CRC Synod 2008: Agenda Part 2

This post is part of a summary of the Agenda. If you want to see what I have written about what has actually happened at Synod this week, please see the front page of this blog. I will keep these summaries updated throughout the week. The official CRCNA Synod page is here.

I finally finished reading the rest of the Agenda for Synod 2008, and here are my highlights: (not that the material left out is unimportant):

The Candidacy [for ministry] Committee examined the issue of the status of ministry associates. It was their understanding that being a ministry associate does not automatically allow one to preach, [167]  but is determined by the mandate of the position the MA fills. Synod 2007 decided that MAs can be called as solo pastors given that “economic need” is present and the other relevant Church Order articles could not be followed. [170] The Candidacy Commitee recommends dropping the “economic need” clause, [171] and adopting a guideline to give a standard for whether it is appropriate to call a MA. [171]

The Contemporary Testimony revision seems excellent. They revised the report to avoid cliches and keep the wording meaningful, also responding to new issues in our changed contemporary situation. Scriptural references are listed at the bottom with explanatory sentences rather than footnotes in the text, which turns out to be very nice. As they changed some of the thematic developments, the report discourages word-for-word comparison with the 1986 version. [211] I don’t have the patience to study the whole document, but it reads well and is clear and relevant, as is its goal.

The Faith Formation Comittee had in its mandate two issues of most interest: children’s communion and infant dedication. Children’s communion is studied intensively, but no recommendations are stated for this year; they plan to end up producing thorough documents about this. [241] They plan to organize communication about topics in this area: putting together a web site, sending discussion points to councils, and organizing representative correspondents. [239-240] They put forth an interesting recommendation that Synod hold a discussion about these matters in the form of a luncheon. [241]

There were a few overtures concerning the new hymnal, slated for release in 2013. Overtures 6 and 7 deal with some proposal not to include the confessions in the hymnal; I didn’t see anything about this (perhaps I just missed it). Overture 8 wishes to ensure there is a seperate Psalm section in the hymnal, as in all previous. I think this issue has sides that are about balanced – having a seperate Psalm section reinforces the importance of singing the Psalms, however it also makes them harder to find, discouraging their use.

Overture 9 asks Synod to establish an “Environmental Policy Task Force”, to write up a list of guidelines for those that wish to live environmentally responsibly. I would have thought this should fall outside of Synod’s juristiction, however it is painfully obvious even at my own church this is needed, as people do not all see environmental responsibility as the important moral issue that it is. I strongly urge Synod to adopt the recommendation in this overture.

If I forgot anything important, be sure to let me know!

Do We Need an “Evangelical Manifesto”?

Do we need an “evangelical manifesto”?

I definitely think so.

Based on my own experiences, I have markedly seen evangelical Christianity looked down upon. Based on most of what I see, I would too.

Some evangelicals irked much of the mainstream through their creation of what is now called the “religious right”, trying to put Christian morality into of modern conservative politics. Some philosophers note that this is misguided, as Christianity and modern politics have completely different presuppositions. To many this looks like infringement upon civil liberties.

And this group, though less vocal, has seen some negative media coverage. For example, the movie Jesus Camp, released in 2006, portrays a certain evangelical/charismatic Christian retreat. People therein pray over bowling balls, pass out tracts to random people, participate in an anti-abortion protest, and pray over a cardboard George Bush. One feels that evangelicals are very much out of touch with reality after watching this. (It is a very excellent documentary; if you haven’t seen it, you need to.)

Therefore, evangelicals have been blasted twice: once because of a few that embark on a misguided political project, then again when a similar group seems very aloof and uninvolved with real issues. This is obviously not an accurate view of all the churches and people that would be grouped under evangelicalism. However, especially these few, through the megahorn of the media, have begun to define evangelicalism for many people.

Therefore, this needs to be corrected by something. The recently-released Evangelical Manifesto, though not perfect, counters these perceptions very well in the second and third sections. It is a way for evangelicals to regain the ability to define themselves, instead of the media or people’s developed biases doing so for them. However, I am quite unsure of whether it could have any lasting influence.

As for a closer examination of the content, James Smith did a far better job than I ever could, on the Generous Orthodoxy blog.