Pauline Perspectives On The Identity Of A Pastor

By Klyne R. Snodgrass

[Klyne R. Snodgrass is Paul W. Brandel Professor of New Testament Studies, North Park Theological Seminary, Chicago, Illinois.

This is the fourth article in a four-part series, “A Hermeneutics of Identity,” delivered as the W. H. Griffith Thomas Lectureship, February 2-5, 2010, Dallas Theological Seminary, Dallas, Texas.]

The main reason to focus on a hermeneutics of identity is that this is what each of us needs to live. This is not an admission of self-centeredness, as true and annoying as that reality may be; rather it is a recognition of responsibility. No one else can live this life. How can we each understand who we are and how we are to live?

Church is supposed to be a place where questions of identity are raised. Going to church is an acknowledgement that we are not the source of our own being, that we do not belong to ourselves, that we owe allegiance to someone, that we have responsibility, that life is not about us, and that we will have to give an account of our lives. Church is the place where we derive our identity and state our allegiances, and the place where we are not allowed to believe our own lies.

What then should a pastor be? People look for and need to see authenticity. They can tell the difference between someone who does pastoral work and someone who is their pastor, or between someone with a superimposed identity and someone whose Christ-shaped identity is lived out. They will always be uncertain about the former; the latter they will trust.

Pastors and all Christian leaders are “entrepreneurs of identity.”[1] Leaders of any group have the task of identity formation, identity explanation, and identity maintenance for other people. Christian leaders are communicating not their own identity but the identity of Christ and His community. Pastors are people who have hope for what others can be, and evangelism is sharing a conviction about and a hope for a worthwhile identity for others. Pastors tell people the good news of who they really are in God’s eyes. The same Christ-identity expected of all believers obviously needs to be seen first in pastors. Someone wishing to exercise leadership needs to “be maximally representative of the shared social identity and consensual position of the group in question.”[2]

On the other hand the identity of a pastor is what scares many away from the ministry. Seminary students often complain that being a pastor feels like wearing Saul’s armor, but what is a pastoral identity? Expectations are placed on pastors, especially to maintain the status quo and run programs or solve problems for people that they themselves are not willing to solve. Pastors then end up with a church but not a life.

To what degree is the identity of pastors different from the identity of their people? At issue is what pastors are called, how they dress, how they relate to people, their privileges or liabilities, and the responsibilities they have for making the identity of the church a reality. The more we say the identity of the pastor is different, the more people will say the work of the church is the work of the pastor. Though a clergy-laity distinction should be resisted, there are differences. These are differences of function but not status, of preparation but not so that only some can teach, of expectations but not of a different ethic. Käsemann rightly emphasized the responsibility of all and the call of some,[3] but not even the call to ministry is given ultimate defining force. Only Christ has that role.

Pastors minister from a sense of identity, and their identities involve an ongoing process of change, as with everyone else. No text is more instrumental or compelling for understanding the identity of a pastor than 2 Corinthians 2:14-3:6. The identity of a pastor is marked by a personal and unadulterated demonstration of God’s saving activity in Christ. This text and others make clear that Paul knew he had a specific, even unique, call and also that this did not make him better than or different from the people he served (cf. 1:24).

Second Corinthians is a complicated letter with considerable debate about its unity and the precise nature of the problem and opponents being addressed. Clearly, though, 2 Corinthians is an assertion of the integrity of Paul’s ministry, the way he had conducted himself, the way his helpers had conducted themselves, their motives in doing so, their relationships with people, and their handling of money. This is seen immediately in 1:12: “For our proud confidence is this: the testimony of our conscience, that in holiness and godly sincerity, not in fleshly wisdom but in the grace of God, we have conducted ourselves in the world, and especially toward you.” Paul had been accused by some (mostly by people who had come into the community but surely some Christians in Corinth too), of being fickle, of using them, of not having pure motives, and of not being very impressive. Such accusations can lead to self-examination, to repentance where necessary, to reorientation to the identity God expects, and, where necessary, to setting the record straight. Second Corinthians is largely setting the record straight, but it is much more than that. It is the most personal, at times even agonizing, of Paul’s letters. It is also the most revealing, the most emotional, and as theologically instructive as any letter, despite the fact that it is often neglected by churches. No letter gives such an extended portrayal of Christian ministry and the identity one should have in order to do ministry.

Second Corinthians 2:14-6:13 (possibly 2:14-7:16) is an extended excursus on ministry, the most important description of ministry in the New Testament. It shows what ministry is, presents motives for doing it, and discusses the character and identity required for doing it. This passage deserves frequent attention, especially by people contemplating or engaged in ministry.

2 Corinthians 2:14-17

The foundational statement for this whole section on ministry is 2:14-17. The suggestion has been made that this passage provides the headings for the rest of the letter, but that seems artificial. Still the themes and wording of these verses reappear throughout the letter.

From 2:14-16 it is clear that ministry is participation in the revealing activity of God. As evident in the article that discussed Galatians 3:26-4:7,[4] God is the prime actor here as well. Paul’s theology is primarily theocentric. Even Christological texts focus on what God is doing through Christ rather than merely what Christ does on behalf of God the Father. One of the main features of God’s activity is in revealing His own character. Salvation is a revelatory act. The gospel is the revealing work of God in which He shows His own identity as a loving, saving God.

The precise nuance of the words in 2:14-16 is heavily debated. The New International Version and the New Revised Standard Version both translate 2:14 with the words “always leads us in triumphal procession.” But what does this mean?[5] The King James Version rendering “causeth us to triumph” in Christ is unjustifiable. This text is not about human triumph; it is about God’s triumph. But how was Paul involved, and how are we involved? Are we marching in a victory parade as victors? Again no linguistic evidence supports this view. Most writers accept the point that behind the imagery is the Roman victory procession in which prisoners were put on display, but on these occasions the prisoners were executed at the end. This fits neither Paul’s “always,” nor Paul’s role, nor the character of God. The metaphorical use of this word does not appear before Paul. Some suggest that the word means only “to display,” and others say it means Paul identified with the humility and shame of prisoners—displayed “like prisoners in a triumphal procession.” Paul did emphasize the degradation that his ministry had brought about. First Corinthians 4:9, as rendered in the New International Version, reads as follows. “For it seems to me that God has put us apostles on display at the end of the procession, like men condemned to die in the arena. We have been made a spectacle to the whole universe, to angels as well as to men.”[6] On the other hand in 2 Corinthians 5:20 Paul viewed himself as an ambassador speaking on behalf of God.

The options are not easily resolved, but it seems that the following must be affirmed: (a) the victory is God’s in Christ; (b) Paul was taken up in that victory by virtue of being in Christ; (c) by necessity that includes the offences of the Cross. Very little suggests that Paul thought this projected him as a winner as the world views winners. Christian faith has little to do with being seen as a winner—blessed, yes; rejoicing, yes; status as children of God, yes; eternal life in Christ, yes; but winner by this world’s standards, definitely not. God puts believers on display in Christ as crucified people, but there is a victory in that Cross, for it never stands without reference to the Resurrection. What appears to be an anomaly is actually the heart of the message: the Cross is the key to God’s victory and ours.

Triumphalism is a sin among Christians; people naturally like the idea in the King James Version translation of God causing us to triumph. We want to win and be seen as winners. But Paul did not focus on winning or being viewed as a winner. He focused on the victory of God. He viewed himself as the least of the apostles and the chief of sinners, as a spectacle bearing the dying of Jesus in his body (2 Cor. 4:10-11). Triumphalism, an overemphasis on a theology of glory, is always a tendency in the church. Humans want to look good, but triumphalism tends to overlook evil in the world and human sin and limitation. It forgets the Cross. There is a theology of glory, but not at the loss of a theology of the Cross.

God in Christ reveals through humans the fragrance of knowing Him (2:14). God is at work demonstrating how pleasing is a relationship with God. The “smell” imagery here is debated as well, with some seeing sacrificial imagery behind it and others seeing allusions to the fragrance or “medicinal” value of wisdom or the Torah. Most likely sacrificial connotations are behind this language. More important, though, is the watershed, the division, that happens as the result of ministry (2:15-16). Some look at this ministry as ultimate death, which certainly fits with the way crucifixion was seen in the ancient world. Others see it as ultimate life because there they experience salvation. Knowing the enormity of this responsibility, Paul asked, “Who is sufficient for these things?” Ministry stands at that point where people diverge either into salvation or destruction, offering to people an understanding of who they are that leads to ultimate life. Who is sufficient for such a task? At this point the passage does not answer this question but Paul did answer it later.

Rightly understood, a minister is one who participates in God’s revealing work, who mirrors the victory of the crucified Lord, and who stands at the divergence of life and death.

Second Corinthians 2:17 may be viewed as the verse for framing a ministry. Paul wrote, “For we are not like many, peddling the word of God, but as from sincerity, but as from God before God in Christ we are speaking” (author’s translation). Ministry requires personal and unadulterated authenticity. What do people really want from pastors and leaders? People want pastors to be present, caring, authentic, and visionary about life. Why do people go to church? Surely near the top of any list of answers is authenticity. Other answers clearly are involved—an encounter with God; and a sense of fit with people; love; and understanding applicable to life. But if leaders are not authentic, any other reality is disabled. Authenticity is what people seek, and even if they cannot articulate their feelings, they can tell phoniness a mile away. Further, the truth is that deep inside ourselves, if we are not authentic, we know it and we will communicate it in subtle and sometimes not so subtle ways. Paul’s words in 2:17 are an assertion of authenticity.

In both the ancient and modern world, ministry stems from all kinds of motives. Paul had seen others take advantage of the Corinthian believers. In 11:20 he complained that they put up with people who enslaved them, preyed on them, took advantage of them, put on airs, or even slapped them in the face. Peddlers, hucksters, ancient or modern, are ego-centered; they use people, work for their own benefit, and adulterate the message. Some do it for political reasons, some for money, some for pride, some for power. They give pieces of the truth, exaggerate claims, avoid difficulties, appear triumphalistic, and are not genuine in their care. Despite the description of pastors as entrepreneurs of identity, they are not sales people and certainly not peddlers. To the degree that money, career, or recognition is the motivation, to that degree ministry is invalid and the pastoral identity is false.

The ease with which money corrupts ministry was obvious to Paul. How do we deal with the tension between the right to be paid and doing ministry for money? In 1 Corinthians 9:3-12 Paul argued for the right to be paid, but he refused to take money from the Corinthians in order not to burden them and to avoid any hint of impropriety. He allowed other churches to support him rather than the one where he was physically present. Issues like money, retirement, and motives for ministry are identity issues. Would the same work be done if money and recognition were not at issue?

Paul insisted on sincerity in his ministry. At least twenty-six times in this letter Paul wrote of his sincerity.

1:12, “in frankness and sincerity of God . . . we conducted ourselves” (author’s translation).

1:17, “I was not vacillating.”

1:24, “Not that we lord it over your faith.”

2:17, “We are not like many, peddling the word of God, but as from sincerity.”

4:2, “But we have renounced the things hidden because of shame, not walking in craftiness or adulterating the word of God, but by the manifestation of truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God.”5:11, “I hope that we are made manifest also in your consciences.”

6:3, “giving no cause for offense in anything, so that the ministry will not be discredited.”

6:6, “in purity . . . in genuine [unhypocritical] love.”

6:7, “in the word of truth”

6:8, “yet true”

10:2, Paul hoped that he would not have to defend himself against those accusing him of living by human standards.

10:3, He did “not war according to the flesh.”

10:11, He was the same whether in his letters while absent or present doing his work.

11:2, He had “a godly jealousy” for them.

11:3, He feared that they would be “led astray from the simplicity and purity of devotion to Christ.”

11:10, “The truth of Christ is in me.”

11:11, God knew that he loved them.

11:31, God knew that he was not lying.

12:6, He spoke “the truth.”

12:6, He did not want anyone to think more than what they saw or heard from him.

12:13-14, He did not burden them, for he did not seek anything from them.

12:15, “I will most gladly spend and be expended for your souls,” for he loved them.

12:16, “I did not burden you myself.”

12:17-18, His helpers did not burden them either.

13:6, He hoped they knew that he and his helpers were not unproven, that is, had not failed.

13:8, He and his helpers were not able to do anything “against the truth.”

Certainly sincerity alone is not enough, but why does sincerity have a bad name? Comments about sincerity reported from any number of people reveal a negative perception of sincerity: “It is dangerous to be sincere unless you are also stupid” (George Bernard Shaw). “A little sincerity is a dangerous thing, and a great deal of it is absolutely fatal” (Oscar Wilde). “The secret of success is sincerity. Once you can fake that you’ve got it made” (Jean Giraudoux). “I am not sincere, even when I say I am not” (Jules Renard).[7] Do such comments derive from conflicting messages within a person even when that person desires to be sincere? Are they attempts at self-defense? Of course not all view sincerity so cynically. Despite this disdain, sincerity and a clear conscience are key to ministerial identity. In 1:12; 4:2; and 5:11 Paul pointed to the testimony of his own conscience and commended himself to every human conscience before God.

Sincerity is necessary, but it is not sufficient by itself. A theology is needed that drives sincerity. Sincerity requires truth, real care for people, worship, not diluting the content, and not serving oneself. The primary issue in ministry is integrity. When integrity is gone, nothing is left. Integrity pertains to how one relates to people, how one deals with his or her sexuality, how one deals with money, the ego, failures, and successes, to name the most obvious.

The reason 2 Corinthians 2:17 is so foundational for the identity of a pastor is its description of the context of ministry, and it is in the prepositional phrases. With prepositions we do theology, for life is relational. Life is lived from, in, to, by, and for the Lord. Here Paul described his speaking as taking place from God, before God, and in Christ.

From God indicates the origin of the message, the purposes to be accomplished, and the authority behind it. The purposes are God’s purposes, not those of the minister. As already seen, Paul’s focus throughout 2 Corinthians is on God as the primary actor. Paul was an apostle through the will of God (1:1), God is the one making all things new and reconciling the world through Christ and giving the ministry of reconciliation to His agents (5:18-19) so that they are ambassadors of Christ as if God were pleading with people through them, so that such ministers are even viewed as partners with God (6:1). Paul and people in this ministry have an authority from God that serves one purpose—building up and not tearing down (10:8; 13:10), a theology derived from Jeremiah 1:9-10. For all Paul’s emphasis on his apostolic role, he did not use the word ἐξουσία in connection with his ministry apart from these two verses.[8] It is God’s gospel (11:7) and God’s work in which Paul was enlisted. Any authority Paul had or that any Christian worker has is not his or her own, but is the authority of the gospel. Christian workers do not so much possess authority as express the authority revealed in the gospel.

The fact that Paul’s ministry is from God highlights the gospel as revelation. Paul’s convictions about revelation are surprising. In 3:7-11 he compared the gospel with the giving of the Law on Mount Sinai and argued that the gospel revelation is superior. In 4:6 he compared the revelation of God in the face of Christ with the creation of light in Genesis 1. Surprisingly the prologue of the Gospel of John includes these comparisons as well. The early church had no small view of the significance of the revelation that came in Jesus Christ. A necessary component of a ministerial identity is a conviction about revelation, for this conviction provides a good portion of the motivation and power for ministry. Without a conviction about the significance of revelation in the Christian message, there is little reason to perform such a task, but if the message is about the revelation of God, everything else falls into place.

The ministry also takes place before God, which indicates that God is the audience and that God is present as both Helper and Judge. This theme is present in a number of passages in 2 Corinthians (2:10; 3:4; 4:2; 5:11; 8:21; 12:19).

In Søren Kierkegaard’s book Training in Christianity he was reacting against the state church in Denmark and the failure of pastors and church officials. He contrasted an actor, who disguises himself, and a preacher, whose task is to be himself, and he commented as follows regarding preaching.

Hence it is a venturesome thing to preach; . . . I have . . . one hearer in addition to those that are visible to me, namely, God in heaven, whom I cannot see it is true, but who can verily see me. . . . He looks to see whether my life expresses what I say. . . . What I have said in course of the sermon puts me under obligation—and God has heard it. . . . The preacher of Christian truth, on the other hand, steps out in a place where, even if all eyes are not fixed upon him, the eye of omniscience is; his part is to be himself, and that in an environment, God’s house, which, being all eye and ear, requires of him only this, that he be himself, be true. “That he be true”—this means that he himself is what he preaches, or at least strives to be that, or at the very least is sober enough to admit that he is not.[9]

Kierkegaard was talking about the pastor’s identity before God, and he urged a radical subjectivity so that one is actually present and engaged, actually an individual.

In a related vein, in his book Attack upon “Christendom” Kierkegaard called for preachers to be persons, not officials. For him, since God is a personal being, there is nothing, not even heresy or sin, so abhorrent to God as the official.[10] Pastoral identities very easily become official identities, with loss of authenticity and the personal. Paul’s discussion about ministry is so personal for just this reason. He is not filling an office or doing a professional job. This is who he is before God and because of the call of God. Being personal is not about being chummy; it is about being sincere, honest, caring, and relational—about an identity revealed as trustworthy, transformed by God, and loving.

Clearly one of the problems in the Corinthian church was appearance, whether people were impressive in the eyes of others. This is addressed especially in chapters 10-11, most notably in 10:12. The temptation to seek to impress others is human, but it is especially a problem in leaders and ministers. Paul rejected such evaluations while also defending the validity of his ministry, as is evident throughout this letter. By comparison, in 1 Corinthians 4:1-5 he encouraged people not to make judgments until the end when the secrets of the heart are made known. As difficult as it may be, anyone ministering for Christ needs to reject status-seeking. This is a Johannine theme as well. Jesus complained in John 5:44 that people could not believe because they sought the glory that came from humans and not what comes from God (see also John 12:43).

Another observation about 2 Corinthians is that it drips with passion. Paul poured out his heart, and the issues were life and death to him. He was emotionally invested. Our exegesis needs to read texts not merely for ideas but also to grasp the emotions expressed in them. Nothing great happens without passion.[11] People follow passion and energy—for good or ill. Yet passion is no good by itself; it must be joined to truth and wisdom as well, but clearly ministry cannot be done without the commitment and caring evidenced in passion. Preachers—and politicians—often use gross exaggeration, and people respond to the rhetoric, and in the process truth is lost. People in parts of Western and Eastern cultures have trained themselves not to show passion or even to have passion, as if passion cannot be scholarly or respectable. Lack of passion is the path to boredom; manufactured passion is easily detected hypocrisy. True passion comes from deep caring, and passion for the gospel comes from a divine persuasion by God’s Spirit. Can one speak from sincerity, from God, before God, in Christ without passion? I think not.

Second Corinthians is a plea for a pastor to be authentic. The advice, however, is not just “Be yourself,” which, as several people have pointed out, is about the worst advice a person can give. Instead this call for sincere personhood is a call to be what God calls you to be and transforms you to become.[12]

The third aspect of the context, in Christ, brings us back to participationist language. It is not merely salvation that takes place in Christ; all of life and all of ministry occur there as well. The identity of early Christians and the actions they performed were lodged in Christ. He was the environment in which they lived and worked, as odd as the language seems to our ears. In 2 Corinthians 12:2 Paul referred obliquely to himself as a man in Christ. Christian workers labored in the Lord, people like Tryphaena, Tryphosa, and Persis (Rom. 16:12). People greeted each other in the Lord (16:11), viewed their relationships with believers as in the Lord (1 Cor. 4:17), married in the Lord (7:39), were in prison in the Lord (Eph. 4:1), urged others in the Lord (4:17), received people in the Lord (Phil. 2:29), and any number of other actions as well. Their lives had been taken up in Him. Interestingly, when speaking of salvation, Paul tended to use “in Christ” language and when he spoke of ethics and actions he tended to use “in the Lord.” Both expressions point to the same reality. They indicate that the person and actions are in keeping with the character of Christ and the content of the gospel. Christ is the force field within which work is done so that it is shaped to His being.

In 2 Corinthians 12:19 Paul repeated his thought from 2:17: “Before God in Christ we are speaking” (author’s translation). A few verses later (in 13:3) the language shifts. Instead of Paul speaking in Christ, here it is Christ speaking in him. But a distinction is not intended. Both statements affirm that Paul was a representative of Christ, spoke without pretense, and communicated God’s gospel to the Corinthians. Valid ministry is done from God, before God, and in Christ.

One of the difficulties in many churches is loss of trust. Pastors lose trust in their people, and people lose trust in their pastors. Lack of trust is a general problem in society, not just a Christian problem. Why is there so much disjunction between what we seek to present to people, what we say, and what we really are? Is it that we do not trust Jesus in the end? Is it that we seek to protect ourselves? What protection is there for people who take up their cross daily, who identify with the dying and rising of Jesus? People can learn to trust, but they need to know that the people with whom they deal have identities marked as from sincerity, from God, before God, in Christ.

Confidence And Boasting

Another recurring feature of pastoral identity in 2 Corinthians is confidence. Paul was extremely confident. He frequently talked about boasting, engaged in a parody of boasting in chapters 10-12, and at times commended himself and his colleagues, while at other times he rejected commending himself and his colleagues. At times, especially in English translations, it sounds as if he contradicted himself. His opponents derided his ability, especially his rhetorical skill, and viewed him as rather commonplace. He did not measure up to the standards his opponents valued. Where is the proof of his apostolic office and genuine credentials for ministry? The letter is a careful response to such questions and deserves careful analysis.

While “boast” is a negative word for us, for Paul it had both positive and negative connotations. English translations often use a word like “rejoice” for the positive connotations, but this loses a lot in the process. Paul had a boasting theology in several letters, especially Romans and 1 and 2 Corinthians. Twenty of the thirty-seven occurrences of the verb καυχάομαι are in 2 Corinthians. In addition to the parody of boasting, Paul boasted positively in what God has done or is doing, as in Romans 5:1-11 (i.e., in such things as the hope of the glory of God, afflictions in identification with the Cross, and in God who reconciles). The bottom line is that legitimate boasting is boasting in the Lord, an idea Paul got from Jeremiah 9:24, which he quoted in 1 Corinthians 1:31 and 2 Corinthians 10:17.

The seemingly odd thing, though, is that Paul sometimes disdained self-commendation, and other times that is the very thing he did. He rejected self-commendation in 2 Corinthians 3:1; 5:12; 10:12, 18, but he commended himself in 4:2 and 6:4 (cf. 7:11). The difference is not detectable in English, but in Greek the difference is reflected by a change in the word order. Translated literally, “ourselves commend” is negative, while “commend ourselves” is positive, but it is more than just a change in word order. The positive uses have a difference in the basis and focus of the self-commendation. Paul would have no part in self-commendation or boasting that was rooted in supposed superiority or status as a human, things by which humans compare themselves with each other. He boasted in what God had done and in the manner by which he and his colleagues had done their work. In 4:2 he commended himself to the conscience of every person before God as someone who had not adulterated the Word—he was no peddler—and had not acted in deceitful or less than honest ways. In 6:4 he commended himself and his coworkers as servants of God, and in 7:11 he said the Corinthians had commended themselves as innocent by their actions. Actions do commend one and reveal one’s true identity; we are what we do. That is true in ministry as well. Some self-commendation should be rejected, but some should be embraced.

But wherein does confidence lie? In 3:4 Paul asserted confidence, not from himself nor toward humans, but through Christ toward God. Christ is the “filter” through which his work was done. Throughout the letter Paul had every confidence; he was not hesitant or reticent about his ministry (see 1:7, 15; 3:4, 12; 5:6, 8).

Faced with the fact that the gospel is the difference between life and death, Paul asked, “Who is sufficient for these things?” (2:16). Is the answer “No one” or “We are”? The answer is not given in 2:16, but it is in 3:4-6. Paul asserted that he and his coworkers were sufficient, but not because of anything in themselves (cf. 1:9; 4:7; 12:11). They were sufficient only because God made them sufficient as servants of the New Covenant (cf. 1:4, 21; 4:1, 7; 5:18). It is no accident that the word Paul used for “sufficient,” ἱκανός, is used as a name for God in the Septuagint (e.g., Ruth 1:20-21; Job 21:15).

Confidence belongs to the identity of pastors if they minister from sincerity, from God, before God, and in Christ, because their insufficiency will be met with God’s sufficiency. A big difference exists between confidence and arrogance. Arrogance disdains, confidence does not. Arrogance cloaks fears of inferiority, confidence faces the truth. Arrogance is ego-centered, confidence is not. Arrogance is based in the person, confidence is based in God.

An obvious feature of Christian identity is the life of the mind, and the biblical focus on the mind, discernment, wisdom, and being able to test what is good and what is the will of God (e.g., Rom. 12:2). The pastoral task involves leading people in the learning and discerning tasks, and often churches have failed at this very basic level. Another aspect of the life of the mind is evident in 2 Corinthians and pertains to pastoral identity. Attention to the letter shows how much thought and care had been invested, how much self-analysis, how much discernment of the relationship between Paul and the Corinthians, and how much theological reflection had taken place. Doing exegetical and theological work is not enough. A pastoral identity requires a much more analytical life of the mind, one that is vulnerable enough to be honestly self-reflective, willing to hear and see the other, willing to discern the will of God in community, and willing to take every thought captive to Christ, as Paul expressed it in 10:5.

Other aspects of a pastoral identity mentioned in 2 Corinthians are an anointing of the Spirit (1:20-21); an ongoing process of transformation (3:18); dying and rising with Christ, which includes the willingness to suffer (4:10-11); eschatological conviction, including the reality of judgment (4:14-5:10); the model of Christ’s self-giving (8:9); and love (11:11), to mention the most obvious.

Conclusion

Attention as well must focus on the moral character of pastors. The declining reputation of pastors, for a variety of reasons, is one of the major factors in the decline of the church. The media’s attention to the moral failure, especially sexual moral failure, of well-known preachers highlights a problem that is not confined merely to the well known. What darkness of the soul allows such inconsistency? No treatment of pastoral identity can avoid an insistence on moral integrity, and Christian communities must find ways to promote and require integrity of leaders. The main aspect of that integrity is one’s own internal boundary-keeping. A person unwilling to do that should not think of ministry.

A hermeneutics of identity is important, then, in two respects with regard to pastors and Christian workers. The first is the attention that should be given to one’s own identity. Leaders cannot afford to be haphazard about the formation and maintenance of their identity. The second is that leaders must be entrepreneurs of identity, people who realize their task is to communicate and enable both individual and group identity. Esler’s words capture especially the latter: “In short, leaders must be ‘entrepreneurs of identity,’ capable of turning ‘me’ and ‘you’ into ‘us’ in relation to a particular project in a particular context that will bestow on the shared social identity meaning, purpose, and value.”[13] Group identity cannot be formed, of course, unless the individual has a self-understanding that fits with the group and engages the group. Boundaries are an important aspect of one’s identity. Where should one put down boundaries, and how impenetrable will they be? Disagreement on many theological issues does not require a boundary. The most important boundaries for a pastor or any Christian are the ethical boundaries one places in his or her own soul.

Martin Buber grasped the significance of identity and authenticity. He realized God would not say, “Why were you not a Moses?” but “Why were you not Martin Buber?” God will ask, “Why were you not you?” In other words, Who are you and how do you show it? This is the hermeneutics of identity.

Notes

1. Philip Francis Esler uses this expression in describing Paul (Conflict and Identity in Romans: The Social Setting of Paul’s Letter [Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003], 109).
2. Ibid., 136.
3. Ernst Käsemann, “Ministry and Community in the New Testament,” Essays on New Testament Themes (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1964), 63-94.
4. Klyne R. Snodgrass, “Paul, Entrepreneur of Identity,” Bibliotheca Sacra 168 (July–September 2011): 259-73.
5. The word in question, θριαμβεύω, occurs elsewhere in the New Testament only in Colossians 2:15 and does not occur in the Septuagint.
6. Cf. the New Revised Standard Version: “For I think that God has exhibited us apostles as last of all, as though sentenced to death, because we have become a spectacle to the world, to angels and to mortals.”
7. Unfortunately people think the same of the conscience: “Conscience is a mother-in-law whose visit never ends” (H. L. Mencken). “Conscience and cowardice are really the same things” (Oscar Wilde). “Living with a conscience is like driving a car with the brakes on” (Budd Schulberg).
8. He did use this word ἐξουσία in relation to his right to be paid, but it was a right he did not use.
9. Søren Kierkegaard, Training in Christianity and the Edifying Discourse Which “Accompanied” It, trans. Walter Lowrie (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1944), 229.
10. Søren Kierkegaard, Attack upon “Christendom” 1854-1855, trans. Walter Lowrie (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1946), 39-177, esp. 153.
11. John A. Mackay, God’s Order: The Ephesian Letter and This Present Time (New York: Macmillan, 1953), 177-78. Kierkegaard also recognized the importance of passion (Attack upon “Christendom,” 1854-1855, 185).
12. As Kierkegaard prayed, “And now, with God’s help, I shall become myself” (The Prayers of Kierkegaard, ed. Perry LeFevre [Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956], 147).
13. Esler, Conflict and Identity in Romans, 38.