Friday, April 08, 2005
The Fishbowl
Recently Scott actually put up a couple of good posts “for a change” (teehee). The topics are two that I have had strong feelings on for a few years, so I’m going to “rant” a bit over the next couple of posts. Be patient with me, because I’ve tried to start this twice now and it’s not coming out right. This post is prompted by why pastors quit the ministry
A few years ago a minister was attending a congregational interview, comprised of a question/answer period. One of the questions was “what housework do you do to help your wife? I can always tell what kind of person a man is by what he does for his wife.” He was also asked “What vision do you have for the church?" Keep in mind that he didn't live in the community and had talked to the board through a couple of interview stages. Not necessarily enough to have formed a vision when in the interview stage. "How much time do you spend praying on your knees every day?"
Every person with an opinion of spirituality phrased their question so that he was screwed if he didn’t answer it the way they wanted, and honestly no human could fulfill all that was asked. None of us would have willing eliminated our privacy to the degree that he was made to in that session. This non-denominational church accepted the pastor into their ranks. The church had a painful past, with a few splits. The 2 in more recent history were due to two factions warring over denomination affiliation. One group believed it wasn’t necessary to join a denomination. The other, perhaps more outspoken, strongly lobbied for joining a particular one. This “holy war” was so strong that the children watched as people fought in the foyer after church. The group wanting to denominate told the other faction that if they didn’t follow they were not in God’s will. And each group was firmly convinced through prayer that their position was the correct one. 5 wounded pastors later, then comes the new one. We began to hear that he was called the “Peacemaker”, because he had begun to proactively contact the other shunned pastors in order to promote healing. He set up an evening service where these pastors were invited and he washed their feet. It’s a wonderful, sentimental account. But here’s where it perhaps isn’t so wonderful. Why did the people leave it to the new pastor to make peace? The people were bystanders…observers (those who attended that is). Who should have been making the peace? Those who were involved during the problems, or the one who was never involved or even around at the time? On a lesser scale it sounds a bit like giving money to missions overseas and turning the other way when a street person needs help. It’s easier to get someone else to do what we should be doing ourselves.
I’ve known of pastors who don’t get jobs or are criticized because their children are difficult to manage. Yes, we can pull out scripture to defend that decision, but in reality, how many of us have unruly children?
I've attended other meetings where pastors were not forgiven for past difficulties in handling personal trauma. The church was left to float, because the "man of God" wasn't leading with a "vigorous vision". Seems to me the Bible says we are the body and we are the church. The vision is ours, along with the leadership. It is not the leadership's alone nor is it ours alone. A lot has been repeated at meetings with the phrase "you are God's chosen man..." and what usually follows is an accusation of disappointment. That ticks me off. We are all ministers of the Gospel. We are all chosen. We each have different giftings, and some of us are gifted as pastors and teachers. It's their job to help equip the rest of us and to ensure we don't fall prey to unsound teaching. That's a simplification, but to delve into more detail would make this post way too long.
Let me talk for a moment about the expectations on pastors' wives. I can't talk about pastors' husbands, because I have never known any of those. The wife of a pastor, according to how many people act, is employed along with the pastor, though only one salary is paid. She should be her husband's receptionist, music leader, Sunday school overseer/teacher, piano player, run a woman's group and assist in counselling. Maybe not all those things, but many of them. Maybe we need to realize that we pay the pastor and not his wife, and let his wife be a layperson without any responsibility, if she so chooses. Don't dump on her if the pastor isn't home and we really want to talk to someone. How many of those kind of calls could she get in one day if there were at least 150 people in the congregation? Many pastor's wives suffer burnout - perhaps even before their husbands give into it.
I realize Scott’s post was about the fishbowl. I needed to spout off about the expectations we place on pastors. Let them be human. Treat them with the same measure of grace that we treat others around us. don't confront them more than we confront others. Many of us want to be the pastor or music leader's friend, because they are in a position of prominence where we feel we know them based on the portions of their life that they talk about weekly. Perhaps a part of us wants to be one of the "in" crowd by hanging out with those people. Or maybe that's just me. Yes, I know they should be a role model of how to live, but they also can’t be expected to be perfect and sinless. Only One is capable of that. And if you want to talk about the fishbowl, many people are watching us. We watch the pastors, and everyone else in the world watches both the pastors and us. To be truthful, the way we treat each other and the way we treat our “spiritual leaders” is excuse for many people to point to Christianity as a hypocritical religion. They see the backstabbing and double-talking. We too are in a fishbowl, and this one really counts. It affects souls.
A few years ago a minister was attending a congregational interview, comprised of a question/answer period. One of the questions was “what housework do you do to help your wife? I can always tell what kind of person a man is by what he does for his wife.” He was also asked “What vision do you have for the church?" Keep in mind that he didn't live in the community and had talked to the board through a couple of interview stages. Not necessarily enough to have formed a vision when in the interview stage. "How much time do you spend praying on your knees every day?"
Every person with an opinion of spirituality phrased their question so that he was screwed if he didn’t answer it the way they wanted, and honestly no human could fulfill all that was asked. None of us would have willing eliminated our privacy to the degree that he was made to in that session. This non-denominational church accepted the pastor into their ranks. The church had a painful past, with a few splits. The 2 in more recent history were due to two factions warring over denomination affiliation. One group believed it wasn’t necessary to join a denomination. The other, perhaps more outspoken, strongly lobbied for joining a particular one. This “holy war” was so strong that the children watched as people fought in the foyer after church. The group wanting to denominate told the other faction that if they didn’t follow they were not in God’s will. And each group was firmly convinced through prayer that their position was the correct one. 5 wounded pastors later, then comes the new one. We began to hear that he was called the “Peacemaker”, because he had begun to proactively contact the other shunned pastors in order to promote healing. He set up an evening service where these pastors were invited and he washed their feet. It’s a wonderful, sentimental account. But here’s where it perhaps isn’t so wonderful. Why did the people leave it to the new pastor to make peace? The people were bystanders…observers (those who attended that is). Who should have been making the peace? Those who were involved during the problems, or the one who was never involved or even around at the time? On a lesser scale it sounds a bit like giving money to missions overseas and turning the other way when a street person needs help. It’s easier to get someone else to do what we should be doing ourselves.
I’ve known of pastors who don’t get jobs or are criticized because their children are difficult to manage. Yes, we can pull out scripture to defend that decision, but in reality, how many of us have unruly children?
I've attended other meetings where pastors were not forgiven for past difficulties in handling personal trauma. The church was left to float, because the "man of God" wasn't leading with a "vigorous vision". Seems to me the Bible says we are the body and we are the church. The vision is ours, along with the leadership. It is not the leadership's alone nor is it ours alone. A lot has been repeated at meetings with the phrase "you are God's chosen man..." and what usually follows is an accusation of disappointment. That ticks me off. We are all ministers of the Gospel. We are all chosen. We each have different giftings, and some of us are gifted as pastors and teachers. It's their job to help equip the rest of us and to ensure we don't fall prey to unsound teaching. That's a simplification, but to delve into more detail would make this post way too long.
Let me talk for a moment about the expectations on pastors' wives. I can't talk about pastors' husbands, because I have never known any of those. The wife of a pastor, according to how many people act, is employed along with the pastor, though only one salary is paid. She should be her husband's receptionist, music leader, Sunday school overseer/teacher, piano player, run a woman's group and assist in counselling. Maybe not all those things, but many of them. Maybe we need to realize that we pay the pastor and not his wife, and let his wife be a layperson without any responsibility, if she so chooses. Don't dump on her if the pastor isn't home and we really want to talk to someone. How many of those kind of calls could she get in one day if there were at least 150 people in the congregation? Many pastor's wives suffer burnout - perhaps even before their husbands give into it.
I realize Scott’s post was about the fishbowl. I needed to spout off about the expectations we place on pastors. Let them be human. Treat them with the same measure of grace that we treat others around us. don't confront them more than we confront others. Many of us want to be the pastor or music leader's friend, because they are in a position of prominence where we feel we know them based on the portions of their life that they talk about weekly. Perhaps a part of us wants to be one of the "in" crowd by hanging out with those people. Or maybe that's just me. Yes, I know they should be a role model of how to live, but they also can’t be expected to be perfect and sinless. Only One is capable of that. And if you want to talk about the fishbowl, many people are watching us. We watch the pastors, and everyone else in the world watches both the pastors and us. To be truthful, the way we treat each other and the way we treat our “spiritual leaders” is excuse for many people to point to Christianity as a hypocritical religion. They see the backstabbing and double-talking. We too are in a fishbowl, and this one really counts. It affects souls.
// posted by Annette @ 4:22 p.m. 