Why Pastors Leave the Parish
The United Church of Christ sponsored a comparative study of ministers and ex-ministers recently. The results have appeared in the book Ex-Pastors, Why Men Leave the Parish Ministry by Jud, Mills, and Burch.
In the majority of cases, money has nothing to do with the decision. As one of the book's authors, Dr. Edgar Mills, put it: "Money is a straw on the camel's back, but not the one that breaks it."
The study showed there was no simple answer since most left for a number of reasons. But two out of five said that being "disillusioned with the church's relevance to problems of the modern world" was of "high" importance.
Some of the problems described by the anonymous minister at the beginning of this article will illustrate the frustrations felt by many.
I had won a preaching award as a student, and 400 persons (half his congregation) were there for my first sermon. Except at Christmas and Easter, the members never came in such numbers again. As one woman . . . put it: "The people would rather hear about their idea of Christianity than Christ's.
Not only didn't they want to hear about it; they didn't want to talk about it. On my first round of calling on members I did little more than joke, make small talk and otherwise get acquainted. This approach of the religious ward heeler, I found made me a big hit . . .
On the next round of visits, I began to talk religion as part of each call. It was a low-pressure approach, mainly telling members what I thought were the main doctrines of our church and asking if they had any questions. Almost every time they would cough, hesitate, smile shyly, try to change the subject and as soon as possible rush me to the door. Soon it became difficult to find members at home. When they were home, many preferred talking at the door to inviting me in.
After fighting with himself and the church's problems for two or three years, this minister, who has chosen to remain anonymous, finally decided:
"This was not the ministry to which I had felt a call." He saw his life "would be wasted as a recreation director for what essentially seemed to me to be little more than a U.S.O. for civilians or a Sunday-morning mutual-admiration society."
Strong words, perhaps! But can anyone argue that, in this case, they weren't justified? As he concluded:
"The majority of today's church members refuse to care. In this refusal, most remaining members and much of their chosen church hierarchy blandly acquiesce. How then can a minister rationalize devoting his life to the organization which results, a superficial extension of society?"
The Experience of Priests
Now consider the worries that confront the Roman Catholic Church. Time magazine estimated that 4000 priests doff their collars each year in the United States alone. In 1965, the ratio of priests to lay Catholics was 1 to 1390; in 1970 it had dropped 1 to 1435. (Time magazine, February 23, 1970)
This crisis gives the incredible picture of one priest out of every four contemplating resignation.
University of Notre Dame Sociologist Dr. John P. Koval recently did a study of 1500 priests. He found that the most serious stresses given by those thinking of leaving were "related to authority, moral and social issues, the slow pace of change, loneliness, lack of support from colleagues and the desire to marry."
But surprisingly, the desire to marry was, for most, not the prime consideration. The greatest stresses included "a lack of leadership from those in authority (40%), disappointment with the church's stand on certain social and moral issues (such as) race and birth control (38%) and the slow pace of change after Vatican II (35%)."
As might be expected, the root for dissatisfaction and frustration of priests and ministers can often be found in their student days — in the seminaries and theological schools which taught them.
What Grows the "Seedbed"?
The very start of problems is with the types of persons who choose the ministry in the first place. (And, of those who choose the ministry, it is some of the most able who are the first to leave)
The secretary of the board of higher education of the United Lutheran Church once commented that far too many of those seeking the ministry are "passive and basically insecure conformists."
He went on to say: "Most are pleasant, well-meaning, nice, happy, even gregarious, but they have little backbone. . . But what the church needs is valiant leadership in order to become a potent spiritual force in society rather than a fringe activity of irrelevant concern."
A country or people is what its educators make it. Church leaders are the products of the seminaries. The faults in the churches can be traced in great degree to the faults of the theological programs which produce the ministers.
How can a pastor point his parishioners to a faith he no longer believes in? And belief — or lack of belief — most likely stems from his seminary days. Remember, the "death of God" concept came from theologians, not Communists or avowed anti-religionists.
It's rather hard on the credibility gap of a bright young aspirant to the ministry when he hears a theologian give the following reply to the question of whether he believed in God: "Well, actually, I'd prefer not to split hairs about it"! (Look, May 16, 1967)
Presbyterian theologian John R. Bodo pointed out that anyone who decided to attend a seminary "should have a shockproof faith." He stated that unless a student is "already deeply committed to the God whom Jesus called Father," he was "not likely to survive this shock treatment."
UPI correspondent Louis Cassels found that the "more famous the seminary, the more corrosive the atmosphere of skepticism pervading its faculty and student body is apt to be." He was not greatly surprised to find that few students of a prestige-laden Episcopal seminary engaged in private prayer, because most just did not believe in that kind of a personal God.
The practicality of seminary training has also been questioned by more than one student and minister. This is emphasized in a gently humorous but pointed manner in How to Become a Bishop: "About the only practical teaching in a seminary consists of lessons (usually bad) on how to write sermons and baptize babies" (p. xii).
A survey by Dr. Robert E. Mitchell at Columbia University's Bureau of Applied Social Research revealed that a minister uses his specialized training much less than most professionals such as doctors or lawyers.
One study, in fact, shows that clergymen spend only 1/10 of their time dealing with theology and ritual. The average minister spends 40 percent of his time in administration and an additional 15 percent in organization or parish education. Yet the concentration of courses in seminary is on the academic subjects rather than on the skills most often called upon by the parish minister.
Many theological training schools and seminaries fail to prepare the young clergy candidate for what actually awaits him in a local church. As one clergyman, who left the ministry, put it:
"The realization of how things really are in a church, and how different they are from what we have been led to believe, shocks almost every minister. One disheartening discovery comes after another, like a series of blows for which the classical seminary curriculum cannot prepare one."
No wonder one Protestant minister in eight and one Catholic priest out of four are contemplating resignation!
Admitted Loss of Influence
Most of the causes of problems in the churches fall into one of three broad categories:
1. The affluence and prosperity of Western society. The rise of affluence and the decline of religious fervency seem to be almost directly proportional. Down through history, the more opulent and prosperous a people or nation, the more of a sham and show became its religion. “God" is for the poor, the destitute and afflicted, it seems. For those who have "outgrown" it — the well-to-do, wealthy, and well-fed — there is the "God concept."
Instead of a supernatural God in heaven, all sorts of "false gods" are the object of worship today. Dr. Reinhold Niebuhr of Union Theological Semi nary stated: "The false gods are obvious. The primary one is physical power and comfort." Professor W. S. Reid of McGill University paraphrased today's primary one as America's "standard of living."
Even Moses is reported to have told the Children of Israel before they were to enter the Promised Land: "When thou halt eaten and art full . . . beware that thou forget not the Lord thy God" (Deut. 8:10-11). The Western world is no longer really conscious of that God.
2. Lack of a central religious authority. Traditionally, Protestants and Jews have appealed to the Bible for their authority. But this has been more in theory than in fact, since there is no agreement about what the Bible means or how to understand it.
Catholics have appealed to Council and Pope for authority. But the admitted schisms and cracks inside the Roman Catholic Church show this no longer holds true for many modern Catholics. The issue of birth control has demonstrated the lack of dominion the church exercises for many Catholics.
The majority of Protestant churches are founded on the principle of democracy. This often leaves the clergy subservient to the wishes of the laymen. But as has been pointed out, the unconcern and ignorance of the congregation often hamstrings the minister who tries to apply his sincere conviction of right and wrong. Dr. Mitchell's study, reported in Redbook, found that "the successful minister is therefore the one who adapts to his parishioners' prejudices and wishes." (Redbook, January 1964)
3. The irrelevance of the church to the modern world and life in general.
One religion editor of a newspaper gave a list of words by which many people described their churches. These included "simpering, servile, unctuous and mummified."
In 1969 the National Observer, a weekly newspaper, conducted a discussion on religion with eight high school leaders from a "typical" high school. Their comments centered on the fact that they found little connection between services on Sunday morning and real everyday life.
Is There a Solution?
While there are other problems and considerations, most would fall under these three main headings. Until these basic problems are solved, churches will continue to be in a state of crisis.
The problems in the churches led a major news magazine to entitle an article: "U.S. Protestantism: Time for a Second Reformation."
More than one minister and theologian has voiced the conviction that the nations need another "Jeremiah" — a modern-day prophet who will really stand up and "tell it like it is."
Today's typical minister has been described as "no prophet but rather a skilled politician." Dr. John Thompson, chaplain of Hiram College, explains it: "He is leading his people back to the flesh pots of Egypt rather than forward to the Promised Land." (Christianity Today, June 24, 1966)
People recognize the need for a leader. But do they want a real leader? Syndicated columnist Sydney J. Harris described a true leader as one who "tells people hard truths, gives them a difficult path to follow, calls upon their highest qualities, not their basest instincts. A true leader does not tell us what we want to hear, but what we ought to hear."
But would people accept such leadership? Would the people have the sense to distinguish genuine leadership and truth from the false?
The original Jeremiah was labeled a traitor because, his detractors said, he "bad mouthed" his country. At least one of his colleagues was murdered in cold blood for standing up for the truth. Would a contemporary "Jeremiah" receive anything less from today's society? Time will tell.
For further reading you are welcome to write for these additional free reprint articles: "Why God is Not Real to Most People," and "What Is a Real Christian?"
Also, you may have an already-paid subscription to the TOMORROW'S WORLD magazine, edited and published by the Ambassador College Graduate School of Theology. These are all given FREE as a public service by Ambassador College to those who request them personally.