By Steve Matthews, FaithX Senior Missional Consultant
Across the US, churches are discerning how to continue their ministries (and stay open) as many experience decreased attendance and giving. Some churches have addressed this issue by decreasing the hours and salaries for their priests and pastors, which often means that the pastor needs to find other work to maintain their needed income. Thus, these priests are often referred to as “bi-vocational.” Some churches with bi-vocational leaders find ways to continue their ministry in sustainable ways. Some thrive, and some see this as the beginning of the end — increasingly scaling back on their ministry as their income and human resources dwindle.
It is common for churches to believe they are clergy-dependent. The ecclesial water in which many of us swim suggests that seminary trained leaders can and should lead our congregations – setting visions and priorities, offering prophetic sermons and compelling worship, visiting the sick, increasing membership, growing stewardship. Is this model sustainable? Is it even desirable?
Fortunately, paths are emerging and merging – paths inviting churches to move from a survival mentality toward empowered innovation that builds on the power and the gifts of the laity. Rather than thinking that paid staff do all or most of the work and mission of the church, “bi-vocational church” suggests that we are all responsible for church growth and we are all empowered for ministry inside and outside the walls of the church. Here are a few of the resources and groups that are trying to build on this transforming momentum:
- The Rt. Rev. Mark Edington (Bishop in Charge of the Convocation of Episcopal Churches in Europe) has written a book entitled Bivocational: Returning to the Roots of Ministry. In the book’s description, he writes, “The contention of the book is simple: A bivocational ministry is not simply a question of whether the ordained minister has a job in the world alongside a job in the church. When it’s realized fully and most joyfully, a bivocational ministry is a work of the entire congregation. It changes the way the pastor functions in the congregation; but it also changes the way everyone (not just the pastor) in the congregation functions as part of an intentional Christian community.
- Bexley Seabury Seminary offers online courses for laypeople through their Pathways platform. One group of courses creates a path to lay licensure in worship, evangelism, preaching, pastoral leadership, and faith formation. The hope is that more and more lay leaders are equipped and respected for the gifts of leadership they feel called to offer.
- The Episcopal Diocese of Northern Michigan has reconfigured their diocesan ministry to intentionally focus on mutual ministry. “We understand that the responsibility for mission and ministry in any place belongs primarily to the people of God in that place. In most settings, we do not send ministry to a community in the form of a professional, seminary trained rector or vicar who might minister to and on behalf of the baptized. Rather, we seek to develop the ministry of all the baptized in each community. Seminary trained persons serve as resource, offering support and encouragement, sharing in the ongoing formation and education of God’s people living the Baptismal Covenant.
- Genesis II: Re-Vision and Renew is a program of the Episcopal Church. This is a lay-led initiative that invites teams of churches from dioceses into a two-year coached redevelopment project aimed at reconnecting churches with their neighbors through Asset-Based Community Development and intentional trust-building. The hope is that ministry opportunity develops from these relationships and in partnership with the neighbors outside the walls of the church
These resources are inviting and exciting in and of themselves, but they point to a movement based in nurturing leadership among the laity – not just relying on paid staff. As we say in the south, this is the work for “all y’all,” and this is our work together. It is a gift and responsibility.
As churches move more toward bi-vocational ministry, it behooves us to stay informed with who we are in relationship to our neighbors at this point in time. FaithX has resources to help you explore your community in depth and consultants who can help lay leaders and clergy alike discern best next steps for the sake of your mission and your relationship with your neighbors. Contact us here for more information.
After having served as a bi-vocational priest for years while also starting a church mission agency, I am increasingly skeptical of the church’s turn toward this model. There are very few options for non religious employment that are flexible enough to accommodate hospitalizations and funerals. While members can and do care for one another in case of illness, in the Episcopal Church our funeral rites largely require the presence of ordained clergy. A good funeral takes at least ten hours to plan and lead, especially if the priest is involved prior to the time of death. Often those ten hours need to take place within the span of one to two weeks. In the case of suicide or other unexpected death, hours of challenging work can begin with absolutely no notice. How many people are going to be willing or able to sustain non religious employment and also be consistently available to add ten hours of work on an irregular, often emergency basis?
As someone whose husband was for thirty years a first responder, I wonder why we don’t take more of a lead from other professions. We could develop teams of paid on-call clergy to work together to cover larger regions, planning their availability for emergencies on a scheduled rotation, rather than anticipating that a solo clergyperson will both bear the burden of ensuring their own sustainable salary and also be immediately responsive in emergency contexts.
Hi Nurya,
Good to hear from you and thanks for this insightful and personal response.
I too look with skepticism about the way the church has approached this model. Not that I think bi-vocational ministry is a bad idea, of course, given that I am a bi-vocational clergy myself. But rather because of the reasons the church is turning toward this model, which are primarily about saving the church money. In my many years as an ordained clergy I have yet to hear a discussion of this issue that is primarily about the value of bi-vocationalism itself and not about the church not being able to afford full-time clergy, and have seldom heard any discussion about making the model sustainable. In fact, when I entered the ordination process over 30 years ago and told the commission on ministry that I saw myself as a bi-vocational priest, the chair of the commission took me aside during the break and advised me not to say that again if I wanted to make it through the process. They need to believe that you want to be a rector (or perhaps a bishop). I have called this discernment approach “ecclesiastical autoimmune syndrome” (i.e., the church removing from its system those who might actually change the institutional church).
If we as the church really believe in bi-vocational ministry, we have to invest in making it sustainable.
Warmly, Ken+
Thanks for this article! The content reminds us of the challenges facing modern Christianity and our responsibility to seek ways to serve others better.
Gracias, Luis!