Retired from the seminary on August 31, 2010. Served 24 years as Professor of Church Polity, eight of those with the additional responsibility of VP for Academic Affairs. Served at Synod of the CRCNA for two years as a delegate and for twenty years as an adviser.
No, it does not. Our rules seek to ensure that minor assemblies have sufficient time to consider important matters before synod meets and to present any viewpoints they may have by way of overture or communication. Any item in the printed Agenda for Synod is “fair game” in this respect. Once synod is constituted, of course, the minor assemblies are all present by way of delegation to make a final decision.
If your church does not currently ordain women as elders, deacons, pastors, the following answer applies, as you can read in my Church Order Commentary (2nd Ed., p. 73):
"May unordained church members participate in the laying on of hands ceremony associated with installation/ordination?
No, I don't think so. A congregation elects but a council ordains to office. This is the clear lesson of Scripture and of church history."
Synod 1973 provided a clear answer to this when it decided that “to invite only ministers, and not elders also, to participate in the laying on of hands is a departure from biblical example” (Acts of Synod, 1973, p. 64). Since a minister receives the call of God through the congregation, and since that minister’s work will be supervised by the council, it seems right and fitting to have the local elders and deacons involved. This would also reinforce our belief in the parity of the offices (Article 2) and our determination that “no officebearer shall lord it over another officebearer” (Article 85). So when this Article 10 uses the words “by the officiating minister,” we understand it to be referring to a minimal requirement and not to an absolute rule that forbids the involvement of other officebearers.
Yea, verily, it is played frequently and with much gusto. For what I take to be mysterious, yet, upon reflection, excellent or even ingenious reasons, the emotional level of CRCNA members that attends the issues involved tends to wane as the study takes its time and toll. This in direct contrast to the way you raucous Maple Leaf fans increasingly explode as the season on ice progresses. Why do you approach it so fanatically anyhow? Here in the U.S. we just have hockey teams for commercial reasons. Fodder for a new study committee? Wait, no, Article 28, “ecclesiastical matters only”!
For the long answer, please consult with our professors at Calvin Theological Seminary. You might sense first-hand in what they tell you that they would not describe the training our synod insists on in such drastic terms. But I’ll give you the short answer.
There is no way to live into the meaning of the ancient text for the first hearers without reading and hearing that text in its original shape and context, and, therefore, no way to apply that Word with its inherent relevance accurately and reliably to our contemporary world. Without this direct access you will forever be dependent on translators and commentators without any assurance that they actually “got it right.” That can’t provide much in the way of your being utterly comfortable in what you’ll be saying from the church’s pulpits.
I am not aware of any official position taken by the CRCNA. It's true that there was this custom remaining in Geneva for a time. But the earliest of Reformed synods in the 16th century continental Reformed tradition left the use of godparents ("doopgetuigen" - literally, baptismal witnesses) as one of the diaphora (indifferent things). There was a rejection of earlier Roman Catholic practices in this regard, and the use of godparents fell into disuse fairly quickly. In general, later assemblies insisted that one of the (natural or adopting) parents must be a confessing member and present for the sacrament, taking upon him- or herself the responsibility to lead the child in the way of the Covenant.
Since it is an indifferent matter, some churches have re-introduced this phenomenon, but never as a replacement for one or both parents. In our congregation, we've had "mentors" stand with the parents as those who agree to be more especially involved than most members in the task of the entire congregation to bring up this particular child in the Christian faith.
I'd be interested in knowing about other instances of use of godparents in our denomination.
I don’t know how good they’ll be, but this is what I’ve heard and seen. What I do not recommend is that the second service be almost exactly like the morning service. In some cases, the difference has involved no more than substituting the call to confession and assurance of pardon with a recitation of the Apostles’ or Nicene Creeds. Our increasingly diverse denomination needs to consider variety.
Consider the teaching service. Early Reformed “second services” were educationally focused. That’s one reason why our Catechism is divided into 52 Lord’s Days and why ministers are asked “each Lord’s Day . . . ordinarily [to] preach the Word as summarized in the creeds and confessions of the church, especially the Heidelberg Catechism” (Article 54b). In the past, synod has even encouraged the use of the contemporary testimony (“Our World Belongs to God”) for this purpose. I sometimes think that members in our churches are confessionally illiterate. Teaching services, creatively planned and well executed, might be just the ticket.
Consider other possibilities as well. A contemporary music service once a month that truly appeals to the young and the youngminded. Perhaps a service in the style of Taizé with its contemplative stillness. A service focused on healing. An “end of the year” service on the Sunday evening before the 31st to remember those who passed on, those who were born or adopted or brought into the church membership, and/or the cardinal moments in nation and world. An intergenerational worship service of one kind or another. For great ideas check with the Calvin Institute of Christian Worship or consult back issues of Reformed Worship magazine (both with a rich online presence). Or arrange for smaller gatherings in homes where people either form a community and tackle each other’s challenges with biblical insights and shared prayer or deliberately disciple new members into our fellowship—or both of these together. In that case, be sure that “such alternatives are part of a strategic ministry plan with full accountability to [your] classis” (Supplement, Article 51a).
All this is not radically new territory. Synod 2005, for example, decided to “remind the churches that the second worship service may be a teaching service, employing models such as small groups, house churches, and various congregational gatherings characterized by learning together, dialogue, and interaction” (Acts of Synod, 2005, p. 720).
Indeed, in Reformed polity the classis and the synod are referred to as “major assemblies,” and the council and classes are referred to as “minor assemblies,” even in the Church Order itself. The intent is not so much that classis and synod have a higher authority than that of the council of the local church, although that is secondarily and derivatively true. It is higher only because it is cumulative. The primary intent is to honor the principle of catholicity: the greater the geographical spread of churches represented, the more significance we attach to the decisions made.
In the classis and in the synod we are dealing with the phenomenon of accumulated authority. For the local council, there is accountability to the broader church. It is for this reason that you will often hear the expression “broader assemblies” in our circles. I admit that we don’t often hear the term “narrower assembly.” But the adjective “broader” does say more precisely what “major” refers to.
My sense is that you are not the only one yearning for greater continuity. There’s a great deal to be said for longevity in office when gifted people are making ministry happen. The chairperson of a nearby diaconate complained to me recently that her deacons never seem to grow out of apprenticeship status. No business corporation, she said, would ever tolerate such inefficiency. What’s the use of casting visions for true diaconal outreach in the community only to have your hopes for it dashed in the Christian Reformed council room version of musical chairs? Elders tell me discipline just doesn’t work when there’s always a “stranger” attempting the outreach.
As I pondered your question for a while, I began to appreciate your honesty about the one whose exit gave you joy. At the very least it is a glimmer of appreciation for limited tenure. A slated retirement is certainly less traumatic than a resignation or dismissal for lack of performance. The truth is that the practice of limited tenure has certain advantages. The more frequent the rotation, the more people we can use to serve in office. The gifted should have that opportunity. And if terms are reasonably short, more will be willing. Fresh insights and approaches sometimes enliven the council room as well as our congregational life. We avoid all semblance of hierarchy or domination by a particular group and lay no particularly heavy burdens on relatively few. You will counter immediately, of course, with the disadvantages you point to. Practice makes perfect, and the earlier we release from office, the less perfection we attain. Pastoral bonds are important and take time to be developed. Gaining a vision for particular ministries doesn’t happen overnight. Growing in confidence doesn’t either. This phenomenon is especially noticeable at our broader assemblies where ministers generally rule the roost simply because they have the experience. Practical considerations alone cannot settle this issue among us. But the fact that Scriptures do not address the issue directly and that fear of hierarchy is at the root of our choice has made us somewhat cautious about binding the church’s practice in the extreme, about becoming “ultra-Reformed” in the matter. This caution, I suppose, is what I would like especially to bring to your attention as you ponder what’s to be done in your congregation. The fact is that Article 25a does not bind us half as much as our established customs do. And we must never equate those two. Please note carefully that Article 25a does not spell out exactly how long the “limited time” must be. Such a time must be “designated by the council.” It could be two years, three years, four years, or even five years. It could be half of council, a quarter of council, or even an eighth. Thus, in a twenty-member council, you could have two elders and two deacons retiring every year, while the other sixteen members continue on their five-year terms. The article indicates that “the retiring officebearers shall be succeeded by others,” but goes on to say that exceptions are possible if “the circumstances and the profit of the church make immediate eligibility for reelection advisable.” Those reelected must then “be reinstalled.” But as you can see, one person could serve for ten years straight. At the heart of our limited tenure provision is not the detail but the principle that the congregation must remain meaningfully empowered to choose its officebearers. This, it seems to me, is what we must hang on to at all cost because it appears to be the lesson of Scripture, Reformed history, and Reformed polity. At the same time, the Church Order provides far more room in these matters than the local rules most of us have adopted as our own. What’s to be done? We should review them.
Article 43 of the Church Order speaks of licensure given by the classis for persons to have the right to exhort. Commissioned Pastors also receive the right to preach after they have been examined by classis and subsequently ordained. This is covered in Article 24.
The council is not permitted to use a "lay person" who has not been given the right to exhort of preach by the classis for preaching in his or her own church.
If you wish to get "behind" these regulations, I urge you to read my commentary on Article 43. The commentary is available from Faith Alive Resources, our denominational publishing ministry.
Dear “Karen”: I’m so sorry to hear this story from you. You are not alone. Unfortunately, there are many others with a similar story. Like you, those people do not know what to do either or where to turn. I’ll do my best to describe the “ins and outs” as you requested. First of all, my response depends on your age. I cannot tell from your letter whether you are an adult, so I am going to describe a response to a minor and then a response to an adult. If you are a minor (under age eighteen in most states and provinces), you should know that sexual abuse of a minor by an adult is a crime whether or not the abuser is a pastor. If the abuser is a pastor, the abuse is also a serious form of church leader misconduct, a violation of professional ethics, a betrayal of your trust, and a sin. Although it might be very difficult for you, you should tell a parent or a stepparent what has happened. If you cannot tell your parent or stepparent or if they do not believe you, then tell your story to an adult—perhaps an elder of your church, a youth leader, or a school teacher—it doesn’t really matter who, as long as it is an adult that you trust. If you live in Canada, all adults are legally responsible to report the allegation. If you live in the United States, some adults must report an allegation of abuse because of their professional responsibilities while other adults do not have to report. Then two things should happen to prevent the sexual abuse from happening again. First, the adult you confide in should report your allegation to the local police. By law, the adult should report the allegation within twenty-four hours of hearing about it. Second, that same adult or the police should inform the church’s executive or leadership group of your allegation. You didn’t say whether he’s your pastor or the pastor of another church. But that doesn’t matter. The church needs to be told. The police will interview you and the pastor separately, and they will interview others as well. It takes some time to conduct a thorough investigation. After all the interviews are done, it is possible that criminal charges will be filed. There could be a trial, especially if the pastor claims he is innocent. If he is found guilty of abusing you or if he pleads guilty to abusing you, he will likely be punished. I can’t say what the punishment might be, but you should understand that any punishment is the result of his abuse and not because you reported the abuse. The church’s leaders should take action too. The church should at least suspend him for a period of time, or they should remove him from the pulpit and prevent him from being a minister again in that church or another church. Throughout this experience, you will find it helpful to have a counselor to talk to. Your friends will be very supportive to you, but you may not want to share all the details with them. Besides being a good listener, a counselor can also help sort through all the feelings you’ll have through the investigation and trial. All this may sound scary and overwhelming to you. I am not trying to frighten you. There really isn’t another way to prevent you from being hurt again by the pastor, or to prevent him from hurting someone else. I hope you find the courage to tell someone, and that the abuse stops. This is my advice if you are a minor. If you are an adult, I am just as saddened and disturbed by your story as if you were a child. My advice, however, is a bit different. First of all, I hope you’ll make an appointment with a counselor or therapist as soon as possible. Please don’t delay. Depression is a very natural reaction to the sexual violation and the betrayal you have experienced. But depression, anger, and sadness can also be overwhelming at times, so you should not face these emotions alone. As an adult, you have different choices than does a child. One of your choices is to go to the police with your story. If the events took place a long time ago, the police may or may not be able to investigate your story. The laws in your community may also affect whether or not charges can be filed. Another choice is to approach the Christian Reformed Church. The churches in the denomination have been challenged to understand the gravity of your situation, and the classes in the denomination are providing Safe Church Teams so that you have a safe place to go with your story. The conduct you describe might be sexual misconduct. Sexual misconduct occurs when a minister does not observe appropriate relationship or physical boundaries. Sexual misconduct usually includes exploiting a person for the power and control that it gives the other person. While it may look as if the relationship between the two people is “consensual,” in fact it is not because the minister is in a position of power and authority over a parishioner and has violated the sacred trust of his office by his conduct. The minister is always responsible to safeguard the relationship with the parishioner. When boundary violations occur, the minister should be held accountable. This is a very serious matter. And I hope my indication of the road to take now, even if it is a difficult one for you, is the right one for you and for the church. If this person is guilty of sexual misconduct, he must not be allowed to continue in office. Despite your own pain, we hope you will help us prevent further hurt and humiliation to even one more person. Unfortunately, once ministers cross these boundaries, more incidents usually follow. The Christian Reformed Church has a network of Safe Church Teams that are convened to hear stories like yours. If a team is not located near you, your expenses to travel to that team’s location will be provided for you. In addition, Safe Church Teams offer claimant advocates to assist those who have allegations of sexual misconduct committed by a minister. To get started and bring your story forward, you may contact a claimant advocate, a Safe Church Team chairperson, or the chairman of the church council to whom this pastor is accountable. If the offender is your minister, you may feel more comfortable calling a claimant advocate or team chairperson, but you certainly may approach someone on your council that you can trust. If the offender is a minister of another congregation, you can call either the claimant advocate, team chairperson, or a person on that church’s council. Usually the claimant advocate makes the call, but you could choose to make the call. If all of this begins to sound too difficult or impossible in some way, please know that the claimant advocates and Safe Church Teams are made up of professionals who are knowledgeable in sexual misconduct dynamics. You do not have to worry about confronting the minister alone or at all. The Safe Church Team will form a panel that will meet with you, accompanied by the claimant advocate, and then they will meet separately with the accused minister. When both parties have been fully heard, the panel will consider whether your allegations are more probable than not. You and the minister will be notified of the panel’s findings; the panel also notifies the executive committee of council. The council will then meet to decide on what should be done. Once again, the claimant and the minister do not meet face to face, but they will both be notified of the council’s decision. If the council judges that the allegations are more likely than not to have occurred, the council should initiate steps of discipline. It is likely that the minister will then first be suspended. If he claims to be innocent, a formal hearing will be held. If he pleads guilty or it is determined that he is, in fact, guilty of an offense, it is likely that he will then be deposed. If, on the other hand, the council judges that the charges you have brought are not likely to have occurred, then the matter could end. However, the chairperson of the advisory panel and the claimant advocate might challenge the decision of council. They could submit a copy of the panel’s report and of the council’s action to the Interim Committee of the classis. This committee presents a report to the next meeting of that classis. This is done to make sure that there is no partiality in the way that your allegations have been responded to in a “more local” setting. When this difficult road of appeal has been followed, and still no action is being taken against the minister for whatever reason, you and your claimant advocate still have the right of appeal from what the classis has decided in the matter. That appeal may be addressed to the synod of the Christian Reformed Church. It meets once a year and has a special committee that can hear the case in confidence. It will then provide the following synod with well-formulated recommendations. So you have representatives from the entire denomination at your disposal to address this serious matter. “Karen,” I’ve just given you a lot of stuff to digest. If you have any further questions, please know that you may contact me at the telephone number listed below my signature. I will keep our conversations confidential and not reveal them to anyone. Or you may write back. Either way is fine. I also encourage you to contact the denominational Safe Church Ministry at 616-224-0735. The ministry has a website with information on how to contact a claimant advocate or a Safe Church Team chairperson. I wish you much strength in all of this. I understand that this minister has hurt you. I hope you will experience a church that wants to end that hurt. The church does not want to bury its head in the sand. It wants and needs the opportunity to help you now. Just getting the word out to others will be difficult but, in the end, I am confident it will lighten your load and lead you on new roads to joy. Grace and peace to you.
On that same page 119 of my Commentary, my advice for those who are not (or not yet) ordained is "Do not raise your arms and pronounce the salutation and the benediction. You will undoubtedly upset someone if you do. Instead, change these pronouncements into prayers: "The Lord bless us and keep us ..."
Then, indeed, I advise such folk not to "do the laying on of hands" but have the chair of the elders and the chair of the deacons do it because they ARE ordained and because Synod 2001 ruled that official acts of ministry are entrusted to the church's ordained leaders, not to a specific office. That reference in on page 294.
You are also free to call all of what I write a "bunch of hokey" (or any other similar expression) since it is what it says it is, a Commentary, but nobody should undercut the authority of the Church Order itself. We have covenanted to observe it faithfully.
Posted in: Does the CRCNA Use a System of "Ratification" Like Other Denominations?
No, it does not. Our rules seek to ensure that minor assemblies have sufficient time to consider important matters before synod meets and to present any viewpoints they may have by way of overture or communication. Any item in the printed Agenda for Synod is “fair game” in this respect. Once synod is constituted, of course, the minor assemblies are all present by way of delegation to make a final decision.
Posted in: Who Should Participate in the "Laying on of Hands"?
Jay,
If your church does not currently ordain women as elders, deacons, pastors, the following answer applies, as you can read in my Church Order Commentary (2nd Ed., p. 73):
"May unordained church members participate in the laying on of hands ceremony associated with installation/ordination?
No, I don't think so. A congregation elects but a council ordains to office. This is the clear lesson of Scripture and of church history."
Posted in: Who Should Participate in the "Laying on of Hands"?
Synod 1973 provided a clear answer to this when it decided that “to invite only ministers, and not elders also, to participate in the laying on of hands is a departure from biblical example” (Acts of Synod, 1973, p. 64). Since a minister receives the call of God through the congregation, and since that minister’s work will be supervised by the council, it seems right and fitting to have the local elders and deacons involved. This would also reinforce our belief in the parity of the offices (Article 2) and our determination that “no officebearer shall lord it over another officebearer” (Article 85). So when this Article 10 uses the words “by the officiating minister,” we understand it to be referring to a minimal requirement and not to an absolute rule that forbids the involvement of other officebearers.
Posted in: Is the favourite sport of the CRC shoving all important issues into study committees?
Yea, verily, it is played frequently and with much gusto. For what I take to be mysterious, yet, upon reflection, excellent or even ingenious reasons, the emotional level of CRCNA members that attends the issues involved tends to wane as the study takes its time and toll. This in direct contrast to the way you raucous Maple Leaf fans increasingly explode as the season on ice progresses. Why do you approach it so fanatically anyhow? Here in the U.S. we just have hockey teams for commercial reasons. Fodder for a new study committee? Wait, no, Article 28, “ecclesiastical matters only”!
Posted in: Why Must We Endure the Torture of Learning the Hebrew and the Greek?
For the long answer, please consult with our professors at Calvin Theological Seminary. You might sense first-hand in what they tell you that they would not describe the training our synod insists on in such drastic terms. But I’ll give you the short answer.
There is no way to live into the meaning of the ancient text for the first hearers without reading and hearing that text in its original shape and context, and, therefore, no way to apply that Word with its inherent relevance accurately and reliably to our contemporary world. Without this direct access you will forever be dependent on translators and commentators without any assurance that they actually “got it right.” That can’t provide much in the way of your being utterly comfortable in what you’ll be saying from the church’s pulpits.
I promised a short answer so, enough said.
Posted in: Does the CRC Have an Official Position on Godparents?
Jeff,
I am not aware of any official position taken by the CRCNA. It's true that there was this custom remaining in Geneva for a time. But the earliest of Reformed synods in the 16th century continental Reformed tradition left the use of godparents ("doopgetuigen" - literally, baptismal witnesses) as one of the diaphora (indifferent things). There was a rejection of earlier Roman Catholic practices in this regard, and the use of godparents fell into disuse fairly quickly. In general, later assemblies insisted that one of the (natural or adopting) parents must be a confessing member and present for the sacrament, taking upon him- or herself the responsibility to lead the child in the way of the Covenant.
Since it is an indifferent matter, some churches have re-introduced this phenomenon, but never as a replacement for one or both parents. In our congregation, we've had "mentors" stand with the parents as those who agree to be more especially involved than most members in the task of the entire congregation to bring up this particular child in the Christian faith.
I'd be interested in knowing about other instances of use of godparents in our denomination.
Posted in: Do you have any good ideas for a meaningful and better-attended second service?
I don’t know how good they’ll be, but this is what I’ve heard and seen. What I do not recommend is that the second service be almost exactly like the morning service. In some cases, the difference has involved no more than substituting the call to confession and assurance of pardon with a recitation of the Apostles’ or Nicene Creeds. Our increasingly diverse denomination needs to consider variety.
Consider the teaching service. Early Reformed “second services” were educationally focused. That’s one reason why our Catechism is divided into 52 Lord’s Days and why ministers are asked “each Lord’s Day . . . ordinarily [to] preach the Word as summarized in the creeds and confessions of the church, especially the Heidelberg Catechism” (Article 54b). In the past, synod has even encouraged the use of the contemporary testimony (“Our World Belongs to God”) for this purpose. I sometimes think that members in our churches are confessionally illiterate. Teaching services, creatively planned and well executed, might be just the ticket.
Consider other possibilities as well. A contemporary music service once a month that truly appeals to the young and the youngminded. Perhaps a service in the style of Taizé with its contemplative stillness. A service focused on healing. An “end of the year” service on the Sunday evening before the 31st to remember those who passed on, those who were born or adopted or brought into the church membership, and/or the cardinal moments in nation and world. An intergenerational worship service of one kind or another. For great ideas check with the Calvin Institute of Christian Worship or consult back issues of Reformed Worship magazine (both with a rich online presence). Or arrange for smaller gatherings in homes where people either form a community and tackle each other’s challenges with biblical insights and shared prayer or deliberately disciple new members into our fellowship—or both of these together. In that case, be sure that “such alternatives are part of a strategic ministry plan with full accountability to [your] classis” (Supplement, Article 51a).
All this is not radically new territory. Synod 2005, for example, decided to “remind the churches that the second worship service may be a teaching service, employing models such as small groups, house churches, and various congregational gatherings characterized by learning together, dialogue, and interaction” (Acts of Synod, 2005, p. 720).
Posted in: How Should We Define “Minor” and “Major” Assemblies?
Indeed, in Reformed polity the classis and the synod are referred to as “major assemblies,” and the council and classes are referred to as “minor assemblies,” even in the Church Order itself. The intent is not so much that classis and synod have a higher authority than that of the council of the local church, although that is secondarily and derivatively true. It is higher only because it is cumulative. The primary intent is to honor the principle of catholicity: the greater the geographical spread of churches represented, the more significance we attach to the decisions made.
In the classis and in the synod we are dealing with the phenomenon of accumulated authority. For the local council, there is accountability to the broader church. It is for this reason that you will often hear the expression “broader assemblies” in our circles. I admit that we don’t often hear the term “narrower assembly.” But the adjective “broader” does say more precisely what “major” refers to.
Posted in: What can be done about the high turnover rate for elders and deacons?
My sense is that you are not the only one yearning for greater continuity. There’s a great deal to be said for longevity in office when gifted people are making ministry happen. The chairperson of a nearby diaconate complained to me recently that her deacons never seem to grow out of apprenticeship status. No business corporation, she said, would ever tolerate such inefficiency. What’s the use of casting visions for true diaconal outreach in the community only to have your hopes for it dashed in the Christian Reformed council room version of musical chairs? Elders tell me discipline just doesn’t work when there’s always a “stranger” attempting the outreach.
As I pondered your question for a while, I began to appreciate your honesty about the one whose exit gave you joy. At the very least it is a glimmer of appreciation for limited tenure. A slated retirement is certainly less traumatic than a resignation or dismissal for lack of performance. The truth is that the practice of limited tenure has certain advantages. The more frequent the rotation, the more people we can use to serve in office. The gifted should have that opportunity. And if terms are reasonably short, more will be willing. Fresh insights and approaches sometimes enliven the council room as well as our congregational life. We avoid all semblance of hierarchy or domination by a particular group and lay no particularly heavy burdens on relatively few. You will counter immediately, of course, with the disadvantages you point to. Practice makes perfect, and the earlier we release from office, the less perfection we attain. Pastoral bonds are important and take time to be developed. Gaining a vision for particular ministries doesn’t happen overnight. Growing in confidence doesn’t either. This phenomenon is especially noticeable at our broader assemblies where ministers generally rule the roost simply because they have the experience. Practical considerations alone cannot settle this issue among us. But the fact that Scriptures do not address the issue directly and that fear of hierarchy is at the root of our choice has made us somewhat cautious about binding the church’s practice in the extreme, about becoming “ultra-Reformed” in the matter. This caution, I suppose, is what I would like especially to bring to your attention as you ponder what’s to be done in your congregation. The fact is that Article 25a does not bind us half as much as our established customs do. And we must never equate those two. Please note carefully that Article 25a does not spell out exactly how long the “limited time” must be. Such a time must be “designated by the council.” It could be two years, three years, four years, or even five years. It could be half of council, a quarter of council, or even an eighth. Thus, in a twenty-member council, you could have two elders and two deacons retiring every year, while the other sixteen members continue on their five-year terms. The article indicates that “the retiring officebearers shall be succeeded by others,” but goes on to say that exceptions are possible if “the circumstances and the profit of the church make immediate eligibility for reelection advisable.” Those reelected must then “be reinstalled.” But as you can see, one person could serve for ten years straight. At the heart of our limited tenure provision is not the detail but the principle that the congregation must remain meaningfully empowered to choose its officebearers. This, it seems to me, is what we must hang on to at all cost because it appears to be the lesson of Scripture, Reformed history, and Reformed polity. At the same time, the Church Order provides far more room in these matters than the local rules most of us have adopted as our own. What’s to be done? We should review them.
Posted in: License to Exhort -- May a council use an approved lay person lead in worship, including preaching?
John,
Article 43 of the Church Order speaks of licensure given by the classis for persons to have the right to exhort. Commissioned Pastors also receive the right to preach after they have been examined by classis and subsequently ordained. This is covered in Article 24.
The council is not permitted to use a "lay person" who has not been given the right to exhort of preach by the classis for preaching in his or her own church.
If you wish to get "behind" these regulations, I urge you to read my commentary on Article 43. The commentary is available from Faith Alive Resources, our denominational publishing ministry.
Posted in: What to do when you have been abused by a pastor?
Dear “Karen”: I’m so sorry to hear this story from you. You are not alone. Unfortunately, there are many others with a similar story. Like you, those people do not know what to do either or where to turn. I’ll do my best to describe the “ins and outs” as you requested. First of all, my response depends on your age. I cannot tell from your letter whether you are an adult, so I am going to describe a response to a minor and then a response to an adult. If you are a minor (under age eighteen in most states and provinces), you should know that sexual abuse of a minor by an adult is a crime whether or not the abuser is a pastor. If the abuser is a pastor, the abuse is also a serious form of church leader misconduct, a violation of professional ethics, a betrayal of your trust, and a sin. Although it might be very difficult for you, you should tell a parent or a stepparent what has happened. If you cannot tell your parent or stepparent or if they do not believe you, then tell your story to an adult—perhaps an elder of your church, a youth leader, or a school teacher—it doesn’t really matter who, as long as it is an adult that you trust. If you live in Canada, all adults are legally responsible to report the allegation. If you live in the United States, some adults must report an allegation of abuse because of their professional responsibilities while other adults do not have to report. Then two things should happen to prevent the sexual abuse from happening again. First, the adult you confide in should report your allegation to the local police. By law, the adult should report the allegation within twenty-four hours of hearing about it. Second, that same adult or the police should inform the church’s executive or leadership group of your allegation. You didn’t say whether he’s your pastor or the pastor of another church. But that doesn’t matter. The church needs to be told. The police will interview you and the pastor separately, and they will interview others as well. It takes some time to conduct a thorough investigation. After all the interviews are done, it is possible that criminal charges will be filed. There could be a trial, especially if the pastor claims he is innocent. If he is found guilty of abusing you or if he pleads guilty to abusing you, he will likely be punished. I can’t say what the punishment might be, but you should understand that any punishment is the result of his abuse and not because you reported the abuse. The church’s leaders should take action too. The church should at least suspend him for a period of time, or they should remove him from the pulpit and prevent him from being a minister again in that church or another church. Throughout this experience, you will find it helpful to have a counselor to talk to. Your friends will be very supportive to you, but you may not want to share all the details with them. Besides being a good listener, a counselor can also help sort through all the feelings you’ll have through the investigation and trial. All this may sound scary and overwhelming to you. I am not trying to frighten you. There really isn’t another way to prevent you from being hurt again by the pastor, or to prevent him from hurting someone else. I hope you find the courage to tell someone, and that the abuse stops. This is my advice if you are a minor. If you are an adult, I am just as saddened and disturbed by your story as if you were a child. My advice, however, is a bit different. First of all, I hope you’ll make an appointment with a counselor or therapist as soon as possible. Please don’t delay. Depression is a very natural reaction to the sexual violation and the betrayal you have experienced. But depression, anger, and sadness can also be overwhelming at times, so you should not face these emotions alone. As an adult, you have different choices than does a child. One of your choices is to go to the police with your story. If the events took place a long time ago, the police may or may not be able to investigate your story. The laws in your community may also affect whether or not charges can be filed. Another choice is to approach the Christian Reformed Church. The churches in the denomination have been challenged to understand the gravity of your situation, and the classes in the denomination are providing Safe Church Teams so that you have a safe place to go with your story. The conduct you describe might be sexual misconduct. Sexual misconduct occurs when a minister does not observe appropriate relationship or physical boundaries. Sexual misconduct usually includes exploiting a person for the power and control that it gives the other person. While it may look as if the relationship between the two people is “consensual,” in fact it is not because the minister is in a position of power and authority over a parishioner and has violated the sacred trust of his office by his conduct. The minister is always responsible to safeguard the relationship with the parishioner. When boundary violations occur, the minister should be held accountable. This is a very serious matter. And I hope my indication of the road to take now, even if it is a difficult one for you, is the right one for you and for the church. If this person is guilty of sexual misconduct, he must not be allowed to continue in office. Despite your own pain, we hope you will help us prevent further hurt and humiliation to even one more person. Unfortunately, once ministers cross these boundaries, more incidents usually follow. The Christian Reformed Church has a network of Safe Church Teams that are convened to hear stories like yours. If a team is not located near you, your expenses to travel to that team’s location will be provided for you. In addition, Safe Church Teams offer claimant advocates to assist those who have allegations of sexual misconduct committed by a minister. To get started and bring your story forward, you may contact a claimant advocate, a Safe Church Team chairperson, or the chairman of the church council to whom this pastor is accountable. If the offender is your minister, you may feel more comfortable calling a claimant advocate or team chairperson, but you certainly may approach someone on your council that you can trust. If the offender is a minister of another congregation, you can call either the claimant advocate, team chairperson, or a person on that church’s council. Usually the claimant advocate makes the call, but you could choose to make the call. If all of this begins to sound too difficult or impossible in some way, please know that the claimant advocates and Safe Church Teams are made up of professionals who are knowledgeable in sexual misconduct dynamics. You do not have to worry about confronting the minister alone or at all. The Safe Church Team will form a panel that will meet with you, accompanied by the claimant advocate, and then they will meet separately with the accused minister. When both parties have been fully heard, the panel will consider whether your allegations are more probable than not. You and the minister will be notified of the panel’s findings; the panel also notifies the executive committee of council. The council will then meet to decide on what should be done. Once again, the claimant and the minister do not meet face to face, but they will both be notified of the council’s decision. If the council judges that the allegations are more likely than not to have occurred, the council should initiate steps of discipline. It is likely that the minister will then first be suspended. If he claims to be innocent, a formal hearing will be held. If he pleads guilty or it is determined that he is, in fact, guilty of an offense, it is likely that he will then be deposed. If, on the other hand, the council judges that the charges you have brought are not likely to have occurred, then the matter could end. However, the chairperson of the advisory panel and the claimant advocate might challenge the decision of council. They could submit a copy of the panel’s report and of the council’s action to the Interim Committee of the classis. This committee presents a report to the next meeting of that classis. This is done to make sure that there is no partiality in the way that your allegations have been responded to in a “more local” setting. When this difficult road of appeal has been followed, and still no action is being taken against the minister for whatever reason, you and your claimant advocate still have the right of appeal from what the classis has decided in the matter. That appeal may be addressed to the synod of the Christian Reformed Church. It meets once a year and has a special committee that can hear the case in confidence. It will then provide the following synod with well-formulated recommendations. So you have representatives from the entire denomination at your disposal to address this serious matter. “Karen,” I’ve just given you a lot of stuff to digest. If you have any further questions, please know that you may contact me at the telephone number listed below my signature. I will keep our conversations confidential and not reveal them to anyone. Or you may write back. Either way is fine. I also encourage you to contact the denominational Safe Church Ministry at 616-224-0735. The ministry has a website with information on how to contact a claimant advocate or a Safe Church Team chairperson. I wish you much strength in all of this. I understand that this minister has hurt you. I hope you will experience a church that wants to end that hurt. The church does not want to bury its head in the sand. It wants and needs the opportunity to help you now. Just getting the word out to others will be difficult but, in the end, I am confident it will lighten your load and lead you on new roads to joy. Grace and peace to you.
Posted in: License to Exhort -- May a council use an approved lay person lead in worship, including preaching?
John,
On that same page 119 of my Commentary, my advice for those who are not (or not yet) ordained is "Do not raise your arms and pronounce the salutation and the benediction. You will undoubtedly upset someone if you do. Instead, change these pronouncements into prayers: "The Lord bless us and keep us ..."
Then, indeed, I advise such folk not to "do the laying on of hands" but have the chair of the elders and the chair of the deacons do it because they ARE ordained and because Synod 2001 ruled that official acts of ministry are entrusted to the church's ordained leaders, not to a specific office. That reference in on page 294.
You are also free to call all of what I write a "bunch of hokey" (or any other similar expression) since it is what it says it is, a Commentary, but nobody should undercut the authority of the Church Order itself. We have covenanted to observe it faithfully.