narcissism, not a virtue in ministry

I once was the mentor to very personable young man, a Taoist who had discovered Unitarian Universalism and wanted to be a minister. He didn't know much about the liberal Christian tradition which nurtured both Unitarianism and Universalism and what I found problematic, he didn't care. Anything that happened before he became a Unitarian Universalist was irrelevant to "his ministry."

He knew what kind of minister he wanted to be, and it had little or nothing to do with what Unitarian Universalists had been before he came among us. He was a new breed.

I offered my advice, and some tutoring. But I did not feel that this candidate was going to do as well as my mentee assumed. He went to Ministerial Fellowship Committee of the Unitarian Universalist Association (MFC) and he got a "3."

The MFC works hard to see the minister in all the candidates that it interviews. If it experiences a minister who it can recommend to serve Unitarian Universalist congregations it awards a "1" -which means "cleared for settlement." This is not a ringing endorsement, it simply says "we think this minister is ready for service to our congregations." If the minister who is interviewed is unprepared in one or more areas, but otherwise they experience the candidate as a minister, they award the candidate with a "2." This means do some work, document it, send it in, and we will clear you for settlement. No need for another interview.

The "3" means that we see the candidates potential, but find that candidate unprepared for ministry, come back when you are ready. A "4" means that the committee does not experience you as a minister in this interview, and we discourage you from trying again. But if you do the work, you can come back for another interview. If the committee awards the candidate a "5" then the committee is saying that they see no purpose in that candidate continuing to pursue ministry.

The committee told my student that they experienced a disconnect between his paper work and the person that they met in the interview. The paperwork constitutes the transcripts, recommendations, evaluations, and essays that the student submits, and the committee said that paperwork was impressive, but the person they met in the interview was disingenuous, and evasive. They told him that he did not connect to the members of the Committee in his interview, but seemed to think that he should perform for them.

He received a "3" which I took to be a yellow light, a warning that the committee experienced some of his relational arrogance and wanted the candidate to deal with this before they could recommend him for ministry. Ministers experience rejection all the time, and good ones learn from the experience and grow as a result.

But my student was livid. " They" had had their chance, "they" were guardians of the status quo, "they" lacked discernment, for he was a religious genius.

He didn't go back, nor is he among us contributing to Unitarian Universalism in any other way. Since most of whom feel called to Unitarian Universalist ministry will experience some kind of "rejection" along the way, I have concluded that the ones who actually become good ministers are those who experience these "rejections" as part of the discernment process. Those who reject anyone who gives them feedback, and who try to paint those who give hard feedback as their enemies have no ears to hear, and no eyes to see.

Yes, this story has been told again and again with the main character being a male Buddhist, female Humanist, Christian vegetarian, for both gay and straight candidates, and for white and candidates of Color and would be ministers who may even have gotten a "4." But we do have a lot of minister-want-to-be s who think ministry is something that is about them expressing their unique self, and don't think they need any evaluation or assessment to do that.