It is good to have an informal policy of a good mix of active elders in consistory, also a good mix of active deacons. While putting in new elders, always make sure that there are some experienced older elders and deacons there to lead and train the others. The new ones will have some fresh and new ideas which the older ones will appreciate, while the older ones will be able to provide a good framework and context and stability in which the new ideas can work well.
I don't think it is a bad idea for a classis to examine a candidate, provided it is done as a service to the calling church, and provided proper respect is given to the responsibility of the local church to make the final decision. In other words, it is possible that the classis will deem the candidate acceptable, but that the local church will become aware of issues that will create problems, and so will decide that the candidate has not passed the classical interview. Or vice versa, that classis will find the candidate lacking, but the calling church will find the candidate acceptable. Classis should not lord it over the responsibility of the local church to decide. It should only make stipulations that impact the interaction of the candidate with the other churches of the classis, if necessary.
I wonder if a proper understanding of delegation would include the possibility of retracting that delegation. In other words, when elders delegate the tasks of deacons to the deacons, or certain other administrative tasks to a secretary, or to a building committee or finance committee, then the authority of that delegation presumes the elders or council ability to overrule the committee or to retract the delegation. Hopefully they wouldn't do that too often, but yet their authority and responsibility implies that they could do so. The delegation of the authority does not make them less responsible for the activities that derive from that delegation, does it?
Maybe that's why we ocassionally sing, "Oh be careful little eyes what you see..."
or, "Our God is an awesome God", or "He has made the fish that swim..." "The Lord's my Shepherd..." "Onward Christian Soldiers..." 'Stand up Stand up For Jesus, ye soldiers of the cross" , "How Great Thou Art."" , and many more.
I guess that's like elders then who also don't lose their ordination when they retire? But why did you say you were retired, when you are not really?
Can a pastor or elder really retire? what does that mean? And if they really retire, meaning they do not do any pastoral activity, why would we still call them a pastor, rather than a retired pastor?
And would not a pastor strive for greater consensus than mere simple majority power rule?
Okay, I realize my questions are a bit like a shotgun. Probably some are uncomfortable as well. Maybe even rhetorical.
Back to the topic at hand:
"And would not a pastor strive for greater consensus than mere simple majority power rule? "
Perhaps it is the concentration on adopting the Belhar, that is really the shell on the turtle. It slows down the real activity, the real mission of the church by concentrating on paper and forms, wasting the time of synod and church councils, rather than devoting that time and energy to going into the world, preaching the gospel, and proclaiming and living for Christ.
On re-reading, I realized that you said that elders are not ordained for life. However, there is a practice and understanding that if you have been ordained as an elder, that a new service period will involve an installation rather than a re-ordination. So I am not totally understanding your implication.
I know of a situation where someone was examined in one classis and passed, but did not pass in another classis. Not sure what that says to procedure or to the way these exams are done, but it certainly made me more alert.
Like in many churches and other denominations, when you have women serving as elders or delegates, often the men become less interested in serving, and so fewer men volunteer to offer their time, especially men who feel that scripture actually encourages men to be leaders both of their families and their church, and thus feel that synod is ignoring or twisting scripture in any case. That is probably one aspect of this.
Another aspect is likely the diversions and artificial aspects of organizational power and institutional unification, which dilutes even more the impact of any elder delegates to a larger body. If you don't actually contribute to the discussion, and if your vote becomes less and less significant, then the only remaining reason to attend is social, or entertainment. For many, the social enticement is minimal if their social core is more significant locally, and we live in a world of entertainment; don't have to go to Synod for that. Who wants to spend a whole week exercising power which one feels does not really exist? Power which you could just as well delegate your wife to exercise?
People of color? Good for them, but it is an artificial criteria of the quality or representativeness of synod. The real criteria would be what is the percentage of afroamericans in the denomination; what is the percentage of eastern europeans; what is the percentage of mexicans; what is the percentage of aboriginals, asians, africans, south americans. Relating everything to color is very primitive way of evaluating anything, and a sad commentary on our perception of diversity. in the 21st century.
In addition to your comment that not all delegates need be males, it would also be useful and helpful to add the comment that there is nothing wrong with all the delegates being males, and that it is more obviously consistent with scriptural precedents. (Given that we supposedly promote this type of diversity in the crc.)
Posted in: Transition Planning
It is good to have an informal policy of a good mix of active elders in consistory, also a good mix of active deacons. While putting in new elders, always make sure that there are some experienced older elders and deacons there to lead and train the others. The new ones will have some fresh and new ideas which the older ones will appreciate, while the older ones will be able to provide a good framework and context and stability in which the new ideas can work well.
Posted in: How Does Synod Work?
Why nine ministers and three elders?
Posted in: Classical Exams
I don't think it is a bad idea for a classis to examine a candidate, provided it is done as a service to the calling church, and provided proper respect is given to the responsibility of the local church to make the final decision. In other words, it is possible that the classis will deem the candidate acceptable, but that the local church will become aware of issues that will create problems, and so will decide that the candidate has not passed the classical interview. Or vice versa, that classis will find the candidate lacking, but the calling church will find the candidate acceptable. Classis should not lord it over the responsibility of the local church to decide. It should only make stipulations that impact the interaction of the candidate with the other churches of the classis, if necessary.
Posted in: Does the CRC Have a Pope?
I wonder if a proper understanding of delegation would include the possibility of retracting that delegation. In other words, when elders delegate the tasks of deacons to the deacons, or certain other administrative tasks to a secretary, or to a building committee or finance committee, then the authority of that delegation presumes the elders or council ability to overrule the committee or to retract the delegation. Hopefully they wouldn't do that too often, but yet their authority and responsibility implies that they could do so. The delegation of the authority does not make them less responsible for the activities that derive from that delegation, does it?
Posted in: People of Color in Leadership Positions
You will have to explain why Jesus did not have quotas.
Posted in: The Unsung Jesus
Maybe that's why we ocassionally sing, "Oh be careful little eyes what you see..."
or, "Our God is an awesome God", or "He has made the fish that swim..." "The Lord's my Shepherd..." "Onward Christian Soldiers..." 'Stand up Stand up For Jesus, ye soldiers of the cross" , "How Great Thou Art."" , and many more.
Posted in: Like a Mighty Turtle...
I guess that's like elders then who also don't lose their ordination when they retire? But why did you say you were retired, when you are not really?
Can a pastor or elder really retire? what does that mean? And if they really retire, meaning they do not do any pastoral activity, why would we still call them a pastor, rather than a retired pastor?
And would not a pastor strive for greater consensus than mere simple majority power rule?
Posted in: Like a Mighty Turtle...
Okay, I realize my questions are a bit like a shotgun. Probably some are uncomfortable as well. Maybe even rhetorical.
Back to the topic at hand:
"And would not a pastor strive for greater consensus than mere simple majority power rule? "
Perhaps it is the concentration on adopting the Belhar, that is really the shell on the turtle. It slows down the real activity, the real mission of the church by concentrating on paper and forms, wasting the time of synod and church councils, rather than devoting that time and energy to going into the world, preaching the gospel, and proclaiming and living for Christ.
Posted in: Like a Mighty Turtle...
On re-reading, I realized that you said that elders are not ordained for life. However, there is a practice and understanding that if you have been ordained as an elder, that a new service period will involve an installation rather than a re-ordination. So I am not totally understanding your implication.
Posted in: Classical Exams
I know of a situation where someone was examined in one classis and passed, but did not pass in another classis. Not sure what that says to procedure or to the way these exams are done, but it certainly made me more alert.
Posted in: Delegates by the Numbers
Like in many churches and other denominations, when you have women serving as elders or delegates, often the men become less interested in serving, and so fewer men volunteer to offer their time, especially men who feel that scripture actually encourages men to be leaders both of their families and their church, and thus feel that synod is ignoring or twisting scripture in any case. That is probably one aspect of this.
Another aspect is likely the diversions and artificial aspects of organizational power and institutional unification, which dilutes even more the impact of any elder delegates to a larger body. If you don't actually contribute to the discussion, and if your vote becomes less and less significant, then the only remaining reason to attend is social, or entertainment. For many, the social enticement is minimal if their social core is more significant locally, and we live in a world of entertainment; don't have to go to Synod for that. Who wants to spend a whole week exercising power which one feels does not really exist? Power which you could just as well delegate your wife to exercise?
People of color? Good for them, but it is an artificial criteria of the quality or representativeness of synod. The real criteria would be what is the percentage of afroamericans in the denomination; what is the percentage of eastern europeans; what is the percentage of mexicans; what is the percentage of aboriginals, asians, africans, south americans. Relating everything to color is very primitive way of evaluating anything, and a sad commentary on our perception of diversity. in the 21st century.
Posted in: Delegates by the Numbers
In addition to your comment that not all delegates need be males, it would also be useful and helpful to add the comment that there is nothing wrong with all the delegates being males, and that it is more obviously consistent with scriptural precedents. (Given that we supposedly promote this type of diversity in the crc.)