In a former career, I represented a publishing company that made Sunday school and other ministry resources available to churches. In this capacity I would call upon pastors on a regular basis. I called upon them in the big cities and in rural towns. I met pastors representing all the major and minor denominations, as well as independent churches. Over the years I was able to build strong relationships with many of these individuals.

After I made my product presentation, our conversations often became candid. One topic that would invariably come up was the lamentable state of pastor/church relations in Canada.

Of course, each pastor would have his own story to tell, but in every case, these were stories all of us have heard before; how they or pastors that they knew of were terminated without substantial cause or due process, or even prior notice; how so many pastors feel burned out and utterly alone; how some work in the most difficult political situations, and as a result, how completely helpless and vulnerable they feel.

In the face of such conditions I marveled and continue to marvel at the courage and temerity of pastors. You see, I was once a pastor, but about 10 years ago experienced a "forced exit.” Unlike some individuals, I have not had the courage to return to the ministry until quite recently.

The fundamental problem with the current state of pastor/church relations is that churches have departed from their traditional way of doing things, and pastors have let them do it, to their personal and professional detriment.

Prior to the Industrial Revolution, and the advent of church boards, the church was run by pastors for more than 1,800 years. Pastors were trained in seminaries established specifically for that purpose. Pastors were given charge over the affairs of the local church, and pastors became the hierarchy of the denominations to which they belonged.

But the Industrial Revolution brought with it societal changes, including the rise of the middle class and the advent of management-style decision-making in business and government. As the 19th century rolled into the 20th, these two new dominating elements began to influence the structure and operation of churches, particularly newer churches that were taking root in the wake of the many revivals occurring throughout the Western world.

Many churches developed a lay-run church board. Many new churches were made up of preachers and teachers, who often did not possess the high academic credentials of the more traditional mainline churches.

In some instances, high academic achievement was even frowned upon by these new churches. This, in combination with the continued rise of management-style decision-making, led to the progressive denigration of the role of pastor, both as the leader of the church and of his traditional occupation as a professional in the service of the church.

The general denigration of the pastoral profession was also assisted by church sectarianism. Since the Reformation the Christian church has not been in any kind of formal unity on anything, theological or otherwise. In terms of professional ministry, this was not significant until the rise of the professional class in the late 19th century.

Prior to this, the study of theology, along with the study of medicine and law, was recognized as one of the "venerable professions.” However, while medicine and law matured in their economic and social roles, and organizationally coalesced along provincial and national lines, the pastorate, as a profession, did not because of church sectarianism.

This state of affairs was further aggravated in the church by the perception that, in general, professionals are avaricious. There is no doubt that professionals occupy the upper reaches of the economic ladder. And there is also, no doubt, many who use their monopoly position accorded by the state to inflate the value of their services in society.

But in the case of pastors there is no monopoly position to exploit, and their motivation for serving professionally in the church is anything but avaricious.

What is so ironic is that the traditional minister represents the quintessential professional. Contrary to what people may think, two guiding principles are at the core of all professionalism: 1) to provide a highly specialized service to the community, and 2) to provide excellence in that service, and thereby, in the performance of that service, contribute to the public good.

Could there be a more accurate description of the role of the pastor in the local church?

In any case, the rise of lay-run church boards in conjunction with the denouement of the professional pastorate is at the root of the problems churches and pastors are facing today.

Whereas other professions have national standards of employment, practice and conduct that were established by the profession itself, pastors do not. Whereas other professionals have retained discretionary control over the work they do, and are regulated in their professional development and conduct by their peers in the institutions they serve, pastors do not.

Instead, pastors are beholden to local church boards, each one having its own way of doing things. Each board, like any management-style run business or government office, essentially tells the pastor what he must do, and how he must do it.

But does such modern business wisdom belong in the church? Both Old and New Testament cite examples of individuals set aside by God, to give their occupational lives to the service of God’s people. The priests and Levites, the 12 of the early church, Timothy and others give ample biblical precedent for the assertion of a "professional” class within the church.

The tradition of the church itself, having pastors be exclusively trained to serve locally and throughout the hierarchy also bears strong witness to the wisdom of a dominant professional pastorate.

In addition to Scriptural precedents, two other compelling reasons advocate a return to the traditional pastorate. The first is the nature of any true profession. The second is the problem of serving two masters.

Sociologists offer a variety of definitions as to what constitutes a true professional, but what they hold in common is that all professionals perform work that is so specialized as to be inaccessible to those lacking the required training and experience. This was obviously the basis for the advent of the traditional professional pastorate, as it has been for the advent of all the professions.

But, in the modern church, dare I say it, amateurs have replaced the professionals; amateurs who are well meaning, intellectually astute and spiritually mature, no doubt, but amateurs, nonetheless.

Today it is the lay-run church board, not the pastor, who exercises the real discretionary power and judgment in our churches, while tradition and experience argues that this is a job for the professional pastor.

Finally, the primacy of the lay-run church board causes additional hardship for the beleaguered pastor. Although in theory he is trained by the seminary to serve the church as a whole, in reality he must give first, and indeed last, allegiance to the church board. After all, it is the church board that hires the pastor. It is the church board that the pastor is accountable to. And it is the church board that will let him go.

But as any pastor will tell you, the real ministry of the church does not reside in the corporate experience of the church board that meets once a month. It resides in the multiple of ministry experiences with which he is involved every day. It is in his vain attempt to reconcile and satisfy the demands of the lay-run church board, with the demands of his professional training and experience, that ultimately leads to the satisfaction of no one.

The current problem of poor church/pastor relations can be traced to the undue influence of secular culture. The church has been seduced into believing it can be run like a business, while pastors have been seduced into believing they no longer have to be true professionals to get the job done.

These (largely unconscious) assumptions are at the root of the church’s present difficulties. The problems churches and pastors are having in the area of employment relations will only be remedied by a return to their traditional places.

Ryan P. Sandulak is a pastor, business entrepreneur and founder of Church Ministries Institute.