Ritröð Guðfræðistofnunar - 01.09.2008, Blaðsíða 39

the more, in disguises we will not recognize and in situations where open
criticism is not possible. Rather, in all human life our leaders need to be
obvious, open to critique and able to present themselves in ways that do
not contradict the communal purposes of their leadership. But, in the
church, we may take joy in the public but paradoxical office of self-critical
authority, of serving leadership. Who says so? A crucified and powerless
man, according to Mark. On what authority? On the authority that
welcomes the un-included, forgives the sinner, washes and gives life to the
dying, and serves the table of the poor, the very authority of the triune God
as known in Jesus Christ. This is the only true authority pastors have, and
they must always be seeking to break the power they are given by their
public and religious role, by their ordentlichen Beruf, to the purposes of
this authority. The comfort is that even if they do not succeed in doing
so, even as they misspeak and mislead, God can nonetheless use also their
stumbling leadership — if their words are somewhere near the words of the
Gospel book and their actions somewhere near the cup and the baptism
given to James and John — God can also use these frail leaders to build up
the church as a real witness to mercy for the life of the world.
So is the office of a pastor a profession or a vocation? Well, I think both
can be true, though the Markan text pushes us to re-evaluate both as well.
If one means by “profession” a functional differentiation in our society
intended for the sake of the inclusion of a wider community of persons in
the skills or gifts carried by the specialists, that might not be a bad way to
begin to speak about pastors. But scribes were also such professionals. And
if one means by “vocation” either a sense that the individual has that this
work is intended by the divine to be done by her or him or a sense that
the community has that the divine intends for this person to do this work,
then that will be a much more traditional way to talk about the pastor’s
role. But rulers and great ones also often had this sense. So did the comm-
unities around them. For the gospel and for the building up of the church,
neither the skill of the professional nor the power of the “called” is enough.
Both may be something like Marks’s scribes and rulers, something like the
Augsburg Confession’s rite vocatus. We have to have both skill and call.
Indeed, we can take joy in them as good things. But they still need the
37