Tuesday, December 28, 2010

Poking the hornets nest. Again.

I was directed to a post on why pastors need four weeks of vacation, a week of “study time”, fringe benefits, conference allowances and a sabbatical every seven years. You know, just like Paul got. I wanted to direct your attention to the post at the Gospel Coalition, Some Friendly Advice for Church Boards: Give Your Pastor a Break, and encourage you to read and perhaps comment. I think all of this concern about pastoral burnout and stress could be easily alleviated if all of the men in a local gathering of the church were equipped, permitted and encouraged to minister instead of restricting ministry to one or a couple of professionals.

Take a gander at the link and let me know whatcha think!

6 comments:

Steve Scott said...

Arthur, of course, I agree with your last sentence. One thing that was obvious was the assumption of the normalization of the position of pastor. It's a tradition that is tightly defined within so many circles. And it is so tightly defined that there is talk of churches not being able to pay their pastors, for the well-defined work that it is assumed pastors do. It almost seems just as assumed that pastors are at the mercy of church boards alone.

I certainly learned that same tradition at every single church I attended, and alternative formats were not even thinkable.

Eric said...

Arthur,

I've read through the responses to your comment on Kevin DeYoung's blog. I'm not surprised to see that none of them have answered with accurate biblical responses. Either their exegesis is incorrect (especially of I Cor. 9 and I Tim. 5) or they are simply responding out of emotion.

I'm not surprised, but I am saddened to see people so entrapped by tradition that they will not simply let scripture speak for itself.

I also see that so far at least Kevin DeYoung has not responded directly to your comment. This is also not surprising since he cannot make a solid biblical case for what he is proposing in his blog.

Eric Holcombe said...

I noticed Eric C. tried to get Kevin to respond specifically to your comments - which I fully expect him not to respond. The response you did receive sounds EXACTLY like labor union representation does when justifying their existence: "Well, maybe YOU should be getting these benefits too..."

Ironic that Kevin will suggest other men share in the teaching, but not too much you understand, can't let go of the position.

Sounds exactly like public school teachers who "desperately need the parents", but don't want them to actually teach their children.

Eric said...

Arthur,

I noticed that Kevin DeYoung (at my prodding) has finally responded to your comment. Actually, he responded by refusing to respond. So he has plenty of time to write all sorts of other things but won't answer your comment. The reason is easy to figure out: he can't defend his position biblically.

Arthur Sido said...

Eric H,

I noticed that too. The difference is that I work for a company and don't ask little old ladies at church to put more money in the plate for my benefit!

Eric C.,

I didn't expect Kevin to respond, he is a busy guy. As much as I dislike men like R. Scott Clark, I appreciate that he will at least interact with those who comment on his blog posts. If you are not going to interact with people, you should just disable comments. I did leave a lenghty response to the three mother guys who accused me of not reading the Bible, which I found ironic.

Arthur Sido said...

Eric C,

I also noticed he resorted to the "I already addressed these questions, buy my book!" response. I wonder if I should break it to him that we have already read his book and found his arguments utterly unconvincing?