Limiting based on age who can serve as a minister is just plain wrong. There is no biblical edict to suggest that only those under a certain age may serve.

If, as I believe, God is the self-creative universe, then everything belongs to God, and God belongs to everything, simply because God is everything and in everything.

 

If one feels oneself as an inseparable part of the godly totality, and thinks and acts accordingly, then one is a servant of the totality. One can be a godly servant as a minister of the church, or in almost any other capacity.

 

Ministers of the church do, beyond being servants of God, require organizational, social, and psychological skills. Every one of us is a unique servant, with unique skills, and able and hopefully willing to put those in the service of the godly whole.

 

This holy or wholly service is not as unselfish as it seems. Once the godly totality has become our higher self, then we can be selfish to our heart's content.  Beyond that, at-one-ment with the godly totality has advantages and joys beyond compare. It is THE way to be: the kingdom of heaven!

 

Well, we know God only wants people with penises to serve as ministers. Maybe he added another requirement that only men with ED are allowed to serve, and the memo only got through to Texas and even there it was misinterpreted. It makes sense. We can't have young men with woodies standing at the front of a church, now can we?

 

Although...a nice robe would probably help.

 

Did I just discover how vestments came to be?

does the church belong to the synergy of humanity and realty working together or does the synergy of humanity and reality working together belong to the church?

 

really?

The Church is God's Church, of course. Not that we always act like it, of course.

 

Perhaps the Church is better thought of as God's gift rather than God's possession?

 

Does God ordain ministers? Or is that done by the Church? Or by the denomination? Or by the local church (congregation)? I have observed some of the frustrations involved when ordination in one denomination is not recognized in another.

 

One traditional view is that every Christian has a call. That every Christian is a minister with a particular ministry. Exactly how the clergy/laity divide fits into this framework seems to vary across denominations (and countries?)

 

Hi MC jae,

 

 

The name elder ( A biblical office) appears, simply by name to favour those longer in the tooth.

 

Since special instruction is given with respect to being husband and father one expects that the indiviudal in question should be old enough to marry.

 

And since those instructions come from the same source as the one who you appeal to in barring women from office I would think you would at least take time to consider.

 

Being thought well of by outsiders is also a prerequisite.

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

I think this is very sad - and it is a concept that would not work in the United Church. Conversations around age and working in the church have come several times in various contexts with me recently. At 35, I am the youngest person on every church committee that I serve on - except for presbytery, where I am the second youngest. In our presbytery, I would estimate that at least 50 percent of the ministers who are currently in congregations became ministers after the age of 45. Of those who became ministers before they were 45, I'd guess that 75% of them have now had their 45th birthday. In other words, there are maybe 3 or 4 ministers who are younger than 45 in our presbytery - and a similar number of lay folk.

 

I've always appreciated second-career ministers - they bring to the job a form of life experience that people who have always been a minister don't have. My congregation has two ministers, both of whom are in their 50s. One of the ministers has been a minister for 30 years, for the other, we are the congregation she was settled into after graduating from the Centre for Christian Studies 5 years ago. It's a good mix - they bring a wealth of different experiences to our church.

Re hamilton conference, if it was said,must have been after 1996.  The e& s committee i was on actually looked for younger ministers, and we were tougher on second career people... did not stop them but pushed them more and a couple dropped out because they could not handle theological toughness.

Pan, is another word for this - bullying?

  No.  Just because one is asked tough questions that is not bullying.  Some jobs do need to have substance, knowledge, thinking and anaylsis.  Sopme jobs have a basic knowledge base, and if one claims prior experience prepares then one has to show that. Higher level of demand, for those who claim more knowlege.  Those who have less expereince must show that they have the ability to learn and grow.  This means they also have a demand placed on them, at the level they have.  For example if someone has an advance degree in biblical studies, then they have to show it. where as a entry degree needs to show potential but not the same level of knowing.

 

It is knee jerk to use the word bullying.

I wasn't on Manitou E&S until 2000 so it would have been after that. I certainly remember a Conference saying it preferred second career people because of the life experience they had as opposed to first career recent University graduates. Hamilton rings a bell for whatever reason.

Does the church really belong to God, though? Perhaps I'm viewing this with my UU eye, but to my mind the church is a human institution and belongs to the people of the church. Those people belong to God, but that is true with or without the existence of the institution of the church. They belong to God when they are in their workplaces, in their homes, even in their prison cells or homeless shelters. A church exists when people come together to share their worship and experience of God so I would say that the church belongs to them and they belong to God. God may work through the church but it is really the people, not the institution directly, that are being moved by God's will.

 

Of course, God does not belong to the church (but see my footnote) and, as Steven suggests, can call to any type of ministry whomever God pleases. But I'm not convinced that the church really belongs to God so much as to God's people.

 

Mendalla

 

Footnote: This assumes a God. From an atheistic perspective, even an agnostic one, God not only belongs to the church but is the creation of the church or at least of the people who form/found that church. However, that is a whole other argument which is why I'm putting it in a footnote.

Hi Rev. Steven Davis,

 

 

Your comment is the first I have ever heard of such intent by any conference of The United Church of Canada.

 

 

As the true head of the Church I believe God has that perogative.

 

 

If God is calling the whole person to ministry then gender and age need to be taken into consideration.  How much weight either get should be dependant upon the ministry they are being prepared for.  Quite frankly, I don't think either gender or age should be an impediment for ministry as a whole, specific ministries might make one's gender or age a deficit.  Right off the top of my head I cannot think of anything specific.

 

 

Does the dog wag the tail or the tail wag the dog eh?

 

I suspect the problem isn't evidence of any Church claiming proprietary interest on God so much as it is evidence of Churches believing that they and God are so tight that anything which enters their heads must be "of God."  Our denomination is really no different in that regard.

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

 

Yes, Inanna, the same question marks popped up inside my head.

God calls.  Howqever it may be reasonable for the church to determine that after a certain point it is not a financial investment the church should make to go throught he road to ordination.  Mind you 45 is too low a threshold for that, I could see an argument for 55 or 60 though.

How can you say "God calls", and then propose a cutoff age? I mean, I agree with you, but on whose authority do you say someone is too old for ordination, when you say they were called by God?

HI GordW,

 

 

Maybe, from a dollars and sense perspective that would have been shrewd money management.  I don't think it actually contributes to a faith perspective.

 

Of course, through the years the Church as a denomination has scaled back on the actual funding of clergy education as a denomination and kicked that ball to the seminaries it no longer funds and the congregations where the students actually do their supervision (hence internships after the academic program now rather than sandwiched into the academic program) so the time for the fiscally prudent discernment has come and gone.

 

Now, it is closer than ever to being every student fending for themselves so if someone in their 60's has a call discerned there is no more cost to the Church for them to follow that call than there is a person in their mid 20's.

 

There is also the current thought that 60 is the new 40 so it may just be that we will be getting more mileage out of our 55 to 60 year old ordinands and commissionands who just might be willing to go to those places in Canada that the Denomination has served so poorly since union.

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

There is an ageist group on Facebook called Below Average Ministers of the United Church of Canada. https://www.facebook.com/groups/101132396643634/?fref=ts. I do not qualify, as membership is closed to those under the age of 56. Gender is not specified. I would probably end up being a Grumpy Old Man, anyway. Perhaps I should start a similar Facebook group and call it Grumpy Old Ministers of the United Church.

Indeed. Seeking a call following completion of educational studies is now akin to a feeding frenzy in the shark tank at Marineland.

Hi DKS,

 

 

There is also an Above Average Ministers of The United Church of Canada.  You might find that more edifying than a Grumpy Old Ministers of the United Church. 

 

Which is not me telling you that you cannot start a Grumpy Old Ministers group.  I know that you are not unique in your grumpiness.  Though just based on observation most of the grumpy old ministers I know aren't on Facebook so it might be lonely there for a bit.

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

How is it determined that someone has "the call" ? 

Is there a shortage of people that have this calling and if so, does this lower the requirements or expectations to determine who would have a calling? In other words, could someone just become a minister later in life just because they think it would be a nice second career to keep them busy?

Hi waterfall:

 

Whether one has received or perceived "the call" is determined by the individual who feels called. However, whether the individual is suited to the position s/he feels called to is also determined by his or her peers or the congregation.

 

There are all kinds of lay ministry positions and ministry teams. If one feels called to serve on any of them, one just does it, undergoes some training, if necessary, and sees how it goes. If one loves what one is doing, and receives a favourable feedback from one's peers and/or the congregation, then one is indeed "called" to the ministry.

 

Which is worse. That group starts at age 52. That means there is a four year overlap. I call "ageist privilige"!

Hi DKS,

 

 

Well, for four years you get the best of both worlds.

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

Naah. That's the most privliged of all.

I beleive the below keeps raising the age as they age

Hi Panentheism

 

 

I believe you are witnessing correlation and not causation.

 

Yes, we have raised the age at least twice since the group was formed.  We have done so based on the changing age given as the average age of ministers.  

 

As an aside I find it quite interesting that the average age appears to climb faster than I am able to age.

 

Grace and peace to you.

John