Qualified to Lead, part 2

Now almost finished with the (rather boring) book I mentioned in the last post, I’ve been thinking more on the issue of the “qualifications” it takes to serve a church or preach the gospel “properly.” I use parentheses there because those are obviously subjective terms that possibly should not even be applied to spiritual matters.

Who could possibly be unqualified to ponder the mysterious ways of God? We all observe nature and experience love—things that cannot help but turn our eyes heavenward. We all read and hear things that others assert about God and life, and weigh those things against our own thoughts, considering the options and coming up with our own theories. (And yes, we do all do that, even if some people’s conclusions end up looking a lot like what was on FoxNews or what Pastor JimBob said.) Is preaching more than just passing on those thoughts and theories publicly?

The revivals of the early 19th century frontier fed off of random, self-appointed preachers. Some people heard a sermon, had a religious experience, and felt inspired to hop up on a stump and preach themselves, all in the same day! They spoke of what they knew—their own experience of God’s love and power to change lives. Others, of course, were free to hop up on their own stumps and contradict what had just been said, but the revival being such an experience-based environment as it was, the point was not who had the “real truth” about God, but that people had been transformed.

I don’t mean to imply that the “real truth” about God is not important. While I don’t believe anyone can come to a complete understanding of God in this life (or perhaps even in the next), I do believe we can all strive to know and understand more and more, growing closer to God in the process. That is the point—not that one knows the Truth and passes it along, but that all are trying to gain a better understanding as time goes on. There is something about the free discussion of ideas and individual understandings of God that was crucial during those revivals that seems to have become secondary in the modern church. As I concluded in the last post, the role of pastor/preacher is to educate the people on theological matters only to the extent that the people can take that proposition as a jumping off point for their own consideration. Many churches today (and throughout history, I am quite sure) use the pulpit as a platform from which to “tell ‘em how it is,” straightforward, no questions asked; but even in those churches where open-minded, reflective pastors aim to inspire reflection among their congregants, there is little or no public discussion of various laypersons’ ideas and experiences of God.

Perhaps more people would be transformed by preaching nowadays if congregations made it a priority to get up on our treestumps (or sofa cushions) and tell each other what we’ve been thinking about God recently. That’s something for which we are all qualified.