Recently, Matt, one of our pastors at “the Vine,” told me “people don’t want to be pastored anymore.” He said that often, when he tries to reach out and minister to younger people who are hurting and struggling, he gets the unexpected rebuff. It’s like they are saying “I feel like I’m a project to you.” Interestingly, Matt reports that when he reaches out to the older group, he is welcomed.
There could be many reasons for this. Most obviously this could simply mean Matt’s pastoral manner isn’t very good. The older ones are just more polite. But I don’t think so. I think this attitude reflects the further onset of the conditions of post Christendom. Here’s three observations.
â€¢ Gone are the days when the pastor, with his/her credentials is assumed to have professional authority and expertise to speak into the spiritual/emotional problems of people. This trust must be earned relationally in community. Older folks are still used to the idea that a pastor should care for and shepherd the hurting during their struggles, whether they be financial or physical etc. The younger ones however now view it with suspicion?
â€¢ The newest generations want someone to be their friend, not their professional pastor.
â€¢ The post-mega-church generation simply cannot seem imagine that the pastor they see up front is someone who actually knows the people in the community. They see the pastor as a figurehead, a media figure, who leads through image and a hierarchical corporate position. They cannot fathom that this person would actually be in their home and talking about their real lives. This has hastened the end of the pastor as “pastoral care” professional.
If the above is true, then:
- This hastens the day when the church must become an actual community, not a professionalized society. The church must be a community of friends, the pastor one among many, walking and mentoring and leading among, not above as some sort of professional. The dramatic shift into post Christendom pushes Christendom models of professional pastoring aside for a “leadership among” that can lead the struggling by walking alongside.
- Relational pastoring necessitates de-centralized leadership in our churches. A pastor can know relationally at most twelve to twenty people. Our churches then either have to be this small so that everyone is the pastor’s friend, or become more decentralized in leadership. Leaders must mentor leaders and give away pastoral authority. And we need places where the spiritual disciplines can be practiced in small groups, where confessing sin, penance, discernment takes place among friends.
- The visiting of our sick becomes an exercise of the whole community not the professional domain of the pastor. I still advocate that all of our pastors must visit the sick in the hospitals. We must model it to others as well as engage in ministry to our friends. I also see the hospitals as places of incarnational ministry. The hospitals are the place where the poor(in spirit) and dying reside. There is nothing more incarnational than ministering Christ’s presense in our austere business-like hospitals of the West.
What do you think? Is the era of the pastoral care professional over among the younger generations? What does this means for professional counseling?
Just to let those know who missed it, Andrew Jones and I are featured in this month’s issue of Next-Wave.It’s great to see that two people in McLaren’s corner can still engage his work critically, yet charitably in a pro-emergent e-zine. Check it out!
Missio Alliance Comment Policy
The Missio Alliance Writing Collectives exist as a ministry of writing to resource theological practitioners for mission. From our Leading Voices to our regular Writing Team and those invited to publish with us as Community Voices, we are creating a space for thoughtful engagement of critical issues and questions facing the North American Church in God’s mission. This sort of thoughtful engagement is something that we seek to engender not only in our publishing, but in conversations that unfold as a result in the comment section of our articles.
Unfortunately, because of the relational distance introduced by online communication, “thoughtful engagement” and “comment sections” seldom go hand in hand. At the same time, censorship of comments by those who disagree with points made by authors, whose anger or limited perspective taints their words, or who simply feel the need to express their own opinion on a topic without any meaningful engagement with the article or comment in question can mask an important window into the true state of Christian discourse. As such, Missio Alliance sets forth the following suggestions for those who wish to engage in conversation around our writing:
1. Seek to understand the author’s intent.
If you disagree with something the an author said, consider framing your response as, “I hear you as saying _________. Am I understanding you correctly? If so, here’s why I disagree. _____________.
2. Seek to make your own voice heard.
We deeply desire and value the voice and perspective of our readers. However you may react to an article we publish or a fellow commenter, we encourage you to set forth that reaction is the most constructive way possible. Use your voice and perspective to move conversation forward rather than shut it down.
3. Share your story.
One of our favorite tenants is that “an enemy is someone whose story we haven’t heard.” Very often disagreements and rants are the result of people talking past rather than to one another. Everyone’s perspective is intimately bound up with their own stories – their contexts and experiences. We encourage you to couch your comments in whatever aspect of your own story might help others understand where you are coming from.
In view of those suggestions for shaping conversation on our site and in an effort to curate a hospitable space of open conversation, Missio Alliance may delete comments and/or ban users who show no regard for constructive engagement, especially those whose comments are easily construed as trolling, threatening, or abusive.