LearnGospelMusic.com Community
Main => Gospel Music Lounge => Topic started by: LaylaMonroe on April 29, 2010, 04:27:51 PM
-
Ok so I realize I can be very "by the book" and inflexible when it comes to certain church-related things, especially if it affects a church's image or overall performance of excellence. I realize that at times, this can work against me so I need some real, truthful advice or input.
Here's the story:
My church is a very country church (as one might expect). My pastor is not country, but 99% of the members are. Last year, one of our ministers preached and Pastor acknowledged openly that her calling is to teach. She is a very effective and gifted teacher, and she knew this all along. She came to the church licensed as a minister and he renewed her license last summer.
A person in the church started calling her "Teacher" as though it is a title, as in "Teacher Jane." I thought it was a pretty dumb sounding joke, but I overlooked it because it isn't that serious. Then, a few lay members started calling her that, and then someone referred to her as Teacher Jane in a meeting in front of people. I've seen it in emails and program drafts and while it got under my skin just because I hate foolishness, I still ignored it and put it under the "choose your battles" umbrella.
The other day, an elder sent me the rotation schedule (who does what each Sunday) and it had in writing "Teacher Jane." Elder asked for my input and critique (exact words) and I gave it. There were a few concerns and one of them was the use of "Teacher" as a title. The response was that Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors have titles, why not teachers? *sigh*
I just think it sounds ignorant, country, and jokey. I'm tired of people making church into a circus and I feel like this is step 1. Should I just let it go or should I insist that the document be changed to reflect her real title, which is "minister." This is my area of authority because I'm the administrator, but technically the elder outranks me because s/he is an elder (and I do esteem him/her very highly... outside of the countryness).
How do I handle this?
-
Ok so I realize I can be very "by the book" and inflexible when it comes to certain church-related things, especially if it affects a church's image or overall performance of excellence. I realize that at times, this can work against me so I need some real, truthful advice or input.
Here's the story:
My church is a very country church (as one might expect). My pastor is not country, but 99% of the members are. Last year, one of our ministers preached and Pastor acknowledged openly that her calling is to teach. She is a very effective and gifted teacher, and she knew this all along. She came to the church licensed as a minister and he renewed her license last summer.
A person in the church started calling her "Teacher" as though it is a title, as in "Teacher Jane." I thought it was a pretty dumb sounding joke, but I overlooked it because it isn't that serious. Then, a few lay members started calling her that, and then someone referred to her as Teacher Jane in a meeting in front of people. I've seen it in emails and program drafts and while it got under my skin just because I hate foolishness, I still ignored it and put it under the "choose your battles" umbrella.
The other day, an elder sent me the rotation schedule (who does what each Sunday) and it had in writing "Teacher Jane." Elder asked for my input and critique (exact words) and I gave it. There were a few concerns and one of them was the use of "Teacher" as a title. The response was that Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors have titles, why not teachers? *sigh*
I just think it sounds ignorant, country, and jokey. I'm tired of people making church into a circus and I feel like this is step 1. Should I just let it go or should I insist that the document be changed to reflect her real title, which is "minister." This is my area of authority because I'm the administrator, but technically the elder outranks me because s/he is an elder (and I do esteem him/her very highly... outside of the countryness).
How do I handle this?
Yeah I'm a country church boy myself but that's ridiculous believe that if the document is very relevant towards the ministry then the title should be changed (even though I feel like titles is a "small-minded" church issue. However if the document really will not affect the main ministry of the church I say just let it go and focus on the big picture of whatever is going on.
-
I've considered letting it go, because in the grand scheme of things, it's a relatively small issue.
My concern is the old adage "give a person an inch and they'll take a mile." If they are allowed to put it on an internal document, next thing you know, it's on an external document. We're doing a fairly large-scale conference in July, with well-known preachers and artists and I don't need them trying to introduce her as Teacher Jane in front of folks.
-
I've considered letting it go, because in the grand scheme of things, it's a relatively small issue.
My concern is the old adage "give a person an inch and they'll take a mile." If they are allowed to put it on an internal document, next thing you know, it's on an external document. We're doing a fairly large-scale conference in July, with well-known preachers and artists and I don't need them trying to introduce her as Teacher Jane in front of folks.
If that's the case, make the correction and you might want to supplement/compliment (whichever one it is.....lol) your correction with some teaching on the issue of titles because it could be plain ole ignorance that leads them to do what they are doing.
-
Here is my question. Why did the Pastor renew her license? Even if she is a teacher, isn't she still ministering the gospel, but in a more teaching form? Was the renewing of her license to state that you are not a certified minister, but certified teacher? My thing would be, even if one is a good teacher, respect (for a lack of choice of words) the education one has received to become a minister.
Titles should not be giving, just to satisfied (which what I think you are saying), but should be earned. When I first started playing piano, people stated calling me a musician. I was hesitant about that because I felt that I hadn't earned that recognition, based on my knowledge. If she has received the training to become a minister, then that should be the title. If they are calling her that in the church, just for the church, then that is one thing. But, if they are going to introduce her publicly, then I would say the title should be Minister.
I am on a blackberry, so if my reply is a bit off, then forgive me.
-
To me, it's not that big a deal. They're country. They're getting a kick out of it. It doesn't affect anything, ministry-wise. Maybe you should ask HER (the teacher) what she thinks of being called that. If she doesn't like it, then you have greater grounds for presenting an argument against having it in writing.
-
Here is my question. Why did the Pastor renew her license? Even if she is a teacher, isn't she still ministering the gospel, but in a more teaching form? Was the renewing of her license to state that you are not a certified minister, but certified teacher? My thing would be, even if one is a good teacher, respect (for a lack of choice of words) the education one has received to become a minister.
Titles should not be giving, just to satisfied (which what I think you are saying), but should be earned. When I first started playing piano, people stated calling me a musician. I was hesitant about that because I felt that I hadn't earned that recognition, based on my knowledge. If she has received the training to become a minister, then that should be the title. If they are calling her that in the church, just for the church, then that is one thing. But, if they are going to introduce her publicly, then I would say the title should be Minister.
I am on a blackberry, so if my reply is a bit off, then forgive me.
With the exception of one person, he renewed all the clergy's licenses at our organization's annual conference. I assume he renewed her ministerial license because he felt she was still qualified to be a minister. Neither our church nor our organization offers a license or any sort of certification for "teachers."
To me, it's not that big a deal. They're country. They're getting a kick out of it. It doesn't affect anything, ministry-wise. Maybe you should ask HER (the teacher) what she thinks of being called that. If she doesn't like it, then you have greater grounds for presenting an argument against having it in writing.
It kinda DOES affect things ministry-wise: to people who come from churches of excellence, it could give the impression that anything goes at GKA, and it could give the appearance of a circus, not a church to be taken seriously. Plus, I'm concerned that if that flies, next they'll be creating titles for the person who's gifted to interpret tongues (Interpreter Sam) or the person who sees visions (Visionary Vic) or anybody else with any of the other spiritual gifts.
Even with that said, I do concede that it's not THAT big a deal. I think it just annoys me more than anything, and makes me fear for what is to come. I declare; as called as I know I am to administration, I HATE it. Hate, hate, hate it. HATE.
Oh, and Teacher Jane doesn't really care what they call her. She's country too. (Though, coincidentally, she does not believe in the five-fold ministry, which is the grounds of the Elder's justification).
-
How can you not believe in the five-fold ministry, when it's right there in the bible in black and white? *shrug* NTWAY...
The Elder makes a good argument. What makes the other four non-laughable titles? Is it just because they have been used more so we're used to them. What are the concrete grounds for "Teacher" not being a title, other than it sounds weird? I'm having a hard time nailing that down. Granted, I agree that it does indeed sound weird, but there's no base for the argument of it NOT being a valid title beyond that. Or at least I'm having trouble seeing it.
-
How can you not believe in the five-fold ministry, when it's right there in the bible in black and white? *shrug* NTWAY...
The Elder makes a good argument. What makes the other four non-laughable titles? Is it just because they have been used more so we're used to them. What are the concrete grounds for "Teacher" not being a title, other than it sounds weird? I'm having a hard time nailing that down. Granted, I agree that it does indeed sound weird, but there's no base for the argument of it NOT being a valid title beyond that. Or at least I'm having trouble seeing it.
IRT your question, we both come from a church that teaches that five-fold is actually FOUR-fold because in that particular scripture, pastors and teachers are one in the same. She held on to that belief. Personally, I don't give it much thought because it doesn't really make a difference in my walk.
The other four titles are not only commonly accepted, but have been commonly accepted and utilized throughout the history of the Christian church. I'm all for changing things that NEED TO BE changed, but I'm not for making a laughingstock of the church I belong to when there are already so many things that go on that make us look country, uncouth, untrained, and circus-ish.
What makes it invalid, however, is that it is not a legitimate title/position/office in OUR organization or in our church. The elder's stance pertained to what s/he believes in, not what the Pastor says or what our Bishop says. It is what s/he believes. I really am not interested in what any individuals believe when it comes to the administration, function, ministry or image of my church. I want to know what God says and what the Pastor believes. And that's it (for me).
-
By the way, I really wanted to know how to respond to this e-mail, because as you all know just from conversing with me here, I can give very detailed responses... from time to time, when I know it's going to be unfruitful or rub someone the wrong way, I can just "tap out" as RJ would say.
I don't want to rub this person the wrong way, and I'm already in a difficult position as it is (as usual), so I'm just going to ignore it and pray that they don't try to include it in writing any place else. I have bigger fish to fry. I just don't like for things to get out of hand, and because of that, I try to maintain control of everything that falls under my area of ministry... but some things you just gotta "see and not see" as my MIL used to say.
Anyway, here's how the e-mail convo went, and here's how I'm going to respond:
ELDER: PTL! Please review/critique. I would like to distribute this Sunday. Thanks!
ME: PTL Elder xxx! Are you asking for my input? Or just to check for errors or something?
ELDER: Check for errors; however, inputs are always welcomed. And please critique. Attached is a corrected copy! I forgot that the 5th Sunday is for the youth. I've already spoken to their parents.
ME: ...And are we really putting something in writing that has [Jane's] title as "Teacher"?? I thought that was like a nickname or something? Is that supposed to be a real title?... (this particular e-mail had a number of issues that I addressed; I only copied/pasted the one that was relevant to this thread)
ELDER: * Teacher: I think I stated before that I believe in the five-fold ministry. Since [Jane] was appointed as leader over Christian Education, the title is appropriate. The others have titles; Apostle, Pastor, Prophet, and Evangelist. Why not the Teacher's? That's me opinion.
I think I answer your concerns. Thanks for your honesty.
And my response will be: Okey dokey. See you Sunday! Love ya.
-
Oh yeah, at the "Pastors and Teachers" thing, I've heard that before. I thought you were saying she didn't believe in those gifts, like some people say the Apostles/Prophets don't have a place in today's church... never heard it from an apostolic, though, lol!
-
LOL! Your perspective makes sense if it is not a title recognized by the church. Titles in the bible were not what they are today, so I can't make that comparison. But as you said, I think this battle is one you can let go. Maybe you won't have to address it at all, or maybe you will on an external publication, but the externals come across your desk anyway, so...
-
LOL! Your perspective makes sense if it is not a title recognized by the church. Titles in the bible were not what they are today, so I can't make that comparison. But as you said, I think this battle is one you can let go. Maybe you won't have to address it at all, or maybe you will on an external publication, but the externals come across your desk anyway, so...
This
-
@Nessa, This is probably just semantics/hair-splitting, because I think I get the bottom line to what you're saying, but I think for the most part the titles in the bible WERE the same as what we use today, we just use them differently. So what I'm saying is the titles were the same, the application is different. I have yet to see examples of apostles being called Apostle So-and-So or prophets being called Prophet Whoever...
But the prophets, missionaries, apostles, pastors, bishops, evangelists, etc. DID exist.
Is that the same as what you're saying?
-
First, let me say, I BET NOT be in that 99%. >:(
Secondly, like I told Britt a while ago, you have to start how you want to finish. The church is still relatively new, so there's still time to establish your 'stance', but every situation that you "let go" or "let pass by" is being added to your image. If you don't establish your authority now, it's going to be a lot harder, if possible at all, for them to take you seriously later, because they're going to have that "Passive" image of you engraved into their cranium. It may be small, but the 'small' things build up.
Now, I'm not exactly saying that you should or shouldn't stand against this, I'm just advising that you consider how each option will effect your 'image'. As stated early, this very well could be a battle not worth fighting...but I don't think anyone can truly answer that but you.
Hope that helps a bit.
-
I think you may be projecting a bit.
Just because it looks a certain way to you, doesn't mean it'll look that exact way to others.
As an educator, I remember a presenter saying that they put 'Tr' at the end of their name the way a doctor puts 'M.D.' I thought it was weird/silly/funny but I didn't view the individual in that manner.
Which brings me to this point, is Jane a 'joke' or can she 'sho' nuff'' teach? If she's fiyah, then her title won't matter, imho.
Even if this made it onto a national flyer or commercial, who's to say that folks see it, inquire about it, ask the origin and adopt it themselves? *kanyeshrug*
There's two sides to a thing.
-
Dang, young man... you are just so doggone wise, it blows my mind sometimes. Seriously.
That's exactly what I was thinking, but I couldn't get it into words.
TJ, you're there every week. You know how far GKA has come in the past year. When I got there (just a couple of months before you), they were walking into the pulpit to read announcements barefoot. There were no ushers. There was constant walking in and out throughout the entire service. No one stood up for P&W. They would talk to each other, holding conversations one with the mic, one in the congregation... it was crazy. But that's how a lot of start-up churches are. They get this "anything goes" mentality because it's just the family, so it's okay.
In the past year, all of that has changed, and we're looking more like a church should. But it didn't come without some sweat and tears. And I'm really concerned about becoming the type of church that just makes up titles on the fly. That makes me nervous because I've seen that in churches before, and I know what it turns into. Next thing you know, 75% of the church is an Elder or Minister, and everyone has a title, and hungry souls can't fit into the sanctuary because all the egos leave no room.
I dunno. Knowing me as well as I know myself, there's a good chance I'm just being unreasonable and inflexible... and taking things too seriously and being too rigid. I tend to get pretty uptight when it comes to excellence and order in the church... and sometimes I can take it too far, I guess.
I just wanna be right. And I want my church to be right.
Oh, and no you're not in the 99%... well, on second thought, I really don't know. I've never seen any country behaviors from you, but it's probably easy to hide the country behind the keys.... lol.
-
I think you may be projecting a bit.
Just because it looks a certain way to you, doesn't mean it'll look that exact way to others.
As an educator, I remember a presenter saying that they put 'Tr' at the end of their name the way a doctor puts 'M.D.' I thought it was weird/silly/funny but I didn't view the individual in that manner.
Which brings me to this point, is Jane a 'joke' or can she 'sho' nuff'' teach? If she's fiyah, then her title won't matter, imho.
Even if this made it onto a national flyer or commercial, who's to say that folks see it, inquire about it, ask the origin and adopt it themselves? *kanyeshrug*
There's two sides to a thing.
You raised some really awesome points, particularly the last one.
But it's been my experience that start-up churches aren't usually successful at being trendsetters. There are hundreds of thousands of people who won't step foot into a small church because of their (usually accurate) perception of the "small church mentality." It exists, and it's quite prevalent in smaller churches. When you do something "different" in start-ups, it tends to be mocked. *shrug* That's just the way it is. I mean, sure there are exceptions. But by and large, it is not lauded or imitated, it is dismissed and mocked. Especially something like that... the issue of titles is already a touchy subject. Think about it. Most people immediately dismiss or at least shun a church that overuses, misuses or abuses Biblical titles.
But I still get that point. It's possible that others won't take it for a joke, which is one of my main issues.
And no, she's not fiyah. She's good, and very studious, but she's not especially phenomenal at teaching. She's excellent at other things, though. Such as MINISTERing.
-
Just don't be consumed by this one little thing that it brings a distraction to your "service" to the Kingdom in the walk of administration.
I agree, it sounds country, (just an opinion)---but then again, it's just unknown to us at this time. Saying Brother John instead of Pastor Doe (a full time pastor), is strange to me, but very common with my friends of other cultures. I can only hope that people don't take his authority any different as pastor, and catch that spirit of familiarity.
If its your responsibility to put the document together, and they are serious, play around with it and show them what it really looks like:
Teacher Jane Doe
Teacher Jane Doe, Facilitator
Minister Jane Doe, Teacher
Minister Jane Doe, Facilitator
Just a suggestion, or do what I typically do, make the correction and send it as a PDF, none of my people have the real acrobat where they can edit the document ;D. Better yet, get it done and have it copied ;)
Nothing wrong with desiring excellence! We should all strive for it. Just because you're "country," doesn't mean you can't have the appearance of perfection(I'm a real country girl who was raised to speak well and proper, sadly, people awesome you are stuck up or think you are better than them because of it). My dad's members for example, were/are ghetto fabulous! With training and teaching (constantly, people grew and ministry evolves and new people come, so the process starts all over again), they may be ghetto at heart, but they know how to stand and walk in excellence when its time to step up.
-
What about calling musicians Professors and Doctor when they've never even gone to college? :D
-
Dang, young man... you are just so doggone wise, it blows my mind sometimes. Seriously.
That's exactly what I was thinking, but I couldn't get it into words.
TJ, you're there every week. You know how far GKA has come in the past year. When I got there (just a couple of months before you), they were walking into the pulpit to read announcements barefoot. There were no ushers. There was constant walking in and out throughout the entire service. No one stood up for P&W. They would talk to each other, holding conversations one with the mic, one in the congregation... it was crazy. But that's how a lot of start-up churches are. They get this "anything goes" mentality because it's just the family, so it's okay.
In the past year, all of that has changed, and we're looking more like a church should. But it didn't come without some sweat and tears. And I'm really concerned about becoming the type of church that just makes up titles on the fly. That makes me nervous because I've seen that in churches before, and I know what it turns into. Next thing you know, 75% of the church is an Elder or Minister, and everyone has a title, and hungry souls can't fit into the sanctuary because all the egos leave no room.
I dunno. Knowing me as well as I know myself, there's a good chance I'm just being unreasonable and inflexible... and taking things too seriously and being too rigid. I tend to get pretty uptight when it comes to excellence and order in the church... and sometimes I can take it too far, I guess.
I just wanna be right. And I want my church to be right.
Oh, and no you're not in the 99%... well, on second thought, I really don't know. I've never seen any country behaviors from you, but it's probably easy to hide the country behind the keys.... lol.
That's out of order or demonstrating a lack of excellence? :-\
-
That's out of order or demonstrating a lack of excellence? :-\
It's both. Anything out of order demonstrates a lack of excellence (but of course, the reverse isn't always true).
Coincidentally, yesterday there were a couple of bare feet standing at the altar during altar call (and in various other places throughout the service) LOL. I'm really tripping out the more I think about it because this will be the first time in my entire career that I will have to include in a Leadership Manual a specific clause indicating that all clergy and leaders are required to wear shoes at all times. :D :D :D *straightface* Seriously, though. :-\
And I did have an update on this but I didn't want to pull the thread back up. Friday evening, my pastor called me to discuss a few things and he asked me about the schedule. I told him what I thought of it and by the time I got to the point about Jane Doe's title, before I could even finish my sentence, he exclaimed, "HER TITLE IS MINISTER!! Minister! That's what's on her license." So I do thank God for stepping in. He also agreed with me on all the other issues I had raised. I'm grateful. It may seem like a small thing (and in the grand scheme of things, it probably IS), but I'm relieved nonetheless. It can be really frustrating to want things to be done well, and have excellence within your reach but still be unable to achieve it because of other people's..... stuff.
-
It's both. Anything out of order demonstrates a lack of excellence (but of course, the reverse isn't always true).
Coincidentally, yesterday there were a couple of bare feet standing at the altar during altar call (and in various other places throughout the service) LOL. I'm really tripping out the more I think about it because this will be the first time in my entire career that I will have to include in a Leadership Manual a specific clause indicating that all clergy and leaders are required to wear shoes at all times. :D :D :D *straightface* Seriously, though. :-\
And I did have an update on this but I didn't want to pull the thread back up. Friday evening, my pastor called me to discuss a few things and he asked me about the schedule. I told him what I thought of it and by the time I got to the point about Jane Doe's title, before I could even finish my sentence, he exclaimed, "HER TITLE IS MINISTER!! Minister! That's what's on her license." So I do thank God for stepping in. He also agreed with me on all the other issues I had raised. I'm grateful. It may seem like a small thing (and in the grand scheme of things, it probably IS), but I'm relieved nonetheless. It can be really frustrating to want things to be done well, and have excellence within your reach but still be unable to achieve it because of other people's..... stuff.
Haha! I really did not know that leadership walking around barefoot was an issue of excellence. I always thought it was just people being comfortable in church like a person who walks barefoot during the offering or someone who dances with their shoes off. One of our ministers use to preach barefoot everytime she got up there.
I mean really though I've always viewed it as "being comfortable"....lol! Maybe it's a country churh thing.....haha! :) :D ;D
-
@Nessa, This is probably just semantics/hair-splitting, because I think I get the bottom line to what you're saying, but I think for the most part the titles in the bible WERE the same as what we use today, we just use them differently. So what I'm saying is the titles were the same, the application is different. I have yet to see examples of apostles being called Apostle So-and-So or prophets being called Prophet Whoever...
But the prophets, missionaries, apostles, pastors, bishops, evangelists, etc. DID exist.
Is that the same as what you're saying?
No, I'm saying titles in the bible were nowhere near what they are today in the sense of the importance placed on them, the widespread use of them, etc.
-
Haha! I really did not know that leadership walking around barefoot was an issue of excellence. I always thought it was just people being comfortable in church like a person who walks barefoot during the offering or someone who dances with their shoes off. One of our ministers use to preach barefoot everytime she got up there.
I mean really though I've always viewed it as "being comfortable"....lol! Maybe it's a country churh thing.....haha! :) :D ;D
No, I'm not country and it happens all the time in our church. I never saw it as an issue, either. Like you said, people kick off their shoes when they dance... once we had a brother whose custom it was to remove his shoes when he entered the sanctuary... *shrug* As long as your feet are not demonstrating poor hygiene and upkeep, and your hosiery is clean and in good repair, I really wouldn't think any less of you.
-
I agree Ness!
-
No, I'm saying titles in the bible were nowhere near what they are today in the sense of the importance placed on them, the widespread use of them, etc.
Ohhh. Yeah, I agree with that, too.
No, I'm not country and it happens all the time in our church. I never saw it as an issue, either. Like you said, people kick off their shoes when they dance... once we had a brother whose custom it was to remove his shoes when he entered the sanctuary... *shrug* As long as your feet are not demonstrating poor hygiene and upkeep, and your hosiery is clean and in good repair, I really wouldn't think any less of you.
(For the record, I don't think I called the examples I listed "country" although I do believe it IS country... and extremely tacky and unladylike).
Kicking off your shoes to dance or because it's a cultural custom is one thing.
Going into the pulpit to read announcements barefoot, or coming to the altar to minister to souls barefoot, or ushering, nursing, singing on the praise team (with open view) barefoot... all tacky and country, IMO. I've just never in my life seen that in New York... and I've been to a gazillion churches in NY. I've never seen it in Atlanta either, from what I recall.
I'm not talking about the occasional issue where your foot swells and you have to take your shoe off... or a broken ankle... or a 6 hour service marathon and just about everyone comes out of their shoes (which I still don't understand)... I'm talking about when your habit is to take your shoes off and serve in ministry with no shoes on. That, to me, is very tacky and country. I guess the key word is TO ME.
Furthermore, as a lady who enjoys wearing heels as high as I can find them, I do not understand why anyone who is active in ministry would regularly buy shoes that they cannot wear for 2 hours at a time. If they hurt your feet, why buy them? If you truly cannot keep your shoes on for a 2-2.5 hour service, and you don't have any special issues, why on earth are you continuing to buy those shoes? May I recommend Aerosoles or Easy Spirit or Nine West Flex?
-
(For the record, I don't think I called the examples I listed "country" although I do believe it IS country... and extremely tacky and unladylike).
Kicking off your shoes to dance or because it's a cultural custom is one thing.
Going into the pulpit to read announcements barefoot, or coming to the altar to minister to souls barefoot, or ushering, nursing, singing on the praise team (with open view) barefoot... all tacky and country, IMO. I've just never in my life seen that in New York... and I've been to a gazillion churches in NY. I've never seen it in Atlanta either, from what I recall.
I'm not talking about the occasional issue where your foot swells and you have to take your shoe off... or a broken ankle... or a 6 hour service marathon and just about everyone comes out of their shoes (which I still don't understand)... I'm talking about when your habit is to take your shoes off and serve in ministry with no shoes on. That, to me, is very tacky and country. I guess the key word is TO ME.
Furthermore, as a lady who enjoys wearing heels as high as I can find them, I do not understand why anyone who is active in ministry would regularly buy shoes that they cannot wear for 2 hours at a time. If they hurt your feet, why buy them? If you truly cannot keep your shoes on for a 2-2.5 hour service, and you don't have any special issues, why on earth are you continuing to buy those shoes? May I recommend Aerosoles or Easy Spirit or Nine West Flex?
lol yes! I mean it seemed like all the ladies were kicking off their shoes on easter because all the ladies and their momma wear their easter outfits so they wear high heels and be going to bathroom with shoes off and everything....lol! That would be funny to see someone go to do announcements barefoot. Now at practice one of our praise team members sung with her shoes off but never on Sunday.
For some reason this conversation really interest me and I needed the laugh.....lol! ;D :D
-
lol yes! I mean it seemed like all the ladies were kicking off their shoes on easter because all the ladies and their momma wear their easter outfits so they wear high heels and be going to bathroom with shoes off and everything....lol! That would be funny to see someone go to do announcements barefoot. Now at practice one of our praise team members sung with her shoes off but never on Sunday.
For some reason this conversation really interest me and I needed the laugh.....lol! ;D :D
Yeah, I can't get with walking down the aisle to go to the restroom with no shoes on. I can't even get with giving offering or most anything else with no shoes on. I just don't get it. Why buy and and put on shoes that you can't actually WEAR? You're just trying to be cute, and that's dumb. And why walk around if your feet hurt? Sit still and wait for benediction. Please ma'am, thank you ma'am.
For the record, although I don't like it, I wouldn't have a problem with lay members going barefoot... wouldn't say a word about it. If you're not embarrassed or whatever, then go for what you know. But if you are a leader, the standards are a little higher and certain things are just unacceptable.
-
Yeah, I can't get with walking down the aisle to go to the restroom with no shoes on. I can't even get with giving offering or most anything else with no shoes on. I just don't get it. Why buy and and put on shoes that you can't actually WEAR? You're just trying to be cute, and that's dumb. And why walk around if your feet hurt? Sit still and wait for benediction. Please ma'am, thank you ma'am.
For the record, although I don't like it, I wouldn't have a problem with lay members going barefoot... wouldn't say a word about it. If you're not embarrassed or whatever, then go for what you know. But if you are a leader, the standards are a little higher and certain things are just unacceptable.
I guess it's a "to each it's own" type of thing :-\
But unfortunately I agree with what's in bold. It is what it is!
-
I think they are denigrating her because she is female. She is, first of all, a minister. Is it possible that they do not want to call her a minister for that reason? Before we earned/bought/were appointed any other titles, we were all ministers of reconciliation after we were saved. Do they call any others who teach within the church context "Teacher So and So"? Probably not.
-
Nah that's not the case at my church. We have male and female clergy and our most highly-regarded Elder is a woman.
-
Oh... I got nervous for a sec. Now that you expounded on the bare-feet thing doing ministry I understand. Now that I think about it, I've never seen my Bishop or Co-Pastor without their shoes. I know at my church some people will take their shoes off in the congregation. And then put them back on if their going to the altar or bathroom or whatever. Then there are some who just walk without them. *LaRueshrug* But I can understand wearing shoes while ministering or doing announcements or whenever you're standing before the congregation.
-
.....The elder's stance pertained to what s/he believes in, not what the Pastor says or what our Bishop says. It is what s/he believes. I really am not interested in what any individuals believe when it comes to the administration, function, ministry or image of my church. I want to know what God says and what the Pastor believes. And that's it (for me).
The bold part is what sealed it for me. At first when I read your original post, I was thinking that the issue might be with Jane being given the same title that was bestowed onto Jesus and that maybe it might be a back-handed jab. Then as I read further and realized that Jane is an ordained minister, I thought that maybe this was a way to not give her the respect that was due her. I think that the real issue is a question of who's will be served. As much as I enjoy being in a denomination that places the balance of power with a body of elders, I do take issue when individual elders attempt to place themselves in a position of being THE decision-maker / spokesperson for the church.
You are in the right on this one.
-
LaRueshrug....ugghh...lol!
-
@Nessa, This is probably just semantics/hair-splitting, because I think I get the bottom line to what you're saying, but I think for the most part the titles in the bible WERE the same as what we use today, we just use them differently. So what I'm saying is the titles were the same, the application is different. I have yet to see examples of apostles being called Apostle So-and-So or prophets being called Prophet Whoever...
But the prophets, missionaries, apostles, pastors, bishops, evangelists, etc. DID exist.
Is that the same as what you're saying?
I've seen this before. I don't see any problem with it, nor the "Teacher" title. I, personally, think that "minister" is a generic "title", and can be applied to almost every Christian.
-
I've seen this before. I don't see any problem with it, nor the "Teacher" title. I, personally, think that "minister" is a generic "title", and can be applied to almost every Christian.
This