Unspoken – Not Really a Secret

Episcopal compensation is a quirky topic among AMEs. We have an official salary for bishops which is unrealistically low. Then, there is the “other” compensation. I went through much of my ministry oblivious to both the magnitude and the process of the “other.” Colleagues continue to act as though no one knows. The truth is: most know…hardly anyone knows “how much.”

So, let’s outline the package. The official budget salary is $63,067. There are travel funds ($21,022) also budgeted. A district may provide housing, a car, and other normal amenities, including office/staff. The Ecumenical Officer receives a housing allowance ($16,404) and an assigned administrative budget ($74,705). Now, the unspoken-not really a secret items:

1. Gifts from the Annual Conferences

2. Gifts from Planning Meeting, Midyear Meeting, and Christian Education Meeting

3. Honoraria from preaching within the assigned episcopal district.

4. Special Occasion Gifts: Christmas, Birthday, Wedding Anniversary, Preaching Anniversary, etc.

5. Miscellaneous gratuities and occasions like shopping outings (not as common these days, but I can remember key pastors taking shoes, suits and other items to their bishop).

In most cases, the Annual Conference gift is the heavy piece of the package. Historically, Bishops Richard Allen and Morris Brown received a set amount when they presided over an annual conference. This practice continued for a while before matters got out of hand. Culturally, many bishops considered the annual conference gifts like “class dues.” Presiding Elders jumped on that train, and we allowed “meeting income” to become compensation/gifts. (Let’s not digress.) For the sake of the future of our Zion, we must get a handle on the matter of compensation.

The 1956 reformers thought they had the solution. One bishop was quoted as saying after 1956, “there is more than one way to skin a cat.” It soon became clear that the power of appointment and co-conspiracy of clergy/lay leaders would nullify the intended reforms. The code of secrecy and nondisclosure has made the actual amount received by a bishop a mystery, with the exception (maybe) of a predecessor/successor.

As the demographics of our Zion shifted, so too, did the compensation gap between bishops of larger/smaller districts. The result is fierce competition among bishops to serve in a specific district where the rewards are greatest. It is an honor to be a bishop in our church, presiding over any district. If they all are the same, why the strife? This is not a critique of the respect for leadership, or the generosity of the AME Family. It is a commentary on a malicious feature of our church which detracts from our gospel proclamation, loving service and liberating activities. Remove (minimize) the dollar factor, and we will see a very different environment around episcopal assignment and episcopal ministries.

Can we equalize the compensation? Not easily, though we can lessen the gap a bit by allowing one bishop to serve two smaller districts. Can we limit the abuse? Absolutely! Next blog post.

3 thoughts on “Unspoken – Not Really a Secret

  1. Bishop Leath, you have taken what I was going to say, and you have said it better! I believe there is another issue connected to your message!

    Our method with the election of bishops is also flawed. It can take a lot of money to become a candidate for the AMEC episcopacy, and that is a genesis of some of the problems with episcopal collegiality, even before one is elected to the episcopacy. One candidate hears something negative another candidate has said about him, her, and even the other candidates, and “bad blood is spilled” that could last for a bishop’s professional episcopacy lifetime. So, there is tension and contention in the entire electoral process. Sadly, the “bad blood” can continue even after all the candidates are elected. Newly elected bishops, happy as they are about being elected must now contend with which episcopal district they will be assigned to, especially if there are more vacancies than what is needed in Africa. As soon as all the episcopal assignments are given, bishops then must be concerned about their next episcopal assignments, and they must do all they can do to insure they receive a good stateside assignment. And in this process, there is competition, and a bishop must be careful not to offend any of the other, or more powerful bishops, lest he or she ends up in Episcopal Districts 14-20 or the Ecumenical Office. There is always jockeying for one of the big or better districts and the competition does not quiet down, it increases, and I suspect the bishops or supervisors can rarely be close friends. The competition continues for the entire episcopacy. It seems to me that retired bishops seem more relaxed.

    I believe in equitable pay and allowances and no additional birthdays, Christmas, Anniversary, etc. gifts. Absolutely, no money or significant gifts from any meetings. Gifts of no-mean value may be publicly presented, and care needs to be taken with any gifts; better the rule of “no gifts!” If a bishop preaches, conduct wedding, funerals, etc., in his or her episcopal district, he or she will not accept honoraria or expenses.

    Instead of “reinventing the wheel,” just copy and paste the UMC bishops’ compensation!

    I am also a proponent of 8-year terms for bishops and if I modified it; it would be 8 years and then an “up or down” vote at the General Conference.

    Just my thoughts,


    “Prayer Changes Things”

    The Rev. Dr. Calvin H. Sydnor III+

    Chaplain (Colonel), United States Army Retired

    The 20th Editor of The Christian Recorder, Retired

    “The Official Newspaper of the African Methodist Episcopal Church”

    Telephone: 615. 714-0986

    Email: chsydnor@bellsouth.net chsydnor@bellsouth.net

    Note: I put all multiple addressees in Bcc format and delete all previous email addresses. Please do the same to prevent Spamming.


  2. I would opine that these monies are not “gifts” but mandatory obligations. Registrations, pre-offerings, opening & closing financial obligations are mandatory.


    1. “Going in” may be viewed as “mandatory obligations.” “Going out” (disbursed) is usually seen as the “gift.”


Comments are closed.