Editorial
March/April, 1975
Volume 10, Number 2
The ordained ministry within the Church of the Brethren consisted historically of a system known as the plural free ministry. Each congregation was served by more than one ordained man who earned their livelihood at regular occupations and gave their service to the church without charge. This was the general practice of the Church of the Brethren for more than two hundred years. The long “preachers’ benches” in some of our older meetinghouses are a lingering testimony to the plurality of ministers. Kermit Eby wrote, “Brethren ministers …. like the rabbis of old, were workers as well as spiritual leaders” (page 225, For Brethren Only).
Today (with the exception of a relatively few congregations) the Church of the Brethren has gone through a period of transition from the plural free ministry system to the singular, salaried, and formally educated ministry. There are those who would make light of our former practice and portray the free ministry as an unworkable, antique system. They say it is inapplicable in our changing culture. And we recognize that there is no system without its dangers and the possibility of abuse. But we believe that the plural non-salaried ministry is not only the scriptural ideal, but that it is also entirely workable even in this day of modem technology and secularization. In fact, in a day when some Brotherhood staff members are even daring to suggest that some of our smaller Church of the Brethren congregations should close their doors (see page 34, Brethren Life and Thought, Winter, 1975) — we believe that a new emphasis on the non-salaried ministry is entirely in order.
While the stress of the present editorial (and of the feature article by Brother James Myer) is on the benefits of the non-salaried plural ministry, this is not to say that there are no dedicated men of God who are serving in the singular pastoral capacity. Indeed there are such persons, and we pray God’s continued blessing upon their labors.
Benefits of the Plural
Non-Salaried Ministry
by James F. Myer
The Church of Jesus Christ needs good ministerial leadership. Until recent times the Church of the Brethren emphasized strongly the plural, non-salaried ministry as the best all-around approach to serving the church. But with wide-spread educational emphasis, and a so-called need for the ministry to provide professional services, the denomination has turned toward a highly trained clergy. Currently the structure of the church from local districts to top brotherhood levels is set up almost exclusively for the promotion and perpetuation of the professional ministry.
Some of us believe that the trend away from the traditional “free” ministry (and subsequently the “elders” and “elders body”) has been a mistake. The professional ministry has not been the answer it was supposed to be. We have witnessed a growing crisis in the ministry (in the Church of the Brethren), ever since the emphasis has been in the direction of professionalizing the ministry. This fact, plus an ever-declining membership in our church, should cause us to at least be willing to look at some of the benefits of the plural non-salaried ministry, to see if this form of ministry might not after all be valuable today.
I. THE BIBLICAL BASIS FOR THE PLURAL NONSALARIED MINISTRY
Early in his ministry, Jesus called the twelve disciples around him for the purpose of preparing them for a team ministry. After an intense period of teaching them, he began to send them forth by two and two (Mark 6:7). The sending of the seventy was done in a similar manner, but with an added note -he sent them “whither he himself would come” (Luke 10: 1). It is not likely that Jesus would have sent a young man, fresh out of seminary, to be the sole spiritual shepherd in a congregation.
The Book of Acts is replete with evidence of plurality in the ministry. Barnabas took Mark, and Paul chose Silas at the beginning of the missionary move into Europe. The Word is very clear that they ordained elders (note the plural) in every church (Acts 14:23). In the Epistles, Titus was told to ordain elders (plural) in every city (Titus 1:5).
The non-salaried ministry is not to be equated with a nonsupported ministry. For this purpose a frequent use of the term “free” ministry is avoided, because it wrongly implies that the church has no financial obligations toward its ministers. In most “free ministry” churches some (often unofficial) remuneration is given for services which are performed. But this usually is without any kind of price-fixing or wage-bargaining agreements. Paul was fluid on this matter. He received some wages (2 Corinthians 11:8), but he also worked with his hands in order to be chargeable to no man (2 Corinthians 11:9). His tentmaking activity was carried on along with a very active ministry (Acts 18:3). His earnings went beyond his own needs and even helped to support others (Acts 20:34). His employment, at least at times, was regular and extensive. According to Acts 28:30, Paul dwelled two whole years in his own hired house (a house paid at his own expense).
When Jesus sent out the disciples, he clearly said “Carry neither purse”. While this suggests that they were to depend on local support for daily sustenance, it also suggests that they were not to walk around with large money reserves, nor with fat contracts. Some preachers won’t go anywhere today without positive knowledge of a stipulated payment. Some pastoral salaries today practically eat up the entire purse of a local congregation, and very little money is left for outreach. It is difficult for a man in such a position to preach effectively about a Jesus who was born in a stable, and borrowed a penny to illustrate a sermon, and had nowhere to lay his head, and whose estate settlement involved only one set of clothing. The provision is not found in Scripture for the minister to amass huge estates and live in Hollywood style and bargain for retirement benefits.
II. THE BENEFITS OF THE PLURAL MINISTRY
By “plural” we simply mean “more than one.” We are aware that this is not always possible, especially in small churches. But where it is possible, there are numerous benefits. These benefits center in the areas of variety and permanency.
“Variety is the spice of life” is a phrase that befits many situations, including ministerial leadership in the church. Few ministers (if any) have matured in all areas sufficiently so as to give just as comprehensive a leadership singlehandedly, as is possible under a team ministry. All ministers have some points that are stronger than others. Some have special preaching abilities. Some have special talents in visitation. Some, are exceptional administrators. Others are excellent teachers. It is very obvious that when a team is brought
together where each functions according to his special ability, it is more likely that a well rounded leadership pattern will develop.
A variety of convictions and viewpoints is also a benefit. A congregation needs a balanced diet of preaching and teaching, if it is to grow to maturity. We believe it is essential for ministers to agree on certain fundamental areas of scriptural truth, but at the same time each in his own way will emphasize points about which he has strong personal convictions. Some may emphasize the need for discipline in the local church. Some may emphasize the need to be outgoing and evangelistic. Some may emphasize theology and doctrine. Others may emphasize the more practical side. Certainly, hearing a variety of convictions and viewpoints based on an acceptance of the basic tenets of the Christian faith, is more healthy than hearing an exclusively one-sided view. Even chocolate candy seems to lose its best taste if one eats some of the same kind every day.
With this variety in ability, age and viewpoint among the ministers, a sharing of responsibilities will occur. Thus, as the younger men are called, they can give themselves to study and preaching, while the older ministers can give themselves to administrative duties and can care for many of the visitation and counseling needs. This enables the younger minister to grow into greater responsibility, under the guidance of seasoned leaders. Too often when a young man assumes a full-time pastorate, he refuses to consult and use the local experienced ministers. Consequently they are shelved with little opportunity to contribute to the ministerial work of the congregation. This, however, is not always the pastor’s fault. Some congregations are very sensitive about anyone else assuming part of the leadership after a contract is finalized. The plural ministry, however, can provide what many pastors are calling for today — and that is a “pastor to pastors.” Advice, encouragement, and counsel become a mutual experience between the several ministers of a congregation, as different aspects of the work are evaluated and shared.
The plural ministry also tends to encourage better family life for the minister. Since “the free minister” is not the only minister in the congregation, he is not the sole person called upon to give spiritual advice for the various needs that arise in the church. Hence his schedule is not as demanding, and more time can be spent at home with the family. This consideration is of utmost importance in light of a current marital and moral crisis in many ministers’ homes. The moral problem is enhanced because pastors do most of their visiting by themselves, often with members of the opposite sex whose husbands are away at work. It is not by accident that Jesus sent them out by two and two.
Another real benefit of the plural ministry is its permanency. This is true because usually this type ministry involves local persons. As the older ministers pass away, the congregation responds and calls another to carry on the work. These men usually are not inclined to move from the community, and frequently will serve out their entire ministry in the same congregation. This eliminates the need for considerable congregational adjustment as ministers come and go. It is a fallacy to think that ministers cannot have a long-term successful period of service in the same congregation. Too many pastors have been misled into thinking that after a few years of service, they have taken the congregation as far as they can. And so they move on, only to learn that their successor has some basic weaknesses, and as a result the group is deteriorating instead of progressing spiritually
It is no secret that some ministers move around because their own record is not too favorable. There may be moral problems or a variety of incompetencies. Sometimes there are personality conflicts that could not be well-known before the pastorate was established. At any rate this potential problem is usually eliminated when a congregation calls a local person whose background, life, and abilities are well known. A congregation that initiates the call becomes a highly supportive body from the very beginning of the licentiate’s time of service.
Along with the move away from the plural, local, free-will ministry, several years ago there came the elimination of what was known in each district as the “elders body.” This group of seasoned ministers, commissioned to care for the problems and ongoing needs of the ministry, was marked by strength, stability, and continuity. No group has effectively taken the place of this body. The strength of the ministry in the Church of the Brethren is deteriorating as a result. The disciplining of ministers who transgressed was once handled with wisdom by this group. Now such action rests heavily on the shoulders of district executives. As a result ministers needing discipline and correction, are seldom approached. Some executives are expressing a need for a support body to rely upon when meeting such critical problems. Usually ministry commissions do not have the depth of understanding to deal effectively with such situations.
III. THE BENEFITS OF THE NONSALARIED MINISTRY
Brethren have always held the view of the priesthood of all believers. In fact, the existence of the “high” clerical ministry in Europe was part of the basis of the resistance movement which led to the formation of our church. The highly trained ministry tends to project the image that it is only those with a particular training who are eligible to preach the Word, lead in worship, and minister to various needs. The move toward the professional ministry today is leading us back to the very thing that our founding fathers rejected.
“He’s getting paid for it, let him do the work,” is a phrase too common to deny its implications. The sentence may not always be expressed verbally, but deep down it often is the deciding urge that causes people to back off from taking responsibility in the church. When the minister works in some form of employment, along with serving in the pulpit, there is a greater challenge for others to share in the work of the church. Hospital visiting, senior citizen care, committee organization, and much detail work is then no longer considered the minister’s major responsibility. He is not looked upon to lead, for example, at all prayer meeting sessions, and thus others are called to share in the experience of ministering the Word of God. The non-salaried minister is usually not looked upon to be an official errand boy for all church functions.
The non-salaried ministry serves to require the existence of a strong deacon board. The office of deacon as an important function has deteriorated in recent years. Some deacons have felt unqualified to serve alongside a highly trained minister. And yet, this denies what the Spirit of God is able to do with yielded lives who have not had the benefit of sophisticated training. The helpers whom Jesus called were not from the highly trained schools of the Rabbis. He selected men from the common walks of life. Deacons were called (in Acts 6) so that preachers could give themselves continually to prayer and the ministry of the Word.
The tentmaking ministry also helps to identify with the working people of a congregation. One is more in touch with real life situations and is more aware of the struggles of the workaday world. This serves to make his ministry more practical. His ministry will not only be a study and pulpit exercise, but he will be down where the people are struggling and sweating and swearing. His life from such a view will be seen with greater impression, than when viewed almost exclusively from the pulpit. A minister’s calluses and overalls do some preaching also.
There are currently several congregations across our Brotherhood which function effectively under the plural, nonsalaried ministry. Their abiding strength proves that with changing times this pattern of ministry is relevant to current needs. In fact, this writer believes that when all aspects are considered, the plural non-salaried ministry is less troublesome and more in keeping with the Word of God than the professional ministry. We are not saying that it is without problems or shortcomings. Sometimes the pursuit of a livelihood limits the time and resources which should be going toward the work of the ministry.
We believe it is time for the Church of the Brethren to take another look at the benefits of the plural free ministry. And to enable this, we challenge our Brotherhood to consider and act in the following four areas:
1. Recognize, encourage, and promote the plural, nonsalaried ministry as a valid form to be adopted.
2. Establish a body of local ordained ministers in each district to function as the former “elders body” once functioned.
3. Encourage local congregations to regularly elect ministers as directed by the Holy Spirit.
4. Have nominations and assignments for district, brotherhood, and Annual Conference offices include more names from the plural, non-salaried ministry.
Adapted from a recent article in Brethren Life and Thought. Used by permission.
