I have walked into more than a few offices where one person did everything.

Opened the mail. Made the deposits. Wrote the checks. Reconciled the bank statement. Entered everything into QuickBooks. Prepared the financial reports for the board.

Every single one of those tasks, handled by the same set of hands.

And in almost every case, that person was deeply trusted, genuinely competent, and completely overwhelmed. They were not doing anything wrong. They were doing everything they could to keep things running. But the structure they were operating inside? That was a problem.

In accounting, we call the solution segregation of duties. The concept sounds technical. The idea behind it is simple: no single person should control an entire financial process from beginning to end. Break the tasks up. Distribute the access. Create checkpoints where one person’s work gets verified by another.

Not because your people are dishonest. Because honest people make mistakes. And because even honest people, under enough financial pressure, can make choices they never imagined themselves making. The structure is not an accusation. It is a protection, for the organization and for the person sitting in that chair.

Here is where it matters most.

Payroll. The person who sets up employees and enters their pay rates should not be the same person who processes payroll and distributes checks. The person who distributes checks should not be the same person who reconciles the payroll account. Each of those hand-offs creates a checkpoint. Remove them and you create opportunity, even if unintentionally.

Accounts payable. The person who requests a purchase should not be the same person who approves it. The person who approves it should not be the same person who cuts the check. The person who cuts the check should not be the same person who reconciles the bank statement.

General ledger access. Not everyone who touches your finances needs full access to your accounting system. Role-based access, where each person can see and do only what their function requires, limits exposure and creates a cleaner audit trail.

I know what you are thinking. We are small. We do not have enough people to split all of this up.

That is a fair constraint, and it is more common than not. But small does not mean unprotected. It means creative.

If you’re a church or nonprofit, volunteers can fill some of these roles. A board member or finance committee member can serve as a second set of eyes on reconciliations. A part-time bookkeeper can handle functions that should stay separate from your full-time staff. An outside firm, even on a limited engagement, can provide the oversight layer your team cannot provide internally.

The goal is not a perfect org chart. The goal is making sure no single person can initiate, approve, execute, and conceal a financial transaction without anyone else ever knowing. That standard scales to any size.

Most fraud does not announce itself. It starts small, in the gaps between responsibilities that nobody thought to close. A few transactions here. A reimbursement there. By the time it surfaces, the damage is done, the trust is broken, and the person responsible is often someone nobody would have suspected.

Including themselves.

Segregation of duties does not guarantee you will never face that situation. But it raises the cost of fraud high enough that most attempts never start. And it protects your faithful, hardworking finance staff from ever being in a position where someone could reasonably wonder.

That is worth the effort of dividing the work.

Who else touches your finances before the books close? If the honest answer is “nobody,” that might be the most important conversation you can have right now. Start that conversation at connect@inspiringchurches.com.

My dad had his own paraphrase of Matthew 22:21.

“Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar. But only what belongs to Caesar.”

He usually said it with a grin. He meant it seriously.

The Pharisees tried to trap him. They wanted Jesus to either endorse Roman taxation and alienate the crowd or oppose it and give them grounds for arrest. His answer did neither. He looked at the coin, noted whose portrait was on it, and said give it back. Simple. Disarming. And, as I have come to believe, about far more than taxes.

But stay with the taxes for a moment, because many churches and nonprofits have not thought carefully enough about this.

The assumption most ministry leaders carry is this: we are tax exempt, so Caesar does not have much claim on us. In many respects, that is true. But “many respects” is where the trouble starts.

Here’s what I mean.

They pay taxes they do not owe.

This one surprises people every time I bring it up. Most states exempt churches and nonprofit organizations from paying sales tax on purchases made for ministry purposes. You know that tax-free weekend before school starts that everyone looks forward to? Churches and nonprofits get that benefit year round. Every supply order, every service contract, every purchase tied to ministry operations, potentially tax-free.

But claiming that exemption requires a certificate and the discipline to use it. Some retailers let you present it at the register. Others, like Walmart, require an application process so they have your certificate on file before they’ll honor it. Some won’t accommodate it at all. It takes a little legwork upfront.

I will be honest with you. Qavah Ministries, the nonprofit my wife Pam and I co-founded, does not spend enough on sales-taxable items to make the compliance effort feel worth it. When you’re talking about saving twelve dollars, the paperwork costs more than the tax. But I have worked with organizations spending tens of thousands on supplies and services who were quietly handing Caesar money he was never entitled to, simply because nobody had gotten around to setting up the exemption. At that scale, it is not a minor oversight. It is a budget line.

They owe taxes they do not pay.

Churches are not exempt from everything. Payroll taxes still apply, including for pastoral staff, and the deadlines are real. Miss a deposit and the penalties compound fast. Housing allowances for ministers come with specific rules and limits that are easy to miscalculate. Revenue generated outside an organization’s exempt purpose can trigger unrelated business income tax. These are not exotic edge cases. They show up in ordinary ministry operations, often quietly.

They lack the proper documentation

Donors who give $250 or more in a single gift need written acknowledgment that meets IRS standards before they file their return. The responsibility for getting that receipt rests with the donor. The responsibility for issuing it rests with the organization. When that process breaks down, donors lose deductions they were entitled to, and trust erodes in ways that are hard to rebuild.

I want to be clear about my lane here, and I mean that literally. I am a cyclist. Not a tax preparer and not a compliance expert. What I bring is a lot of miles on roads many ministry leaders have not ridden yet. I know where the terrain gets technical, where the shortcuts create headaches, and when it is time to call in a ride-leader with the right credentials for the route. That usually means a CPA who knows nonprofit and church tax law specifically. Not every CPA does.

Here is the part my dad’s paraphrase does not cover, but Jesus did.

After “give to Caesar what is Caesar’s,” He said “and give to God what is God’s.” Most readings treat that as a tithe reminder. I think He meant something much more.

Whose portrait appears on a coin? Caesar’s. Give it back.

Whose portrait appears on a human life? God’s. Give that back too.

Caesar wants compliance. God wants us. The organizations that understand that distinction tend to handle both better. They pay what they owe without resentment, reclaim what they do not owe without guilt, and hold all of it loosely because none of it was theirs to begin with.

That is not just good theology. It’s good stewardship.

Do you know what your organization actually owes, and what it does not? If you have never had someone walk those questions with you, that conversation might be worth having. Start at connect@inspiringchurches.com.

Nobody invites an audit.

Most people in ministry know it. The word “audit” lands somewhere between “subpoena” and “IRS notice” on the list of things leaders look forward to. So when I tell churches that at a certain point, they should not just tolerate an audit but actually want one, I usually get a look.

Hear me out.

An audit does not accuse. It does not signal that something went wrong. At its core, it brings a trained, independent set of eyes to your financial records and delivers an honest report on what they find. Nothing about that warrants fear. Everything about it warrants pursuit.

Here are six reasons your church should invite an auditor in to take a closer look.

1. It fulfills your obligations.

Some churches have no choice. Lenders often require audits as a condition of a loan covenant. Bylaws or denominational policies sometimes mandate them. If any of that applies to you, this one stays simple: get it done. But even here, the framing matters. Compliance marks the floor, not the ceiling. The churches that treat an audit as a box to check miss everything else on this list.

2. It creates transparency.

Transparency does not function as a buzzword. In a ministry context, it functions as a witness. When your congregation, your staff, and your board know that an independent CPA firm has reviewed your finances and issued an opinion, it builds the kind of trust that takes years to earn any other way. Transparency does not mean sharing every line item from the pulpit. It means operating in the light, without anything to hide, and saying so credibly.

3. It provides accountability.

Your finance team, however talented and trustworthy, benefits from external accountability. So does your board. So do you. An auditor does not hunt for criminals. They hunt for gaps, inconsistencies, and controls that underperform. Finding those things before they become problems counts as a gift. The accountability an audit provides protects your people as much as it protects the organization.

4. It deters fraud.

This one makes people uncomfortable, but it matters too much to skip. A regular audit changes behavior. Not because your team lacks integrity, but because structural accountability forms the foundation of what keeps honest people honest, especially under pressure. Most church fraud never starts with a villain. Believe it or not, it rarely begins with intention. It starts with a trusted person, under financial stress, with too much unsupervised access and no reason to expect anyone will ever look closely. An audit changes that equation.

5. It strengthens your internal controls.

An auditor will tell you where your processes have gaps. Maybe one person holds too much control over a single financial function. Maybe your approval workflows lack documentation. Maybe your reconciliation process runs less consistently than you think. Those findings do not indict. They point the way. The churches that take audit recommendations seriously and rigorously implement solutions that address the weakness come out operationally stronger. Every time.

6. It builds credibility with outside stakeholders.

If your church ever applies for a loan, pursues a major grant, enters a building campaign, or brings on a significant donor, someone will ask about your financials. An audited financial statement carries weight that unaudited books simply cannot match. It signals to lenders, foundations, and major donors that you operate with rigor and accountability. That credibility opens doors.

I have sat in rooms with church leaders who genuinely feared what an auditor might find. In almost every case, the auditor found not scandal but opportunity: tighter processes, clearer reporting, better stewardship of what God had already entrusted to the ministry.

That outcome warrants an invitation.

An audit costs money. Fraud costs more. So does a loan denial, a failed grant application, or a congregation that quietly stops trusting the ones holding the pursestrings.

Need help writing that invitation?

“Examine yourselves to see whether you are in the faith; test yourselves. Do you not realize that Christ Jesus is in you, unless, of course, you fail the test?” 2 Corinthians 13:5

I have sat at nearly every seat at the audit table.

I started my career in public accounting at a large regional CPA firm in Central Florida, as a bookkeeper while still finishing my accounting degree. I eventually made my way into the audit department, where I served as the in-charge on my first audit engagement as a staff accountant. Baptism by fire. From there I moved to the client side as a controller, which put me on the receiving end of the same process I had been running.

Not every audit went as expected. Not nearly.

I have been the auditor. I have been the one being audited. And I have sat alongside others as they prepared their organizations for audits. And I have learned something from all three seats at the table.

And I welcomed the process.

Not just tolerated it. Not just endured it as a professional obligation. Actually welcomed it. Something clarifying, even purifying, emerges when someone knowledgeable comes behind you, examines the work carefully, and tells you honestly whether it holds up. That audit feels less like a threat and more like a gift. It tells you where you actually stand, not just where you hope you stand.

In technical accounting language, an audit means examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting certain amounts and disclosures in order to form a basis for an opinion. In plain English, it means asking someone who knows what to look for to look carefully and tell you the truth about what they find.

That sounds less like an accounting procedure and more like friendship.

The examined life

Paul offered blunt instruction to the church at Corinth, blunt in the way only found in genuine care. Examine yourselves. Test yourselves. Do not assume. Do not coast on the faith you declared last year or the commitment you made a decade ago. Look carefully. See whether it holds up.

No anxiety lives in that instruction. No one here wants to disqualify you. Paul writes, and I write, as someone who knows that an unexamined life, in faith as in finance, tends to drift in directions we did not intend and might not see.

Socrates said the unexamined life is not worth living. He meant it philosophically. Paul meant it spiritually. And after thirty years of working in and around organizations whose financial health was directly tied to whether their leaders looked honestly at what the numbers actually said, I would argue it applies operationally as well.

Rarely did the ones with the worst problems struggle the most. Rather, the real struggles often plagued the ones most resistant to examining themselves honestly. The ones who found reasons to delay the audit. The ones who preferred the comfort of not knowing to the discomfort of finding out.

The struggle reveals the problem: resisting examination, resisting accountability, resisting the truth.

Someone to look behind you

Are you willing to invite an auditor into more than just your financials?

Do you have someone you trust enough to tell you the truth? Someone who will look past the surface and tell you what they find without flinching?

A spouse, a best friend, a small group, a mentor.

Jesus.

If we let him, he can look into our lives, past the performance and into the character, and point out where we need correction or where our lives actually hold up better than we thought.

Letting someone in that deeply costs something. We want to manage the narrative, present the version that ties out, and hope no one looks too closely at the supporting documentation.

Examination ushers in a value worthy of the discomfort.

The examined life, in faith and in finance, truly is the one worth living.

Who is your auditor? The person in your life who tells you the truth about what they see? If you do not have one, that might be the most important thing on your list right now.

I heard something recently from a CFO that resonated. One of her controllers asked what it would take to move into a CFO role. Her answer was simple and direct: “A career change.”

At first, that sounds a little harsh. But she’s not wrong. She wasn’t dismissing her controller. She identified something that most organizations don’t understand, or if they do, they don’t say it out loud: a controller and a CFO are not the same job at different pay grades. They are different jobs, different by design, requiring different instincts and different ways of thinking.

I was still rolling that around when I opened LinkedIn the next morning and saw a job posting for a CFO in my feed. So I read through the description. By the third bullet point, something felt off. By the end of the post, it was obvious that their ad for CFO did not describe a CFO; they were looking for a controller. Reconciliations. Monthly close. Financial statement preparation. Timely compliance filings. Internal controls. All necessary, all valuable, but not CFO work. Maybe they just liked the sound of the title better. Or they thought an ad for CFO would attract better or more qualified candidates. Or more charitably, maybe they genuinely didn’t know the difference.

To be fair, a lot of candidates don’t know the difference.

But if your LinkedIn ad for a CFO starts with “We are seeking an experienced and detail-oriented Chief Financial Officer to oversee day-to-day accounting operations, including accounts payable, accounts receivable, payroll, and general ledger,” you should probably be searching for a controller.

I see this same confusion constantly, and not just in hiring posts. I see it in my own conversations with prospective clients. A pastor or executive director reaches out because someone told them they should consider hiring a fractional CFO. We start talking, and fairly quickly it becomes clear that what they actually need first is something else. Maybe they need a controller. Or maybe an accounting manager. Maybe even a senior accountant or bookkeeper.

And when the role they seek doesn’t match what they actually need, somebody ends up frustrated and nobody ends up well-served. Sure, that pastor or ED might need a CFO eventually, but that CFO will bring a lot more value if she’s not encumbered with the fundamental details of accounting or bookkeeping.

So which one do you need? Let’s talk about it.

Where the Two Roles Overlap

Here’s why the confusion makes sense in the first place. Both a controller and a CFO need to understand financial statements and generally accepted accounting principles. Both need to understand the organization, the ministry model, the cost structure, well enough to make sense of the numbers and translate them for people who don’t live in spreadsheets. Both need to operate with integrity. That overlap is real and it’s significant. It’s also where the comparison ends.

What a Controller Does

A controller’s core responsibility is to ensure that the financial information is accurate, complete, and timely. Month-end close. Account reconciliations. General financial oversight. Payroll. Accounts payable and receivable. Internal controls. Audit support. Chart of accounts. Financial statement preparation. If that sounds like the unglamorous but foundational backbone of a healthy organization, that’s because it is.

The best way I know to say it: a controller builds the financial foundation. And if the foundation is faulty, it doesn’t matter how big or beautiful the building is.

What a CFO Does

A CFO uses accurate financial information to help leadership make better decisions. Cash flow forecasting. Scenario modeling. Margin analysis. Debt and capital strategy. Program sustainability. Long-range planning. Board communication. Risk assessment. Where a controller looks backward to ensure that history is recorded correctly, a CFO looks forward and asks what the organization should do next.

The CFO’s job is to sit across the table from the pastor, executive director, or board chair and help answer the questions that keep them up at night. Can we afford this hire? Is this program sustainable at current funding levels? What happens to cash if giving drops 20%? Should we wait, borrow, or phase this project differently?

Those are not accounting questions. They are leadership questions with financial dimensions, and that is a very different seat.

A Controller Explains the Numbers. A CFO Helps You Decide What to Do With Them.

The most useful way I’ve found to frame this for leaders who don’t spend their days thinking about finance is this: a controller tells you what happened and makes sure the story is accurate. A CFO helps you decide what story you want to write next. Both matter. But they are not interchangeable, and sequencing them correctly matters enormously.

Why Churches and Nonprofits Feel This More Acutely

Churches and nonprofits operate in a fundamentally different financial environment than for-profit businesses. Good leaders recognize the disconnect, that revenue doesn’t always come directly from the people you serve. It comes from donors, foundations, and people who believe in the mission. That puts unusual pressure on leadership to communicate well, steward carefully, and operate with clarity that many organizations struggle to find.

Because most churches and nonprofits run lean, they often don’t have a deep finance bench. A part-time bookkeeper. An outside CPA they see at tax time. A board member who was voluntold to be the treasurer. And a senior leader cobbling things together in between.

So when the pain shows up, they reach for the biggest title they know. “We need a CFO.” And maybe they do. But when I start asking questions, I more often hear things like: our books are behind, our reports don’t make sense, nobody trusts the numbers, payroll keeps creating surprises. Those are not CFO problems. They are controller problems. And naming them correctly is actually good news, because controller problems have controller solutions, and those solutions tend to be more accessible and more impactful than most leaders expect.

The Fractional Version of the Same Problem

This shows up regularly in the fractional services world. A prospect tells me they want a fractional CFO, and then the actual deliverables they describe are things like closing the books each month, reconciling restricted fund balances, cleaning up the chart of accounts, documenting approval workflows, and building a monthly reporting pack. That is not a knock on what they need. It is excellent work. I genuinely love it when that work is done well. But it is work tailored to a controller, not a CFO. Calling it CFO-work sets everyone up for the wrong expectations and, ultimately, a frustrating engagement.

A true fractional CFO conversation sounds different. The client is asking things like: Can you help us model what happens to cash if we open a second site? Can you help us think through our next 13 weeks of cash? Can you help us prepare for a lender conversation? Those are actually two very different needs.

So How Do You Know Which One You Need?

Start with a simple diagnostic question: Do you trust your financial information?

If the answer is anything less than a confident yes, start with controller-level help. Build the foundation. Get the books current, the reports clean, the processes documented. This kind of foundational work is about creating a reliable recipe that anyone on your team can execute consistently. It’s not exciting, but it is the work that makes everything else possible.

If your answer is yes, your information is solid and timely, but leadership isn’t sure what to do with it, that’s when a fractional CFO engagement starts paying real dividends.

There is no shame in needing controller work first. In many organizations, it is the most responsible next step you can take. A CFO operating without reliable numbers is guessing. And guessing with donated dollars isn’t stewardship; it’s a liability.

The Real Benefit of Getting This Right

If we don’t say the benefit out loud, how will they know it’s there? The benefit of defining this correctly isn’t just semantic tidiness. It’s that you hire the right help, set the right expectations, and actually solve the problem you showed up with rather than the problem you thought you had.

Churches and nonprofits don’t need inflated titles. They need clarity about what kind of help will actually move them forward. Sometimes that means strategic CFO-level guidance. Sometimes it means controller-level discipline and follow-through. Sometimes it means both, just not simultaneously.

Before you reach out to a fractional CFO, ask yourself two honest questions. Do we trust our financial information? And do we need someone to help us understand what the numbers say, or do we need someone to help us decide what to do next?

The answer to those two questions will tell you more than any job description ever will.

A pastor called me a while back, voice slightly tighter than usual. His lender had just informed him that as a condition of the loan his church was pursuing, they would need audited financial statements. He wasn’t panicking exactly, but he wasn’t far from it either.

“What does that even mean?” he asked. “Are we in trouble?”

He wasn’t in trouble. He wasn’t even close to trouble. But I’ve had enough versions of that conversation to know that the word audit does something involuntary to people. The shoulders go up. The stomach drops a little. The brain immediately files it somewhere between tax season and getting called to the principal’s office.

I blame the IRS. They borrowed the word, attached it to one of the more anxiety-producing experiences in American civic life, and now the rest of us are dealing with the fallout. Because an independent audit of your church’s financial statements by a qualified CPA firm has almost nothing in common with the version that involves a federal agent and a shoebox of receipts.

Let me clear up the five most common misconceptions I hear.

Misconception 1: An audit is adversarial.

It isn’t. Or at least, it isn’t supposed to be. A financial audit is a professional engagement, not an investigation. The auditors aren’t arriving at your church looking for something wrong. They’re arriving to examine the evidence supporting your financial statements so they can form an independent opinion about whether those statements are fairly presented. That’s it.

The relationship works best when it’s collaborative. Your team provides documentation, the auditors ask questions, and everyone is working toward the same goal: a clean set of financials that leadership, lenders, donors, and denominational bodies can rely on. If it ever feels adversarial, that’s usually a sign that the wrong firm was selected for the engagement. More on that in a moment.

Misconception 2: An audit is painful.

It doesn’t have to be. I’ll be honest with you. A poorly planned audit with an inexperienced firm that doesn’t understand church accounting can feel like a really long bike ride without padded shorts. But that’s a firm selection problem, not an audit problem.

The right firm, one that has genuine expertise in church and nonprofit accounting and shows up as a partner rather than an interrogator, makes the process manageable. Proper planning on the front end eliminates most of the aggravation. Knowing what documentation you’ll need, having your records organized before they arrive, and designating a clear point of contact on your team make the difference between a disruptive six weeks and a smooth engagement that barely interrupts the rhythm of your ministry.

Misconception 3: An audit will catch any and all fraud.

This one matters, because some church leaders assume that having an annual audit means they’re fully protected against financial misconduct. They’re not, and it’s important to understand why.

Audits examine transactions on a test basis, which means not every transaction is reviewed. The audit opinion covers whether your financial statements are fairly presented in all material respects. It is not a forensic investigation designed to surface every irregularity. That said, an audit is a significant deterrent. A would-be embezzler who knows that an independent CPA is coming behind them each year to examine the books is far less likely to attempt anything in the first place. Think of it like a known speed trap on a road you drive every day. The officer doesn’t pull over every speeder, but most people slow down anyway. The audit’s value as a deterrent is real and substantial, even if its scope as a detection tool is limited.

Misconception 4: An audit is cost-prohibitive.

For some churches, an audit is required by a lender, by denominational bylaws, or by the church’s own governing documents, so the cost conversation is somewhat moot. You find the right firm and you budget for it.

For churches considering a voluntary audit, cost is often the first objection. And it’s a valid concern. But here’s what I’d offer in response. First, proper planning and effective use of your own staff during the engagement can offset a meaningful portion of the cost. Second, a firm that specializes in churches won’t waste billable hours going down audit rabbit trails that are relevant to commercial businesses but completely unnecessary for a ministry context. Third, a good auditor delivers more than an opinion letter. A well-prepared Management Comment Letter, which a quality firm will produce alongside the audit, is a practical and actionable document that helps leadership understand where the financial infrastructure could be strengthened. That’s value that extends well beyond the audit itself.

And if a full audit is genuinely out of reach right now, there are alternatives. A review (and sometimes even a compilation) can provide meaningful financial credibility at a fraction of the cost of a full audit. Think of it as a crawl, walk, run approach: a compilation establishes a baseline, a review adds a layer of analytical scrutiny, and a full audit provides the highest level of independent assurance. Many churches start at one level and grow into the next as their needs and resources develop.

Misconception 5: All audits are the same.

The language of an audit opinion report is largely standardized. GAAP prescribes the wording, so from firm to firm, the actual opinion letter looks similar (sometimes word-for-word exactly the same). But the language of the report and the quality of the audit are two completely different things.

How the audit is performed, the expertise of the staff, the relevance of their questions, the efficiency of the process, the quality of the communication, varies enormously from firm to firm. An auditor who genuinely understands fund accounting, restricted gifts, pastor housing allowances, and denominational reporting requirements is going to conduct a fundamentally different engagement than a general-practice firm that has never audited a church before. The opinion letter at the end might look similar. The experience of getting there, and the insights you walk away with, will not be.

So what should you actually do?

If your church is required to have an audit by a lender, by your bylaws, or by your denomination, select a firm that specializes in churches and nonprofits, plan the engagement carefully, and approach it as a partnership rather than an obligation. Done well, an independent audit is one of the strongest statements a church can make about its commitment to financial integrity and donor stewardship.

If your church is considering a voluntary audit, start by asking what level of independent assurance your leadership and your donors actually need right now. A compilation may be the right first step. A review might get you where you need to go. A full audit is the gold standard, but the right starting point is the one your organization can sustain and build on.

Either way, the next time someone says the word audit and you feel those involuntary shivers, take a breath. It’s not the IRS. It’s not adversarial. And it’s almost certainly not as painful as you think.

Have questions about whether your church needs an audit, review, or compilation? Or not sure how to find the right firm? Reach out. We’re happy to help you think it through, connect you with an audit firm, and even help you with audit prep if that’s what you need.

A pastor announces he’s leaving, and the explanation is almost always some version of the same sentence: “God is calling me to another church.” Sometimes there’s a geographic detail attached. Sometimes a vision statement. Sometimes it’s just left at that, as though the declaration itself closes the conversation.

For a season, I worked as a recruiter. I was a headhunter, or so my friends like to call me. At our firm, we worked specifically on placing pastors at churches. I didn’t count, but I must have heard this phrase hundreds of times. And for a long time, I accepted it at face value. Who am I to question someone’s sense of calling?

But then I started noticing the pattern on the other end of those stories. The same pastor who felt undeniably called to Grace Community Church in Somewhere, Texas, eventually announces that God has released him. Sometimes months later, sometimes years. Or that he’s sensing a new calling. Or, in the more awkward versions, that the church board has helped clarify that calling for him.

Which left me with a question I couldn’t quite shake: Did God UNcall him?

I want to be careful here, because I’m not trying to be cynical. The concept of calling is real, it’s biblical, and it matters. Jeremiah knew it. Paul built his entire apostolic identity around it. And I’ve met enough pastors who carry a deep, settled, costly sense of vocation to know that divine calling is not fiction.

But I’ve also sat in enough search committee meetings, exit interviews, and uncomfortable parking lot conversations to wonder whether we’ve stretched the language of calling well past its biblical load-bearing capacity.

Here’s what I mean. When a staff member says, “God is calling me to this church,” what they almost never say is, “I think this new job opportunity might be a good fit. I’m not entirely sure, but I’m going to take it anyway.” That kind of honesty would require more vulnerability than most of us are willing to offer in a professional context. So instead, we invoke the language of calling, which is both more spiritually satisfying and, conveniently, harder to argue with.

The problem is that calling has become a one-way ratchet. It explains the arrival beautifully. It gets a little awkward on the way out.

What’s actually going on?

One is that calling is genuinely dynamic. God does direct people to specific places for specific seasons, and that release is just as real as the original summons. I believe this. The book of Acts is full of it. The Spirit sends, redirects, and reassigns. A calling to a church isn’t necessarily a calling to that church forever. That’s a theologically defensible position, and I hold it loosely.

But another possibility is that we’ve conflated two things that the Bible actually treats differently: the call to ministry and the decision to take a particular job. Paul was called to preach the gospel to the Gentiles. The specific cities, synagogues, and households where that happened were largely a combination of Spirit-direction, circumstance, relationship, and good judgment. Calling set the trajectory. Wisdom navigated the path.

If that’s true, and I think it is, then a pastor isn’t necessarily called to a specific church the way he’s called to ministry. He may be well-suited for it, led toward it, gifted for the moment it’s in. And when he leaves, God may not have UNcalled him so much as the season simply changed, as seasons do.

That framing actually does more pastoral good than the language we typically use, because it removes the implicit suggestion that someone failed their calling when they leave, or that the church failed to sustain it.

Here’s what I’d love to see more of in hiring, for ministry or otherwise: honest conversations about fit, season, and sustainability, conversations that take calling seriously without using it as a conversation-stopper.

A pastor who says, “I believe God has wired me for this kind of ministry, and everything about this church tells me this is the right place to bring that wiring, at least for this chapter.” That’s a pastor who is being both faithful and honest. That’s not a diminished calling. That’s a mature one.

And a church that says, “We’re praying that God sends us the right person for where we are right now, and we’re committed to being honest if that changes over time,” is doing the same thing.

Calling isn’t a contract that God breaks when a pastor moves on. It’s a compass, not a map. It tells us the direction. We figure out the roads to take along the way.

The next time you hear someone say God has released them from a church, resist the urge to read between the lines. Maybe God did. Maybe the season shifted. Maybe the fit was never quite right and it took a few years to know it. Maybe the board made the decision and the spiritual language was the only dignified wrapper available.

Whatever the case, the calling to serve doesn’t get UNcalled. That calling follows a pastor right out the door of one church and into the next conversation God puts in front of him.

And that, at least, is something worth holding onto.

Have you wrestled with this? What has your experience been with the language of calling, in your own life or in the ministry context around you? I’d love to hear your perspective.

These are books written by team members, friends, and acquaintances of ours.

Books by our co-founder Delton de Armas

Uncompromised Faith: Overcoming Our Culturalized Christianity – Michael Craven

The Influential Mentor: How the Life and Legacy of Howard Hendricks Equipped and Inspired a Generation of Leaders – Maina Mwaura

Weeds in the Garden – Verne Hargrave

God’s Got Your Number – Steve Lewis

Running with the Horses: A Parenting Guide for Raising Children to be Servant-Leaders for Christ – Larry Taylor

The Boy Born Dead: A Story of Friendship, Courage, and Triumph – David Ring

Secrets of Dynamic Communications: Prepare with Focus, Deliver with Clarity, Speak with Power – Ken Davis

Wisdom Meets Passion: When Generations Collide and Collaborate – Jared Angaza and Dan Miller

Years ago, I was speaking with my uncle, catching up on life. In conversation, I told him about ICNU and our hopes to inspire churches, and he asked a simple but profound question. “What benefit are you offering them?” I began to explain some of the services we provide, and he interrupted me. “You keep talking about the how. I get that. But what’s the benefit? Why would pastors want to engage you? What benefit to you give them?”

I was ultimately able to answer him, but it got me thinking. I intuitively know that we do what we do specifically for the benefit of churches, but how do they know that? Why would they know that if I haven’t told them? I may know the benefits, but I need to talk about them. And often!

Benefits. This seems like such a simple term. Why, then, do we forget to talk about it?

We often reserve our use of the word benefits to conversations about health insurance or PTO for ourselves or our staff. So maybe that’s a great context to start rethinking this term.

We call these employee benefits because of what it provides to them. Paid time off from work. Health insurance to offset the costs of care. But what is the benefit? Why does it matter?

With PTO, for example, an employee knows that they can use their time (a limited resource) at their own discretion without it affecting their ability to buy groceries. But PTO is not so much a benefit, but a feature. The benefit is worry-free time with their family.

Health insurance provides the feature of covering large out-of-pocket healthcare expenses. Because of that, health insurance offers the benefit of peace of mind and the assurance that should a health crisis emerge in their lives, they will not be solely responsible for the enormity of the financial impact.

That seems intuitive, right? Yet most employers couch their description of such benefits in terms of the transactional value the employee may receive or the features of what they’re offering rather than the inherent or perceived value—the benefit—being provided.

For example, “We offer two weeks’ paid vacation and five paid personal or sick days per year.” That implies limits and buckets, rather than freedom, choice, and peace. Consider this contrasting approach. “We will gladly pay you for fifteen work days to use at your personal discretion. Whether you’re sick and can’t make it to the office, or traveling with friends or family, or just need a break to get your thoughts together, we want you to rest assured that you’ll still get your normal paycheck. And if you find you need more than fifteen days this year, come talk to us. We value you and want to make sure that we are caring for you and your most valuable resource: your time.”

Sometimes I think we assume our audience knows the benefits of what we’re offering. In a surprising number of instances, though, they do not.

So why not point them out?

If your church is entering a building campaign, there’s a high probability that you will need to borrow some of the funds, at least for a season. Lenders can be very individualistic about their lending policies, but there are some criteria that are almost universal. If your team can prepare a financial package that addresses each of these points satisfactorily, your chances for successfully obtaining a loan improve dramatically.

Over the years, we have spoken to several banks specifically about church lending, and following is our list of seven leading success factors that your loan package should include.

Church History – Overall, the history of the church is a key consideration. These days, many young churches are growing churches, but longevity tends to help with loan approval. In your loan package, be sure to include when your church was founded, the success of previous fund-raising campaigns, historic growth rate, and other positive trends. But don’t leave out the potential negatives. Being upfront with how your church has handled speed bumps along the way, such as any previous splits within the church, how any previous financial downturns were handled, or other known problems and solutions may help establish your church as a responsible, healthy organization.

Being upfront with how your church has handled speed bumps along the way…may help establish your church as a responsible, healthy organization.

Historic Cash Flow – Generally, a church structure will be considered “single-use” by most banks. The reliance on the collateral, then, is weak when compared to most commercial businesses, which puts even more emphasis on the overall financial strength of the church. Obviously, then, historic cash flow is key. On the positive side, many churches, particularly churches entering a building program, have a long history of healthy financial stewardship. I’ve heard stewardship explained this way: spending less than you earn and doing it for a long time. If this describes your church, highlight your history in your financial package. As a note, we have also found that most churches do not accumulate; rather, they utilize the resources that God provides for ministry. To highlight the strength of your historic cash flow, segregate those expenses that could be safely labeled as “discretionary.” This will allow a bank to easily see what your free cash flow could be.

Many churches, particularly churches entering a building program, have a long history of healthy financial stewardship. If this describes your church, highlight your history in your financial package.

Ratio Analysis – There are a number of financial ratios that are measured for every bank loan, but others are unique to churches. Below are a handful of key ratios that should be computed and clearly shown in your financial package. If you are using church management software, most of these data points and ratios can be obtained very easily.

• Annual Gross Income / Giving Unit – This ratio indicates the average donation of each giving unit or family. Banks can use this to determine whether this amount is considered reasonable based on the demographics of the congregation. If you have your church’s demographic data available, it is helpful to provide this to the bank as well, perhaps in a comparative format. (How is your demographic data similar or different to the census data?) Otherwise, they will base their calculation on generalizations derived from census data that may or may not be relevant to your church. Census data will likewise not have church specific membership data that might be relevant to telling your financial story. (More on that later…)

• Monthly Loan Payment / Giving Unit – This ratio indicates the monthly donation by family unit required to meet loan payments. Obviously, the lower the metric, the better.

• Annual Debt Service / Annual Budget – This metric indicates the percent of debt service covered by the annual budget. A good “rule of thumb” maximum is 33%; “healthy” is 20% or less.

• Total Debt / Annual Income – This measures the debt capacity of the organization. One bank’s recommended maximum is 2.5 times annual gross income, but the lower the ratio, the better.

Congregation demographics – The demographics of your specific congregation are vital to the bank’s overall evaluation. Therefore, provide a section with a number of statistics that will help your bank understand your congregation. This would include such things as the range of age of your membership base (too much concentration in either too young or too old adds to the level of risk), geography (are there competing churches in the area, travel from previous location, etc.) average household income of membership, and the definition of “giving unit. If you have a pledge campaign, it might also be helpful to include some specific metrics on the campaign, particularly the top 10 or 15 largest pledgors as a group, such as average length of membership, historical giving patterns, and the like. The bank will be looking for any factors that could affect their ability to meet pledges and ultimately the repayment of the loan, so this is an opportunity to show your strengths.

If you have a pledge campaign, it might also be helpful to include some specific metrics…such as average length of membership [and] historical giving patterns.

Church Staff – In addition to your congregation, your staff is obviously vital as well. The pastor is the key to the success of any building program and to the future of the congregation. To strengthen your outlook with the bank, highlight some success factors, such as how long your pastor has been with the church and the likelihood of continuing. In addition to the staff, it would also be appropriate to emphasize the quality of your church lay leadership.

Denomination Affiliation – This isn’t necessarily a requirement for a loan, but one bank we spoke to indicated that they have found that the level of risk is significantly higher for a church that does not have a strong affiliation with or membership in a “mainstream” denomination. If your church is non-denominational, other affiliations could be beneficial and should be highlighted. Beware, though, that this factor in and of itself could lead to a loan declination. Therefore, even though a church may be “self-governed,” affiliations within a “mainstream’ denomination could provide advisory and other support, which, in the bank’s eyes, lessens the risk of the loan. If your church is non-denominational, highlighting your other strengths becomes even more important. Also, if you have other affiliations or associations that the bank may view as a strength, spotlight those instead.

If your church is non-denominational, highlighting your other strengths becomes even more important.

Guarantors – This can be a rather sticky subject. Banks will seek personal guarantees whenever possible to minimize their exposure. However, it is rarely a firm requirement. If your church is not able to obtain a loan without personal guarantees from your staff or lay leaders, then you should take a very hard look at whether or not you should be entering into the contract at all. There are mitigating circumstances and exceptions, of course, but often the troubles caused by personal guarantees far outweigh the benefits.

If your church is not able to obtain a loan without personal guarantees from your staff or lay leaders, then you should take a very hard look at whether or not you should be entering into the contract at all.

Construction Risk – This risk is generally the same for a church facility as any other commercial project, so banks will follow the same principals in this regard. That typically means requiring bonding of larger contractors, or at least larger subs. It tends to be a major exception to accept a “cost plus” contract or the use of construction managers, due to their open-ended nature. As a result, if you have selected a contractor before approaching your bank, particularly if your contractor has strong experience with churches, highlight their strengths to the bank. Demonstrate that the construction risk is limited because of your selection.

Organizing your financial data in the manner described above is certainly no guarantee that your loan will be approved. However, it demonstrates good fiscal responsibility and professionalism. My grandfather used to say that you never get a second chance to make a good first impression. Putting together an organized and complete financial summary before you approach a bank for a loan is a great first step towards establishing trust with a prospective bank. You might also learn a thing or two about your church in the process.

I had a staff member from a church I was working with hit me with this.

We hired a new staff member last week. Well, we didn’t really hire her, but she started coming to our management meetings, the Pastor doesn’t make any major decisions without asking her, and I think we even started paying her. (And I’m ok with that, because she’s here 50 hours a week anyway!) Strangely enough, she has the same last name as the pastor, and rumor has it that they’re sleeping together. Good thing they’re married!

I couldn’t help but laugh. As a PK, I grew up with my parents serving on staff together at a small church. My dad was the pastor, and my mom didn’t get paid, but make no mistake, they both worked there. Growing up with it, it never struck me as odd or out of place. These days, they even have a name for her: First Lady!

As an adult who works with churches daily, I can see the struggle that may exist. On one hand, the pastor’s wife plays an integral role in the ministry. She might lead a ministry and even speak from the main stage from time to time. She’s vital, and the pastor listens to her! On the other hand, how do you interact with someone who isn’t on staff or serve in any official capacity? Can you speak your mind openly? Are you free to offer criticism? Be careful, though. Handling this relationship poorly could be detrimental to your career in ministry!

How does it work in your church? Is there a good way or bad way for this to happen? What are the best (or worst) examples you’ve seen (in your church, or in another)?

When I was younger, my mom made the most incredible banana pudding. It wasn’t just pudding; it was custard—a delicate, flavorful, and complex dessert that was as unique as it was delicious. I loved it so much that I wanted to learn to make it myself. But when I asked for her recipe, she didn’t have one. Her process was intuitive, a series of steps perfected over time but never written down.

So, I decided to learn the old-fashioned way: by watching her. The first time, I stood in the kitchen and observed. The second time, I worked alongside her, mimicking her every move. The third time, I took the reins while she supervised. Finally, I was able to replicate her pudding on my own and even write the recipe down to share with others.

It’s this same process I use in my work as a fractional CXO.

Uncovering Your “Secret Sauce”

Many entrepreneurs have built incredible businesses, but when asked to articulate their “secret sauce,” they often struggle. Their success is real but not always fully understood—even by them. This is where I come in.

Much like learning my mom’s banana pudding, I start by observing. I watch how you operate, from your financial strategies to your operational workflows. Then, I work alongside you, helping refine and replicate those processes. Finally, I step into your shoes, testing and proving the systems under your supervision. By the end of our collaboration, you have a well-documented, scalable, and repeatable “recipe” for success.

Why Fractional CXO Services Work

Hiring a full-time CFO, COO, or other executive can be cost-prohibitive for startups, small nonprofits, and businesses that are still growing. Yet these organizations often face complex challenges that require high-level expertise. That’s where a fractional CXO comes in.

By engaging fractional services, you get the benefit of a C-Suite executive’s full expertise but only pay for what you need. Think of it like hiring the world’s best chef to teach you one signature dish rather than hiring them to cook for you full time.

Scaling with Your Needs

The goal isn’t just to solve your immediate challenges—it’s to position you for long-term success. Whether you’re a startup navigating uncharted waters or a nonprofit making every dollar count, I help you establish the processes and insights you need to scale.

Just as I can now whip up my mom’s banana pudding anytime, you’ll have the tools and confidence to run your organization with precision and purpose.

Ready to perfect your recipe for success?

Let’s start by uncovering the ingredients that make your business unique. Together, we’ll refine your processes, empower your team, and set you up for sustainable growth.

Contact us today to learn more about fractional CXO services!

Did you count your attendees at church this week?

You might be thinking to yourself, “Duh! Of course we counted. We counted in the worship service, in the children’s area, in Bible study classes and small groups. We counted our volunteers, cars in the parking lot, and anyone else who would stand still long enough to be counted.”

Or, maybe you’re in another camp. “Count? We don’t care about numbers. We just want to sense the presence of the Holy Spirit. Numbers don’t really matter.”

Or maybe some of you had a third response, like this one I once heard from a thoughtful pastor. “No, we didn’t count this week. We use a cycle count system. We only count the worship service once a month. We count Bible study classes and small groups at their first meeting, last meeting, and maybe once or twice in between. You see, for us, we don’t take attendance…it’s more like a census. We want to know how effective we are at reaching new people, and that we’re retaining visitors, and that our members are getting involved, but counting everyone who can fog a mirror every single week is unnecessary overhead. If it doesn’t change the way we operate, or create an actionable metric, we don’t bother.”

So, what did your church do? Is your way the right way, or is there a better way? 

You hear him speaking to you week after week. There’s a sort of familiarity, intimacy even, that you feel when you look at him. His words pierce your soul, because he knows you, he really knows you. But does he?

His words pierce your soul, because he knows you, he really knows you. But does he?

You and I are among a sea of faces that he sees every week. He genuinely wants to know us, to care for us, to love us. And I truly believe that in his heart of hearts, he does, at least to whatever extent he can. But how well can anyone really know an entire congregation of people?

I suspect it’s similar to the way we view celebrities. If you’ve ever met a celebrity in public, it’s a strange sensation. Our brains instantly spark with recognition and familiarity…we know this person! Yet we are not surprised when they don’t know our names if we ask for an autograph. I mean, of course they don’t know who we are, right? They are the celebrity, not us. But why is it still hard to shake the feeling that maybe they should still know us?

But pastors are different, right? After all, we’ve probably actually met before. We’ve spoken to them, shared our names, maybe shared our stories, even sometimes even shared our struggles and sin. They’ve counseled us, consoled us, and comforted us. How could they not know us?

If we stop and think about it, do we really know them either? Do we know their struggles and sin? Do we know their fears and fantasies, their joys and sorrows, their startling successes and their utter failures? Unless their inner life became a sermon illustration, or their sin became very (and certainly painfully) public, we probably do not. 

Our pastor may not know us, but most of us are fortunate enough to have a close circle of family and friends who do know us, people we can be ourselves in front of without shame, fear of retribution, or any necessary pretense or show of strength. We are free to be ourselves. 

But what about pastors? For them, I think it’s a lot tougher.  Whether it’s true or not, they feel the need to have it all together for their congregation. They want to show strength and confidence to their staff. They want their elders, deacons, board or leadership team to have confidence in their decision-making and leadership. And the hold themselves to a higher standard. Scripture even seems supports this notion (James 3:1). 

If you think you deal with imposter syndrome, imagine how a pastor must feel?

I’ve come to the conclusion that being a pastor must be one of the loneliest professions in the world.

I’ve come to the conclusion that being a pastor must be one of the loneliest professions in the world. Who can they talk to? Who can they confess to or confide in? To whom do they admit weakness, uncertainty, or fear? Their spouses? Of course. But is that always enough? Other pastors? Maybe, if they know any and are willing to be vulnerable. Their small group? Probably not, at least not fully, any more than they could open up to their staff or elders. What a burden of responsibility pastors carry! And how sad, how terribly sad, that the enemy whispers to them that they must carry that burden alone. 

In my experience, introvertedness often goes hand-in-hand with loneliness. Of course, not all pastors are introverted, and more than all pastors are lonely. And there’s certainly not a causal relationship between the two: being introverted does not make one lonely, nor does being lonely make one introverted. But I find the all-too-common correlation seemingly undeniable. 

I am an extrovert. And just so we’re clear about how I define the term, it means that I am energized by being around other people. That doesn’t mean I always love large groups of people, or even small groups of people, just that I renew my energy more efficiently and effectively when I am around others than I do by being alone. 

Most pastors I know … are generally more energized after having time alone. 

Most pastors I know are the opposite. That doesn’t mean they don’t like being around groups of people, just that it tends to drain them, not energize them. They are generally more energized after having time alone. 

Does that mean we should leave pastors alone? That’s not what I’m saying at all. I just think that a healthy awareness of their natural tendencies might help us practice the Golden Rule and “do unto pastors as we would have done unto us.” 

Many introverts will say that they benefit from one-on-one (or one-on-a-few) time with close friends. So as we seek to encourage pastors and help them battle the loneliness that would otherwise plague them, we should do this with an awareness of their potentially introverted nature. 

Throwing a party with 500 of their closest friends is not apt to energize an introvert! And, frankly, it probably won’t do anything to help his loneliness, either!

Over the last several months, we’ve had the unique opportunity to work with Todd Miechiels at The 315 Project and get a behind-the-scenes glimpse into this remarkable ministry. Take a look at this video.

If you want the opportunity to know and share your story, visit Todd and his team at https://www.315project.com/ or comment below and we’ll be happy to make an introduction!

I met with a couple of guys a few weeks ago. They have a business idea they were pitching. As I started asking questions, I felt a little like one of the investors on the ABC television series Shark Tank, only without a big checkbook!

I wanted to find a way to add value, though. So thinking about Shark Tank gave me an idea. Instead of trying to think of all the questions they need to be asking themselves, I decided to try to let the show lead them in the right direction. So I sent them this email.

Hi Guys!

Thanks for inviting me to meet with you today. I found the concept you’re exploring very interesting, and I hope that I can help you guys take next steps. 

Here’s some more information on your “homework.” Again, the goal of this exercise is to watch some episodes of Shark Tank to get a feel for the kinds of questions investors ask. Right now, you guys are the investors in your own product, so this will help you understand the kinds of questions you should be asking yourselves before investing another dollar. Then, as future ideas and opportunities come your way, you should have a good handle on the kinds of questions you’ll want to ask before getting involved. We’ll want to brainstorm product questions that would be specific to your product or products, but that’s a different exercise. For now, let’s focus on the business model questions. 

Here’s a link where you can stream the show for free: https://abc.go.com/shows/shark-tank/episode-guide 

As you watch, you’ll notice that the Sharks will ask a lot of questions. Don’t get bogged down with completely irrelevant questions, or questions that are hyper-specific to a product. It’s still a good exercise to write them all down, but if you try to catch every single question, it’s going to take you a LONG time to get through an episode, much less five. (I did that, or tried to, on my test case, just so you guys would have an example to follow. It took me about 15 to 20 minutes, I think.)

So, go ahead and watch five episodes, because you can glean a lot just by watching. Then instead of writing down the questions from every pitch in all five episodes, just pick five total pitches (about one per episode, or every pitch from an entire episode) and write down the questions from those. If each of you does that, it should give you enough question samples to get a good feel for the kinds of questions we’ll need to be able to answer about your product/business. 

It was helpful to write them down all together, as a list, then categorize them afterward by copy/pasting them under the appropriate heading. Here’s how you should group them:

THIS QUESTION DOESN’T APPLY TO OUR BUSINESS AND OTHER GENERAL STATEMENTS

THIS QUESTION MIGHT APPLY, BUT I DON’T KNOW THE ANSWER

I DON’T UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION (We can discuss these)

THIS QUESTION APPLIES OR MIGHT APPLY TO OUR BUSINESS AND HERE’S MY ANSWER

Does this all make sense to you guys? Are you up for it?

Please let me know if you have any questions. Then let me know when you’re ready to have another conversation. 

I hope this is a fruitful exercise for you. And maybe a little fun!

Talk soon!

The resulting discussion was interesting, to say the least.

Maybe this exercise would be worthwhile in your organization? Even as a nonprofit, we still have to think about our customers and investors (donors), and see things from their point of view. Maybe this approach could help you find your next breakthrough?

Jobs in ministry are among the easiest of any industry. We get to do what we love for the people we love in an environment we love. What could be better than a frictionless environment where everyone loves one another, and puts the needs of others ahead of their own? Every leader leads as a servant, and we’re all striving for the same goals. 

As a worship leader, all I have to do is show up on Sunday morning and sing a few songs.

As a pastor, my naturally extroverted personality gets to stand on stage and soapbox about whatever’s on my mind.

As a nonprofit leader, I get to follow my passions and do good in the world. And best of all, they actually pay me for this! It’s like being a professional Christian!

As the business administrator, I get to manage the financial affairs. Since cash flow is never an issue, I have lots of time to create beautiful reports and interesting charts. And everyone, including the youth pastor, turns their expense reports in on time!

What’s that you say? You say I’m living in a dream world? That this isn’t your reality? 

Comment below and tell me where I’m wrong. Maybe you can convince me…

One of the biggest adjustments I had to make in my transition from for-profit business to not-for-proft ministry has to do with the disconnect between our “customers” and our revenue. In business, the old adage is typically true: provide a great product at a great value, and the rest takes care of itself. In other words, focus on delivering a good product and the revenues will follow. (Simplistic, I know, but generally true.)

The disconnect for nonprofits is that our customers, that is, those who use and benefit from our “products” are not the ones who provide the revenues. In other words, we can hundreds of happy customers, customers who are eager to continue using our products and services, but our revenue does not necessarily correlate. 

Many nonprofits run at capacity for their staff and facility. They simply can’t add any more participants without sacrificing the quality of service they provide to the participants. In a for-profit paradigm, they could increase the price, and let the laws of supply and demand adjust our revenues, allowing them to invest in more personnel or additional facilities. But that approach simply doesn’t work in ministry. Accepting one child would mean rejecting another, which is an impossible choice. 

Don’t let there be a disconnect between the hearts and minds of your donors and the benefits you’re providing to others.

Sometimes we try to please our constituents/clients/participants. Sometimes we seek the approval of our donors or grant providers. Sometimes we simply aim to please our bosses or the board. But our goal, our one and only goal, should be pleasing God. He is our only audience. He is the maker and provider of every good thing! He is the one that connects the givers of the funds and the recipients of our ministry. And he works all things together for our good!

So keep trying to please God. And keep working and improving the quality of care in the goods and services you provide. And finally, make the effort to communicate to your donors all the good that you’re doing, all the smiles and joy you are bringing, all the problems you are solving, and all the volunteers you are mobilizing.

Don’t let there be a disconnect between the hearts and minds of your donors and the benefits you’re providing to others. Shout it from the rooftops! Be clear. Be consistent. Be relentless. Communicate, communicate, communicate.

Never grow weary of telling your story and sharing your vision. Where God gives a vision, he always gives provision.

When I was 17 years old, I was wrestling with what I perceived to be a calling from God on my life. Not completely sure what that meant, I approached a mentor of mine in ministry to get wise counsel. His response surprised me a little, but I’ll never forget it.

“Delton, there is so much more you can do as a layman. You have more freedom, more resources, more time. I’d give anything to still be a layman. Go out and be the best layman you can be. If God wants you in full time vocational ministry, he’ll know where to find you.”

So that’s what I did. I went to college, got two degrees in business (finance and accounting), and pursued a career. At the same time, I was deliberate and intentional about being an effective layman. I stayed involved in church, and my family and I routinely gave our lives away.

As a professional layman, I deliberately and actively use my vocation and my vocational experiences and abilities to assist churches in their mission.

A couple of decades later, I sat at another crossroads. More clearly than ever, I felt a calling to serve God in vocational ministry. I didn’t (and still don’t) ever expect to be a pastor, or even on staff at a church, but I want to spend the rest of my career, the rest of my life, effectively serving God and his Church with my vocational efforts. In short, I want to be a professional layman.

Paul says that we’re each called according to his purpose. He says that we should each use our gifts to serve the Church. teachers should teach,

• Romans 11:29-God’s gifts and his call can never be withdrawn

• Romans 12:6-In his grace, God has given us different gifts for doing certain things well.

• Ephesians 4:11-Now these are the gifts Christ gave to the church; the apostles, the prophets…

The dictionary says that a layman is “a person without professional or specialized knowledge in a particular subject.” In the context of ministry, it’s more apt to refer to a non-ordained member of a church. The Bible, interestingly, is silent on the topic. We are all called to be ministers of the Gospel, regardless of our vocational calling.

To a great extent, churches can (and should) use volunteers from within their congregation to accomplish their mission. By matching the available tasks or positions with the gifts, talents, skills and passions of the congregational members, it allows a church to have the right people doing the right things for the right reasons. That goes back to having the teachers teach, the givers give, and the servants serve.

Sometimes, though, it makes sense to utilize a “professional’ layman. In the financial arena, for example, preserving the independence of your auditor or avoiding a conflict of interest might be a reason to utilize someone from outside the church. Insurance is another area, in that you may not have an agent within your congregation with specific church experience.

There are other areas that might also need attention. Perhaps you need to involve an expert when performing background checks for children’s ministry volunteers, or an architect that specializes in church buildings, or a security expert with a church background, etc.

The term “vocational ministry” has always had a certain connotation to me. It’s like clergy were up here, and the rest of us down here. But the mandate of responsibility for creation (subduing the earth) was never qualified as clergy-specific. Interestingly, neither was the great commission in Matt 28. In fact, Acts 6 is the arguably the first place in the New Testament where there is any sort of distinction of clergy and layman. And there, it would appear that the layman are being more empowered, not less, being given administrative responsibility for the daily distribution of food. That left more time for prayer and teaching the word.

Acts 6:1-4 “1But as the believers rapidly multiplied, there were rumblings of discontent. The Greek-speaking believers complained about the Hebrew-speaking believers, saying that their widows were being discriminated against in the daily distribution of food. So the Twelve called a meeting of all the believers. They said, ‘We apostles should spend our time teaching the word of God, not running a food program. And so, brothers, select seven men who are well respected and are full of the Spirit and wisdom. We will give them this responsibility. Then we apostles can spend our time in prayer and teaching the word.‘”

An acquaintance at a networking lunch, during a time of sharing prayer requests, asked for prayer as she searched for a church near her home where she and her children could get involved.

She went on to tell us a horror story about visiting a church near her home. She arrived at the door, and the greeter asked if she was visiting. When she said yes, the greeter said, “Today’s probably not a good day to visit. We’re baptizing today. You should try back next week.”

“Are you asking me to leave?”

“Yes. It’s just not a good week for visitors. Try back next week.”

Sound incredible? I thought so, too. When she posted this on Facebook, she was very careful not to mention the church. She went so far as to not mention that they were having baptism that week, so as not to tip anyone off and inadvertently slander the church. Yet several commented on the post with guesses. And most got it right!

Many of us have our own horror stories about visiting churches. When my wife and I moved to Nashville in the late 90s, we visited several churches. One church asked all the visitors (we were the only ones) to stand. When we didn’t stand, the family in front of us began to point! So much for remaining anonymous!

Another church asked the visitors to remain seated, while the rest stood and greeted us. (Do you know what’s at eye level when you are seated and everyone else is standing?)

At another, we walked from the car, through a large parking lot, through the front doors, through the Welcome Center (ironic name, but I guess it’s more friendly than “Narthex”), to our seats, sat through an entire service, and walked back to our car. In that hour and a half, not a word was spoken to us by anyone.

Nearly 20 years later, we were looking for a new church. I guess you could say we were church shopping. At dinner with some friends, the topic came up.

“What are you guys looking for in a church?”

So I’d like to ask the question: How would you answer? What would you be looking for if you decided to change churches? Comment below and let me know.

And while you’re there, share a horror story. It’s ok. We won’t judge, but we can all learn.