The Priesthood of All Believers

Wow, it has been quite a while since I have posted anything. This is a paper I wrote for one of "Work, Vocation and Ministry" course. I actually got decent feed-back on it and am still wrestling deeply with some of the issues involved. So here you go. Feel free to disagree and comment with your opinions.

            In today’s Western culture, the dignity and importance of each individual seems to be a value, which is engrained into a majority of its people. Because of this ideological trend, a theological understanding of the priesthood of all believers is as important as ever. Martin Luther writes, “All believers share this high dignity whatever their daily calling might be,” to refer to the believer’s responsibility as being a priest ministering to the people of God and the world, which is a duty shared by all Christians. Although Luther may be biblically and exegetically accurate to assume that the priestly responsibility belongs to each believer, there seems to be a misguided approach to Luther’s teaching on this matter. It is easy to make the mistake of believing that the priesthood of all believers would negate any idea of having pastoral and elderly roles (a.k.a. clergy) reserved for a few in the Church. If this doctrine is taken to its extremes, people might mistakenly interpret Luther’s words as meaning that the teaching role and administering the sacraments is a task for all people to take part in. The gifts God gives to some people to shepherd the flock become extinguished in this reaction. By expounding on Luther’s quote and theological stance, this paper will argue against the negative view of the pastoral function in the church and promote its importance. By looking at the cultural situation of Luther’s day and the one we share today, I will argue that there is room in the church for what is typically called ‘the clergy,’ although its roles and the “prestige” attached to it will need to be reexamined. In arguing for a model that maintains the clergy and laity distinction, I will defend that there is a way to keep both roles and not create a hierarchical system, which places value of one group over the other.[1]

            Before we go any further, we will need to come to an agreement of how we are going to understand Luther’s quote, mentioned above. Stevens writes, “All the people of God have experienced the inbreaking of the reign and kingdom of God. All are called to service (Eph. 4:1). All are servant/ministers (Lk. 22:27; Acts 19:22). All are empowered and gifted for service by the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:7). All are included in the royal priesthood (1 Pet. 2:5-10).”[2] Stevens writes from the stance that every member of the body of Christ is to use the gifts they are given in order to serve the body of believers and the world. Leadership is not to be understood as an office but the appointment of multiple people (from the larger body of the church) in order to help guide and nurture the gifts of its members. [3] There is no ontological difference between any persons within the church, regardless of their roles and gifts. This paper will understand Luther’s quote (mentioned above) as: every member of the church having a responsibility to use their God-given gifts to further the Kingdom of God on earth, regardless of their vocational careers.

            In order to grasp an understanding of why the priesthood of all believers is a foundational cornerstone of the Protestant faith, one must look at how that doctrine came into prominence. Olson writes, “Although on paper the official theology of the Roman Catholic Church was solidly anti-Pelagian and even anti-Semi-Pelagian, and although some of its leading thinkers strongly advocated Augustinian monergism, the popular theology of the church had fallen into a nonevangelical synergism”.[4] This synergistic view of soteriology was the cause for the clergy teaching the laity that they would need to earn their salvation, which was mainly done through the purchasing of indulgences. In the logic of the Reformers, if the doctrine of sola gratia et fides was not enough to bring someone to salvation, then Christ would not have been an adequate mediator between sinful humans and the Father. The Church and its clergy would assume a joint responsibility with Christ for fulfilling this mediating role and in doing so the Church would be elevated in status. The Church would be seen as a necessary mediator of grace, making her participation in the salvific act of the people equal to Christ’s sacrifice. Luther and the Reformers’ stance for the priesthood of all believers was developed through a reaction against a false soteriological teaching that was aggressively promoted by a select few who controlled the authority of interpretation. This is not to say that Luther did not find support in the New Testament but it is important to see how this doctrine was developed in a period when there was great dissatisfaction with the lethargic state of the Church.

            Although the Reformation was in part a reaction against corrupt practices and teachings of the clergy of the Catholic Church, Luther did not imagine a Church without the leadership of a few qualified people. Luther writes:

I respond that an injustice is committed when the words ‘priest,’ ‘cleric,’ ‘spiritual,’ and ‘ecclesiastic’ are transferred from all Christians to those few who have those titles in the church. The holy Scriptures make no distinction among them. It gives the names ‘minister,’ ‘servant,’ and ‘steward’ to those in our day who are proudly called popes, bishops, and lords. According to the ministry of the word this latter group ought to serve others and teach them the faith of Christ and the meaning of Christian freedom. Although it is true that we are all equally priests, we are not all able to minister and teach publicly.”[5]

            For Luther, the issue was not about whether or not there was to be a group of people who would assume an authoritative teaching role. Rather he was more concerned about the nature of these positions. Luther rejected the subordinating status of laity, which was prevalent if not systemic in the Catholic Church.  Instead of getting rid of the pastoral function, Luther viewed it as an important part of the body of Christ, which was to be used to serve the body through teaching and service. The pastors and elders of the church were to be equals among the rest of the congregation and not hierarchically superior, which he observed to be the case in the Catholic model. Luther had in mind that the driving force for each person assuming a responsibility in the church would be motivated by gifting and not prestige (because each role is equally important).

            Although Luther “levels the playing field” in his church model, his radical view of the priesthood of all believers causes one to ask, “How then is someone to become a pastor or elder of a church?” Olson writes, “[Luther] affirmed the teaching office of ministers as servants trained to interpret and teach God’s Word. However, he believed that ministers ought always to be called and chosen by God’s people and not imposed upon them by a hierarchical officer of the church.”[6] Instead of a secret inner calling, which Calvin affirms, Luther believed that each congregation had the right and duty to call upon its own members to minister and teach the congregation. Because the pastor was not to be assigned from a higher authority but from the people, the pastor was to be considered as one of the congregation members, as part of the flock. The term pastor was to be a description of a person’s function in the church, not their status. Georgia Harkness writes, “There is a functional but not an essential difference between clergy and laity.”[7] One of the themes we see in Luther’s teaching is that whoever accepts the pastoral task is to serve the congregation, almost in a subservient role. Perhaps Luther understood that teachers and ministers of a congregation are susceptible to receiving higher honor than the laity, therefore he emphasized their need to be humble and not covet high status.

            The pastoral role is designated to a few by the congregation to help teach and shepherd its people in order that the whole body may better fulfill its duty to minister to the world. However, this hardly seems to be the case.  It is common to find congregations of all different denominations and cultures who uplift their clergy in a “pope-ish” fashion, while the laity are given a subservient if not demeaning status. Kraemer blames the Church for keeping it members spiritually immature by pushing an agenda of ‘implicit faith’ on the laity. As the Reformation came along, he points out that the clergy-laity distinction may have been eliminated, however it was recreated in a new way, particularly through preaching of the Gospel. He goes on to write, “This vehement stress on correct, ‘pure’ preaching as the sustaining nourishment, required a specially qualified group of bearers of this office.”[8] The emphasis of sola scriptura played a counter role against the priesthood of all believers. Because Scripture was seen as the only authoritative source in knowing the grace of God, replacing Church tradition, understanding and exegeting the Bible would require extra training. This responsibility was unable to be fulfilled in the churches, therefore it would create another schism between clergy and laity.          

            The repercussions of this split would negatively affect the laity, mainly in its ability to be Christian in all spheres of life. Kraemer observes that Christians tend to serve openly in a church setting but are unable to serve as God’s priests in the workplace.[9]  Because the clergy will always have their hands full tending to the needs of the laity, they will find their faith and work intricately connected. As work and faith become separated and compartmentalized, it becomes increasingly difficult for laypersons to find a connection between the two. Instead of considering that every part of a Christian’s life is to be an expression of their faith, “being Christian” for the average layperson becomes a two-hour ritual expressed on Sundays. As there becomes a misguided distinction that pastors do ministry through their lives while laypersons do it when they are at church, the interests and focuses of both sides inevitably create a larger schism. So, is there any hope to close this gap between the clergy and laity?

            So far we have observed that the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers was developed in reaction to the corruption of the Catholic Church. By maintaining a system of clergy among the laity, the Protestant church has accidentally reverted back to creating a clergy-laity split which they fought against. From here, we will look at how the Protestant church may keep the pastoral function and yet refrain from creating an ontologically dichotomous split, which was Luther’s vision.

The first step in closing the gap between clergy and laity in the church relies on having a view that sees the pastoral role as among the people and not apart from them. Countryman writes:

“I cannot say too often that the priesthood of the whole people is the fundamental priesthood. Even for the ordained minister, Christian priesthood still means primarily one’s exercise of the priesthood shared with the whole people. The ordained priesthood is a sacramental service offered not so much to the whole people (which would imply a stance over against the laity) as in and for that prior and more universal ministry.”[10]

            By examining the pastoral role in the church, it is to be seen as a person’s expression of the gifts that God has given them. It is easy to fall into the idea that a pastor’s ministry is more significant and important than a layperson’s, however this must not become the case. One person’s ministry might be to clean the kitchen, another person’s might be to babysit in the nursery and another person’s might be to preach. Regardless of which ministry a person’s gifts point them toward, it is imperative to see that each ministry is a person’s expression of being a priest among all believers. Each person and each ministry is furthering the Kingdom. Both clergy and lay roles must be valued equally and seen as every person’s responsibility to the body of Christ and to God.

            The next step is going to be to work on ways to direct and move the church as one body and not as split entities. Although a church might recognize theologically that a pastor is one function of the church, the pastoral role is usually highlighted, making it automatically a position given the authority to move and direct the church. Even though the pastor might be qualified to take on the task, if the church and pastor do not agree, the laity will automatically become alienated and left directionless. Jeffrey Hadden studied the rift between clergy and laity in the 1960’s-70’s revolving around social justice issues. The rift seemed to be caused by different interests between clergy and laity. He writes, “Clergy have developed a new meaning of the nature of the church but for a variety of reasons, laity have not shared in the development of this new meaning.”[11] Hadden continues his train of thought and observes that the laity lost its trust in the clergy’s use of authority to lead the church. An abolition of clergy is not what is being suggested here. What is being suggested is that the church must find a model, which allows for its people to speak up and have an influence on the direction and focus of the church. Pastors must empathize with the rest of the congregation because he/she is a part of the congregation. As the whole church decides which direction they wish to go, the pastor is part of that movement. The pastor’s role now is to continue to teach and enable the rest of the church in order for them to best fulfill their ministry duties, inside and outside of the church context, in their new direction. Pastors and laity are to work hand in hand.

            This paper has generally looked upon the problems of the clergy-laity split as a fault stemming from the clergy and their misuse of power and authority. However true this observance might be, the clergy is not to receive full blame for this problem. There is as much blame to be pointed towards the laity. Richard Christopherson studied the importance of “calling” in the life of clergy people and indicates that the clerical role is commonly viewed in terms of job description. Christopherson writes, “Clergy talk about the authority they are granted when they display knowledge, skill and usefulness in managing the everyday life of the church. Their leadership role within the priesthood of all believers is enhanced to the extent that their work pleases the laity.”[12] As churches hire people with seminary degrees to fill a need in the church, the role a pastor plays in the life of the congregation is reduced to a business transaction. The role of the pastor as a member of the priesthood of all believers is no longer relevant, the pastor becomes a religious mercenary. Churches need to look back upon Luther’s words and see that pastors are to be chosen from the congregation and not transplanted from the outside. This would require for churches to foster an environment that allows for the flourishing of all types of gifts. The body of believers also has to take up the responsibility to point out and affirm the gifts of its congregation members, particularly that of pastor. The pastoral function is united with all the other functions of the body only if the congregation allows it to be. If the church is willing to recognize and train their own pastors, there is great potential for the life of the church to flourish.

            Luther envisioned the church as a body of believers who come together to express their gifts in service to one another. As the priesthood of all believers gather to equally share their talents in ministry, this also involves the pastoral function. Although the church has experienced poor clergy-laity models, this is not a good enough reason to diminish the pastoral function. The church (clergy and laity) is going to have to come together and reexamine its attitude and see how it views the individual roles people have in the life of the church. When Luther wrote, “All believers share this high dignity whatever their daily calling might be,” he had in mind that pastors and lay-people would serve the body together in humility. Only time will tell if the clergy and laity can share the same dignity and amount of responsibility in ushering in the Kingdom of God.

---

[1] In this paper, the term clergy will be used synonymously with pastor (and elder) while laity is to refer to the rest of the congregation who do not assume those specific responsibilities.

[2] Stevens, R Paul. The Other Six Days: Vocation, Work, and Ministry in Biblical Perspective. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1999. 145.

[3] Ibid., 148.

[4] Olson, Roger E. The Story of Christian Theology: Twenty Centuries of Tradition & Reform. Downer Groves, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1999. 372.

[5] Luther, Martin. The Freedom of a Christian. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2008. 68-69.

[6] Olson 392. - He goes on to add that Luther allowed for the untrained believer to administer the sacraments and preach the Word in emergency situations.

[7] Harkness, Georgia E. Understanding the Kingdom of God. Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1974. 70.

[8] Kraemer, Hendrik. A Theology of the Laity. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1958. 65.

[9] Ibid., 37-38.

[10] Countryman, L W. Living on the Border of the Holy: Renewing the Priesthood of All. Harrisburg, Penn.: Morehouse Publishing, 1999. 109.

[11] Hadden, Jeffrey K. The Gathering Storm in the Churches. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday & Company Inc., 1969.

 5-6.

[12] Christopherson, Richard W. "CALLING AND CAREER IN CHRISTIAN MINISTRY." Review of Religious Research 35, no. 3 (March 1994): 219. Religion and Philosophy Collection, EBSCOhost (accessed June 17, 2011). 225

Pay It Forward

      In the Western world, especially in North America, we are suckers for stories about people who do something extraordinary things, even though we would never expect it from them. We love the stories of Mother Theresa, Nelson Mandela and many different people who sacrifice their own comfort in order to benefit their fellow man. I also am a huge sucker for these stories.

      I just recently watched Pay It Forward with Kevin Spacey, Helen Hunt and Haley Joel Osment. The movie is about a kid who is challenged by his Social-Studies teacher to do something which would change the world. In response, he decides to do great life-changing things for 3 people who would then have to go out and do something great for 3 others. This act of kindness is termed, paying it forward. Well without giving any more details about the movie which would spoil it for the rest of you (who I’m sure will run to the stores to rent it), I would just like to share that it changed the lives of people.

      Watching this movie got me thinking, “this is pretty gospelish.” There is something about this movie which seems to echo how Christians are to live and how the world just may eventually be changed. Now before you go off to rent this for your next family movie night, I warn you that there is profanity and sex (probably not the best for your 4 year old).

      Matthew 5:14-16 reads:

“You are the light of the world. A town built on a hill cannot be hidden. Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven.

      As Christians, we claim that we have been moved by the Gospel message, however there is usually very little in our actions which prove that to be the case. Our words are often very powerful but our lives are very weak.

      In the movie, there are important events which happen to people out of the blue and their lives are drastically moved. Out of that response, they go out of their way to change the lives of someone else in need. For you and me, we have been touched by what Christ has done. We have been changed by the fact that He became human to give us life eternally. Perhaps it is time for you and I to live a life where we learn to PAY IT FORWARD.

Making God Glad

This is the Feb 15, evening devotional from Charles Spurgeon's, Morning and Evening

Psalm 45:8
Whereby they have made Thee glad.

And who are thus privileged to make the Saviour glad? His church-His people. But is it possible? He makes us glad, but how can we make Him glad? By our love. Ah! we think it so cold, so faint; and so, indeed, we must sorrowfully confess it to be, but it is very sweet to Christ. Hear His own eulogy of that love in the golden Canticle: "How fair is thy love, my sister, my spouse! how much better is thy love than wine!" See, loving heart, how He delights in you. When you lean your head on His bosom, you not only receive, but you give Him joy; when you gaze with love upon His all-glorious face, you not only obtain comfort, but impart delight. Our praise, too gives Him joy-not the song of the lips alone, but the melody of the heart's deep gratitude. Our gifts, too, are very pleasant to Him; He loves to see us lay our time, our talents, our substance upon the altar, not for the value of what we give, but for the sake of the motive from which the gift springs. To Him the lowly offerings of His saints are more acceptable than the thousands of gold and silver. Holiness is like frankincense and myrrh to Him. Forgive your enemy, and you make Christ glad; distribute of your substance to the poor, and He rejoices; be the means of saving souls, and you give Him to see of the travail of His soul; proclaim His gospel, and you are a sweet savour unto Him; go among the ignorant and lift up the cross, and you have given Him honour. It is in your power even now to break the alabaster box, and pour the precious oil of joy upon His head, as did the woman of old, whose memorial is to this day set forth wherever the gospel is preached. Will you be backward then? Will you not perfume your beloved Lord with the myrrh and aloes, and cassis, of your heart's praise? Yes, ye ivory palaces, ye shall hear the songs of the saints!

Do We Trust God?

   Over the past couple of months, my faith in God has been tested like never before. Part of what I have been dealing with is the question, “Will God provide for me? Will God truly be enough?” I know that I am not the only one who feels this way and I am going to assume that this runs through the minds of many of you. We worry daily about our current and future financial status, we worry about the health of ourselves and loved ones, and the list goes on and on and on. Some of these worries make us freeze in our footsteps and does not allow us to live the life we were created to live. As I struggle with this, I am reminded of Matthew 6:25-34:

“Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothes? Look at the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not much more valuable than they? Can any one of you by worrying add a single hour to your life?

“And why do you worry about clothes? See how the flowers of the field grow. They do not labor or spin. Yet I tell you that not even Solomon in all his splendor was dressed like one of these. If that is how God clothes the grass of the field, which is here today and tomorrow is thrown into the fire, will he not much more clothe you—you of little faith? So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well. Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own.

   Now, I want you to sit back and think. What is your calling in life? This does not necessarily mean what career you are supposed to have. I’m asking, what has God called for you to do? I think when we think about callings we automatically assume our jobs or vocational ministry but it could be as simple as cleaning the church every week or as extreme as packing up your bags and moving to a 3^rd world country. What is the desire and passion God has placed inside of you?

   After you begin to formulate that calling, I want you to ask yourselves, what is holding me back from fulfilling my calling? Often times it is a fear of failure, being sick, being uncomfortable, etc. Maybe you are fulfilling things you feel God has called you to but what else can you be doing which you are not? The fear of not knowing what will happen to us if we take this step of faith causes us to fall short of the potential which we have.

   

   I now wish to ask you, is this how you would encourage others to live out their faith in God? Would you truly advise someone, “Be faithful in giving but make sure you hold back some so that you’ll be safe and secure?” Would you teach your kids to love and follow God in this fashion?

   Imagine yourself 50 years from now on your deathbed. Could you truly be satisfied with the life you lived if it was all about being safe and secure? Perhaps tomorrow you’ll find yourself in a car accident which will paralyze you for the rest of your life. Would you be able to live with yourself for not having done all that you could for God?

   Over the past several months there has been a buzz in the Christian community about the famous pastor from California, Francis Chan. He is an extremely effective preacher and has a very “successful” church. In the midst of his fame and church growth, he has decided to lay it all down because he feels God leading him to do so. He also has struggled with the fact that he oftentimes hears his name more than the words, “Holy Spirit.” What’s in store for him? He does not know but he is choosing to follow God’s call.

I struggle deeply with giving God open-handedly. I am a person who REALLY needs a plan that entails some form of security but God is slowly changing that. As I am learning to be open to the will of God, I am finding myself much more excited about life. There is a great deal of fear in not knowing what tomorrow holds but I realize that if I give myself wholeheartedly to God, there is no limit to what He may do. Perhaps it will be to lead just one person to Christ or maybe a million. Either way I hope that one day I can die and tell everyone that I lived the life God had intended for me to live. 

Everyone Who Confesses the Name of the Lord Must Turn Away From Wickedness

            As I was reading through 2^nd Timothy yesterday (which is probably one of the books I’ve read through the most) there was a little line in there which I don’t seem to have ever noticed. It comes from the second half of verse 19, in the second chapter. It reads, “Everyone who confesses the name of the Lord must turn away from wickedness.” Although this statement seems to be extremely simple and basic for the Christian faith, it gave me a strange sense of comfort and revelation.

            In our post-modern world, there is very little desire to label things right and wrong. I place much of the blame on fundamentalist Christianity which was/is so great at labeling every piece of society. As we have progressively learned to think outside the box and become more ecumenical (thinking of the WHOLE Church), it has caused many of us to rethink and evaluate our current understandings of what makes something okay and what makes something not okay. There have been many great benefits for critically thinking about our values, yet there seems to be some issues and problems which have arisen.

            Usually in any reactionary movements, there seems to lack a visible boundary. In our case, the line between right and wrong is almost invisible. This causes tension with Scripture because the authors of the Bible seem to make a great distinction between right and wrong. Our problem probably lies in our reaction to what we have found to be wrong.

            When I read the Gospels and even the Pauline Epistles, wrongful ways of living and sin seem to be addressed with grace and not hostility. If we look in 2 Timothy 2:24-26, Paul writes that people who are in opposition to the gospel are to be treated kindly so that they may repent and come to the true knowledge of God. Christians are instructed to interact with others in kindness and patience. Paul knew early on that threatening people and yelling at others were probably not the best medium to deliver a message about grace and mercy.

            Going back to our main passage, I find myself in a dilemma. Usually when I commit sin, I find myself unmoved by the wrongful deed I just committed. I have been desensitized to seeing God treated with injustice and dishonor. I am coming to the conclusion that I need to take seriously the things of this world which displease God and treat those things the way in which God would treat them. However, if I am to break away from sin, I realize that others may not find it so easy themselves. My reaction to other peoples’ struggles must be gracious and not one of condemnation.

We must not be blind to the fact that we have much sin in our own lives and need Christ’s cleansing blood to make us pure. The disastrous result of sin must be realized and we cannot take it lightly. It is God’s command that we move away from the old life to the new. At the same time, we as Christians must realize that others struggle with sin too and they need to be forgiven also. Our understanding of grace must go beyond ourselves. After all, didn’t Christ come for those who were sick?

I would like to leave a video clip of a sermon I heard at the Desiring God Conference for Pastors. Every time I watch this clip, it makes me see how so many of us “Christians” have labeled certain things as wrong while we believe we are always right. This clip humbles me and causes me to ask for repentance for not being able to break away from sin and at the same time condemning others for their own struggles… may you be the redeemed rose.