Paid versus Free Ministry

Over on the VOS listerve there has been a conversation about the merits of paid versus free ministry. I posted this last evening but I am being blocked as a spammer. Funny.

I am on vacation but can't help but respond briefly to this thread. First, let me admit my bias as a seminary trained and employed pastor in a congregation. I really like the idea of going to college and graduate school and then finding a paying job in my field of interest. For me it happens to be in a church.

What I wonder about as I read this thread is if we value a seminary educated clergy. I know that some people don't; they mistrust the seminary educational system, particularly if it includes an element of modern biblical criticism. I think it is important when we talk about paid versus free ministry that we make a distinction between educated clergy and paid clergy. What are we really talking about when we talk about the value of free ministry versus paid ministry? Do we have a problem with education, or do we have a problem with the model?

Having said that, my own experience in two churches over 20+ years is that having a paid pastor can get in the way of having a priesthood of all believers. Congregations, with the help of pastors, can come to believe that they are paying the pastor to be the resident holy person. It's the pastor's job to pray, preach, visit, evangelize; its the congregation's job to be fed. Some pastors love this model; some congregations have come to expect it.

But it doesn't have to be this way. It is also possible to have paid clergy in a congregation and have a genuine priesthood of all believers. Paid clergy can cultivate this kind of model; churches can expect it and look for clergy who have experience in practicing it in their previous church experience and employment.

My own seminary education did not teach me how to be a pastor; there is simply no way a classroom setting can do that; the only way to learn is on the job. So why, then, not skip the seminary education and go straight to the church? What my seminary education gave me was a
foundation - in biblical scholarship, church history, COB history and practice, introductions to listening and counseling skills (I learned just enough to know that I need to have a strong professional and volunteer referral network), worship practices, a community of students and faculty to think and practice with, and probably more that doesn't come to mind at the moment.

There are individuals and churches who don't see much value in this educational foundation. Personally, I would never choose to be part of such a congregation. In the same way that I value the education of a physician and a trained counselor and a school teacher, I value the education of clergy. Choosing to use the services of a doctor in no way diminishes my responsibility to take care of a my own physical well-being; but they bring something to the table - their medical education - that makes it possible for me to live a healthier life. It is the same with educated clergy.

From an evangelism, church growth perspective, it is very difficult to grow a church in communities where education is valued highly with clergy that are not similarly educated. It may not matter much in some parts of the country and in some communities, but in places where the people are highly educated and professional, they tend to expect the same from their clergy. Sometimes when I listen to these discussions about paid versus free ministry and I put it together with the fact that we have very few churches in major metropolitan areas in our country, I understand better why it is we are in rapid numerical decline.