Ron Vanden Brink

Thank you for taking the time to read and respond to the “Recruiting Officebearers in
Challenging Times” resource. Your engagement with the content and your concern for truth and
faithfulness to Scripture and our confessional standards are both clear and appreciated.
The document was written with the aim of encouraging churches to approach the process of
calling officebearers with prayerful discernment, pastoral sensitivity, and clarity. We certainly
did not intend to downplay the importance of the Covenant for Officebearers (CfO), nor the
commitments made within it. Rather, our hope was to provide space for discussion and dialogue,
especially in a time when many of the congregations we encounter in our work are wrestling
with how best to speak about confessional commitments in light of recent decisions and
developments within the CRCNA.
In that spirit, I want to acknowledge your concern regarding Points 5 and 8. You’re right to point
to the full text of the CfO, which affirms the Three Forms of Unity as fully agreeing with the
Word of God, and to note the high expectations for how officebearers are to be formed,
governed, and conformed to those doctrines.
That said, within the context of the document, the language used in those sections was intended
not to water down the confessional commitments of officebearers, but to encourage honest
conversation within councils—especially in situations where potential nominees have questions
or hesitations. We’ve found that beginning with an invitational posture often helps people enter
into meaningful dialogue. As discussions unfold, the weight and integrity of the promises made
in the CfO are more fully explored and clarified—often including the very points you’ve raised.
In particular, our aim was to equip councils to walk alongside nominees in a non-anxious way
that neither compromises the church’s confessional identity nor shuts down sincere questions.
We agree that honesty about expectations is vital, and your reminder to hold those expectations
in full is well taken.

ron vanden brink 

A good place to start researching your decision (and decisions like this one) would be https://diaconalministries.com/resources/   I'd suggest you download the 2 documents under "Guidelines for Preparing an Offering Schedule".

(Let us know if these tools are helpful.)

Also, have a look at:  https://www.crcna.org/ministries/accredited-nondenominational-agencies

Organizations on this list have been reviewed and approved by the annual synod of the Christian Reformed Church in North America.  Some primary requirements for receiving accreditation with the CRCNA include:

That the agency not duplicate a ministry that is being performed by a CRCNA agency.

That the agency soliciting the CRC for support is closely related to the CRC's integral work (works of mercy, of Christian education, or the distribution of the Word of God.)

That the agency is closely allied with CRC ecclesiastical task and can be recommended to the entire denomination for support.

When dealing with these kinds of situations I'd also suggest keeping some basic principles in mind (and perhaps developing policies based on the principles). 

I've found that the following can provide a very helpful start point.  (Adapted from The Oath for Compassionate Service by Robert Lupton in his book “Toxic Charity” p. 128)

1. LISTEN
2. Never do for the others what they can do for themselves;
3. Limit one-way giving to emergencies;  (this is an important principle of learning to Help Without Hurting)
4. Strive to empower the materially poor through employment, lending, and investing, using grants sparingly to reinforce achievements;
5. Keep your self-interest secondary to the needs of those being served;
6. Listen closely to those you seek to help;
7. Above all, do no harm