Thank you for the clarification. Appreciated. I'm used to quotations following a statement, not before.
Nonetheless, Gary Burge has been challenged for holding this very position, i.e. Israel is "mov(ing) to deny the right to vote and other democratic participation by people other than Jews" which was provided as grounds in the 2nd overture to classis.
Though the revised 2nd paragraph in the overture to Synod removes this sentence, it now intimates Israel is in the process of establishing an "apartheid regime." A matter on which Gary Burge has also been challenged, raising questions about the veracity of the overture's source material.
The recommendations set out in the “Reimagining Ministry Shares”report prepared for Synod 2019 are both illogical and ignore the facts. I’ve previously commented on this issue. See the comments portion of Gayla Postma's Council of Delegates Discusses Reimaging Ministry Shares The Banner 2018-10-19; and see also Clayton Libolt's Do Synods Remember? A Look at MinistryThe Banner 2018-08-24
I have been a member of the CRCNA for 70+ years in 5+/- churches; and have served as a deacon, elder, clerk, and Stated Clerk. To my recollection church budgets have usually been structured to include denominational and classical ministry shares as integral part of congregational finances. These budgets are adopted and recommended by councils for approval at congregational meetings.
The recommendation set out in Section VIII of the report that “each church council prayerfully considers how much they are willing and capable of giving for their ministry shares” based on “guidance developed by denominational staff and endorsed by the Council of Delegates is sent to the churches and to classis treasurers to aid them in this step” ignores:
1. the role and capacity of the congregation in the giving process; and
2. interferes in the ecclesiastical and civil governance of incorporated bodies.
Based on demographic data from the Yearbook and Statistics Canada for the period 1921–2019 in the province of British Columbia, as well as the classes financial statements for the period 1985 – 2018, denominational ministry share giving averages between 55 – 65% of what is approved by Synod based on denominational agency requests. It is my understanding this giving pattern aligns with the denominational receipts average. Is this report ignoring the obvious?
With the increase in smaller churches, and the passing of the boomer generation, the financial capacity of churches to support pastoral staff will come under increasing stress and potentially further erode the existing denominational ministry share base.
Assigning a new name to classis raises a number of questions:
a. Do the terms diocese or presbytery present the same problems as classis within their respective denominations, or is this simply a matter of church members losing touch with ecclesiastical language in a post modern secular society?
b. Freighting in another term, even if it were diocese or presbytery, or some other term raises questions whether the new word adequately captures what the term classis encompasses in Christian Reformed church polity, i.e. governance. Each ecclesiastical body operates on different governance principles.
c. In changing the name does the CRCNA move closer to a top down versus a bottom up governance model? (see Church Order, Article 27-a. Each assembly exercises, in keeping with its own character and domain, the ecclesiastical authority entrusted to the church by Christ; the authority of councils being original, that of major assemblies being delegated.)
It's one thing to responsibly exercise stewardship. However, there are political factions opposed to coal, oil, gas, LNG, hydro (British Columbia), as well as, nuclear (Ontario). To complicate matters, the NIMBY movement is also opposed to wind and solar energy in various parts of the country (Ontario).
Quite apart from negatively affecting the economy, the question arises what impact these actions will have on not only the fully employed (Alberta); the marginally employed; and those who live in poverty. Forced subsidization of wind and solar energy will only not only make the poor poorer; but add others to their ranks where power agencies cut off hydro power to those who cannot no longer pay their bills (Ontario).
Even if OSJ is stepping outside the boundaries of Church Order, Article 28 - there is a further scriptural concern with respect to acting justly where the poor are concerned, especially by those who lead relatively affluent lives within and outside the denomination.
If it is of any assistance, below is advice provided on Church Order, Article 28-a from the 2017 edition of the Manual of Christian Reformed Church Government:
Commentary:
1. Ecclesiastical matters
The work of the assemblies is limited to ecclesiastical matters. Such matters relate to the ministry of the Word and sacraments, worship, education, works of benevolence, the exercise of Christian discipline, the furtherance of the communion of the saints, and other activities that pertain to the church and its ministries.
Although Christian people have a responsibility to serve the Lord in all spheres of life—physical sciences, education, political life, art, business, etc.— these are not to be regarded as ecclesiastical matters. Synod has declared that political, social, and economic questions are ecclesiastical matters only when doctrinal and ethical issues of sufficient magnitude are involved as commonly understood according to the Word of God and the confessional standards of the Christian Reformed Church. By adhering to this fundamental principle, the church will not invade the rights of the state (government) nor erase the boundary between the duty of the church-institute and the duty of Christian citizens.
Your welcome. Church Order, Article 27-a may also have some relevance in this matter: "Each assembly exercises, in keeping with its own character and domain, the ecclesiastical authority entrusted to the church by Christ; 'the authority of councils being original, that of major assemblies being delegated'."
The question I struggle with is whether the Vision 21 Report submitted and adopted by Synod 1987 upended the ecclesiastical governance model set out in Church Order, Article 27-a where CRCNA administrative bodies are speaking on behalf of church councils and congregants without their authorization and outside their sphere of sovereignty. In particular, the Manual for Christian Reformed Government in the commentary states,
"1. The assemblies of the church exercise the ecclesiastical authority entrusted to the church by Christ. This is a basic principle in Reformed polity. The church is not based on the principle of hierarchy but on shared authority that flows from the head of the church: Jesus Christ. From that principle flows the following:
a. Ecclesiastical: The essential authority in the church is ecclesiastical—it is limited by the nature of the church as the body of Christ. The Bible speaks of various other types of authority, such as the authority of parents over their children and the authority of rulers and judges over a nation. Each type of authority must be exercised within its own sphere and in accord with its own structural purposes....
b. Entrusted by Christ: The first principle of all ecclesiastical authority is the headship of Christ. The mandates he gives to his church are based upon Christ’s own authority. The church has no ecclesiastical authority other than that of Christ. In other words, 'the authority of the council is not delegated to it by the classis or the denomination.'...
2. The relationship of the assemblies: Each assembly exercises its own peculiar authority in keeping with its own character and domain—the council in relation to the congregation, the classis in matters relating to its member congregations, and the synod for the denomination as a whole.
a. The authority of councils: The authority of councils is original; the authority of the major assemblies is delegated. Each congregation as a unit is a complete expression of the body of Christ in its particular setting. Congregations are the basic units of the church, comprising all of its members in a given community of faith.
b. The authority of major assemblies: To express and maintain the broader unity of the church and to reach out beyond the local boundaries, councils (minor assemblies) unite in broader (major) assemblies called “classes.” The churches of the classes (as minor assemblies) unite in a still broader (or major) assembly called the “synod” of the church....
3. Movements that undermine the authority of the assemblies: The ecclesiastical assemblies must be guarded against actions that, knowingly or unknowingly, undermine the authority and threaten the unity of the church. On various occasions synod has warned against the circulation of petitions and against pressure movements within the church that circumvent the decisions of the assemblies and cause disunity in the church."'
I hear, more and more, the "narrative of fear" as an explanation for people not stepping up to a challenge, and/or not helping out and have come to wonder whether this is really a misnomer for something else. There is a "meta-narrative that runs deeper in our post modern world, i.e. "disengagement" from institutions and community life that has been evolving over the last 20-30 years that is likely at odds with the vision of communal life set out in scripture.
Are there really that many fearful/inadequate people out there? It is troubling in today's society and churches to find that many people consider themselves inadequate in engaging in social institutions, etc. when they operate quite "competently" in the work and family world, skills that can be carried over to the former. Yet, having seen the results of a recent Building Blocks of Faith Formation survey, only confirms the inadequacy explanation for not engaging. Think we need to dig deeper.
Question: Is "fear" a mask "cover-up" for something else?
Question: Why is it that in today's church, rather than volunteer, the preference is to hire/pay someone else to do the task?
Not withstanding the fact this is a troubling societal issue, it is even more troubling when the courts need to enter the dialogue to ensure justice is done.
Those are all good ideas, yet are premised on insiders looking outside the box. The underlying assumption is people outside the box would unreservedly want to join them in the box knowing the benefits.
Yet they are not.
How do we put ourselves in their shoes, see things through their eyes, engage where they are at to understand why the disengagement, disaffiliation, etc. How does scripture speak into this issue?
Agreed. Having the previous interim Executive Director and deputy Executive Director still in place sends conflicting messages to staff as to who is in charge.
I am not certain that labeling things as left, centre or right is helpful to a fruitful conversation, let alone making the charge that "Canadian" Banner editors "liked" to be provocative. That individuals may disagree with the arguments laid out in some of the articles that were published is one thing and an opportunity for an ongoing dialogue, however, we always need to ask ourselves whether our comments occasionally slip into ad hominem attacks.
The comment, "It's also worth asking whether we should have such Canadian dominance of the Banner editorship when a large majority of CRC members are U. S. citizens," raises an important question. Why does citizenship in a nation state trump membership in the Body of Christ? Does civil religion take precedence to following Jesus Christ?
Paul VanderKlay raises some important points above regarding the mandate given the Banner by Synod over the years in contrast to other writers who feel that mandate needs to be revised. The question that needs to be asked is whether there has been shift within the CRC "not" to a more conservative outlook on issues, but a shift from it's Reformed roots to realignment with North American fundamentalism.
Regardless, the Banner and it's editors are an easy targets for what are ongoing pastoral and ecclesiastical discussions on various topics at annual Synods. That these topics are on the table at all, is a reflection of what local churches are struggling with in ministering to their flock. If pastoral care is to be extended that means both dialogue and engagement with scripture and God's creation is required rather than mounting the ramparts.
Posted in: ‘Palestine’ and Overture 6: Ten Questions to Consider
Hi Martin...
Thank you for the clarification. Appreciated. I'm used to quotations following a statement, not before.
Nonetheless, Gary Burge has been challenged for holding this very position, i.e. Israel is "mov(ing) to deny the right to vote and other democratic participation by people other than Jews" which was provided as grounds in the 2nd overture to classis.
Though the revised 2nd paragraph in the overture to Synod removes this sentence, it now intimates Israel is in the process of establishing an "apartheid regime." A matter on which Gary Burge has also been challenged, raising questions about the veracity of the overture's source material.
Yours in Christ,
Posted in: Let's Discuss "Reimagining Ministry Shares"
The recommendations set out in the “Reimagining Ministry Shares”report prepared for Synod 2019 are both illogical and ignore the facts. I’ve previously commented on this issue. See the comments portion of Gayla Postma's Council of Delegates Discusses Reimaging Ministry Shares The Banner 2018-10-19; and see also Clayton Libolt's Do Synods Remember? A Look at Ministry The Banner 2018-08-24
I have been a member of the CRCNA for 70+ years in 5+/- churches; and have served as a deacon, elder, clerk, and Stated Clerk. To my recollection church budgets have usually been structured to include denominational and classical ministry shares as integral part of congregational finances. These budgets are adopted and recommended by councils for approval at congregational meetings.
The recommendation set out in Section VIII of the report that “each church council prayerfully considers how much they are willing and capable of giving for their ministry shares” based on “guidance developed by denominational staff and endorsed by the Council of Delegates is sent to the churches and to classis treasurers to aid them in this step” ignores:
1. the role and capacity of the congregation in the giving process; and
2. interferes in the ecclesiastical and civil governance of incorporated bodies.
Based on demographic data from the Yearbook and Statistics Canada for the period 1921–2019 in the province of British Columbia, as well as the classes financial statements for the period 1985 – 2018, denominational ministry share giving averages between 55 – 65% of what is approved by Synod based on denominational agency requests. It is my understanding this giving pattern aligns with the denominational receipts average. Is this report ignoring the obvious?
With the increase in smaller churches, and the passing of the boomer generation, the financial capacity of churches to support pastoral staff will come under increasing stress and potentially further erode the existing denominational ministry share base.
Posted in: Time to Rename Classis?
Assigning a new name to classis raises a number of questions:
a. Do the terms diocese or presbytery present the same problems as classis within their respective denominations, or is this simply a matter of church members losing touch with ecclesiastical language in a post modern secular society?
b. Freighting in another term, even if it were diocese or presbytery, or some other term raises questions whether the new word adequately captures what the term classis encompasses in Christian Reformed church polity, i.e. governance. Each ecclesiastical body operates on different governance principles.
c. In changing the name does the CRCNA move closer to a top down versus a bottom up governance model? (see Church Order, Article 27-a. Each assembly exercises, in keeping with its own character and domain, the ecclesiastical authority entrusted to the church by Christ; the authority of councils being original, that of major assemblies being delegated.)
Posted in: Should the CRCNA Lobby in Favor of Federal Carbon Tax Legislation?
It's one thing to responsibly exercise stewardship. However, there are political factions opposed to coal, oil, gas, LNG, hydro (British Columbia), as well as, nuclear (Ontario). To complicate matters, the NIMBY movement is also opposed to wind and solar energy in various parts of the country (Ontario).
Quite apart from negatively affecting the economy, the question arises what impact these actions will have on not only the fully employed (Alberta); the marginally employed; and those who live in poverty. Forced subsidization of wind and solar energy will only not only make the poor poorer; but add others to their ranks where power agencies cut off hydro power to those who cannot no longer pay their bills (Ontario).
Even if OSJ is stepping outside the boundaries of Church Order, Article 28 - there is a further scriptural concern with respect to acting justly where the poor are concerned, especially by those who lead relatively affluent lives within and outside the denomination.
Posted in: Should the CRCNA Lobby in Favor of Federal Carbon Tax Legislation?
Eric...
If it is of any assistance, below is advice provided on Church Order, Article 28-a from the 2017 edition of the Manual of Christian Reformed Church Government:
Commentary:
1. Ecclesiastical matters
The work of the assemblies is limited to ecclesiastical matters. Such matters relate to the ministry of the Word and sacraments, worship, education, works of benevolence, the exercise of Christian discipline, the furtherance of the communion of the saints, and other activities that pertain to the church and its ministries.
Although Christian people have a responsibility to serve the Lord in all spheres of life—physical sciences, education, political life, art, business, etc.— these are not to be regarded as ecclesiastical matters. Synod has declared that political, social, and economic questions are ecclesiastical matters only when doctrinal and ethical issues of sufficient magnitude are involved as commonly understood according to the Word of God and the confessional standards of the Christian Reformed Church. By adhering to this fundamental principle, the church will not invade the rights of the state (government) nor erase the boundary between the duty of the church-institute and the duty of Christian citizens.
Posted in: Should the CRCNA Lobby in Favor of Federal Carbon Tax Legislation?
Hi Doug...
Your welcome. Church Order, Article 27-a may also have some relevance in this matter: "Each assembly exercises, in keeping with its own character and domain, the ecclesiastical authority entrusted to the church by Christ; 'the authority of councils being original, that of major assemblies being delegated'."
The question I struggle with is whether the Vision 21 Report submitted and adopted by Synod 1987 upended the ecclesiastical governance model set out in Church Order, Article 27-a where CRCNA administrative bodies are speaking on behalf of church councils and congregants without their authorization and outside their sphere of sovereignty. In particular, the Manual for Christian Reformed Government in the commentary states,
"1. The assemblies of the church exercise the ecclesiastical authority entrusted to the church by Christ. This is a basic principle in Reformed polity. The church is not based on the principle of hierarchy but on shared authority that flows from the head of the church: Jesus Christ. From that principle flows the following:
a. Ecclesiastical: The essential authority in the church is ecclesiastical—it is limited by the nature of the church as the body of Christ. The Bible speaks of various other types of authority, such as the authority of parents over their children and the authority of rulers and judges over a nation. Each type of authority must be exercised within its own sphere and in accord with its own structural purposes....
b. Entrusted by Christ: The first principle of all ecclesiastical authority is the headship of Christ. The mandates he gives to his church are based upon Christ’s own authority. The church has no ecclesiastical authority other than that of Christ. In other words, 'the authority of the council is not delegated to it by the classis or the denomination.'...
2. The relationship of the assemblies: Each assembly exercises its own peculiar authority in keeping with its own character and domain—the council in relation to the congregation, the classis in matters relating to its member congregations, and the synod for the denomination as a whole.
a. The authority of councils: The authority of councils is original; the authority of the major assemblies is delegated. Each congregation as a unit is a complete expression of the body of Christ in its particular setting. Congregations are the basic units of the church, comprising all of its members in a given community of faith.
b. The authority of major assemblies: To express and maintain the broader unity of the church and to reach out beyond the local boundaries, councils (minor assemblies) unite in broader (major) assemblies called “classes.” The churches of the classes (as minor assemblies) unite in a still broader (or major) assembly called the “synod” of the church....
3. Movements that undermine the authority of the assemblies: The ecclesiastical assemblies must be guarded against actions that, knowingly or unknowingly, undermine the authority and threaten the unity of the church. On various occasions synod has warned against the circulation of petitions and against pressure movements within the church that circumvent the decisions of the assemblies and cause disunity in the church."'
Posted in: Our Deepest Fear...Rising to the Top and Staying There
I hear, more and more, the "narrative of fear" as an explanation for people not stepping up to a challenge, and/or not helping out and have come to wonder whether this is really a misnomer for something else. There is a "meta-narrative that runs deeper in our post modern world, i.e. "disengagement" from institutions and community life that has been evolving over the last 20-30 years that is likely at odds with the vision of communal life set out in scripture.
Are there really that many fearful/inadequate people out there? It is troubling in today's society and churches to find that many people consider themselves inadequate in engaging in social institutions, etc. when they operate quite "competently" in the work and family world, skills that can be carried over to the former. Yet, having seen the results of a recent Building Blocks of Faith Formation survey, only confirms the inadequacy explanation for not engaging. Think we need to dig deeper.
Question: Is "fear" a mask "cover-up" for something else?
Question: Why is it that in today's church, rather than volunteer, the preference is to hire/pay someone else to do the task?
Posted in: Crying Rape
Not withstanding the fact this is a troubling societal issue, it is even more troubling when the courts need to enter the dialogue to ensure justice is done.
http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/CA/15/00/2015BCCA0047.htm
and
http://news.nationalpost.com/2015/02/12/b-c-man-wins-right-to-sue-rape-accuser-for-defamation-after-he-was-cleared-of-charge/#__federated=1
Posted in: Activating the Inactive
Hi Louis...
Those are all good ideas, yet are premised on insiders looking outside the box. The underlying assumption is people outside the box would unreservedly want to join them in the box knowing the benefits.
Yet they are not.
How do we put ourselves in their shoes, see things through their eyes, engage where they are at to understand why the disengagement, disaffiliation, etc. How does scripture speak into this issue?
Posted in: Long Goodbye
Agreed. Having the previous interim Executive Director and deputy Executive Director still in place sends conflicting messages to staff as to who is in charge.
Posted in: What Do We Want from The Banner?
I am not certain that labeling things as left, centre or right is helpful to a fruitful conversation, let alone making the charge that "Canadian" Banner editors "liked" to be provocative. That individuals may disagree with the arguments laid out in some of the articles that were published is one thing and an opportunity for an ongoing dialogue, however, we always need to ask ourselves whether our comments occasionally slip into ad hominem attacks.
The comment, "It's also worth asking whether we should have such Canadian dominance of the Banner editorship when a large majority of CRC members are U. S. citizens," raises an important question. Why does citizenship in a nation state trump membership in the Body of Christ? Does civil religion take precedence to following Jesus Christ?
Posted in: What Do We Want from The Banner?
Paul VanderKlay raises some important points above regarding the mandate given the Banner by Synod over the years in contrast to other writers who feel that mandate needs to be revised. The question that needs to be asked is whether there has been shift within the CRC "not" to a more conservative outlook on issues, but a shift from it's Reformed roots to realignment with North American fundamentalism.
Regardless, the Banner and it's editors are an easy targets for what are ongoing pastoral and ecclesiastical discussions on various topics at annual Synods. That these topics are on the table at all, is a reflection of what local churches are struggling with in ministering to their flock. If pastoral care is to be extended that means both dialogue and engagement with scripture and God's creation is required rather than mounting the ramparts.