Ministry is inevitably a series of painful decisions, often in the form of choices between the good of the institutional church and the need or comfort of the individual. Further, these choices are frequently the no-win variety between the lesser of two evils. Church boards and committees, conference committees and denominational councils, make so many decisions month by month, year by year— decisions that deeply affect the lives of many people, decisions that bring disruption and pain. Members are disciplined, disfellowshiped, denied church office. Pastors are removed from their pastorates, professors terminated from their positions.
Jim Kok, Chaplain at Pine Rest Christian Hospital, Grand Rapids, Michigan, has suggested that the church should establish an annual day of mourning—not just generalized mourning, but specific mourning by the church for the suffering, pain, and grief inflicted upon members by its decisions. He writes, "This would be a day when we would face the truth about ourselves and sorrow over how we have hurt people—in the name of Christ, and that we might have been in error when making decisions that affected people's lives." 1
Kok supports his call for mourning in church decision-making by citing an example: "Recently a school terminated the services of a young teacher because she had divorced her husband. This decision was devastating to the teacher and very upsetting to her students. No one will ever know the permanent consequences for better or worse in their lives. The firing was done, I am told, out of consideration for the students. The conviction being, it appears, that accepting a divorced person as teacher is offering a negative role model for children and, I suppose, is considered an encouragement to divorce.
"I do not know the feelings of those who made this decision or the attitude surrounding it. However, I have some convictions about what they should have been. Let us put it in the form of a prayer: " 'Lord, we have just decided on taking a lady out of her classroom, away from her students forever because she is divorced. We hurt for her as we do this. We cry for her pupils who will miss her. We ache because her colleagues will miss her too. We believe this is the right thing to do. We trust that You led us to this choice. We want to do what is right for the Christian community, for the school, for the lives of the children. But we can't do it without hurting people. People may even be turned away from You because of this. She, whose services we are terminating, will be injured deeply at a time when she needs support and encouragement from the Christian community. O Lord, we hate being put in this position; hurting people and even giving people reason to question You. But we do believe it is right. Nevertheless, Lord, in the corners of our hearts there is also the haunting fear that we could be wrong. As we understand things, we don't think so. But we could be wrong. And we beg Your forgiveness if out of the limitations of our human condition we have been mistaken. Accept our efforts, Lord. We hesitatingly present our decision and stand behind it. Heal, comfort, sustain those whom we've hurt in doing what we believe is Your will. . . . Support and encourage us who have to do this awful deed. Amen.'" 2
Even if we could know for certain that our decisions were objectively right, should we not sorrow over the pain and disruption they bring to the lives of others?
Ministry requires deep human involvement. The pain of that involvement can be overwhelming, and it is only proper that the minister have some insulation, not only for his own sake, but for the sake of those to whom he ministers. Two concepts, pragmatically applied, could help provide the kind of objectivity needed: (1) the concept of the church as a human institution under God, and (2) the concept of ministry as a profession within that institution.
In the first place, while acknowledging the uniqueness of the church as a spiritual organism, the body of Christ, we must not deny its human side as an organization, "a sociological entity that has worship services, committees, women's groups, men's organizations, educational programs, youth groups, and problems." 3 As a human society, the church must determine policy and have the necessary social power to act in the light of its decisions. In this sense the church is political, exhibiting "the patterns of relationships and action through which policy is determined and social power exercised." 4 Every human organization contains political elements, and the church is no exception. Through a variety of means, we nominate, elect, control decisions, and exercise influence. Suggesting that church life has political elements does not mean that it is evil and to be avoided. To be human means to be political. But as Christians, sensitive to the brokenness of our human situation, we accept this aspect of our existence as standing always under the judgment of God.
This concept lays the groundwork for a second, that of the minister as a professional and his call to the ministerial office as a call to a profession. Such writers as James Glasse5 and David C. Jacobsen6 have developed this understanding at length. Especially does Jacobsen show its liberating value for decision-making in the church. The classic professions such as law and medicine, he argues, carry an implicit profession of faith in a person or concept. The medical doctor professes his faith in the healing arts and the tools and methods of that profession. Likewise, the lawyer, from a professional point of view, professes faith toward the State and its system of laws. He must have faith in the judges and the courts, and, with certain limitations, a faith in his fellow attorneys.
The clergyman is a professional also. According to Jacobsen, one might say, at first thought, that his profession of faith is to God. But as an ordained minister he professes faith also in the visible church. Repeatedly, in his leadership role, he is called upon to express his faith in the visible body, the church, as a human institution under God. There are occasions when the growth and stability of the church as a human institution is the church leader's chief professional responsibility
Of course, as a person, the minister is called to a deeper loyalty—to place his faith in God alone, but as a professional within the visible body he is called to have faith in that visible body. This does not mean that he may not have reservations about its present structure or effectiveness, but he does not doubt that it should exist. And he will work for its ongoing improvement. "He cannot be a cynic and sit in arrogant judgment over that church and still remain a professional." 7
This concept of the ministry as a profession among other professions may be both "freedom-producing and anxiety-producing" in the face of tough decisions. It will be anxiety-producing when the growth and stability of the institution appear to be achieved at the expense of human values. For the sake of the many, some choices will have to be made to the detriment of the individual. If a pastor or denominational leader knows that those in his charge are not sufficiently mature or are "incapable of absorbing the impact of a decision that is too radically loving toward one person," 8 he may decide for the good of the institution. As a professional with a commitment to the visible institution, he must be able to do so with "calculated and educated calm" rather than collapsing in pain. But for the minister to make every choice undiscriminatingly in deference to the many would be to abandon his pastoral responsibility.
Of all the dilemmas confronting the minister, Jacobsen reminds us, this is the most critical. Illustration: the valued associate of a pastor has offended the neurotic wife of a leading elder. All efforts at reconciliation have failed. The pastor and his church are faced with the decision of either offending a family of longstanding influence or losing the services of a much-appreciated and broadly supported staff member. Whatever the choice, the pastor cannot avoid the decision or the hurt that will result. As a professional, he realizes that the church should respond as the body of Christ with love for all the parties. He recognizes that it is also a human institution that may not respond in love but in defensiveness and self-preservation.
If, after careful study, he concludes that the benefits and costs are weighted in favor of a choice for the many, he must support that choice, though it be with pain. Jacobsen argues: "The minister is called to a task that is essential to the institution. He is called to be a competent professional and not a sentimental perfectionist. He must be sensitive to need and the group dynamic that cuts across the visible body to the injury of some. But the sensitivity ought not to paralyze him." 9
In one way or another, with or without the minister, tough decisions are made, often cutting and hurting those involved. Even though made prayerfully, these decisions can be made only with a sense of sorrow and humility. We must always be aware of our limited vision and distorted perceptions, our biases, prejudices, and self-deception.
An annual Day of Mourning in the church! A Day of Mourning for the decisions we are compelled to make! It would have to be a day when we lay aside our defensiveness, our reasons, and our rationalizations. It should be a day when we are stripped to the naked truth that in spite of earnest prayer and careful consideration, "in our weakness and mortality and finitude and limitations as human beings, we know we have hurt, damaged, and even led people astray while doing what we thought was right, fair, just, and faithful" 10 to the will of God.
Notes:
1 Jim Kok, The Chaplains Newsletter, vol. 12, No. 2.
2 Ibid.
3 Robert Worley, Change in the Church: A Source of Hope (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1971), p. 15.
4 James Gustafson, Treasure in Earthen Vessels (New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1961), p. 100.
5 James Glasse, Profession: Minister (Nashville, Term.: Abingdon Press, 1968).
6 David C. Jacobsen, The Positive Use of the Minister's Role (Philadelphia: The Westminister Press, 1967).
7 Ibid, p. 23.
8 lbid., p. 24.
9 Ibid., p. 25.
10 Kok, op. tit., p. 2.
