Bullseye: Attitudes Towards Clergy

We now come to one of the stickiest issues to be addressed in this series—the treatment of people. On this subject there are two categories of people, clergy and laity. Borden advocates markedly different attitudes and allowances when dealing with pastors than when dealing with lay leaders. We agree that it is appropriate to make that distinction, but on somewhat different grounds and with very different results than Borden does. Because of the volume of statements Borden makes on this subject we are going to give it two posts. This one will address treatment of pastors. The next will get into the treatment of volunteer leaders and rank and file members.

So why the distinction? As we pointed out in our previous post on unsubstantiated statements, Borden believes that pastors are due special honor and consideration simply by virtue of their being leaders. He therefore starts by giving them the benefit of the doubt.

“I always assume the best in every cluster meeting of every pastor regardless of how poorly the pastor thought about his or her ability to lead. I constantly envisioned a better future and what these pastors would be doing some day to lead healthy, growing, and effective ministries. I believed they all could develop as leaders. Some might develop better than others and accomplish more as leaders; however I really did believe they each could improve. I found that by treating pastors this way and expecting the best, they did improve and some have even surpassed my greatest expectations for them” (p.110).

“It is important to state at this juncture that we always went into the consultation supporting the pastor and attempting to conduct the consultation to prepare the pastor to be the primary leader of change” (p.86).

Borden also allows that when an individual pastor or congregation has been underperforming in spreading the gospel the problem may simply be a lack of training in the skills needed to accomplish the task. He responds supportively by offering training and resources and encouraging the pastors to grow their newly acquired skills through use.

“By changing the title of area minister to area consultant, accompanied by new expectations, we now had the moral obligation to provide these individuals with the resources required to accomplish their new responsibilities and meet the new expectations” (p.42).

"Our goal was not to lose pastors over this decision but have them step up to the task of being a leader who would take risks and be willing to be held accountable for fruitful ministry. We also assured them that if they took such risks the region was not going to abandon them. In the past when congregations had conflicts, it was often easier to have the pastors leave, and the region was known for advocating this. We knew that change would bring conflict, and we assured the pastor that when the conflict came, we would help the pastor deal with the dragons in the congregation who did not want health and growth because it affected their ability to hold influence in the congregation" (p.49).

The support Borden encourages for pastors goes well beyond the traditional understanding of that term, becoming “protection.” This manifests in various ways, from helping pastors “deal with” lay members who don’t fall in line to running interference between pastors and other denominational leaders who might become concerned with their conduct and seek to counsel them.

“Third, we wanted the pastor to help us understand what we would encounter during the consultation weekend and who would be the most resistant to change and why that was so. Fourth, we wanted to know how we could help the pastor deal with those people most resistant to change” (p.88).

“I also served pastors by being a regional representative who would come into their congregation when needed and speak the truth to people who still behaved in dysfunctional ways” (p.109).

“I also saw my role as protecting the pastor and leaders from any undue denominational pressure” (pp.78, 79).

Ultimately, Borden recognizes that some pastors simply aren’t capable of bringing about health and growth in a congregation.

“Another implication of fulfilling our mission is that we are willing to confront pastors who are ineffective” (p.32).

“Sometimes protecting congregational leaders meant meeting with pastors to remind them that, since they now had both the authority and responsibility for ministry, if goals were not met they were accountable and could not shift the blame to others” (p.98).

“In our congregational consultations our goal was to establish the pastor as the leader of the congregation. At the same time the pastor had to be willing to be held accountable for specific missional goals. If the goals were met the pastor was given even more freedom to lead. If the goals were not met, then the pastor needed to realize that perhaps a different calling and vocation was in the pastor’s future” (p.97).

Our reasons for making the distinction between pastors and lay membership are rather different. First, a pastor’s influence is much greater and more far-reaching than a lay member’s. Second, the pastor is the official representative of the denomination both within the congregation and to those outside of it. Third, a pastor receives a paycheck for his religious work. Finally, a pastor is also a regular member (and the two roles are not interdependent). Each of these distinctions contributes to making the way a pastor should be treated different than the way a lay member should be treated.

“Heaven is watching to see how those occupying positions of influence fulfill their stewardship. The demands upon them as stewards are measured by the extent of their influence” (Gospel Workers, p. 495).

A pastor’s larger influence means that both their successes and their errors have much greater impact. Consequently, their behavior must meet an even higher standard than lay members are held to so that their actions don’t lead people away from Christ rather than toward Him. Also, as an official representative of the denomination a pastor’s actions reflect not only on him but on the entire denomination.

“God's servants have to deal plainly, act openly, and not cover up wrongs; for they are standing between the living and the dead and must render an account of their faithfulness, their mission, and the influence they exert over the flock of which the Lord has made them overseers” (Early Writings, p.99).

“Those who profess to be servants of the living God must be willing to be servants of all, instead of being exalted above the brethren, and they must possess a kind, courteous spirit. If they err, they should be ready to confess thoroughly. Honesty of intention cannot stand as an excuse for not confessing errors. …Those who profess to be teachers should be patterns of piety, meekness, and humility, possessing a kind spirit, to win souls to Jesus and the truth of the Bible. A minister of Christ should be pure in conversation and in actions. He should ever bear in mind that he is handling words of inspiration, words of a holy God. He must also bear in mind that the flock is entrusted to his care, and that he is to bear their cases to Jesus, and plead for them as Jesus pleads for us with the Father. I was pointed back to the children of Israel anciently and saw how pure and holy the ministers of the sanctuary had to be, because they were brought by their work into a close connection with God. They that minister must be holy, pure, and without blemish, or God will destroy them. God has not changed. He is just as holy and pure, just as particular, as He ever was. Those who profess to be the ministers of Jesus should be men of experience and deep piety, and then at all times and in all places they can shed a holy influence” (Early Writings, pp.102, 103).

As with any other form of employment, a pastor’s employers have a right to expect the pastor to earn his paycheck through the accomplishment of certain predetermined duties, and if those duties are not fulfilled they have the right to terminate the employment. Such a termination does not conflict with our assertion in a previous post that there is no such thing as an expendable soul, because terminating a pastor’s employment in no way impacts his standing as a regular member of the church or implies that he is no longer welcome to be active in outreach. The only thing that changes (assuming the termination was for ineffectiveness rather than some sort of moral or ethical transgression) is that the former pastor is no longer paid for his efforts and must therefore have some other source of income.

“Those who give themselves to the ministry of the Word enter a most important work. Some have made a mistake in receiving ministerial credentials. They ought to take up work for which they are better adapted. Their efforts are feeble, and they should not continue to receive pay from the tithe. In many ways the ministry is losing its sacred character” (Review and Herald, October 6, 1904 par. 17).

Our point here is not that we are, or should be, “out to get” pastors—we are simply saying that with pastors the stakes (and therefore the consequences) are higher. We have no problem with Borden’s approach of assuming the best in pastors until proven otherwise. (In fact, we believe this principle should be applied to all people, but that’s straying into the topic of our next post.) What we do take issue with is Borden’s concept of “protecting” pastors, as the behaviors he recommends for accomplishing this goal often require treating lay members badly. He goes so far as to refer to pastors leading congregations through change as “velvet covered bricks” (p.120). This hardly strikes us as modeling Christ-like behavior to a congregation.

“Do not lead with harshness and severity, but with respect, kindness, confidence, and love.--You do not feel under sound obligation to God to be patient and kind and respectful toward your ministering brethren and toward every member of the church. They lose confidence in you and then your influence is crippled. You need the kindness, courtesy, meekness, and lowliness of Christ. You have many valuable qualifications that can be perfected for highest service if sanctified to God. You should feel the necessity of approaching your brethren with kindness and courtesy, not with harshness and severity. You do not realize the harm you do by your sharp, domineering spirit toward them.--EGW'88 245” (Pastoral Ministry, p.53).

“There is a most fearful, fatal deception upon human minds. Because men are in positions of trust, connected with the work of God, they are exalted in their own estimation, and do not discern that other souls, fully as precious in the sight of God as their own, are neglected, and handled roughly, and bruised, and wounded, and left to die” (Testimonies to Ministers, pp. 357, 358).

Then, of course, there is the question of whether a pastor acting in accordance with God’s will would really need human protection.

“That same night the LORD said to him, ‘Take the second bull from your father's herd, the one seven years old. Tear down your father's altar to Baal and cut down the Asherah pole beside it. Then build a proper kind of altar to the LORD your God on the top of this height. Using the wood of the Asherah pole that you cut down, offer the second bull as a burnt offering.’

“So Gideon took ten of his servants and did as the LORD told him. But because he was afraid of his family and the men of the town, he did it at night rather than in the daytime.

“In the morning when the men of the town got up, there was Baal's altar, demolished, with the Asherah pole beside it cut down and the second bull sacrificed on the newly built altar!

“They asked each other, ‘Who did this?’ “When they carefully investigated, they were told, ‘Gideon son of Joash did it.’

“The men of the town demanded of Joash, ‘Bring out your son. He must die, because he has broken down Baal's altar and cut down the Asherah pole beside it.’

“But Joash replied to the hostile crowd around him, ‘Are you going to plead Baal's cause? Are you trying to save him? Whoever fights for him shall be put to death by morning! If Baal really is a god, he can defend himself when someone breaks down his altar.’ So that day they called Gideon ‘Jerub-Baal,’ saying, ‘Let Baal contend with him,’ because he broke down Baal's altar” (Judges 6:25-32).

When religious conflict arises it is not God or His servants who need human protection, but rather the human systems that have been set up in opposition to God.