One of our members told me yesterday that her non-Christian husband asked her to watch it with him. I am praying that God will use this series as the open door through which this man will step asking more questions and perhaps finding the answers in Christ.
Thought provoking piece, Sam. Thank you. We are both Calvin Seminary class of 1979 and the same age.
Until this past fall I had planned to retire early from my current charge in Howard City, but God gave me a distinct nudge to accept a new challenge. I thought at age 60 no church would be interested and was surprised to receive two calls a week apart. In three months I head to Anchorage, Alaska to serve Trintiy CRC until retirement. I am hoping for and expecting good things to happen.
There is a lot to be said for the wisdom and skill that comes from experience. I encourage pastors not to stop using those gifts too quickly, and churches not to reject them too quickly, either.
Bert, I will be two months short of ten year here when I leave. I went exactly ten years at my last church. Nothing to brag about, just how God prompted. That said, I remember sitting with a pastor going through a nasty separation after about 13 or 14 years in his church. As part of the process he needed to be evaluated by the occupational psychologist used by the denomination. One thing that psychologist said has stuck with me ever since. Very few people have the ability to effectively serve as the key leader of any American institution for more than ten years. He pointed to Lee Iacocca at Chysler and others. I think he was probably right.
We are looking forward to our first moose sighting. Just hoping it is not on the Alaska Highway as we drive up.
From the report: "Instructed the Executive Director, in consultation with staff, to review and propose a revision to the Public Declaration of Agreement with the Forms of Unity, in light of the newly adopted Covenant for Officebearers and the new status of the Belhar Confession." After Synod 2012 carefully reached a compromise so that no one would have to subscribe to the Belhar Confession, is BOT now instructing that the Public Declaration of Agreement that is read at synod is to include the Belhar? That is what it sounds like.
Thanks, Henry. My flag went up with the explicit reference to "the new status of the Belhar Confession" in the BOT instruction. Synod made clear that it did not want the Belhar to be a document that people would have to subscribe to, and referencing it in the Public Declaration of Agreement would suggest at least some level of subscription.
ARTICLE 76 (The report of Advisory Committee 9 is continued from Article 74.) Advisory Committee 9, Creation Stewardship, Mr. Lawrence Hoogerhyde, Sr., reporting, presents the following: Creation Stewardship Task Force B. Recommendations (continued) Call to Action In response to section XI, 1 of the task force’s report regarding the “Doctrine of Discovery” (p. 348), the Advisory Committee recommends: That synod affirm the necessity for the CRC to examine, better understand, and respond to the “Doctrine of Discovery” and related legal instruments—particularly in their origins, their historical effects, and their continuing effects on indigenous peoples in Canada and the United States. To that end synod instructs the Board of Trustees to form a small task force with a clear mandate, process, and time frame composed of knowledgeable CRC staff, board members, and appropriate resource persons. The task force will be expected to keep the church informed throughout its work and to conclude its work with a summary report of its findings and, if appropriate, recommendations to the Board of Trustees and synod for further action. Ground: This responds appropriately to the Creation Stewardship Task Force report’s conclusions that, although a deeper understanding of the “Doctrine of Discovery” and related legal instruments could be very helpful in clarifying our cultural attitudes toward caring for creation, the issues raised by the “Doctrine of Discovery” and related instruments cut deeply across the entire spectrum of the church’s life and ministry in Canadian and U.S. society and, therefore, merit a separate effort. —Adopted
Chris, I think you will find the week filled with times of joy, greater awareness, times of excitement and others of tedium. Relax. Enjoy the process, even if at times it seems unnecessarily complex. I've been to a few, and have seen God's hand at work in final resolutions to seemingly intractable problems. I'll see you next Friday.
Our classical prayer coordinator produces a half page bulletin insert to be published the Sunday before classis. Each edition highlights the ministy of one congregation and notes items of interest at the upcoming meeting. The stated clerk is going to begin distributing a summary of highlights of the decisions of each classis meeting to distribute to all the churches. It's hard to know the best balance. Weekly communications may be ignored because of their regularity. The problem with publishing to a classical web site is someone has to go there to find the information. Pushing out six communications a year for publication in church bulletins may be accepted and used by more churches.
In my experience, knowing the source does make a difference in how we judge the weight of a comment. I have never posted an anonymous comment anywhere. Some may think knowing I am commenting adds weight, others the opposite. But they will know the source.
Bill Vis
P.S. As a pastor I occasionally receive anonymous communication. I always destroy such.
precherkid, I didn't condemn anonymous comments on the web. I merely note they carry less weight than when a comment comes from a named source I know and trust. Not sure how you make the leap to child abuse. As a mandatory reporter I have and will report such when there is credible evidence.
What's the rush? We adopt a new confession once every 150 years or so. We amend every 30 years or so. Allowing an extra year for a broad denominational discussion isn't unreasonable. Also, having a significant consensus on confessional changes would help avoid further division in the CRCNA. The overture deliberately avoided requiring the classical concurrence for church order changes so as not to gum up the works. But confessional changes go to the foundation of what we believe. Gaining broad consensus is warranted.
I'll set my "establishing a broad consensus" against your "minority rule." When you were a pastor would you have moved forward with a major building program on a 51%-49% vote? I hope not, unless you wanted a split church that couldn't pay its mortgage. If you got a call on a solo nomination in which 45% of the people voted they did not want you to come, would you accept that call because you got a majority of the vote or would you decline and let the "minority rule?" Some things are too important to decide by a small majority. I'll contend that our confessional foundation is one of them.
Regarding the overtures, a classis is an interesting thing. Those two overtures came independently from different churches with different purposes. And the fact they came from the same classis doesn't mean everyone agrees. We have four overtures before synod this year. I support one and a half of them, am neutral on another one and a half, and oppose one.
You know enough about synodical procedure to know that a major change in the church order is not in effect until ratified by a subsequent synod. If Synod 2011 adopts the overture to amend Article 47, as I hope, it clearly would be a major change and would not be in effect unless ratified by Synod 2012. Thus it would have no effect on the vote this year to approve the three new translations of the confessions. We explicitly talked about this when we voted in January. It is neither our intent or expectation that a vote on the three translations would require classical ratification. The suggestion that we are conniving in that way is insulting. It would have been nice to have been asked rather than to have the worst assumed about our motives.
By the way, if it were required, as it would be in the RCA and PSUSA, I would expect easy ratification by 2/3 of the classes for the new translations. In spite of the overture this year, I suspect it would even get a majority vote in my classis. Classes don't always make consistent decisions.
We would hope it would apply to adopting the Belhar Confession as a fourth standard. Adopting a new confession is on an entirely different plane than approving a new translation of an existing confession. For a matter of that weight, classical ratification as required in the RCA and PCUSA is warranted. If it can't get an affirmative vote in 2/3 of the classes, there is no consensus and adoption risks further fracturing of the denomination. If it does get 2/3, those who have serious reservations are more likely to accept the decision.
Posted in: The BIBLE on the History Channel
One of our members told me yesterday that her non-Christian husband asked her to watch it with him. I am praying that God will use this series as the open door through which this man will step asking more questions and perhaps finding the answers in Christ.
Posted in: I Don't Want to Be One of Those Pastors
Thought provoking piece, Sam. Thank you. We are both Calvin Seminary class of 1979 and the same age.
Until this past fall I had planned to retire early from my current charge in Howard City, but God gave me a distinct nudge to accept a new challenge. I thought at age 60 no church would be interested and was surprised to receive two calls a week apart. In three months I head to Anchorage, Alaska to serve Trintiy CRC until retirement. I am hoping for and expecting good things to happen.
There is a lot to be said for the wisdom and skill that comes from experience. I encourage pastors not to stop using those gifts too quickly, and churches not to reject them too quickly, either.
Here is a link to the article Sam mentions: http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2013/april/quitting-time.html
Posted in: I Don't Want to Be One of Those Pastors
Bert, I will be two months short of ten year here when I leave. I went exactly ten years at my last church. Nothing to brag about, just how God prompted. That said, I remember sitting with a pastor going through a nasty separation after about 13 or 14 years in his church. As part of the process he needed to be evaluated by the occupational psychologist used by the denomination. One thing that psychologist said has stuck with me ever since. Very few people have the ability to effectively serve as the key leader of any American institution for more than ten years. He pointed to Lee Iacocca at Chysler and others. I think he was probably right.
We are looking forward to our first moose sighting. Just hoping it is not on the Alaska Highway as we drive up.
Posted in: BOT Highlights - September 2012
From the report: "Instructed the Executive Director, in consultation with staff, to review and propose a revision to the Public Declaration of Agreement with the Forms of Unity, in light of the newly adopted Covenant for Officebearers and the new status of the Belhar Confession." After Synod 2012 carefully reached a compromise so that no one would have to subscribe to the Belhar Confession, is BOT now instructing that the Public Declaration of Agreement that is read at synod is to include the Belhar? That is what it sounds like.
Posted in: BOT Highlights - September 2012
Thanks, Henry. My flag went up with the explicit reference to "the new status of the Belhar Confession" in the BOT instruction. Synod made clear that it did not want the Belhar to be a document that people would have to subscribe to, and referencing it in the Public Declaration of Agreement would suggest at least some level of subscription.
Posted in: BOT Highlights - September 2012
Article 76, page 806 in the 2012 Acts. In full:
ARTICLE 76
(The report of Advisory Committee 9 is continued from Article 74.)
Advisory Committee 9, Creation Stewardship, Mr. Lawrence Hoogerhyde, Sr., reporting, presents the following:
Creation Stewardship Task Force
B. Recommendations (continued)
Call to Action
In response to section XI, 1 of the task force’s report regarding the “Doctrine of Discovery” (p. 348), the Advisory Committee recommends:
That synod affirm the necessity for the CRC to examine, better understand, and respond to the “Doctrine of Discovery” and related legal instruments—particularly in their origins, their historical effects, and their continuing effects on indigenous peoples in Canada and the United States. To that end synod instructs the Board of Trustees to form a small task force with a clear mandate, process, and time frame composed of knowledgeable CRC staff, board members, and appropriate resource persons. The task force will be expected to keep the church informed throughout its work and to conclude its work with a summary report of its findings and, if appropriate, recommendations to the Board of Trustees and synod
for further action.
Ground: This responds appropriately to the Creation Stewardship Task Force report’s conclusions that, although a deeper understanding of the “Doctrine of Discovery” and related legal instruments could be very helpful in clarifying our cultural attitudes toward caring for creation, the issues raised by the “Doctrine of Discovery” and related instruments cut deeply across the entire spectrum of the church’s life and ministry in Canadian and U.S. society and, therefore, merit a separate effort.
—Adopted
Posted in: Great Expectations: Synod—through a Rookie’s Eyes
Chris, I think you will find the week filled with times of joy, greater awareness, times of excitement and others of tedium. Relax. Enjoy the process, even if at times it seems unnecessarily complex. I've been to a few, and have seen God's hand at work in final resolutions to seemingly intractable problems. I'll see you next Friday.
Posted in: The Secret Society
Our classical prayer coordinator produces a half page bulletin insert to be published the Sunday before classis. Each edition highlights the ministy of one congregation and notes items of interest at the upcoming meeting. The stated clerk is going to begin distributing a summary of highlights of the decisions of each classis meeting to distribute to all the churches. It's hard to know the best balance. Weekly communications may be ignored because of their regularity. The problem with publishing to a classical web site is someone has to go there to find the information. Pushing out six communications a year for publication in church bulletins may be accepted and used by more churches.
Posted in: Our Attitudes Toward Our Leaders
pdr,
In my experience, knowing the source does make a difference in how we judge the weight of a comment. I have never posted an anonymous comment anywhere. Some may think knowing I am commenting adds weight, others the opposite. But they will know the source.
Bill Vis
P.S. As a pastor I occasionally receive anonymous communication. I always destroy such.
Posted in: Our Attitudes Toward Our Leaders
precherkid, I didn't condemn anonymous comments on the web. I merely note they carry less weight than when a comment comes from a named source I know and trust. Not sure how you make the leap to child abuse. As a mandatory reporter I have and will report such when there is credible evidence.
Posted in: Like a Mighty Turtle...
What's the rush? We adopt a new confession once every 150 years or so. We amend every 30 years or so. Allowing an extra year for a broad denominational discussion isn't unreasonable. Also, having a significant consensus on confessional changes would help avoid further division in the CRCNA. The overture deliberately avoided requiring the classical concurrence for church order changes so as not to gum up the works. But confessional changes go to the foundation of what we believe. Gaining broad consensus is warranted.
Posted in: Like a Mighty Turtle...
I'll set my "establishing a broad consensus" against your "minority rule." When you were a pastor would you have moved forward with a major building program on a 51%-49% vote? I hope not, unless you wanted a split church that couldn't pay its mortgage. If you got a call on a solo nomination in which 45% of the people voted they did not want you to come, would you accept that call because you got a majority of the vote or would you decline and let the "minority rule?" Some things are too important to decide by a small majority. I'll contend that our confessional foundation is one of them.
Regarding the overtures, a classis is an interesting thing. Those two overtures came independently from different churches with different purposes. And the fact they came from the same classis doesn't mean everyone agrees. We have four overtures before synod this year. I support one and a half of them, am neutral on another one and a half, and oppose one.
You know enough about synodical procedure to know that a major change in the church order is not in effect until ratified by a subsequent synod. If Synod 2011 adopts the overture to amend Article 47, as I hope, it clearly would be a major change and would not be in effect unless ratified by Synod 2012. Thus it would have no effect on the vote this year to approve the three new translations of the confessions. We explicitly talked about this when we voted in January. It is neither our intent or expectation that a vote on the three translations would require classical ratification. The suggestion that we are conniving in that way is insulting. It would have been nice to have been asked rather than to have the worst assumed about our motives.
By the way, if it were required, as it would be in the RCA and PSUSA, I would expect easy ratification by 2/3 of the classes for the new translations. In spite of the overture this year, I suspect it would even get a majority vote in my classis. Classes don't always make consistent decisions.
We would hope it would apply to adopting the Belhar Confession as a fourth standard. Adopting a new confession is on an entirely different plane than approving a new translation of an existing confession. For a matter of that weight, classical ratification as required in the RCA and PCUSA is warranted. If it can't get an affirmative vote in 2/3 of the classes, there is no consensus and adoption risks further fracturing of the denomination. If it does get 2/3, those who have serious reservations are more likely to accept the decision.