Had an interesting conversation with someone today regarding an easier path to being ordained. They didn't want to go to college and weren't sure they wanted to go to any form of 'selection' conference because it sounded a bit stressful. Not only that but they only wanted to be ordained and remain in their 'sending' church (where they were already working and doing services.
I asked one of my favourite questions (after the 'how' and 'why' questions), "What would ordination do for you and what could you do without it that you couldn't do now?" The response was a new one for me because the answer was, "Nothing - I'm already doing it now!'
Impressed I asked the questions:
Leading services - Yep!
Worship - Yep!
Praying - Yep!
Preaching - Yep!
Involved in the communion service - Yep (and in fact they told me they were already 'doing communion' when their minister was away)!!
I asked where they were (outside of our diocese) and why they'd called me (because someone they know knows me and thought I'd be able to advise) and then got more involved with the more pressing questions after which it transpired that they were in a multi-benefice setup and the clerical person had told them that they needed to get ordained so they could 'formalise' what they were doing. After more discussion I realised that what they wanted was to be ordained to the group of churches and those alone (what we call an ordained local minister where we are) and no more.
I've suggested that they have a chat to a local ministry advisor in their own patch or even arrange an introduction to their DDO. Oddly, what I find interesting here is that this conversation appears to have been prompted by a cleric who was looking to make their local help more official and I can understand why (five churches in the group is reason enough) but I am also left wondering what I could have done further?
It was only a couple of days ago that I was in a group where I brought up the increasing desire to convert any adequate or able lay person into a minister because of the workloads and pressures and here I am perhaps facing yet another of this being flesh in this instance.
I'm left wondering what some clergy see ordination as being and how they discern calling?
Gis' us a clue? Has anyone else encountered anything like this I wonder?
Pax
4 comments:
yes its about time the 'powers that be' started thinking outside the box about this. personally am struggling going throigh the discernment process. Am doing all of what your guy is going, although I don't wish to stay in my church necessarily, but seem to be being squeezed through the wrong shaped hole at the mo. It seems like it's their way or no way... frustrating..
redx
Ordination is wrong as we don't need priests because all of us are priests because of Jesus's death.
This is yet another of the places the church of England gets their theology wrong like baptizing babies and all the repeating of the same mumbled prayers all the time.
It is sad because I know many in the local church really believe they are doing it the right way and yet proper modern understanding show it all to be wrong - which is why I go to a fellowship with a pastor because a shepherd is the right person to lead Christians.
Tony W
Red - thanks for your comments (which I will come back to once I've given a few people a chance to get scribbling on this).
'Anon' - I have to say that I think you have missed a few points here and there and would have to say that ordained ministers (AKA priests) and the priesthood of 'ALL' believers are very different practically, functionally, spiritually and in terms of the onology too!
Baptising babies - well as I understand it (didache onwards) the practice is one that was present from the earliest days of the Church of Christ (and because of this it is a fair extrapolation that it was how the initiation of those 'being added' also worked).
Because some in the 16th century (and the popularising in the mid-nineteenth century) came up with various elements which today appears billed as 'believer's baptism) this does not confer rightness to the theory (or practice). In fact I'd probably say that the Bible distinctly speaks against anabaptism where the baptism was carried out in the name of the Trinity (for it is only where the baptism mentioned was 'John's baptism of repentance' that any approval of anabaptist practices was approved.
Don't look now but your Pastor is probably ordained or accredited by some body and so there's not much to differentiate (other than a theological understanding which, sadly, I have to assume you don't have :-) ).
As for mumbled prayers - that's not just uninformed but rather rude too (but I'll excuse you because I'm nice).
thanks for your comments
I am in a similar position in that I lead services, preach and carry out other 'ministry' duties - but all without epiklesis. When prompted to consider ordination, I asked the same question: what would ordination allow me to do that I can't do now? The answer is 'very little', apart from presiding over communion. I don't feel a calling to Eucharistic ministry, so - thus far - I have not followed the route to ordination. I don't see ordination as a rank, badge or 'formalisation' of my ministry. As I understand it, ordination is a specific calling; but there are many other callings and ministries within the church. Why do so many people clamour after ordination as if it is some sort of be-all and end-all?
The selection process of the Church of England is structured to allow discernment of calling and to ensure that those who go forward have the spiritual, emotional and intellectual ability to cary out the task. It's tough for a reason! However, for those who go forwards and are not selected there are many other avenues to explore. The Body needs all types of parts, not just clergy shaped ones.
I'd be interested to know what the 'proper modern understanding' of the anonymous commenter's church is. I've sat in many non-conformist and Pentecostal churches where there has been copious amounts of mumbled repetitive prayers (normally a favourite mis-quoted Bible verse, or song lyric). Whereas Anglican liturgy is taken primarily from the Bible. Think this might be a case of a little knowledge being spread a long way?
Post a Comment