Mark, I agree we should be considerate of our language. But over the years I have also found it an onerous and impossible task to avoid what some regard as insensibility in language. This has been particularly true for the racial issue. The terms white and black and colored are used in very strange ways. At times I am offended by being referred to as white. It puts me into a presumed category which may not apply in every instance. But I know that in general, it is a waste of time to be offended by it.
When homosex people got the right to marry, I then no longer wanted to be identified as married, since I felt the term had become sullied, and had lost its meaning. But, what term can one use instead?
Last night we watched a video on Mother Teresa working in India. Her weathered skin was as dark as that of many of the East Indians and Pakistani people, yet she was referred to as "white", by the Indians. The afro-americans are often referred to as "black" in USA or "colored" in South Africa. But whether the term is a problem, is usually in the ears of the hearer, and sometimes in the intentions of the speaker. Most afro-americans in the USA are not black but brown or in many cases tanned. But the colors become a euphenism for their racial background. I find it an impossible situation to satisfy all the feelings associated with the nuances of various designations.
In the aboriginal situation in Canada, they were originally called Indians in english. Then they wanted to be called "Natives" or "First Nations", both terms which offend me, especially "Natives". (as if I was not a native, but they are...therefore suggesting that perhaps I do not belong in this country... ) "First Nations" is simply presumptious (to me), as if to suggest that perhaps Quebec was a second nation, and Canada a third nation. And of course, how many "First Nations" were there, and of those, how many exist today? But the point is political, to suggest that they are still viable or valid nations with the possibility of governance, on a par with Canada, and perhaps superior to the provinces. And, since their ethnicity is enshrined in our constitution, they want to maintain their racial distinctiveness, whatever it is called, since it gives them all sorts of entitlements that the average Canadian does not have.
So the main reason I have problems with the usage of words, is when they convey a lie, an untruth, or attempt to paper over the reality of the situation. Thus using the terms of a deaf mute or a wheelchair bound individual is only problematic if not true. Provided that we realize that deaf mute people are people, and can still communicate in other ways, and are still valuable to God, and to us.
Trying to suggest that disabilities are not diseases, may be technically true, but misses the point. Sometimes diseases cause great disabilities, such as polio causing lameness, or cancer causing colostomys, or flesh-eating disease or diabetes causing amputations, meningitis causing other problems, cataracts causing blindness, etc. Whether a disability is caused by a disease, or by an accident, or by genetics, or by gestational problems, does not really matter in the effect of the disability. The disability still causes problems, and we are called to help, to love, to care, not to ignore or dismiss.
I know a person who must continually wear a brace (even while swimming) to support his back, which is severely bent and mishaped from birth. He can still get around, and can drive, and has a marvelous sense of humor, and I like him. He knows his problem, but he also knows it doesn't have to stop him from being a person who can do what he can do. He faithfully visited his mom in the nursing home until she died, even though she barely knew him. He visits different churches almost every week, mostly I think to see who he can cheer up, and as a way of bringing people together (at least that's how I see it). I've never heard him whine or complain.
I know a teenage girl who has cerebral palsy, and had spina bifida. She has a good mind, but it does not connect well to any part of her body, and so it is difficult for her to speak or write. But she can speak if you are patient enough to listen. She has a motorized wheelchair and loves to race around on the grass with it, or pull kids behind her in a cart. Is she disabled? Does she have problems? yes! major problems. Sometimes she has pain. Can't feed herself (or barely), can't walk, can't bathe herself or bring herself to the wc. It's a lot of work getting her around, using lifts and hoists, sometimes, (but I can still carry her up and down the stairs, and frankly, I don't mind. ) But she has still learned much, has a good memory, and knows when and how much medicine she needs to keep her muscles from binding up too tight, she can read, and she has a sense of humor too. She takes up a bit more space in our church, but that's okay. Maybe she reminds us to be thankful for our small problems. She teaches us to be patient, and when we think of building improvements or renovations, she is always on our mind. And we don't mind.
I know a fellow who lost his hand and wrist in an accident. It causes him some problems, but he works hard every day at a physical job, and figures how to get aound his disability and minimize its effects. But it's an in your face kind of disability, that he also turns into a kind of humor from time to time. I also know a young girl born with a missing hand and wrist, who took her situation for granted, but was quite pleased to meet the older fellow with the missing hand. (She is also "black" or "colored" or something.) They had a great time doing the "high-five" with the short arms!
What am I trying to say? Maybe the same thing as you. That people with disabilities are people first. That disabilities are part of who they are. That some disabilities descibe a person almost as much as their occupation, or the color of their hair, or their nationality, or their ancestry. I am glad you are concerned for them.
I wonder. Yes if we delight in God, then we will be compelled to share the gospel. But maybe the real thing is simply to experience God in our lives. It may be delight; it might be a sorrowful experience; it might simply be inspiring. But perhpas it cannot be merely theoretical delight. It needs to be as real as cutting your finger or spraining your knee or eating your desert. It needs to be real. And we have to make ourselves vulnerable. Pride, vanity, self-consciousness, fear must all disappear or be overcome. Your trust in God to provide must be real, if you lose your job, or if you lose chance of advancement or if you lose acceptance by peers. Remember Christ's suffering for us. (compared to that, our risks are very small).
Good point about offerings. It is essential that the local church decides, and is encouraged to decide where to send money, and for whom to take offerings. This is part of their spiritual growth, and if the decision is apparently taken away, or seems to be taken away, it will discourage spiritual growth.
I sense the frustration that Mister B has. (I am sorry about this frustration.)
I just want to reiterate a couple of things I mentioned before. First, the calling must wait on the Lord. It is not the job of any particular church to provide a job for a candidate or any other preacher. The task is for the preacher to serve the church, to enhance the service of that church to love God and to serve God. It is a misnomer to say that a church without a full-time preacher is vacant. The church is not vacant, since presumably the congregation is still there, elders still lead and serve, services are still held, God's word is still preached, and people still worship. God's spirit is still there, and thus the church is not vacant, even without an official "pastor".
It is in thinking that the church is vacant, that the problem lies. The candidate may be vacant without a church....
How can a hired full-time preacher enhance the ministry? That is the question. That is what must be specifically answered and not taken for granted. It should not try to address the question of a quasi-vacancy, but should answer the question of purpose. That is the question that congregations are asking themselves, I think.
It is kind of nice to be able to agree with everyone, with Jim, and Henry, and Bev and Michael Bentley, all at the same time. Experiencing truth, and delighting in it! Henry's statement that he lived in the shadow of the church all his life.... how about maybe you lived in the warmth and security of the church, in the sunlight of God's Word all your life? Same life, same experience, but different perception of that experience, and thus a different experience....
It sounds like there is a bit of a mixup on expectations.... The candidacy committee keeps track of candidates the way some councils keep track of members?... In any case, in my experience, most candidates have some contacts who are promoters, as in the example you gave. They help to connect congregations and situations with certain candidates or pastors looking for a call. It is necessary to make contacts, to discover appropriate potential situations, and put out feelers or let them know you are interested. This is especially true now when congregations have become much more picky about who they want as a pastor or preacher, and they will not necessarily trust that simply anyone will do as their pastor. As in most occupations, word of mouth and personal connections have a much bigger impact on obtaining a job than a simple add in the paper or a simple resume. \you may have to find or cultivate some promoters. So that is the practical side.
The other practical and spiritual issue is that there must be a sense of purpose beyond merely filling a role. What is it that God has called you to do beyond what any other preacher might do, or beyond what the elders might do. Why would you think that God called you to a particular situation? Why is it necessary for you to pay your student loans back by being a preacher rather than a carpenter or a tent-maker or an electrician or computer technician? I know that is what you expected, but what is God expecting from you?
Maybe a church plant? Maybe it is your task to call others to Christ rather than waiting for someone to call you to do something? I am not saying what it is, since i don't even know you but i am suggesting some possibilities. Maybe patience, but that can be difficultl. Anyway, i hope you find what God wants you to find.
Do people feel welcome in the church? Probably we need to differentiate between sincere Christians who do not feel welcome, vs nominal or seekers who do not feel welcome. This question needs to explain the phrase: "God disciplines those whom He loves..." If the gospel is not preached completely, or if sanctification is ignored or denied then sincere Christians will not feel part of a church. If Romans 6 (shall we sin the more that grace may abound? by no means...) is ignored, or if repentance (as in "Repent and Believe") is ignored, or if I john 1:9,10, or I John 3:6 is ignored then the church has lost its salt. On the other hand, the message of grace and forgiveness and repentance means that sinners are permitted and encouraged to repent, and to experience God's grace and forgiveness. That means that unbelievers should always be encouraged to hear the gospel, not to be excluded from that message. The difficulty is whether a "seeker" is truly a seeker, or is only trying to find acceptance, rather than forgiveness for their sins. While patience is a virtue, and while God is long-suffering (patient), we also know that God disciplines those whom he loves. Some of God's discipline was very severe, such as the death of 24,000 Israelites who practiced sexual immorality with people of Balaam, or the death of Annanias and Sapphira for merely lying. We should not arrogantly assume superiority over God, in thinking that we are more merciful than God. God judges more severly than us, and also provides a greater sacrifice than we do. But He asks us to be holy as he is holy. True love for one another means that we do not tolerate sin and idolatry. (I John 3: 6, Revelations 21:8). Our attitude towards sin will also demonstrate to believers and unbelievers whether we really desire God's grace, or whether we merely desire human acceptance.
While on vacation, we often attend non-crc churches. A few weeks ago, we attended a "community" church where the pastor was attending a conference during the week, and they had a pancake breakfast on Saturday, which we attended. It was organized completely by men, although a few women attended to partake of the bounty. While discussing with them the service for the next day, the men were not absolutely certain that the preacher would be there the next day on the Sunday. But one of them said, "we think he will be there, but if he isn't, I will lead the service myself". This was a small church, denomination not identified, probably less than 80 attended on sunday morning, with about 16 at the bible study just previous. As it turned out, the preacher did make it, I believe a six hour trip from the conference location, and they invited us to join the choir that morning. We were quite reluctant, not having practiced with the choir, and not knowing one of the songs at all, but eventually they persuaded us.
A small church, but in my opinion, very mature. A church is mature when it continues regardless of circumstances, and regardless of who is there to lead or preach. And it is mature when the spirit of worship and welcome especially for strangers, is obvious.
Another church we attended a week later was Assembley of God, in a different town. We discovered it was pentecostal, and we were somewhat uncomfortable, but it was our vacation, a time when God opens up new discoveries to us. In his sermon, the preacher highlighted the strengths of this church, in being welcoming, and in being discipling (entering and applying the word to life, and leading others to christian living). He suggested that a weakness was evangelism, by asking how often the members had asked someone to come to church with them? Perhaps a self-centered church can never be mature, no matter how old it is, or how financially secure.
We ought to ask ourselves also how these three aspects of maturity (self-sustaining, governing and propagating) relate to the "marks of the true church" as we know them , which are identified as the pure preaching of the word, the pure administration of the sacraments, and the administration of discipline.
As a practical matter, I would suggest that a church would be mature if it is evangelistic either through growing in numbers or through planting another church, or both. Possibly a church is not mature merely because it is old. And possibly a previously mature church could regress to immaturity. Food for thought.
Having experienced various church settings and experiences, your comments make me wonder about the relevance of coming to meetings, whether deacons, elders, sunday school planning, building, bible studies, etc., without our bibles in hand, and what that says about where our focus is. Is that a symbol of our calling?
Should elders be chairing classis meetings? It should be a possibility. I can remember at least once when a pastor, who had been a pastor for only a year, maybe two, ended up on the rotation for chairing classis, since it was the turn of his church. He struggled, although he tried hard and did his best. How many times had he previously attended classis, maybe three? I know other pastors who were not too interested in the protocols and procedures of classis, and I know others who were too interested in the 'legal" details and niceties of procedure in order to achieve their results, or to reduce discussion.
There is always assistance for the chair from others, such as the stated clerk, the previous chair, experienced people, etc. The main issue is not just who chairs, but how involved the non-preaching elders can be. I have found the elders more involved lately than they were thirty years ago. But all of this starts at the local council. It also starts with the idea that just because an elder is not on council, doesn't mean he doesn't have responsibilities for staying informed, and remaining to be a spiritual influence and leader in the church. His term on council may be temporary, but his calling as a spiritual leader is not ended unless he is deposed or disciplined in some way.
We should also realize that not all elders go to classis, while some go more often. In some cases, some elders might even go once a year, since certain elders have more time, ability and desire than others. So we should be careful about overgeneralizing.
While elders will not know everyone's name, neither do the pastors, since they often don't know all the elders attending. I highly recommend all classis meetings to produce a list of attenders to classis at the beginning of the meeting to be handed out with the agenda or any other meeting materials. Name tags are good, but a list of attenders would be most helpful as well, since sometimes people are known by their names more than by their face.
"Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus" by Nabeel Quereshi is a very good book written by a former Muslim who came to Christ in his twenties. The theological, cultural, family and philosophical struggles he had to go through are well explained and narrated in an easy to read story format. Even the intellectual knowledge about the poverty of the koran, the contradictions of the prophet Mohammed, and the truth of Jesus, could not initially overcome his reluctance to accept it. This reluctance was mostly because of the cost... the cost of family relationships, and the built in fear of eternal death for believing in Jesus as God. It is a very interesting and revealing book.
Posted in: Good Intentions Gone Awry
Mark, I agree we should be considerate of our language. But over the years I have also found it an onerous and impossible task to avoid what some regard as insensibility in language. This has been particularly true for the racial issue. The terms white and black and colored are used in very strange ways. At times I am offended by being referred to as white. It puts me into a presumed category which may not apply in every instance. But I know that in general, it is a waste of time to be offended by it.
When homosex people got the right to marry, I then no longer wanted to be identified as married, since I felt the term had become sullied, and had lost its meaning. But, what term can one use instead?
Last night we watched a video on Mother Teresa working in India. Her weathered skin was as dark as that of many of the East Indians and Pakistani people, yet she was referred to as "white", by the Indians. The afro-americans are often referred to as "black" in USA or "colored" in South Africa. But whether the term is a problem, is usually in the ears of the hearer, and sometimes in the intentions of the speaker. Most afro-americans in the USA are not black but brown or in many cases tanned. But the colors become a euphenism for their racial background. I find it an impossible situation to satisfy all the feelings associated with the nuances of various designations.
In the aboriginal situation in Canada, they were originally called Indians in english. Then they wanted to be called "Natives" or "First Nations", both terms which offend me, especially "Natives". (as if I was not a native, but they are...therefore suggesting that perhaps I do not belong in this country... ) "First Nations" is simply presumptious (to me), as if to suggest that perhaps Quebec was a second nation, and Canada a third nation. And of course, how many "First Nations" were there, and of those, how many exist today? But the point is political, to suggest that they are still viable or valid nations with the possibility of governance, on a par with Canada, and perhaps superior to the provinces. And, since their ethnicity is enshrined in our constitution, they want to maintain their racial distinctiveness, whatever it is called, since it gives them all sorts of entitlements that the average Canadian does not have.
So the main reason I have problems with the usage of words, is when they convey a lie, an untruth, or attempt to paper over the reality of the situation. Thus using the terms of a deaf mute or a wheelchair bound individual is only problematic if not true. Provided that we realize that deaf mute people are people, and can still communicate in other ways, and are still valuable to God, and to us.
Trying to suggest that disabilities are not diseases, may be technically true, but misses the point. Sometimes diseases cause great disabilities, such as polio causing lameness, or cancer causing colostomys, or flesh-eating disease or diabetes causing amputations, meningitis causing other problems, cataracts causing blindness, etc. Whether a disability is caused by a disease, or by an accident, or by genetics, or by gestational problems, does not really matter in the effect of the disability. The disability still causes problems, and we are called to help, to love, to care, not to ignore or dismiss.
I know a person who must continually wear a brace (even while swimming) to support his back, which is severely bent and mishaped from birth. He can still get around, and can drive, and has a marvelous sense of humor, and I like him. He knows his problem, but he also knows it doesn't have to stop him from being a person who can do what he can do. He faithfully visited his mom in the nursing home until she died, even though she barely knew him. He visits different churches almost every week, mostly I think to see who he can cheer up, and as a way of bringing people together (at least that's how I see it). I've never heard him whine or complain.
I know a teenage girl who has cerebral palsy, and had spina bifida. She has a good mind, but it does not connect well to any part of her body, and so it is difficult for her to speak or write. But she can speak if you are patient enough to listen. She has a motorized wheelchair and loves to race around on the grass with it, or pull kids behind her in a cart. Is she disabled? Does she have problems? yes! major problems. Sometimes she has pain. Can't feed herself (or barely), can't walk, can't bathe herself or bring herself to the wc. It's a lot of work getting her around, using lifts and hoists, sometimes, (but I can still carry her up and down the stairs, and frankly, I don't mind. ) But she has still learned much, has a good memory, and knows when and how much medicine she needs to keep her muscles from binding up too tight, she can read, and she has a sense of humor too. She takes up a bit more space in our church, but that's okay. Maybe she reminds us to be thankful for our small problems. She teaches us to be patient, and when we think of building improvements or renovations, she is always on our mind. And we don't mind.
I know a fellow who lost his hand and wrist in an accident. It causes him some problems, but he works hard every day at a physical job, and figures how to get aound his disability and minimize its effects. But it's an in your face kind of disability, that he also turns into a kind of humor from time to time. I also know a young girl born with a missing hand and wrist, who took her situation for granted, but was quite pleased to meet the older fellow with the missing hand. (She is also "black" or "colored" or something.) They had a great time doing the "high-five" with the short arms!
What am I trying to say? Maybe the same thing as you. That people with disabilities are people first. That disabilities are part of who they are. That some disabilities descibe a person almost as much as their occupation, or the color of their hair, or their nationality, or their ancestry. I am glad you are concerned for them.
Posted in: Why Are Believers Not Declaring the Gospel?
I wonder. Yes if we delight in God, then we will be compelled to share the gospel. But maybe the real thing is simply to experience God in our lives. It may be delight; it might be a sorrowful experience; it might simply be inspiring. But perhpas it cannot be merely theoretical delight. It needs to be as real as cutting your finger or spraining your knee or eating your desert. It needs to be real. And we have to make ourselves vulnerable. Pride, vanity, self-consciousness, fear must all disappear or be overcome. Your trust in God to provide must be real, if you lose your job, or if you lose chance of advancement or if you lose acceptance by peers. Remember Christ's suffering for us. (compared to that, our risks are very small).
Posted in: How Helpful are Disagreements?
Very wise words, Al, that you have given here!
Posted in: Wag the Dog
Good point about offerings. It is essential that the local church decides, and is encouraged to decide where to send money, and for whom to take offerings. This is part of their spiritual growth, and if the decision is apparently taken away, or seems to be taken away, it will discourage spiritual growth.
Posted in: Waiting Pastors, Counting Sheep and Counting Shepherds
I sense the frustration that Mister B has. (I am sorry about this frustration.)
I just want to reiterate a couple of things I mentioned before. First, the calling must wait on the Lord. It is not the job of any particular church to provide a job for a candidate or any other preacher. The task is for the preacher to serve the church, to enhance the service of that church to love God and to serve God. It is a misnomer to say that a church without a full-time preacher is vacant. The church is not vacant, since presumably the congregation is still there, elders still lead and serve, services are still held, God's word is still preached, and people still worship. God's spirit is still there, and thus the church is not vacant, even without an official "pastor".
It is in thinking that the church is vacant, that the problem lies. The candidate may be vacant without a church....
How can a hired full-time preacher enhance the ministry? That is the question. That is what must be specifically answered and not taken for granted. It should not try to address the question of a quasi-vacancy, but should answer the question of purpose. That is the question that congregations are asking themselves, I think.
Posted in: Why Are Believers Not Declaring the Gospel?
It is kind of nice to be able to agree with everyone, with Jim, and Henry, and Bev and Michael Bentley, all at the same time. Experiencing truth, and delighting in it! Henry's statement that he lived in the shadow of the church all his life.... how about maybe you lived in the warmth and security of the church, in the sunlight of God's Word all your life? Same life, same experience, but different perception of that experience, and thus a different experience....
Loved all your comments!
Posted in: Waiting Pastors, Counting Sheep and Counting Shepherds
It sounds like there is a bit of a mixup on expectations.... The candidacy committee keeps track of candidates the way some councils keep track of members?... In any case, in my experience, most candidates have some contacts who are promoters, as in the example you gave. They help to connect congregations and situations with certain candidates or pastors looking for a call. It is necessary to make contacts, to discover appropriate potential situations, and put out feelers or let them know you are interested. This is especially true now when congregations have become much more picky about who they want as a pastor or preacher, and they will not necessarily trust that simply anyone will do as their pastor. As in most occupations, word of mouth and personal connections have a much bigger impact on obtaining a job than a simple add in the paper or a simple resume. \you may have to find or cultivate some promoters. So that is the practical side.
The other practical and spiritual issue is that there must be a sense of purpose beyond merely filling a role. What is it that God has called you to do beyond what any other preacher might do, or beyond what the elders might do. Why would you think that God called you to a particular situation? Why is it necessary for you to pay your student loans back by being a preacher rather than a carpenter or a tent-maker or an electrician or computer technician? I know that is what you expected, but what is God expecting from you?
Maybe a church plant? Maybe it is your task to call others to Christ rather than waiting for someone to call you to do something? I am not saying what it is, since i don't even know you but i am suggesting some possibilities. Maybe patience, but that can be difficultl. Anyway, i hope you find what God wants you to find.
Posted in: No Outsiders: Relating to Those Who "Don't Belong"
Do people feel welcome in the church? Probably we need to differentiate between sincere Christians who do not feel welcome, vs nominal or seekers who do not feel welcome. This question needs to explain the phrase: "God disciplines those whom He loves..." If the gospel is not preached completely, or if sanctification is ignored or denied then sincere Christians will not feel part of a church. If Romans 6 (shall we sin the more that grace may abound? by no means...) is ignored, or if repentance (as in "Repent and Believe") is ignored, or if I john 1:9,10, or I John 3:6 is ignored then the church has lost its salt. On the other hand, the message of grace and forgiveness and repentance means that sinners are permitted and encouraged to repent, and to experience God's grace and forgiveness. That means that unbelievers should always be encouraged to hear the gospel, not to be excluded from that message. The difficulty is whether a "seeker" is truly a seeker, or is only trying to find acceptance, rather than forgiveness for their sins. While patience is a virtue, and while God is long-suffering (patient), we also know that God disciplines those whom he loves. Some of God's discipline was very severe, such as the death of 24,000 Israelites who practiced sexual immorality with people of Balaam, or the death of Annanias and Sapphira for merely lying. We should not arrogantly assume superiority over God, in thinking that we are more merciful than God. God judges more severly than us, and also provides a greater sacrifice than we do. But He asks us to be holy as he is holy. True love for one another means that we do not tolerate sin and idolatry. (I John 3: 6, Revelations 21:8). Our attitude towards sin will also demonstrate to believers and unbelievers whether we really desire God's grace, or whether we merely desire human acceptance.
Posted in: Three Marks of a Mature Church?
While on vacation, we often attend non-crc churches. A few weeks ago, we attended a "community" church where the pastor was attending a conference during the week, and they had a pancake breakfast on Saturday, which we attended. It was organized completely by men, although a few women attended to partake of the bounty. While discussing with them the service for the next day, the men were not absolutely certain that the preacher would be there the next day on the Sunday. But one of them said, "we think he will be there, but if he isn't, I will lead the service myself". This was a small church, denomination not identified, probably less than 80 attended on sunday morning, with about 16 at the bible study just previous. As it turned out, the preacher did make it, I believe a six hour trip from the conference location, and they invited us to join the choir that morning. We were quite reluctant, not having practiced with the choir, and not knowing one of the songs at all, but eventually they persuaded us.
A small church, but in my opinion, very mature. A church is mature when it continues regardless of circumstances, and regardless of who is there to lead or preach. And it is mature when the spirit of worship and welcome especially for strangers, is obvious.
Another church we attended a week later was Assembley of God, in a different town. We discovered it was pentecostal, and we were somewhat uncomfortable, but it was our vacation, a time when God opens up new discoveries to us. In his sermon, the preacher highlighted the strengths of this church, in being welcoming, and in being discipling (entering and applying the word to life, and leading others to christian living). He suggested that a weakness was evangelism, by asking how often the members had asked someone to come to church with them? Perhaps a self-centered church can never be mature, no matter how old it is, or how financially secure.
We ought to ask ourselves also how these three aspects of maturity (self-sustaining, governing and propagating) relate to the "marks of the true church" as we know them , which are identified as the pure preaching of the word, the pure administration of the sacraments, and the administration of discipline.
As a practical matter, I would suggest that a church would be mature if it is evangelistic either through growing in numbers or through planting another church, or both. Possibly a church is not mature merely because it is old. And possibly a previously mature church could regress to immaturity. Food for thought.
Posted in: All I Learned From Church Is How To Do Administration
Having experienced various church settings and experiences, your comments make me wonder about the relevance of coming to meetings, whether deacons, elders, sunday school planning, building, bible studies, etc., without our bibles in hand, and what that says about where our focus is. Is that a symbol of our calling?
Posted in: Are We ignoring Elders at Synod?
Should elders be chairing classis meetings? It should be a possibility. I can remember at least once when a pastor, who had been a pastor for only a year, maybe two, ended up on the rotation for chairing classis, since it was the turn of his church. He struggled, although he tried hard and did his best. How many times had he previously attended classis, maybe three? I know other pastors who were not too interested in the protocols and procedures of classis, and I know others who were too interested in the 'legal" details and niceties of procedure in order to achieve their results, or to reduce discussion.
There is always assistance for the chair from others, such as the stated clerk, the previous chair, experienced people, etc. The main issue is not just who chairs, but how involved the non-preaching elders can be. I have found the elders more involved lately than they were thirty years ago. But all of this starts at the local council. It also starts with the idea that just because an elder is not on council, doesn't mean he doesn't have responsibilities for staying informed, and remaining to be a spiritual influence and leader in the church. His term on council may be temporary, but his calling as a spiritual leader is not ended unless he is deposed or disciplined in some way.
We should also realize that not all elders go to classis, while some go more often. In some cases, some elders might even go once a year, since certain elders have more time, ability and desire than others. So we should be careful about overgeneralizing.
While elders will not know everyone's name, neither do the pastors, since they often don't know all the elders attending. I highly recommend all classis meetings to produce a list of attenders to classis at the beginning of the meeting to be handed out with the agenda or any other meeting materials. Name tags are good, but a list of attenders would be most helpful as well, since sometimes people are known by their names more than by their face.
Posted in: Christian - Muslim Dialogue
"Seeking Allah, Finding Jesus" by Nabeel Quereshi is a very good book written by a former Muslim who came to Christ in his twenties. The theological, cultural, family and philosophical struggles he had to go through are well explained and narrated in an easy to read story format. Even the intellectual knowledge about the poverty of the koran, the contradictions of the prophet Mohammed, and the truth of Jesus, could not initially overcome his reluctance to accept it. This reluctance was mostly because of the cost... the cost of family relationships, and the built in fear of eternal death for believing in Jesus as God. It is a very interesting and revealing book.