Previous Post – Be The (Climate) Change – Blog Action Day 2009
My friend John Frye, author of the excellent “Jesus The Pastor: Leading Others In The Character & Power Of Christ” and “Out of Print: A Novel”, has been blogging up a storm lately around the topic of pastors, leadership and the priesthood of all believers (so far with Part 1, Part 2, Part 3 & Part 4). John, himself a pastor, is down-right angry with some of the talk he has heard in some emerging/missional/evangelical circles of late, where the role of pastor seems to be treated as the new leper of ecclesiology. He cites critique from some in the organic church community, stating:
- “I have noted a mantra from the organic church sympathizers. Any critique of their priesthood-of-all-believers, no-hierarchal-structure, anti-clergy/laity split, all-are-leaders-and-thus-none-are-leaders theology receives this: ‘Well, show me from the New Testament anyone with a modern pastor job description.’ I want to respond, ‘Show me your thorough-going American egalitarian, democratic, consensual decision-making polity in the New Testament.’ It just ain’t there.”
John goes on the very clearly defend the role and calling of pastor as not only Biblical, but reflective of Christ’s own example. Anyone who knows me will know that I often talk about organic structures, am suspicious of hierarchy, oppose a clergy-laity divide that places the administration of the sacraments in the hands of the privileged few, etc. And yet, find myself deeply resonating with John while simultaneously standing by the previous sentiments. While some might think my defence of the role of pastor stems from my recent move to become one, this is not the case. I am convinced that correctives of the organic church movement are essential, but that there is a trend that is taking things too far.
I do not believe that a pastor is meant to be in hierarchy over the local church community. Pastoring is often about leadership, but I believe that leadership is necessarily hierarchical. Too often, as we seek to dismantle the hierarchical structures of power that have become all too common in the church, we make the equally devastating move of seeking equality through uniformity. This shift is most often defended by referencing the priesthood of all believers, a fair reversal of sacramental power structures, but one that should not be confused with the unique vocation of pastor. Our previous unfortunate confusing/blending of the priestly and pastoral roles not only resulted in pastors being endowed with more power and privilege than ever intended, but also contributed to throwing the pastoral baby out with the bathwater of hierarchy.
Our Little Flowers Community is very intentional in moving towards functioning under community discernment, even a communal hermeneutic- that is, we form our understanding and practice of faith by moving together, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit and the in-formation of Scripture. In that process, my role as pastor has been critical, just as the unique spiritual gifts of others have been essential. It is one among many equally valuable giftings that make up the necessary diversity reflective of Christ’s Body. Does my role give me more power and/or authority? Without question, at this stage in our community development, it does. However, it is not the power or authority that make the role abusive, but how that power and authority is exercised.
Again and again, John turns us back to Christ, and with good reason. Jesus had stunning authority of every kind, yet His life and ministry is characterized by humility, service and self-sacrifice even unto death on the Cross. His example does not deny or reject power and authority, but rather teaches us to radically embrace it and subvert them. As we do this, uniquely embracing our individual giftings and vocations, we are formed together into a unity born from diversity, transformed into Him in Whose Image we were created, the very Body of Christ.
As devastating as the use of power to force or demand some form of unity, so too will denying the unique gifts and callings within the Church disintegrate His Body. Both extremes seek to avoid the difficult path of conflict and chaos that will inevitably emerge as each of us face the challenge of not abusing or denying our Christ-endowed authority. Without question they are ultimately easier, but ultimately futile. Rather, we must seek together to be humble enough to submit to the Spirit as He works through the authority of others and equally humble as we respond to His leading to walk out our own.
Yes, I totally agree. We seem to have become uncomfortable with authority…with the thinking that it makes those exercising it “better than”. Authority is a function not a position. And it mostly means the person willing to step up gets the headaches not the glory. Submitted followers that recognize authority only work healthily with humble leaders who do not “lord it over”. Every role has it’s function and a group small enough to know and love each other has a chance to walk through it with the necessary grace. So I hope you never become “Big Flowers” because what I saw last Sunday was beautiful. I’m home safe. Thanks for a great week.
Thanks, Chris. That means a lot. I have been increasingly moved and challenged by the vow of obedience in the Franciscan tradition. From it comes liberty, not control. It is something of a paradox made manifest only at/on the Cross.
Peace,
Jamie
I think people idealize leaders and expect them to be on their side or else they are abusing their authority. This is a deification of a leader in the image and expectations of the beholder. I think that this could explain why no-one can agree on leadership, everyone wants the pastor to agree with their inidividual view on every topic. Some leaders get tired and become authoritarian in response to this dynamic which is where the fun ends and the fireworks begin. Let the good times roll …..let the good times roll… let the good times rollllllll.
Good point, Dennis. When people expect the pastor to police everyone according to their own expectations, things start falling apart. The other concern, however, is when no one has any authority into each others lives, making us islands of individualism that may or may not spend time together.
Peace,
Jamie
The problem points to the foundational understanding of the role of the ordained in the community of faith, which of course is defined across denominational boundaries as well as in other ways. If you haven’t already, I would suggest looking at the book “Walking in the Border of the Holy” by William Countryman to explore the various functions involved with priesthood. It covers much, including our priesthood as human beings, points at the priesthood of other creatures, and develops further the role of the (ordained) priest as priest of religion, as well as exploring the role of the non-ordained priesthood. He provides quite a lot to think about, and I think this would augment your exploration of the “organic” within your community.
Your description reminds me of the approach that early Liberation Theology took, and which put it on the outs with the Roman Catholic Church. It also reaches into elements of Practical Theology which I get nervous about when discussing a communal hermeneutic since it can become exclusionary.
The other book (a pamphlet, really) you may try to find, now out of print, is The Authority of the Laity, by a woman named Verna Dozier, who died just a year or two ago. In it she “updates” (it was written 20+ years ago) the work of Heinrich Kramer, who had written “The Theology of the Laity” back in the 1950’s. She also discusses “clericalism,” which is unfortunately all too alive in this day and age, and which I agree is not a good thing.
All of these present helpful historical as well as real approaches to the question that you seem to be wrestling with in “real time.” Most folks only encounter it in the abstract, since they don’t really want to “bury the dead.” (Lot’s of folks would like to say Eucharist, however, because it seems to provide an authority they wouldn’t otherwise have! If nothing else, the Pastoral Office proves the statement “with the rights come the responsibilities”!) I find it amazing that when many folks discuss the “priesthood of all believers” they forget that the clergy are part of “all believers”! It becomes an “us” or “them” kind of proposition. Just so you know, I come from an ecumenical Episcopal context (as Episcopalian, Franciscan and Unitarian) and do have a rather broad view of the matter!
Hope this helps a little!
Many Blessings & Much Peace!
Hey Dan,
Thanks for some great input and recommended resources. I can see where my description can point in the general direction of some Liberation Theology & Practical Theology. It does so, again in general, to affirm the best of those traditions. However, I tried to be intentionally generally so as not to point to either specifically. Ultimately, all I am try to affirm is that both the pastoral vocation and appointed leadership are important aspects of ecclesiology within the context of an understanding of the Body as equally valued & essential parts making up a unified whole.
Also, when I refer to a communal hermeneutic, I am strongly (though not exclusively) pointing towards the Anabaptist tradition. However, many other traditions feed this approach to spiritual/ecclesial formation, such as many monastic traditions. I share your concern about the potential for exclusion this approach presents, though I think that dynamic tension (inclusion/exclusion) is inevitable and essential to the work of the Church in becoming like Christ and actively living His mission as His Body.
Thanks again!
Peace,
Jamie
Thank u John Frye.
I’ve tasted the sting of some of the anti pastoral / institutional polemic and hv found it not only unfair but quite elitist in tone. While I understand where this view’s adherants are coming from; it’s just too much.
Also, to look for textual evidence of the pastoral role is somewhat disingenuous; perhaps the pursuit should be for pastoral theology instead. And dare we ignore the centuries of rich heritage in pastoral history. To be fair, many of the best bishops in history got their start in these organic monastic movements; and they often accepted bishoprics only against their will.
But contrary to what some are saying I think there will always be a need for and relevanc to the pastoral vocation.
Hey Wayne,
I think some can be elitist and disingenuous. However, I sincerely believe that most are responding out of a genuine desire to correct the abuses of the past. I just think they have gone too far at times. I share you confidence in the need & relevance for the pastoral vocation. Perhaps our most compelling argument is embodying the kind of pastoral alternative to what so commonly fits their critique. Thanks!
Peace,
Jamie
[...] Previous Post – Of Pastors, Priesthood & Power [...]
The problem seems to come when we equate leadership with power, with asserted authority, and with all the taints that the corporate world, the political world, and the rest, bring to leadership.
Of course the Holy Spirit raises up some who will lead; of course he gives some an authority in what they teach. But the way that works out depends very much on the people and the context: some of the greatest leaders of God’s people have been decidedly meek and unassuming.
The *office* of pastor (and even moreso, priest) does seem troublesome. And the honorific “Pastor John” seems to fly in the face of what Jesus said about all being brothers. The whole overblown “generation X” includes an observation that many people do not do the same thing/job throughout their lives: should we assume that there will be life-long ministry positions in the church, or take the same “for now” perspective?
Hey Andrew,
I think you hit the nail on the head- that we must learn to separate leadership with hierarchical authority. I also agree that the “office” of pastor has not been helpful. The role/vocation of pastor needs to be rescued from that mess. Thanks for weighing in.
Peace,
Jamie
It seems one of the issues is a great discomfort in the Church with the whole notion of power generally. The word “leadership” is not (in my limited recollection) used in the scriptures to describe what the leaders did or what a leader is to do. The words are much more often words of power and service, which are not antithetical. I believe the word “leadership” is actually much more borrowed from corporate lingo, and while I understand what is meant by that, and embrace it, it seems that it can be a cover for failing to deal with our own inherent suspicion of power / authority, especially when that power or authority seems to be positional rather than earned. That in itself betrays a strikingly strong cultural bias; western cultures generally are cultures that value earned rather than positional authority, which is not necessarily what we see reflected in scripture.
Jesus had no problem with power and indeed empowered his followers, the apostles especially in a particular and unique way and such recognition of authority seemed to be important in the early life of the church. Ultimately such authority and power derived from the Holy Spirit and his recognized workings through persons within the community. We have to wrestle with our preconditioned notion that educational and institutional credentials somehow are a proxy for and endowment of the Holy Spirit’s power while simultaneously contending with our own suspicion of power and authority generally.
Well said, elderj. I agree.
Peace,
Jamie