"What Do Ministers Do and Why"

Reading for the Service:

The pastoral vocation is to help people grow spiritually, resist their lowest impulses and adopt higher, more compassionate ways.

“…(Pastors) are no longer expected to offer moral counsel in pastoral care sessions or to deliver sermons that make the comfortable uneasy. …
“Ministry is a profession in which the greatest rewards include meaningfulness and integrity. When those fade under pressure from churchgoers who don’t want to be challenged or edified, pastors become candidates for stress and depression.”
(G. Jeffrey MacDonald, “Congregations Gone Wild,” The New York Times “Sunday Opinion,” August 8, 2010, p.9.)

 

Sermon:

The reading for today is taken from an article in the opinion section of The Sunday New York Times, two weeks ago. Written by an active minister, the primary focus of the article is a call to congregations to encourage ministers to be ministers. To put the matter bluntly, ministers should not be “mascots” for Congregations. Here is the way one liberal Baptist minister (By the way, liberal Baptist is not an oxymoron.) Here is what this minister said on his web site:

“Maybe you want a preacher in stripes and suspenders with white gloves and nothing much to say. A person with a perpetual smile, twisting balloon bunnies and handing out theological la-dee-das to the smiling crowds. Is that what you want?” (Gordon Atkinson, “ Real Live Preacher,”)

I think the minister who wrote that bit of sarcasm was having a bad day. I’ve been a parish minister for over forty years, and a district executive another eight years, and I’ve known some of the frustrations which both congregations and ministers have with one another.

The article from which today’s reading is taken was called, “Congregations Gone Wild.” Well, yes, sometimes. However, I’ve also experienced ministers
who have “gone wild.” They have mistaken the ministerial role as authority rather than authenticity; more about that in a moment.

I was asked to talk about professional ministry because you will very soon be receiving a new settled minister. Karl Lisovsky who served on the Search Committee and who is today’s Pulpit Host shared with me that following today’s service he will be showing a documentary about this congregation which might be helpful as you welcome Rev. Rebecca Bijur to be your minister.

So I ask your indulgence as I share my thoughts about ministry based on over 50 years experience. The first thing to say is very important: Namely that ministry is something congregations and ministers do together. Ministry worthy of the name is shared, not left to the professional.

The first sentence of today’s reading bears repeating: “The pastoral vocation is to help people grow spiritually, resist their lowest impulses and adopt higher, more compassionate ways.” (G. Jeffrey MacDonald, “Congregations Gone Wild, “ The New York times “Sunday Opinion,” August 8, 2010, p.9 of “The Week in Review.”

The Minister of First UU Congregation in San Diego, where Betty and I are members says the same thing in this way: The purpose of the Church is to help transform people so that people in turn may help transform the world.” The major
task of ministry, it seems to me, is to help people grow beyond their normal everyday cares; to encourage both personal and social transformation.

This is our responsibility—both congregants and ministers. Here’s an example from another area of ministry. When someone is bereaved, both the minister and lay friends have a significant role in being present as people go through the torments of grief and misery. We are all in this together. Ministry worthy of the name is always shared. One temptation facing this Congregation and all congregations after an interim period is to breathe a sign of relief and say something like, “Oh, finally, we’ll have a minister, now we can relax.” I urge you not to place that kind of “everything is up to you” burden on Rev. Rebecca.

Perhaps a brief reminder will be helpful. Interim ministry is specialized ministry; settled ministry is different. Do not expect your new Settled Minister to do some of the things your interim ministers have done. Just as you would not want your internist to be your surgeon, so do not expect the settled minister to do the same as interim ministers.

Several years ago The New York Times carried an article about the election of an Episcopal Bishop for the city of New York. I’ve lost the clipping, but do have some notes. The article began with these sentences:

“What does it take to be an effective leader? And what can one reasonably expect
from the people one would lead? These are perennial questions for religious
leaders.”

Those perennial questions about the quality of professional leadership required for people who are ministers with congregations are just as applicable to being minster of this or any other UU Congregation as to the Episcopal Bishop of New York City.
.
One of the realities facing religious leaders is the substantial difference between the authority or power once given to religious leaders and the authority or power given to religious leaders now. There was a time when the minister or “parson”—that’s the word—parson—it comes from old English with the parson being the “person.” The minister was the “go to” person when there were problems. That may have been good for earlier times, but no longer. Even the Pope is object of protests. The days of the power of Cardinal Richelieu or Cotton Mather are long since gone and good riddance.

The point is that in the contemporary congregation the minister’s authority comes at least in part from the congregation, and that is very dangerous. When a congregation gives authority to the minister, that sets up the perfect scenario for the minister becoming nothing more than spokesperson for the status quo. When professional ministers are doing their proper work, there will be times when the minister needs to challenge the congregation, even when challenge is not appreciated.

The key element for professional leaders, whether ministers or CEO’s of major corporations is authenticity, which is far more significant in leadership than authority. Both are hard to define because what is considered authentic by one person may be considered authoritarian by another. An article about leadership in a recent issue of Harvard Business Review said it succinctly: “(Leaders) work day after day to enhance their self-awareness…” (Robert I. Sutton, “The Boss as Human Shield,” Harvard Business Review, September, 2010, p.109)

In addition to the self-awareness of professional ministers, congregants also need healthy doses of self-awareness. Congregants need to be aware when they are concerned only for their particularly pet project, and not the good of the whole congregation. I was consulting minister with a UU congregation not long ago which was torn asunder by a few people who insisted their particular project should be the direction of that congregation.

The key is not only self-awareness on the part of the professional minister and the congregational ministers, but also the reality that generally speaking we
muddle along the best we can, trusting one another and when there is a question, speaking honestly, openly, and most importantly carefully—full of care—to one another.

At this point I differ from the article from which today’s Reading was taken. Seems to me that challenge, when done with care, is a two way street. I have known interim ministers and settled ministers who felt their calling was to “shake things up” in the congregations they served. There are people, both ministers and congregants who act in the “kickative mood, contrary tense” Authenticity based on self-awareness will encourage open communication and care.

Let me challenge you with an idea. Congregations can help to make or break professional ministers. You will have a major role in what is called “ministerial formation,” namely helping to form a young minister. I know a congregation with a young minister who are at odds with one another because some people, only a few, do not like one element of the young minister’s leadership. Rather than going to talk with the minister with care, they have initiated a “gossip campaign,” which will become congregational conflict. If any leader, including a professional minister, does something congregants may not appreciate, the congregants should go and talk carefully, thoughtfully and directly to the minister.

After 45 years of experience with congregations and 8 years as a district executive, I am increasingly aware that ministerial leadership is highly subjective. What appeals to one person is considered anathema by another. I have noticed the varieties of responses to sermons. For one person a sermon is “the finest” or the most helpful sermon ever; while the same sermon for another person is mediocre at best. That brings me to a uniquely Unitarian Universalist problem. We UUs expect each person to engage in his or her own “search for truth and meaning.” Each of you is responsible for your own religious understandings. If that is true, what is the role of the professional minister?

The short answer is that clergy are called, ordained, installed and supported so that they-the clergy-can give more direct attention to matters of faith and the congregation. To say it another way: Clergy are expected to provide a major portion of time to consideration of matters of faith and the operation of the congregation, so that lay people, who because of other responsibilities, can give only part time to these considerations.

Please notice that I included two elements of the ministerial role—matters of faith and congregational issues. As some of you know I was Interim Minister at the UU Congregation of Santa Fe for the past year. There were two doors to the room which was designated for the minister. One door had a sign, “Minister’s Study.” The other door had a sign, “Minister’s Office.” That is correct. Professional ministers are concerned for faith, but also for congregational operations. That is why ministers are installed and supported by congregations.

Perhaps a bad analogy will help. I suppose each one of us, if given the proper training and manuals and tools could repair our own automobile. However we do not do so. Rather we take our car to a mechanic who has given full time to study and learning about automobiles. By the same token clergy go to seminary to study and learn so that they may provide leadership for congregations.

What do ministers do and why? Professional ministers attempt on the basis of study and experience and expertise to provide leadership which enables congregants to do their own faith work. The Unitarian Universalist Pocket Guide uses several analogies to describe the work of the professional minister. One suggests that the minister is a “storyteller,” to relate tales of the past, present and future in order to assist congregants to clarify their life issues.

Another analogy used in the “Pocket Guide” is that the professional church leader is a “midwife” to help give birth to the life already abiding in a congregation. Another analogy is that the clergy are “jugglers” working to bring order out of chaos. I like this description in the “UU Pocket Guide:”

“…in private moments with parishioners and in public forums with the
congregation, (professional ministers) are asked to hold in tension a
multitude of truths. With hands and heart (professional ministers) try
to bring balance to the sometimes conflicting needs in faith communities.”
(Beth Graham, “Our Ministry,” in The Unitarian Universalist Pocket Guide, p.26)

In addition to those analogies from the “Pocket Guide” I suggest two more which may be helpful. Seems to me that a professional minister is much like a gardener. As a gardener the clergy attempt to help the congregation be the kind of place where people may grow or develop their personal and corporate religious consciousness.

Another analogy came to mind several years ago when I heard an interview on public radio. The interviewer was talking with a playwright whose Broadway play had been successful. The playwright expressed concern that the only reason his play had been successful was a famous actress, Carol Burnett, played the lead role. He wonder if perhaps people liked the play primary because of the actress and not his writing.

Seems to me that successful plays require both good writing and good acting. Even the best play without good acting will be mediocre; and even the best dramatist with a poor vehicle will have limited success. Without stretching that analogy to the point of allegory, I suggest that professional ministers are in some sense playwrights, laity are actors and actresses.

That analogy is not new with me, indeed it is many decades old. The philosopher/theologian Soren Kierkegaard once used a similar analogy. In writing about the worship service, Kierkegaard drew a clear distinction between worship and theater. He said people tend to confuse the two, thinking the clergy are actors, God is the prompter and the congregation is the audience.

Kierkegaard said this is a poor understanding of the Sunday Service. Rather he said the clergy are the prompters, congregants are the actors, and God is the audience watching to see how well we act what we say we believe.

My understanding is that professional ministers based on their education and experience attempt to provide insights as well as questions, comfort as well as challenge, organizational skill as well as pastoral care, all aimed at helping people act well in the drama of life.

Whenever professional ministers are seen only as actors, providing entertainment for congregants there are very real and present dangers, the dangers of manipulation on the part of clergy and resentment on the part of people in the congregation. Here’s what I mean.

A few years ago the Library of Congress published a magazine called Civilization. The magazine included a regular column about film and theater. In one issue the column featured the work of Alfred Hitchcock. According to that article, this is what Hitchcock said to a colleague while they were filming, “North by Northwest.” Hitchcock is speaking:

“The audience is like a giant organ you and I are playing. At one
moment we play this note and get this reaction, and then we play
that chord and they react that way.” (Terry Teachout, “The Genius of Pure
Effect,” Civilization, February/March, 1998, pp. 43-44)

That is a perfect statement of manipulation. It is deliberately controlling the thoughts and feelings of other people. All one has to do is watch some of the television evangelists to see this same kind of manipulation. This will always happen when ministers are encouraged to be entertainers.

What do professional ministers do and why? Seems to me clergy are playwrights who attempt to provide material which can be used by congregants as
they live out the search for their own religious truth in the drama of life.

What do professional ministers do and why? Sometimes as a playwright the minister needs to be a friend, remembering that there are times when a true friend will not only provide comfort but may also tell you what you least want to hear.

What do professional ministers do and why? Ministers comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. I heard recently about a conversation between a search committee and candidate. Members of the committee asked the candidate if he is a humanist or theist. The candidate replied, “That depends on you.” When the committee asked for clarification, he said something like this: If you are humanist, I will be theist, if you are theist, I will be humanist. That’s a bit raw, but it makes the point. The reason being that one of the ways clergy help people through the challenges of life is to help congregants consider options. That is done most frequently not by giving answers but by the simple, but highly significant acts of sharing understandings and being present.

What do professional ministers do and why? Ministers encourage and challenge congregations to take risks, to exist in a state of “holy discontent” in order to share the good word of liberal religious understanding.

What do professional ministers do and why? One more analogy. In a very real way clergy and laity are engaged in a dance:

…the dance of life in the face of death,
the dance of hope in the face of despair,
the dance of challenge in the face of contentment,
and the dance of exuberance in the face of caution.

We dance together in many, many ways. Sometimes we clergy and laity will step on each other’s toes. Sometimes we will miss the rhythm of the music of life. Sometimes we will grow weary in well doing. However we dance because if we stop dancing our muscles will grow flabby, and our witness will flag, and this really fine congregation will become not much more than a historical museum.

My concluding word is a plea, an urgent request. When I served with you several years ago you were very gracious and kind to Betty and me. I’m sure that is your style. I want to ask you to be very careful, very aware of invidious comparisons. Beware of comparing your new settled minister to those you have known in the past. Different ministers have different gifts. Comparison is a blind alley and will almost certainly lead to difficulty.

If you find yourself saying or thinking, “Well Judith did so-and-so, but our new minister…” Or if you think, “Ernie always did …., but our new minister…”
If you find yourself making those kinds of comparisons you will be looking backward not forward. Worse still, you will not encourage your new minister to be authentic.

This Congregation, the Unitarian Universalist Community Church of Santa Monica, is on the edge of a lively future, a future ripe with possibilities. I remember with pleasure the four months I was with you. I’m sure the same is true for the Interim Ministers who served with you. Before long someone Rebecca will be standing here. Together you can actualize your potential; both the potential of this congregation and of the new Minister. Do not jeopardize your future by looking backwards. Grace and peace to you.