The letters are a response to David Wigger’s opinion piece published in Outlook magazine, “Calls for Reform of the PC(USA) Investiture Process.”
As a psychiatrist and Presbyterian clergy member, I agree with the Rev. David Wigger’s article “Calling for Reform in the Presbyterian Church’s Ordination Process.” Not only does the current process reflect a decades-old approach, it also fails to adequately address the mental health needs of those entering the ordination profession.
The struggles inherent in seminary, the ordination exam, and the pastoral preparation process are still fresh in my memory, and from my experience serving on a pastoral preparation committee, I understand the challenges inherent in the preparation process, the stresses pastors face, and the stresses that impact their own emotional and spiritual needs, as well as their ability to meet the needs of their families.
Statistics show that most ordination candidates come from large churches but receive callings to small rural communities. With fewer students interested in parish pastoral care, seminaries are shifting their focus to social justice curricula. As church sizes get smaller, so do staffing patterns and church expectations of pastors. This results in increased stress and risk of burnout for new and experienced pastors.
As we consider ways to improve our preparation for service process, we must be intentional about recognizing and addressing the emotional, spiritual, social, and physical needs of those preparing to serve and those currently serving in an ever-changing and unpredictable environment. — Rev. Jane Holtzclaw, Lincoln, Nebraska
Reading David Wigger’s Voices essay about his upcoming proposals for reforming the candidacy process left me with more questions than confidence about positive changes to the system. There was a lot of language about diversity and inclusion, but very little desire to address the actual problems with the candidacy process. He made bold claims about preparing for the “church of the past,” but offered no evidence to support this claim.
The current process works on the premise that: Those who are ordained in our denomination should be people who can apply what they learned in seminary and through their walk with God to the general work of a pastor. When someone comes to you in a spiritual crisis, you do not have the option to say, “I have terrible exam anxiety. Email me your questions and give me enough time to quietly think about them. I will get back to you when I feel more confident.” The ordination exam attempts to simulate real-world situations that you may be called upon to deal with as a pastor.
The infamous Judges 19 question is a good example. Who would say to a congregation, “I will only accept questions about the Bible that do not provoke negative emotions or remind you of traumatic experiences. If you have questions about these verses, please contact someone else”? Questions about sex, sexual orientation, domestic violence, politics, cultural issues, issues of war and peace, poverty, and just about anything you can think of can and will be asked of any pastor at any time. Seminary training is designed to develop the ability to step back and think critically about these questions.
I have served many terms on our Committee for Mission Preparation (CPM), and the primary work we do is preparing individuals for the responsibilities of orderly mission as elders in the PC(USA). We mentor individuals, help them through difficult times, and help them find accommodations in extreme situations, but the focus of the CPM is mission preparation, not the individual. That’s what’s in the name.
Moreover, we do not know what kind of ordination a candidate will one day receive. What they want to do on the day of ordination can (and often does) change depending on their life situation, where they live, their age, and their opportunities. That is why the ordination examination focuses on areas that are essential for all PC(USA) pastors: knowledge of the biblical text and how to interpret it and construct a sermon, the use of theological reasoning based on Scripture and our theological documents and traditions, hearing and responding to requests for healing of souls, and the use of complex and specialized methods to direct churches to respond to situations that arise among them.
If Rev. Wigger wants to put candidates at the center of the process, this is exactly the wrong path. The current system expects and provides for exceptional candidates. Making the exception the rule distracts attention from preparing for what we know, and continue to know, to be true: certain skills and abilities are non-negotiable for the pastoral profession. I hope the General Conference will recognize this in its discussion of this proposal and not be swayed by emotional appeals. — Robert Johnson, Ashland, Virginia
