SERMON: “A Minister’s Right to Pay” (1 Cor. 9:1–14)
“A Minister’s Right to Pay” (1 Cor. 9:1–14)
Series: “1 Cor: Holiness from Messes” #30 Text: 1
Corinthians 9:1–14
By: Shaun Marksbury Date: June 20, 2026
Venue: Living Water Baptist Church Occasion: AM Service
Introduction
There are some texts that are awkward for pastors to teach
for various reasons. Talking about money
is always one of those. The sermon can seem
like a call for increased support, even if it’s just what’s next in the
text! That’s because there are certain
charlatans out there who take advantage of others, and good pastors don’t want
to be associated with them.
Yet, the Lord gives us passages like this because we need to
learn. Money can become an idol to so
many people, whether we’re talking about the huckster in the pulpit or
Christian in the pew holding on to it with a tight fist. Perhaps it arises from lack of basic
Christian charity and old-fashioned selfishness. Sometimes, the idolatry isn’t with the money
as much as it is a control issue: We simply don’t trust God to take care of us,
so we hoard money in an attempt to secure our future. False teachers are a problem for the church,
and so are Christians who don’t pray over finances and consider giving
generously and joyfully to the Lord (cf. 2 Cor. 9:6–7).
(Paul has a unique point in mind for this particular
passage, and we’ll talk about that specifically next time.)
There could also be bad theology and logic at play. Some are convinced that pastors should be
poor; one of the first questions I was asked by someone who found I entered
ministry some 20+ years ago is whether I had taken my vow of poverty! Again, there are several high-profile
“celebrity” pastors who drive pricy cars to their mansions filled with
expensive clothes, and people are fed up with that hypocrisy. Even so, the church member who expects that
the pastor can just get a “real job” like everyone else isn’t thinking
biblically or even very logically on the matter.
Paul says here that he has a right to make his living by the
gospel, as do others who are in ministry.
As such, and at the risk of sounding self-serving, we’ll see that
ministers do indeed deserve compensation for their services. We’ll see that in seven parts: Ministers
deserve pay because of apostolic design (vv. 1–2), basic needs (vv. 3–6), common
principle (v. 7), biblical law (vv. 8–11), others also receive (v. 12), ministerial
regulation (v. 13), and Christ’s command (v. 14). Let’s consider how we should take care of
ministers by starting with the first point.
First, Ministers Deserve Pay Because of Apostolic Design (vv. 1–2)
Am I not free? Am I not an apostle? Have I not seen Jesus our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord? If to others I am not an apostle, at least I
am to you, for you are the seal of my apostleship in the Lord.
Now, we must back up a bit, because this may seem like a
sharp turn from where we were in the previous chapter. Through the issue of eating meat sacrificed
to idols, Paul was talking about our liberty in Christ and how we sometimes
limit ourselves for the love of others.
Here, he begins by talking about his freedom, and even his right to
money, but he will also give the example of refusing himself this right at
times for the sake of serving others.[1] He’s hoping that the Corinthians will imitate
his lifestyle with one another.[2]
Yet, we won’t understand that unless we clearly see today
his rights. He asks four rhetoricals
here which all assume a “yes” response.[3] First, he’s free because Christians are set
free from “Mosaic ceremonialism” (cf. 9:19).[4] This doesn’t mean that Paul is free to do
whatever he wants, though, but he is free to serve the Lord.[5]
He is also an apostle.
There may have been those within (or outside) of the Corinthian
congregation that doubted him, just as some do today. However, he placed himself on par with the
other apostles. In fact, as to the third
question, seeing Jesus the Lord (the one who appoints apostles) is part of his
testimony (see Acts 9:3, 17; 18:9; 22:14, 18; 23:11). Those who haven’t seen the Lord cannot claim
to be apostles.
Finally, he asks about them.
Paul founded this church.[6] He noted them earlier in this letter (1 Cor 3:6; 4:15). He says here that his work is in connection
with the Lord or in the Lord’s power.
Now, as an apostle of the Lord Jesus
Christ, he has the prerogative to compel them to give, should he choose to do
so. And he reminds them in v. 2 that
others might doubt his apostleship, but they don’t. Indeed, they serve as a seal stamping his
apostleship!
So, Paul says that this is an
apostolic right, and many did give to his work, if not the Corinthians. Now, pastors and missionaries are not
apostles, so this doesn’t directly apply.
Yet, if we were to ask where giving to ministers started in church
history, we must go back to the very beginning and see the design established
by the apostles themselves.
Yet, that’s not the only reason to
give to them:
Second, Ministers Deserve Pay Because of Basic Needs (vv. 3–6)
My defense to
those who examine me is this: Do we not have authority to eat and drink? Do we not have authority to take along a
believing wife, even as the rest of the apostles and the brothers of the Lord
and Cephas? Or do only Barnabas and I
not have authority to refrain from working?
Paul now asks three more rhetorical questions as his defense
of compensation. The word here is apologia
— an “apology” a defendant would argue in a court of law.[7] As
Matthew Henry notes, “It is no
strange nor new thing for a minister to meet with very unkind returns for great
good-will to a people, and diligent and successful services among them.”[8] There were some sitting in judgment
over Paul, so he must defend himself.
The rhetorical questions here go to basic human need that we
all must consider. In a sense, all
people have a right to food and water, but Paul claims authority for it. Everyone must eat, so material compensation
isn’t unreasonable, especially given his ministry.
In fact, Paul says the apostles and the rest have the
authority to take along a wife. Of
course, he gives an important caveat.
This is literally a “sister-wife,” meaning a
wife who is a sister in the Lord[9] (Christians should not take
unbelieving wives). This evidences that
ministers can marry (as well as Jesus’s earthly brothers who became believers
and leaders in this church)[10] — and that it’s good for
their wives to join them in ministry.[11]
This also hints at something
else. The church should compensate the
minister with the needs of the wife (and presumably, children) in mind. It’s no good to pay the minister bare minimum
and expect him and his family to be available 24/7, for he must try to figure
out how to support his family outside of church.[12]
Paul gets a little sarcastic with his
last rhetorical question. He asks
whether only he and Barnabas lack authority to stop working. As we’ll note in a few minutes, others were
receiving full-time compensation, but Paul was voluntarily working as a
tentmaker in Corinth (Acts 18:3). Since
the Greeks despised manual labor,[13] Paul asks how exactly they
are expected to meet their basic needs.
The need for money is basic, and it’s common sense that
people require it. So, why not
ministers? That brings us to the next
point:
Third, Ministers Deserve Pay Because of Common Principle (v. 7)
Who at any time
serves as a soldier at his own expense? Who
plants a vineyard and does not consume the fruit of it? Or who shepherds a flock and does not consume
the milk of the flock?
Whether we are talking about soldiers, vinedressers,
shepherds, or someone else we would meet anywhere in the world, people expect
some kind of renumeration for their services.
As Matthew Henry puts it: “Soldiers
expect to be paid for their service. Husbandmen
and shepherds expect to get a livelihood out of their labours. If they plant vineyards, and dress and
cultivate them, it is with expectation of fruit; if they feed a flock, it is
with the expectation of being fed and clothed by it!”[14] Workers should “benefit from their labor,”[15]
and that is common sense.
Well, Paul himself uses each of these
images for a pastor. If the common
principle is to pay a laborer for his labor, then it should be common sense to
pay the person who is spending forty or more hours to prepare various
teachings, several more hours in counseling and discipleship, more hours in
practical service to others in the church, and even more in various meetings
and visitations. But, if that isn’t
enough, Paul says it’s biblical next:
Fourth, Ministers Deserve Pay Because of Biblical Law (vv. 8–11)
Am I speaking
these things according to human judgment?
Or does not the Law also say these things? For it is written in the Law of Moses, “You
shall not muzzle the ox while it is threshing.” Is God merely concerned about oxen? Or is He speaking altogether for our sake? Yes, for our sake it was written, because the
plowman ought to plow in hope, and the thresher to thresh in hope of sharing
the crops. If we sowed spiritual things
in you, is it too much if we reap material things from you?
Paul says that he’s not using arguments based on mere
reason. Some in Paul’s day might have
thought that God’s Word didn’t call for the pay of preachers, as some still
think today.[16]
So, Paul cites Deuteronomy 25:4 (which he also does over in
1 Tim. 5:18). The ancient world used
livestock to help separate the grain,[17] and some stingy
farmer might have placed a muzzle over their mouths to keep them from eating
any of the potential profits. However,
Scripture as well as Jewish tradition saw the mistreatment of animals as a step
away from mistreating humans.[18]
That’s the point.
It’s not that God is so concerned about the welfare of
oxen — as Martin Luther said, “This is not written
because of the oxen, since they do not know how to read.”[19] God is far more mindful of the welfare of
people, which is the greater context of Deuteronomy 25. It’s written for the sake of God’s ministers
who need to plow and thresh day and night in hope of sharing the crop. That’s the moral principle of the Old Testament command.
In v. 11,
Paul makes it clear that he’s talking about spiritual work. The sowing was that of teaching and
instruction. The reaping should have
been material, financial support.
At some
level, the Corinthians must have understood this. They were paying others, as we see next:
Fifth, Ministers Deserve Pay Because of Others Receiving (v. 12)
If others share
this authority over you, do we not more?
Nevertheless, we did not use this authority, but we endure all things so
that we will cause no hindrance to the gospel of Christ.
Perhaps the Corinthians had been paying those Paul had
listed in v. 5.[20] Paul is arguing from the lesser to the
greater again. If those who are helping
with the church now deserve compensation, how much more do those who founded
the church?[21]
You might ask why they weren’t paying Paul at this
point! Remember, though, that Paul
didn’t want them to support him. Since
all teachers asked for money, when Paul came to Corinth for the first time, he
didn’t want them to think he came for their money.[22] We’ll talk more about this later in this
chapter, but Paul refused their pay so they would listen to his free gospel
call.
Even so, asking for compensation is okay. We already considered that it’s biblical, and
next, we also see that God created it to be practiced.
Sixth, Ministers Deserve Pay Because of Ministerial Regulation (v. 13)
Do you not know
that those who perform sacred services eat the food of the temple, and those
who attend regularly to the altar have their share from the altar?
Paul goes back
to consider the Levites and the priests.
Here were some oxen who weren’t muzzled!
Both in God’s temple as well as the pagan ones, those who serviced
received of the offerings.[23] If we consider the Bible for regulation on
our worship, then we see that God also regulates how those who conduct worship
get their food — through ministry!
Again, there are bad examples. At the beginning of 1 Samuel, for instance,
Eli the High Priest had sons who were dishonoring the Lord in many ways through
their greed. Even so, paying ministers
for their ministry is still God’s pattern.
If that were not clear, then we have Christ’s words to consider lastly:
Seventh, Ministers Deserve Pay Because of Christ’s Command (v. 14)
So also the Lord
directed those who proclaim the gospel to get their living from the gospel.
Paul would have heard what Jesus told His disciples. The Lord sent out His disciples to preach,
and He said in Luke 10:7 to stay in that house that receives them, “eating and
drinking what they give you; for the laborer is worthy of his wages.” They didn’t need to worry about also getting
sustenance and shelter for themselves; Jesus told them they were worthy of
compensation because of the very work they were already doing.
Conclusion
Those called to ministry should not have to worry about
pay. Yes, God will take care of them,
but the number one way He does that is through His people. Now, of course, some churches are smaller
than others, and a pastor may need to work a second job like Paul did. This is known as bi-vocational ministry, and
most pastors are not full time, but God commands Christians to give some.
Of course, Paul is in a different situation here. Others had paid him, and he was in a new area
that had never heard the gospel. As one
study notes, “The Lord commands His people to offer
support to those who minister to them, but He does not command those who
minister to accept the support.”[24] Some pastors already have support, or they
have other gospel-oriented goals, and that is on them.
Still, unless the pastor is refusing pay for some reason,
God’s people have an obligation to pay what they can. While the goal isn’t for the pastor to become
wealthy, fleecing the sheep, he and his family should be able to
live. In fact, if the church is giving
to outside missions and refuse to pay the teaching pastor full time, they
should reconsider their priorities.
May pastors be able to serve in joy, not in sorrow, with the
church doing what it can to help.
(And no, I’m not asking for more money!)
[1] John D. Barry, Douglas Mangum, Derek R. Brown, Michael
S. Heiser, Miles Custis, Elliot Ritzema, Matthew M. Whitehead, Michael R.
Grigoni, and David Bomar, Faithlife Study
Bible, (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2012, 2016), 1 Co 9:1–27.
[2] Andrew David Naselli, Romans–Galatians, 2020, X, 297.
[3] David K. Lowery, The
Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures, 1985, 2, 522.
[4] A. T. Robertson, Word
Pictures in the New Testament, (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1933), 1 Co
9:1.
[5] Roy E. Ciampa and Brian S. Rosner, The First Letter to the Corinthians, The
Pillar New Testament Commentary, (Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, U.K.: William B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2010), 398.
[6] Barry, et. al, 1 Co 9:1.
[7] Ciampa and Rosner, 400.
[8] Matthew Henry, Matthew
Henry’s Commentary on the Whole Bible: Complete and Unabridged in One Volume,
(Peabody: Hendrickson, 1994), 2259.
[9] Robertson, 1 Co 9:5.
[10] J. I. Packer, Wayne Grudem, and Ajith Fernando, Eds., ESV Global Study Bible, (Wheaton, IL:
Crossway, 2012), 1616.
[11] John F. MacArthur Jr., 1 Corinthians, MacArthur New Testament Commentary, (Chicago: Moody
Press, 1984), 201–202.
[12] Ibid., 201.
[13] Barry, et. al., 1 Co 9:6.
[14] Henry.
[15] Packer, et. al.
[16] Robertson, 1 Co 9:8.
[17] Ibid., 1 Co 9:9.
[18] Ciampa and Rosner, 405.
[19] Naselli, 298.
The Luther quote is cited from Martin Luther, Lectures on Deuteronomy, Luther’s Works, ed. Jaroslav Pelikan, vol.
9 (St. Louis, MO: Concordia, 1960), 248.
[20] Packer, et. al.
[21] F. Alan Tomlinson, CSB
Study Bible: Notes, 2017, 1824.
[22] Lowery, 523.
[23] Ibid.
[24] MacArthur, 205–206.