Authority, Charisma, & Charism
As my presbytery has debated and discussed various pastoral matters (by which I mean issues which arise out of, or directly affect, local congregations) over the last twenty years, I've suspected there's been an underlying—although by no means the—theme, but only recently have I been able to put a finger on it. What seems to come up again and again, even when talking about congregational child protection policies, is a concern to maintain and protect the authority of the pastor and/or session of the local congregation. I've been mystified as to why some care so much about this issue. But I've come to suspect their concern may be rooted in an American perspective on the basis of personal authority.
In many areas of life, Americans tend to grant authority to individuals on the basis of personal charisma. In this instance, I'm using "charisma" to refer to the ineffable qualities which induce others to trust and respect an individual. There is the charisma that draws us to prefer certain dining companions, and then there is the charisma that leads us to believe a person's views on Spiritual affairs should be respected. The pastor's charisma is not that of the actor, but there is certainly a sort of gravitas we expect from ministers of Word and sacrament. That charisma may be ineffable, but most think they've identified it when they tell a young man they believe he should pursue the ministry.
Charisma has certainly become the guiding principle for electing American presidents. For all their differences and even their (apparent) personal animus, the current chief executive of these United States and his most recent predecessor have at least one thing in common: neither had much (or any) experience in civil government, and none at all as an executive official, prior to taking up that office. In addition, they both have charisma which exerts a remarkable hold on their followers. Admirers of men not only focus on their best qualities, but they also seem to project onto them all the best qualities of great leaders throughout space and time. Then there’s a strange commonality: they are held in contempt by their detractors to the same extent they are adulated by their admirers.
It’s no coincidence that the most ardent admirers of these two men have sorted themselves into mutually exclusive groups. (A point in evidence: right now, some reader, somewhere, is highly annoyed that I’m asserting these two men have at least three traits in common.) Charisma is volatile stuff: what attracts one person also violently repels another. We’re not always persuaded by words and arguments so much as by a charisma that seems to speak directly to our core identities. To succumb to anyone’s charisma, whether politician or pastor, is much like falling in love—a mysterious surrender of self which does not readily respond to reason.
Thus, charisma shares romantic love’s core weaknesses: it is both without reason and ineffable. Like romantic love, charismatic attraction can quickly turn into unreasoning loathing when that which transcends description fails to withstand close examination. Surely this is one of the elements at play in our current cultural moment of confrontation with the sad reality of sexual harassment perpetrated by powerful men. The more widely beloved or admired the celebrity personality is the more quickly he is cast aside and every outraged attempt made to remove him from the cultural stage. Charisma’s charms are fickle and misleading—we want to be seduced by them, but we are angered by their seductive power.
The same holds for pastoral authority based on charisma. If a pastor on some occasion acts, well, unpastoral, his charisma is called into question. If charisma is without reason and ineffable, then it is shifting sand and the authority founded on it may quickly evaporate. I well remember my fear as a new teacher that my control of the classroom would disappear if even a single student successfully challenged my authority. That fear motivated a reactionary posture in which all perceived opposition had to be vigorously put down lest it spread like a contagion. (No, this wasn’t a very successful classroom management philosophy.)
Sadly, I think I've seen the same fear in more than one pastor's or session's attitude toward the congregation. Any challenge to the session’s authority is a contagion that must be contained or cauterized, even if that means treating the challenger harshly. If the charisma evaporates, so might the authority, and with it the man’s ministry.
Perhaps the same problem is found in other cultural contexts, but I’ve only ever been a pastor in these United States. I write as an American to Americans, and it seems to me that in this regard, pastors and elders risk captivity to the spirit of this age, or at least this nation’s culture. It’s a spirit of fear—fear that charisma will be challenged, respect undermined, and authority taken away. That fear may be manifested not only in attitude but in action: more specifically, actions that abuse the office-bearer’s authority in order to shut down opposition within the congregation. That abuse can take hard or soft forms, such as manipulating church courts or spreading misrepresentations within the congregation against the opposition by emphasizing one’s authority to judge with one’s position of spiritual expertise.
To be clear, I'm not commenting on the legitimacy of that opposition. The person challenging the pastor's preaching may be entirely out of line and not a little bit crazy. (I’ve been a pastor since 1999 and was a deacon before that. I’ve seen my fair share of crazy.) Even in those cases, the man of God must pursue gentleness. It's the only way to fight the good fight with those who are wayward and confused (2 Timothy 6:11-12). Frankly, those crazy people are the bruised reeds our Lord would not break (Isaiah 42:3). They are done no service when they are punished merely for questioning the elders' authority.
Now, it's all well and good to suggest the pastor ought to be like Jesus and not return reviling for reviling (1 Peter 2:23). But won't doing so undermine his authority in the eyes of the congregation? If authority rests in charisma, yes indeed. But his authority cannot be undermined if it rests on a charism.
"Charism" means "gift," and all presbyterian Church officers should remember they received one at ordination:
"Do not neglect the gift you have, which was given you by prophecy when the council of elders laid their hands on you" (1 Timothy 4:14, ESV).
The Spiritual charism granted by ordination is an objective reality, and cannot be removed or undermined by challenges to authority or questioning of charisma. During our Lord's earthly ministry, he got challenged plenty, but he never lost possession of his divine or messianic authority. Similarly, the authority granted to elders by ordination is a durable, presbytery and Spirit-imposed thing, easily able to survive any opposition. A challenge to my authority to preach would be like a challenge to the blueness of my eyes–silly, and not worth quarreling over. After all:
“[t]here is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear. For fear has to do with punishment, and whoever fears has not been perfected in love. We love because he first loved us.” (1 John 4:18-19, ESV)
We are called to ordained service because God first loved us: without reason, he chose us to receive his grace and eternal life in his Son, our Lord (Romans 9:10-18). The calling to an ordained office is likewise a gift of love, for no one can be said to have earned the right to minister God’s grace to his people. Those called, elected and ordained to an office of rule, then, have certainly received God’s love.
If God is for us, who can be against us? We cannot be punished by those who withhold their respect and love from us because, like them, we are loved by God. That perfect love casts out fear and gives one confidence in the charism he has received from our Lord by his Spirit.
The Lord’s gift of love enables the elder to exercise his charism of authority in imitation of our Lord’s love for us sinners.
“Love is patient and kind; love does not envy or boast; it is not arrogant or rude. It does not insist on its own way; it is not irritable or resentful; it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth. Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.” (1 Corinthians 13:4-7)
This includes insults and opposition within one’s congregation.
When it comes to our authority, we ought not think of ourselves as Americans, but as ecclesiastical, and specifically presbyterian, persons. Church officers do well to remember all church power and authority are ministerial and declarative: they are exercised as delegated by, and on behalf of, our Lord Jesus, and can only set forth that which is set forth by the Word of God (Orthodox Presbyterian Church Form of Government III.3). So long as I exercise my charism of authority according to those very presbyterian principles, my charisma (or lack thereof) is utterly beside the point.
Authority in the Church is lost only by those afraid of losing it. As the angels so often say, brothers, fear not.
