The Other Six Days: C3 – Two Peoples or One?

The Other Six Days

Part One – A People Without 'Laity and Clergy': Chapter 3 – One God – One People

It is widely acknowledged that pastors are facing an identity crisis, a crisis which may be deepened by the pastor-as-equipper emphasis now being promoted by many, including myself. Simply put, if there is no single activity that is the exclusive prerogative of the pastor, including equipping, is there anything left? John Stott calls this aclericalism. At least those in a sacramental tradition can cling to their officiating role a baptism and the eucharist.

Being ‘unnecessary’ may be a gift. It may enable one to become truly counter-cultural*, to go deep with God and to become a true counter-cultural, to go deep with God and to become a true pastor – nurturing people in the faith, directing people Godward so they are dependent on the Head of the church. I may also help one to envision a God-sized ministry for the whole people of God, to identify giftedness in others and to empower the people to love and serve God fully. (51)

[*In a footnote here, “It can be argued that this less counter-cultural in a post-Christian, postmodern age.]

Stevens divides this Chapter 3 into the following three sections.

  1. Two Peoples or One?
  2. One God – Three Persons
  3. Communion or Union?

Today I focus on the first section.

Two Peoples or One?

Stevens identifies three common responses to the issues of clergy and laity.

  • Clericalism – Domination of the "ordinary" people by the "ordained."
  • Anticlericalism – Domination of the "laity" and rejection of ordained church leadership.
  • Co-existence – "…two peoples separated by education, ordination, function, and even culture."

Stevens argues the community is the more biblical term to describe the relationships between leaders and others.

Each member contributes to others in a diversity of functions that contributes to a rich social unity, like the loving unity through diversity found in the triune God in whose image the church, the laos tou theou, is created. (53)

Stevens catalogs several images of the Church given in the Bible beyond "the people of God.

  • The Church (the gathered)
  • Saints (people dedicated to God)
  • Chosen ones
  • A royal priesthood
  • The household of God
  • The Israel of God
  • The body of Christ
  • A holy temple in the Lord
  • A colony of heaven / God's commonwealth

Stevens notes New Testament metaphors that highlight the relationship of the Church to God.

  • Vine and the vinedresser.
  • Flock and Shepherd
  • Household and Father
  • Temple and Builder
  • Body and head

The emphasis is on God as the authority and equipper, and the people in a more or less horizontal relatedness, not a hierarchical chain of command. Stevens suggests that Paul was struggling with some of this hierarchical baggage that was similar to the clergy/laity divide. For instance, he fought the idea that Jewish law observers were a higher form of Christian than the Gentiles. Paul had to dig deep beyond these surface distinctions and reach the core of what God intended for the people. Stevens believes that the Trinity is the starting point for a discussion of the communal nature of the Church. More on that tomorrow.

Is Stevens on to something here? Do you agree with the lessons he pulls out of the metaphors for the Church?

[Previous] [Next]


Comments

3 responses to “The Other Six Days: C3 – Two Peoples or One?”

  1. Dana Ames Avatar
    Dana Ames

    Yes and yes 🙂
    Dana

  2. Not sure I can comment cogently — I’m behind in this book (the trials of being in two book studies at the same time when I’m the lead in one of them!)
    But part of me is asking, “Well, duh…?” Of course this all makes sense. What doesn’t make sense is the HUGE separation between all Stevens is saying (and what I’d expect a lot of people, clergy and laity) would agree with… and the ACTUAL ways we continue to plod along as if we really don’t (not deep down) believe it.
    And I think that some of what Dave Moody was getting at in the C2 post comes into play here. Perhaps the question isn’t so much what Stevens is positing, but why we aren’t somehow translating that into the “kinectic”? I don’t know… and may contradict myself when I catch up — sorry for posting without actually doing the work!
    RPS

  3. RPS, my take is that there are multiple reasons. First, institutions of the past have built an alternate reality that is not the Church as God would have it. It is a paradigm; a set of mutually reinforcing assumptions and realities that is not easily dissected and deconstructed. It is like being an American and reading up on China versus flying to China a living there a few months. Reading about it generates some head knowledge. When you actually go to China you come to really KNOW China and see your own culture in a different light. Something is wrong and we know need to change to something else, but we haven’t “been to China” so we can’t clearly see another paradigm. Therefore, as human beings always do, we continually fall back into the patterns we have always known.
    Second, change will require enormous amounts of work for both “clergy” and “laity,” and to be honest, I don’t think the overwhelming majority of Christians want to work at it that hard. It is perceived as high order commitment for unclear benefits and high risk of failure.
    Third, there are people (many very well meaning) who are heavily invested in the status quo. They have developed very elaborate and effective tools to prevent them from seeing the challenges in front of them.
    Fourth, we are talking about a decentralized, organizationally minimal, new model trying to replace entrenched models and with high degrees of organization. It is almost like we need to organize in order to achieve less organizational overhead. Organizing to do that runs the risk of simply becoming a new organization replacing the old.
    Those are just some off the cuff thoughts. Anyone else have ideas?

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Kruse Kronicle

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading