Do we really need the clergy?
The Church of England is currently engaged in word and action which is pulling in rather different directions in relation to the importance of its clergy, and these debates were exemplified in the latest meeting of the General Synod in York over the weekend.
One of last debates, held on Tuesday morning, concerned the follow-up to the 2022 reportSetting God'due south People Free (SGPF). The report was commissioned by the Archbishops' Council as function of theRenewal and Reform programme, and it was led past Council member Matthew Frost, who had formerly been the Main Executive of TEAR Fund. The overall aim of the study, which has generated a plan of activity across the Church, was to recognise that the 'church' is really comprised of all Christians, not just as they gather together to worship on a Sunday, but as they become about their daily occupations Monday to Saturday. Information technology emphasises that 'lay ministry' isnon primarily nigh lay people doing things in Sun services, simply engaging in discipleship in all the places God has put them. It does include a careful balancing of the role of clergy and lay, as set out in its introduction:
- It calls for a shift in civilization – non a narrow, centrally driven strategy.
- It looks beyond and exterior Church structures to the whole people of God at work in communities and wider society – not to 'fixing' the institutional Church building.
- It seeks to affirm and enable the complementary roles and vocations of clergy and of lay people, grounded in our common baptism – non to blur or undermine these distinctions.
- It proposes steps to nourish, illuminate and connect what is working already in and through frontline parishes – not to institute a summit down arroyo.
- Information technology aims to run across confident involvement, engagement and leadership of lay people wherever they are called to serve – not to devise lay alternatives to clergy.
This vision is careful not to dismiss the function of clergy, but it is very unlike from some highly clericalised views of the Church that still exist, such as that of Linda Woodhead who, in a critique of the wholeRenewal and Reformprocess at its inception, stated that, if 'all regular Lord's day worshippers disappeared overnight…the Church would remain, and its most influential activities could continue.' It also sits slightly uncomfortably with more 'sacramental' views of ordination, which run into the ordained ministry as somehow constitutive of the Church itself. In a supporting paper on the SGPF web page, Pete Wilcox, the bishop of Sheffield, in a really interesting paper 'Permit the Service Begin' on the biblical understanding of worship, ministry building and piece of work, makes this comment on Jesus' ministry as depicted in Mark i:
I dislike hearing the word 'ministry' used as a shorthand for 'ordained ministry'. People still sometimes say, 'They're going into the ministry'. No! Ministry is service, and information technology's expected of every fellow member of the people of God. If yous are baptised, you are by default a minister in Christ'southward service. Ordained ministry is just one possible outworking of that baptismal obligation.
At least 2 other major discussions besides pulled away from what we might call 'clerical exceptionalism'. One was the extended and vital discussion almost safeguarding. This session of Synod reserved a special time for questions almost safeguarding to be taken separated from questions on other subjects, and there was a presentation and word on safeguarding led by Peter Hancock, bishop of Bath and Wells, who is the national pb on this, and Phil Johnson, an abuse survivor. The repeated message from this discussion was that the Church must rid itself of clericalism and a 'culture of deference' to this in authority, whether that was in relation to clergy in parishes or bishops in their dioceses. Respect for authorisation must not give infinite for the failure to challenge and ask questions which has allowed abuse to proceed unchecked.
A third strand was the discussion well-nigh 'fresh expressions' of church, 15 years on from the beginning presentation of the report Mission-shaped Church that came to Synod in 2004 (when I was previously a member) and marked the formal recognition of the value of church planting and not-traditional forms of coming together equally a meaning role of church growth, mission and evangelism. In response to the debate on Monday, Martyn Snow, bishop of Leicester, posted an extended comment on Facebook:
I believe fervently that the Fresh Expressions movement is the unmarried most significant development in the church in this country for decades. Having talked for many years virtually the importance of evangelism and the 're-conversion of our nation', this predominantly lay move, has quietly got on with the task. Eschewing the big events, mass publicity and big spending of some initiatives, the motion is instruction us about what Pope Francis calls 'The Church'southward Missionary Transformation'. This wonderfully cryptic phrase – is the church the agent of the transformation of others or is information technology the subject area of transformation – leads me to suggest that there are three specific lessons for the wider church.
Firstly, this is predominantly a lay motility. Fresh expressions of church offer us a living model of what tin happen when God's people are gear up gratis to be leaders in mission, when clergy and lay work in partnership, with a genuine sharing of gifts and truthful mutuality. Clergy are set costless to be enablers of others – lay people are set free to use their God-given gifts, and their feel in networks outside the church. Both are needed.
At a time when the church is being forced to recognise the very damaging effects of clericalism – where a civilisation of deference has contributed to abuse, and difficulties in the reporting of abuse, and the poor response to the reporting of abuse – our recognition of lay ministry needs to be more a patronising, 'isn't that interesting'. Nosotros simply must find ways of learning from fresh expressions and enabling their arroyo to ministry building to shape that of the wider church.
In response to an observation I made on the thread, Martyn offered further comment:
More and more than, I am convinced that the role of clergy is to enable the ministry of others, but we struggle to do this for a whole mix of reasons. Unless and until the clergy are set up gratis to do this, lay ministry volition ever been seen as 'helping the clergy' rather than valid in its own right.
On the other hand, there were a number of strands in the Synod session, reflecting other work going on, which seemed to put the focus more on clergy and their importance. One was the proposed Clergy Covenant, responding to concerns about clergy welfare and the challenges and pressures clergy face up, which has been interpreted in some quarters equally suggesting that clergy are distinct from laity in having unique needs which require special and unusual attention. The other strand is the focus on the role of clergy in church growth: one of the major goals promoted by Archbishops' Council the growth of numbers entering ordination training, with a target of a net increase of 50% over a five-year period. This is significant not to the lowest degree for its touch on on national budgets; ordination training is a major component of the national central budget, and therefore has a direct impact on what is asked for from the diocesans in terms of national 'apportionment', that is, financial demand. If lay ministry is so of import, and lay-led 'fresh expressions' are the central to growth, why this emphasis on clergy numbers? The uncomplicated reply: research has shown that the number of stipendiary ministers (who volition unremarkably be ordained) has a straight affect on church attendance. If yous want the church to grow, then appoint more clergy.
How might we resolve these tensions? Key to this volition be to render to biblical reflection on the part and status of leaders in the church. Nosotros need to practice this because of the mythology that all besides frequently springs up in relation to the condition of clergy. I thought this example, from Peter Leithart of the Theopolis Institute, fascinating. He defends the importance of wearing clerical collars on two primary grounds: first, the biblical theology of dress as a marker of part; and 2d, for the clerical collar as expressing a Pauline theology of leaders as 'slaves of Christ'. On the first, I don't think such a theology actually exists in Scripture, and Peter doesn't offer any show of it—too, clergy don't appear to accept had distinctive dress until around the sixth century, then this certainly wasn't evident to the early church. On the 2nd, this is shear invention; the clerical neckband in its mod form was invented in 1865, and was derived from the earlier wearing of a white cravat, which was the full general practise of gentlemen. So, rather ironically, the roots of this are to make the clergy alloy in to the gentlemen class, rather than stand out from it!
My reading of the information of the New Testament agrees in large part with Martyn Snow'south. I regularly cite the compelling study of Robert Banks,Paul'southward Idea of Customs, in which he notes the distinctive dissimilarity in the New Testament organized religion communities compared with both the Old Testament patterns of ministry and pagan religion in the surrounding earth:
Paul's dissolution of traditional distinctions: between priest and laity
Within the church building, distinctions between priest and layman, mediatorial and common service, cultic ritual and secular activeness, do not and cannot be…
Between officials and ordinary members
Paul rejects the idea of certain members of the customs possessing formal rights and powers…
Between holy men and mutual people
Paul has no place in his view of customs for the traditional distinctions between its members along cultic, official or religious lines… (Paul's Idea of Customs chapter xiii)
There are several key texts which support both the unified nature of the community of Jesus-followers (theekklesia, which does not accept the institutional overtones that become with our word 'church'), the almost of import of which is probably 1 Corinthians 12–xiv which centre around Paul's chief metaphor of believers every bit the 'body of Christ'. The relation of leaders to others in the customs is elucidated, in terms that Martyn Snowfall expresses, in Ephesians 4.11–13:
So Christ himself gave the apostles, the prophets, the evangelists, the pastors and teachers, to equip his people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until nosotros all reach unity in the religion and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.
So ministry is indeed the work of the whole people of God, and there are those who are set apart for particular kinds of ministry, and these are non to be an finish in themselves, simply are to equip all God's people so that they might accomplish maturity. All this is within a 'single status' community without 'ontological' divisions of identity and rank.
These relationships are expressed in narrative form in Acts. The shape of Acts traces the way that the early Jesus movement shifts from a focus on the renewal of the Jewish people of God to being a largely Gentile religious movement, and a key moment in this is the establishment of a Jesus customs in Antioch 'where the disciples were offset called 'Christians" (Acts 11.26). But this came about, not through apostolic church planting, but through a natural 'lay' movement (though note that the distinction between 'lay' and 'clergy' is something that the NT does not recognise).
Now those who had been scattered by the persecution that broke out when Stephen was killed traveled as far as Phoenicia, Cyprus and Antioch, spreading the word simply among Jews. Some of them, however, men from Republic of cyprus and Cyrene, went to Antioch and began to speak to Greeks also, telling them the good news virtually the Lord Jesus. The Lord's paw was with them, and a great number of people believed and turned to the Lord. (Acts 11.nineteen–21)
Hither, it seems, is the original lay-led 'fresh expression' of church! Yet the immediate response of the believers in Jerusalem is to sent Barnabas to Antioch, and he takes Paul with him, in order (every bit per Ephesians iv) to equip and build up the believers there so that they might grow into maturity.
But information technology is very striking in Acts that, along with the emphasis on the ministry of 'ordinary' believers, and the mode in which apostles and other leaders support and equip 'ordinary' believers, the leaders also accept a distinctive ministry building of pioneering, declaration, and church planting themselves. This adds a third layer to Luke's narrative depiction of ministry—one which has importance in its own right, though without being congenital on a clergy/lay distinction, without 'ontological' distinction, and without suggesting that in whatever sense these leaders 'constitute' the church.
Perhaps we do need clergy after all—though not always in the means that are suggested.
If yous enjoyed this, do share information technology on social media, possibly using the buttons on the left. Follow me on Twitter @psephizo.Similar my folio on Facebook.
Much of my piece of work is done on a freelance basis. If you have valued this post, would you consideraltruistic £1.20 a month to support the production of this weblog?
If you enjoyed this, do share information technology on social media (Facebook or Twitter) using the buttons on the left. Follow me on Twitter @psephizo. Like my page on Facebook.
Much of my work is done on a freelance basis. If you lot have valued this post, you tin can make a single or echo donation through PayPal:
Comments policy: Good comments that engage with the content of the post, and share in respectful fence, can add existent value. Seek showtime to empathize, then to exist understood. Make the about charitable construal of the views of others and seek to larn from their perspectives. Don't view argue as a conflict to win; address the argument rather than tackling the person.
Source: https://www.psephizo.com/life-ministry/do-we-really-need-the-clergy/
Postar um comentário for "Do we really need the clergy?"