On the other hand, while earning a largish income is not wrong, living a life of voluntary poverty does tend to be a sign of holiness or of being serious about attempting holiness. You can’t necessarily tell that by someone’s reported income; some people living a life of voluntary poverty have negotiated a lower salary than others with similar skills doing similar work, while others earn a salary comparable to others in their profession but quietly give most of it away.

How much more does Graham, or any other missionary, merit making that much money than someone who runs around a field with a ball? Admittedly, that is hard work, too, but so much different.

I remember reading about the things that Graham does (in the early days–I’m not sure how much he does hands on work anymore) and it seems that he risked his life on many occasions to help people in the most dangerous parts of the world.

Of course, for every Franklin Graham, there are hundreds or more who risk their lives and make far less money, if any at all. In the Bible there are those who were supported by those they served, and people like Paul who made and sold tents so that he would not have to take any money from those he served. Some have different callings than others.

A few years back the some well-known non-profits went through a series of scandals about executive compensation. The executives involved pointed out that they had increased donations so that even with their big salaries (and perqs) it was a net gain for the non-profits.

But this kind of thinking betrays how off-course the non-profits had become. They were focusing on dollars and not people.

I’m now in my third year sitting on my church’s board and I cannot imagine ever taking money that people sacrificed to give and paying anyone these kinds of salaries.

In the words of Wes “Scoop” Nisker, “Your guru should never drive a better car than you.”

In my opinion, the public has the right to know the bulk of all expenditures for organizations that receive tax-deductible donations, including the salaries of employees.

Yet if only the salaries are listed, it seems like the list was generated so that people could complain about it.

Potential donars should be allowed to know how their donations will be spent.

And that is a reflection of jealousy and covetousness disguised under altruistic language.

Nevertheless, even if you can tell a person’s character by what he is spending, should you have access to that information? You know what I mean?

….especially since you have already ceded the point that we know nothing about someone’s character by learning how much money they make.

I would hope people don’t instinctively “judge” me because I’ve never “made alot of money”.

Frankly, I’m more curious about World’s motivation in publishing the information. Possessing such a powerful flashlight is a pretty awesome responsibility: I wonder if they sometimes get caught up in just feeling compelled to “brighten some [supposed] dark little corner”–just because they have this reeeaally powerful flashlight.

If it’s someone’s character/priorities/values you want to better understand, then spending habits are much more informative since “where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”

If a local children’s shelter pays its CEO $1 million, I might not donate money. I might even be mad. If a local store pays its CEO $1 million, I couldn’t care less.
(On the other hand, if it treats its workers really poorly, I might care. That’s why I boycott my local car wash)

I understand the case of a non-profit, but still: how you spend your own personal money is YOUR business, and not your neighbor’s. If you’re not getting the job done with the money I give, then I’ll find somewhere else to give. But if the job is getting done….