I interpret this article as a defense of Bob DeMoor and the publication of the two articles. It seems to me the defense is often built on a false dichotomy: either The Banner tows the denominational line with rote, stale answers to important issues or we allow its authors to push us outside our existing theological framework so that we might find new answers. I propose a "third way" where The Banner challenges the church to think critically and creatively while remaining true to the Bible and our confessions. Unfortunately the Walhout and VanBelle articles do not fulfill those requirements. For examples of thought-provoking articles that accomplish this, check out the blog of Kevin DeYoung, a pastor in the RCA. Our own Forum magazine produced by the seminary also does a good job of meeting those goals.
I read many of the author's concluding questions as rhetorical. They seem more like statements than actual questions. In the second-to-last paragraph he seems to be saying that the CRC lacks a clear position on certain issues so The Banner should explore what our position should be. We don't truly lack a position on some of the issues that have been raised by The Banner (I'm thinking particularly about the VanBelle article there, as the catechism states our official position on cohabitation). When we do need to explore new theological terrain it seems best to follow the processes prescribed in the Church Order. Councils create overtures. Classes forward quality overtures to Synod. Synod decides if the overture should be normative. I'm not sure where The Banner fits into that process. I'd be willing to hear thoughts from others on that matter.
I love the idea of continuing in sermon evaluation after the initial tests are passed. The purpose for those evaluations could simply be to chart progress and spot areas for growth.
There was a similar question asked of the Apostles in Acts 6.
"In those days when the number of disciples was increasing, the Grecian Jews among them complained against the Hebraic Jews because their widows were being overlooked in the daily distribution of food. So the Twelve gathered all the disciples together and said, 'It would not be right for us to neglect the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on tables. Brothers, choose seven men from among you who are known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom. We will turn this responsibility over to them and will give our attention to prayer and the ministry of the word.' "
This type of pastoral leadership might be seen as passive or even lazy from a modern pespective, but it actually binds the church together by creating trust between pastor, council and the congregation. "Prayer and the ministry of the word" still involves visiting, council meetings and necessary administrative tasks (afer all, the Apostles' decision was made at a council meeting). However, the text does seem to state the preeminent task of the pastor is bringing the Word.
Good article. It provides a great reminder for churches to be excellent in how we present ourselves.
One caveat that is missing from the article is that context makes a huge difference for the importance of a church's website. I pastor a rural congregation where the vast majority (I would estimate 75%) of people don't use email or the internet in general. These aren't just older people who never wanted to learn about computers, these are people who work in fields, barns, warehouses and shops during the day and don't see a need for the internet. So, consequently, the website isn't that valuable to them.
This doesn't excuse churches like ours from having outdated websites, but it does mean that the amount of time I spend working on the website should be relatively small.
(If you'd like to check out our site it's http://sumascrc.com)
I totally agree with John's main point that relationships will connect young people to a church or a lack thereof will send them somewhere else.
Regarding worship styles, I'm a big fan of talking throughout the service about why we do things, why we sing a certain song or even why there's a sermon every Sunday. This usually means that I spend some time every couple weeks reminding people that the most important part of a song is the lyrical content. Sometimes I'll read the words of the song before we sing it so they can sink in a little bit. Our church is very traditional in the songs we sing because of that factor. If a contemporary song has great words (we sing lots by the Gettys) we'll use it. I think that this helps the older people appreciate a new song and it helps the younger people appreciate the older ones.
I'm not sure if this approach will grow or shrink our youth group, but the passion for congregational singing at our church is quite high. If the people in the seats are passionately engaged with the Living God, young people will want to be there no matter the type of music.
As denominational loyalty recedes, the church will go to great (and sometimes foolish) measures to retain youth and young families. You're probably frustrated that many churches have began catering to the demands of young people while neglecting the preferences of older folks. What this creates is older people who are loyal to the CRC but also feel betrayed by their churches for the sake of the youth. And on the other end of the spectrum, the youth come to a church where many of the older people don't/can't sing and there is a feeling of disunity during worship (especially while the praise team is blasting the latest Christian radio hit). I have visited over a dozen CRCs in the past few years and this tension has been evident in too many of them.
What I encourage is for you to talk with your elder or pastor about the importance of a song's 1) singability and 2) lyrical content. If you find that your church is singing several that don't fit both criteria, you might have a problem.
I totally agree, Doug! I wonder what percantage vote will be required if it does come to a vote (which I doubt it will). For the sake of unity, those in favor and those opposed should both agree it needs to be 2/3.
I also appreciate your assessment of this article's muddying the waters on classical support/rejection of the Belhar as a confession. Let's begin with a simple question. Should we adopt the Belhar as a 4th confession? The answer has been a resounding, "No!" Synod 2012 should at least affirm this truth. After this, we can sort out how we will handle the Belhar once its status as a possible confession is taken off the table.
Posted in: What Do We Want from The Banner?
I interpret this article as a defense of Bob DeMoor and the publication of the two articles. It seems to me the defense is often built on a false dichotomy: either The Banner tows the denominational line with rote, stale answers to important issues or we allow its authors to push us outside our existing theological framework so that we might find new answers. I propose a "third way" where The Banner challenges the church to think critically and creatively while remaining true to the Bible and our confessions. Unfortunately the Walhout and VanBelle articles do not fulfill those requirements. For examples of thought-provoking articles that accomplish this, check out the blog of Kevin DeYoung, a pastor in the RCA. Our own Forum magazine produced by the seminary also does a good job of meeting those goals.
Posted in: What Do We Want from The Banner?
I agree, Paul. The question is an excellent one.
I read many of the author's concluding questions as rhetorical. They seem more like statements than actual questions. In the second-to-last paragraph he seems to be saying that the CRC lacks a clear position on certain issues so The Banner should explore what our position should be. We don't truly lack a position on some of the issues that have been raised by The Banner (I'm thinking particularly about the VanBelle article there, as the catechism states our official position on cohabitation). When we do need to explore new theological terrain it seems best to follow the processes prescribed in the Church Order. Councils create overtures. Classes forward quality overtures to Synod. Synod decides if the overture should be normative. I'm not sure where The Banner fits into that process. I'd be willing to hear thoughts from others on that matter.
Posted in: What Do We Want from The Banner?
You got this complementarian saying, "Preach it, sister!" : )
Posted in: Sermon Critics
I love the idea of continuing in sermon evaluation after the initial tests are passed. The purpose for those evaluations could simply be to chart progress and spot areas for growth.
Posted in: Leadership or Preaching? What is more important in the CRC?
There was a similar question asked of the Apostles in Acts 6.
"In those days when the number of disciples was increasing, the Grecian Jews among them complained against the Hebraic Jews because their widows were being overlooked in the daily distribution of food. So the Twelve gathered all the disciples together and said, 'It would not be right for us to neglect the ministry of the word of God in order to wait on tables. Brothers, choose seven men from among you who are known to be full of the Spirit and wisdom. We will turn this responsibility over to them and will give our attention to prayer and the ministry of the word.' "
This type of pastoral leadership might be seen as passive or even lazy from a modern pespective, but it actually binds the church together by creating trust between pastor, council and the congregation. "Prayer and the ministry of the word" still involves visiting, council meetings and necessary administrative tasks (afer all, the Apostles' decision was made at a council meeting). However, the text does seem to state the preeminent task of the pastor is bringing the Word.
Good question, John!
Posted in: Growing Churches Part 2
Thanks for this list! I'm curious about the item titled, "The church values solid, Reformed, biblical teaching."
I would love to read more about how these growing churches utilize our confessions in the classroom and the pulpit.
Posted in: Growing Churches
I look forward to reading the rest of the list. Here's hoping there is some mention of the Holy Spirit, prayer, and the good preaching of the Gospel.
Posted in: Church Website Statistics
Good article. It provides a great reminder for churches to be excellent in how we present ourselves.
One caveat that is missing from the article is that context makes a huge difference for the importance of a church's website. I pastor a rural congregation where the vast majority (I would estimate 75%) of people don't use email or the internet in general. These aren't just older people who never wanted to learn about computers, these are people who work in fields, barns, warehouses and shops during the day and don't see a need for the internet. So, consequently, the website isn't that valuable to them.
This doesn't excuse churches like ours from having outdated websites, but it does mean that the amount of time I spend working on the website should be relatively small.
(If you'd like to check out our site it's http://sumascrc.com)
Posted in: #helphimjesus
Excellent post, Scott. I wonder if the proverbial pendulum has swung from the "sage on the stage" to the "sage in the seats."
Posted in: Congregational Worship and its Effect on Youth Groups
I totally agree with John's main point that relationships will connect young people to a church or a lack thereof will send them somewhere else.
Regarding worship styles, I'm a big fan of talking throughout the service about why we do things, why we sing a certain song or even why there's a sermon every Sunday. This usually means that I spend some time every couple weeks reminding people that the most important part of a song is the lyrical content. Sometimes I'll read the words of the song before we sing it so they can sink in a little bit. Our church is very traditional in the songs we sing because of that factor. If a contemporary song has great words (we sing lots by the Gettys) we'll use it. I think that this helps the older people appreciate a new song and it helps the younger people appreciate the older ones.
I'm not sure if this approach will grow or shrink our youth group, but the passion for congregational singing at our church is quite high. If the people in the seats are passionately engaged with the Living God, young people will want to be there no matter the type of music.
Posted in: Congregational Worship and its Effect on Youth Groups
Bill,
As denominational loyalty recedes, the church will go to great (and sometimes foolish) measures to retain youth and young families. You're probably frustrated that many churches have began catering to the demands of young people while neglecting the preferences of older folks. What this creates is older people who are loyal to the CRC but also feel betrayed by their churches for the sake of the youth. And on the other end of the spectrum, the youth come to a church where many of the older people don't/can't sing and there is a feeling of disunity during worship (especially while the praise team is blasting the latest Christian radio hit). I have visited over a dozen CRCs in the past few years and this tension has been evident in too many of them.
What I encourage is for you to talk with your elder or pastor about the importance of a song's 1) singability and 2) lyrical content. If you find that your church is singing several that don't fit both criteria, you might have a problem.
Posted in: Belhar—Up, Down or Sideways?
I totally agree, Doug! I wonder what percantage vote will be required if it does come to a vote (which I doubt it will). For the sake of unity, those in favor and those opposed should both agree it needs to be 2/3.
I also appreciate your assessment of this article's muddying the waters on classical support/rejection of the Belhar as a confession. Let's begin with a simple question. Should we adopt the Belhar as a 4th confession? The answer has been a resounding, "No!" Synod 2012 should at least affirm this truth. After this, we can sort out how we will handle the Belhar once its status as a possible confession is taken off the table.