Harry Boessenkool

I would like to update the discussion on this topic given the 2016 Synod decision to "re imagine" the Ministry Share system inside the CRCNA.

Actually the article I am using to start this discussion already gets at the heart of the issue. Money is not a problem. Membership and how the Head Office of the CRCNA is organized and run is. 

We all know that membership is declining. So is loyalty as older members pass away. Barnabas Foundation and Christian Stewardship Services are doing awesome work. Their Estate Planning services are responsible for a lot of Estate gifts to the various ministries of the CRCNA. That income is peaking.

H.O does not appear to recognize that as membership declines, their cost should also go down. They have already removed missionaries from the payroll.  The overall cost in the denomination office have not gone down. How is that possible? The cost of not raising Ministry Shares is estimated at $200,000. That would be the salary of some 4 missionaries who are now supposed to raise their own salary. The HO folks of World Mission are not asked to raise their own money, why not? Based on salary schedules as reported in the Agenda of Synod only two of WM executive salaries would equal the $200,000. 

Statistics show the number of professing members it takes to pay for one full time staff at CRCNA H.O. has been increasing which means the HO costs are rising faster than the Professing members!  It is that reality that the Executive has to deal with. Not the Board of Trustees.

Another very important statistic is that the number of professing members per church is declining at a precipitous rate. That means we the CRNA  has too many small churches. From where I sit this is being caused by Regional Home 'Missionaries who have little else to do but promote church plants.Local churches get on the band wagon because of "HO" funding.

John Bolt was absolutely right ... The ministry share program is a very efficient way to raise money.... Leave it alone but solve the cost problem. Also stop creating and or funding new positions in the regions. If churches want to do something in their own area let them pay for it. 

My own church last year reduced the budget for ministry shares from 75% to 60% of what was approved at Synod. That was a decision based on what Council wanted to achieve at the local level. It was a courageous and necessary decision.

The CRCNA HO leaders need to take decisive action to get their costs under control and work at a program to let those of in the pew know what they are paying for. Not with numbers but with names and what those names are doing to further the spread of the gospel. 

Starting with non-paper communication would be a very good start. The Banner?

To place a $100 million worth of Bonds would have taken some doing and lots of fees.  How are these secured? How were interest rates set and were futures involved in hedging the rates? Depending on the timing this process could have resulted in steep losses. The fact that Calvin undertook a $100 million worth of building projects is quite suprising but I suspect it's over a number of years.I do not need answers to these questions but am a bit nervous about $100 million in debt.

If there have been "misstatement" of facts can we please have those corrected so we have the real story.

Thank you for these well thought out comments. I agree with you that the stories contained in the Belhar need a wider discussion. But to make them part of the church's confession is going a step too far. Sad to say that  the CRCNA (in general) has relegated the three forms of unity that we do have, to the back burner. So has the preaching on these documents.  The use of the ten commandments and the apotles creed are also on that sloop.  

The  CRCNA, of which I am a member, as organism is getting ever more socially, rather than missionally, active via its bureaucracy. The excellent work in Home Missions (church plants) World Missions, BTGMI and diaconal work of CRWRC is excellent.  The involvement of the CRCNA in Kairos and  Centre for Dialogue with the Government (in Canada) is more problematic.  My fear is that the Belhar, if elevated to Confessional standard will undermine the missional work of the CRCNA while giving undue (too much) emphasis in the social aspect.  

Appreciate John's comments.  It is exactly such discussions that we are having as individuals that makes my point. Each Sunday I get "fed" by God's word. It impacts my life and how I function in society. I join organizations (political and others) and participate in their "mission and vision". The church should be busy with "Word" proclamation and urging us to get involved. In the CRCNA we have Republicans, NewDemoncrats, Conservitives, Democrats etc. (mixing Americans/Canadians with the names!) 

We need Christians in all areas of life and make impacts. I just do not believe the Church, except in extra- ordinary circumstances, should speak on my behalf to goverments. In both Canada and the US we have organizations, specifically created for that purpose, that do that very well. 

Our schools (both Christian and Public) need to do a better job in teaching the topics (history) that involve social history. What is going on in Africa (and other places)  today with displacements of whites, blacks and minorities is still unfolding. 

Response to John re Organizations. We have think tanks (Cardus, Fraser Institute, CPJ, CD Howe, Discovery Institute) who all deal with economic and social issues. Quoting Doug :

"Two people can adopt our three forms of unity, and the CRCNA's perspective on Scripture and come to completely different political/economic views. Neither should be excommunicated. What I am saying is that the CRCNA should not itself, as a church institution, adopt a political/economic statement (which the Belhar is), nor even a "story" as one of its confessional statements. If we begin to divide the CRCNA by adopting specific political/economic perspectives, we will begin the process of morphing from an institutional church to a political association".

Note the range of thinks tanks that I mentioned. I am sure Christians (including CRC folks) are members and possibly even employees of these organizations. So I say "Amen"  to Dougs comments.

This report includes a discussion on stewardship. That is very good. But let's look at the record of the CRCNA and how it behaves relative to stewardship of resources. I spent a bit of time going through the Acts of Synod but what I could not find (understandably), is what the the Corporate church and its Agencies spend on travel.  We have three hugh Agencies with the word "World" or "International" in it. Even Home Missions have folks that travel in Canada and the USA. I would like to see the total expenses for these Agencies and the church Corporately for  the last 11 years. Three simple numbers for each year: 1) Airfare 2) Meals and Hotels and 3) Milage allowance and/or car rentals. From 2000 to 2011. That as a % of total Agency and Denominational  expenses for the year(s). I suggest it will show very significant annual increase. I hope I am wrong. If someone at 2850 is reading this they can maybe look for the answer.

See todays lead Editorial in the National Post. I could not have said it better myself. The headlines surrounding the United Church are an embarrasment to the Christian Community.

In a news release by the CRCNA press office advises that churches (CrCNA) want to start an aboriginal educational reconciliation discussion in the church. I have trouble seeing a role for the church in this area. History is not exactly in accord here. This type of discussion belongs somewhere else and the CCBF might be a much better place.

The Feds were already well under way when the process was stopped because Chief Atleo could not get the support he needed to carry on.

Without debating the issue here, this probably a key reason there are fewer and fewer denominations and more and more community churches. It's another manifestion of individualism at work.  But like you say, it will liven up Synod (but not the church in the eyes of the world).

Steve, I too have not seen the program but your comparison is interesting. The issue of CRWM is an issue for the CRCNA . We need to look at the whole and just not at each piece. The pillars (some would call them silos) are no longer the supporting the whole structure or mission. And I believe the foundations of the pillars need reform as well. 

I believe were are internalizing the process of the review and might be better served if we looked outside the religious establishment for some options. Just an idea.

I have lost the thread of this discussion so my comments may relate to earlier comments. The distribution regionalization of Classis, certainly in Canada is purely arbitrary and has no relation to churches being in geographic areas. Just looks at the the two Classis in British Columbia Canada . I live in Classis SE but attend a church in Classis BC NW! Thirteen km from my house, I pass two Crc churches on the way. One of Classis BC NW churches is almost a 1000 miles away from the church I attend.