Skip to main content

We start Sunday School (including adult bible class) at 10 am, church starts at 11am with a ten minute break between.   Then, after the service, there is coffee and sometimes cookies, usually people stay for another half hour or so.   We have dinner at 2 pm, maybe at 1:30 pm.   or a light lunch, and then dinner/supper at 5 or 6 pm.   But we only have one service on a Sunday, which makes it easier to be at church for 2 and a half hours in the morning. 

I don't think telling horror stories of classis is much fun.   But I will say that my first classis meeting was disappointing many years ago.  Why?  It seemed everything was about dollars and budgets.   Not what I had envisioned.  We should have sent all the church treasurers instead of the elders.  Maybe.  Maybe it was just me, young, idealistic.   Wondering how church leaders would respond to God's claims.  Wondering how church leaders would see God's purposes.   But it turned out to be all about money.   Mostly. 

Having participated in local ministerial meetings for several years, where preachers and pastors would get together to organize events and things for the local community, I saw a different purpose, one where christian witness was foremost, where the hospitals, lodges, and community christmas and easter were claimed for Christ.   A great classis would do that.   The local ministerial cooperated in encouraging a local christian volunteer radio station, which now pretty well operates apart from the ministerial.  It organized and supported christian concerts, dramas that were available to the entire community.   It coordinated a local transient approach.   It was more outward focussed.  Perhaps a great classis would do that too. 

A great classis would be spiritually 'deep", not shallow.  It has been said that the influence of the church in society  is a mile wide and an inch deep.   But if it is only an inch deep, then that mile can decrease to a half mile or a quarter mile very easily.   A great classis would deepen its spirituality.   Grow its roots. 

A great classis will encourage the independance and growth of its members.   It will not establish rules and regulations about order, but rather will offer helpful suggestions in a respectful context.   It will provide advice, prayer, scriptural guidance.   It will offer more prayer.   Honest prayer.   Open prayer.  It will leave more things in God's hands.   It will seek scriptural leadership rather than using or abusing scripture to fit agendas.  It will seek to serve God rather than man, rather than human institutions.   And it will return to humble prayer. 

I am somewhat alarmed at your list, Karl.  It contains some good things, but leads to a checklist.  You cannot check off prayer.  It is not something that can be done and finished.  You cannot check off encouragement either.   It is ongoing.  A foundation of piety is not something you can check off;  nor is piety really the foundation.   God in Christ is the foundation.   His grace, His life, His mercy, His claims are the foundation.   Not our piety.  This distinction is subtle but important.  Talking about piety and recording it in the minutes is not the same thing as being close to God and relying on His spirit. 

 

Policies and procedures and church order does not always presently serve that mission.   Some would claim that these things  do now serve that mission, but they often don't.  These things often serve themselves, regardless of how the supposed link gets documented.  It would be as easy to demonstrate the lack of how they serve the mission.   So merely documenting this link in reports and minutes could be quite self-serving as a contrived link.   It cannot simply be checked off, and  a policy or activity may have that link initially but lose it quickly or slowly.  

However, reading over your four points, I particularly like points 2 and 4 .    

John Zylstra on July 28, 2011

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

This (by vanderlught) is the best synopsis of classis I have ever seen.  congratulations and thanks! 

I appreciate this article.  Prayer without the willingness to act, is kind of an empty prayer, although  God surprises us anyway in sometimes forcing us to act as we pray.   But diakonia with prayer assumes that our prayers are primarily about the physical welfare of others?   Given that we often distinguish between the role of elders and deacons, we ought to perhaps consider that elders might pray also for the spiritual welfare of others.   This might mean praying for spiritual awakening, or for proper discernment of God's will, or praying for obedience to God and scripture.  \it might mean praying for the grief of others, or for an opportunity to serve, or for patience, or a listening ear.    And yes, this means an eagerness and willingness to accompany prayer with action. 

And maybe this is what you were trying to say anyway...

From an elder's point of view, there is too much a sense of entitlement by pastors, when it comes to classis.  Vanderlught's comments point out some of the tendencies, which are problems.  And de Ruiter's comment highlights the sense of obligation, which is related to the entitlement of preachers.   .    Classis is not a meeting of a professional association or club.   Classis is not a pastor's conference, but it is often treated that way   This is wrong. 

Classis is a delegated church government function.   Therefore it should highlight the role of the elders.   They should receive the pre-eminence, and should be held responsible for the results;  not the pastors/preachers.   Consideration should be given to having pastors there as advisors, not as voters.   Consideration should be given to having non-pastors as chairs of classis, as happens at most similar types of association/organization meetings, where hired staff are not given the roles of chair, vice chair, etc.    

It should not be necessary for pastors to be concerned about hospitality towards elders;  rather it could perhaps be the other way around.   It is a sad thing to assume that pastors have so much control over classis that they need as a group to worry about hospitality towards elders.  The church order should not stipulate that each church needs to delegate a minister and an elder to classis, but rather that two elders should go.   If one of those happens to be a pastor/preacher, fine,  but if not, that's fine too.   And then a bored preacher such as deRuiter could just as well concentrate on those things where his gifts lie, rather than trying to be a business administrator in classis.   He might prefer to attend a pastor's conference, rather than an elders classis. 

And if they want to attend a classical examination, they can always do that without being a delegate. 

Food for serious thought. 

The original deacons were appointed because a badly needed job was being neglected, and needed doing.   There was no question about purpose, or about what they needed to do next.   Do you ever wonder whether sometimes, in some churches, deacons are just looking for something to do...?   Just going through formalistic motions?   Rather than knowing and seeing the need right in front of them, long before even becoming deacons?    So the question should be asked, if deacons were not appointed, how much difference would it make to your church?   could you operate fairly easily without them?   If all your widows and orphans are taking care of themselves,  or being cared for by their family, and if there are no definably poor people in the church,  are deacons necessary?   Is making an offering list and collecting spontaneous offerings enough justification for the existence of the office of deacons?   Just asking....  

And I'm reminded of the great and extensive sermon preached by the deacon Stephen, as he preached Christ, rather than defending or protecting himself or concentrating only on material distributions.   Are the deacons in your church prepared to do the same thing as Stephen? 

So I'm hoping that deacons are writing the devotionals for the deacons....

Okay, what's an example of self promoting vanity and infectious pretension that pervades the internet, and how does your article differ from that?   :o) 

Next week, I will be entering another term of eldership, my third in this church, my fifth term in all.   When I think of an installation or ordination service, I do not think of this as an ordination service for myself, but rather a re-instatement, a re-installation, going back on active duty, officially as opposed to unofficially.  But for another younger person who will be a new elder, who will be ordained, I would like some special consideration;  a laying on of hands of previous elders, a special prayer perhaps by several elders;  maybe a song of his choice.   Maybe a special bible passage read, chosen by him.  A special blessing conveyed by the other elders.  That would make his ordination meaningful. 

John Zylstra on July 28, 2011

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

Perhaps there is less a sense of entitlement than there was thirty years ago.   But what I mean by entitlement, includes the idea that it is pastors rather than elders who chair classis.  It includes the fact that pastors/preachers are distinguished from elders, even though they are elders.    At classis, pastors are not treated as elders, but as pastors.   The real legitimacy of pastors at classis, as voting members, is the fact that they are elders.  So why are they not treated as elders then?   Why make a requirement that one delegate must be a preacher, and the other an elder?  This is from an organizational and regulatory point of view.    I know that the intent sometimes in this is to get more elder involvement, but ....

The other thing is that preachers have usually been trained at seminary.   How much effort do they put into training elders, or assisting elders to take responsibility for their roles?   Even though preachers may be capable of leading, why do they not enhance the leadership of the other elders, by guiding, modelling, teaching, and letting go?  

The entitlement of preachers at classis is imbedded in the inconceivability of most pastors if not all pastors to decide not to attend classis as a delegate.   Even though 90% of elders do not attend classis, it would not be conceivable if 90% of preachers did not attend classis.   That is entitlement.   Is it a lack of confidence in the elders?   Is it laziness by the elders (condoned or encouraged by the preachers)?   

The idea that used to prevail that the preacher/minister/pastor had to preach two sermons every Sunday, teach all the catechism classes, chair the consistory meetings, lead the entire service from beginning to end, still has some vestiges lingering in the idea that classis could not function without preachers leading and running it. 

Is this the role of preachers?  

John Zylstra on July 28, 2011

In reply to by anonymous_stub (not verified)

I certainly agree that often the elder and deacon delegates allow the "clergy" to dominate.   But if the "clergy" are truly pastoral pastors, they will not permit this to happen.   They will find ways of ensuring that pastors do not usurp their roles, and that elders take on their responsibility seriously. 

(Yes the conflict of interest is interesting, even though usually the general welfare is considered by all.)

One possibility is simply that pastors do not vote at classis.   That they act as advisors, and not as delegates.  This means they speak at the request of the elders, when requested.  

I do agree that at candidate examinations the preachers should take on a leading role.   But considering that candidates have already passed their seminary exams, it might also be fruitful to consider having non-preacher elders taking on some of the lead in the classical exam as well.   While not all elders are capable, we ought still to consider trusting the elders more.  And it would help to change the impression that there are two different and separate clubs existing within classis. 

Good post, Neil.   I would add that the authority of the elders to be involved in worship ought to be recognized, encouraged, and increased.   If they regulate the worship, then it should also be possible for them to lead worship.   That means that elders should often be encouraged to at least do some of the simple symbolic things such as pronounce the blessing, lead in prayer, make the special announcements, lead the sacraments, perform the installations and ordinations.   And more elders should be encouraged to make and present their 'once-in-a-lifetime" sermon, the sermon that becomes their testimony as well as a direct encouragement to the church that they are leading. 

Their main function is not regulation, but leading, as well as ruling.  "Regulation" is merely one part of that leadership. 

Some of that leadership continues even when they are presently not "serving" elders.   Although they may not be attending council meetings when not on "active duty", they are still called to be spiritual leaders.  

We want to hear from you.

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

Add Your Post