Pastoral Partners or Puppets?

THE BIG conference table was totally encircled by the 22 men seated at it, some chatting animatedly, some idly leafing through papers, others staring pensively into space. The young est appeared to be in his late 20's, while the oldest might have been 55 or 56. Their dress ran the gamut from flashy sport coats and gay neckties to ultra-conservative Oxford-gray business suits. In fact, so different were they in appearance and attitude, they might have been a random selection of salesmen, teachers, businessmen, and physicians. Actually, all had in common just one thing: their vocation. They were parish ministers.

The man at the head of the table cleared his throat noisily. "Gentlemen, let's get underway." Reluctantly, the last conversation tapered off. "We are here this morning, as you know, to hold a seminar on team ministry, its potential and its problems. You have come either because you are presently in a team ministry, or because you contemplate starting or joining one."

He paused and looked around the circle of faces. "If this session is to pay off, we need to be completely frank and honest with one another. With that as a preamble, I'd like to throw open this meeting for your comments on the team ministry . . . your expectations for it ... some of the obstacles and problems you may have encountered, or heard about from others. Let's explore all aspects, brethren."

Apprentice Work

There was only a brief pause before the first halting comment came from a ruddy-faced minister of 50 or so.

"I've needed an assistant for some time," he said slowly. "My church has reached the size—almost 600 members—where I'm just not able to keep pace with the preparation of sermons and prayers, hospital and nursinghome calls, marriage counseling, administrative duties and paperwork, attending committee meetings, conducting wedding and funeral services, handling community contacts . . . well, you know what we're all up against. But frankly, I hesitate to take on an assistant. I've heard of so many blowups that I'm wary. Am I right in this? Or simply chicken?"

"I think you're overly cautious, George," boomed out a portly man. . . . "I've had assistants for the past eight years, and they've saved me a lot of drudgery. Don't stay long . . . maybe two years at the most . . . but they learn some thing about the parish ministry, then move on. I couldn't get along without 'em."

One of the younger men at the table frowned. "Maybe I'm one of those fellows you couldn't get along without! I've only been out of seminary two years, and I'm an assistant in a suburban church. But I'm not happy. I'm simply marking time, doing menial jobs. Office work. Taking the young people on outings. Calling on shut-ins. Recruiting new members. Except for the summer, when the senior minister is on vacation, I don't get to preach one Sunday in ten." He shook his head sadly. "Do you call that get ting experience?"

"Yes, but if you preached every other Sunday, what would the congregation say?" demanded another of the older men.

"I'll tell you," someone volunteered. "They'd say, 'Why isn't the senior minister preaching every Sunday? Look what we're paying him! Yet we're having to listen to a young guy re-work his semi nary sermons.' "

"The trouble with young ministers is they want to get to the top without serving their apprentice ship," put in another older man, almost petulantly. "They should take a little church in some small parish, and learn what it's all about. Then after a few years of struggling with all the duties involved, they'd be glad to get into a team ministry. And they'd have more to offer."

A Place in the Sun

... A man with a mustache and closely-cropped beard spoke up. You've been talking about young men in a team ministry. Usually they've got problems, I agree. But so do older, more experienced men. Take my case, for example. I've been out of seminary 14 years, and I've had my own churches during eight of those years. For the past three years I've been an associate on the staff of a large church. And I've had it" he raised his hand to his throat "up to here!"

"What seems to be the trouble?" asked the man who had opened the meeting.

"Basically, the senior minister. He treats me like a young assist ant. My professional competence isn't recognized. The boss man makes all the decisions. Unilaterally. Seldom is my advice sought. Yet I'm expected to carry a heavy load of pastoral counseling, sick calls, adult education, new-member training, and the like. In fact, I do just about everything in the parish but preach at the main service on Sunday. Instead, I'm permitted to conduct the earlybird service. Big deal!"

"That's not good," someone muttered. "Separate services tend to divide a congregation into two churches."

"You say your advice isn't sought," put in another. "Maybe you should develop plans on your own initiative, then present them to the senior minister. Something tangible he can buy."

The bearded man shook his head. "I've done that. But he won't buy anything he hasn't created himself. He's a prima donna. They call the church 'Dr. Smith's church' because he preaches all the time, and is always in the limelight."

"That's a rough situation," commented one of the younger men.

"Many in the congregation see my side of it," he went on. "They tell me they want to help me. They feel I'm not getting a fair shake."

Identifying With the Underdog

"And maybe you aren't," agreed a man at the end of the table. "But there's usually another side to these stories, too. Oh, I'm a senior minister myself, and you'll accuse me of being biased, and maybe I am. But this I know, and from long experience: the associate or assistant minister invariably wins a lot of sympathy from many in the congregation because they identify with him as the underdog. But every time some major problem or crisis arose, it's considered the fault of the senior minister. And, in a sense, it's exactly that. He's the man who carries the responsibility, and he's the man who gets the blame. So don't picture him as knee-deep in clover."

"I wish there were some way of avoiding all this controversy and bad feeling," mused one of the younger ministers thought fully. "When I decided to enroll in seminary, it was because I felt called to be a disciple of Christ, to the best of my ability. I dreamed of working creatively with like-minded men to help equip lay people for a life of Christian service. It sounded exciting. But where is that agape love we learned about at seminary? Is the ministry just another business? Are we partners or puppets? I'm confused!"

And well might our young friend feel confused. For seldom do we bear in mind that ministers are the earthern vessels in which the wine of the spirit must be carried and dispensed. Like lay people they, too, have feet of clay!

In certain respects the ministry resembles the medical profession. Like a physician, the pastor works with many people on an intensely personal, often emotional basis. But unlike most physicians, he is also exposed to people "in the mass." . . . His pulpit role inevitably takes on some of the aspects of the theater, as people judge him according to his ability to articulate abstract ideas, to speak forcefully, to use colorful language, to interpret through modern parable and illustration . . . yes, and even to entertain.

But beyond this, as ministers strive to impress upon their congregations the relevance of the Christian gospel, ethically and morally and in humanitarian terms, challenging their parishioners' complacent attitude to ward the issues confronting them daily, those in the pews soon find their pet phobias and prejudices being exposed. Few teachers be come popular by striving to correct a student's shortcomings. Yet here is a teacher who not only strives to do just that, but consciously or subconsciously identifies himself with God. How dare he do such a thing! After all, he's merely a man ... a modest mortal who drives a four-year-old Chevy and is paid a paltry nine thousand a year and lives in a house which he doesn't even own!

Thus develops in the minds and hearts of many church members an ambivalent attitude toward their ministers: affection for the one who socializes with them, holds their hand in times of stress, sees them through the crises of life . . . but irritation to ward the one who stands before them as a surrogate for God Him self. For although we find it easy to love God, whom we cannot see, we find it infinitely more difficult to love a God symbol whom we can see, especially when he is shaking a finger and chiding us from the throne-like eminence of a lofty pulpit. As a result, churches with a team ministry face an ever-present danger. Any flare-up in the professional staff serious enough to leak out into the congregation can intensify this ambivalence to a point where members begin choosing sides, forming opposing factions intent on damning or deifying the minister who has become the center of the~ controversy. Such a situation can develop into a parish-wide tug-of-war which invariably hurts the ministers, both factions, and the entire church family.

Partners or Puppets?

Can anything be done to minimize or prevent such distressing situations? Can a measure of unity and cooperation be fostered in a group ministry? Can the pastors become partners, and not mere puppets? Can the laity be educated to play a responsible, constructive role in helping to maintain pastoral health?

Let's look at a few of the "hazards" which may prove dangerous to ministerial health, along with some simple precautions to circumvent the danger.

First, no minister should join (he "team" unless he is compatible, theologically and philosophically, with the others. This does not imply that he should be a carbon copy of the others. A contrast in age, in academic training, in experience, in fields of expertise, will usually enhance the creativity and versatility of any staff. . . .

Second, each minister must be team oriented, emotionally as well as intellectually. He must feel secure enough in his own self-knowledge to enjoy seeing a col league excel, yet must never permit the team ministry to become an excuse for not striving to excel in his assigned area of responsibility. Like a good football player he should run interference when another carries the ball, displaying the same spirit he expects from others when he is the ball carrier. If he is a "loner" who insists on having his own way, he should stay away from team ministries (and probably from any minis try!). Above all, the team minister should not be concerned about status to a point where he craves the adulation of the congregation. Although he will understandably want to feel their interest, their appreciation, their affection, he must not require the exclusive support of lay people in order to fulfill his emotional needs.

Third, all members of the team ministry must have a clear under standing of their duties, responsibilities, and authority, as developed in conjunction with the proper committee of lay people. Assignments should recognize the expertise of each minister, the areas for which he has a particular affinity, his need for challenges and growth-potential, as well as an equitable distribution of the work load. Authority vested in the senior minister, or in the coministers (where such a structure exists) should be specific. All this, along with procedures and practices relating to personnel, should be embodied in a manual given to each staff member. By reviewing annually all assignments, the changing interests and professional development of each minister can become the basis of shifts in assignments, thus introducing variety, rotational training, and changes in interface with lay people on various committees ... all important for guarding against "going stale." . . .

Fourth, free and frank communication among ministers is essential. At regular staff meetings, specific assignments for the week will be made by the senior minister, or negotiated by the co-ministers. Newly activated projects will be discussed. Problems and opportunities will be shared, and advice pooled so that the best thinking of the group can be brought to bear. Ideally, each staff member then will understand how his duties will supplement or complement the activities of the others. At the same time, through the interchange of creative ideas and experiences, each member of the staff will benefit professionally, and the work of the church become more effective. . . . Educating the Laity While all of these precautions are being taken to help the ministers operate as pastoral partners, what of the laity? How can we educate the members of the church who never serve on a pastoral relations committee, and who have little comprehension of what is involved in ministering to a large parish? Can lay people really play a significant role in promoting harmony? Let's consider three ways in which their help can be enlisted.

First, seminars can be held on the ministry of the church, at which each minister in turn ex plains his rationale, how he operates, the types of services he performs. This can provide an answer for the member who frequently asks, often petulantly, "What do the ministers really do to earn their salaries?" In addition to combating this "iceberg syndrome"—in which only the tip of the minister's work is visible—these seminars can provide a forum for discussing new directions, new ministries, new forms of mission. Out of such meetings might come agreement, for example, on the need for a street ministry, or a ministry to drug addicts, to unmarried mothers, to alcoholics, to prison parolees!' Through questions arid answers, the ministers can strive to sensitize the members to the deeper role they can play in Christian service. For if a church ever is to become truly effective, every lay person must find his personal form of ministry to others.

Second, items in the parish paper and occasional letters to the members . . . can explain to the entire parish, in advance, any new direction in the church's ministry being contemplated. By avoiding surprises, by letting the members in on plans still in a formative stage, future objections and antagonism can often be minimized.

Third, the members can be urged to support their ministers, and to appreciate their various unique talents. Stress can be placed on the church as a family in Christ, in which responsible Christians recognize that gossip, the spreading of ill-founded rumors, and indulgence in petty criticism, simply are not worthy of men and women who are seeking to live together in trust and faith. Reconciliation, clearly, must be fostered at home before any member tries to carry it beyond the confines of the parish. In other words, the church must be a place where Christians learn not to sulk when their every wish is not acted upon, not to strike back when they feel that a person or an idea has offended them, not to chortle with glee> when a form of ministry they opposed meets with failure.

What's at Stake?

Having endeavored to help the ministers to a realization of their high calling, and the congregation to a new sensitivity to their role in the family of Christ, is any thing left to be said?

If the church of Jesus Christ should function as a microcosm of society, embracing a diversity of people who serve as a laboratory to work out, perfect, demonstrate, and spread to others the good news of God's love, forgiveness, and reconciliation, how important it is that the team minis try become, in turn, a microcosm of the church family, demonstrating to the laity by example how this koinonia—this fellowship in Christ—can be attained! Doesn't this call for a ministerial staff which prays together, studies together, affirms one another, and celebrates with joy the unity of the faith? And includes in its fellowship the ministers' wives?