The Pew Looks at the Pulpit

Note: Your comments and constructive criticisms are invited. Whether it be praise or disapproval, our only re­quirement is that it be done in the framework of a Chris­tian spirit. All items under this heading reflect the per­sonal views of the respective writers and not necessarily those of this journal or the denomination at large.—Editors

A friend of mine, when asked how he rs is doing, often replies that he prefers to let others judge how he is doing. "I'm likely to be prejudiced about myself," he says. How often it is that we progress along our daily pathways supposing that we are doing all right. In fact, sometimes we con­gratulate ourselves that we are pretty good fellows, that we are doing a superb job—until we are brought up short by some cir­cumstance, by one of our associates, or by our superiors.

By "errors of attitude" I mean several things—error in attitude toward other or­dained men, improper attitude toward non-ordained people in the church, and error in attitude toward nonchurch members. I will discuss them in that order.

Because of the nature of my work I have been a lay member of quite a number of committees or I have been called to meet with committees frequently. I have discovered what I shall call a fawning attitude on the part of some ministers toward other ministers—an attitude that since the other man is ordained, his opinion must neces­sarily be correct and his judgment must carry the day. When I asked why certain committees voted such and such actions, in justification it was indicated to me that the opinions of ordained men were not to be questioned.

During my lifetime of nearly sixty years I have known several hundred men who were ordained after I first knew them. However, I must confess that I have never known a man to whom ordination added information, business judgment, or talents in any field whatsoever. One man of whom I am really quite fond, in speaking of the purpose of ordination, said: "It is so one can speak with the authority of the church." Now, if this is the purpose of ordination, or the main purpose, I have a great misconception as to what ordination means. To me ordination means the formal rec­ognition by the church of a fact that has been evident for some time past—that God has called a man to preach the everlasting gospel for Him. The man has conducted evangelistic efforts, he has won souls, he has given proof of his call in such an unmis­takable way that even men recognize it. The idea that men by ordination acquire au­thority is to me a strange and new idea. I don't believe it. People are elected or ap­pointed to positions of authority, not or­dained to them.

Some of my ordained friends have what to me is the curious attitude that unless a man is ordained he is not possessed of good judgment as to how the work of the church should be conducted. They feel that only ministers' opinions are worthy of considera­tion.

Ordained men tend to come to church board meetings with preconceived ideas as to just what should be done and exactly how to do it. Then they proceed to ride roughshod over any opposition that may arise, giving no real consideration to alter­natives, respecting no other person's ideas. I have seen this happen several times in the various church boards of which I have been a member.

This attitude generates several different kinds of reaction on the part of board mem­bers. Some of the members willingly take the attitude that since the pastor or elder wants to do certain things such and such a way, there just isn't any other way for them to be done. From such persons each pastor will get the utmost in cooperation, no mat­ter how harebrained the program that is proposed. Such persons are the delight of a thoughtless minister.

Others will tend to argue with the pastor, each tending to value his own opinion as highly as the pastor evidently does his. Such persons are those who tend to cause divisions in the church, those who divide it into factions, each mutually jealous of the others. The wise pastor will avoid draw­ing a line that will cause such cleavage, and will recognize the symptoms long before such cleavage can take place, and will avoid it in various ways, such as dropping the subject for the time, until he can see the strong-minded persons privately and work out an acceptable solution. And there are other ways of dealing with such persons.

Then there is another class of person in the church who will propose that the work of the church be done in ways that appeal to them as being sound, and when the pas­tor proposes and insists on his own program, will let the pastor have his way. They will not oppose, but because they do not really believe in what the pastor wants to do, they find themselves unable to coop­erate heartily, so they just sit and stagnate.

The pastor isn't able to get them to help, nor will they come out and oppose him.

This isn't good for the church either. The wise pastor will see such a situation devel­oping and will avoid it. Each pastor ought to have enough rubber in his make-up to avoid such hard situations. I have seen more than one occasion when such people let the pastor have his way to the detri­ment of the church.

What About Attitudes Toward Non-Adventists

A certain minister has the habit of point­ing a finger or a thumb at each non-Adventist church he drives by and saying the word, "Babylon," as he passes. He inter­rupts any conversation to make the point clear. Seldom does he say more than the word, "Babylon."

This is a curious attitude to assume by one who is to preach the gospel. Now, with respect to attitudes toward other Christians, it is my opinion that the minister, above all other church members, should have greater charity for the members of other churches. He should respect their beliefs and find some way to win them in love. To think of them all as "Babylon" is to show con­tempt, an attitude that is not calculated to win friends for the Adventist Church. Such a minister would certainly have difficulty in joining heartily in the local ministerial as­sociations or in cooperating with other pas­tors in joint community projects, such as we often can do. He has built up in his mind a barrier to nonchurch members that is well-nigh insuperable.

Others will notice it. Our own church members will remark about it. Non-Advent­ist pastors will resent it. Soul winning is just about impossible as long as this opin­ion is held.

The facts are that if one feels superior to another, he can do no effective work for that person. I found that out many years ago in the mission field. If one feels supe­rior to another, he cannot hide that feeling. It will come out in some remark, in an unexpressed attitude, in a look, in a multi­tude of ways. We must take others as we find them, respect their beliefs, treat them as equals. Then we can do effective work for them.