(Note:
Although I believe in politically correct speech, it sometimes makes writing
difficult. So please read clergyman [clergymen] as referring to the ordained of
both genders.)
In
the first congregation I served, the Sunday school's treasury was always larger
than the church's and often I had to appeal to the superintendent (who was also
lay-leader) for money to cover current expenses. In return for his largess, I
was expected to visit him and his family at least once a week, the parsonage
family to dine with his at least once a month, seek his advice and counsel on
all matters of church business, and graciously receive his weekly critiques on
my sermons and consider seriously his suggestions for those in the future.
Because
the clergyman is the most visible person within a congregation, he may be
believed to be the person in charge, that he makes all of the significant
decisions concerning not only the religious life of his congregants but also
all of the important administrative decisions. Because of this assumption, he
is the first to be blamed when things go awry. This apparent authority is
almost always a paper tiger; the clergy are more often pawns of limited power
and authority controlled by one or more others who often have a profound
influence over the clergyman's present and future success.
Most
Protestant clergy are allowed, even encouraged, to marry. And as an inducement
most local churches provide housing and other kinds of financial support for
the clergyman and his family. In the main, this support comes from the
voluntary contributions of the members of the congregation. A happy and content
congregation is most often a generous congregation. On the other hand, an
unhappy congregation (or displeased power behind the pulpit) can purposely
impoverish the parsonage family. Because of this, clergy must avoid preaching
controversial sermons and clothe the often-discomforting demands of the Gospel
in palatable terms, (My homiletics professor referred to these as 'feel good
sermons' designed to make the congregation feel superior to those outside of
their fellowship.)
In
all congregations there is always at least 'one tail that wags the dog', one
person (or clique) that wields power over the minister. He or she may be the
most generous donor, be chairperson of the most powerful committee, leader of
the most influential group of the preacher's supporters or adversaries, member
of the 'founding family', or may manage the affairs of the church so covertly
that he or she is invisible to both the pastor and congregation. In a strict
connectional system this power may be within the hierarchy outside of the local
church. Clergy of long duration with the same congregation have probably
learned early who is the power behind their pulpit and striven to maintain good
relations with it. (I had a particular genius for alienating the powerful,
which may explain why I served five different congregations in ten years and am
no longer wearing the collar.)
(It is difficult not to
generalize when limited to just four paragraphs for a theme, so may I remind
the reader of Oz's Rule: There are exceptions to every rule of human behavior.)
No comments:
Post a Comment