Due to common and widespread financial constraints, made worse by the recent economic downturn (a.k.a. “The Great Recession” - see ‘How We Got Here’ [Audio] (Lewis Walton, ASI 2009); see also this (illustrated) presentation by Australian evangelist Herb Kersten), lay pastoring has become more and more popular in some Local Conference policies. Current denominational statistics (p.6) show that as much as 24%-32% of “Evangelistic and Pastoral Employees” who are not “Ordained” or “Licensed”, but classified as “Other”, may be formally recognized/utilized “Lay” Workers. Despite this stance of the Global Church on formal lay “utilization,” there really is no Biblical support for such a plan for the “corporal”/organized work of God. From the times of the Old Testament, the priesthood (i.e., the Levites) were to be “wholly” set apart for the work of ministry. (Num 18:20, 21) They were to be completely taken care of by the tithes and offerings given by the rest of God’s people. In the early days of the SDA Church,
the ministers were largely all self-supporting, and worked secular jobs to support their families. That is until financial downturns (typically enough, the “Panic of 1857") caused many of them to wholly devote themselves to secular work and their pastoring work greatly suffered, if not entirely abandoned. It is at this time, starting in 1858, that the Church leaders turned to the Bible by forming a study group under the leadership of J.N. Andrews to find a Biblical solution/model for the support of the ministry, and eventually tithing was introduced (as a part of the greater “Systematic Benevolence” which was based on 1 Cor 16:2) so that ministers can wholly focus their efforts the work of ministry. Tithing was later formally passed as a General Conference resolution in 1873, (interestingly enough, in the darkness of the “Panic of 1873"). [See Light Bearers to the Remnant (1979), 89, 178, 179].
* And this “1 qualified pastor per congregation” ideal should actually be according to the functional/responsibility lines which were Biblically and Historically well substantiated and documented by Kameron DeVasher in this SEYC 2013 sermon, which is with them functioning as Evangelist in/for their assigned field and Educators/Teachers and Trainers to their congregation, thus, like Paul and his Church letters, actually responsible for Church Planting and, and as the need is, Biblical Instructing, but with the bulk of the Local Pastoral work, which is really merely rehashingly repetitive in most Churches and to most long-time members, being done by local Elders. Thus by time that a Pastor retires (some e.g., 40 years later), he/she potentially would have spent their entire ministry working their assigned field new Churches and as that Calculus would result in the overall world field thus being quickly all properly worked, the Gospel Work thus would have long been quickly done and the field ripe and ready for the Rev 18:1 Final Harvest under God’s wrapping up Latter Rain!!
Pastors are supposed to be there to satisfactorily shepherd the flock that is coming in. (Maybe a demonstrated endeavor to caring excellence by the Church’s leadership in this matter, which would also come to included the due default hiring of all ministerial graduates and not ‘passing them through the fire’, as it were, in the name of the revered, godlike economy, would motivate Church members to tithe as the 100% rate that they should be tithing (that is 100% of baptized members returning a faithful tithe), and thus cover these added disbursements here!)
In the economic downturns that regularly occur in capitalistic economies and its greedily whimsical ways, local conferences may think that have hit a God-given “gold mine” with non-paid lay pastors, but all that is being done is the systematic abuse of them and their devotion in the name of God, solely for the purpose of ‘balancing books.’ Conferences should either pay all of the people they expect to pastor a church, or equally pay none of them. But certainly do not effectively “enslave” some in order to pay others their full salaries. Or even, better yet, (and why this is not done is quite puzzling in itself), reduce the salaries of currently paid pastors so lay pastors can also be paid with an equal salary. (This is done at times to retain pastors who are to be laid off because of financial constraints, but of course, non-professional, uneducated laymen, are not worthy of this professional consideration and courtesy.) Hopefully, the fact that lay pastors have not obtained a piece of paper from an accredited Adventist Institution of Higher Learning for Theological studies is not seen as a reason, or better, an excuse, for not paying them because that will only confirm the fact that they are indeed being quite intentionally, and with effective discrimination, exploited and enslaved. This whole, purely capitalistic, side system is only, inherently, purely self-serving for the Church.
 The percent range here is due to the skewing of the data by the statistics of the Northern-Asia Pacific Division (NSD) where the political situation in e.g., China and North Korea dictate that the work be of a underground nature, and thus defaultly involve non-paid workers. As much as 48% of Denominational Lay Evangelistic and Pastoral Employees may come from these two countries.
 Though the church is baptizing on average ca. 3,714 people per day, according to normative stats, it can be seen that ca. 40% of these baptisms are “faith confirming” vs. “faith converting” baptisms, i.e., from young children (ca. -15 years of age) who were born and/or raised in the Church and are now, being of age, deciding to be baptized....many of whom, according to Church statistics, go on to also leave the Church around their college years.
 If fairness in dealings and Gospel ministry had been the foremost objectives of the conference leaders using lay pastoring, they would have assigned lay pastors to churches that have a need for such “administrative pastors” and assigned non-lay pastors, (i.e., those who have a pertinent diploma from an SDA University and/or the Seminary), to churches that only need one pastor. But of course, under the foundational capitalistic approach that is being used in SDA conferences, the main concern is still that a church is capable to afford paying for its pastors, even if indirectly. So the churches that contribute the most to the tithes are implicitly “entitled” to have even more than one paid pastor. If the aim of the church had been to further its Gospel mission, it indeed would have assigned its (presumably) “most qualified” (i.e., most formally educated) pastoral workers to congregations that have the most need, i.e., churches or companies that currently have a low membership, and thus a need to increase it; which is supposed to be something that these “educated” and “paid” “professional pastors” should be able to easily do, or else, why are they then being so highly prized!??