Your Children and ministry.

[Paidiske]

I always saw the point of that saying from Jesus as being, "You are not the only child of wisdom; those who are different from you are also her children."

The point being, in this instance, that one doesn't have to be a carbon copy of a first-century church (or a 70s revival movement) to be living an authentic Biblical Christianity. Are we proclaiming the good news? Are we teaching, nurturing, and baptising new believers? Are we responding to human need with loving service? Then the gospel is at the heart of our life together, and it's a mistake to accuse churches of departing from it.

 

[Carl Emerson]

the gospel is at the heart of our life together, and it's a mistake to accuse churches of departing from it.

It is also a mistake to assume we are doing the best we can.

However we deviate somewhat from the topic of the thread...

Do we ignore the passage in the OP and if not how can we action it in Love and Wisdom ?

 

[Paidiske]

Do we ignore the passage in the OP and if not how can we action it in Love and Wisdom ?

Probably the best way to action it is in the discernment phase of someone considering entering ministry. At that point, by all means look at their marriage (if they're married); look at their parenting; see if these relationships show the character that we would expect of a church leader.

What it should not become is a threat to be held over the head of currently serving ministers; "if your child does something someone disapproves of, we can get rid of you."

 

[Carl Emerson]

Probably the best way to action it is in the discernment phase of someone considering entering ministry. At that point, by all means look at their marriage (if they're married); look at their parenting; see if these relationships show the character that we would expect of a church leader.

What it should not become is a threat to be held over the head of currently serving ministers; "if your child does something someone disapproves of, we can get rid of you."

Yes I cant see that in the text at all - and the real life example I gave was about standing with the parents in Love. In this case the outcome was spectacular.

In all my years of church I have not seen this taken seriously - so I raise the issue in the hope that we might not miss the blessing intended from the teaching in Titus.

 

[Paidiske]

Yes I cant see that in the text at all - and the real life example I gave was about standing with the parents in Love.

Really? I don't think being stood down from your ministry because your adult daughter has disappeared is "standing with the parents in love." I certainly wouldn't find that loving.

In all my years of church I have not seen this taken seriously - so I raise the issue in the hope that we might not miss the blessing intended from the teaching in Titus.

Hmm. Have you ever been involved in discerning people's vocations for ministry? Because that's the point at which it's most likely to come into play.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Really? I don't think being stood down from your ministry because your adult daughter has disappeared is "standing with the parents in love." I certainly wouldn't find that loving.

Maybe you didn't read it - they prayed and fasted with the parents for several days in loving support.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Hmm. Have you ever been involved in discerning people's vocations for ministry? Because that's the point at which it's most likely to come into play.

Maybe but not always.

Further - some branches of the church have a poor track record in this regard.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Maybe I should point out that churches in some parts of South America take this teaching very seriously, such that a pastor with a wayward child will voluntarily step down. They don't have to be asked.

 

[Paidiske]

Maybe you didn't read it - they prayed and fasted with the parents for several days in loving support.

I'm still not seeing it as loving, sorry.

In a situation where a) it has not been established that the adult child is, in fact, in any way "insubordinate," and, b) it has not been established in any way that the parents are at fault, I don't see removing someone from their position, and depriving them of their livelihood, as loving. I see it as a complete lack of procedural fairness. And no amount of prayer or fasting is going to make that injustice, just.

What would have happened if the daughter had never been found? Would they be expected to live in llimbo, under a cloud of negative judgement, forever?

 

[Shane R]

My father's fellowship has very narrow and exclusive view of what constitutes a true church and Anglican nor Lutheran are not it. He took some flak when I began attending Lutheran churches many years ago. Now that I am ordained I am frankly an embarrassment. He will never be promoted to the position of elder because of me.

 

[Carl Emerson]

I'm still not seeing it as loving, sorry.

In a situation where a) it has not been established that the adult child is, in fact, in any way "insubordinate," and, b) it has not been established in any way that the parents are at fault, I don't see removing someone from their position, and depriving them of their livelihood, as loving. I see it as a complete lack of procedural fairness. And no amount of prayer or fasting is going to make that injustice, just.

What would have happened if the daughter had never been found? Would they be expected to live in llimbo, under a cloud of negative judgement, forever?

Firstly we are not talking about an adult child.

Secondly you have no way of knowing that the support was unloving.

Thirdly no one said the parents were at fault.

Forthly no one said they were to be deprived.

Really you have made serious assumptions - very sad.

Sorry but you seem unable to relate to the level of dedication to support in such fellowships.

Pretty shocking really - The family and the fellowship deserve honour not unfounded comments that question their credibility.

 

[Paidiske]

Firstly we are not talking about an adult child.

She had completed high school. That's an adult.

Secondly you have no way of knowing that the support was unloving.

I am saying that to require someone in church leadership to stand down, without even establishing that there are grounds for doing so (which had not been shown, at the point she had "completely disappeared"), is not loving. No matter what else was going on.

Thirdly no one said the parents were at fault.

Then why require the father to stand down?

Forthly no one said they were to be deprived.

Is this not an implication of losing one's ministry position?

Really you have made serious assumptions - very sad.

I am reflecting on the story as you have presented it. It shows exactly how open to abuse such an approach is, and reaffirms my caution about using this Scripture in this way.

Sorry but you seem unable to relate to the level of dedication to support in such fellowships.

I think you and I differ in what we might mean by "support." Effectively sacking someone is not "support."

Pretty shocking really - The family and the fellowship deserve honour not unfounded comments that question their credibility.

I'm not questioning their credibility. I'm questioning whether what you've held up as an example is really something I'd want to see play out in other similar situations. My answer would be a resounding, no.

 

[seeking.IAM]

I will respond from under two hats. As a former preacher's kid with 18 years experience raised in a parsonage, I want to shout that you hired my dad, not me, and I am no more responsible for what he does as a church leader than he is for my behavioral choices. I grew very weary of having church people judge me by different standards than those applied to their own children. Who did you think I was getting into trouble with? Well, my peer group from church, of course. The sons and daughters of the very persons making decisions about my parent. Attitudes like those conveyed here, are what leads to stereotyped thinking about PKs. Either we are holy, not on our own merit but because of our clergy parent's influence, or we are rebellious, pushing back against it all. It makes many of us pretenders, having a public persona for the benefit of our parents' job that is quite different from what we think or do when no one is looking.

From under my hat as a therapist, I'll say that attitudes conveyed here demonstrate lack of understanding about the developmental tasks of adolescence. The developmental task of adolescence is to begin to separate oneself from one's parents so one is not still living in parents' basements at 35. To do that, youth question parents values, sometimes acting contrary to them to claim their own independence. Be patient with them. Often they come back to center after they have done what they need to do developmentally. Persons who think a parent can stop or control that are delusional.

 

[Lost Witness]

failing in family life is more likely to reflect failures in ministry & vice versa
as family life generally tends to echo throughout our individual lives regardless of calling or position..
both are important and turning over the ministry (or position) for a time would allow someone to reevaluate not only their family life but their ministry or calling (position etc) as well.
Blessings come in all kinds of packages. in my opinion


May The LORD Bless You and Keep You


Shalom Aleichem

 

[Carl Emerson]

She had completed high school. That's an adult.

No... she ran away when she was only 12...

The later episode was when she was 17.

 

[Carl Emerson]

She had completed high school. That's an adult.

I am saying that to require someone in church leadership to stand down, without even establishing that there are grounds for doing so (which had not been shown, at the point she had "completely disappeared"), is not loving. No matter what else was going on.

Then why require the father to stand down?

Is this not an implication of losing one's ministry position?

I am reflecting on the story as you have presented it. It shows exactly how open to abuse such an approach is, and reaffirms my caution about using this Scripture in this way.

I think you and I differ in what we might mean by "support." Effectively sacking someone is not "support."

I'm not questioning their credibility. I'm questioning whether what you've held up as an example is really something I'd want to see play out in other similar situations. My answer would be a resounding, no.

Honestly I don't understand why you seem intent on vilifying these good folk.

I met them personally, they came to my church.

I consider them among the finest believers I have ever met in 60 years of church.

Judging from afar doesn't sit well with me.

Who said they did not embrace the couple and work the matter through in Love ?

The Father didn't have to stand down - they worked the matter through.

Yes they take the scripture more seriously than we do in the West but with much Love.

Do elders pray with folks for days on end in the West - sadly not.

No one was 'sacked', your accusations are frankly shocking.

To call Love 'abuse' is a serious call.

 

[Paidiske]

failing in family life is more likely to reflect failures in ministry & vice versa

There's some truth to this. For example, I know someone who was turned down for a ministry position after he conceived his child with a new partner before his divorce from his first wife. I think that was appropriate.

What concerns me is that petty or normal or healthy behaviours by children might be judged "insubordinate" or "failures" when that is very far from showing the same kind of issues of character.

The later episode was when she was 17.

And on her way to live apart from her parents. Maybe not quite technically an adult, but also a situation where a bit more independence would be normal and healthy.

Honestly I don't understand why you seem intent on vilifying these good folk.

I'm not vilifying them. I'm looking at the situation you presented and asking, Is this good practice? Is this fair to the parties involved? Does it offer adequate protection from bullying and abuse? Is it going to be healthy for the children or parents in this situation?

And my answers are no, no, no and no. This particular family might be happy with their outcome; great for them. This is not a model I would want to see adopted more widely.

It leaves me with questions like, say my autistic child has a meltdown at a parish event. Is that judged as "insubordination"? Am I then seen as an unfit parent? Are people going to demand that I step down until... what, she's not autistic any more? I can guarantee she won't melt down? Or what?

It's too subjective, too open to power plays by lay church leaders, leaves ministry families needing to perform for the church (exactly one of the things we want to minimise for our children, thank you @seeking.IAM for pointing out just how harmful that can be), and leaves them vulnerable to every whacky idea about parenting out there.

If - and that's a very big if - we wanted to set some sort of standard of good parenting as a condition of ongoing ministry, I would want to see some very robust safeguards, along the lines of something like a clinical recommendation from practicing professional therapists that this person is an unfit parent who is harming their child, being a prerequisite of being stood down.

The Father didn't have to stand down

Then why on earth did you raise this as an example of the situation you wanted to consider in the OP, where "the leader must step down"? Or say, in your post #11, "he Christian leaders there took the scripture very seriously and would not allow a brother to continue in Christian leadership with a child in rebellion"?

To call Love 'abuse' is a serious call.

Lots of people, especially in churches, engage in controlling and abusive behaviours and call it love.

 

[Carl Emerson]

There's some truth to this. For example, I know someone who was turned down for a ministry position after he conceived his child with a new partner before his divorce from his first wife. I think that was appropriate.

What concerns me is that petty or normal or healthy behaviours by children might be judged "insubordinate" or "failures" when that is very far from showing the same kind of issues of character.


And on her way to live apart from her parents. Maybe not quite technically an adult, but also a situation where a bit more independence would be normal and healthy.

I'm not vilifying them. I'm looking at the situation you presented and asking, Is this good practice? Is this fair to the parties involved? Does it offer adequate protection from bullying and abuse? Is it going to be healthy for the children or parents in this situation?

And my answers are no, no, no and no. This particular family might be happy with their outcome; great for them. This is not a model I would want to see adopted more widely.

It leaves me with questions like, say my autistic child has a meltdown at a parish event. Is that judged as "insubordination"? Am I then seen as an unfit parent? Are people going to demand that I step down until... what, she's not autistic any more? I can guarantee she won't melt down? Or what?

It's too subjective, too open to power plays by lay church leaders, leaves ministry families needing to perform for the church (exactly one of the things we want to minimise for our children, thank you @seeking.IAM for pointing out just how harmful that can be), and leaves them vulnerable to every whacky idea about parenting out there.

If - and that's a very big if - we wanted to set some sort of standard of good parenting as a condition of ongoing ministry, I would want to see some very robust safeguards, along the lines of something like a clinical recommendation from practicing professional therapists that this person is an unfit parent who is harming their child, being a prerequisite of being stood down.

Then why on earth did you raise this as an example of the situation you wanted to consider in the OP, where "the leader must step down"? Or say, in your post #11, "he Christian leaders there took the scripture very seriously and would not allow a brother to continue in Christian leadership with a child in rebellion"?

Lots of people, especially in churches, engage in controlling and abusive behaviours and call it love.

In this case folks are acting in Love and you call it abuse.

 

[Paidiske]

In this case folks are acting in Love and you call it abuse.

I said this approach was too "open to abuse."

Surely you can see why I'm concerned? That someone in the church might decide - on no agreed or documented standard - that a child is "insubordinate," and that the consequences for the entire family are drastic?

 

[Carl Emerson]

To set about and judge this particular incident as abusive was inappropriate.

To dismiss Titus is also inappropriate.

Any good church would wrap around anyone who felt to step down .

Leadership in the church was never meant to be a commercial decision.