|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: "I don't want to bother Father."
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
...is the phrase that I hear often when parishioners don't actually request or want pastoral care or counselling from their clergy.
In my experience, it is often regularly attending, church members who are reluctant to avail themselves of pastoral care. In some cases, it means they feel they must suffer in silence in whatever they are going through.
Has anyone else have this experience? And do you have any pointers in encouraging people to consider pastoral counselling or care from their clergy?
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
Are you sure they aren't getting along OK?
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
For a long time now Baptist churches have recognised the issue of the overloaded 'monopastor' by setting up some form of pastoral team whereby you know who your 'pastoral team member' is and they are your first port of call for counselling.
This has also long been the case in 'Brethren' churches where there is usually a group of elders running things rather than a single minister.
On the one hand this makes seeking pastoral help much easier, less intimidating, and so on, and protects against one person becoming overloaded as Gwai hints at. However on the other hand, even then too many people don't bother the pastoral team, which suggests a wider problem than just "not wanting to bother 'Father'". Reluctance to seek help is a problem in itself, and probably leads to many unrecognised difficulties for churches.
I've recently been making some effort to use the team more and indeed to share more with others in the church - and it has been beneficial.
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I think there's a balance to be struck - both in settings where there is more of a 'monoculture' in terms of leadership or pastoral care and in those where there is a team or shared approach.
Some church cultures - both 'high' and 'low' it seems to me - can create a culture of dependency.
I've certainly seen this happen in certain evangelical charismatic circles where, indeed, one could argue that the whole object of the exercise is to create a 'dependency culture' in order to keep people on-board.
Anyone who has come across charismatic churches where people keep 'going forward' for 'ministry' again and again and again will be only too aware of what I'm getting at.
In my own parish setting, being provocative, the imcumbent, wider leadership team and those 'trained' to conduct so called 'prayer ministry' would be the last people I'd go to with any personal or pastoral problems.
I'd be inclined to look to trusted friends and to clergy I know elsewhere rather than in my own church.
Why?
Because I know what I'd get. Half-digested pietistic platitudes for the most part.
My wife had breast-cancer last year and I could see our vicar's wife was itching to 'lay hands on her' and pray for a good while. Eventually, she cornered my wife after one service and did so. My wife simply smiled and shrugged it off. But she did feel it was an invasion and violation of her personal space.
I'm glad I wasn't there at the time otherwise I might have 'had words.'
I'm sure the gesture was well meant but I often think this sort of thing is done to fulfil a need on the part of the person doing the praying rather than the recipient.
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Anyone who has come across charismatic churches where people keep 'going forward' for 'ministry' again and again and again will be only too aware of what I'm getting at.
I've observed it as well - the same handful of people go up for prayer/healing/etc every single Sunday. If the rector asks people to come up who need to recommit to Jesus, they're up there. People who are bereaved - same. People who are struggling in their jobs - same. And so on. It's a bit troubling to be honest, they either have extremely damaged lives given the myriad problems they claim to have, or they just need some attention.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
...is the phrase that I hear often when parishioners don't actually request or want pastoral care or counselling from their clergy.
In my experience, it is often regularly attending, church members who are reluctant to avail themselves of pastoral care. In some cases, it means they feel they must suffer in silence in whatever they are going through.
Has anyone else have this experience? And do you have any pointers in encouraging people to consider pastoral counselling or care from their clergy?
In my experience, there are a lot of possible issues going on here, all of which need to be handled differently:
1. There are people new to the church who simply don't realize that that's something pastors do. So simply educating them-- a phone call to let them know you're available would do the trick.
2. Similarly, there are generational differences in expectations & even comfort level of pastoral care. Younger generations have little experience with it (because they've had fewer serious illnesses), don't know how/when to ask for it, or much expectation of it. In my experience, many younger people are particularly uncomfortable with the traditional settings for pastoral care: the pastor's office or the parishioner's home. Inviting them to meet for coffee at Starbucks seems to work far better-- just a more comfortable, relaxed setting. This group also responds well to lay pastoral care (e.g. Stephen's ministers, deacons, or more informal lay leadership options).
3. Conversely, older generations seem to have in my experience fairly high expectations for pastoral care. They often expect pastors to be omniscient-- to "just know" that a long term member is ill or unhappy or whatever, and get peeved if they don't. "I don't want to bother Father" can have a passive-aggressive ring to it-- they really DO want Father to be bothered-- but they want to be important enough they don't have to ask. This group will appreciate visits from deacons or Stephen's ministers, but they don't "count". They still won't see them as "real" pastoral visits. In fact, as a female ordained clergyperson, I found older parishioners would similarly view my visits-- they liked/appreciated them, but they don't count. Dealing with these sorts of issues can be difficult. As irritating as the passive-aggressive nature of it can be, there may be some value in accommodating their expectations, if resources are available. But of course, the "omniscience" thing is gonna be a hard one to meet. Having well-trained lay leaders who know to call the pastor with a heads up re: pastoral needs helps.
4. These statements can come from a false view of Christian piety-- that there's virtue in suffering silently, that it's not OK to admit to struggles. Effecting long term teaching/preaching is probably the only way to address this unless/until a specific person suffering from this false pov is identified.
That's my 2 cents.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Steve Langton
Shipmate
# 17601
|
Posted
The one about people who don't think they've been visited unless it is THE minister is another side issue to this. I recall such a situation at a Methodist church I knew where relatives were complaining that a lady "hadn't been visited by the church" even though she had been - very frequently! They turned out to mean that 'THE Minister' hadn't been to see her. The person who told me about this was a bit miffed about that because not only had she been one of the regular visitors, she was herself an ordained minister - but apparently she didn't count either!
No easy answer to that kind of thing....
Posts: 2245 | From: Stockport UK | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Possibly a high/low church distinction? I've seen the total reverse of the OP much more, but only in churches where calling the minister/priest 'Father' would be seriously rebuked.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Possibly a high/low church distinction? I've seen the total reverse of the OP much more, but only in churches where calling the minister/priest 'Father' would be seriously rebuked.
As Steve Langton suggests, one would have thought that this would be the case ... but it doesn't necessarily follow. Even in Baptist churches, where ordination is usually understood as "recognition of gifts and setting aside for a particular role", rather than an ontological change, many members still think that only a visit from "the" Minister counts.
Does this mean that Clergy have put themselves on a pedestal or created a dependency culture? Or that something of the mediaeval understanding of the Priest in the Catholic Church still lingers within Protestant Nonconformity? Worse than that, does it mean that devout Christian still think that "only the Minister's prayers can really do the magic"?
If so, we're sunk!
P.S. Regarding the OP: why is it that people with real needs "won't bother Father" while other people, who can perfectly well do things for themselves, bombard clergy with the most trivial requests?
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
On a slight tangent, am I right in thinking that it's only the RCs who go in for the ontological change thing?
Whatever the case, I think it's possible to find unhealthy dependency things going on right across the spectrum. As well as the opposite - as Cliffdweller notes, a kind of falsely pious 'suffer in silence' thing.
Not an easy issue.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
On a slight tangent, am I right in thinking that it's only the RCs who go in for the ontological change thing?
Whatever the case, I think it's possible to find unhealthy dependency things going on right across the spectrum. As well as the opposite - as Cliffdweller notes, a kind of falsely pious 'suffer in silence' thing.
Not an easy issue.
No, Anglicans do too - hence priests are priests for their entire life, even if they lose their license to preach.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
JoannaP
Shipmate
# 4493
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anglican_Brat:
In my experience, it is often regularly attending, church members who are reluctant to avail themselves of pastoral care. In some cases, it means they feel they must suffer in silence in whatever they are going through.
As Gwai suggested, it is the regularly attending church members who know how much Father has to do and are thus reluctant to add to his burden. I think the best thing the priest can do is to emphasise that providing pastoral care is an important part of his/her ministry and not an imposition.
--------------------
"Freedom for the pike is death for the minnow." R. H. Tawney (quoted by Isaiah Berlin)
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin
Posts: 1877 | From: England | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
There's a move in many churches for the minister to be accessible rather than available.
It's a bad move in my view as it somehow seems to put the minister/pastor/priest (or whatever description you use) as rather beyond others.
I see my role, status and function as being driven by pastoral considerations. Yes people may think I'm too busy but it's partly up to me to
a) not give that impression
b) make myself available
c) be proactive in providing care
d) have a good team who communicate
e) make sure I listen
I can't do everything, though. Several hundred people have a direct link to the church and we have an active witness to a wider community of several thousand. As part of welcoming people into the fellowship here, we explain how we can care for and support each other.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
[QUOTE]No, Anglicans do too - hence priests are priests for their entire life, even if they lose their license to preach.
Is that true of all Anglicans? I thought the more low church Anglicans held a view of ordination that is as loose as we Baptists.
I thought it was more of an A-C idea really. Can the ontological change be reversed in any circumstances under this view?
[ 28. July 2014, 19:15: Message edited by: ExclamationMark ]
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
No, Anglicans do too - hence priests are priests for their entire life, even if they lose their license to preach.
Is that true of all Anglicans? I thought the more low church Anglicans held a view of ordination that is as loose as we Baptists.
I thought it was more of an A-C idea really. Can the ontological change be reversed in any circumstances under this view?
Well - not all Anglicans will agree that there is an ontological change, but the CoE ordination rite makes it clear that the church understands ordination as involving an ontological change. Low-church clergy will just ignore this bit of the ordination rite, but they still have to go through it.
I am not aware of any circumstances that reverse the ontological change, but that's not to say that there aren't any.
[code]
[ 28. July 2014, 20:06: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Interesting. I might be wrong but my understanding of the Orthodox position on this is that they don't see ordination as conferring any 'ontological' change. They think that's another Western innovation.
I'm not familiar with the wording of Anglican ordination services, where's the part that suggests an ontological change?
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garasu
Shipmate
# 17152
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Interesting. I might be wrong but my understanding of the Orthodox position on this is that they don't see ordination as conferring any 'ontological' change. They think that's another Western innovation.
I'm not familiar with the wording of Anglican ordination services, where's the part that suggests an ontological change?
So if there's no ontological change then, if the priest can't make it, anyone can step into the breach?
--------------------
"Could I believe in the doctrine without believing in the deity?". - Modesitt, L. E., Jr., 1943- Imager.
Posts: 889 | From: Surrey Heath (England) | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Interesting. I might be wrong but my understanding of the Orthodox position on this is that they don't see ordination as conferring any 'ontological' change. They think that's another Western innovation.
I'm not familiar with the wording of Anglican ordination services, where's the part that suggests an ontological change?
Here is the ordination rite. It's not as clearly suggesting an ontological change as I was remembering, though I do still read it as saying that. Also the recent DH-related priest-firing debacle has the priest in question stripped of his license to preach - he's not de-priested, because priesthood is permanent in the CoE.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
I have heard it.
When (and it is a big if) a Reformed congregation is working properly then there is a system to counteract this. It is called the Eldership.
That is every person within a congregation has another lay person who is responsible for looking out for their welfare within the congregation. The people who are responsible are supposed to be pro-active about finding out. They are also supposed to keep the minister informed when a ministerial pastoral visit would be welcome.
When it is working well it does a lot more than this. It works to give people a connection into the congregation, a way of noting when someone is not managing to come to church and deal with it without making a song and dance and a place where things can be talked through in confidence.
However, it does rely on highly motivated elders who make it work. That is the big if. With the added administration that is demanded in the URC of elders, there are very few Elderships where this type of Eldership is prioritized.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Anyone who has come across charismatic churches where people keep 'going forward' for 'ministry' again and again and again...
I've observed it as well - the same handful of people go up for prayer/healing/etc every single Sunday...
In defense of those who ask for prayer again and again - a friend's 30-something son was on drugs. At a weekly prayer meeting she asked for prayer for him every week. Yes it got a little boring for the rest of us to hear the same request, but is it more important that she not say what is tearing at her heart just for our comfort? The reason she asked every week is because every week he was still on drugs. It was still a serious need.
Is a person with an ongoing problem suppose to pretend everything is fine after one prayer? If the cancer treatments continue, the relationship is still in danger, the job still missing in spite of efforts to find one, we are suppose to NOT ask for prayer? What happened the the frequent instructions to be persistent in prayer?
The idea that you get only one shot at any request feeds the idea God doesn't answer prayer, and/or teaches us to give help only one time to someone with an ongoing need. Not many problems physical relational economic or spiritual are "fixed" with one time help.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Sure, Belle Ringer, but there's surely a more 'holistic' way of dealing with persistent problems than laying on some kind of 'altar-call' week after week ... ?
@Garasu, of course someone else could step into the breach ... if they were ordained ...
![[Biased]](wink.gif) ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
The thing about it only being ordained clergy and so on who celebrate the eucharist in the CofE doesn't bother me at all...
I don't feel 'excluded' because I'm not permitted to do so. Why should I?
Back in my 'new church' restorationist and my Baptist days I did 'preside' (for want of a better word) in the 'breaking of bread' a few times. I can't remember how many - but a handful of times perhaps.
That was fine, because that was the done-thing in that context.
It's not the way things are done among the Anglicans and that's fine too - because that's the way things are done in that context.
I don't really see the big deal.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Meanwhile, I've just skimmed through the ordination rite, Jade Constable and I couldn't see anything that immediately struck me as suggesting an ontological change.
Did I overlook it?
What particular section appears to uphold that view?
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garasu
Shipmate
# 17152
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
@Garasu, of course someone else could step into the breach ... if they were ordained ...
So priests are different? In kind?
I'm clearly not getting it, but I'm not clear what I'm not getting?
--------------------
"Could I believe in the doctrine without believing in the deity?". - Modesitt, L. E., Jr., 1943- Imager.
Posts: 889 | From: Surrey Heath (England) | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Anyone who has come across charismatic churches where people keep 'going forward' for 'ministry' again and again and again will be only too aware of what I'm getting at.
I've observed it as well - the same handful of people go up for prayer/healing/etc every single Sunday. If the rector asks people to come up who need to recommit to Jesus, they're up there. People who are bereaved - same. People who are struggling in their jobs - same. And so on. It's a bit troubling to be honest, they either have extremely damaged lives given the myriad problems they claim to have, or they just need some attention.
They must have needs that aren't being met in any other way, which is a problem in itself. Ideally, churches would have a wider range of ministries, including being able to direct people to useful sources of secular counselling.
As for not wanting to bother the minister, I share that feeling. MOTR clergy tend to have a high regard for the pastoral side of things, but my sense is that they get on best with specific kinds of problems. They deal well with the sicknesses of old age. I suppose they know what to say in those circumstances. Sometimes I think I ought to hang around in the traditional church for long enough to be able to benefit from those particular skills, because at the moment my wimpy problems are unlikely to be soothed by the personal assistance of the clergy!
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ahleal V
Shipmate
# 8404
|
Posted
Anglican theology of indelibly - the character of ordination - is inferred in the Canon c1.2:
quote:
2. No person who has been admitted to the order of bishop, priest, or deacon can ever be divested of the character of his order, but a minister may either by legal process voluntarily relinquish the exercise of his orders and use himself as a layman, or may by legal and canonical process be deprived of the exercise of his orders or deposed therefrom.
You can chose to stop acting as a priest, or the Church can forcibly prevent you from doing so, but the ordination can never be removed.
X
AV
[ 28. July 2014, 23:24: Message edited by: Ahleal V ]
Posts: 499 | From: English Spires | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jengie Jon:
I have heard it.
When (and it is a big if) a Reformed congregation is working properly then there is a system to counteract this. It is called the Eldership.
That is every person within a congregation has another lay person who is responsible for looking out for their welfare within the congregation. The people who are responsible are supposed to be pro-active about finding out. They are also supposed to keep the minister informed when a ministerial pastoral visit would be welcome.
When it is working well it does a lot more than this. It works to give people a connection into the congregation, a way of noting when someone is not managing to come to church and deal with it without making a song and dance and a place where things can be talked through in confidence.
However, it does rely on highly motivated elders who make it work. That is the big if. With the added administration that is demanded in the URC of elders, there are very few Elderships where this type of Eldership is prioritized.
Jengie
Hmmmm. I am an ordained minister in a Reformed denom. Check my post above re: how well it worked for (female associate) Minister of Word and Sacrament to provide pastoral care. For elders, it's even more of a "doesn't count" situation-- but, again, only for the older generation.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
When I was an active pastor often times it seemed I was the last one to know. Last church I was at though had a very active prayer chain which I was connected to. Helped.
Some congregations in the US have also started Stephen Ministries in which trained lay people are assigned six to eight people to stay in contact with. If something comes up, they will ask permission to contact the pastor.
I also found staying in contact with parishioners helped. I made it a goal to contact every member of my parish at least once a year through calls or face to face visits.
They all knew I would go out of my way to visit them if the need arose,
Now that I am not in the pastorate, I still work with my local pastor to keep him informed about what I am hearing. As long as I don't receive something in a confessional setting I am pretty open about it.
He admits he is sometimes the last person to know what is happening too.
Just heard a confession today from a member. I will honor that member's privacy, though I expect at some point that member will approach the pastor which I encouraged them to do.
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pyx_e
Quixotic Tilter
# 57
|
Posted
I seem to do less and less pastoral work the more I pray with people, encourage their discipleship and bible study I do. It's a bit odd really.
--------------------
It is better to be Kind than right.
Posts: 9778 | From: The Dark Tower | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Gamaliel:
[qb] So if there's no ontological change then, if the priest can't make it, anyone can step into the breach?
In the Baptist church, yes - and sometimes even when the priest can make it.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ahleal V:
Anglican theology of indelibly - the character of ordination - is inferred in the Canon c1.2:
quote:
2. No person who has been admitted to the order of bishop, priest, or deacon can ever be divested of the character of his order, but a minister may either by legal process voluntarily relinquish the exercise of his orders and use himself as a layman, or may by legal and canonical process be deprived of the exercise of his orders or deposed therefrom.
You can chose to stop acting as a priest, or the Church can forcibly prevent you from doing so, but the ordination can never be removed.
X
AV
Agreed - you can't unact an an act. The debate is surely around what that act actually does -- is there a change in character as a result of the actions performed or merely an affirmation of character? In other words, does being ordained "make" you anything?
I'd rather think not - as this act would be God's calling. We're all ordained anyway.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
@Garasu. I don't get what you don't get.
In the CofE it's only ordained ministers who get to preside at communion. That doesn't mean that they are different 'in kind' to anyone else.
It's not that anyone who is ordained has a different knee-cap, liver (unless they drink too much), or willy (if they have one) than anyone else.
It's simply that they are the ones authorised to carry out that particular task or office or whatever we might call it - on behalf of the others.
As ExclamationMark says, in Baptist churches it's not just the minister who can 'preside' - or whatever term Baptists might use. I've 'presided' over communion in a Baptist church - once with the minister present - at other times without.
I don't feel any more or less 'empowered' or disenfranchised in either setting. It's not as if in either the Baptists or the Anglicans anyone is saying that you're 'better' than anyone else because you've presided at the communion.
It's all a question of context.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
In defense of those who ask for prayer again and again...
I do understand that and of course realize people have ongoing problems. I certainly do!
The thing is that the rector does try to focus the calls forward for prayer on specific issues, usually related to the sermon. So it does strike me as unlikely that the same 4-5 people (and it is a small number) always require prayer on every single issue.
For example last Sunday it was for people who had either not yet committed to Christ or who had been astray for a long time and wanted to come back. So why would these same people who are at church every Sunday, involved in home groups, and one who is a reader, go up to the front?
Perhaps there is a gap in our pastoral care but it makes me uncomfortable to go up for prayer myself, mostly because I end up having to wait because the usual suspects rush to the front as soon as there is a call.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Yes, Seekingsister, this is something I noticed 20 year ago when I was involved with a more full-on charismatic fellowship.
I wouldn't be surprised if those same people were 'going forward' for the self-same things 20 years later.
Some issues are never going to be resolved until eternity, of course.
But I think SvitlanaV2 is on the money when she suggests that churches have to become more adept at steering people to sources of help in a more holistic way - be it conventional, secular counselling for instance.
These days, there are plenty of Christian forms of counselling and support too. Although some are clearly better than others and the quality varies.
I think what's happened in charismatic circles is that the 'altar-call' or 'ministry time' or whatever people call it, has developed into a kind of parallel liturgy.
It's become an unwritten part of what's expected to happen. Consequently, both your rector and those who go forward so regularly for prayer have become culturally conditioned to expect it.
At our parish they've had so-called 'prayer ministry' at the end of the more informal 11am service for some time.
Now, they are beginning to introduce it at the end of the more traditional 9am service.
A group of specially 'trained' people come it at the end of the 9am service (they almost invariably are people who attend the 11am one). They sit to one side and at the end of the service the vicar invites anyone who would like prayer to go and sit with them.
There's nothing 'forced' or manipulative about this, but on more than one occasion I've heard the 'prayer ministry' people and the vicar express disappointment that no-one has availed themselves of the opportunity.
Most of the 9am congregation are elderly or at least more 'conservative' in their spirituality and so tend to drift off at the end of the service - either to go home to the church hall for tea and coffee.
To me,it justs seems a bizarre thing to do. It feels like a Trojan Horse to try to introduce more 11am-ish practices into the 9am service. If people wanted the 11am stuff they'd go to the 11am service.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I'd also suggest, Seeking Sister, that the way these 'appeals' or invitations are couched are so general that almost anyone could fit into the categories offered.
'Been astray for sometime ...' Heck, during any single week there are times when I 'feel astray'.
No, what's going on here is rather disturbing, I think. These people are becoming addicted to the attention and to the temporary adrenalin rush they receive when they respond.
It's like a spiritual comfort-blanket.
Rather than issue these invitations, it would better to try to equip people to face the vicissitudes of life with fortitude. By robust teaching and catechism ... supported by genuine love and concern of course.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I think what's happened in charismatic circles is that the 'altar-call' or 'ministry time' or whatever people call it, has developed into a kind of parallel liturgy.
It's become an unwritten part of what's expected to happen. Consequently, both your rector and those who go forward so regularly for prayer have become culturally conditioned to expect it.
...
There's nothing 'forced' or manipulative about this, but on more than one occasion I've heard the 'prayer ministry' people and the vicar express disappointment that no-one has availed themselves of the opportunity.
I slightly disagree with that final comment: the very fact of it being offered each time increases a certain sense of anticipation - although I'm sure the "pray-ers" don't intend that. The same was true of the Toronto Blessing: clearing the chairs and bringing on the "catchers" subtly increased the psychological pressure to get "slain in the Spirit". As you say, a parallel liturgy, with all that involves and implies.
However, might we get back to the OP ... especially as I've already tangentified it at least once?
[ 29. July 2014, 08:57: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Ok - yes, I concur with your interjection, Baptist Trainfan, both in terms of your observation about the 'expectation' thing and the need to get back to the OP ...
I s'pose the tangent does raise the issue of what our expectations are and how we would see them being met or fulfilled.
What are we expecting in terms of pastoral help and support?
Are we looking for:
- A listening ear?
- Practical advice?
- Information on sources of possible help?
- Some kind of divine intervention? Whether that is understand in a 'zapping' Toronto sense or in other ways?
A combination of some or all of these?
It seems clear to me that we can't expect one person or even a team of people to provide all of these - at least not simultaneously.
We're never going to completely be able to manage expectations but we need to have some way of identifying and defining them.
If not we run the risk of burn-out on the ministerial/clergy side or disillusionment and disappointment on the part of those seeking help.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Anyone who has come across charismatic churches where people keep 'going forward' for 'ministry' again and again and again will be only too aware of what I'm getting at.
I've observed it as well - the same handful of people go up for prayer/healing/etc every single Sunday. If the rector asks people to come up who need to recommit to Jesus, they're up there. People who are bereaved - same. People who are struggling in their jobs - same. And so on. It's a bit troubling to be honest, they either have extremely damaged lives given the myriad problems they claim to have, or they just need some attention.
Actually, the thought occurs to me that these people are at least determined enough to take what's on offer at church without caring what other people think. If I ever joined a charismatic church, I'd hardly ever want to 'go foward', for fear of what the people watching might be thinking: 'She went up two weeks ago, so why does she need to go again? What's wrong with her? She's just an attention-seeker!'
However, the appeal of the altar call for some people probably shows that what church leaders think they're offering isn't necessarily what people in the pews are actually receiving. We create our own meanings out of the formal rituals that are available. This is true of all kinds of church.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Actually, the thought occurs to me that these people are at least determined enough to take what's on offer at church without caring what other people think. If I ever joined a charismatic church, I'd hardly ever want to 'go foward', for fear of what the people watching might be thinking: 'She went up two weeks ago, so why does she need to go again? What's wrong with her? She's just an attention-seeker!'
Well to relate this back to the OP - there are times where I need prayer on the specific issue at hand, but the usual suspects rush to the front immediately, meaning I'd have to hang around awkwardly at the front while waiting for someone from the prayer ministry team to free up. So I sit in my seat instead.
Their behavior prevents me from participating.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Are the leaders too afraid to 'deal' with these people properly? Or do you think the leaders might be party to confidential information that explains why they're indulgent towards them?
If it's the former, perhaps the real problem is that 'Father' doesn't want to bother 'us'!
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I'm afraid I've got big issues with the idea of a 'prayer ministry team' in the first place. The people who are usually attracted to such teams are the last people I'd go to if I had a problem.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by seekingsister:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Actually, the thought occurs to me that these people are at least determined enough to take what's on offer at church without caring what other people think...
...there are times where I need prayer on the specific issue at hand, but the usual suspects rush to the front immediately, meaning I'd have to hang around awkwardly at the front while waiting for someone from the prayer ministry team to free up. So I sit in my seat instead.
Their behavior prevents me from participating.
If I feel a need (desperation) to respond, I go forward and hang around. Awkwardly, sure, but better than denying my own need to be there. And often if I do go forward and hang around, others come too, hanging around becomes a patient group waiting their turn.
If people stay in their seat, those arranging the program don't know the existing system isn't working. What they see is only a few people have need or desire for this.
It seems worth raising in a private discussion with someone who can make necessary changes - what do they think you should do when you would like to go forward in response but feel crowded out by the ones who go every week?
More prayer stations as some upthread have mentioned might be one answer. Or prayer teams who approach individuals with "come over here to be prayed for" pulling some of the excess numbers away from the central place.
I've been in conferences where the coordinator announces the big name guy (or gal) will not be praying for anyone, go to a prayer team during prayer time. This prevents everyone lining up for one person while prayer teams stand around unused.
A similar announcement could be made in a church - "we're doing things differently, trained prayer teams instead of the clergy will stay with anyone who needs prayer as long as there is need." Or "only those wanting to join the church should go to the pastor, he will direct any who come to him for prayer to go to a prayer team." (Of course this requires the pastor to totally agree with the change.) The program can continue with hymn and closing prayers meanwhile.
I will also mention, I've heard sermons /conference talks where the speaker said NOT going forward in response to an invitation is rejecting God because we always have more to commit to God, prayer needs, whatever. Some people go forward because they think they are supposed to. If that becomes a habit, it "doesn't feel right" to just stay seated in the pew. Habits are powerful.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I'm afraid I've got big issues with the idea of a 'prayer ministry team' in the first place. The people who are usually attracted to such teams are the last people I'd go to if I had a problem.
I'm afraid that I tend to agree. I'm sure that text about "Not laying hands on any man suddenly" (1 Tim. 5:22) needs to get a bit of a look in here! (Yes, I know that it's probably about ordination or setting aside for ministry, but still ...!)
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
I will also mention, I've heard sermons /conference talks where the speaker said NOT going forward in response to an invitation is rejecting God because we always have more to commit to God, prayer needs, whatever. Some people go forward because they think they are supposed to. If that becomes a habit, it "doesn't feel right" to just stay seated in the pew. Habits are powerful.
As the Japanese friend of a Western missionary (Michael Griffiths) said at an evangelistic rally, "Is it all right if I don't go forward? Will he be offended?" Forces other than purely spiritual ones may be at work here!
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
Whenever there is an altar call during the service, I always stand up and rush ... towards the nearest exit.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LeRoc:
Whenever there is an altar call during the service, I always stand up and rush ... towards the nearest exit.
One could make a point of it and head for the furthest exit ... ![[Devil]](graemlins/devil.gif)
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Absolutely ...
People being 'trained' in 'prayer ministry' is a busy-bodies' charter. What it really means is that they have been trained to use cues and techniques to elicit particular responses from desperate, vulnerable or suggestible people.
Away with this nonsense already!
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Absolutely ...
People being 'trained' in 'prayer ministry' is a busy-bodies' charter. What it really means is that they have been trained to use cues and techniques to elicit particular responses from desperate, vulnerable or suggestible people.
Away with this nonsense already!
In most cases, yes. But in some cases it just means people who have been trained NOT to give advice, NOT to offer pat answers/ quote Scripture, but simply to listen, sit with the person, and then pray with them. I do think there's a real value to that-- even when some people come week after week.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
I just finished a CPE placement and I now agree with everyone who I know who did do CPE, that a clinical pastoral education unit should be required for everyone intending to pursue ordained ministry.
One thing that I learned in CPE is pastoral ministry is not about fixing people or their problems. It is about listening and being present with people in what they are going through. It is also not about making people happy.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I'm afraid I've got big issues with the idea of a 'prayer ministry team' in the first place. The people who are usually attracted to such teams are the last people I'd go to if I had a problem.
Well, this is exactly the reason I'd - contra your earlier post - actually prefer a properly trained 'curer of souls' when I need pastoral help.
Which is one of the reasons I think the trend towards outsourcing of pastoral work is a terrible one.
Of course you get elements of control and all sorts of things - but I don't think the new situation actually improves things at all.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
