success

two friends, Alan and Ken have recently written on a similar topic from a similar perspective (although with opposite polarities) and I wish to add a thought that speaks to a common thread that i see in both of these.

the fundamental issue at hand is that pastors are routinely treated poorly - without compassion - perhaps even, as a machine.

and while this is deplorable, i can't help but wonder if pastors haven't brought this on themselves?

it's almost like there is a contractual arrangement in place to make one person the fall guy.

so while i'd like to get excited with Alan that one church started behaving like a church, and while i can commiserate with Ken that church's find it acceptable to work their pastors like dogs, I have a hard time expecting a change in the near future.  insanity is doing the same thing but expecting a different result.

start with a resume, go to an interview, get scrutinized publicly, contracted for a salary, put on a (spiritual) pedestal, worked to the bone, expected to perform tirelessly, required to grow numbers, to please stockholders, board of directors, the deacon board, prepared to be fired "at will"... what part of this looks shittier than a big corporation? ok, all of it does. all of this looks shittier than a big corporation - because those are corporations and you can expect to be treated like shit by the black soulless tarball whose bottom line is money... but this is supposed to be church.  turns out the church has it's own bottom line figure: "numbers".

so pastors subscribe to this regime and write books about being purpose driven and build the kingdom of heaven here with their own hands and get put on a pedestal and actualize their leadership and/or charisma and become powerful, involved in politics and successful...

and now we need to ask if being successful has gotten us where we set out to be?

our reformation

what martin luther began to do in 1517, was to call into question the absolute truths of the religious establishment & its associated power structure. he did this by pointing out accepted teachings and practices that were not scriptural, and by pointing out that infallible teachings from some popes contradicted the infallible teachings from other (earlier) popes.

luther's basis for doing so was the priesthood of all believers.

this opened the door for a less centralized leadership structure and the establishment of independent churches. many of us in protestant circles consider this model a vast improvement over the previous model... local pastors and teachers now have authority to create local versions of truth... we are given essentially more data points on what is truth (vice one data point via the papacy)... and perhaps more flavors of truth to choose from... (in increasing order of discomfort for some).

~

today we find fiefdoms of power - run by elites, who went to school, have special knowledge, received credentials, and are now empowered to tell us what the scriptures mean. if you've been paying attention, that should sound familiar. what these leaders hold in common today, is a claim that absolute truth exists and we can know it... code for *they* know it. not, *you* or *i* can know it. that should sound familiar too.

in response, we invoke a familiar test... we'll call it Luther's test. we point out teachings that have come down that are not scriptural (e.g. the church phillip yancey grew up in), and we point out that teachings from fiefs (who believe we can know absolute truth) contradict other teachings from other fiefs (who also believe we can know absolute truth).

to wit:

take all the christian ministers or leaders who claim we can know absolute truth ... (take just those from north america and/or a specific denomination, this will still work) ... and ask them to write down the truths that we are sure that we know.

build a website like baptistaboslutetruth.com and have everyone enter their set of absolute truths. if what they believe is so, we could expect vast agreement with a striking level of detail - with only a few outliers... (we'll call them "false prophets" secure in the knowledge they will burn in hell).

this should be relatively easy to accomplish. even trivial - and would settle the matter. yet, it hasn't been done, and won't be done... because it can't be done... because agreement doesn't exist. rome tried this first.

traditionally, the response of the catholic church when errors or contradictions are pointed out, has been to say that the pope didn't have his infallibility hat on when he issued such and such a statement. today, senior pastors and religious leaders pull the same trick as the catholic church does when confronted by errors or contradictions amongst their teachings. all except for relinquishing either their hold on power or their assurance that absolute truth is knowable.

these folks insist the power structure and the senior / teaching pastor or other leader must continue ... e.g. "to keep us from error". an alternative understanding is these roles are important because these people like their day job... and anyone who claims that absolute truth isn't knowable threatens this system and basis of power. this is their linchpin... so don't expect them to understand this - or to surrender this point easily.

~

the key to unlocking an understanding in much of this - is to realize that when we are using the word truth in many of these arguments, what were really arguing are facts. facts like; 1) the earth is the center of the solar system, 2) black people are the 'sons of ham' and are inferior, 3) women should cover their head and not speak in church, 4) bringing more wine to parties where drinking has already been occurring is not christ-like, and 5) the whale that jonah lived in for three days was the dunkleosteus.

contrary to what rick warren says, the first reformation wasn't about beliefs - it was about wresting this same notion of absolute truth away from the religious powers that be. and todays reformation, our reformation, led by the emerging church... is not really a second reformation. it's really just a continuation of luther's work.

our basis for doing so is the priesthood of ALL believers.