Thanks for your response, Jeff. You seem to be suggesting that conduct is as important a profession as is stating agreement with a creed. If you don't walk the talk, do you really believe the talk.... But some would say that we are sinners, and must be forgiven; that is part of our faith. How would you answer that?
It would seem best when regional ministries are not established simply to have or fill a position, but rather to meet an obvious need or to meet a specific achievable goal. A tendency is possible to continue with certain regional staff even when the need is not there, and then to ignore other needs because financial and human resources are already allocated or exhausted. Regional ministries are probably most effective when they meet a criteria of flexibility and need, and avoid meeting a "formula" or avoid the criteria of traditional expectation.
In response to Frons, I am curious as to whether you could give an example of where the love of God is not present in a situation that you have experienced? Or perhaps give an example of where people are not willing to change in a situation where you thought they should have changed?
Thanks for your comment, Randy (dominee). It is much appreciated.
Suppose council forgot this article, or didn't follow it. Suppose they permitted the young couple to make profession of faith in spite of them living together without marriage. Then what would be an appropriate follow-up?
Jim, I agree with Jeff basically. However, it might depend on policies that the church already has in place. If you have policies relating to public use of the facilities under certain conditions, and if the antenna does not significantly alter the ambience or spiritual atmosphere of the building, a council might take it upon themselves to make a decision without having a formal congregational meeting. Sometimes a simple yes/no ballot vote after a church service may be sufficient, or an announcement with opportunities for individuals to raise objections to council could suffice.
Henry, with respect, the church order is not incredibly clear about the limitations of the office of elder. It says they shall normally retire from office. This has no scriptural sanction whatsoever, unless understood in the sense of a change of service. The church order says they shall serve (not "be") for a limited time. The church order says the time shall be designated by council. They can be re-elected, and terms can be changed. Thus the aspect of "serving" and "non-serving" elders can also be designated by council if it so chooses. This would not be disimilar to "retired" preachers continuing to preach, at the request of various councils. The church order uses the term installation in the case of re-election. It also uses the qualifier "immediate eligibility", but this is artificial, again with no scriptural sanction, nor a practical exclusion for someone who is re-installed one week or two months after his term is up, or one year after his previous term, or four years after his previous term. Thus it is reasonable to install, and not re-ordain an elder who has been previously ordained. As far as you asking a non-serving elder to serve, of course there is no problem with that, assuming that your council approves and you are preferably not doing it arbitrarily and individually by yourself. In the same way, there is no problem with council inviting non-serving or "retired" elders to participate in the laying on of hands. It is their decision. From the perspective of the non-serving elders, they ought to make sure however, that they understand the intentions of the serving council, when they assume certain tasks, including participating in ordinations or sacraments. If the council would rather that they did not participate, then they should honor that.
There are different perspectives on what it means to be an elder. I have heard sermons for retiring elders that advised these elders that in one sense they were still elders; they still provided spiritual leadership, they still had a responsibility to use their eldership talents to teach, to provide guidance and advice and leadership. They have been ordained, and not deposed, (and no article 17 for elders) so their qualifications and calling still stands. However, since the term is over, they are not officially part of the governing body. The tasks they might carry out are subject to the requests and approval of the elders who are serving their terms. What they can do is regulated by their council. Ultimately council also has the ability to determine the length of the terms of office as well. At the request of council, they could help to serve Lord's supper, or be part of the laying on of hands, or visit the sick, or be delegated to some organization or committee, or lead a service, or assist with some visits. But they are not responsible to attend council meetings, nor to initiate certain activities as council members are. They are not part of the board of directors aspect while they are past their term, and should not be voting on council matters.
At least this is how I would interpret the calling and tasks of "non-serving" elders, within the general description and limitations indicated by the church order. "Non-serving elders" is a misnomer, a poor term to use, and "retired" elders is also a poor term, an unscriptural term. Can anyone come up with a good term to use? Maybe we have to be satisfied with using poor terms for this?
It would be nice if we did not regard the primary task of elders to attend meetings and vote on things. Instead, we should regard their primary task as one of providing spiritual leadership; this would relate better to the qualifications as outlined in scripture, and would contribute more to the spiritual health and growth of the body of Christ.
I agree we shouldn't blame any confession, statement, declaration, testimony, creed, or discussion of it, for our own misbehaviour. But I am not sure why you made the statement. I have not seen anyone doing that. Other than one of the authors of it attempting to use the Belhar as justification for behaviour which is contrary to scripture. And it doesn't seem as if this co-author believes that the behaviour is actually "misbehaviour". Which merely demonstrates the lack of clarity of the Belhar.
Perhaps Mike your judgement that people have slipped into picking sides too quickly, is a bit misplaced. People will obviously have opinions on the appropriateness of a proposed new confession or testimony. That is as inevitable as the opinions of those who wrote and proposed it. It is during the discussion that these opinions either change or are confirmed. Usually the difference in opinions is not primarily based on the facts of the document itself, since often there is agreement on that. The difference in opinions is usually based on the standards applied to the facts, and the insights applied to the longterm impacts of the wording, and whether the wording is sufficiently appropriate and clear not to cause problems in the future, and whether adopting a particular statement in such an official way is appropriate in the context of need for other similar types of statements on different issues.
See? Steve, I told you there were different perspectives. Kathy's perspective is related to Synod. My perspective is related to council. But Kathy is correct in the sense that a "non-serving elder" cannot be a delegate, or have voting privileges, unless re-appointed as an elder by council, or having the term extended by council. So "non-serving" elders are not members of council.
But there is much more to being an elder than simply having voting privileges or delegation responsibilities. And these other tasks are the tasks of greater significance. The office of elder is much more than a mere administrative task. It is a calling by God to lead and teach spiritual truths and Godly living to the people of God, to demonstrate christian service, exercise admonition, promote evangelism, and supervise the preaching. This calling is confirmed by God's people but it is ultimately God's call. The "legal" part of it means that when the term is up, there is no more voting. But the general service and leadership part does not end. For that reason, elders can still lead services, even when they are not on council, provided they have the approval of council. They can still assist council with the supervision of preaching. They can still provide council with counsel and advice. And because council has the authority to make decisions, council can ask them as previously ordained "called" elders to carry out certain elder tasks or duties such as serving or supervising communion, laying on of hands, making a specific visit, or supervising preaching, or supervising a worship service when official elders are absent due to vacation or illness. Some of these things are rare circumstances. But there needs to be certainty about what council/consistory is asking them to do, or about approving their actions.
So don't totally discount your eldership. But recognize it needs to be subject to specific council decisions. Bu
Article 25 of the church order recognizes the principle that elders can be re-installed without requiring re-ordination, since they have been ordained previously. Article 25 also confirms that the council designates the term (or limited time) that elders shall serve. Presumably council can also change or extend this term from time to time as it sees fit, as appropriate to the circumstance and profit of the church. So councils have a couple options available to make delegation to official bodies possible if necessary.
Posted in: When a young person who's living a sinful lifestyle wants to make profession of faith; what's an appropriate response?
Thanks for your response, Jeff. You seem to be suggesting that conduct is as important a profession as is stating agreement with a creed. If you don't walk the talk, do you really believe the talk.... But some would say that we are sinners, and must be forgiven; that is part of our faith. How would you answer that?
Posted in: Has the idea of classis staff come and gone?
It would seem best when regional ministries are not established simply to have or fill a position, but rather to meet an obvious need or to meet a specific achievable goal. A tendency is possible to continue with certain regional staff even when the need is not there, and then to ignore other needs because financial and human resources are already allocated or exhausted. Regional ministries are probably most effective when they meet a criteria of flexibility and need, and avoid meeting a "formula" or avoid the criteria of traditional expectation.
Posted in: Diversity in Leadership Planning Group II report. What is the meaning of 'diversity'?
In response to Frons, I am curious as to whether you could give an example of where the love of God is not present in a situation that you have experienced? Or perhaps give an example of where people are not willing to change in a situation where you thought they should have changed?
John
Posted in: When a young person who's living a sinful lifestyle wants to make profession of faith; what's an appropriate response?
Thanks for your comment, Randy (dominee). It is much appreciated.
Suppose council forgot this article, or didn't follow it. Suppose they permitted the young couple to make profession of faith in spite of them living together without marriage. Then what would be an appropriate follow-up?
Posted in: When a young person who's living a sinful lifestyle wants to make profession of faith; what's an appropriate response?
Thanks, Randy dominee.
Posted in: Is congregational approval required to lease part of our building?
Jim, I agree with Jeff basically. However, it might depend on policies that the church already has in place. If you have policies relating to public use of the facilities under certain conditions, and if the antenna does not significantly alter the ambience or spiritual atmosphere of the building, a council might take it upon themselves to make a decision without having a formal congregational meeting. Sometimes a simple yes/no ballot vote after a church service may be sufficient, or an announcement with opportunities for individuals to raise objections to council could suffice.
Posted in: Once an elder, always an elder?
Henry, with respect, the church order is not incredibly clear about the limitations of the office of elder. It says they shall normally retire from office. This has no scriptural sanction whatsoever, unless understood in the sense of a change of service. The church order says they shall serve (not "be") for a limited time. The church order says the time shall be designated by council. They can be re-elected, and terms can be changed. Thus the aspect of "serving" and "non-serving" elders can also be designated by council if it so chooses. This would not be disimilar to "retired" preachers continuing to preach, at the request of various councils. The church order uses the term installation in the case of re-election. It also uses the qualifier "immediate eligibility", but this is artificial, again with no scriptural sanction, nor a practical exclusion for someone who is re-installed one week or two months after his term is up, or one year after his previous term, or four years after his previous term. Thus it is reasonable to install, and not re-ordain an elder who has been previously ordained. As far as you asking a non-serving elder to serve, of course there is no problem with that, assuming that your council approves and you are preferably not doing it arbitrarily and individually by yourself. In the same way, there is no problem with council inviting non-serving or "retired" elders to participate in the laying on of hands. It is their decision. From the perspective of the non-serving elders, they ought to make sure however, that they understand the intentions of the serving council, when they assume certain tasks, including participating in ordinations or sacraments. If the council would rather that they did not participate, then they should honor that.
Posted in: When a young person who's living a sinful lifestyle wants to make profession of faith; what's an appropriate response?
Colin, thanks for your comment. It is sometimes a difficult issue. Your comments are appreciated.
Posted in: Once an elder, always an elder?
There are different perspectives on what it means to be an elder. I have heard sermons for retiring elders that advised these elders that in one sense they were still elders; they still provided spiritual leadership, they still had a responsibility to use their eldership talents to teach, to provide guidance and advice and leadership. They have been ordained, and not deposed, (and no article 17 for elders) so their qualifications and calling still stands. However, since the term is over, they are not officially part of the governing body. The tasks they might carry out are subject to the requests and approval of the elders who are serving their terms. What they can do is regulated by their council. Ultimately council also has the ability to determine the length of the terms of office as well. At the request of council, they could help to serve Lord's supper, or be part of the laying on of hands, or visit the sick, or be delegated to some organization or committee, or lead a service, or assist with some visits. But they are not responsible to attend council meetings, nor to initiate certain activities as council members are. They are not part of the board of directors aspect while they are past their term, and should not be voting on council matters.
At least this is how I would interpret the calling and tasks of "non-serving" elders, within the general description and limitations indicated by the church order. "Non-serving elders" is a misnomer, a poor term to use, and "retired" elders is also a poor term, an unscriptural term. Can anyone come up with a good term to use? Maybe we have to be satisfied with using poor terms for this?
It would be nice if we did not regard the primary task of elders to attend meetings and vote on things. Instead, we should regard their primary task as one of providing spiritual leadership; this would relate better to the qualifications as outlined in scripture, and would contribute more to the spiritual health and growth of the body of Christ.
Posted in: Can unity be established under constraint?
I agree we shouldn't blame any confession, statement, declaration, testimony, creed, or discussion of it, for our own misbehaviour. But I am not sure why you made the statement. I have not seen anyone doing that. Other than one of the authors of it attempting to use the Belhar as justification for behaviour which is contrary to scripture. And it doesn't seem as if this co-author believes that the behaviour is actually "misbehaviour". Which merely demonstrates the lack of clarity of the Belhar.
Perhaps Mike your judgement that people have slipped into picking sides too quickly, is a bit misplaced. People will obviously have opinions on the appropriateness of a proposed new confession or testimony. That is as inevitable as the opinions of those who wrote and proposed it. It is during the discussion that these opinions either change or are confirmed. Usually the difference in opinions is not primarily based on the facts of the document itself, since often there is agreement on that. The difference in opinions is usually based on the standards applied to the facts, and the insights applied to the longterm impacts of the wording, and whether the wording is sufficiently appropriate and clear not to cause problems in the future, and whether adopting a particular statement in such an official way is appropriate in the context of need for other similar types of statements on different issues.
Posted in: Once an elder, always an elder?
See? Steve, I told you there were different perspectives. Kathy's perspective is related to Synod. My perspective is related to council. But Kathy is correct in the sense that a "non-serving elder" cannot be a delegate, or have voting privileges, unless re-appointed as an elder by council, or having the term extended by council. So "non-serving" elders are not members of council.
But there is much more to being an elder than simply having voting privileges or delegation responsibilities. And these other tasks are the tasks of greater significance. The office of elder is much more than a mere administrative task. It is a calling by God to lead and teach spiritual truths and Godly living to the people of God, to demonstrate christian service, exercise admonition, promote evangelism, and supervise the preaching. This calling is confirmed by God's people but it is ultimately God's call. The "legal" part of it means that when the term is up, there is no more voting. But the general service and leadership part does not end. For that reason, elders can still lead services, even when they are not on council, provided they have the approval of council. They can still assist council with the supervision of preaching. They can still provide council with counsel and advice. And because council has the authority to make decisions, council can ask them as previously ordained "called" elders to carry out certain elder tasks or duties such as serving or supervising communion, laying on of hands, making a specific visit, or supervising preaching, or supervising a worship service when official elders are absent due to vacation or illness. Some of these things are rare circumstances. But there needs to be certainty about what council/consistory is asking them to do, or about approving their actions.
So don't totally discount your eldership. But recognize it needs to be subject to specific council decisions. Bu
Article 25 of the church order recognizes the principle that elders can be re-installed without requiring re-ordination, since they have been ordained previously. Article 25 also confirms that the council designates the term (or limited time) that elders shall serve. Presumably council can also change or extend this term from time to time as it sees fit, as appropriate to the circumstance and profit of the church. So councils have a couple options available to make delegation to official bodies possible if necessary.
Posted in: When a young person who's living a sinful lifestyle wants to make profession of faith; what's an appropriate response?
Thanks Dave and Jeff for your comments.