1. Amendment 02-A, “General Background,” asks the church to agree that DCEs be allowed the pathway to become a specialized kind of AP whose exercise of ministry is restricted to proclaiming the Word through teaching. It asks the church, however, to call these specialized APs “ministers of the Word and Sacrament.” The effect of this request is to ask the church to make a large exception to what is normally expected of an AP. The “sacrament” part is left out. Thus a congregation is forced to make a radical disconnection between the AP role that we all know and this new exceptional role. Example: “Yes, I am called your AP, but I only teach. I don’t preach, and I don’t baptize or preside at the Communion table. I don’t moderate Session meetings.”
In a time when our church cries out for clarity, this amendment confuses. Are advocates for this amendment hoping that by making these adjustments to the role of church educator, it will attract more candidates? We disagree. Who wants to have a job with a title about which you always have to be explaining your exceptions? Ordinary church members hear this as creating disappointing expectations.
2. The “General Background” states: “Ministry within our Reformed tradition is rooted in our knowledge of God.” True enough, but the Reformed tradition has steadfastly joined in the office of minister both proclaimed word and sacramentally enacted word. It is ministers who shape the church into Christ by both word and sacrament. Persons who are called to educational ministry have entered into a restrictive, specialized ministry for which the title minister of the Word and Sacrament says too much.
3. Amendment 02-A.1 asks the church to amend the classical definition of minister of the Word and Sacrament by adding language that makes “teacher” a substitute for “pastor.” Again, this is confusing. Is or teacher meant to be a full explanation of what being a pastor means? Is it meant to be an option to being a pastor? Is it meant to be equivalent to being a pastor? We know that none of these conjectures will stand up to experience. Serving as a pastor and teaching are joined together in ministry, not set in opposition.
Over the centuries, Presbyterians have pondered repeatedly the usefulness of a separate office of “teacher” and/or “doctor” of the church and have shown little enthusiasm for instituting such. See John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion (4, 1, 1-2, 5). The reason for lack of interest has been the better judgment of linking the office of pastor “with” teaching. This was clearly stated as one of the roles of the pastor in the former PCUS Book of Church Order‘s description of the office of minister: “As he [or she] expounds the Word, and by sound doctrine both exhorts and convinces the gainsayer, he [or she] is termed teacher.”
4. Amendment 02-A.2 asks the church to specify requirements for the ordination of church educators into educational ministry. Here we see clearly the restrictive, specialized nature of what we are being asked to honor with the title AP. We don’t think the church ought to be giving this title which carries with it an expansive offering of ministry to such a specialized role.
5. Amendment 02-A.3 asks the church to place on the same level a sermon preached and a lesson taught before presbytery as parts of trial in examination before ordination. The unavoidable implication to be drawn is what happens in the classroom can be substituted for worship in the sanctuary; that the techniques of teaching are equivalent to the dynamics of worship; that an art project can be of the same value as the sacramental seal of the proclaimed Word. We respectfully disagree.
The Reformed tradition has a great reputation in teaching its members. However, no one can dispute the fact that in the Reformed tradition, worship beats at the heart of the gathered church. Presbyterians have a legitimate expectation that people called ministers will be skilled at leading worship, preaching and celebrating with them the sacraments of entrance into the community (baptism) and ongoing nurture in the community (Holy Communion). It is the obligation of presbyteries to assure the members of the particular churches under their care that people whom they authorize as ministers of the Word and Sacrament can fulfill adequately all these expectations.
Amendment 02-A.4 asks the church to agree to waive in specified cases the ordinary requirements for ordination for certified Christian educators. This language is not strictly necessary since it is already permitted in the Book of Order. Yet even so, the effect of this permission can load more exceptions onto a professional persona that already carries exceptions to what the role normally means.
Amendment 02-A.5 asks the church to agree to waive in specified cases the ordinary requirements for a full, open search for any minister to a position that is an installed office. While this may be done with the best of intentions, this seems to us to present a potential source of conflict in a congregation. It may have unfortunate effects when dealing with colleagues who have submitted to the expected rigors of the prescribed educational requirements and search process.
Warner M. Bailey is minister of Ridglea church, Fort Worth, Texas. Betsy Harper Lockhart is an inquirer under the care of Grace Presbytery and a third-year student at Brite Divinity School, Texas Christian University.
