What's the point of clergy?

[Levite]

is there any skill involed in teaching the texts? If there is, why doesn't God do it himself?

That sounds like alot of power. Why is God comfortable with that power in men who don't know everything and can make mistakes?

If God wanted human beings to be omniscient and without free will, He would have created us so. Clearly, having free will and not being omniscient, God wants us to learn from our own experiences; and wishes us to do so in different ways, for different reasons.

We don't really know why God created us as He did, or what all His motivations are in wanting us to have free will and do things for ourselves and make our own mistakes. But many of our rabbis have taught that He wishes for us to have free will to be more like Him; and he wishes us to make our own mistakes and learn from them, because doing so cultivates compassion and empathy for one another. And the best way for us to learn to love Him better is for us to learn to love one another better.

How does this infringe free will? If God infringes the believers free will by organizing the faith, doesn't the clergy infringe the worshippers free will too?

Because if God did everything for us, and constantly gave us all the right answers through miracles and divine intervention, we would never learn to think for ourselves, to act for ourselves, or to value the work necessary to learn, or the experience that breeds wisdom over time.

Clergy don't infringe people's free will because we are not divinely appointed, not hierarchical, are entitled to disagree with one another, and have no authority over the souls of others. In order to become a rabbi, one does not need miraculous selection, or special powers, or noble bloodlines, or to be rich or powerful, or any other quality except education. And rabbis may be halachic judges, but the most we can do to anyone is to put them in cherem (like excommunication): people absolutely have choices about whether to follow what we say. And, most frequently, if people hate the way their rabbi interprets the law, they find another rabbi who interprets it more to their liking, and goes to that rabbi's synagogue instead. No compulsion to it.

 

[Looncall]

These disclaimers never work, but I want to know I did what I could: This discussion only refers to omnipotent, perfect and all loving gods. And, obviously, I'm only discussing organized religions with clergy in them, like imams, priests or the like. If your religion is not about omnipotent beings and there's no clergy, this discussion doesn't concern your faith.

Ok, so let's get busy. Why do religions need clergy? God is omnipotent, omnipresent and loves us so why does he put people in charge of organizing the believers and preach his word? This is kind of a big job, and doing it wrong means people are going to miss out on salvation (unless there is absolutely no technique or talent involved in preaching, in which case clergy really becomes useless) so why doesn't he do it himself? Why does he require people do sacrifice their time and resources to build churches to house congregations, keep priests on the pay roll and handle all the financial problems and what not? I mean, he's omnipotent and perfect, he won't just do a better job, he'll do a perfect job. Nothing can or will go wrong if he's handling it, and since his powers are infinite, he sacrifices no resources (no matter how much you take out of an infinite power reserve, there will still be an infinite amount left) and his effectiveness is infinite too so it would take him no time to complete these tasks either.

I am aware of the benifits of being involed in a church. It gives the satisfaction of work and it teaches you alot of things, not to mention the satisfaction when you reach new people and prove what you're capable of. But are these things really more important than all the billions of people that won't find salvation, simply because clergy can't preach to absolutely everyone everywhere? They can't even reach every person who has an open mind about their religion.

And, I think it's worth adressing; there would be absolutely no abuses of the power clergy possesses if God simply handles the job. No Crusades, no Islamic terrorists and no misuse of his name to reach human goals.

So, this is basically what I'm asking; if the work of clergy matters, why doesn't God do it?

The first tribesman who managed to escape the daily grind of survival by pretending to talk to gods realized right away that he was onto a good thing (for him). It has just snowballed from there.

 

[rusra02]

This is patently untrue. And I resent the false witness. The apostles were sent out to plant churches, to preach, to teach, to bear witness, to heal, to lead -- in other words, to do what clergy do. The "rise of the clergy class" was there from the very beginning, with Peter, James, Thomas, Paul, and the rest. They were the clergy class. Soon others, such as Phoebe, were called to be leaders.

In fact, the scribes and Pharisees were not "clergy." The Levites and priests were clergy.

Geez!

I am sorry the truth offends you. Constrast the course of Paul with the titled clergy of today. Paul worked secularly to avoid becoming an expensive burden to those he preached to. How many clergy persons today can say this? (1 Thessalonians 2:9, 2 Thessalonians 3:8-10) It is true the apostles took the lead among God's people, but they did not exalt themselves over their brothers. Rather, they became examples to the flock to imitate. All early Christians were zealous preachers. (2 Peter 5:1-3)
Your statement that the scribes and Pharisees were not clergy is simply wrong. They were religious leaders the people looked to for religious instruction. They were legalistic, proud, self-righteous teachers who tried to control the nation through synagogue instruction. (Matthew 23:2-4) The term "clergy" does not appear in the Bible, but the proud Pharisees, scribes, and Sadducees are the prototype of today's clergy class. I believe responsibility for the inquisitions, crusades, and support of bloody modern wars can all be laid at the feet of the clergy. And much, much more.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

So, this is basically what I'm asking; if the work of clergy matters, why doesn't God do it?

First of all, which God/god are we talking about?
For the time being, according to 2nd Corinthians 4 v 4, Satan is the 'god' of this world of badness. [Rev. 12 vs 9,12]

The work the clergy do DOES matter to God.
That is why he had the Bible writers forewarn us how they would be corrupt.
Luke wrote that false clergy would fleece the flock of God. [Acts 20 vs 29,30]
Jesus gave the illustration of how genuine 'wheat' Christians would grow together with fake 'weed/tares' Christians until the Harvest Time.
A harvest comes at an end or a conclusion which is our time frame.
Jesus also warned Not to follow those who follow tradition over Scripture.
-Mark 7 vs 1-7,13; Matthew 15 v 9

The clergy class is called as a composite 'man of sin' and 'son of perdition [destruction]' at 2nd Thessalonians 2 vs 2-8.
That clerical 'man of lawlessness' set themselves up as a law unto themselves.

They sit themselves [verse 4] in the temple [houses of worship] as if they are God when in reality they are anti-God.

They often assign a 'Christian' messianic role to an un-Christian organization to save the world such as the U.N.
They, instead of following Jesus agenda, often follow a political agenda even using the pulpit as a recruiting station so parents will sacrifice their young on the Altar of War.

They being a 'son' of perdition/destruction inherit from their 'father'.
[John 8 v 44; 2nd Thess. 2 v 9]
Inherit as being an 'heir of destruction' because their father Satan deserves destruction. The wicked are to be destroyed forever [Psalm 92 v7] and
Jesus will also destroy wicked Satan -Hebrews 2 v 14 B

What God will do is have Jesus rid the earth of all wicked ones.
-Isaiah 11 vs 3,4; Rev. 11 vs 19,15; Proverbs 2 vs 21,22; 10 v30; 21 v 18

 

[doppelganger]

Clergy, gurus, self-improvement teachers, and the like are servants of social institutions that derive their political and economic vitality by heightening and then exploiting the separation between human being and the divine.

 

[sojourner]

I am sorry the truth offends you.

The truth doesn't offend me. But crap like this does.

Constrast the course of Paul with the titled clergy of today. Paul worked secularly to avoid becoming an expensive burden to those he preached to. How many clergy persons today can say this?

Paul lived in an entirely different time and culture, and worked for an entirely different church. To compare modern clergy with Paul is folly at best.

It is true the apostles took the lead among God's people, but they did not exalt themselves over their brothers.

None of the clergy I know (which is quite a few) are not "exalted" over others. In fact, clergy are taught (and rightfully so) that their ministry is a servant ministry. The stole worn over the shoulders is a sign of servanthood, derived from the towel with which Jesus girded himself when he washed the disicples' feet. You're making a lot of statements here that are patently untrue, and that you cannot back up.

(2 Peter 5:1-3)

If you're going to make incriminating statements, you can at least back them up with real Biblical references. There is no 5th chapter of 2 Peter.

Your statement that the scribes and Pharisees were not clergy is simply wrong. They were religious leaders the people looked to for religious instruction.

The scribes were lawyers. The Pharisees was a particular group of religious -- like an order of monks. "Religious leader" and "clergy" are two different things.

The term "clergy" does not appear in the Bible,

So? There are lots of terms that don't "appear in the bible." What's your point?

the proud Pharisees, scribes, and Sadducees are the prototype of today's clergy class.

No, they're not. These groups were all groups found in ancient Judaism. The Christian clergy are founded on the various ministries of the apostles.

I believe responsibility for the inquisitions, crusades, and support of bloody modern wars can all be laid at the feet of the clergy. And much, much more.

some people believe in a flying spaghetti monster, too.

I'm appalled. Just appalled.

 

[sojourner]

Clergy, gurus, self-improvement teachers, and the like are servants of social institutions that derive their political and economic vitality by heightening and then exploiting the separation between human being and the divine.

Rubbish.

Clergy are servants of churches who seek to deepen the spiritual awareness of humanity, and to lessen the separation between humanity and Divinity.

 

[Looncall]

Rubbish.

Clergy are servants of churches who seek to deepen the spiritual awareness of humanity, and to lessen the separation between humanity and Divinity.

I'm not sure either of you have it quite right.

I see religion as an elaborate self-perpetuating con game that has been carefully developed over thousands of years. The really odd thing about it is that some of its perpetrators are also victims. Even a sincere cleric is still a con man.

 

[sojourner]

I see religion as an elaborate self-perpetuating con game that has been carefully developed over thousands of years.

In what way is it a con game?

Even a sincere cleric is still a con man.

Oh? How?

 

[Looncall]

In what way is it a con game?

Oh? How?

It is a con game because the goods it purports to provide cannot be demonstrated to be provided (eg an afterlife).

The clerics, even sincere ones, claim to provide benefits that they cannot demonstrate that they can indeed provide.

If you search for a satire whose name starts with "Kissing Hank's" you will see what I mean. Sorry if you find it a bit crude. It's the most pointed account I know of.

 

[doppelganger]

Rubbish.

Clergy are servants of churches who seek to deepen the spiritual awareness of humanity, and to lessen the separation between humanity and Divinity.

Nope. If that were their purpose, they wouldn't exist. Humans who are in direct experience of the divine don't need religious authorities or social institutions to put words around that experience.

Btw, may I suggest Jung's essay, "Psychotherapy or the Clergy"? The other thing the clergy does is sloppy, primitive therapy with inadequate training, no standardized methodology and poor information gathering.

 

[rusra02]

The truth doesn't offend me. But crap like this does.

Paul lived in an entirely different time and culture, and worked for an entirely different church. To compare modern clergy with Paul is folly at best.

None of the clergy I know (which is quite a few) are not "exalted" over others. In fact, clergy are taught (and rightfully so) that their ministry is a servant ministry. The stole worn over the shoulders is a sign of servanthood, derived from the towel with which Jesus girded himself when he washed the disicples' feet. You're making a lot of statements here that are patently untrue, and that you cannot back up.

If you're going to make incriminating statements, you can at least back them up with real Biblical references. There is no 5th chapter of 2 Peter.

The scribes were lawyers. The Pharisees was a particular group of religious -- like an order of monks. "Religious leader" and "clergy" are two different things.

So? There are lots of terms that don't "appear in the bible." What's your point?

No, they're not. These groups were all groups found in ancient Judaism. The Christian clergy are founded on the various ministries of the apostles.

some people believe in a flying spaghetti monster, too.

I'm appalled. Just appalled.

"If you're going to make incriminating statements, you can at least back them up with real Biblical references. There is no 5th chapter of 2 Peter."

Sorry about the incorrect reference. Should be 1 Peter 5:1-3. But you knew that, didn't you?
As to your other statements, the record of the clergy is there for all to see. The inquisition, the crusades, and the bloody wars that are supported to this day by professed "Christian" clergy are not the flying spaghetti monster, and cannot be so easily dismissed. The pedophilia, money grubbing, false teachings, and moral misconduct of many of the clergy are also a matter of public record. You should be appalled, but for the right reasons.

 

[doppelganger]

Soj:

If one of your "flock" were to ask you what Jesus was, what he did and why it was important, what would you tell them?

 

[sojourner]

Nope. If that were their purpose, they wouldn't exist. Humans who are in direct experience of the divine don't need religious authorities or social institutions to put words around that experience.

Most humans who are on that journey need help and guidance. That's our job.

Btw, may I suggest Jung's essay, "Psychotherapy or the Clergy"? The other thing the clergy does is sloppy, primitive therapy with inadequate training, no standardized methodology and poor information gathering.

Nope. We're not allowed to do that, unless we're specifically trained and certified. We're taught to refer, refer, refer.

 

[sojourner]

The inquisition, the crusades, and the bloody wars that are supported to this day by professed "Christian" clergy are not the flying spaghetti monster, and cannot be so easily dismissed.

And we don't dismiss them. But presidents, monarchs and generals also start bloody wars (to wit: the careful orchestration of the unnecessary war in Iraq by King George the Unwise). Yet, we say we need a president, and many people voted for the idiot... twice.

The pedophilia, money grubbing, false teachings, and moral misconduct of many of the clergy are also a matter of public record. You should be appalled, but for the right reasons.

There is a higher percentage of pedophilia among volunteers who work with children. Shall we outlaw the YMCA? There are more money grubbers in industry. Shall we outlaw industry? There are also a lot of false teachings going on in our public schools. Let's outlaw them, too. Humanity is rife with moral misconduct. Let's just kill all of us and be done with it.

You're looking to scapegoat the clergy for being human. How dumb is that?!

 

[doppelganger]

Most humans who are on that journey need help and guidance. That's our job.

Nope. We're not allowed to do that, unless we're specifically trained and certified. We're taught to refer, refer, refer.

All of your colleagues that I've encountered (every single one of them) apparently didn't get that memo. They must not be true Scotsmen.

 

[sojourner]

Soj:

If one of your "flock" were to ask you what Jesus was, what he did and why it was important, what would you tell them?

I'd give them an appropriate answer, based upon who they are and what, specifically they want to know.

 

[beerisit]

Hey Sojourner your kickin' but here. Yo.

 

[sojourner]

All of your colleagues that I've encountered (every single one of them) apparently didn't get that memo. They must not be true Scotsmen.

They're not from any denomination I've been part of.
I'm sure there are many irresponsible yahoos, but that's true of any profession: Science, medicine, law, you name it. We all have our Frankensteins, our Kevorkians, our Ken Starrs and our Jim Joneses. But that doesn't mean that scientists, doctors, lawyers and clergy aren't needed.

Or perhaps I should advance the conclusion that all attorneys engage in throwing around bad legal advice, just because I lost my shirt in a divorce?

 

[nrg]

I think Xy is, primarily, a religion of liberation. It is designed to set people free from that which binds them. it has always thrived in cultures where such liberation is most necessary. Sounds as if in Sweden, it's not that necessary.

It lifts humanity. First of all, from poverty of body - second, from poverty of spirit. It serves to heighten our awareness of and need for true community. Look what happened in El Savladore and South Africa. If it hadn't been for the church, people would still be in bondage there. If it hadn't been for the church, I'm convinced the violence would have been much, much worse. An example is what happened in Cosovo and Serbia. In those places, the church had been suppressed.

Ever heard the story of "The Four Asian Tigers"? There was once upon a time four countries who were desperately poor, illiterate, unskilled and severely hurt by the largest war in history. They did have some contact with christianity, going back not much more than a century, but christianity never really got a foothold in any of those four countries during these trying times. However, they all pulled out of poverty and became four of the most developed countries in the World, with higher literacy and longer life expectancy thanm the United States. They're called Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan and South Korea.

Western Europe had alot of trained engineers, a love for money and effeciency, and the funding to start the Industrial Revolution. That's the reason I have clean water, most of my family members are alive well into their 80s and we have the resources to enforce a democracy. We just happened to be christian in the 19th century, and it didn't play any role of what happened. Christianity's influence fell throughout the 20th century and our living standards outgrew the United States throughout this period.

Very basically, it's learning to notice God. It's learning that there's more to life than simply atoms stuck together in various combinations. It's learning to take theological positions with regard, not just to yourself and the obvious religious stuff, but also with regard to the world around you.

With the risk of sounding more obnoxious, isn't that basically what you allready believe when you're a christian?

I think God did. I think our job is to peel back the layers we cover ourselves with and relearn those reflexes we've forgotten. We spend a lot of time ************ ourselves (and others) about who we are. We have to relearn to be vulnerable. We have to relearn to be interdependent. We have to relearn to be honest. The church ought to help us do that. It often fails.

How did we lose them to begin with, yet we don't lose the breathing reflex? Wouldn't it be better if we didn't lose that one, seeing as people won't reteach it perfectly and the influence that teaching position has can be abused?

Because Xtians are called to the present, not the future. Salvation plans usually have it all wrong. We're not looking for a future utopia, we're striving to live fully right now.

But, then that means millions of people aren't living life to their fullest simply because God didn't take this job on himself. Didn't he want everyone to live life to it's fullest?

When I was a kid, I used to ride bikes with my friends. Mom always wanted to know "where we were going." I always said, "We're not going anywhere... we're just riding around." Sometimes there isn't a specific destination. Sometimes it's just walkabout.

There's a reason you were riding your bike as a kid; you liked it. You progressed through moments of enjoyment when you went on a bike ride. You progress through moments of enjoyment when you take a cup of coffee too. A progress from one moment to the other falls within the definition of a journey, and if we can divide a joruney into infinitely smaller ones (remember calculus?) everything you do for a reason is a journey. In it's most abstract sense, and in the sense I'm discussing.

God limits God's Self so that we can be expanded. It's the crux of the gospel message (the parable of the leaven -- the Kingdom of God is like a woman who hid leaven in a lump of dough. Leaven in those days wasn't yeast. It was, basically poison. In order for the bread to expand, leaven was used. God became Incarnate, became human -- gave up Divinity for humanity -- became as dirt (we are dust, you know) for us, because we cannot become clean on our own. Therefore, God lives most especially in our relationships, because relationships expand who we are.

This still sounds like alot of things we could achieve with God not being limited anyway. He could just tell us to value relationships.

Worship isn't a perfunctory set of activities that "make us righteous." Worship is a shape of events in which God enters the creative process with us to transform us. It is a set of specific, intentional, ordered events that serve to point us toward the transformation process. Intentional programs are usually better than independent study.

Well, yes. But independent study with God avaliable to offer help 24/7/365 is still infinitely better. A priest will never be as good as God at helping that process, God being all powerful and perfect.