Before I begin the text of the message today I have a story from another religious tradition to share with you:
A couple was getting married when an earthquake struck, collapsing the church and killing them just before they could say their vows. When they appeared in Heaven, St. Peter welcomed them, showed them around, and asked if there was anything else they wanted.
"Well, you know we were about to get married when we were called here," the bride said, "Can we finish the ceremony here? Can we get married in Heaven?"
"Let me check," said St. Peter. "I’ll be back in a jiffy." Now a jiffy can mean different things in different places, and in Heaven where the Eternal is standard, it took about five years. Suddenly the Saint returned and announced somewhat breathlessly, "Yes! You can get married in Heaven."
"Great," said the groom. "But in light of Eternity, we were wondering if we could get divorced if things don't work out."
"Give me a break," pleaded St. Peter. "It took me five years to find a preacher up here, and now you want an attorney?!!"
All apologies to the legal profession. This joke though does illustrate the current status of clergy in the popular culture. Similarly, when I told my father that I was going into the ministry he remarked, "At least you’re not a drug-dealer or a lawyer." Again, apologies to the legal profession.
Interestingly, clergy and lawyers are linked together in the common mind-set with the medical professions. Until the end of the eighteenth century every man who went to college was training to enter either ministry, law or medicine. Today the medical profession is held in high esteem.
Ministry and law are further down the scale of favor. In popular surveys, clergy in general are not accorded high respect in general. Yet, when individuals are asked to rank their own esteem for their clergyperson, they always rank them higher than clergy in general. Similarly, lawyers in general are not held in high esteem but folks tend to have much higher opinions of their own attorneys, particularly if he or she has won their cases!
The current low esteem for clergy might be attributable to the shocking revelations found in the media. Televangelists are constantly asking their distant flocks for more and more money. They are often found guilty of tax evasion and sometimes live scandalous lives.
The current low esteem for clergy might also be attributable to scandals like the ones within the Roman Catholic Church. Diocese after diocese has been rocked by court cases involving priests whom bishops placed in parishes knowing that they were dangerous to their youngest parishioners.
These are isolated stories. The truth is that clergy of any faith are less likely to be involved in abuse of office than other professions. It is only more shocking to us because we all have higher expectations of those who are entrusted with the ethical education of their charges. As Chaucer wrote, "If gold should rust, what should iron do?" He meant that clergy are to be held to a higher ethical code than most people and try to lead by example.
Unitarian Universalist ministers are also held to a high standard of personal conduct. We are expected to subscribe to the Unitarian Universalist Minister's Association's ethical code of conduct. Those ethical guidelines describe the role that ministers should take and not take with their congregations. They include not breaking the law, except in cases of civil disobedience. They include not dating or having sex with congregants of any age. They include living in sacred covenant with each other.
Unitarian Universalist ministers are as different as Unitarian Universalists are. To me, it is kind of interesting to see the different size, shapes and colors of my colleagues. Yes, there are some common uniforms. Male Unitarian Universalist clergy seem to have a General Assembly uniform. Imagine being in a room with fifty men and three-quarters of them are wearing khaki pants, blue Oxford shirts, have beards and wear glasses. Imagine being in a room in which half the women are wearing diaphonous mumus and bobbing, dangling earrings. That is what is like to be at Unitarian Universalist clergy meetings at General Assembly.
In a sense, our clergy have fallen far from the tree. The Unitarian movement traces its origins back to the Puritans, the original English settlers in New England. The Puritans came to New England from different places in old England. They were people determined to establish Calvinist religious communities as far from the Church of England as possible.
The original Puritan church was composed of people who were born-again, the called themselves the "regenerate." They also called themselves the "Saints." In their congregations everyone was considered equal because everyone was one of the elect, the chosen of God.
They called a man to minister to them not in the belief that he was better than they were but in the hope that he would be better educated in religion than they were. The authority given to Puritan ministers was based upon their learning, "a learned ministry" as the founders of Harvard College wrote. He was not gifted with extraordinary powers. His role was much like that of a rabbi in the Jewish tradition. He was first and foremost a teacher.
That does not mean that Puritan ministers in Massachusetts were not powerful. They could have someone put into the stockade or in irons for immorality, drunkenness, and lack of deference. They could bring charges against unruly congregants. They had real, political power. In other words, those were the good old days!
But for all their power, the Puritan ministers were accountable to their congregations. Their power was derived from the calling of a congregation. They were not appointed by a larger body. No bishop would oversee their authority.
The Puritan churches were founded before they were organized. Most of the congregations in the Massachusetts Bay Colony were worshiping roughly a generation before anyone thought of bringing them together. In the course of that generation they developed their own worship styles and often their own theological expressions. In other words, in a short period of time, with little communication between them the Puritan churches were slightly different from town to town. Coming together they realized that they would need to accept their differences and stress conformity only to the ideals they all shared. I cannot add much more to the history of the Puritan movement but would summarize them as being harshly conservative Christians.
Eventually though the seed of liberalism evolved from the meeting which established the linkages within the Puritan movement. Churches were to tolerate their differences. They would have the power to call clergymen who would suit the congregation. Though they generally agreed upon some general theological statements and a fairly democratic polity, the Puritan churches were free to express those ideas very differently.
In the fullness of time, the Puritan church began to fall apart. After the American revolution people in this country began to question everything. They questioned the idea of monarchy. They questioned the idea of a government-supported religion. The questioned the validity of religious creeds.
Among the Puritan ministry this was no less so. Some became liberals, believing that each individual had the ability to determine religious truth from his or her own experience, were causing controversy. They became Unitarians.
Unitarians inherited the congregational structure and expectations of the role of clergy from their Puritan forbears. Their churches were operated by the laity with the minister tending to preaching, teaching, sacraments and pastoral duties. Their ministers mostly though preached and visited congregants. That sounds like an easy life for the clergymen, but it was not. Preaching in those days took five or six hours every Sunday. Imagine sitting there in a pew for that long. Imagine speaking for five or six hours with a new sermon every week. Preaching then must have been as daunting a task as listening to a sermon.
The Unitarians kept the polity of the Puritans but they made one very significant change. They gave their ministers freedom of the pulpit. Recognizing that with their new experiment in personal theology that most individuals in any given congregation would believe differently, they also recognized that it would be impossible for any minister to speak to all of the theologies present in even the most homogenous congregation.
Freedom of the pulpit meant, and still means, that the minister speaking the truth to the best of given ability. It means that ministers cannot satisfy all the theological positions in any given Unitarian Universalist congregation—and that they should not try to. It means that most Unitarian Universalists will find themselves differing with their minister eventually. Such differences of opinion are built into our system and they have always been there. We assume that we grow from dynamic tension, even when it sometimes painful.
In the fullness of time, Unitarians envisioned ministry differently. They began to admit women into their ministry. Today more than half of Unitarian Universalist ministers are women. Later, as Unitarian Universalists they admitted open gays and lesbians to the ministry as well.
Ministry in most religious movements has changed dramatically over the course of the past century. Before, most clergy were teachers, preachers, and pastors. Now, most clergy are also administrators to a greater degree. In our tradition this change is no less real.
When I went to seminary I was told that despite the fact that the laity actually run the church in our tradition, the minister spends most of his or her time administering it. Administration means attending meetings, starting and running programs, overseeing staff, checking up on all the work of the various committees and supporting and sometimes inspiring them.
Unitarian and Universalist ministers two centuries ago spent almost all their time writing the Sunday sermon. Nowadays Unitarian Universalist ministers have to spread their time between administrative functions, pastoral calls, social justice issues, collegial relations and write a sermon as well. Though it is fortunate that the sermon does not need to be sixty pages long, the minister still needs time to think, read, pray and meditate in order to compose the sermon.
The ministry is a very stressful profession in all faiths. In the nineteen fifties a speaker from a seminary was asked to speak to a Boston minister's group about the challenges of those time. He began his presentation by saying, "I know one thing. Despite the challenges of our times, ministers do not get ulcers." Immediately after that remark one of the ministers whispered under his breath, "‘Well, I have ulcers." Another minister overheard him and said, "So do I." Other ministers overheard them and said that they too had ulcers. One brave soul finally stood up, interrupted the speaker and told him that most of the folks in the room, clergy all, had ulcers. With that the speaker said that his presentation was based on a faulty premise and he left the ministers to talk among themselves about the virtues of ulcer-beating drugs.
So, ministry is a stressful vocation. There are other realities which make it even more stressful. Ministers are not paid very well compared to other professions requiring similar skills and educational experiences. In writing this sermon I consulted with the Reverend Ralph Mero, the Unitarian Universalist Association's Director of Church Staff Finances. I wanted to know the reality in which most ministers find themselves. Though I am not well-off by comparison to many, I discovered that I do not have quite as many financial concerns.
Ralph Mero in addition said something interesting. He pointed out that churches in our movement are not reluctant in the search process to ask ministers about many kind of personal issues. Search committees routinely ask pre-candidates about their lifestyles, families, mental health, time in recovery. Ministers anticipate such questions in the interview process and formulate their answers.
One of the components which congregations omit in the search process is, "Can you afford to be our minister?" Ministers are not likely to appreciate that question, fearing that the way they respond will affect their negotiations with the congregation later. Yet, indebtedness is still an issue.
Finances will be a major issue for this congregation as it seeks a settled minister. When minister's look at congregational record sheets on the Unitarian Universalist Association's website churches are ranked by salary ranges by letter codes. At the very bottom in this code is "S," which stands for substandard, meaning that the church is not paying a living wage for the area in which it is located. The next level of compensation is the "A" category. The "A" level in ministerial compensation is adequate for someone just graduating seminary or with a few years of experience. The Unitarian Universalist Association recommends the "A" level also for a congregation for congregations with fewer than one hundred fifty members. This congregation's current salary range is in the "A" level but I anticipate that the membership will grow into the next level in the next year. The good news is that only a slight increase in the salary range would probably put this congregation into the next category.
Why do that? First, this will attract more ministers to the church. Even being slightly in the "B" category will increase the number of minister applicants to any congregation. More applicants for the church's vocational ministry means a greater chance of a perfect fit for your next ministry.
When the last president of this congregation, Lincoln Baxter, went to a seminar at the Unitarian Universalist General Assembly for leaders of congregations seeking ministry, the director of the Ministerial Settlement Department asked congregation presidents to sit in clusters grouped according to congregation size. After the congregation presidents were seated in these clusters, the ministerial settlement director asked them to look at the other people with whom they were seated. He then said, "This is your competition." It made a great impact upon the past president of this congregation.
The other reason to increase the next minister's compensation package is that the next few years will be new territory for this congregation. You will be traveling through that uncomfortable size transition that Alice Mann spoke of. During that time it would be to this congregation's benefit to have a minister with more experience than the typical minister in the "A" category. It would benefit the Unitarian Fellowship of West Chester to have a minister who has mastered the basic skills of ministry and is experienced enough in congregational leadership to shepherd the church through the growth and development that it has indicated it wishes to nurture in coming years.
Today I have begun a conversation from the pulpit of this church about your future ministry. I know that such matters are not always spiritually enlightening, but they are important for the road that you will be traveling. My duty to this congregation is to prepare it for its future.
Low prestige, low pay compared to comparable professions, long hours, heavy debt–those are some of the issues that Unitarian Universalist ministers face. As a profession we are held in esteem only slightly higher than lawyers and we often work long hours, have high debt loads and little job security and no real union. Did I mention that it is still worth it? We serve a movement in which I believe offers a model for human relationships.
In the reading from Salted with Fire the Rev. Barbara Wells advocates giving the ministry away. She means that congregational health is to be measured by the degree to which the laity minister to each other and to the larger world. In effect, we have been doing that since those stoic individuals called Puritans landed in Massachusetts Bay. Their ministers gave the ministry away by giving laity the power to administer the congregation. They gave the ministry away by letting them write their own covenants and tell their ministers what the church's mission really was. The Unitarian ministers gave their ministry away when they told congregants that no authority was greater than their own experience and reason. Unitarian Universalist give the ministry away when lay persons are encouraged to speak their truth from the pulpit and to minister to the needs of society.
In no other religious movement I know of is there more possibility to form and change. No other religious movement is more likely to embrace the future. By employing democratic means we have the potential to revision ourselves collectively. By decrying obedience to creeds we have the capacity to explore new revelations about the divine, nature and science. By speaking up about the larger world we have the potential to change it.
Walking with a community so determined is part of the joy and the challenge of being a Unitarian Universalist minister. Walking with people who submerge into this task is one of the privileges of ministry. For as Marge Piercy writes "The pitcher cries for water to carry and a person for work that is real." For such real work, the work of lay ministry and the work of "learned ministry" may we be truly grateful.
Amen.
|
