1 Corinthians 9:1-18
At first it may look like Paul is now changing subjects, but actually he is still thinking of the issue of whether Christians should give up their “right” to eat any meat (even meat from a pagan temple) in order to be accommodating to others. He uses as an illustration how he has given up his “right” to be paid for preaching the gospel in order to make hearing the gospel “free of charge.”
If a person feels called to travel from city to city proclaiming a message from God, how should that person be supported? Should an established church send and sponsor the person, paying living expenses? Should the person look for wealthy donors to underwrite the expenses? Or should the person ask for support from the people he or she is preaching to–requesting lodging and food? Jesus had an itinerant ministry, and it appears to have been supported in the second and theird ways. Wealthy women underwrote some of the expenses. In addition, he and his disciples depended on the hospitality of the townspeople where he preached–hoping someone would provide a meal and a place to sleep. This was Jesus’ way of demonstrating trust in God and encouraging people to share with each other.
But Paul takes a very different approach. Unlike Jesus, and unlike Peter and Jesus’ brothers (who are now missionaries) and all the other apostles, he and Barnabas do not ask anyone for support. Instead, Paul pays his own way through self-employment as a tent-maker. This represented quite a sacrifice on Paul’s part. Tent-making was hard, low-status work. It also took away valuable time from his mission of preaching and teaching. In fact, even some of the Christians in Corinth thought he was humiliating himself by not being supported through donations or charging a fee for teaching.
Paul says he could claim his right as an apostle to be supported by those who receive his message, but he chooses not to. Paul affirms that it is perfectly right–and biblical–for evangelists to be supported by the congregations they create. But he will not claim this right. Why not? Because he wants his message to be free of charge. No one can claim he is acting out of greed, and no one can claim he is keeping the good news from those who are too poor to pay.
This is a passage about being willing to give up one’s legitimate rights for the sake of benefiting others. This is a message our American churches need to hear. We live in a litigious society, hyper-sensitive to our rights, suing whenever possible for personal gain. This is contrary to Christian community and Christian character. Rather, as Christians, we seek to build up community, strengthen relationships, and move toward reconciliation. Rights are not unimportant, and indeed there are many times when they ought to be championed. But we do not fight selfishly for ourselves but for the benefit and building up of all.
This passage also raises interesting questions about how pastors today ought to be compensated. It is assumed by the vast majority of churches that a congregation ought to hire a pastor (full-time if possible) and pay him or her a wage comparable to other professions with similar training and workload. This is legitimate–as Paul himself affirms. But this model has had unintended consequences. When a congregation pays a person to “do ministry,” it implies that the rest of the congregation does not do ministry. Ministry becomes professionalized–something only highly-trained and paid people are supposed to do. It also fosters an attitude by the congregation that the pastor is supposed to “feed” the congregation–the congregation’s role is as passive receiver, not as activer doer. The pastor is doing a good job if the congregation is properly organized, entertained, inspired and comforted by the pastor.
But this warps the proper nature of ministry and the congregation. Ministry is what every believer does. Pastors and other congregational leaders are for equipping the congregation to do ministry. It is the congregation that shares resources, helps the poor, sees to the needs of the sick, comforts the distressed, gives testimonies, prays, and builds a better world in the name of Christ.
I wonder whether we may need to abandon the notion of “full-time professional ministry” for the sake of rescuing the church. At the very least, we need to de-emphasize it. Every believer should be recognized as a minster with a particular ministry. As few people as possible should be paid, and paid positions should be part-time whenever possible. We may need to recover Paul’s tent-making approach to ministry if we want to revitalize the true ministry of the church.
This may sound impractical, but I notice that the Mormons have avoided paid clergy for their entire history–and look at how well they’re growing! I’m not against full-time paid pastors–I’m one myself. They have a place. But the church has given them too large of a place.
