Okay, everyone back in your corners over Overtures 3 & 4. Thanks to so many for genuine engagement and thoughtful contributions. Let’s hope that spirit of thinking aloud, iron-sharpening-iron, and clarification continues around here.
By far, the issue with greatest coverage in the Agenda is the Diakonia Remixed report (Agenda for Synod 2013; pp 263-299). I really recommend reading it for yourselves as I believe the report is a model of how these things ought to be laid out. It is confessional, conversant in the relevant threads of church polity and winsome to boot. To cut to the chase, though, the recommendations of this study committee are the word-smithing of numerous articles of church order, liturgical forms and the like for the purpose of:
“A Re-imagined Diaconate”
This study report “requires a major rethinking of how the CRC does ministry.” (Well, that should be met with opinion of some sort, I imagine.) “At a community level, it places new leadership expectations on the local diaconate. At the national level it assumes that deacons have input into the diaconal dimension of the CRCNA’s ministry planning.”
The report continues with steps for practical implementation of that vision but what do you think? Does the CRC require “a major rethinking” with regard to ministry?
- What is to be gained by the seating of diaconal delegates at Classis and Synod? What would be lost by the same?
- How does this report dove-tail with the increasing “missional” emphasis in church planting?
- What connection, if any, does this report have to the discussion of the Belhar Confession last year? The shifting or additional emphasis on orthopraxis (right practice) alongside orthodoxy (right belief)?
