In actual fact, the flexibility is already there, since the councils can designate the length of the terms and there is no absolute requirement that all terms be the same length. There also does not seem to be anything preventing councils from designating indefinate terms, or ten year terms, etc., nor stopping them from making a distinction between serving elders and deacons on council, and those who are not serving on council. For example, having deacons on ten year terms, but serving on council for only three years... the point is even though there is lots of flexibility, it is hidden in the text and thus reduces the apparent options or considerations. It would seem more transparent just to highlight how much flexibility the councils really have to work with this as needed.
I think that the church order does not prohibit the assist council concept, but it implies a special process is required, or that "former" elders merely assist and can not function as elders in the sense that they can be designated with elder authority to carry out certain tasks and delegations and representations. This implication is mixed and can be overcome by convolutions, but why not just make it plain and simple?
Thanks to those involved in setting up the network, the technical management as well as the guides and the contributors. It is particularly valuable to those who are busy, who are far from GR, far from the center of activities, and yet are interested in the contribution of the CRC to the walk of faith in the body of Christ. It provides a way for unfiltered and relatively unfettered discussion and sharing on the issues that are on the hearts. Thankyou. God Bless you. May you enjoy this Christmas time.
Paul, its unfortunate that you used the term "bishop" in your article. I believe the term sometimes translated as bishop is usually translated as "overseer", and attributed to the office of elder. I believe the greek word was translated into "bishop" because it suited the church structure of the time, otherwise it would have simply been translated as overseer. It would have been better that you used the term "leader" to make your point, since it is true that not all overseers or elders are leaders; or at least that there are also leaders of leaders. It would seem that for an improved classis, what is really needed are not administrators, nor even overseers, but rather leaders. These leaders might be overseers, or they might be deacons, or they might simply be those who encourage and stimulate a new approach.
In organizational parlance, it is common to realize that there are managers, and then there are leaders, and then ocassionally there are those who are both. Forcing the concept or (even unofficial) title of bishop on such a leader may be a disincentive to take up a leadership role.
However, your general encouragement to look with fresh eyes is a good thing.
The revised re-wording is better than the old, but I would suggest separating the elders and deacons into separate articles. There may be benefits in treating them somewhat differently in terms of roles, appointments, etc.
Paul, maybe the solution is in the mindset. Changing the focus and atmosphere of classis from an approval or hierarchical mindset to a cooperative venture mindset might bring about much of what you are looking for. To do that, classes need to eliminate as much as possible all the unnecessary approvals and formal processes that distract from the focus on a cooperative venture. If bringing a city to Christ, or Christ to the city is the focus, then 90% of the time should be spent on that, including prayer for it.
The reason for splitting these offices into two articles is simply to highlight their significance, and the fact that they might be treated differently. Something like having different articles for evangelists and preachers/pastors. Their tasks are different, thus the titles, and since the tasks are different, the terms might also be different, as decided by the local church. One of the possibilities that churches should consider, is that elder terms and deacons terms could be flexible, so that terms are not always fixed, but might range between three to five years depending on the projects or involvement of particular elders or deacons. Thus there would be a discussion near the end of the year as to whether an elder or deacon would resign his active duty or continue on for another year. This might be a useful policy for some churches to consider in order to benefit from the activities of particular office-bearers. There are also other mechanisms, such as designating certain office-bearers as contributors and workers but non-voting, which could also be used. Flexibility is the key, and the tasks done by them rather than the strict adherence to the arbitrary terms ought to be the focus and determining factor.
In our church our office bearers are both elders and deacons; they serve a dual role and this is another way to be flexible.
I should point out that the principle for the congregation to be meaningfully empowered (per deMoor's commentary) to choose its leaders/officebearers does not appear to be applied to the position of pastor/preacher in the same way, as the church order apparently does not have term limits for that? It's a good principle to some degree but we do seem to apply it in an adhoc fashion rather than be consistent with it.
And of course, the content of these songs, and the things they watch and see, do affect them. It may not seem to at first, but it does. Just like the candy and cookies and alcohol and fatty diets affect their physical bodies; first just a little bit, and then more and more. The very fact that they deny it already demonstrates what it has done to them. It has numbed them, anesthetized them. They no longer worry about the immorality or about how God regards the songs and movies and books and conversation. So it has already affected them.
Delbert, your comments were very enlightening and encouraging. Also highlighting the vast difference between LDS growth in the millions, and CRC yellowstone in the thousands. We seem so often to be willing to adopt the practices of other cultures that do not lead to growth; perhaps we should adopt some of the practices of the LDS and use them to lead others to the Jesus of the Bible. Wow!! wouldn't that be something?!
At a recent meeting, not church related, I witnessed the interesting non-use of technology (powerpoint) by two speakers, who although they had a prepared presentation, decided not to use it, and simply spoke from some notes instead, and left off the projector and slides. I believe they felt the engagement of the audience increased, and that the audience could live in the moment, in the sponteneity. So I agree, that thought should be given to this, and that sometimes simply changing the pace is one of the most effective methods of relating the message.
On a side note, not technology related, but somewhat similar, is the use of "liturgy". I am beginning to find distasteful the common practice of "readings" done by everyone in unison. To me, it is like bad singing and bad music. While good readings, ocassionally done, and done for effect, may be uplifting, their common overuse leads to a kind of disharmonious drone that hides rather than helps the message. Often they are too long, and lack the sponteneity and heart-felt familiarity and sense of renewal that a unison reading should contain. How often will congregants remember these readings or even be affected by them?
Rather than so many of these unison readings, perhaps heartfelt "Amen!" s or repetition of key phrases would be more useful.
In terms of their spiritual life and growth, family devotions have a much larger impact than christian school, or any church activities, including catechism, sunday school, gems, or worship. So if you are concerned about your children, and if you love them, you will not neglect family devotions with your children, especially at young ages. By the time they are twelve or fourteen, they will quite likely have their own personal devotions daily, provided the family has modelled and encouraged them.
A couple of options for family devotions that work well: 1. family devotions at mealtimes. This means that you either start or end the meal with prayer, reading scripture, possibly discussion, and possibly singing of some songs, preferably from memory. In my case, this is what we do at least at breakfast and supper, and when on vacation or weekends, also at noon meals. The children enjoy this. When we read the bible, or a bible story book, invariably one or two will want to sit on my knee when we read, although this diminishes when they become older. At breakfast, I am often gone, so my wife leads this reading. When the grandchildren are also there, then often four of them are trying to sit on my knees, and I can barely see the book. They also love to pick the songs, especially the action songs. As they get older and learn, they may want to play the piano for a simple song they are learning.
The other option, 2, is family devotion at bedtime. This works well if children more or less go to bed at a similar time. It can also be done with parent and single child. Again, the children miss it when it is skipped.
Sometimes both options done together are possible, and the children do not mind it at all. In fact, sometimes they are the ones who insist on it, and this keeps the practice consistent.
Usually simply reading the bible, rather than all kinds of devotional books, is the best.
Is there a spot to observe the parallel translations, ie. the present version, and the proposed version, with the changes highlilghted in different font or color?
Posted in: Diakonia Remixed: Terms for Deacons
In actual fact, the flexibility is already there, since the councils can designate the length of the terms and there is no absolute requirement that all terms be the same length. There also does not seem to be anything preventing councils from designating indefinate terms, or ten year terms, etc., nor stopping them from making a distinction between serving elders and deacons on council, and those who are not serving on council. For example, having deacons on ten year terms, but serving on council for only three years... the point is even though there is lots of flexibility, it is hidden in the text and thus reduces the apparent options or considerations. It would seem more transparent just to highlight how much flexibility the councils really have to work with this as needed.
I think that the church order does not prohibit the assist council concept, but it implies a special process is required, or that "former" elders merely assist and can not function as elders in the sense that they can be designated with elder authority to carry out certain tasks and delegations and representations. This implication is mixed and can be overcome by convolutions, but why not just make it plain and simple?
Posted in: Give Some Christmas Cheer!
Thanks to those involved in setting up the network, the technical management as well as the guides and the contributors. It is particularly valuable to those who are busy, who are far from GR, far from the center of activities, and yet are interested in the contribution of the CRC to the walk of faith in the body of Christ. It provides a way for unfiltered and relatively unfettered discussion and sharing on the issues that are on the hearts. Thankyou. God Bless you. May you enjoy this Christmas time.
John
Posted in: Bishops in the CRC
Paul, its unfortunate that you used the term "bishop" in your article. I believe the term sometimes translated as bishop is usually translated as "overseer", and attributed to the office of elder. I believe the greek word was translated into "bishop" because it suited the church structure of the time, otherwise it would have simply been translated as overseer. It would have been better that you used the term "leader" to make your point, since it is true that not all overseers or elders are leaders; or at least that there are also leaders of leaders. It would seem that for an improved classis, what is really needed are not administrators, nor even overseers, but rather leaders. These leaders might be overseers, or they might be deacons, or they might simply be those who encourage and stimulate a new approach.
In organizational parlance, it is common to realize that there are managers, and then there are leaders, and then ocassionally there are those who are both. Forcing the concept or (even unofficial) title of bishop on such a leader may be a disincentive to take up a leadership role.
However, your general encouragement to look with fresh eyes is a good thing.
Posted in: Diakonia Remixed: Terms for Deacons
The revised re-wording is better than the old, but I would suggest separating the elders and deacons into separate articles. There may be benefits in treating them somewhat differently in terms of roles, appointments, etc.
Posted in: Fat Bureaucracies vs Flat and Fluid Networks
Paul, maybe the solution is in the mindset. Changing the focus and atmosphere of classis from an approval or hierarchical mindset to a cooperative venture mindset might bring about much of what you are looking for. To do that, classes need to eliminate as much as possible all the unnecessary approvals and formal processes that distract from the focus on a cooperative venture. If bringing a city to Christ, or Christ to the city is the focus, then 90% of the time should be spent on that, including prayer for it.
Posted in: Diakonia Remixed: Terms for Deacons
The reason for splitting these offices into two articles is simply to highlight their significance, and the fact that they might be treated differently. Something like having different articles for evangelists and preachers/pastors. Their tasks are different, thus the titles, and since the tasks are different, the terms might also be different, as decided by the local church. One of the possibilities that churches should consider, is that elder terms and deacons terms could be flexible, so that terms are not always fixed, but might range between three to five years depending on the projects or involvement of particular elders or deacons. Thus there would be a discussion near the end of the year as to whether an elder or deacon would resign his active duty or continue on for another year. This might be a useful policy for some churches to consider in order to benefit from the activities of particular office-bearers. There are also other mechanisms, such as designating certain office-bearers as contributors and workers but non-voting, which could also be used. Flexibility is the key, and the tasks done by them rather than the strict adherence to the arbitrary terms ought to be the focus and determining factor.
In our church our office bearers are both elders and deacons; they serve a dual role and this is another way to be flexible.
I should point out that the principle for the congregation to be meaningfully empowered (per deMoor's commentary) to choose its leaders/officebearers does not appear to be applied to the position of pastor/preacher in the same way, as the church order apparently does not have term limits for that? It's a good principle to some degree but we do seem to apply it in an adhoc fashion rather than be consistent with it.
Posted in: Adult Content in Youth Ministry?
And of course, the content of these songs, and the things they watch and see, do affect them. It may not seem to at first, but it does. Just like the candy and cookies and alcohol and fatty diets affect their physical bodies; first just a little bit, and then more and more. The very fact that they deny it already demonstrates what it has done to them. It has numbed them, anesthetized them. They no longer worry about the immorality or about how God regards the songs and movies and books and conversation. So it has already affected them.
Posted in: What's a Classis for Anyhow?
Delbert, your comments were very enlightening and encouraging. Also highlighting the vast difference between LDS growth in the millions, and CRC yellowstone in the thousands. We seem so often to be willing to adopt the practices of other cultures that do not lead to growth; perhaps we should adopt some of the practices of the LDS and use them to lead others to the Jesus of the Bible. Wow!! wouldn't that be something?!
Posted in: Life in the Candidate Waiting Room
Good points, Brian Tebben.
Posted in: Thoughtful Use & Non-Use of Technology
At a recent meeting, not church related, I witnessed the interesting non-use of technology (powerpoint) by two speakers, who although they had a prepared presentation, decided not to use it, and simply spoke from some notes instead, and left off the projector and slides. I believe they felt the engagement of the audience increased, and that the audience could live in the moment, in the sponteneity. So I agree, that thought should be given to this, and that sometimes simply changing the pace is one of the most effective methods of relating the message.
On a side note, not technology related, but somewhat similar, is the use of "liturgy". I am beginning to find distasteful the common practice of "readings" done by everyone in unison. To me, it is like bad singing and bad music. While good readings, ocassionally done, and done for effect, may be uplifting, their common overuse leads to a kind of disharmonious drone that hides rather than helps the message. Often they are too long, and lack the sponteneity and heart-felt familiarity and sense of renewal that a unison reading should contain. How often will congregants remember these readings or even be affected by them?
Rather than so many of these unison readings, perhaps heartfelt "Amen!" s or repetition of key phrases would be more useful.
Posted in: Family Devotions
In terms of their spiritual life and growth, family devotions have a much larger impact than christian school, or any church activities, including catechism, sunday school, gems, or worship. So if you are concerned about your children, and if you love them, you will not neglect family devotions with your children, especially at young ages. By the time they are twelve or fourteen, they will quite likely have their own personal devotions daily, provided the family has modelled and encouraged them.
A couple of options for family devotions that work well: 1. family devotions at mealtimes. This means that you either start or end the meal with prayer, reading scripture, possibly discussion, and possibly singing of some songs, preferably from memory. In my case, this is what we do at least at breakfast and supper, and when on vacation or weekends, also at noon meals. The children enjoy this. When we read the bible, or a bible story book, invariably one or two will want to sit on my knee when we read, although this diminishes when they become older. At breakfast, I am often gone, so my wife leads this reading. When the grandchildren are also there, then often four of them are trying to sit on my knees, and I can barely see the book. They also love to pick the songs, especially the action songs. As they get older and learn, they may want to play the piano for a simple song they are learning.
The other option, 2, is family devotion at bedtime. This works well if children more or less go to bed at a similar time. It can also be done with parent and single child. Again, the children miss it when it is skipped.
Sometimes both options done together are possible, and the children do not mind it at all. In fact, sometimes they are the ones who insist on it, and this keeps the practice consistent.
Usually simply reading the bible, rather than all kinds of devotional books, is the best.
Just some suggestions to consider.
Posted in: Our Three (Updated) Confessions
Is there a spot to observe the parallel translations, ie. the present version, and the proposed version, with the changes highlilghted in different font or color?