Carl Trueman: "99 out of a 100 seminary graduates should..."
- Thread starter ReadBavinck
- Start date
- Status
polemic_turtle
Puritan Board Freshman
This is certainly a sobering thread. I'm contemplating a call to the ministry myself. Subjective experience is so hard to sort out, but I've been unnaturally sure about it before, having arrived there from formerly thinking that the pastorate was one of the worst decisions a man could make, financially speaking, and thus something I would hate to be called to do. Ahhh, hard to say.
As far as maturity goes, that is a serious concern for me. As of right now, I'm 17 and am about to enter into a business partnership with my father building a house. I've been working as a framer, job cleanup, handy man, etc from the time I was 11 and seriously since I was about 15 or 16. School has been neglected for work, but with a vision for College in the next year or two, I've a vision to prevent my perishing, so to speak, so school will become a priority. I hope I can be an exception to the general lack of maturity in this generation, which gives me hope that if I can wish that before it's too late, perhaps I shall be blessed to escape it. Lord help me!
As for the help of the local church in determining a call, I think that's sound doctrine, but difficult to apply in my situation. You see, my church's theological heritage is HyperCalvinist and they deny duty-faith, have a very low view of human responsiblity, etc, so while my burning desire is to preach evangelistically, I'd choke on every invitation or exhortation to the impenitent if I were to speak in their pulpit. I will not speak ill of my pastor, God bless him, but would mention that he has quite an admiration for Herman Hoeksema's theology, with which I'm appalled at many places. It's not easy to disagree at so early a stage in your theological development with your pastor; there is much temptation to overreact into something equally unwise, as I'm sure you'd agree. Please pray for me.
I'm looking into a university where I can major in classics and then use that to study theology more thoroughly, perhaps at a seminary. Oh, this will be a decision the Lord will have to guide me in, because I'm in over my head as far as certainty goes!
[Edited on 10-17-2006 by polemic_turtle]
As far as maturity goes, that is a serious concern for me. As of right now, I'm 17 and am about to enter into a business partnership with my father building a house. I've been working as a framer, job cleanup, handy man, etc from the time I was 11 and seriously since I was about 15 or 16. School has been neglected for work, but with a vision for College in the next year or two, I've a vision to prevent my perishing, so to speak, so school will become a priority. I hope I can be an exception to the general lack of maturity in this generation, which gives me hope that if I can wish that before it's too late, perhaps I shall be blessed to escape it. Lord help me!
As for the help of the local church in determining a call, I think that's sound doctrine, but difficult to apply in my situation. You see, my church's theological heritage is HyperCalvinist and they deny duty-faith, have a very low view of human responsiblity, etc, so while my burning desire is to preach evangelistically, I'd choke on every invitation or exhortation to the impenitent if I were to speak in their pulpit. I will not speak ill of my pastor, God bless him, but would mention that he has quite an admiration for Herman Hoeksema's theology, with which I'm appalled at many places. It's not easy to disagree at so early a stage in your theological development with your pastor; there is much temptation to overreact into something equally unwise, as I'm sure you'd agree. Please pray for me.
I'm looking into a university where I can major in classics and then use that to study theology more thoroughly, perhaps at a seminary. Oh, this will be a decision the Lord will have to guide me in, because I'm in over my head as far as certainty goes!
[Edited on 10-17-2006 by polemic_turtle]
KenPierce
Puritan Board Freshman
A very interesting discussion.
As one who was a young seminarian (graduated @ 24, and now almost 35), but had a lot of second career friends, I can see relative strengths and weaknesses for both sides.
As has been noted above, the second career phenomenon is relatively new. The advantages of being young and unmarried in seminary are great: the ability to focus on one's studies and not neglect a family, the inexpensive nature of single living, etc. Some (by no means all) of the 2d career men with wife and children perpetually complained of the workload (I know this wasn't true of you Fred, but you are sui generis yourself!).
But, as Fred rightly noted, an inexperienced pastor should not be a problem, IF he is surrounded by a well-trained and active eldership. IN my experience, however, such sessions are rare. Dutch Reformed consistories, in my experience, tend to be better, taking far more responsibility than your average PCA session.
That is how, for instance, Seventh Reformed Church in Grand Rapids, when it had 1000 members, could run very well with only a senior pastor, a part time visitation minister, a youth guy, and a hapless intern (me).
And, there are churches out there who are great training grounds for younger men. My first solo pastorate was like this. I buried 15 people in 3 years in a church of about 60 active members. I did a lot of hospital visits. And, the folks were very patient and appreciative. They knocked off my rough edges, too.
Unlike Fred, I do not see short pastorates as necessarily a negative thing. If you ever have to follow a long-term pastor, you will see why this is the case. Human weakness being what it is, people tend to get attached to particular men. I see this when I am gone for a Sunday, and people complain that the fill-in was "just not Ken." That is a sad commentary. Now, multiply that out over a number of years (I have been senior here for almost 4). Likewise, my predecessors have cadres who are loyal to them! They don't get that Paul and Apollos and Peter are simply servants. I try to remind people that the truth, and not who brings it, is paramount. But, they just don't get it!
We have come to embrace the idea that long-term pastorates are, in and of themselves, good things, perhaps on the models of Lloyd-Jones or Wm. Still. But, those were singular men. I remain unconvinced. Paul did not remain long anywhere. Even Titus, who was to organize the church on Crete, was not intended to stay there long (read the letter closely, if you don't believe me!).
I've rambled off topic long enough. I think one way the church can remedy the current situation (a glut of men, many who are unqualified, far too many ministers for churches, at least in the PCA) is to take a more proactive role in who goes to seminary, and not just rubber stamp every 23 year old college grad who doesn't know what to do with their life. Put them to work in the church first. Have them be mentored by the pastor, and prove their giftedness. Then, when the call is tested, PAY THEIR WHOLE WAY!
Seminary should not saddle people with any debt, especially with the meagre salary of most pastors. And, seminaries should not accept anyone who can sign the check (not that all are like this, of course). Men should have a liberal arts background for ministry --no question about that-- or make non liberal arts folks take remedial courses in things like logic and grammar. They should not accept people with zero real ministry experience, either.
Okay, rant over.
As one who was a young seminarian (graduated @ 24, and now almost 35), but had a lot of second career friends, I can see relative strengths and weaknesses for both sides.
As has been noted above, the second career phenomenon is relatively new. The advantages of being young and unmarried in seminary are great: the ability to focus on one's studies and not neglect a family, the inexpensive nature of single living, etc. Some (by no means all) of the 2d career men with wife and children perpetually complained of the workload (I know this wasn't true of you Fred, but you are sui generis yourself!).
But, as Fred rightly noted, an inexperienced pastor should not be a problem, IF he is surrounded by a well-trained and active eldership. IN my experience, however, such sessions are rare. Dutch Reformed consistories, in my experience, tend to be better, taking far more responsibility than your average PCA session.
That is how, for instance, Seventh Reformed Church in Grand Rapids, when it had 1000 members, could run very well with only a senior pastor, a part time visitation minister, a youth guy, and a hapless intern (me).
And, there are churches out there who are great training grounds for younger men. My first solo pastorate was like this. I buried 15 people in 3 years in a church of about 60 active members. I did a lot of hospital visits. And, the folks were very patient and appreciative. They knocked off my rough edges, too.
Unlike Fred, I do not see short pastorates as necessarily a negative thing. If you ever have to follow a long-term pastor, you will see why this is the case. Human weakness being what it is, people tend to get attached to particular men. I see this when I am gone for a Sunday, and people complain that the fill-in was "just not Ken." That is a sad commentary. Now, multiply that out over a number of years (I have been senior here for almost 4). Likewise, my predecessors have cadres who are loyal to them! They don't get that Paul and Apollos and Peter are simply servants. I try to remind people that the truth, and not who brings it, is paramount. But, they just don't get it!
We have come to embrace the idea that long-term pastorates are, in and of themselves, good things, perhaps on the models of Lloyd-Jones or Wm. Still. But, those were singular men. I remain unconvinced. Paul did not remain long anywhere. Even Titus, who was to organize the church on Crete, was not intended to stay there long (read the letter closely, if you don't believe me!).
I've rambled off topic long enough. I think one way the church can remedy the current situation (a glut of men, many who are unqualified, far too many ministers for churches, at least in the PCA) is to take a more proactive role in who goes to seminary, and not just rubber stamp every 23 year old college grad who doesn't know what to do with their life. Put them to work in the church first. Have them be mentored by the pastor, and prove their giftedness. Then, when the call is tested, PAY THEIR WHOLE WAY!
Seminary should not saddle people with any debt, especially with the meagre salary of most pastors. And, seminaries should not accept anyone who can sign the check (not that all are like this, of course). Men should have a liberal arts background for ministry --no question about that-- or make non liberal arts folks take remedial courses in things like logic and grammar. They should not accept people with zero real ministry experience, either.
Okay, rant over.
Well said, as usual Dr. Clark. "It's not a purely subjective judgment made by the candidate himself. It's a judgment made with others in the church."
My church session confirmed my call and sent me to Presbytery to be confirmed as a candidate for the gospel ministry. This past July, it was confirmed, and I came "under care" of my Presbytery.
Around this time, I was asked by not a few TE's, "Why haven't you been in Seminary yet" or "How come you've waited".
"Well," I said, "I do not trust myself enough to confirm my own call. I trust God and his ministers and the authority over me to confirm it and send me to Seminary." "If you brothers saw fit I was not qualified or I needed more time then so be it".
The point is, I really believe that one ought to go through the process in order to make sure his call is legitimate. The man called needs to be discipled, needs to be checked up on, and needs close scrutiny of his entire life.
Can anyone here imagine anything worse than flattering oneself into the Ministry only to discover at the Judgment God never sent you and you mistreated and abused His people?
I can't!
KenPierce
Puritan Board Freshman
Ruben,
We should. But, right now, missionaries and would-be missionaries I know and respect are having a very hard time raising enough $ to go. There are reasons for that. One is that missions agencies place a heavy burden on missionaries for administrative expense. Another is the oppressive expatriate taxes in countries like the UK and South Africa. And, yet another is that, since 9/11/2001, many church budgets continue to hurt.
We are doing some good things with mission though. The PCA has more missionaries than the PCUSA, though we are about 1/16th the size, and have no sizeable endowment like our wayward mother. Also, the partnership with nationals in various countries, and entrusting leadership to them, I regard as a very positive development.
We should. But, right now, missionaries and would-be missionaries I know and respect are having a very hard time raising enough $ to go. There are reasons for that. One is that missions agencies place a heavy burden on missionaries for administrative expense. Another is the oppressive expatriate taxes in countries like the UK and South Africa. And, yet another is that, since 9/11/2001, many church budgets continue to hurt.
We are doing some good things with mission though. The PCA has more missionaries than the PCUSA, though we are about 1/16th the size, and have no sizeable endowment like our wayward mother. Also, the partnership with nationals in various countries, and entrusting leadership to them, I regard as a very positive development.
KenPierce
Puritan Board Freshman
Andrew,
I graduated from RTS Jackson @ 24 years old. Was I ready to be a pastor? No. But, there is something about being shoved out of the nest. What you need is a good internship, and I would also heartily counsel you to seek an assistant pastorate somewhere --one with a broad range of duties, not just a niche like youth.
Then, attach yourself to your senior pastor. Pepper him with questions. Ask him for books. Get him to read through The Work of the Pastor, Preaching and Preachers, and Fairbairn's Pastoral Theology with you, and discuss his work.
Trust me, you will flatter him. He will love you, and build you into a pastor.
I graduated from RTS Jackson @ 24 years old. Was I ready to be a pastor? No. But, there is something about being shoved out of the nest. What you need is a good internship, and I would also heartily counsel you to seek an assistant pastorate somewhere --one with a broad range of duties, not just a niche like youth.
Then, attach yourself to your senior pastor. Pepper him with questions. Ask him for books. Get him to read through The Work of the Pastor, Preaching and Preachers, and Fairbairn's Pastoral Theology with you, and discuss his work.
Trust me, you will flatter him. He will love you, and build you into a pastor.
KenPierce
Puritan Board Freshman
Have your boss buy them for you! Most are very willing to do this. If you worked for me, I'd buy you books! ;-) Plus, the above would probably total about $35.
My first senior pastor (John R. de Witt) did this often --give me $100 for books. He was a fantastic mentor.
Will you be interning @ Redeemer?
My first senior pastor (John R. de Witt) did this often --give me $100 for books. He was a fantastic mentor.
Will you be interning @ Redeemer?
Yes, I understand that fundraising is a problem. I think that mission boards need to revise some estimates sharply downwards. I am currently in Mexico City; of promised support we get $500.00 a month, although most months we get more like $700.00.
We have paid for a surgery for a little girl: large amounts of supplements for a very sick lady: a guy's bail; another guy's car (only means of income) payment; and given out books, small gifts, etc., etc.
One mission board I asked said that for a childless couple (which my wife and I are) the support norm per month is $3000.00.
Right now I don't pay rent or electricity: those are nice perks. Say those were added in. I would need $1000.00 a month (given that I've run through my savings since being here I do think the $700.00 figure is a little low. Make it $1200.00 so I can go the dentist and buy a waterproof jacket.
Where is that extra $1800.00 a month going?
P.S. I should add that Mexico City is a lot more expensive than some other parts of Mexico.
[Edited on 10-18-2006 by py3ak]
We have paid for a surgery for a little girl: large amounts of supplements for a very sick lady: a guy's bail; another guy's car (only means of income) payment; and given out books, small gifts, etc., etc.
One mission board I asked said that for a childless couple (which my wife and I are) the support norm per month is $3000.00.
Right now I don't pay rent or electricity: those are nice perks. Say those were added in. I would need $1000.00 a month (given that I've run through my savings since being here I do think the $700.00 figure is a little low. Make it $1200.00 so I can go the dentist and buy a waterproof jacket.
Where is that extra $1800.00 a month going?
P.S. I should add that Mexico City is a lot more expensive than some other parts of Mexico.
[Edited on 10-18-2006 by py3ak]
Philip A
Puritan Board Sophomore
Now there's an argument for waiting if I ever saw one....
/Ducks behind
to avoid the tomatoesBut to be serious for a moment, less than a year ago, I was on track for the eldership, preaching and teaching in my church, and serving as a deacon. It would have been a terrible thing for me to have entered the office, and the fact that I'm now a paedobaptist is the least of the reasons. The lessons that I have learned in just a short amount of time - lessons about humility, suffering, the reality of living in a sin-cursed world, preaching, dealing with people, teaching people, being mistreated and slapped across the face by dear brethren in the faith - I would consider indispensable were I to ever be a pastor. There was a day when most of the people in my church thought me qualified. Some even told me that they were conviced that I would be their elder, and that very soon.
I now thank God that he kept both me and the church from that awful fate. It would have been disastrous for me and for them. The reality is that I'm not qualified to do much more than lurk on the PB and make silly, meaningless quips.
Didn't some well known person once say that they had to endure severe affliction and maturation before they were qualified and able to serve as a pastor? Who was that, I wonder?
:Owen:
backwoodspresbyterian
Banned
Amen Sailor. I come from a Church where my liaison to session has not called me or e-mailed once in two years to even check if I was still alive. My liaison to my Presbyteries CPM has wrote me a letter once in nearly two years. My previous liaison was relieved of his pastoral duties at his church. I yearn for some type of mentoring from someone.
KenPierce
Puritan Board Freshman
Trevor,
I agree with you that most churches commitment to missions is somewhere between pathetic and downright shameful. I don't have a better system to offer than itineration, but I do think it's sad that it does seem to favor newer missionaries over those with years of established faithfulness in the field.
And, some missions agencies take more than others. I don't think missionaries are overpaid, it is just that they don't get enough of what it costs to send them!
Just out of curiosity, do you serve under the aegis of a mission board? If so, which? What do you see as its relative benefits over others?
I agree with you that most churches commitment to missions is somewhere between pathetic and downright shameful. I don't have a better system to offer than itineration, but I do think it's sad that it does seem to favor newer missionaries over those with years of established faithfulness in the field.
And, some missions agencies take more than others. I don't think missionaries are overpaid, it is just that they don't get enough of what it costs to send them!
Just out of curiosity, do you serve under the aegis of a mission board? If so, which? What do you see as its relative benefits over others?
As one who attends a Church where zeal, not according to knowledge, abounds I could not disagree more with this statement.
The emaciated nature of most Evangelical Churches is precisely due to this sickness. It is very "Warren"-esqe to assume that we need less doctrine and more action but that action is usually mis-directed.
I have respect for you and I don't want that fact to be lost but I really must remind you that saying "...well what about Spurgeon?" really has no bearing upon the Scriptural mandate.
I'm a bit hyper-sensitive to this kind of "just get out there and work" attitude right now because the ill effects the Franklin Graham crusade is having on our Church. The guest preacher we had for a number of months (who worked for the Graham organization) was de-frauding the Church of monies owed for months. The deacons refused to do anything about it until I found out about it because two women, who knew about the lack of integrity, could not stand to sit in the Church while he preached any more. I finally confronted the deacons with this ethical lapse and the high standard for Biblical leadership. The individual finally, when confronted sternly, paid the money owed.
Well the Deacons let him preach one last time. Do you know what his message was? He completely butchered the meaning of a passage to use as a segueway into what he wanted to talk about (a common practice among the poorly trained Graham missionaries) and told us that we need to focus on the important things. What were the important things: Telling people about Jesus. That's it. Everything else is unimportant.
I brought the deacons into an office after he left that Sunday and began laying out, in detail, what Scripture views are the important things. The command at the end of the Gospels is to make disciples after all.
There is absolutely no getting around the requirement for maturity and training for such a standard. I respect certain zeal but some of it is just plain folly. I have more to say about the thread in general but I simply cannot let this idea go unchallenged. That idea that we need to just "...get out there and do..." is poisonous to the Evangelical faith. Every other organization that does anything with consequence does not put novices in charge of things. Yet we think that somehow the world gets turned upside down when a man becomes a minister and leave it to the realm of amateurs.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
I agree with Rich but I raise a question to something else Trevor brought up that hasn't been discussed: the issue of working for a secular boss for an indefinite period of time. Paul had his tentmaking skill. Times might come where one cannot be in ministry for any number of reasons for any amount of time. He needs to find some other way to support his family.
With that specific concern off my chest I'd like to weigh in on this discussion. It seems there are a lot of old threads being resurrected these days.
I've been a Marine Officer for 16 years and a zealous Christian for most of those years but only Reformed and a serious student of the Word for about 10 years. As I've studied more about the role of Elders (something I've been nominated for on a couple of occasions) and matured in my leadership, I've always been struck at how compatible the concepts of leadership are between military leadership and the leadership of elders. All truth is God's truth after all and, because all men are created in His image, it ought not to surprise us that effectively leading and persuading a person is pretty much the same in any sphere of activity. The type of leadership is different and the oaths are different but the principles are pretty consistent.
My response to Trevor might have some believe that I am against young leadership. I am not. I was responding to, primarily, a specific concern. I am a huge believer in young leadership but, as I have evaluated leadership among most Churches and Presbyteries (independent of denomination), I generally believe that the amount of energy devoted to developing leadership is shameful.
Leaders are made but they are also groomed. They are also mentored. The reason I believe in young leadership is I have witnessed countless 18 year old kids take responsibility for the lives of others and done so with self-sacrifice and with great results. I've seen countless 23 year old Lieutenants care for dozens of Marines in their charge. They've trained them, disciplined them, and counselled them.
Do they make mistakes? All the time. It is a bit amusing to me now to see young leaders in action. I love their zeal but, and this is important, I and other more senior leaders are there to keep them from doing to much damage when their zeal is mis-directed. Sometimes they take initiative and step beyond the bounds of their authority. Sometimes they want to hammer a Marine and write him off as a "dirtbag" when the Marine needs more attention.
If you've ever been in a large organization, you probably had this thought: "If I ever get into a position to change things then I will do this...." I used to be that young Officer who said the same thing and then found myself making the same decision when I was in the position to change it. Why? My perspective had changed. My maturity had increased. You learn certain things over time: people will lie to your face, the "nicest" men beat their wives, some zealous leaders steamroll over others and wreck their careers.
If you compare the amount of time and energy the Marine Corps spends on leadership development with a typical Presbytery, the comparison is shameful. Out of my 16 year career, the Marine Corps has sent me to school for about 4 years of that time. Professional Military Education is a constant process and that doesn't even count the amount of time I, and others, spend sitting down with our younger Marines and giving them course adjustments to their leadership.
I think, first of all, that far to many men are not exposed to high expectations and the stress that really refines and brings out leadership (or causes some to run away). Where is the mechanism in most Churches to pull a pastor aside and take him to task for his poor leadership in a constructive way? Honestly, if you're going to call a young TE then you better have a mature Session but do those who are more mature think of it as their responsiblity to help a young leader mature or do they just assume "...he'll figure it out."
In fact, just because a person has a lot of time in a leadership role doesn't mean he has matured in that role. I was appalled at one Church I attended at both the lack of knowledge that the elders had as well as their aloofness from the congregation. It wasn't that they didn't care but they never really sought out people in the congregation to get to know them. They didn't visit people in their homes. They didn't do anything to develop leadership in the men of the congregation except an Elders and Deacons class if somebody happened to be learning on their own. I was shocked at the ignorance of 13 year old boys that I taught Sunday School to. They were raised in that Church and some of them were completely ignorant of not only the Catechism but even of basic Biblical literacy. But their fathers seemed, in some cases, to be doing OK. How would the Elders know any different if they never sat down with them and led them.
There is just so much to say here. There are just so many fundamentals of leadership that are neglected that to go over all of them would be time prohibitive. I think my thoughts boil down to this:
1. Young leaders with initiative and zeal are extremely important
2. Young leaders need mentorship
3. If the Church has no mechanism to mentor them then even time pursuing secular goals is not going to necessarily teach them about leadership.
4. The Church needs to invest more time and energy developing leadership in all men to be in a position to notice those with special gifts and devote specific energy to mentoring those.
I've been a Marine Officer for 16 years and a zealous Christian for most of those years but only Reformed and a serious student of the Word for about 10 years. As I've studied more about the role of Elders (something I've been nominated for on a couple of occasions) and matured in my leadership, I've always been struck at how compatible the concepts of leadership are between military leadership and the leadership of elders. All truth is God's truth after all and, because all men are created in His image, it ought not to surprise us that effectively leading and persuading a person is pretty much the same in any sphere of activity. The type of leadership is different and the oaths are different but the principles are pretty consistent.
My response to Trevor might have some believe that I am against young leadership. I am not. I was responding to, primarily, a specific concern. I am a huge believer in young leadership but, as I have evaluated leadership among most Churches and Presbyteries (independent of denomination), I generally believe that the amount of energy devoted to developing leadership is shameful.
Leaders are made but they are also groomed. They are also mentored. The reason I believe in young leadership is I have witnessed countless 18 year old kids take responsibility for the lives of others and done so with self-sacrifice and with great results. I've seen countless 23 year old Lieutenants care for dozens of Marines in their charge. They've trained them, disciplined them, and counselled them.
Do they make mistakes? All the time. It is a bit amusing to me now to see young leaders in action. I love their zeal but, and this is important, I and other more senior leaders are there to keep them from doing to much damage when their zeal is mis-directed. Sometimes they take initiative and step beyond the bounds of their authority. Sometimes they want to hammer a Marine and write him off as a "dirtbag" when the Marine needs more attention.
If you've ever been in a large organization, you probably had this thought: "If I ever get into a position to change things then I will do this...." I used to be that young Officer who said the same thing and then found myself making the same decision when I was in the position to change it. Why? My perspective had changed. My maturity had increased. You learn certain things over time: people will lie to your face, the "nicest" men beat their wives, some zealous leaders steamroll over others and wreck their careers.
If you compare the amount of time and energy the Marine Corps spends on leadership development with a typical Presbytery, the comparison is shameful. Out of my 16 year career, the Marine Corps has sent me to school for about 4 years of that time. Professional Military Education is a constant process and that doesn't even count the amount of time I, and others, spend sitting down with our younger Marines and giving them course adjustments to their leadership.
I think, first of all, that far to many men are not exposed to high expectations and the stress that really refines and brings out leadership (or causes some to run away). Where is the mechanism in most Churches to pull a pastor aside and take him to task for his poor leadership in a constructive way? Honestly, if you're going to call a young TE then you better have a mature Session but do those who are more mature think of it as their responsiblity to help a young leader mature or do they just assume "...he'll figure it out."
In fact, just because a person has a lot of time in a leadership role doesn't mean he has matured in that role. I was appalled at one Church I attended at both the lack of knowledge that the elders had as well as their aloofness from the congregation. It wasn't that they didn't care but they never really sought out people in the congregation to get to know them. They didn't visit people in their homes. They didn't do anything to develop leadership in the men of the congregation except an Elders and Deacons class if somebody happened to be learning on their own. I was shocked at the ignorance of 13 year old boys that I taught Sunday School to. They were raised in that Church and some of them were completely ignorant of not only the Catechism but even of basic Biblical literacy. But their fathers seemed, in some cases, to be doing OK. How would the Elders know any different if they never sat down with them and led them.
There is just so much to say here. There are just so many fundamentals of leadership that are neglected that to go over all of them would be time prohibitive. I think my thoughts boil down to this:
1. Young leaders with initiative and zeal are extremely important
2. Young leaders need mentorship
3. If the Church has no mechanism to mentor them then even time pursuing secular goals is not going to necessarily teach them about leadership.
4. The Church needs to invest more time and energy developing leadership in all men to be in a position to notice those with special gifts and devote specific energy to mentoring those.
Fair Enough Brother.
You were probably typing while I formed my next reply to the thread in general.
I agree that there is a certain level of equipping, prior to the person becoming refined in all things, that we need to get them out the door and work. I also believe, however, that young leadership requires supervision because it gets misdirected and is naive in some cases.
I think that the idea of a professional ministry where the Pastor is seen as the fully prepared leader that has no need of growing is a bad model. New pastors need some care and the occasional loving "smack down" just like any other leader growing in wisdom.
I afford new Pastors the respect of their office but, with age and some experience, I see the common tells of new leadership among many of them. The benefit that a new Marine leader has is that he is instilled with the idea that he needs to seek advice. Many pastors are stilted with the notion that they're fully equipped and, combined with the confidence of youth, that can be dangerous sometimes.
There's an old joke that says that it's really dangerous when a Lieutenant says: "Based on my experience...."
- Status
Similar threads
