How much work should be expected from a pastor?

Since I was quoted by Rob, below (I was the one who responded to "Anonymous #2," which in Rob's cut-n-paste from the blog, is really Anonymous #1), I guess I'll offer my thoughts on this issue. I don't know if I will answer the question, How much work should be expected from a pastor?, but, as a result of a fairly great deal of business travel, attendance at District Conventions and various Free Conferences, and the like, I have made a few observations regarding WELS pastors' attitudes toward ministerial labor on behalf of the congregation. Of course, this is anecdotal evidence, so should be taken with a grain of salt, but maybe these observations resonate with others who frequent this board.

Attitude #1: Pastor as Omni-minister. In my observations, this either occurs when (a) the congregation assumes that the Pastor is the only individual qualified to be Pastor, Teacher, Evangelist, etc., and forces the pastor to do everything, or, (b) when there is legitimately no one else in the congregation qualified to meaningfully participate in these forms of Public Ministry, forcing the pastor to shoulder all of these responsibilities. In every case I have encountered, when speaking with the pastors or the congregation members involved, they have indicated that their congregation was in the throes of a miserable and slow death. They have all been rural congregations.

My understanding from my current pastor is that, in many ways, this idea is a holdover from Pioneer Era American Lutheranism, when the Pastor was, quite seriously, the only one educated beyond the 8th grade, perhaps in the region, and quite literally the only one qualified to fill these ministry roles. He was responsible for multiple congregations, rode a circuit on horseback, knew everyone in the territory, and was responsible for personally performing nearly all ministerial work for the various congregations under his care. Such Pastors were quite motivated, it seems, and they generally had the luxury of polite reception when they visited people and enjoyed almost universal reverence of their position as Called Workers. Over time, these early congregations formed their organizational structures and procedures around the idea that the Pastor is the only one who does the work, and in this way have passed this same idea to following generations -- more as an organizational artifact than anything else. In my experience, these older rural congregations, by and large, seem to be the ones that are in trouble.

Attitude #2: Everyone is a Minister. To reinforce John's observation, yes, I have perceived some definite problems related to this attitude. But first, let me make clear, I am not one of those who insists that the "laity" are to do nothing more than sit stationary like dung on log while the "clergy" run about as the only bona fide ministers in Christendom. And here I make a quasi-Catholic distinction between Laity and Clergy, as if seminary training bestows ministerial right or privilege by some sort of pseudo- apostolic succession. Luther is said to have abolished the laity. By my reading of Scripture, this is true: all Christians are Priests in the Order of the Universal Priesthood of All Believers. By definition, therefore, all believers, as Priests, perform ministerial function. Further, to be a Disciple of Christ is, by definition, to heed His call, to be Fishers of Men, placing all Christians squarely in the ministry of evangelism. Further still, true and undefiled religion is defined by St. James as care for those in need, like widows and orphans, placing all Christians squarely in the ministry of serving others for the sake of Christ. I suppose I could go on, but that would be unnecessary. I don't think there can be any question, that all Believers are, indeed, ministers. The question is one of context. Certainly, in the context of their personal lives, all Christians are "Ministers." However, does this mean they are therefore "Ministers" in the context of the congregation? My reading of the Scriptures indicates a fairly clear answer on this as well. The answer is "No." Whether one favors the Missouri or Wisconsin position on Church and Ministry, I think that it is fairly clear from Scripture that no one is a "Minister" in the context of the congregation who performs any such functions without a Divine Call. Despite my Charismatic background, I have never met anyone with a legitimate Immediate Call, but such an individual would have verifiable miracles and other such wonders attending his claim to such. For the rest of us, a Call to Ministry on behalf of others comes in the form of the Mediate Call. Such a call is extended by a calling body, like the local congregation, after such a body has identified a need, determined approval criteria, examined the qualifications of candidates who would potentially fill said need, and then, after prayerful consideration, extended a Call to the individual they feel lead to select. Public Ministers are only those who are overtly Called and Approved as such by the congregation.

And here is the problem I have perceived with the "Everybody is a minister" attitude: all too often, the Public Ministry is discussed, and ministries even identified, outside of the context of the Divine Call, leading pastors and congregations to the mistaken conclusion that individuals conducting the ministry of their personal lives are doing so under the auspices of the congregation. Personal ministry and Public Ministry are becoming confused, because everyone is a "minister" in the congregation, with or without a Divine Call. The result can be seen in the nonsense quoted by posters in one of John's recent blogs: some sadly mistaken pastor from eastern Wisconsin thinks that janitors, secretaries, baristas, etc., are Public Ministers -- he not only thinks it, but preaches it! If such is being promoted as Scripture teaching, it must certainly be doctrinal innovation. I have never read any such thing, not in the Bible, not by recognized Lutheran theologians of the past, nowhere. Individuals acting without a Divine Call have no right to call themselves Public Ministers, and, at the very least, it is disorderly to think of them as such.

Anyway, the result of this attitude, as I have observed it, is that Pastors and congregations visibly slack off, relying on -- leaching off of, really -- the work that individuals in the congregation do in the context of the ministry of their personal lives, all the while calling it the "congregation's work," when, in reality, the congregation, including the pastor, is really doing nothing, is not planning to do anything, and have called no one (other than the pastor, perhaps) to do what they claim to be doing. Naturally, as John, and others, have pointed out, the result in these situations is that the Pastor and congregation takes little organizational responsibility for ministerial tasks that have been given to the congregation in Scripture.

Attitude #3: Nobody does anything --or-- “Hyper-Fideism”. Finally, a third observation I have made over recent years concerns an abuse of the very true teaching that it is the Holy Spirit alone, working by Means of the Gospel in Word and Sacrament, Who creates and strengthens faith, teaches and reminds us of all that Christ taught, and causes the Church (Universal) to grow. The abuse begins in the form, “We are all sinners, everything we do wreaks of sin, and falls short what God expects. Nothing we do is the right thing. Yet, the Holy Spirit works through Word and Sacrament, despite our bumbling efforts, and causes the Church to grow, in His time and in His way.” So far, so good. But it continues, “Therefore, it doesn't matter what we do. The Holy Spirit will bless it. Even in our failure to do anything at all (since everything we do represents failure), the Holy Spirit will work in the interest of Christ's Bride.” Even left as it stands, I think there is room to receive such statements without offense -- actually, it is cause for great hope for a poor sinner like me!

In my experience, the abuse comes when these statements are used as an excuse to completely throw out the role of sanctified judgment in the stewardship of resources God has given the congregation -- not only over finances, but over the time and the talent that people offer to the congregation to conduct its ministry. I've personally witnessed this in a congregation I was a member of, and have seen it occur in others. All ideas, no matter how ridiculous or inefficient, are viewed as equivalent. Nothing is planned (indeed, Planning is almost viewed as a sin against the Holy Spirit). Congregational efforts are undirected and half-hearted, and there is no continuity year over year as one big idea is replaced by another, which in turn is happily displaced by no idea at all -- all because it doesn't really matter anyway. This lack of direction, with a dash of laziness, often reminds me of the slothful servant in the parable of the talents -- the one who actually thought that it was a good idea to bury the resources his Master had given him, with which he was expected to produce a return, rather than go to the effort to determine how best invest those resources in his Master's interests. Apparently, as the parable goes, the Master didn't think that all ideas were equivalent. It seems to me that this abuse of the Bible's teaching regarding the work of the Holy Spirit simply plays to man's weakness: under it, Board, Council, and Voter's meetings become social functions, congregational ministry grows sloppy, if it gets done at all, and people give up because it doesn't matter anyway. When it comes to the question of the role of human effort in a congregation's ministry, I think it is wise to remember that we are Laborers in the Master's fields, that our implements are the Means through which the Holy Spirit works, and that we are also Stewards of the resources God has given us, which He expects us to invest in the interest of employing those Means in the context of a congregation's ministry. Remembering this, I think, will give balance to the rather abusive laissez faire attitudes regarding the Holy Spirit's work, and impel congregations to consider how best to use their limited resources, that the Means of Grace and the Holy Spirit's work attending them, would be distributed more widely and more routinely. Thankfully, most congregations that I have visited do just this.

Anyway those are my thoughts and observations. Sorry if they were a little lengthy -- and I think I may have soap-boxed the last paragraph a little bit... Maybe others have more concise and helpful thoughts to offer.

Freddy Finkelstein