One of the questions that came up when I asked for topics
related to the Renewed Lutheran Church, was the question “Who is the Pastor’s
Boss?” as a way to talk about authority, transparency, and accountability.
On one hand, there are a few different places you can point regarding
who an ELCA pastor is accountable to and supported by. Firstly, we have our
baptismal vocation (I have a hunch many clergy struggle with prioritizing
our baptismal vocation, I know I do) like all other Christians. Additionally,
we have various commitments we make in the
candidacy process, and our
ordination vows, most of those are channeled through the Synod. Hopefully
those commitments do not just function as Law, but also Gospel, we find both
accountability and support in living out those vows and commitments. Then, with
call
and installation, commitments of support and accountability are made with
the calling congregation(s). So, in a sense, a Pastor is in relationship with
multiple expressions of this church, and they have multiple bosses.
On the other hand, all those commitments and relationship kind
of obscure what the average person is really asking when they ask, “Who is the
Pastor’s Boss?” The above description can feel like a lack of transparency. If
a clergyperson has hundreds of bosses, it can sound like they really have no
boss. This means they are accountable to no one and supported by no one. Now
some folk would like that to be true, but it isn’t. So,
let’s look at that question from a slightly different angle—power and efficacy.
I took a Political Science course in college called Theories
of Power, it was a 300-level course and I wasn’t a polisci major, so I was a
bit out of my depth, but here’s what I took away from the course and how it
might speak to the question, “Who is the Pastor’s Boss?” There are three paradigms
for interpreting power relationships:
Dictator-Person in charge causes the changes in the
system.
Empty Suit-The Person in charge is a conduit or
vessel for grass roots change.
Negotiated Leadership-There is a web of
interconnection between all parties that regularly shifts.
These three descriptors can easily be applied to being a
Pastor and to the question at hand.
In the dictator model the Pastor is in charge. In the
Lutheran tradition we even have a funny name for this phenomena—Herr Pastor.
The Pastor is the authority, what she or he says, goes. Full stop. The
congregation is an extension of Herr Pastor’s will.
At the other extreme is the situation where the identity and
will of the Pastor is practically irrelevant to the running of the congregation;
the behavior of the congregation won’t change no matter who is installed as
pastor; it could be Jesus Christ himself or a tail-less salamander leading them,
and there would be no discernable behavior change. The Pastor will bow to the
will of the congregation, or break.
Then there is the third way, authority is given and earned,
relationships deepen or wane as situations develop. Often the Pastor is
installed and is given enough political capital to do one big thing, there is a
honeymoon period. After folk have kicked the tires for a while, the pastor
buries someone, they weather a crisis, etc, more authority is given. At the
same time the pastor learns who is worthy of trust in the congregation, who are
the informal leaders, and tries to discern what the consensus of the
congregation is regarding a vision. It is a dance.
Now, where all this gets tricky is when expectations and
assumptions about who the Pastor’s boss is come into play. If a Pastor comes in
hoping to be a Herr Pastor, and the congregation is used to negotiated
leadership, there is going to be friction. Similarly, a Pastor coming in
seeking consensus can look an awful lot like they are offering an empty suit
and a power vacuum to a congregation that has experienced a Herr Pastor or has
a history of running roughshod over the Pastor.
What does all this have to do with a Renewed Lutheran
Church?
-It points to a need for both support and accountability
throughout a pastor’s journey. Any change in how the ELCA does things ought to maintain
and/or improve support and accountability.
-It touches on the informal nature of congregational systems.
There is a reason they teach pastors systems theory, so they can exegete their
particular congregation, and behave accordingly.
-This also touches on a lay/clergy divide. The Pastoral vocation
is strange and doesn’t exactly have good secular analogies. This can lead to
distrust between people and pastor, and that can be deadly to a congregation.
Note to readers—I intend to participate in National
Novel Writing Month, as such, my morning writing time will be devoted to that
instead of blogging for the month of November. That said, I intend to read A Journey
of Grace and High Expectations, and re-read Anatomy of a Merger, all to think though
the background of the ELCA merger. So expect a big blogpost about that sometime
in December.
