months myself, I can testify that I had to hide my chocolate in my sock drawer, as anything in the cupboards was fair game for guests coming daily for Bible studies and meetings as well as the preacher’s 9 year old daughter!

Is the figure quoted online for one or two people? What is the currency and GDP and cost of living factors it that place?
Understanding the total in the context of GDP, currency exchange and the costs and average wage in that city is not something I’ve heard factored into the questioning process.

Who decides what wage is fair?
Their may be some members that due to political opinion, or private experience may have an expectation that ministry staff take a vow of poverty. This is something that some Catholic clergy do take as part of their vows. It is plainly obvious, from the Catholic example, firstly that such a vow will not usually exempt the church itself from becoming rich in property and lifestyle which can then be passed on to those very same persons who take vows of poverty but live in relative mansions and have all their needs taken care of within the Roman Catholic Church much like in the army. This includes international travel and everything they need, to do charity work or teach the doctrine of the church. Neither would it necessarily be fair, just or biblical to limit the income of ministry staff to below what they need to survive comfortably whilst doing the ministry. The Bible speaks clearly about this when it talks about muzzling the ox. So if the evangelist themselves should not decide on their own wage to avoid corruption, and if they should not be made to live in poverty, exactly where should their wage be placed on the spectrum? This is a matter that is decided by the church board or a council of members rather than any individual. Therefore no evangelist is directly responsible for how much they are paid.

Is it right to keep the wage of a minister private?
I believe that I have made a strong argument to show that ministers in former ICOC, the ICC and RCW are not in fact paid ‘too much’. I will break this down more specifically below. But even with many or most ministers on minimum wage, should they be made to publicly declare their wage? This is the point I now finish with based on all the other questions combined.

In corporate settings, charities (nonprofits), education, medical fields, and even many churches outside the former ICOC, the ICC and RCW, compensation is handled through a structured process and kept private just as the incomes of members is private. That privacy protects staff, prevents unhealthy comparison, and avoids misunderstanding about taxes, benefits, and actual take home pay. Churches are often held to a disclosure expectation that is not common in most other workplaces often due to the obvious excesses of some actual churches outside the restoration movement. If we have ministry staff surviving, as will be shown below, on or around minimum wage (working long hours) does their income need to be available to all the members?

I consider this in some detail with a focus on the poorest members. 

I think about the effect of this on the poorest members I have known personally. I have been asked for money for food or even for tithe on a few occasions by brothers. For disciples who do not abuse drugs or alcohol and are typically using their finances in a very wise way, based on advice and discipling that is freely available in the church, as well as career guidance and advice about education (all of which I’ve benefited from as a disciple) we usually expect to see financial stability. I have a very specific posture towards members of the church who ask me for money. My go to scripture is as follows, 

1 Thessalonians 4:11-12

Make it your ambition to lead a quiet life, to mind your own business and to work with your hands, just as we told you, so that your daily life may win the respect of outsiders and so that you will not be dependent on anybody.

In cases where I have been asked to provide a single meal, if I have the cash flow to be able to afford it, I will usually agree, but then as I am becoming someone who is taking this person on as a dependent in the situation, I explain that I feel I have the right to help them, by knowing the private information about what has led them to this state of dependency. In every case I have quickly been able to identify certain issues that that person needs to change in order to become able to meet their own needs. The world has this same philosophy in the proverb,

“Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.”

It expresses the principle that short-term aid meets an immediate need, but equipping someone with skills or opportunity creates long-term independence.

There are some cases where people are very sick physically or mentally and even in those cases especially in the UK (and often another countries as well) it is possible to assist these people to get diagnosis and/or state benefits that can stabilise their situation. As a result of my conviction I have developed great advocacy skills.
For me considering whether ministers should be the go-to church members to give to poorer members, I would say that it would be counterproductive to set them up with that expectation and would lead to an a-biblical culture that places undue emphasis on ministers rather than all disciples taking care of one another in this way.

Those disciples who find themselves in situations of financial hardship (I’ve known and advised my fair share) might find it very challenging to think about the fact that the church supports its ministry staff to do their job whilst at the same time does not equally offer responsibility to take care of all of the physical needs of all of its members. The church of the Book of Acts had ‘no needy persons among them’ and so there was a certain amount of interdependence amongst the disciples. I have been the supporting ligament in such situations. However, as I have explained, the same church would also have tried to make sure that those who did need to be temporarily dependent, made any significant changes necessary to meet their own needs. When considering minister’s income privacy, one can understand therefore that whilst publishing income of ministers may increase transparency it could also make their lives unnecessarily difficult ministering to rich and poor alike.

Revisiting the numbers
When a £74,000 household ministry couple salary is examined beyond headline figures—after tax, generous regular giving, generous special contributions, extended working hours, and reduced at-home privacy—the effective hourly reality shifts dramatically to minimum or below minimum wage. None of this denies that genuine prosperity abuses exist elsewhere in the Christian world; Scripture clearly condemns greed. But modest, middle-income ministry salaries in small UK congregations are not comparable to high-profile excess.

A gentle and rational conversation about ministry pay must therefore count the cost—for everyone. It must weigh Scripture’s affirmation of fair support, its warnings against greed, the sacrificial giving of leaders themselves, the long hours worked, and the shared life of the church. Only then can we approach the subject not with suspicion, but with balance, humility, and fairness.

In conclusion, ministry staff have helped me get both of my degrees repent of my drug, alcohol and smoking habit, increase my income, find a wife, and stay out of major sin for the vast majority of the last 35 years. The tithe I gave was worth every penny. God has blessed it.
The problem the RCW will have in years to come, around incomes, will not be one of ministry incomes but of the incomes of the members, because when we reach a million disciples and beyond we will see rapid expansion in poorer countries to the point where the comparably affluent lifestyle of every member in richer countries, will cause them to become hyper-aware of their privilege or greed compared to the poor in our churches abroad. Then we will see who has too high an income!

Sad to say, I have never heard ministry staff give a robust answer like the one I have here. I believe they often choose silence knowing that they are not rich. But I also believe that they do not wish to advertise the low status of their pay in case it detracts from the godly ambition they want to foster for a hunger for full time ministry. We need many tens of thousands of ministry staff to evangelise the world in our generation. I am proud to say that I can give full trust to my evangelists and continue to lay my tithe at the feet of the leaders of the RCW movement who are striving now, more than ever, to give transparency to the membership with monthly financial presentations by administrators eager to do the will of God.