Sam Hamstra

Thank you, Eric, for your post.  In my initial post I noted that the fundamental purpose of most denominations has been "to do more together."  With your comment, and that of Doug, I more clearly see that such a purpose may produce denominational advocacy groups, such as the Office of Social Justice (CRCNA). Perhaps it is my own insecurities, but these groups feel patronizing and paternalistic to those of us in the trenches serving local congregations. Plus, and more importantly, the very existence of advocacy groups at a denominational level suggests that the prophetic function of the church lies with the denomination and not within the local church which has been gifted by the Spirit with the prophetic.     

Me, too ... Still working on it, Wendy! 

But I will add that when I served as a pastor of a local CRCNA congregation, the denomination supplanted the ministry of my congregation, and the congregation would have loved to do more but couldn't because of ministry shares. Just two days ago, I received two personal phone calls from CRCNA pastors who, while thanking me for starting this conversation, shared the same experience.  

On a similar note, I find broad support from CRCNA pastors, including this one, for the work of World Renew. Your agency meets congregations in their context, walks alongside of them, and provides opportunities to extend their witness.  Keep up the good work.

Amen on the need for more listening and fewer surveys.

Darren, thank you for your contribution to this conversation.  You encouraged me to do "some double checking and write in such a way as to how you see your hopes and dreams being realized in the context of the CRCNA."  I found that suggestion interesting and. perhaps, telling. Here's what I mean: I am a pastor in the field, serving local congregations (from several denominations, including the CRCNA) where I am not seeing the denomination serve the mission of the local church. But I am to do research to be convinced that the denomination is, in fact, advancing the mission of the local church? 

I am reminded of a basic principle that love is determined by the beloved, not the lover. The wife who tells her husband, "I don't think you love me." And he offers a litany of things he does that he perceives as loving. The problem being that she doesn't perceive those same acts as loving. To remedy the problem, the husband must ask his wife, "How can I love you?"  In other  words, he must do far less communicating and far more listening -- and then respond accordingly. 

I wonder is that dynamic exists between congregations and their denominations. Could that explain the thread-like connection between the two? The denomination may think it is supporting the mission of the local church but the local congregation is not feeling that support. The denomination ramps up its communication to convince the congregation that it is supporting her, when the remedy is for the denomination to listen to its congregations. Perhaps it is time for denominational officials to sit down with each congregation and ask, "How can we help you better fulfill your mission?" (An opportunity that has never been afforded the congregations I have served.) And, then, respond accordingly.   

Wendy, I am helped by the distinction between the church gathered (the local church) and the church scattered (individuals living in obedience to Christ in their homes, workplaces, neighborhoods, and world). In this scenario, the scattered Christians are attached to the Church gathered because they serve while under the spiritual authority or covering of the local church.  At this very moment, for example, we blog as scattered Christians.  If, God forbid, our blog got nasty, our local congregations would/should hold us accountable for our behavior. Granted, such action doesn't happen as often as, perhaps, it should. 

Thanks, Doug, for the suggestion.  I don't know first hand, but such experiences may have played a role in the development of groups like ECO and LCMC.

I wonder if that option was considered?

THanks for feedback, Tim.  I can see where my use of the non-compete clause led you to conclude that I was addressing competition between churches. Sorry about that.  My point, however, was not about competition and, therefore, I agree with your statement. We all need to keep our eye on the priize and seek first the kingdom.

My concern is with pastors who break their vows/promises and, in the process, divide congregations. (It is hard for me to see God at work in such behavior.) Plus, as you know, the unfortunate fruit of such actions is often divisions which, as Jesus warned, hinder, rather than advance the witness of Christ to the communities they seek to reach. 

Tongue in cheak, for sure.  

But trying to find a way to address a significant problem in the American Protestant Church.  How do we encourage pastors to be faithfil to their promises and committed to unity?  Perhaps one way is to talk about it.  Hence, my post.

But trying to find a way to address a significant problem in the American Protestant Church.  How do we encourage pastors to be faithful to their promises and committed to unity?  Perhaps one way is to talk about it.  Hence, my post.