Jude 2

Having followed this board for several years, I know there is some very wise and discerning people on here. Many who were responsible in bringing us to a better understanding of the need for changes in our doctrinal stands. So with that in mind I pose the following question.

You have been slected to serve on a study group, to develop a plan to totally restructer the leadership of the CoGoP, on the International, National, and State levels.
What offices do you see as being necessary? What could be eliminated or combined?

Would the General/national/state/regional Overseer have more credibility, if he was pastoring a church thus dealing with the same problems that the pastors were facing every day.

car50

I know I've heard alot in favor of overseers pastoring, but as a pastor, I have to wonder how this would negatively effect the church he was in. Our SO sees himself as pastor to the pastors, and when needed is all over the state, how active is he in the local church where he holds membership, I'm not sure, but I know of times where he has been out of there for weeks at a time covering another church where the pastor left, or was going through things and needed time away.

Does it work in some cases, yes, PG is a good example of that, but geographically there are obstacles, as well just the number of churches under him he is serving can be a stretch. I'm not sure it would work everywhere, or solve the problems many think.

Eager Beaver needs to jump in on this one. His pastor is also the Missouri/Kansas overseer.

I honestly don't know how an overseer can also pastor unless he has a really qualified leadership team or associate pastor. Either that - or he takes care of a state that has absolutely no problems or issues (yeah right) or a very small number of churches.

I know in the case of our territory - we actually at one point had several churches without pastors & he was filling in with a few other willing retired ministers/evangelists on a rotating schedule until permanent pastors could be selected. He had a couple churches close by - but also had some that were 4+ hours away (mine included). I know he was rushing from our a.m. church trying to make it back to his for the evening service.

That would have to be very draining after awhile. I certainly think they can "lose touch" with the field if they haven't pastored for awhile. Seems like at one time there was mention of folks in the upper ranks taking a year off to pastor just for that reason? Could that be a possibility?

[[i]quote="Pastor Bill"]
Our SO sees himself as pastor to the pastors, and when needed is all over the state, how active is he in the local church where he holds membership, I'm not sure, but I know of times where he has been out of there for weeks at a time covering another church where the pastor left, or was going through things and needed time away.

Does it work in some cases, yes, PG is a good example of that, but geographically there are obstacles, as well just the number of churches under him he is serving can be a stretch. I'm not sure it would work everywhere, or solve the problems many think.[/quote][/i][quote]

I think that there maybe 3 or 4 other than PG who are serving as Pastor/Overseer. I am sure that it would involve a major adjustment in our thinking instead of being over a state, perhaps district or area overseers would work better. Their duties would have to be adjusted.

As far as filling in while a church doesnt have a pastor or the pastor has to be away. Why not use the retired ministers for this purpose.

My question invloved totally restructering, the way we operate. However,
if we must continue to operate as we have been, more and more money will have to be sent to state/national/international offices.

If we continue to do things the way we have always done them, we will continue to get the same results.
My point was to think new, to think outside of the box.

car50

[quote="Pianoman"]/

I honestly don't know how an overseer can also pastor unless he has a really qualified leadership team or associate pastor.

I think this may be on the right track, the overseers church which would be one of the larger churches in the area and could serve as a training/development center for young ministers or new ministers of any age. With the purpose that at some point they would be placed over an existing church or sent to plant a new church.

car50

car50 wrote:[As far as filling in while a church doesnt have a pastor or the pastor has to be away. Why not use the retired ministers for this purpose.

That sounds wonderful - and may certainly work in some areas. In our territory, however, I believe we have either a shortage of ministers, or a shortage of willing ministers (active and retired.) We were without a pastor for approx. a month last year during a transitional period. We were blessed that a recently retired minister agreed to fill in for us as much as he did. He let us know up front & pretty candidly that he was only filling in for the Sunday preaching. He wasn't there for hospital visitation or midweek services & in no way wanted to be considered for a permanent pastorate (meaning a replacement minister needed to be coming in quickly).

I hope that's not the case in other areas!

In our territory, however, I believe we have either a shortage of ministers, or a shortage of willing ministers (active and retired.) We were without a pastor for approx. a month last year during a transitional period.

With all the hoops you have to jump thru to get and keep your license, I can see why there is a shortage. I can remember when God called and you answered it. Even in the old days if you had somebody behind you, things went faster and smoother. Not against education. Well you get the ideal.

God Bless

car50 wrote:I think that there maybe 3 or 4 other than PG who are serving as Pastor/Overseer. I am sure that it would involve a major adjustment in our thinking instead of being over a state, perhaps district or area overseers would work better. Their duties would have to be adjusted.

As far as filling in while a church doesnt have a pastor or the pastor has to be away. Why not use the retired ministers for this purpose.

My question invloved totally restructering, the way we operate. However,
if we must continue to operate as we have been, more and more money will have to be sent to state/national/international offices.

If we continue to do things the way we have always done them, we will continue to get the same results.
My point was to think new, to think outside of the box.

car50

I see where you are coming from on this, and in smaller areas it would work, but at some point do you want to lose the connections in larger states by breaking them up smaller?

Our SO does not pastor, we have appointed 3 Area Presbyters who serve almost like you are describing, they can act on behalf of the SO, and meet regularly as a team with the SO. They have all been pastors, but recently one man was selected who was a former pastor (he is not currently pastoring, but has been up to maybe a year or so ago) I don't think these are paid positions, but are paid by the local church they pastor (and the one who no longer pastors, is most likely working without a salary, having another source of income)

Pianoman wrote:

car50 wrote:[As far as filling in while a church doesnt have a pastor or the pastor has to be away. Why not use the retired ministers for this purpose.

That sounds wonderful - and may certainly work in some areas. In our territory, however, I believe we have either a shortage of ministers, or a shortage of willing ministers (active and retired.) We were without a pastor for approx. a month last year during a transitional period. We were blessed that a recently retired minister agreed to fill in for us as much as he did. He let us know up front & pretty candidly that he was only filling in for the Sunday preaching. He wasn't there for hospital visitation or midweek services & in no way wanted to be considered for a permanent pastorate (meaning a replacement minister needed to be coming in quickly).

I hope that's not the case in other areas!

I believe it is, experienced ministers don't neccesarily have a retirement to go into (we don't provide it, only if they have done so on their own or through another job)

We have pastors still pastoring in their 70s and 80s, we don't have too many just sitting around idle, or this would be a great resource. Prior to coming to the CoGoP, I did have a retired pastor come back to fill in in the CoG I was attending, I learned alot from him in the short time I sat under his ministry, and it helped prepare me for pastoring myself.

car50 wrote:Having followed this board for several years, I know there is some very wise and discerning people on here.

Feel free to address your posts to Mrdanger since you are obviously referring to me.

MrDanger wrote:

car50 wrote:Having followed this board for several years, I know there is some very wise and discerning people on here.

Feel free to address your posts to Mrdanger since you are obviously referring to me.

maybe he wants to talk to someone twice your weight, though.

RamboPreacher wrote:

MrDanger wrote:

car50 wrote:Having followed this board for several years, I know there is some very wise and discerning people on here.

Feel free to address your posts to Mrdanger since you are obviously referring to me.

maybe he wants to talk to someone twice your weight, though.

That one seriously made me laugh

MrDanger wrote:

RamboPreacher wrote:

MrDanger wrote:

car50 wrote:Having followed this board for several years, I know there is some very wise and discerning people on here.

Feel free to address your posts to Mrdanger since you are obviously referring to me.

maybe he wants to talk to someone twice your weight, though.

That one seriously made me laugh

even if we are off-topic, i think it's good to interject humor in some of these "heavy" threads.

MrDanger wrote:

car50 wrote:"Having followed this board for several years, I know there is some very wise and discerning people on here."

Feel free to address your posts to Mrdanger since you are obviously referring to me.

I appreciate the humor, and as someone said it is necessary to use humor when discussing these heavy subjects.
And of course your comment brings the subject back up for discussion.

My point in starting this thread was that according to the report of the Finance and Stewardship Committee they had done a study and "the majority of our state/regional offices are in financial need, and could face financial insolvency in the future"

The committee's solution was for the local churches to send more and more money from the local church, to fund these offices.
While these offices from IHQ through the State level are becoming less relevent, less respected and having less impact on the local churches.
Do we hear a reccomendation for a better leadership system? NO!
The solution: take more money from the local church to support a system whose time has come and gone.

car50