In an effort to place emphasis on pastoral ministry, C. E. Bradford, vice-president of the General Conference for North America, recently called together twenty-four pastors: eight from multi-staff or institutional churches, eight from large city churches with no more than one assistant, and eight' from multi-church districts. This group met at the Adventist world headquarters March 4-6, 1981.
The purpose of this historic meeting (the first of its kind, as far as I know) was to have these field leaders, as Brother Brad ford put it, "resonate to the various problems" field ministerial forces face in their work. The overall purpose, then, was to enhance the ministry of the church. If the pastor is indeed the key figure in the organized work of the church (as we are fond of declaring), then his position and ministry should be enhanced in the ecclesiastical structure. It is axiomatic that the stronger the local church becomes, the stronger will be the entire body. There has been general agreement among all segments of the church that one of the primary reasons for the existence of the church organization—local conferences, unions, divisions, and the General Conference—is to enhance the ministry of the local congregation. However, all too often certain policies seem to say just the opposite, that the local church exists to serve the various units of denominational organization. We must recognize that the local church is basic and foundational in the mission of the church, and that the pastor of the local church thus occupies a crucially important role.
These twenty-four men did not presume to speak on behalf of the entire ministry of the church, but they have said things that should be heard and seriously considered both by their fellow pastors and by administration. All three groups made it clear that they did not consider this to be merely an opportunity to vent their feelings in a "gripe session." Rather, they wanted to respond genuinely to the request of denominational leadership to voice their ideas and make concrete suggestions for strengthening pastoral forces.
The meeting consisted of both group and plenary sessions. Each group chose a chairman and secretary, and reports were given to the entire body. I want to share here a summary of these reports. It is interesting that several concerns were held in common by all three groups, while others were distinctly related to the peculiar situations faced by the pastors of a particular group.
Finances
Recommendations in this area can be divided into two parts: increased funds for the local church and adjustments in the wage scale.
It was felt that since the funds available for ministry come from the local church and are shared with the conference, union, division, and General Conference, a larger portion should be available for ministry at the grass-roots level. One group suggested that in actual financial practice "the churches exist to perpetuate the organization. We find it incredible that the tithe dollar supports the entire church structure, including plant and equipment and secretary's salary—conference, union, General Conference—but not (with the exception of the pastor's salary) the local congregation that gives it. So the local church that is supposed to be the focal point of ministry is poorly funded and crippled while organizational overhead has grown and grown."
This group recommended "that a percentage of the tithe be retained by each local congregation to enhance that church's outreach efforts. Careful study should be given as to the exact percentages and procedures, but 10 percent should be a starting point with a gradual increase as overhead structures are eliminated."
Another group suggested on this particular point that "there should be a redistribution of tithe percentages; a reduction in General Conference percentages; a substantial reduction for the union conference; a larger percentage for the local conference; a percentage for the local church."
An additional recommendation was that "a minimum of 10 percent of all trusts and annuities, upon maturity, automatically be returned to the local congregation of which the donor was a member at the time of contractual agreement."
A second emphasis in the financial area dealt with the wage scale. "In view of the fact that the pastor's role is considered by administration as most important, this concept should be reflected in the pastor's wage scale in comparison to that of those in administration and departmental positions," one group declared.
Regarding this point, I have to agree that our present system of pay is more status oriented than service oriented. Several years ago certain leaders in the General Conference attempted to establish wage parity, and brought in a recommendation that was discussed at an Annual Council but failed to survive.
Administration
Closely related to the financial items above was the desire of all three groups to reduce and simplify administration and departmental structure. They pointed out that "at the present time in North America there is almost a one-to-one ratio of administrative workers to field workers. Pastors and laymen are increasingly asking, 'What are we getting for our money?' This costly structure—departmental secretaries duplicated in conference, unions, and the General Conference—is not useful." There was some thought that such a situation may even be counterproductive. "Positions and programs have been developed for which there is little or no market."
One group felt that a reduction in staff could take place "especially at the union conference level." Another group recommended that "instead of office-based departmental secretaries in each conference, pastors be recognized as field-based specialists to whom others may come and learn. Not only will this greatly reduce overhead costs but it will give credibility to the teaching process."
Along with this appeal for improving the ratio of pastors to administrators and departmental directors came the suggestion that the pastor have more "input into administrative decisions" that affect him and the local church.
These two items, finance and administration, were the two major concerns common to all groups. Underlying these concerns, it seems, is a feeling on the part of pastors that in spite of lip service being given to the importance of their role, the policies and operation of the church give them cause to feel that they are not really so considered. Unless present perceptions of success in ministry change, pastors will naturally tend to see themselves as some thing less than successful should they remain a pastor for life. I fully agree with these dedicated men that actions need to be taken that will declare to the field that their work as shepherds of the flock is at least as important as is that of the individual who is on a higher wage scale and who has a special title for his position. This church cannot afford to minimize the work of those individuals who have the direct spiritual care of those who finance the superstructure.
Other recommendations to enhance the pastor's position included: a regular sabbatical program for pastors; a pastor or counselor outside the administrative level to minister to the pastor and his family; funding a team ministry approach using both husband and wife; more frequent opportunities for open dialogue with administration on issues, and more opportunities for professional growth through specialized continuing education.
One group felt that the Sabbath school should be restructured and used as a "golden opportunity for church outreach" and "for small group dynamics." In connection with this, it was suggested that "the present one-quarterly concept is not having the unifying impact that we might wish worldwide." Thus this group recommended that liberty and approval be given for the use of alternate formats "providing there is a regular mission emphasis and a focus on outreach within each group." A desire was expressed that "curriculum materials be made available for a wide variety of classes, and that "these materials should be permeated with the security of salvation that is possible for a Christian to enjoy who has accepted Christ as Saviour."
One group felt that "the Seminary needs to consider the fact that the large majority of its graduates will minister at least initially in the multichurch district." Therefore it was recommended that "education for ministry must incorporate in its curriculum and engender in its teaching the concept of the legitimacy of the multichurch district, thus preparing young men both in training and in attitude for the multichurch ministry."
Pastor as a husband and father
The multichurch pastor group expressed several concerns regarding this area of their role. The quality and/or availability of education for their children is usually not commensurate with that available to the children of those who pastor larger churches, although younger men, who are more likely to have school-age children, normally fill these positions. The particular challenges they face in multichurch districts—traveling, absenteeism from home, et cetera—tend to create more family problems. Attention should be given to solving these.
I can only list in this brief report some of the other concerns and recommendations that emerged from this group of twenty-four pastors. They voiced suggestions regarding such items as our present Ingathering program, tenure of pastors, church discipline, volunteer pastoral forces, the importance of a renewed emphasis upon attention to prayer and the ministry of the Word in the context of the worship service and personal ministry, a serious look at' our Seminary ministerialtraining program, training church members for soul winning, church standards, and the overlapping of conference pro grams with too many plans that don't work.
These loyal men expressed appreciation for the fact that they were being listened to. They were not interested in merely criticizing and finding fault. They were concerned that the church face certain situations and renew its vision and focus regarding those features that make us a peculiar people.
I will conclude this editorial with a statement of ministry prepared by one group. It would be well for leadership to consider seriously not only this concluding statement but the entire report of these men who represent the pastoral force of this church not only in North America but the entire world field.
"We appreciate the fact that we as pastors were called here not primarily to produce a statement to our fellow pastors; nor to make a statement that would be credible because we are pastors. Rather, we have been given an honest hearing by General Conference administrators. But there are some concerns which we feel must be expressed regarding the ministry. Pastors today are experiencing severe problems in their personal lives, the nurturing of their congregations, and outreach.
"We affirm a balanced ministry which has as its priorities a commitment to the Lord and a personal devotional life, and a commitment to the body of Christ that recognizes a pastor's concerns to be first his family, then the local congregation, and outreach to the world. We affirm the importance of preaching. We need a renewed emphasis upon 'our attention to prayer and the ministry of the Word' in the context of the worship service and personal ministry."—J.R.S.
In Memoriam
On Sabbath, June 6, 1981, Andrew Coats worth Fearing IV passed to his rest, minutes after preaching two sermons—one in Dade City and one in Zephyrhills, Florida. Elder Fearing had experienced a longstanding heart condition, and he finally succumbed to it. His funeral was held on June 8 and was conducted by Elders N. R. Dower and J. R. Spangler.
The last seventeen years of his official ministry were spent as an associate leader in the Ministerial Association of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists. During this time he also carried duties as an associate editor of MINISTRY, bringing to its pages the benefit of his dedication to preaching and evangelism.
Elder Fearing was born in Columbus, Ohio, on February 5, 1907. He attended academy in Oshawa, Canada, and college at Emmanual Missionary College and Washington Missionary College. He began his church career as a teacher in the mountains of western Virginia in 1932. During his long career in church work he served as evangelist, church pastor, departmental leader, and church administrator in Virginia, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, California, Nevada, Utah, Georgia, and Tennessee. He formally retired at the General Conference session in the
summer of 1975, but he never retired from preaching—it was foremost in his life down to the last few hours of his earthly existence.
He leaves to carry on his work for the Master his companion of nearly fifty years. Bertha; his brother, Richard, president of the North Pacific Union Conference; and two nephews and three nieces. He was greatly loved by the thousands of young ministers whose lives he touched in their formative years; they too mourn his passing. And a host of friends, fellow workers, converts, and hundreds of congregations around the world will remember his ministry and mark his passing with respect and hope for a short rest in Jesus Christ, his Leader and Saviour.
