Well, we are officially in fund-raising mode for our India trip. God was tugging on my heart about India, and after sharing my thoughts with others, God spoke through many “coincidences” and we are going to India hoping to find our next clue as to what God wants us to do.
Although the typical way of raising funds for missions is: bake, garage, yard sales, or support letters, I have always felt pressed to get out and work (any jobs that come up) for our support. “For you yourselves know how you ought to follow our example. We were not idle when we were with you, nor did we eat anyone’s food without paying for it. On the contrary, we worked night and day, laboring and toiling so that we would not be a burden to any of you. We did this, not because we do not have the right to such help, but in order to make ourselves a model for you to follow. For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: ‘If a man will not work, he shall not eat.’” (2 Thess. 3:7-10). I don’t think inviting others to support us in our missionary endeavors is wrong; in fact, many people want to be a part of what God is doing in our lives and they might not be able to physically go, but can financially support us. However, we, like Paul, should contribute as much as we can so as not to be “a burden to any of you.”
So, last week we (Laben, Paul, and I) painted a two-story house for a woman in the church. We did a good job and did it for about half price, so she was also blessed. I had a great time hanging out with the guys “modeling” for them what (in part) Paul modeled to the churches he fathered: no spiritual bums please. “Or is it only I and Barnabas who must work for a living?” “In the same way, the Lord has commanded that those who preach the gospel should receive their living from the gospel. But I have not used any of these rights. And I am not writing this in the hope that you will do such things for me. I would rather die than have anyone deprive me of this boast.” (1 Cor.6; 14-15) “I would rather die…” Why, when he had all the rights in the world to be paid by the churches he started did he choose to “not have anyone deprive (him) of this boast(?)” WDPD
10 comments:
I would say that a belief in the "vocational calling" to ministry is about the most arrogant, self-centered, self-serving concept I have heard in the Church...
I have a unique calling to recieve money? How does that work...
I always wonder why this was the one boast Paul would not let his disciples deprive him of. Also, it seems so backwards that today, many ministers could not fathom doing what they do without being paid a "fair" wage. Why was this so important to Paul and so unimportant to us? If you told a minister he/she wouldn't be paid anymore what would their reaction be? What would Paul's reaction be?
I guess it just depends on why we are doing what we are doing...
You and I both know salaried pastors who view it as God's gracious provision, and would not stop giving themselves to God's people if the source of God's provision changed from a Church paycheck to a paycheck from a general contractor or from a restaurant.
Do we live lives of obedience to God, trusting Him to work out the details (like provision)? Or do we push for our own agendas (like salaries, 401k's, houses, cars, etc.) and pronounce it blessed by God?
I like my work-a-day job. I get to meet, greet and eat with all sorts of people. They get to work/play with my silly Christian self, I get to work/play with them, and we chat about what is going on in one another's lives. One way or another, I'd end up doing what God would have me do. I have found He has amazingly persuasive powers (I'm particularly fond of the framing-hammer of righteousness). Does what I happen to do, at any time in my life, make professional clergy anything other than simply professional clergy? No, it does not. Do we condemn those folks that will seek only professional clergy for their various spiritual needs? No, I think we shouldn't. Do we as people take advantage, misunderstand and miss subtle self-interest in most of what we do? That's probably a yes. Some folks, my self included, do things for reasons that may not appear appropriate to our various theological bents. I figure Paul saw the same thing…and he wrote letters…and he lived his life for God to the best of his abilities. I bet he would totally dig using an airless sprayer on his pals homes to fund his walk to Rome.
Of the C, could you elaborate on the thought "Do we condemn those folks that will seek only professional clergy for their various spiritual needs? No, I think we shouldn't."
Since:
1) Seeking spiritual fulfillment through what I do and not through Christ is...
2) Seeking spiritual fulfillment through being a professional minister is tied to me finding my spiritual satisfaction through a dependency on other's dependency of me(?).
3) Would this individual (in your mind...scary) cease to find spiritual fulfillment if he was not a professional Christian?
Although what God calls us to, which is not always a given with pro Christians, should be fulfilling; the question remains is Christ alone sufficient? Two, is it what you do or who you are? From a simple reading of you text (sounds cooler saying text) I would say, "disagree with" instead of "condemn."
http://thejourney.typepad.com/
Check this guy out on "vocation," read posts from May 15-16-17
Priesthood of all believers, five-fold ministry, the office of priesthood, and a 3rd wave of Pentecostal movement...all finding models for leadership in the New Testament.
There are those individuals that pay deference to leadership. I often look for aid, comfort, council, wisdom, a better mouse trap and fellowship with people that occupy a 'perceived' station that is higher than what I may occupy in the church. Not that any of us are somehow closer to God, but we do develop a toolkit of experience, strength and hope through our years of being rode hard and put away wet. So, in a sense (through this simple interaction), I would be seeking a portion of my spiritual fulfillment through this person. It would not be an end unto itself, but a method of facilitation. Iconoclasts and Lollards aside, some folks simply require an acknowledged authority to initially open a door to their inner lives and for direction in their personal relationship with the Lord. For some this role has been institutionalized to the point that professional clergy may seem a requirement. As an example in my own life, I would use my first sponsor relationships in AA and the 12 steps as a sort of 'spiritual kindergarten' to lead me in the directions that God may ultimately have in mind for me. I still revisit these places, but they are no longer the same ends they appeared years ago.
From the language in the post and subsequent comments, I sense more than a simple difference of opinion (to disagree). Rather, I read an expression of strong disapproval, and declaration that certain motivation may be unfit…in this manner I use the term condemn. I too often use language than may not be quite that soft. This is certainly my own rebellion against the modern-day overuse of euphemisms offering the texture of cold lumpy oatmeal. No one's going to the chair over the heart felt intent of their employment. That is, if it is within the letter of the law presently on file with the appropriate enforcing agencies (AKA the man).
We might offer correction to professional clergy regarding their motivation, suggesting that they may boast in their livings and not remain spiritual bums. And as leaders, they are certainly held to higher level of inspection. Could anyone pursuing a task in exchange for compensation be doing God's will, or pursuing self interest? Given my own self interest, by no means do clergy hold this matter exclusively to themselves. It is most certainly an issue of how the character of Christ is reflected in our whole being, and not simply our every other odd doing. That part breaks me down every time. I got to get back to work…
to clarify:
I have no problem with someone recieving money in payment for church leadership.
I have a problem with someone believing they have a specific calling from God to receive money for such service.
I have heard people say that they were called to 'full time ministry,' and many of the other "lumps of oatmeal" euphemisms we have all heard that, in essence, denigrate service to God without a paycheck as somehow less than 'real' ministry.
It is this that my vehemence was directed...
If we stopped paying you what would happen? Would you leave for greener pastors? Would you lessen your load and do only certain things? Is this what you do or who you are? Where is your identity? Outside of the cross of Christ, this is the only boast Paul had.
part of the reason for paid ministers is the "demands," purpose, and voiced desires of the congregation. we all go to a church that is not "traditional" in a lot of ways and one way in particular is the willingness to follow god /holy spirit in very unconventional ways (i.e. yaks, non-salaried pastors, church-planting outside of the community, etc.) i really feel that many "in the world" when looking for spiritual help outside of self-help, pop-religious pulp, give creedance only to paid clergy...that is until someone crosses their path in their work-a-day life who is truly following christ. steve and i spoke briefly about the misconceptions of many, myself included, who see paid ministry as the ultimate goal. i have come far in my journey in that i no longer have that misguided idea. but, there are many in my life, mom in particular, who view it this way still. ministry through the lens of american-capitalist-individualistic economy?
Post a Comment