Editorial

The clergy-laity gap

This does not mean that these churches did not have strong leaders. Each church usually had several ordained "ministers" who shared the preaching and leadership responsibilities. These men could understand the needs of their congregations because they had the same occupation and way of life. They also had the same Bible education as many in their congregations--a few winters of study at a Bible school in the local MB church, taught by perhaps only one or two Bible teachers. They often had tremendous moral influence; they were respected for the heavy burden they took on, not only without pay but also often at the sacrifice of the prosperity of their own farms; because of the respect given to them, they could change the direction of a church business meeting with a single comment from the floor. Partly because of the selfless example of these men, other members of the church also willingly volunteered to minister to each other. The church was a mutually supportive community (this was undoubtedly strengthened by the fact that Mennonite Brethren were an immigrant ethnic group, with shared experiences and needs, isolated from other neighbours by language and culture).

But this situation was probably never as idyllic as people now imagine. Some people now remember the poor quality of some sermons composed while ploughing. There was also little time or energy for outreach beyond the Mennonite ethnic community. Then, beginning in the 1950s, came a new development: paid pastors. The process had probably begun somewhat earlier, with full-time evangelists and Bible school teachers. These new pastors were trained in better Bible schools, with something approaching professional training. They were better suited to minister to the needs of congregations who were moving into the cities and becoming trained professionals themselves--teachers, doctors and businessmen. They learned to minister in English, as their congregations made the painful transition from German to English. They could reach out better to the general society around them, an increasing need in a Canadian society where Christian commitment was beginning to decline. In an increasingly busy society, they had time to do ministry. The pastors also were paid adequately for their work; they and their families did not have to suffer the financial hardships their predecessors had.

There was a down side to this generally positive development. The congregations sometimes felt inadequate compared to the professional abilities of the pastors. As they took their own professional training, fewer of them attended Bible school, so perhaps they were less able to minister. They were also busier. They didn't have time to do as much ministry, and they began to leave that to the paid pastors.

The congregation also felt inadequate compared to the professional managerial skills of the pastor, and more power (as opposed to influence) fell into the pastor's hands.

A subtle change also came about in the congregation's attitude. Instead of seeing their pastor as a godly man who volunteered to sacrificially serve them, they began to see him as an employee. He was paid well, but he was also fired when things didn't go well. Instead of acting as a servant and being treated with great respect, the reverse happened; he now sometimes did not think of himself as a servant but was more often treated as a servant, given little respect or consideration. The pastor, while paid better than before, sometimes still made real sacrifices--lower wages than he could earn in another profession, long hours and the burden of pastoral care--sacrifices which were often overlooked by the congregation, who sometimes thought the only support they owed him was his salary.

The process continued. As churches grew in size and affluence, the senior pastor was joined by a paid youth pastor, a paid Christian education director and perhaps a paid worship pastor. All brought gifts and improved ministry to the church, but they also strengthened the growing gap between the clergy and laity, the paid professionals who did the ministry and the critical, frustrated consumers in the pew. Then, an even stranger thing happened. Churches grew even larger and wealthier. They added even more staff. But times had changed. People no longer worked at a single profession, but often put together a number of part-time activities, or moved back and forth between professions. Women became more active in the workforce, often on a part-time basis. As schools became more expensive, people took part-time jobs to support their studies.

The effect on the church was that the pendulum began to swing back the other way. The line between clergy and laity began to blur again. As the Herald

has continued to report pastoral changes in its Personalia column, we have found it more difficult to decide who to include. There are many more part-time pastors: interns, women's ministry leaders, Christian education directors. The church youth group that grew large enough to require a full-time youth pastor has now grown large enough to require a full-time youth pastor and

several "volunteer youth sponsors" and perhaps an intern or two. The music pastor no longer leads a volunteer choir accompanied by a single pianist. He is now assisted by worship teams composed of singers, guitarists, drummers and actors. Retirees are taking up part-time positions as seniors' pastors and visitation pastors. Some "pastors" are no longer paid, while some "laypeople" receive a church salary.

Some people are moving into the pastorate in mid-life after a career in teaching or business; other pastors are moving into secular, counselling or charitable organization jobs after a number of years in the pastorate. In increasingly large congregations in an increasingly varied and mobile society, the pastors now realize they cannot minister to or even know all of the members and adherents in their congregations. The actual pastoral care is being passed on to "lay" care group leaders, overseen by "lay" elders.

As congregations become larger and more complex in a larger and more complex society, church councils are being replaced by boards of elders. The elders are not just elected but discerned, often after a lengthy process of interviews, and ratified by an 80% vote as pastors are. The new churches are run by elders' boards in which paid pastors and "lay" elders sit as equals. In fact, some members of the paid pastoral staff do not sit on the elders' board.

Pastors (in the spirit of the much-quoted Ephesians 4:11-13) are beginning to see themselves as the coaches who prepare their congregational members to do the real ministry, often out in the world (in their jobs and community involvements) rather than in the church building.

Strangely, the larger churches, where these trends are becoming most prominent, are beginning to see themselves as communities again, where all Christians, clergy and laity, work together to serve God, minister to each other and reach out to the needy around them. (It is now more often the middle-sized churches with two-to-four pastors that seem to struggle more with the clergy-laity gap and to hire and fire pastors with regularity.) O

ver the years, the church has adapted to changing circumstances, needs and opportunities. Often the changes have brought increased efficiency and greater ministry. Often they have also brought confusion and frustration, as people, even those people leading the way, have not fully understood what was happening. Through it all, however, some principles have remained: the need for godly leadership; the need for the church to be a community; the need for voluntary sacrificial service of Christ (by paid and unpaid church workers); the need for all work and interaction in the church to be carried on in a spirit of love and compassion; the need for submission to Christ and also to one another; the need for humility; the need for forgiveness; the need for wisdom and discernment.

Jim Coggins