One of the agenda items at my District Convention was the Task Force proposal for restructuring our synod. We spent some amount of time on this. I will probably blog about several items in that presentation. First, though, is the proposal to give larger congregations more voting delegates at conventions. One of the rationales for this is that since they bear a larger share of the convention costs through assessments, they deserve a greater voice.
Hmmm.
Besides the fact that this proposal violates our understanding of the church, that every congregation is not just part of the church but fully the church in that place (not because of size, but because Christ is present there with His gifts), I started wondering about this rationale . . . does size matter? And if so, which size?
I know that larger congregations bear a greater cost in paying for conventions. Assessments are usually made on the basis of communicant membership. But if we want to use “bearing the cost” as our criteria, is this the only size that matters? What about in between conventions? What about the day-to-day costs of operating the Synod? What would an analysis of that reveal?
The truth is that year after year, many larger districts give much less money to the synod than smaller districts. For example, take my own SELC District. In many categories, we are among the smallest districts in the synod. However, we are ninth in giving to the synod per communicant member. This means that year after year (not just in convention years and in assessments) the people of the SELC - on average - give more than 3/4 of the other districts.
Why not use that criteria for deciding representation? In fact, that criteria seems more biblical. When Jesus commended folks who were giving, who did He commend? The rich who contributed much out of their abundance, or the widow who contributed much less in dollars, but much more because it was all that she had? (Mark 12:41-44) You know the answer.
Now, I’m not really advocating for this, I simply want to point out that this suggestion by the Task Force regarding representation is quite an arbitrary standard which on the surface may seem fair to many, but which in the end serves very few and undermines the doctrine of the church and ultimately, the Gospel. Instead of marginalizing and silencing the many “widows” in our synod which give all they can, we should be honoring and cherishing these old faithful ladies of the church. Perhaps there is even something we could learn from them?
1 comment:
It seems to me that your observation is similar to that which often occurs in Baptist Churches, at least in the South where I grew up.
During each service, an accounting is given to the congregation: how many people were in Sunday School at each grade level, how much money was given, how many this, how much that. It is all about the numbers. But is God the one caring about numbers?
Sort of like alter calls. Now, I do believe that there is value in offering spiritual counseling to those in need, to make an open invitation. But, not that long ago, I attended a funeral with an alter call that included much pleading for those to come forward, claiming that Jesus needed greater numbers upfront. Jesus needs greater numbers?
When the Church becomes about numbers its true focus has been lost. So, I would agree, standing on the outside of this issue, that a focus on the Gospel is of greater value than a focus on numbers.
Post a Comment