Skip to main content

Presbyterianism & immigration

Becoming an official Presbyterian candidate made me think of when I became an Australian citizen.
I became an Australian citizen in Sept 1991. I'd been living here since 20 Dec 1988. But it took that long to go through the procedures required to get citizenship status. Once I had citizenship, I had access to all the privileges that came with it - passport, social security etc.
It's been a bit like that with Presbyterian candidacy. I've been attending a Presbyterian church since Feb 2007. I've been a member of the Presbyterian denomination since March 2007. But it's taken this long to go through the process of becoming a Candidate. And accessing all the benefits that come with it.
The biggest benefit is I get the respect and authority of "officially" belonging to this particular denomination, with its history, culture & way of doing things - a history, culture & way of doing things that, as you all know, I really like and identify with. I now "fit" the denomination in two ways - I've always fitted ideologically, and now I fit officially.
The biggest practical benefit is an added layer of ministry support and guidance. I'm now under the supervision of the Presbyterian dept of Ministry & Mission. They're job is to see that I get the best possible training & support, and then the best possible ministry role that "fits" my skills & personality. It's nice to have that kind of support - reduces the fears & uncertainties of what'll happen when I finally (!) finish all my training, and get launched into real ministry.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The different distractions of secularity and spirituality

There has been a lot of discussion about the recent 'vibe shift' away from radical atheism back towards an openness to the supernatural. I don't think this new spirituality is necessarily an openness to the unique claims of Christ. It will more probably replace one set of commonly-accepted misunderstandings about Jesus with another.  Under radical atheism, people dismissed the Biblical claims about Jesus' resurrection because they 'knew' that it was impossible. Jesus hadn't really died. He just passed out (after being beaten and whipped and crucified) and then woke up in the tomb (and rolled away the stone himself and overcame several guards). Or the disciples hallucinated that they saw him (even though Jewish beliefs of the time didn't expect one person to rise possessing eternal life himself; they expected a general resurrection at the end of time - see John 11:24 ). Or something else.  The so-called 'explanations' of Jesus' non-resurrectio...
Post a Comment
Read more

A better understanding of nonbelief

The Nones Project is an ongoing study into the belief systems of people who call themselves non-religious. A few weeks ago one of the project leaders,  Ryan Burge  of Washington University,  posted some really interesting preliminary results  on his Substack.  1. We've probably heard of people who are spiritual but not religious (SBNRs). SBNRs were "the largest group of nones" in the sample. They believe in the supernatural realm but not necessarily in "a God." They are "deeply skeptical of religion but highly interested in spirituality," therefore individualistic and anti-institutional.  2. But this study differentiated SBNRs from people they called Nones In Name Only, NiNos. They different to SBNRs by being religious about their spiritual. They believe not just in the supernatural but in "God." And they tend to engage in traditional communal religious practices while SBNRs practice individualised eclectic bespoke spiritual practices. The s...
Post a Comment
Read more

Wax and Wright on the definition of "mission"

Trevin Wax has written a clear, simple, and charitable introduction to a debate about the nature and boundaries of the kinds of Christian activities that validly should be called "mission." In brief:  Should we use a broad definition, where "mission" encompasses all the various purposes which God calls Christians and the church in general to perform, e.g. being ethical at work; general acts of care and charity; standing against systematic oppression and working towards justice instead? If so, "evangelism" is only one part of the church's mission - a central, necessary, and irreplaceable part, but only one part nonetheless. The latter kinds of activities don't save anyone for eternity, but they do genuine good in this world which please God. And that kind of good makes a real difference in many parts of the world which have not benefited from the kind of Christian moral transformation which the West benefited from - the kind of moral transformation...
Post a Comment
Read more