Skip to main content


Some of what I have done in life would be explicitly called ministry.  But most of the things I have done would not have been called ministry, but in fact were a form of ministry.  In this country the term, ministry, usually has religious overtones.  People think ministers are special people within the church who often have designated roles.  Clearly, priests and pastors are doing ministry.  In fact, they are often called “ministers.”  And there are other folks within the church structure who also minister.           

This is not a bad use of the idea of ministry.  Truly there are people who are doing amazing ministers in their church context.  But the problem is to limit the word, minister, to a church context.  It is a much broader word.  The word comes from the Latin word, minister, which means to serve.  Therefore, it means servant.  It can be noted that the term, minister, is widely used in the British system to designate a political role.  There is the Prime Minister, the Minister of Defense, etc.  There is nothing inherently religious in the Latin word, minister.           

Given the nature of much of my work teaching Religion, folks might assume that my ministry is religious.  Some of it doubtless is.  Of course, what is tricky in trying to assess this is deciding what counts as “religion?”  But I have no interest to go in this direction.  Actually, I would prefer to talk about spiritual instead of religious.  But again, I don’t want to get into detail about the difference between spiritual and religious.  I am interested in thinking about the nature of service (ministry) as part of what being spiritual means.           

In effect, I want to suggest that to be spiritual is to be willing to serve---to be a servant.  Think about it: I don’t see how you can talk about spiritual and selfishness in the same breath!  To be spiritual means a willingness to serve.  You may not have to serve, but you need to be willing to serve.  It is with this simple distinction---willingness to serve, even if you don’t actually have to serve---that I want to introduce the idea of “availability.”           

The idea of availability intrigues me because the willingness to serve is an issue of availability.  There are two key facets of availability.  In the first place availability contains the notion of present or presence.  If we are available, we are present.  There are at least two levels of presence.  One level is the literal level of being present.  It means I am literally there.  I remember elementary school when the teacher would take attendance.  She would call a name and we would individually answer, “present.”  Of course, if you are absent, you can’t answer and you obviously are missing.  The other level of presence is the conditional.  This means I am not literally in the place, but if desired, I can come to be there.  This could be called “the promise of presence.”           

Availability is the willingness to be present and as helpful as possible.  If I have this kind of availability, then it means I am willing to serve.  This has characterized much of my life.  I have a willingness to serve and, hence, make myself available.  One way to be available is to tell people you are available.  The other way is to be around.  We can literally spend some more time in situations where our availability is evident.  Yet I remind us that availability means a willingness to serve.  I might or might not actually have to serve.           

The second key facet of availability is to see availability as a readiness to serve.  Although this may sound like the first aspect, i.e. willingness to serve, I think it is different.  To be ready is to be prepared to jump into service whenever and wherever it is needed.  Indeed, I think we could be willing to serve, but not ready.  Readiness presupposes a readiness for action when it is immediately needed.  Additionally, it is a special kind of readiness to serve.           

Service asks for us to be present in a non-egocentric, but non-invasive, way.  Service has nothing to do with my will---what I want to wish to see happen.  Service serves the will of the other.  It cannot be egocentric.  It cannot be invasive.  This can be difficult for some of us, because we tend to be driven by our ego.             

Thinking more deeply about service in this fashion helps me understand why so much of my work is, indeed, ministry.  I am not sure where it came from, but I have always had a service mentality.  But I also knew if you were authentically a servant, you could not always choose the venue of service.  The best we could do is to be willing to serve.  Of course, I could volunteer for service duties---soup kitchens and the like.             

But ministry opportunities come in various ways.  All we can do is be available.  We are willing to serve and are ready to serve.

Popular posts from this blog

Inward Journey and Outward Pilgrimage

There are so many different ways to think about the spiritual life.And of course, in our country there are so many different variations of religious experiences.There are liberals and conservatives.There are fundamentalists and Pentecostals.Besides the dizzying variety of Christian traditions, there are many different non-Christian traditions.There are the major traditions, such as Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, and so on.There are the slightly more obscure traditions, such as Sikhism, Jainism, etc.And then there are more fringe groups and, even, pseudo-religions. There are defining doctrines and religious practices.Some of these are specific to a particular tradition or a few traditions, such as the koan, which is used in Zen Buddhism for example.Other defining doctrines or practices are common across the religious board.Something like meditation would be a good example.Christians meditate; Buddhists meditate.And other groups practice this spiritual discipline. A favorite way I like to …

I-Thou Relationships

Those of us who have read theology or, perhaps, those who are people of faith and are old enough might well recognize this title as a reminder of the late Jewish philosopher and theologian, Martin Buber.I remember reading Buber’s book, I and Thou, when I was in college in the 1960s.It was already a famous book by then.I am not sure I fully understood it, but that would not be the last time I read it.It has been a while since I looked at the book.
Buber came up in a conversation with a friend who asked if I had seen the recent article by David Brooks?I had not seen it, but when I was told about it, I knew I would quickly locate and read that piece.I very much like what Brooks decides to write about and what he contributes to societal conversation.I wish more people read him and took him seriously. Brooks’ article focused on the 2016 contentious election.He provocatively suggests, “Read Buber, Not the Polls!”I think Brooks puts it well when he said that Buber “devoted his whole career …

A Pain is not a Pain

A rose may be a rose, but a pain is not a pain.  Maybe somebody has said that before, but I have never heard it.  So I am assuming (for the moment) I made it up.  Of course, most of us have heard that line, “a rose is a rose.”  I don’t know who said it first or if I should give it a footnote, but I do know that I did not create that line.  Furthermore, we all could explain what the phrase, a rose is a rose, means.

However, if I say, “a pain is not a pain,” the reader may not be too sure what I mean by that.  And if the reader is unsure, he or she does not know whether to agree with me or say balderdash!  So let me explain it by some development.

For sure, every adult knows what pain means.  It is difficult to imagine living into adulthood and not experiencing some kind of pain.  There is physical pain; we all know this.  There is emotional pain----a pain many people know all too well…and others may barely know.  There may be something like spiritual pain, but this one is tricky.  Not …