Meetings & Travelling preachers, are they compensated?

[Chris]

I guess the subject describes my question best in summary. I'm curious if it is a pretty wide practice between Mennonites to compensate a travelling preacher (such as for meetings) for their gas / lodging within reasonable $. Is this the case?

[Hats Off]

I don't believe it is in our old order types of settings. Some travel often, some travel rarely. Many times if we know that an ordained man wants to travel to another district, someone will volunteer to accompany them. This usually includes paying for fuel. I assume that they sometimes receive gifts from individuals to help pay travel costs.

[RZehr]

If we have meetings and have a visiting preacher from outside our fellowship speak, we will take up an offering to help cover his travel expenses and time off work.
I think if we are asking a preacher who cannot easily afford to come, we let him know that we will lift an offering for him, and I think we may give him assurance that it will be at minimum enough to pay the travel costs.

[Chris]

I don't believe it is in our old order types of settings. Some travel often, some travel rarely. Many times if we know that an ordained man wants to travel to another district, someone will volunteer to accompany them. This usually includes paying for fuel. I assume that they sometimes receive gifts from individuals to help pay travel costs.

I mean if somebody is requested to come give meetings or a presentation etc., from a church, is there a general understanding that fuel, food/traveling expenses should be compensated? Or is somebody asked to come give a presentation then eats the entire bill & gives the presentation?

[Hats Off]

We have a committee travelling to our community next weekend to make a presentation. I am fairly confident that they will be paid some kind of a mileage rate. As far as food and accommodations while they are here, they will stay in our homes and eat with us.

[ohio jones]

It's our practice to cover travel expenses, provide food and lodging, and pay a daily rate when multiple days are involved.

[Bootstrap]

I don't believe it is in our old order types of settings. Some travel often, some travel rarely. Many times if we know that an ordained man wants to travel to another district, someone will volunteer to accompany them. This usually includes paying for fuel. I assume that they sometimes receive gifts from individuals to help pay travel costs.

I mean if somebody is requested to come give meetings or a presentation etc., from a church, is there a general understanding that fuel, food/traveling expenses should be compensated? Or is somebody asked to come give a presentation then eats the entire bill & gives the presentation?

Is this a concrete situation where someone has been asked, and isn't sure if he is being expected to foot the bill to go serve? Or is it a more hypothetical question?

[Chris]

I don't believe it is in our old order types of settings. Some travel often, some travel rarely. Many times if we know that an ordained man wants to travel to another district, someone will volunteer to accompany them. This usually includes paying for fuel. I assume that they sometimes receive gifts from individuals to help pay travel costs.

I mean if somebody is requested to come give meetings or a presentation etc., from a church, is there a general understanding that fuel, food/traveling expenses should be compensated? Or is somebody asked to come give a presentation then eats the entire bill & gives the presentation?

Is this a concrete situation where someone has been asked, and isn't sure if he is being expected to foot the bill to go serve? Or is it a more hypothetical question?

Yes, concrete. Church X calls a brother Y from 4 states away to give a presentation at their church. Happens all the time with meetings... Brother Y doesn't want to ask if he will be compensated for fuel/travel expenses.... Is there a "known standard" that brother Y is compensated for gas, costs of travel, etc.?

I know at my church another post said there is generally an offering lifted which covers way more... I'm just curious if this generally applies to greater "Mennodom".

[Bootstrap]

Yes, concrete. Church X calls a brother Y from 4 states away to give a presentation at their church. Happens all the time with meetings... Brother Y doesn't want to ask if he will be compensated for fuel/travel expenses.... Is there a "known standard" that brother Y is compensated for gas, costs of travel, etc.?

I know at my church another post said there is generally an offering lifted which covers way more... I'm just curious if this generally applies to greater "Mennodom".

I have never been a plain Mennonite. Here's how I see it, but it may not fit plain Mennonite culture, I just don't know their culture well enough to know.

If Brother Y would have difficulty making the trip without compensation, I think he should go ahead and say that. "Thou shalt not muzzle a threshing ox." Brother Y may worry that they do not have enough of a relationship to discuss this, and be afraid to offend Brother X, but if they don't have a relationship, I don't think Brother Y should feel all that obligated to to it at his own expense if it would cause him financial hardship.

If Brother Y is relatively well off and suspects the church might not be, I think he should take that into account - it's rarely good for a church to take without giving back, but Paul relied on his abilities as a tentmaker and decided not to burden the churches he served.

How different is that from the way that plain Mennos might think about it?

[silentreader]

Yes, concrete. Church X calls a brother Y from 4 states away to give a presentation at their church. Happens all the time with meetings... Brother Y doesn't want to ask if he will be compensated for fuel/travel expenses.... Is there a "known standard" that brother Y is compensated for gas, costs of travel, etc.?

I know at my church another post said there is generally an offering lifted which covers way more... I'm just curious if this generally applies to greater "Mennodom".

I have never been a plain Mennonite. Here's how I see it, but it may not fit plain Mennonite culture, I just don't know their culture well enough to know.

If Brother Y would have difficulty making the trip without compensation, I think he should go ahead and say that. "Thou shalt not muzzle a threshing ox." Brother Y may worry that they do not have enough of a relationship to discuss this, and be afraid to offend Brother X, but if they don't have a relationship, I don't think Brother Y should feel all that obligated to to it at his own expense if it would cause him financial hardship.

If Brother Y is relatively well off and suspects the church might not be, I think he should take that into account - it's rarely good for a church to take without giving back, but Paul relied on his abilities as a tentmaker and decided not to burden the churches he served.

How different is that from the way that plain Mennos might think about it?