Skip to main content

As a leader in a classis I do long for more lay participation but not just in classical committees.  In Classis Toronto we do have a lot of lay participation in our committees - we try to have at least one pastor on every team and try not to have more than two or three.  I find that our teams for the most part work well together and really further the ministries of classis.  However, what we often struggle with is how to get this lay participation to translate to the classis meetings themselves.  Most of the lay members of our teams have never been to a classis meeting and many don't want to go because it seems to be a business meeting rather than one that furthers ministry.  But we need more lay people to get involved at that level as well.

Most classes send one pastor delegate and one elder delegate to the meetings (some classes are now including a deacon delegate as well) from the local church council.  These are the people who have the right to speak to what is happening at the meeting and vote on motions.  Each classis meeting is an open session which means that anyone can come and listen to what is going on. 

Often it is the pastors who speak most at the meetings - they do have the advantage of coming to every classis meeting while elders usually rotate, so pastors often feel more comfortable in the situation.  So my challenge as a classis leader is to explore how we can encourage more lay participation and leadership in the meetings themselves. 

How have we lost trust in each other?  Is it because we do not agree on certian issues?  How can regain trust in each other while still holding positions that are different?

You are right, my point does need some clarification.  I did not mean to say that we don't use the Reformed accent  to find the missiologic purpose for the CRC.  I too love the Reformed tradition and don't want to throw it out. We do not need to do that to become more welcoming of other ethnicities.  But to say that our primary purpose is to promote Calvin's teachings seems to give it the wrong focus because it is not about Calvin's teachings (even if he got it all right) it is about God and God's work in the world.  Calvin helps us understand what this means and how we practice it but it is not the purpose to which we exist.  If it is then it seems we have become more of a cult following of one person's teachings rather than a church who follows Christ.  Becoming diverse as a church does not mean we have to change who we are, it means we need to become more of who God has called us to be.

Bill, I am very glad that you found a church home in the CRC and that you have found God in profound ways in “traditional” worship. I'm happy that the dutch culture and customs of the CRC have been good for you and not a barrier.

What you experience as the traditional CRC worship looks very different from what the founders of the CRC intended. Many of those Dutch people would have been horrified to find out your CRC is singing hymns! Only Genevain Psalms were appropriate in the CRC. Things have changed in the CRC – what you experience as traditional has not been the tradition long. Calvin and Calvinist teachings were imported to the Netherlands, I don't think that Calvin ever came to the Netherlands or knew what influence his teachings had there. Church culture changes, the gospel does not change. 2 Corinthians 4:16-18: “Therefore we do not lose heart. Though outwardly we are wasting away, yet inwardly we are being renewed day by day. For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all. So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen, since what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal. “

You are right that there maybe changes that are not great. I too wish that those churches who have taken the CRC out of their name on the fronts of their buildings would put it back in and that in some churches they would rediscover the joy of hymns and be more discerning about song lyrics.

I do not think that church leadership is for the most part trying to “hide” our dutch culture but trying to understand it as part of our history and move forward to where we are today. Most people in our congregations (even those who come from the Dutch background) do not identify with the dutch culture that is so prevalent in our churches. They do not fit in as it seems you have been able to do. True theology and true worship is not equal to Dutch traditional worship. Many people from many cultures love the reformed view on Christianity and love the CRC but do not identify with the Dutch traditional way of worship. I believe we need to find a way to welcome different ways of worshiping within our reformed tradition.

You are right that we in the CRC need to be who God calls us to be, but that is not necessarily what we have always been. God wants to transform us more and more into God's likeness. As reformed believers we believe that the Kingdom of God is already among us and we get a clear picture of what this looks like in Revelation 7:9a: “After this I looked and there before me was a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language, standing before the throne and in front of the Lamb.” May our churches reflect this glory of God's Kingdom! What does this mean for us? I don't think it means that we say, “we worship this way, if you want to be like us, great, if you don't, go away.” I think it means we need to figure out who God calls us to be and this may mean changing our culture, not to “cater” to other ethnicities, but to grow into God's will for our church.

I pray that we, as a church, can continue to become diverse and that as we do we can figure out what that means for our church traditions, worship and structure.  And I pray that we can do this all with the Holy Spirit's leading, not in our own strength or with our own power but understanding who God wants us to be.

Bev, I really appreciate your comments about prayer and discernment when looking for leaders.  I think too we need to be very prayerful and discerning about our plans and ways we set up to find the right leaders we are looking for.  It is not just about the best model for an organization but what God wants for us - no matter what the model.  At every level of church governance we need to be focused on prayer and discernment.  So often when we have a busy meeting planned we think that cutting short our prayer and devotions will give us more time but it is when we have a focus on God through prayer that meetings become productive and energizing.  I hope that all the reports that come from the various committees of the denomination can be said to be developed through prayer and discernment, even the ones that stress the need to have diversity in our leadership.

A person of colour is someone who is not caucasian.  A woman person of colour is an important delegate - she would still only have one vote but would bring an important, often missing voice to our classes and synod meetings.  It may take pressure off the usual white male delegates to attend the meetings, allowing other voices to be heard as well, but it doesn't take all the pressure off of them since they will be needed to begin to develop leadership in others.

To me this means that as a church we are a people of many different backgrounds and places in life (not just in colour and ethnicity but also in ability, age, jobs and maybe even more aspects of life), and yet are all unified in our committment to God, our belief in Jesus Christ and our dedication to join God in God's mission in the world.  I think we have an example of this in the Trinity - three distinct persons of God and yet one God - diverse and unified.  In John 17 Jesus prays that we will all be one just as he and the Father are one.  Diverse and unified.

Perhaps you are right Alejandro Pimentel - our standard ways of organizing people groups don't fit very well do they?  So maybe we need to say things differently - that our leadership and our classis and synod delegates should reflect our local church communities and our local churches should reflect the communities in which they are situated.  How different would our churches and leadership be if this was the case?  Maybe in some nothing would be different but I'm guessing that in many churches and classes the faces represented at our meetings would look different than it is now.

Hi Bev,  you're right, we do need the Holy Spirit to guide us in who should be selected for leadership positions and when we listen to the Holy Spirit, pray and fast, God will show us who should be leading.  This is a very significant way God leads and guides us, however, throughout the Bible God has used other ways as well to choose leaders.  The seven who are chosen to take on the work of looking after those who did not have food were chosen because they were known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom (Acts 6:3).  That is what was needed for the leadership role.  While listening and praying to God about our leaders it is also appropriate to name the type of gifts we need for leadership roles and search for those who have those gifts, always being in prayer and listening for the Holy Spirit.

I think the primary purpose of the CRC is neither promote Calvin's teachings or numerical growth but to join God in God's mission to the world to bring redemmption and renewal to a world broken by sin.

I think that you, aguilla1, are saying that Classis should primarily be concerned with the minsitries that are done together  and the sharing and learning from each other happens informally at the meetings and at other venues.

What do others think?  What makes a classis relevant to its congregations?

Posted in: Classical Exams

Great comments and good to think about.  Dutch - I think you hit on a few things that I hadn't thought about.  I agree that it seems like our denomination is going for a more "centralized" model and I am not convinced that is the best thing. So then maybe what needs to change is the process that happens BEFORE the classical exam.  I don't have any real ideas because all those steps seem important and yet it does seem like there should be somthing different because often the classis that does the examining does not know the candidate well - perhaps the church that is actually doing the calling knows the candidate but that is only two or three of the delegates to the classis meeting and they are not usually directly involved in the exam but just as observers and sometimes even called upon to defend their choice of someone for their minister. 

Over the last few years the denomination has been encouraging classes to develop teams of peple that journey with the person being called to ministry from the beginning of their call - before they even begin seminary - and not just for funding but for leadership development and mentoring.  Perhaps this is the key to how classical exams can be less "redundant" and more relevant.  Except, often the home classis of the person going into ministry is not the classis that ends up doing the exam. 

This issue has been on my mind lately because I am facing my classical exam next week.  I have some advantages, however, because it is also my home classis and I have been involved with the Leadership Development team, preached in many of the churches over the years, been a part of the classis for eight years and been examined there for a licence to exhort about five years ago.  Many of the pastors and elders there do know me and I think that makes it easier for me because even if I get really nervous and mess up on a few things they have had other interactions with me and perhaps are able to see better what is nerves and what is real. 

Maybe getting rid of the classical exam is not what is needed but I do think something needs to change.

We want to hear from you.

Connect to The Network and add your own question, blog, resource, or job.

Add Your Post