The nature of power in
Pastoral Ministry
Chapter 5
Observations
and Conclusions
The purpose of this study
has been to make it clear that to attempt to deny or ignore the power inherent
in Pastoral encounters is deluded and opens the way to serious, though often
unconscious, abuses of the power that exists whether it is acknowledged or
not. This acknowledgement of power and
the acceptance of the authority conveyed upon those engaged in pastoral
ministry is the beginning of any attempt to move on and tackle the related
issues that arise in pastoral work. The
presence of power will, whether known or not, influence any pastoral encounter
for ill or for better.
As discussed in the previous
chapter, the church structure within which power is exercised and from which
authority for ministry is gained is often blamed for individual failures to use
power appropriately. While it is true
that the ‘senior executives’ within the church - whether they be elders,
Bishops, Archdeacons, Superintendents or otherwise, - often have a strong
influence over the Christian community it is recognised more and more that the
authority these individuals hold is dependent upon acceptance from those who
are part of the main body of the church.
In this way issues such as hierarchy, power sharing and accountability
are being placed on the everyday agenda of the ministry of the church.
The Church of England has
always located the ultimate authority of a given situation in one individual -
the Bishop, priest or other figure. This
has given those in pastoral ministry in that denomination a sense of
accountability and responsibility due to the power invested in them. This has not always been successful but has
offered a working model for the Anglican Church for a number of generations.
The truth is, that without an
obvious location of power and responsibility then power often comes out in
other ways. Churches that claim no one
leader will often still have an individual who, through the dynamics of the
group, will be an unconscious bearer of power, with the ability to influence
the congregation accordingly. This offers
more dangers than the model of a defined role taken by one person who, though
working as part of and on behalf of the fellowship is the one on whom
responsibility will lie. At least in
such a model there is some form of accountability.
It is important to
acknowledge the ‘power factor’ in a pastoral relationship. This process involves a certain amount of
vulnerability on the part of the pastor and the client, but it is one which,
having made the issues known, leaves less room for unacknowledged power to
sabotage the process.
Three
Steps in Moving Forward
The first step in moving
towards more open pastoral relationships is to examine the dynamics that inform
the process of pastoral encounter. This
is the concern of Dr Brice Avery (1996)as stated in Chapter Three. Therefore the position of client and pastor
must be made clear and the, often unconscious, motivations of each must be
examined. This is not to advocate that
the pastor offers all of her or his misgivings, vulnerabilities, strengths and
weaknesses to the client, thereby disempowering him or herself, but that, from
the very beginning, there will be an awareness of the underlying issues of
power and authority that flow quite naturally within a pastoral
relationship. Brice Avery (1996: 46) tells
us,
“The
activity in the best of pastoral encounters is one in which the pastoral pair work together to reveal, for reflection,
activities on the emotional level that the client had, until then, been unaware
of.” (Italics mine)
Recognition of the nature of
the power relationship that will exist in such an encounter is the beginning of
working together in order to bring about such revelations. Pastors, especially Christian pastors, must embark on the long journey of
self-awareness, informed by reflection, scriptural understanding and personal
honesty that will allow them to be truly aware of their motivations and
desires, and not allow them to subvert the true purpose of the pastoral
encounter, to bring about the increased well-being of those who seek the
pastor’s aid. Campbell (1993: 99) states
“Because
caring is an interaction in areas of life where helper and helped are both vulnerable, the person who claims
to care must learn to recognize the intrusive quality of his or her own needs.”
Without this
self-understanding and self-knowledge the pastor is liable to be living out
unresolved issues, playing out fantasies and serving her or his own ends in the
pastoral encounter and thereby making it impossible to engage in a deeper
relationship, a relationship of trust - in this case the client will find it
difficult to open up to a pastor, as Harris (1977: 48) tells us “…a trusting
climate is necessary if an individual is to see purpose in relaxing his defenses,
in opening up his life and concern to others.”
The second step in making
pastoral relationships more open and more constructive is concerned with the
consideration of the roots of pastoral ministry which, certainly in the church,
are found in the early history of the church and in the life and ministry of
Jesus. With this basis we find a
critique of any aspects of power which involve control or manipulation, and the
ideal of the pastoral community as one of mutuality and sharing. In looking at certain biblical material in
this study we have not sought to claim that only Christian pastoral contact is
of any value, but that all pastoral ministry can be informed by the example
firstly of Jesus and secondly of the primitive church that struggled to care
for those it met, even while the church was subject to persecution, in the
early years of its life.
The issues of ‘power’ and
‘authority’ which stand out so strongly in the life of Jesus and in the
writings of the New Testament are tied up with the need for the pastor to be
grounded in the life of the spirit and with the community of faith. This is the natural outcome of the struggles
of the earliest generations of the church between ‘charismatic’ and ‘institutional’
power being located in leaders.
At best, power that is
acknowledged as institutional offers, a safeguard against the extreme abuses of
pastoral power. This power is rooted in the
understanding that Jesus found his home among those he trusted and gave them
the authority to continue his work.
These were the founders of the heritage to which the church clings
today. Power and authority are indeed
dangerous, unstable concepts, yet Jesus was unafraid to speak with authority
and to follow the leading of compassion and commitment to others event when it
brought criticism. This, indeed, is the
calling of pastors in every age, to be committed to the appropriate use of
power in encountering those who seek help.
Ultimately the call of the
pastor is to encourage healing and wholeness, recognising her or his own need
for that healing and wholeness. Jesus
offers us a model of humanity which allows us to feel, to weep and laugh
alongside those who are travelling with us through our journey in life. Harris (1997:
167) writes that pastors must “…learn to focus on the struggles of their people
to be more fully human. The aim and
purpose of Christ’s ministry was that human beings might live more abundantly.”
This is the aim of pastoral relationships within the church.
As a third step to fuller
pastoral contact we must bear in mind the ongoing
dynamic of the pastoral encounter within the community. This study is concerned to make clear the
idea of community as the background and basis of any genuine pastoral
encounter, whether it be through the network of persons in church fellowships
or the fact that the minister represents and works on behalf of the community.
Pastoral authority and power, to be used appropriately, must be made to exist
in relationship to the community of faith or pastoral organisation from which
the pastor works and such power must be acknowledged as part of the ministry of
the church, not just a personal control over others..
Pastoral ministry, certainly
in the long term, can only be effective, and perhaps safe, agains the background
of community. Those who are pastoral
ministers gain their identity, their authority, their grounding in being a part
of and coming from a community or organisation from which they derive their
power and authority. For the Christian
pastor that community comprises of the church, both on the level of individual
fellowships and on the structural level of the church at large. A Christian minister is recognised as having
power due to the social, historical and tradition-based processes that have
made the church what it is now. Even for
those who have no active involvement in the church the minister will be an
approachable figure because of their
office as well as, or even in spite of, who they are as a human being. Though exploring one’s full humanity must be
a part of the ministerial task.
Because of this ‘rootedness’
in the community, the minister must always be accountable to the group she or
he represents and speaks for. To
facilitate this the pastor must be transparent, honest and open to the community
for and to which she or he ministers. This involves, from the start,
acknowledging the presence of power in pastoral encounters and being willing
and able to work on the issues involved together. If the pastor genuinely finds their grounding
in the life of the community then there is the potential for a relationship of
trust which is essential for power to be truly shared. This concern can be tackled initially by the
desire to bring about mutuality in pastoral relationships. Harris (1977: 71) borrowing
a phrase from Rollo May, talks in terms of ministers not having ‘power over
the members (of the Community) but power with them.”
Pastoral
Power grounded in community
Apart from the community the
pastor has no power to offer authentic pastoral assistance, for it is by the
commission of the community that he or she derives authentic pastoral
power. There will be times when healing
and wholeness can only be brought within a community, and the leader must hand
over to the pastoral community to allow the worshipping fellowship to do that
work. Frank Lake (1994: 14) makes the
observation that
“It is in
such a Christian community that the resources of Christ are meant to work. It would be a departure from the New
Testament pattern to set up separate clergymen working like therapists and
general practitioners in isolation from the Body of Christ. The resources of God are mediated in the
whole life of the Christian fellowship…”
It must be admitted that for
the leader of a community it can be a risk, it can be costly letting go. At a certain level, sharing power allows more
opportunity for mistakes to be made and more potential for failure, simply due
to the fact that more people are a part of the pastoral process. On the other hand holding power has the
danger of one person’s failure being ultimately equally or even more damaging
than a community sharing responsibility.
If, as discussed in the
previous chapter, the role of the pastor is partly about being one who can
foster and appropriate dependence on themselves within the community, it is
only done in order to move individuals beyond ‘extra-dependence’ to ‘intra-dependence’. In other words, as Dominian (1976: 98) says,
“Although we are born in a state of dependence, the meaning of life is not to
be found in dependence but relationship.”
This stresses the need for a mutuality in pastoral communities. As Harris (1977: 60) explains, “Power is a
social process. In its best forms, power
is expressed as people speak and act together in a climate of mutual respect.”
In pastoral care the aim must be to empower people in such a way that it
facilitates both their own healing and the healing of others.
Beyond
the Church
Though this discussion has
been concerned with a critique of power within the church, there must never be
any doubt that the care that the church offers must be for society at large,
not for a select group seeking to be comfortable and well-adjusted at the
expense of others. Just as many caring
agencies seek to assist any in need,
the care of the church must be open to all who come. Pattison (1993: 15) states that
“One
feature of the experience of pastoral care today which is very important is the
fact that while pastoral care may be carried on primarily in, or on behalf of
particular Christian communities, it cannot be directed solely towards
Christians.”
This is the ‘Mission’ of the
church in its broadest sense - working in common with other pastoral agencies
to bring healing and wholeness to an often broken and confused humanity. This mission, for the Christian, reflects
faith in a God whose ultimate aim is the healing of creation, a work that is
performed by those that seek to do the work of healing as part of the Christian
vocation.
Pastoral care is needed by
the world, by society as a whole, and the church is called to model healing
relationships, appropriate dependence and authority without abuse. Dominian (1976: 78) writes
“…ultimately,
what society is seeking is that the model of authority should be one of
integrity, wholeness, holiness, wisdom and love and not based on the power of
money, coercion, violence and subjugation of others.”
In the present era, when so
many values and ideas are being questioned, people are turning to people they
can trust rather than to ‘meta-narratives’ or cosmic explanations. If the future paradigm, the future
‘philosophy’, of western culture is to be relational, then the Christian
community of faith must live in relationship to one another and the world in
such a way as to demonstrate the love and freedom that their faith aspires to.
Word
and Deed
In any pastoral encounter
words and deeds, teaching and practice, must both work together. It is impossible to pay lip-service to empowerment
and then retain old methods of control and still retain any credibility with
those who seek the aid of the pastor.
The authenticity of such a ministry would soon come under question. The pastor cannot claim to be mutual and
concerned with sharing if their model of ministry is still dictatorial and
manipulative. Therefore, those who hold positions of pastoral responsibility
must take risks in allowing the community of which she or he is a part to be
responsible for their own healing. If we
are, however, to follow the example of Jesus as pastor then we must acknowledge
the client’s part in their own move towards wholeness. Pastors must live by values that allow them
to empower those they serve as well as talking about such values. Hannah Arends,
quoted by Harris (1977) writes
“Power is
actualized only when word and deed have not parted company, where words are not
empty and deeds are not brutal, where words are not used to violate and destroy
but to establish relations and create new realities.”
If pastoral care is about creating
a new reality in the lives of those who are seeking wholeness and healing then
power and authority must be part of a system that allows for its appropriate
manifestation. Those who are particularly responsible for the administration of
pastoral care, and there will always be individuals whose calling is to
particularly minister pastorally on behalf of the community, must be willing
and open to admit their limitations, to allow the community to be a resource
and encourage partnership in the pastoral process. There is no room for the kind of relationship
where a pastor tells a client exactly how to lead their life, though there may
be times when an authoritative pronouncement is appropriate. Instead we have sought to express mutuality,
transparency and accountability in pastoral relationships. When the pastor is seen as a person of
integrity, speaking from and as a part of a pastoral community she or he
embodies and authority that is representative and persuasive rather than
manipulative and coercive, in short, Harris (1977: 79) talks about it in terms
of “…the difference between authority and control, the capacity to have one’s
advice and insight taken seriously, verses the power to decide what happens.”
Conclusions
The pastor is a person of
authority, and that authority is part of the heritage of the Christian
community. The authority to offer
forgiveness, love, healing, wholeness.
This is a process where that authority is bestowed by the institution of
the church, but is also made real and effective by the spiritual and emotional
power that comes from integrity.
Integrity has been a much used word in this study, with a belief that
the reader will make their own assumptions as to the meaning of the word ,but a
definition given by Alastair Campbell (1993: 12) adds some meaning in relation
to our subject, Campbell writes
“When we
speak of someone possessing ‘integrity’ we are trying to describe a quality of
character for which the word ‘honesty’ may be too weak a synonym. To possess integrity is to be incapable of
compromising that which we believe to be true.”
The ultimate conclusion of
this study is that fostering responsibility and integrity is the only solution
to the difficulties of issues around pastoral power and authority. Those who are called to exercise a pastoral
ministry must be grounded in
community, aware of self, and seeking to do what is right for others and for
themselves. All these must be believed
to be true in order for the pastor to be truly a person of integrity. When
pastoral power, and the authority of the church, is to be exercised then it
must be done by those committed to assist their fellow travellers to live life
to its fullest extent.
The conclusion of this study
is one made on a personal level, it must be those who are pastors who have the
responsibility to care for themselves and be honest with themselves in order
that they may care for others. It is
difficult to impose any structural changes that could foster this beyond what
seems obvious, that pastors need supervision, support and accountability
structures both within and without the local fellowship in order to facilitate
this. The church is beginning to take
seriously commercial and managerial models of support, but these cannot be
simply transferred into ecclesiastical structures, they will need translation,
interpretation and adaption. The church
at large is recognising the need for change, and as we end this study our hope
is that this recognition will grow and develop.
There will be tensions on
this journey, as Harris (1977: 171) writes
“…the
practicing minister needs constantly to balance opposing tendencies within
himself, and between himself and the congregation…He is continually caught, for
example in at least three fundamental tensions: the tension between comforting
and confronting, between controlling and sharing control with others, between
encouraging healthy dependence and stimulating growth toward interdependence.”
This tension is where this
study ends, we recognise that the issues brought up by this work are not easy
ones, nor are they easily defined. For
the church to continue to function in service to the world and faithful to the
gospel, however, the issues must be faced by all of those who offer pastoral
care on its behalf. Pastoral power is an
unavoidable part of the pastoral encounter, and must be acknowledged, accepted
and worked with, rather than ignored, repressed and allowed to cause damage to
those who come seeking guidance and help from ministers.
