The Ecumenism Blog

Home » Church Reform » If I wanted to be wealthy, I should have been a priest

If I wanted to be wealthy, I should have been a priest

What is missing in the 2017 National Diocesan Survey on Salaries and Benefits for Priests and Lay Personnel? (Commissioned by the National Association for Church Personnel Administrators [NACPA] and the National Federation of Priests’ Councils [NFPC], it was carried out by the Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate [CARA]). The overview seems both modest and comparable to the typical lay ecclesial minister’s income:

If I were a priest, I could probably afford the $795 that NACPA is charging to download a copy of their full study, and find out in closer detail. But as a lifetime lay employee of the Church, I have to take it as a given that the good people at NACPA (mostly lay pastoral administrators) have crunched their numbers accurately and the $45,593 is in fact the median taxable income of U.S. priests. A table of contents is publicly available which indicates what they did (and did not) consider.

What about the untaxable income? What about the things that are hard to quantify but observably make a difference? Or easy to quantify but simply taken for granted? What about the expenses that the lay counterpart has that the priest does not? A penny saved is a penny earned, after all.

A pastor I know complained – often and loudly – that he was paying the lay pastoral staff at his new assignment far too much (A little less than $50,000 per year, less than the state’s average income[1]). To his credit, the pastoral council president, who had been involved in the hiring process with the previous pastor, usually replied that the staff were paid about 1/3 of what they were worth in the private sector, and the young priest should be a little more appreciative.

Fr. Scrooge’s attitude got me thinking about the apparent disparity between compensation for equally qualified people with a vocation to ecclesial ministry.

Look at two people of reasonably comparable demographic – single, no children, with undergraduate and graduate degrees in theology/divinity, committed to a life of ministry in the Church – and consider them in a similar parish, similar ministry, with similar qualifications, experience, and responsibility. One is a priest, the other a lay ecclesial minister.

There is no question the priest in such a scenario is “wealthier” – enjoying a higher standard of living, a nicer house, with greater stability, and less stress about making ends meet. So how does this observable reality reconcile with the apparently low income that priests have, according to the NACPA study? Something is missing.

Considering a few major areas of disparity, we can easily track how those pennies add up, taxable or otherwise.


Source: Mundelein Seminary

In the U.S., the standard education and formation program for a priest is to have a four-year Bachelor’s degree (in anything, really, but with a year’s worth of philosophy and theology at the undergrad level before graduate seminary), and a three-year Master of Divinity or equivalent, plus a pastoral internship year. Most lay ecclesial ministers have something similar, if, of necessity, in a greater variety of configurations.

In one diocese I am familiar with, the entire cost of seminary is covered, at least from pre-theology onward, plus a variable stipend for travel and spending. For college seminarians, the students are accountable for half their cost (which could be covered by scholarships they earned from the university, for example).

The average cost of tuition and fees at Catholic colleges and universities in the U.S. in 2016-2017 was about $31,500, with the highest ones being around $52,000 (Source: ACCU). So let us say the diocese i mentioned is typical, and pays for two years of the undergraduate and all three years of the graduate costs for formation: middle-of the road estimate of $157,500 per seminarian.

An additional spending stipend can range from $2000-$6500 per year depending on where they are in studies. Let us say $4000 a year for ease of calculation. An additional $20,000 brings the educational investment up to $177,500. It would be interesting to see what the actual numbers on this spending are.

The candidate for lay ministry, on the other hand, has to work or take out loans, though in some places some assistance is available. Forty years ago, one could work full time at a minimum wage job in the summer to pay for a year of tuition at a respectable state school, but that has not been true since the 1980s. Despite savings, work-study, scholarships and grants, and, if fortunate, parent contributions, the average graduate leaves with $38,000 in student loan debt after a Bachelors, and about $58,000 all told if they have also a Masters from a private institution, which has to be the case if you have a degree in theology. (Source: study, The interest on that, at the standard federal rate of 6% over the life of the loan (twenty years) will add another $19,000 to the total.

So far, in terms of pennies saved and earned, the priest is $196,500 ahead, and ministry has not even begun.

But we are not done: the best and brightest are often called to graduate studies, say, a license in canon law or a doctorate in theology.

Another three years of graduate school for a JCL (or five, at minimum, for a doctorate). In Rome, where tuition is cheap but living is costly and jobs are hard to find, it is easy to contrast the stability and support given to clergy with the complete chaos experienced by most laity – who, nevertheless, sacrifice more and more in answer to a vocation to serve the Church.

About $25,000 a year, (choosing the cheaper options of a canon law degree in Rome), and there’s another $75,000 where our priest has uncounted ‘income’.

He is now $271,500 better-off than the lay counterpart …and we are not even counting the little extras Knights of Columbus ‘pennies for heaven’ drives or Serra club gifts.

Note, too, that the priest-grad student continues to draw a salary/stipend, plus other benefits like housing and food stipends, while in studies; the lay minister has to give all this up to pursue studies. According to the study, that means adding another $45,000 per year to the priest’s advantage.

So, make that $406,500 ahead of the lay minister with the same education.


St. George Parish Rectory, Worcester, MA.

Housing was calculated in the NACPA study, either (or both?) in terms of taxable cash allowances and housing provided, but it is hard to reconcile the low-ball numbers given with the observable reality: Priests living alone in houses that are considerably larger and/or nicer than what their lay counterpart could ever afford to live in. How is this possible?

Simply ask the question: What is the value of the house (rectory) and what would it take to live there?

You can either look at the value of the rectory and estimate the salary required to afford such a place; or you can look at the salary earned and look at how much house someone with that income can afford, and how it compares.

Based on the 2012 CARA survey (being unable to see the 2017 median salary as it is behind a paywall), the median annual salary in 2010 was $34,200. That’s about $38,351 in 2017, factoring for inflation. Assuming no other debts (ha!), that means one could afford a house valued at about $185,000, considerably less than the median price.

The median house value is about $300,000 in the U.S., based on sales prices over the last year (Source: National Association of Realtors). To afford this, one would have to be making about $65,000 a year, at least, and paying $1800 a month mortgage or rent.

But is the typical rectory more or less expensive?

As a point of reference from which to extrapolate, I checked on the value of the rectories in the five parishes where I have lived and worked in the last twenty years. (Source: Zillow). I then compared their value to the median house value in the same cities or regions.

  • Everett, WA Rectory Value: $550,000. (Median House: $330,000)
    Estimated monthly payment: $3560. Recommended income: $120,000 per year.
  • Woodinville, WA Rectory Value: $641,000. (Median House $755,000)
    Estimated monthly payment: $4366. Recommended income: $146,000 per year.
  • Bellingham, WA Rectory Value: $700,000. (me Median House: $415,000)
    Estimated monthly payment: $4480. Recommended income: $150,000 per year.
  • Bothell, WA Rectory Value: $951,000. (Median House: $529,000)
    Estimated monthly payment: $6051. Recommended income: $202,000 per year.
  • Edmonds, WA Rectory Value[2]: $1,600,000. (Median House: $541,000)
    Estimated monthly payment: $10,281. Recommended income: $343,000 per year.

The average rectory value was $888,400 in a region where the average house is valued at $514,000 (or, 172% the price of a ‘median’ house). Only in one case was the rectory valued lower than the typical house, and in most cases they were considerably higher. One would have to be earning an annual salary at least $192,200 in an area where the median household income is $58,000, in order to live in these rectories – and most Church employees are not even making the state median income.

Extrapolating this trend to the national median house price, we could estimate that the national typical rectory is valued at about half a million dollars, meaning a mortgage or rent of $3000 a month for the lay employee wanting to buy or rent the same place. An additional $36,000 a year is well beyond the taxable extras indicated by the NACPA survey. The main reason for this is probably that many of the properties are already owned in full by parish or diocese, so the cash flow is calculated differently, but to my question: what would it take for the lay employee to live there, this is the more accurate measure of wealth differential.

Our priest is now not only $406,500 better off to begin with, but at an advantage of $36,000 per annum. On average. In a place like western Washington State (where my rectory examples are from), the annual disparity is nearly double.


These days, it is not unusual to be without work for some period of time, no matter how educated, skilled, or driven one is. Though Baby Boomers tend to think of these as irregular, it is an expected part of professional life for GenX and Millennials. About 1 in 5 workers are laid off every five years, in the twenty-first century, and 40% of workers under 40 have been unemployed for some significant amount of time in their short careers. I can only imagine this statistic is higher for those who have worked (or tried to work) for the Church.

When a priest is incompetent, or just not a good fit for a particular job or office, it is almost impossible to have him moved or fired. Even when he does, his livelihood is never in question.

Even when a lay minister is at the top of his or her game, an economic downturn will affect them far before the priest. Our exemplar lay minister not only has to worry that he could lose his job just because the new pastor does not like lay people or feels threatened by anyone with a theology degree besides himself, s/he has to worry about more than just a loss of respect or office, but something as simple as whether or not he can afford a place to live, health care, or the cost of moving to a new job. Lay ministers are not even entitled to state unemployment benefits, being employees of a religious institution. If he or she is out of work for a month or two, that means a significant loss of income and increase in stress, not vacation time.

How do we quantify this? Certainly, the psychological advantage of knowing you have virtually untouchable job security is priceless. Based on some (admittedly unscientific) survey of other lay ecclesial ministers, an average seems to be about one month of (unpaid, involuntary) unemployment for every three years of working for the Church. Based on the median annual pay and benefits of such ministers, that’s a little more than $4300 in lost income and benefits every three years, or about $1450 a year we can add to the priest’s income advantage, which now stands at $406,500 out of the blocks and $37,450 annually.

Blurred boundaries and clerical culture

Some years ago, I was at a conference once with several priests, and we decided to go out for a steak dinner at a nice downtown establishment. One of the priests (soon after, a bishop) reached for the bill, pulled out a credit card, and said, “Dinner’s on the parishioners of St. X’s tonight!”

Whether he meant the he was paying out of his own pocket for our dinner but realized his salary came from parish giving, or that he was using the parish credit card (and budget) was a little unclear, but it seemed like the latter.

Even the most well-intentioned priest is hard-pressed to clarify where his personal finances begin and the parish’s ends in every case, especially as he has essentially full control over the latter, what with most parish finance councils being merely ‘consultative’.  For those who feel they are entitled to the benefices of their little fiefdom, it is only too easy to meet basic needs without even touching one’s official salary or stipend.

Sometimes it is a result simply of not knowing any other way. When I was a grad student, the then-chair of theology was a Benedictine monk. At the end of my first year, he called me in to inquire why I, as a scholarship student, was not getting straight A’s. When I mentioned the 25-30 hours I put in at work each week, he was perplexed: why was I working while in studies? I pointed out that my scholarship covered only tuition, and not university fees, housing, food, insurance, travel and transportation, books, computer, etc., he sat back and with a rather distracted look on his face said, “Oh… I forgot about all that.” Such is the advantage of the ‘wealthy’ – even in vows of poverty!

I cannot calculate the untaxed income of intentional or innocent blurring of boundaries between budgets, but we would be naïve if we did not realize that our current quasi-monastic compensation structure lends itself to confusion at best, and abuse at worst. Certainly, most priests are among the well-intentioned and conscientious in this regard. That does not mean we cannot improve.

Conclusions and Solutions

Fifteen years after ordination or the beginning of a career in ministry, our two Church ministers are sitting quite differently. Nearly $970,000 differently, in fact. Our priest started with $406,500 in education advantages, and enjoyed housing and security advantages at a rate of $37,450 per year.

In other words, in order for our lay ecclesial ministers to be living on par with our priest – their average salary should be about $96,000 per year (plus benefits) – nearly triple the current reality. (Calculated by dividing the education advantage over twenty years, and adding the annual advantage to the average annual pay).

Remember, this is not all cash in hand, or the kind of wealth you can take with you (I know most priests do not own the rectories in which they get to live, but then, most lay ministers are renting too.). Nor is this all of the same quality information – some is based on extensive national study, but where data is lacking, we have had to estimate a median goal by extrapolating from known reference points. Obviously, that means i will continue to update the figures up or down as more or better information presents itself.

But in terms of, “what would the lay minister’s salary have to be to enjoy the same ‘wealth’ as a priest” there is your answer. These are expenses the priest never personally had, that the lay minister did or would have to have had to live in the same houses, have the same education, etc.

So how can we make our compensation structure more just, more transparent, and more equitable?

The detailed information in the NACPA study helps, but it only address some of the problems. Accounted taxable income is only a portion of the income disparity, as we have seen. So what could we do differently?

Perhaps when a bishop or pastor hires a lay ecclesial minister, he should compensate them for the education they paid for that he now gets to take advantage of, to the same degree as what he would have paid for a priest in their situation? How does a $406,500 signing bonus sound? At the very least, compensate the individual as you would a fellow bishop when a priest from his diocese is excardinated from there to join yours.

On that note, all ministers should be incardinated, or registered, or something. It really makes no sense, ecclesiologically, to have any kind of ‘free-agent’ ministers in the Church, which is how our lay ministers are treated. All ministry is moderated by the bishop, and all ministers are, first of all, diocesan personnel, ‘extending the ministry of the bishop’. They should be organized, supported, and paid as such. (At the bare minimum, they should show up in every dioceses’ statistics on pastoral personnel!)

I am a big supporter of the idea that all of our ministry personnel – presbyters, deacons, and lay ecclesial ministers – should all follow the same compensation system and structure. Preferably, a straight salary. This clarifies the boundaries, makes real tracking of compensation easier, and clarifies comparable competencies.

Wherever the Church wants to remain in the real estate and housing business – though i am unsure if it should – these should be administered at the deanery level and set up as intentional Christian communities for ministers. Will have to write something else about this.

The same should be said for support and funding for formation and education. When the majority of parish ministers are lay ecclesial ministers (which has been the case for over a decade in the States), the majority of funding should be going to support their formation.

The same is true for advanced studies. Too often bishops seem to forget that their pool of human resources is wider than just the presbyterate. Raise up talent wherever it is found, and you will find dedicated ministers and coworkers for the Lord’s vineyard.

Years ago, I met a young woman who wanted to spend her life in service of the Church, and so was pursuing a degree in canon law. She had written dozens of bishops asking for some kind of support or sponsorship in exchange for a post-graduation commitment to work, and received only negative responses. Her classmates were all priests ten to twenty years her senior, most of whom had not chosen to study canon law, and all receiving salaries in addition to a full ride scholarship from the diocese.

When she and I caught up ten years later, half her class was no longer even in priestly ministry, and she was still plugging along, serving as best she could. Talk about potential return-on-investment! Hundreds of thousands wasted on priests who did not want to study canon law in the first place, a fraction of which would have yielded far better results with this one young lay woman. Imagine how many more are out there denied the opportunity to serve simply because not enough support is offered.

You never know what it is that will catch people’s attention. I hoped this post would provoke some thought, at least among friends and colleagues who read my now very occasional postings, but never thought this would be one to run viral. Read 4000 times here, shared 900 times on Facebook (!), quoted in America and prompting at least one blog in response, i have read and engaged many comments and am adding a follow up to those – many insightful – in a new post.


[1] Household median income is the standard measure of “average salary” in the U.S. census and demographic studies; it includes single-earner households such as our examples of a priest or a single lay ecclesial minister. The average per capita income for the same state was $30,000. (For the county in question, median household income is $68,000 and average per capita is $38,000.)

[2] This is the only one I had to make an estimate. Neighboring houses ranged from $800K to $1.5m, all of which were substantially smaller, on less property, and none of which featured an outdoor swimming pool… So I am, if anything, probably a bit conservative on the estimate.




  1. Well noted on a lot of points. I would not like to see the same standards applied for salary though. A priest’s education and experience in a given diocese is going to be fairly consistent across the board, but to attract quality lay employees, many of whom will have families, you’d need to pay more than you pay the priest.

  2. Don Antonio says:

    What did you figure in for being on call 24/7/365 ?

    • A.J. Boyd says:

      Note that i never said the priests did not earn it, only that the lay ministers – who are also on call 24/7/365 in most cases – did too.

  3. Patty says:

    I know that lay ministers work in a parish for less than they could earn in an equivalent private sector, but it this article appears to
    me to be a bit of sour grapes. Why denigrate priests when the problem is that the parish is most likely unable to afford anything much higher than a basic salary for lay ministry? My very small parish cant even afford a lay minister, period. Our payroll consists of the priest, secretary, part time organist,part time housekeeper, and part time maintenance man. Be glad you even have a job.

    • A.J. Boyd says:

      Point is that they work for less than they could earn if they were a priest doing the same job. It isn’t about grudging the priests anything, it is about equal pay for equal work/qualifications/experience/commitment/sacrifice, etc.

      • Patty says:

        Except it’s not really equal, is it? Lay ministers do not report to the bishop. They are not in charge of the parish. They do not have hundreds or thousands of souls depending on them for their sacraments. And so on.

      • A.J. Boyd says:

        Many lay ecclesial ministers are in charge of parishes, or report to the bishop, or are engaged in sacramental ministry. Many are on call for emergencies, or work 60-80 hour weeks. At the same time there are priests (not many, i suspect!) whose only responsibility is to say mass a couple times a week, or who are only responsible for sacraments while someone else manages ministries, programs, or personnel. There are priests who are not called to be pastors, and some called to be pastors who are not priests. We have to address all of that. But that’s another post…

  4. Also: retirement. Priests never really “retire” being priests, and many continue some kind of ministry well their entire lives, but retirement savings is a huge financial stress/burden for American workers that most priests don’t have to worry about.

  5. AC says:

    What am I being paid for? I have no idea.

    It’s not because of my experience or credentials or quality of preaching. It’s not for how many hours I put in a week or how much sacrifice I make.

    I wonder whether we can make this comparison if we don’t know what we are being compensated for.

    You’re right, lay church professionals are under appreciated- money (when it’s available) is an indicator of what we value.

    Everyone needs a living wage. I didn’t have a choice in how much I make and neither do priests in Lincoln NE that make 18k a year.

    We are in a weird time in history with the rise of the lay church professional and I think its great. The church is trying to catch up with all the changes.

    Keep up the good work. I’ll pray you get a just pay. And pray that my parishes can afford someone like you one day.


    Ps your article was forwarded to me by a poorly paid lay evangelist friend.

    • A.J. Boyd says:

      That’s another excellent question: are we paying/compensating for the same thing? I suspect we tend to pay lay ministers by function, and priests in terms of presence/being. But that’s a far more subtle thing…

      • AC says:

        You’re right, it’s not by function. My priest friend has an administrative job that lay people get paid about $125k for every year. If it was by function, than my friend should treat me to a trip to Rome and buy us both gelato.

  6. Many of these issues can also be traced to the ills of our American economy in general. It’s not really okay to send any college graduate into professional life with $80,000 in debt, which he may end up paying multiple times over in interest, even if he chose a career field to meet chicks and make benjamins and not to serve the Church. It is unconscionable to subject a beauty salon worker who does hair/nails to the whims of the “gig economy” just because her work isn’t “professional ministry”.

  7. Dan Miller says:

    I had a friend who was an Elementary Principal at a Catholic school. I remember him telling me back then, “I will have to get out of Catholic education if I want my children to go to Catholic schools.” Sad. I worked in the Seattle Archdiocese as a professionally and theologically trained pastoral minister and for nearly 30 years in various Catholic settings and institutions — I have an M.Div, a Th. M. and a Ph.D. All of my theological education was either paid for by Protestants or myself. Also sad. Justice starts at home.

  8. A.J. Boyd says:

    My post sparked a response from a fellow blogger. He raises some good points, though i think he misreads a couple of things in my post. My one personal quibble: i do not think i was “hostile to priests”, categorically, at all. “Fr. Scrooge” was not a good priest (for many reasons not included here), but he is not my idea of a normal priest either.

  9. Also worth mentioning: in Evangelical/Protestant communities there’s a thing called “bi-vocational ministry” (really, it’s a google-able thing) which is basically gig economy for evangelical pastors/ministers. Some church members try to sell its benefits: more affordable for smaller churches, a part-time pastor is more relateable to laity from his “other vocation” (2nd job), but it’s still trying to sell low-paying, sans-benefits, part time ministry jobs. So, it’s not just a Catholic thing.

  10. FrMichael says:

    Sir: As a diocesan priest and pastor, I take no offense at the body of your post, even though the title is provocative and misleading. Rare would be the priest in the US, even if he works a full 50 year active ministry path (age 25-75), who could accumulate a million dollars in assets by the end of his life unless he were a (1) spectacular investor, (2) had additional sources of income, (3) came from old money, or (4) was defrauding the parish. I’m using a million dollars in assets (liquid and otherwise) as an arbitrary marker of being rich. Since the median age at priestly ordination is 36, for most priests we are speaking of a 40 year window to accumulate assets.

    Since you stated in your article that you were open to revisions based on additional facts, I would have you consider the following:

    1) The standard American Catholic MDiv is a four year theology degree, not three. I don’t know of a Catholic diocesan seminary in the country that has a three year theology program.

    2) A large percentage of priests– I would daresay almost half– enter the seminary system already having earned a bachelor’s degree on their own dime. They enter into a two year non-degree pre-theology program.

    3) The large majority of priests either have no interest, or will never be allowed, to take advanced theological or canonical studies. I can see why given your personal life story while you would factor that in, but the cost of studies beyond the MDiv is not relevant to most priests and even lay ecclesial ministers, few of whom have more than a Master’s Degree.

    Essentially to realistically model salaries, you have to break up priests into four cohorts: the lifers with theological education paid for by the diocese and the late vocations with Bachelor’s not paid for by the Church. Then subdivide these two cohorts again into two: those with education beyond M.Div. vs. the large majority who don’t.

    4) I thought your rectory analysis was good, but it needs more sophistication. How many rectories are used only by one priest? Some have multiple priests living in them and yet others serve as parish offices: the priest living areas are only a portion of the building. And as you factor in the great value of job security, so you should factor in the loss of privacy for priests living in mixed-use rectories.

    5) Priests (and ministers) generally have an unfavorable tax situation in that we are considered self-employed for FICA purposes. Additionally, we have to pay FICA on the value of our room-and-board. Thus we pay federal taxes far in excess of the laity with our same income. To give a real life example, I paid $12,000 federal and FICA taxes on a total income (not AGI) of $47,000. When diocesan priests’ pay structures are designed, the tax line is usually the biggest line item, larger than food, car, clothing, etc.

    Anyways, thanks for the thought-provoking post. I heartily agree that in the contemporary era most American priests live materially comfortable lives, but not lives that normally lead to great material wealth.

  11. A.J. Boyd says:

    Thanks, Fr. Michael. Thank you for sharing. Some quick replies:
    1) The academic work of the M.Div. is three-years at full-time, but the pastoral year/formation makes for a fourth. I counted them separately, but i know seminaries tend to include them together.
    2) I’m aware, i tried to account for this but will update accordingly. Also somewhere clear numbers on a national level would help.
    3) good point. I should make that more clear, perhaps in two examples: typical parish priest and DRE/Youth minister in one, those with advanced studies in another.
    4) it does. Working on it.
    5) another headache i deliberately put off. But worth including to do it well.

Leave a Reply to John M. Stegeman Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: