FAQs

Categories

Why Direct Bill? (Item 3, Proposal to Direct Bill Active Clergy Pension Costs)

First, to take the pension and benefit costs out of the apportionments so that our apportionment giving can be more clearly addressed to mission. Second, since the current pension plan is based on compensation, not years of service, to place the responsibility for pension on the local church where compensation is determined.

What will Direct Billing do? (Item 3, Proposal to Direct Bill Active Clergy Pension Costs)

It will make transparent the full cost for each clergy placement. That will allow for more fully informed missional personnel decisions.

What will Direct Billing not do? (Item 3, Proposal to Direct Bill Active Clergy Pension Costs)

It will not prevent us from helping churches in missional situations. We will do that through apportioned giving for equitable compensation, emerging congregations, special missional compensation, and ethnic minority congregations.

Isn't it reasonable and to be expected that financially successful churches should subsidize other churches? (Item 3, Proposal to Direct Bill Active Clergy Pension Costs)

There are many assumptions in this question that need to be examined: about what is "reasonable," "expected," "financially successful," and the manner of appropriate "subsidization." We have been doing it this way – accepting many unexamined assumptions. I know of no churches that have extra money that could not be used for mission. The question is: Is the best way to do mission by subsidizing pension costs in more than 200 churches in this Conference?