NationStates Jolt Archive

This question is geared more to Christians, but, as always, anyone can answer.

First some background information: I attend a Presbyterian Church (PCUSA). This denomination ordains women and has no age requirement to serve as an ordained officer. In a Presbyterian church, elders are elected to rule over the individual church as a member of the session and to represent the church at the presbytery level. Elders are elders for life, but they serve for three years before taking a one year sabbatical. They may then choose to serve again, or wait to serve.

Two years ago an Elder had to end his service before his three years were up. This left a hole on Session, which had to be filled. The nominating committee selected me and asked me if I would be willing to be ordained and serve as an elder. At the time I was only sixteen. After about a week of debating it, the committee needed an answer. My father answered for me and said no. Or rather, he forbid to do it, and I said no.

His reasoning was that whether I was ready to serve as an elder was one issue. The issue which he was concerned about was whether the vast majority of today's youth are ready to serve as elders. The answer is no. So if I became an elder (assuming of course that I was ready to be one) and then, my term ended, it might be that some would feel that they needed to have a youth as an elder. They might feel so strongly that even tough there may not have been any youth qualified to be an elder, they would still ordain one, because I had set the precedent. Of course, assuming that I was ready to be ordained, which is another matter.

I still haven't made up my mind whether I agree with my father. I have begun to reconsider the issue, and I would like to see what you all think. Do you think that a youth should be permitted to be elders (or other ruling officials) in the Church?

I always find it quite funny to see people younger than myself walking around with name tages saying "Elder So and So" (I think they are Mormons).

In most cultures I have dealt with that have elders, it is a title of respect accorded to those that have led very accomplished lives or have met certain tests. It is usually, but not always, restricted to older people.

Here's how I see it (and I'm not a religious person, but I like to think that I can contribute ideas):

Youth, presumably, are a part of the church community, and speaking as one I can say that these youth will no doubt have ideas about how things ought to be run. In all likelihood, most of them aren't very good ideas (free candy! And pot! WOOO!), but some will be. Now, most older people have by turns a very fond view of youth, or more commonly a very dim one. (Damned teenagers. Always getting into trouble and spraypainting trains.)

As your father demonstrates (no offense to him, he might be a great guy) most adults feel that youth 'aren't ready' to be put in positions of decision-making. However, fact is that we make life-altering decisions on a daily basis. Do I take cocaine like all my friends, or not? Do I take an AP class that might help me get into college or not? Do I drive home drunk, or not?

Also, adults seem less inclined to listen to their 'juniors' than they are to peers-- I think that it's the same with youths. If you (or another youth) were an elder, you would be an easily approachable person for other youths who want to say something about the way that the church is run, much moreso than Mrs. Stevens, the 65 year old woman who runs the local library, or Mr. Hodge, the school principle. Does that make sense? I don't know if I expressed it that well.

I don't really know much about the Presbyterian faith, but I imagine that as with most, there will be all kinds of outlooks on the way that things are done. Older people (middle aged adults or senior citizens) will have different views, on the whole, than younger people such as yourself. It might be good for your church to get a new outlook on the way it goes about things-- one that you are prepared to offer because of your (presumably) different viewpoints about things, or as a mouthpiece for your peers.

Of course, not knowing much about you as a person (no offense to YOU this time) I don't know if I would agree with your dad or not in this situation. I mean, you might actually not be suited for this sort of thing for whatever reason, but it sounds like your dad was basing it off of your age, not who you are as a person. Anyway, an atheist's two cents.

I always find it quite funny to see people younger than myself walking around with name tages saying "Elder So and So" (I think they are Mormons).

In most cultures I have dealt with that have elders, it is a title of respect accorded to those that have led very accomplished lives or have met certain tests. It is usually, but not always, restricted to older people. It is not a title that gives anyone any formal authority, but rather a sign that they have important life experience that bears listening to.

Windows XP, 2000
512MB System RAM
2.0 GHz Intel Pentium 4 or equivalent processor
128MB DirectX 9.0 compatible video card
8x DVD-ROM drive
4.6 GB free hard disk space
DirectX 9.0c (included)
DirectX 8.1 compatible sound card

does your father just believe the rest of the leaders of your church are stupid and weak willed? aren't they capible of making the descision both now and in the future as to whom them want to lead their congregation? if your father objected to you serving for a reason related to you i would understand his reservations, afterall who knows you better. but he doesn't seem to have a problem with you serving, he has a problem with the precedent, and that seems extremely arrogant. he is taking advantage of his relationship with you and his parental authority to enforce his views on a subject that is not his perogative.

does your father just believe the rest of the leaders of your church are stupid and weak willed? aren't they capible of making the descision both now and in the future as to whom them want to lead their congregation? if your father objected to you serving for a reason related to you i would understand his reservations, afterall who knows you better. but he doesn't seem to have a problem with you serving, he has a problem with the precedent, and that seems extremely arrogant. he is taking advantage of his relationship with you and his parental authority to enforce his views on a subject that is not his perogative.

Well, it is his obligation to raise me according to the principals of the Bible, and if he believes that it is a danger to the life of the Church for me to be an elder, then it is his responsiblity to refuse to allow me, and it is my responsiblity to obey, because I am still under his roof.

And there is much debate in my church right now about many things. And some, including myself and most of my family, think that most of the current leaders of the church as well as most of the people in the pews are not even Christian, much less Presbyterian. That being said, we believe that they are incapable of leading any congregation of believers and various instances have proved our fears.

You may call that arrogance, but we beleive it to be protecting the Church. The question I am asking is whether it would be permissible to reufse a youth, even though he be qualified because most youth are not qualified?

No, you're much too young at 16 to be an elder.

Elders need to be able to deal with pastoral matters (divorce, death, dementia, adultery, alcoholism, abuse, more alliterative lists!), administrative duties, committees, the presbytery, and be responsible for the general spiritual welfare of the congregation, at both an individual and group level.

At 16, an individual cannot hope to have had the experience and self-confidence (not arrogance, that's something else) to be able to perform those duties.

Younger people can and should be encouraged to take an active, leadership role in the church, but an eldership is beyond someone of that age's capabilities - it's not fair to the 16 year old to put that much pressure on them, and it's not fair to the spiritual life of the congregation to appoint someone before they can be ready.

You need to know yourself, know others, know your god, be tested by the world and come through it by faith before you can begin to be a good Elder - anyone who says they're ready for all that, in the modern world, at age 16 is a liar.

Windows XP, 2000
512MB System RAM
2.0 GHz Intel Pentium 4 or equivalent processor
128MB DirectX 9.0 compatible video card
8x DVD-ROM drive
4.6 GB free hard disk space
DirectX 9.0c (included)
DirectX 8.1 compatible sound card


i'sn't that the requirements for the game oblivion?

i'sn't that the requirements for the game oblivion?
The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion

The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion

thats what is was talking about.

thats what is was talking about.
See. That post is on topic.

See. That post is on topic.

how?

how?

Requirements for Elders : Requirements for Elder Scrolls IV Oblivion.

It's a joke - it's not very good, but it's a joke!

I certainly feel that youths, depending on their character should be made elders. Eldership is not dependent on knowledge or wisdom, elders are elected to support, sustain and protect the church from attacks. Be it from Satan or man itself. If you feel you have the ability to protect the church, then I certainly agree.

I, myself am only nineteen, yet I'm on the leadership team of my church. I don't proclaim to have a vast knowledge on the background of Christianity, but I do proclaim this. I have faith. That's all you should be concerned about. Are you willing to place your life in the hands of God? Will you change your life for God? Which means no sex until marriage and the list goes on.

Truly ask yourself this. Are you willing to completely dedicate yourself to the cross? If yes, then you are ready to be an Elder, if no then you're not.

I'll post something more profound tomorrow when I'm more awake, until then...

No, you're much too young at 16 to be an elder.

Elders need to be able to deal with pastoral matters (divorce, death, dementia, adultery, alcoholism, abuse, more alliterative lists!), administrative duties, committees, the presbytery, and be responsible for the general spiritual welfare of the congregation, at both an individual and group level.

At 16, an individual cannot hope to have had the experience and self-confidence (not arrogance, that's something else) to be able to perform those duties.

Younger people can and should be encouraged to take an active, leadership role in the church, but an eldership is beyond someone of that age's capabilities - it's not fair to the 16 year old to put that much pressure on them, and it's not fair to the spiritual life of the congregation to appoint someone before they can be ready.

You need to know yourself, know others, know your god, be tested by the world and come through it by faith before you can begin to be a good Elder - anyone who says they're ready for all that, in the modern world, at age 16 is a liar.

If a 16 year old who by God's grace was able to do all that, do you think that you would be in error or sin to refuse to ordain him?

I certainly feel that youths, depending on their character should be made elders. Eldership is not dependent on knowledge or wisdom, elders are elected to support, sustain and protect the church from attacks. Be it from Satan or man itself. If you feel you have the ability to protect the church, then I certainly agree.

I, myself am only nineteen, yet I'm on the leadership team of my church. I don't proclaim to have a vast knowledge on the background of Christianity, but I do proclaim this. I have faith. That's all you should be concerned about. Are you willing to place your life in the hands of God? Will you change your life for God? Which means no sex until marriage and the list goes on.

Truly ask yourself this. Are you willing to completely dedicate yourself to the cross? If yes, then you are ready to be an Elder, if no then you're not.

I'll post something more profound tomorrow when I'm more awake, until then...

The problem is that then you may have those with blurred vision leading the blind. If you don't understand the Trinity, how are you to be able to explain the Trinity to those who do not? Elders (I am speaking of ruling elders, some denominations call pastors teaching elders) have to have more knowledge of theology than others because they are looked to for guidance and they have to know when other elders, particurally the pastors are in error.

Well, it is his obligation to raise me according to the principals of the Bible, and if he believes that it is a danger to the life of the Church for me to be an elder, then it is his responsiblity to refuse to allow me, and it is my responsiblity to obey, because I am still under his roof.

And there is much debate in my church right now about many things. And some, including myself and most of my family, think that most of the current leaders of the church as well as most of the people in the pews are not even Christian, much less Presbyterian. That being said, we believe that they are incapable of leading any congregation of believers and various instances have proved our fears.

You may call that arrogance, but we beleive it to be protecting the Church. The question I am asking is whether it would be permissible to reufse a youth, even though he be qualified because most youth are not qualified?
if you don't believe that either the majority of the leadership or the general membership are actually christians, then you certainly shouldn't accept the role of elder. in fact both you and your father should leave the church as soon as possible. you are committing a breach of faith by remaining in what you believe is a false communion.

you are pretending to be in fellowship and communion with people you feel for the most part are not christians. so everytime you take the sacrements with or generally engage in "christian fellowship" with these people you are mocking the true secraments and fellowship.

this may actually consitute blaspemy against the holy spirit, since you are attributing the works of the devil(the false communion) to god. thus you may already be irrovociably damned since this is the one unforgivable sin.

even if your transgression is not that great, living within a christian community you believe to be false can not be better in the eyes of god than living in the worst brothel or drug den on the planet. for what must be worse in the eyes of god, the unbeliever who continues in sin through ignorance, or the false believer who has been shown the word but choises to be false to his faith?

if you don't believe that either the majority of the leadership or the general membership are actually christians, then you certainly shouldn't accept the role of elder. in fact both you and your father should leave the church as soon as possible. you are committing a breach of faith by remaining in what you believe is a false communion.

you are pretending to be in fellowship and communion with people you feel for the most part are not christians. so everytime you take the sacrements with or generally engage in "christian fellowship" with these people you are mocking the true secraments and fellowship.

this may actually consitute blaspemy against the holy spirit, since you are attributing the works of the devil(the false communion) to god. thus you may already be irrovociably damned since this is the one unforgivable sin.

even if your transgression is not that great, living within a christian community you believe to be false can not be better in the eyes of god than living in the worst brothel or drug den on the planet. for what must be worse in the eyes of god, the unbeliever who continues in sin through ignorance, or the false believer who has been shown the word but choises to be false to his faith?

I agree with you. However, we take steps to ensure that we take the sacraments within the requirements of Scripture. And I am living under my father's roof, so so long as he provides means for me to follow Scripture, I may not defy him.

Both pastors are Christian and we make sure we accept the elements only from someone who we know is a Christian (in our church the elders help in distributing the elements). We are in no way pretending that the problem is not there. And I doubt highly that we are commiting blasphemy against the Holy Spirit, because, again, we are not denying the problem.

I have voiced these concerns to my father many times. His reasoning is that if we leave, there will be no one to bring the church to repentence. I hope I don't sound arrogant in this, but I can only think of three people outside my family who would be able to spot a heresy. I can only name a handful more who are aware of the problem. I do not know if we are in sin for staying; it is something I have been in much prayer over. However, I do know that the church needs help, especially since it is part of the PCUSA. Am I one of those called to help it? I don't know. But until I am able to leave, I have to keep trying to change it.

And some, including myself and most of my family, think that most of the current leaders of the church as well as most of the people in the pews are not even Christian, much less Presbyterian. That being said, we believe that they are incapable of leading any congregation of believers and various instances have proved our fears.

This sounds like serious Earthly power control problems more than whether or not there is spiritual leadership. When you get that much animosity going on, it's usually a matter of people being jealous that they're not in charge.

This sounds like serious Earthly power control problems more than whether or not there is spiritual leadership. When you get that much animosity going on, it's usually a matter of people being jealous that they're not in charge.

Could be. Or it could be legitimate concern.

There are a lot of things going on. I would rather leave than become part of the leadership now. That was different two years ago, because I wan't as aware as I am now.

Windows XP, 2000
512MB System RAM
2.0 GHz Intel Pentium 4 or equivalent processor
128MB DirectX 9.0 compatible video card
8x DVD-ROM drive
4.6 GB free hard disk space
DirectX 9.0c (included)
DirectX 8.1 compatible sound card

You win the thread.

I am an Elder in the PCUSA and I was ordained when I was 16. As it was explained to me (and as I agree with), my position was to represent the youth of the church in session. The idea being that elderly elders (heh) may not understand the kinds of issues that the youth need help with, or, perhaps, said youth may not be willing to turn to more hidebound elders for help.

My pastor also reminded me that when Christ came, He came for everyone, the old, the young, the strong, the weak, and so on. There is no age limit to profess faith (Suffer the little children to come unto me) so His church should have the voices of all faithful, not just those who are over 21.

And, as he added with a twinkle, not only does the Church train up new leaders that way, but SOMEONE has to be hanging around to liven up the boring meetings on the buddget.

I think that if you can display the wisdom needed for the job, then you should take the job. I know some adults that can't do that. Political skills do not equal the wisdom to do good and know better, to discern the ultimate correct path.

I am an Elder in the PCUSA and I was ordained when I was 16. As it was explained to me (and as I agree with), my position was to represent the youth of the church in session. The idea being that elderly elders (heh) may not understand the kinds of issues that the youth need help with, or, perhaps, said youth may not be willing to turn to more hidebound elders for help.

My pastor also reminded me that when Christ came, He came for everyone, the old, the young, the strong, the weak, and so on. There is no age limit to profess faith (Suffer the little children to come unto me) so His church should have the voices of all faithful, not just those who are over 21.

And, as he added with a twinkle, not only does the Church train up new leaders that way, but SOMEONE has to be hanging around to liven up the boring meetings on the buddget.

Well, I must disagree. There is no point in having a youth on session to present ideas or whatever. Anyone can be called to session to be interviewed. Also, humor at budget meetings is a poor excuse for anyone being on anything.

As for Christ and the children, there is a difference between the youth being active in the Church and the youth ruling the Church. And as an elder, you were elected to rule over your church. Not to represent anyone! Put that modernist crap out of your head!

There is nothing wrong with having a youth representative to session. But to make that youth an elder is another matter. Unless that youth is very mature for his age, mentally, emotionally, and most importantly spiritually, he should not be ordained.

If a 16 year old who by God's grace was able to do all that, do you think that you would be in error or sin to refuse to ordain him?

Error or sin? No. But probably a wise decision.

Even if a 16 year old WERE able to do all that, it would be monumentally unfair to place that much of a burden on such a young person. 16 is an age of learning and growth, not of theological leadership. And if a 16 year old were capable, they would also probably be wise enough to realize that "God's grace" is one thing, and "life experience" is another. There are things that you learn from living that are important in a leader. Not everyone learns those lessons, which is why not all old people are elders, but it is not fair to either the young person or the church to not let the youngster have a chance to learn those lessons before taking on the leadership role.

It would not be inappropriate for your board of Elders to ask your opinion on certain things, I would think, since you seem to have impressed them with your current abilities, but to put the pressure of always having to be responsible, and on issues about which you may know absolutely nothing, on you while you are still growing up would be a terrible thing.

Error or sin? No. But probably a wise decision.

Even if a 16 year old WERE able to do all that, it would be monumentally unfair to place that much of a burden on such a young person. 16 is an age of learning and growth, not of theological leadership. And if a 16 year old were capable, they would also probably be wise enough to realize that "God's grace" is one thing, and "life experience" is another. There are things that you learn from living that are important in a leader. Not everyone learns those lessons, which is why not all old people are elders, but it is not fair to either the young person or the church to not let the youngster have a chance to learn those lessons before taking on the leadership role.

It would not be inappropriate for your board of Elders to ask your opinion on certain things, I would think, since you seem to have impressed them with your current abilities, but to put the pressure of always having to be responsible, and on issues about which you may know absolutely nothing, on you while you are still growing up would be a terrible thing.

That wasn't quite my question.

My question was that if God had given someone wisdom so that they made wise decisions regarding such issues without such experience, would it be okay to refuse them ordination to prevent setting a precedent?

Not to actually answer your question biblically or anything, but...

Go read Paul's epistle's to Timothy. He says not to let anyone look down on him for his age. Timothy was a YOUNG man... and "man" was anything past 13. I see absolutely no bibilcal reason why a young man of 16 couldn't be an elder, if he were suited to it, and fulfilled the biblical requirements for elders. Do you?

That wasn't quite my question.

My question was that if God had given someone wisdom so that they made wise decisions regarding such issues without such experience, would it be okay to refuse them ordination to prevent setting a precedent?

Yes.

But "setting a precedent" should be the least of the reasons to refuse them ordination.

Not to actually answer your question biblically or anything, but...

Go read Paul's epistle's to Timothy. He says not to let anyone look down on him for his age. Timothy was a YOUNG man... and "man" was anything past 13. I see absolutely no bibilcal reason why a young man of 16 couldn't be an elder, if he were suited to it, and fulfilled the biblical requirements for elders. Do you?

Looking down on is not the same thing as saying "We don't want to start something where we have people in leadership who shouldn't be, so we're going to ask you to wait."

But what you presentd is one of the reasons I am heavily leaning toward allowing the ordination of youth, though I am still torn.

Looking down on is not the same thing as saying "We don't want to start something where we have people in leadership who shouldn't be, so we're going to ask you to wait."

But what you presentd is one of the reasons I am heavily leaning toward allowing the ordination of youth, though I am still torn.

I see a lot more biblical precident for ordination of youth than ordination of women. 1 Tim 4 not only says "Let no one dispise you for your youth..." but also "Do not neglect the gift you have..." I'd think that would be a stronger argument than "Someone else unsuited might get in too..." considering there are PLENTY of older men who are elders and aren't exactly suited. Youth does not have a monopoly on immaturity. There're qualifications laid out quite nicely in 1 Tim 3, and so long as they're met, I don't see that God would put an age requirement on it any more than he put an age requirement on salvation.

...My father answered for me and said no. Or rather, he forbid to do it, and I said no.

His reasoning was that whether I was ready to serve as an elder was one issue. The issue which he was concerned about was whether the vast majority of today's youth are ready to serve as elders. The answer is no. So if I became an elder (assuming of course that I was ready to be one) and then, my term ended, it might be that some would feel that they needed to have a youth as an elder. They might feel so strongly that even tough there may not have been any youth qualified to be an elder, they would still ordain one, because I had set the precedent. Of course, assuming that I was ready to be ordained, which is another matter.

I still haven't made up my mind whether I agree with my father. I have begun to reconsider the issue, and I would like to see what you all think. Do you think that a youth should be permitted to be elders (or other ruling officials) in the Church?

If "Daddy" says you can't do something, anything, then you can't expect people to call you Elder with a straight face.

But then again, I refuse to call any clergyman by the title "Reverend," because it means "deserving of worship," and while I'm not that religous that I'd get pissed off about blasphemy, I don't think anyone who claims to serve God ought to go laying claim to his perks. If he wanted to be called "Reverent" well then that would be another matter.

Well, I must disagree. There is no point in having a youth on session to present ideas or whatever. Anyone can be called to session to be interviewed. Also, humor at budget meetings is a poor excuse for anyone being on anything.

As for Christ and the children, there is a difference between the youth being active in the Church and the youth ruling the Church. And as an elder, you were elected to rule over your church. Not to represent anyone! Put that modernist crap out of your head!

There is nothing wrong with having a youth representative to session. But to make that youth an elder is another matter. Unless that youth is very mature for his age, mentally, emotionally, and most importantly spiritually, he should not be ordained.

So basically, you're asking if YOU should be ordained as an elder, but when someone who WAS ordained as an elder at the same age of 16 tells you his experiences and gives you probably the most germane advice here, you insult him, tell him what his job actually was as opposed to what his elders told him it was, and tell him his service was pointless.

Your father was right to forbid you to become an elder -- though perhaps not for the reasons he had in mind. Your attitude seems arrogant, immature, and prideful, not to mention a good deal less than charitable towards both those in your congregation and others of faith who responded for your request for advice.

When the entire world is wrong, it's time to take a good long look in the mirror and examine one's own soul.

No, you're much too young at 16 to be an elder.

Elders need to be able to deal with pastoral matters (divorce, death, dementia, adultery, alcoholism, abuse, more alliterative lists!), administrative duties, committees, the presbytery, and be responsible for the general spiritual welfare of the congregation, at both an individual and group level.

At 16, an individual cannot hope to have had the experience and self-confidence (not arrogance, that's something else) to be able to perform those duties.

Younger people can and should be encouraged to take an active, leadership role in the church, but an eldership is beyond someone of that age's capabilities - it's not fair to the 16 year old to put that much pressure on them, and it's not fair to the spiritual life of the congregation to appoint someone before they can be ready.

You need to know yourself, know others, know your god, be tested by the world and come through it by faith before you can begin to be a good Elder - anyone who says they're ready for all that, in the modern world, at age 16 is a liar.

I would disagree entirely.

Those of limited experience can and should be able to take an active role in the church especially at an eldership role. I base this off the formation of the early church where, everyone was young (in faith), and rather new to the salvation brought by christ. No one claims Paul was not prepared to lead the church, even though he was a legalist, inexperienced and previously a persecutor of everything Christian.

A young Elder, provided that this man is serious about his faith and willing to change his life, or has already changed should be allowed to become an elder. Knowledge comes with experience, but faith comes from the heart.

You can have a sixty year old elder who knows practically all there is to know about Christianity, however without faith, this man will slowly kill the church from the inside out. Faith is a more important attribute to Christianity than knowledge ever was or will be, Paul makes this clear in the new testament.

Anyone can listen, and anyone can refer those with troubles to certain parts of the bible or offer kind words. It's more of a question upon the persons individual mental capacity. Are they stable enough to absorb all of these problems? Do I want this responsibility? And more importantly and I can't stress this enough, is my faith strong enough to justify and keep me moving in this position?

I answered those three questions myself, I ended up saying yes. :)

So basically, you're asking if YOU should be ordained as an elder, but when someone who WAS ordained as an elder at the same age of 16 tells you his experiences and gives you probably the most germane advice here, you insult him, tell him what his job actually was as opposed to what his elders told him it was, and tell him his service was pointless.

Your father was right to forbid you to become an elder -- though perhaps not for the reasons he had in mind. Your attitude seems arrogant, immature, and prideful, not to mention a good deal less than charitable towards both those in your congregation and others of faith who responded for your request for advice.

When the entire world is wrong, it's time to take a good long look in the mirror and examine one's own soul.
You know, I was going to respond back, but Kat did a MUCH better job at it. ;)

That and considering what I was feeling the first time I read your words, I'm pretty sure my first responce would have been considered a flame.

What I will add though is, 1. Go back and read your history of the Church. The Elders are ordained to guide the Church. They function very much like Congress in that they provide the voices of the Church. They do not rule the Church. They never have and anyone thinging anything like that needs to really do some soul searching. There's only ONE ruler of the Church, and you are NOT Him.

2. Each individual chuch is different and conducts its afairs unto itself (guided by the Church laws and so on). This is how my church works and I am still proud of being an Elder in the Presbyterian Church, even if it has been many years since I was last called into that role. I may not have always understood the budget issues or other things going on, but I did do my best to remind the other members of the church that the youth were still hanging around, and that we are called to Christ the same as they are.

If you cannot understand this, or feel like attacking me some more, I suggest strongly that you talk with your pastor (not your father) about your faith and beliefs, or possibly consider converting to another denomination.

Free religious advice from an atheist:

A group of dottering old men, who tend to get lost in thier bibles, often lose connection with not only young people, but the whole congregation.
Having one young person on such a council could actually prove very benefical in terms of making the younger generations feel included in the churches goals and events.

That ideally, is what organized religion is all about.

However, I would have to say that the O.P, would probably be a bad choice for any such position, as it is one that requires a a great deal of compassion.
All too often, I see a distinct lack of that in his posts.

Well, I must disagree. There is no point in having a youth on session to present ideas or whatever. Anyone can be called to session to be interviewed. Also, humor at budget meetings is a poor excuse for anyone being on anything.

My church has many meetings a week, the leadership are all involved in what can be boring and sometimes laborious exercises. But do you know what keeps me going? The jokes, the laughter and the communion, which is provided by us, the younger people on the leadership team. Laughter is not a poor excuse, it breeds Christian fellowship and love. When was that ever a poor excuse in Gods kingdom? Look behind the words and see the reasoning and understanding, NERVUN's pastor was very wise and his reasoning perfect in bringing young adults into the leadership of the church.

As for Christ and the children, there is a difference between the youth being active in the Church and the youth ruling the Church. And as an elder, you were elected to rule over your church. Not to represent anyone! Put that modernist crap out of your head!

An Elder is not not to rule the church. They are to guide it. Open your bible man and look at how Paul ministered to the Corinthians, Philippians and the rest. He was not ordering them about, but asking, suggesting, guiding. Honestly, an elder is there to support Christ and guard the church from attacks. He is not a pastor, instead an assistant to the pastor. An Elder being a guide is hardly "modernist".

There is nothing wrong with having a youth representative to session. But to make that youth an elder is another matter. Unless that youth is very mature for his age, mentally, emotionally, and most importantly spiritually, he should not be ordained.

We agree, however, being old does not mean you're matured mentally, emotionally or spiritually. It's just the general consensus which I think needs challenged. Age brings knowledge not wisdom. And form what I can see, you lack both.

So basically, you're asking if YOU should be ordained as an elder, but when someone who WAS ordained as an elder at the same age of 16 tells you his experiences and gives you probably the most germane advice here, you insult him, tell him what his job actually was as opposed to what his elders told him it was, and tell him his service was pointless.

Your father was right to forbid you to become an elder -- though perhaps not for the reasons he had in mind. Your attitude seems arrogant, immature, and prideful, not to mention a good deal less than charitable towards both those in your congregation and others of faith who responded for your request for advice.

When the entire world is wrong, it's time to take a good long look in the mirror and examine one's own soul.

The question was about youth elders in general, not me, though some have asked about my personal experiences. And I never told him that he should not be an elder; I told him his concept of what an elder is supposed to be and do is wrong.

An Elder is not not to rule the church. They are to guide it. Open your bible man and look at how Paul ministered to the Corinthians, Philippians and the rest. He was not ordering them about, but asking, suggesting, guiding. Honestly, an elder is there to support Christ and guard the church from attacks. He is not a pastor, instead an assistant to the pastor. An Elder being a guide is hardly "modernist".

An elder being a guide is not modernist; an elder being a representative is.

In the Presbyterian churches elders rule over the church. They make the decisions. They guide peopl spiritually, but they rule over the policy and operations of the church. The pastor is the chief guide. The elders are in charge of him, not the other way around in the Presbyterain churches.

The question was about youth elders in general, not me, though some have asked about my personal experiences. And I never told him that he should not be an elder; I told him his concept of what an elder is supposed to be and do is wrong.
Forgive me, but I believe I shall trust to the words of my pastor over a kid on the Internet in terms of what my role as an Elder was to be.

Forgive me, but I believe I shall trust to the words of my pastor over a kid on the Internet in terms of what my role as an Elder was to be.

Well, fine don't trust me. But then trust the Bible, the Book of Confessions, and the Book of Order, the rules of faith and order in the PCUSA. All of which my arguments are in agreement with.

Well, fine don't trust me. But then trust the Bible, the Book of Confessions, and the Book of Order, the rules of faith and order in the PCUSA. All of which my arguments are in agreement with.
And where do you think my pastor's words were from?

And where do you think my pastor's words were from?

Not from those three places. He either doesn't understand what they say, or he is ignoring them.

I don't have a Book of Order with me, but I do have a copy of the Westminster Confession of Faith, the chief confession of the PResbyterain faith.

XXX. Of Church Censures

1. The Lord Jesus, as king and head of his church, hath ordained therein appointeda government in the hand of church-officers, distinct from the civil magistrate.

2. To these officers the keys of the kingdom of heaven are committed, by virtue whereof they have power to retain and remit sins, to shut that kingdom against the impenitent, both by the word and censures; and to open it unto the penitent sinners, by the ministry of the gospel, and by absolution from censures, as occasion shall require.

Also, all those who are both ordained and installed are required to affirm that they will uphold the essentials of the Reformed tradition. That is summed up in the above. So, either your Church did not ask you that (which means they are in a serious breach of protocol (sp?)), or they did ask, but you affirmed something you did not understand.

Not from those three places. He either doesn't understand what they say, or he is ignoring them.
You, sir, challenge a pastor who has been ordained a Presbyterian minister upon the basis of what? Being 16 years old and obviously in discord with the Church leadership?


I don't have a Book of Order with me, but I do have a copy of the Westminster Confession of Faith, the chief confession of the PResbyterain faith.
Thankfully I have access to the Book of Order, take heed:

The persons elected by the church to service in the offices of the church (G-6.0000) shall be ordained to these offices by the church. Ordination is the act by which the church sets apart persons to be presbyters (ministers of the Word and Sacrament or elders) or deacons, and is accompanied with prayer and the laying on of hands. Ordination to the office of minister of the Word and Sacrament is an act of the presbytery. Ordination to the offices of elder and deacon is an act of the session, except in the case of the organization of a new church. (G-7.0202)

G-14.0102 Commissioning

Other persons called to perform special services in the church or in the world may be commissioned by the appropriate governing body of the church through a service of dedication.
G-14.0103 Servant Style

The purpose and pattern of leadership in the church in all its forms of ministry shall be understood not in terms of power but of service, after the manner of the servant ministry of Jesus Christ.

As well as:

G-6.0100 1. Offices of Ministry
G-6.0101 Christ's Ministry

All ministry in the Church is a gift from Jesus Christ. Members and officers alike serve mutually under the mandate of Christ who is the chief minister of all. His ministry is the basis of all ministries; the standard for all offices is the pattern of the one who came "not to be served but to serve." (Matt. 20:28)

G-6.0102 Offices of Ministry

One responsibility of membership in the church is the election of officers who are ordained to fulfill particular functions. The existence of these offices in no way diminishes the importance of the commitment of all members to the total ministry of the church. These ordained officers differ from other members in function only.

G-6.0100 1. Offices of Ministry
G-6.0101 Christ's Ministry

All ministry in the Church is a gift from Jesus Christ. Members and officers alike serve mutually under the mandate of Christ who is the chief minister of all. His ministry is the basis of all ministries; the standard for all offices is the pattern of the one who came "not to be served but to serve." (Matt. 20:28)
G-6.0102 Offices of Ministry

One responsibility of membership in the church is the election of officers who are ordained to fulfill particular functions. The existence of these offices in no way diminishes the importance of the commitment of all members to the total ministry of the church. These ordained officers differ from other members in function only.

G-6.0104 Variety of Forms

While the ministry is one, specific forms of ministry may emphasize special tasks and skills and the ordering of the offices of ministry shall reflect this variety. There may be forms of ministry in which primary emphasis is given to proclamation of the Word and the celebration of the Sacraments, forms that stress deeds of love and mercy, forms that are primarily educational, administrative, legislative, or judicial, and forms that are primarily prophetic.

G-6.0105 Called to Ministry

Both men and women shall be eligible to hold church offices. When women and men, by God's providence and gracious gifts, are called by the church to undertake particular forms of ministry, the church shall help them to interpret their call and to be sensitive to the judgments and needs of others. As persons discover the forms of ministry to which they are called, and as they are called to new forms, they and the church shall pray for the presence and guidance of the Holy Spirit upon them and upon the mission of the Church.

G-6.0106 Gifts and Requirements

G-6.0106a. To those called to exercise special functions in the church--deacons, elders, and ministers of the Word and Sacrament--God gives suitable gifts for their various duties. In addition to possessing the necessary gifts and abilities, natural and acquired, those who undertake particular ministries should be persons of strong faith, dedicated discipleship, and love of Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord. Their manner of life should be a demonstration of the Christian gospel in the church and in the world. They must have the approval of God's people and the concurring judgment of a governing body of the church.

G-6.0107 Election by the People

The government of this church is representative, and the right of God's people to elect their officers is inalienable. Therefore, no person can be placed in any permanent office in a congregation or governing body of the church except by election of that body.


Also, all those who are both ordained and installed are required to affirm that they will uphold the essentials of the Reformed tradition. That is summed up in the above. So, either your Church did not ask you that (which means they are in a serious breach of protocol (sp?)), or they did ask, but you affirmed something you did not understand.
Candidates for Ministry

G-6.0108c. Persons seeking to be received as candidates for ministry in the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) shall have their attention drawn to the constitutional documents of the church including its statement on freedom of conscience. (G-14.0304

I understood, I have a feeling that you do not.

As I said, talk to your pastor.

Okay, so I am not Presbyterian, so my advice/opinion may or may not apply.

We don't have Elders in my denomination, we have deacons, but I hear those are different, especially since the church my husband attended when he was young had both.

In my church deacons do the budget stuff, and the spiritual support stuff. They are assistants to the pastor, they are there to make sure that everyone in the church gets taken care of and nobody is forgotten.

There are also strict requirements of someone who is in a leadership role in the church, any leadership role, not just being an elder or a deacon. Speaking as a person who is in a leadership role at my church, you have to figure out pretty quick that it's not about you. The tone of your OP gives me the idea that you haven't figured that out so you probably shouldn't be in leadership at church.

1 Tim. 3:8 Deacons, likewise, should be worthy of respect, not hypocritical, not drinking a lot of wine, not greedy for money, 9 holding the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. 10 And they must also be tested first; if they prove blameless, then they can serve as deacons. 11 Wives, too, must be worthy of respect, not slanderers, self-controlled, faithful in everything. 12 Deacons must be husbands of one wife, managing their children and their own households competently. 13 For those who have served well as deacons acquire a good standing for themselves, and great boldness in the faith that is in Christ Jesus.

now, as to the question of "in general" should teenagers be allowed to be in leadership positions? it would depend on the position and the teenager, but really I don't know that I have ever met a teen with the requirements outlined in the Bible for a deacon, so I would probably say no to that. At my church there are teens who are on commitees, but that's probably about as high as they are going to go without seriously growing up more spiritually.

Okay, so I am not Presbyterian, so my advice/opinion may or may not apply.

We don't have Elders in my denomination, we have deacons, but I hear those are different, especially since the church my husband attended when he was young had both.

In my church deacons do the budget stuff, and the spiritual support stuff. They are assistants to the pastor, they are there to make sure that everyone in the church gets taken care of and nobody is forgotten.

There are also strict requirements of someone who is in a leadership role in the church, any leadership role, not just being an elder or a deacon. Speaking as a person who is in a leadership role at my church, you have to figure out pretty quick that it's not about you. The tone of your OP gives me the idea that you haven't figured that out so you probably shouldn't be in leadership at church.

1 Tim. 3:8 Deacons, likewise, should be worthy of respect, not hypocritical, not drinking a lot of wine, not greedy for money, 9 holding the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. 10 And they must also be tested first; if they prove blameless, then they can serve as deacons. 11 Wives, too, must be worthy of respect, not slanderers, self-controlled, faithful in everything. 12 Deacons must be husbands of one wife, managing their children and their own households competently. 13 For those who have served well as deacons acquire a good standing for themselves, and great boldness in the faith that is in Christ Jesus.

now, as to the question of "in general" should teenagers be allowed to be in leadership positions? it would depend on the position and the teenager, but really I don't know that I have ever met a teen with the requirements outlined in the Bible for a deacon, so I would probably say no to that. At my church there are teens who are on commitees, but that's probably about as high as they are going to go without seriously growing up more spiritually.

Ditto, without reservations.

Adding assistance to what Smunkeeville said, Titus 1
6An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient. 7Since an overseer is entrusted with God's work, he must be blameless—not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain. 8Rather he must be hospitable, one who loves what is good, who is self-controlled, upright, holy and disciplined. 9He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it.

A youth ministry group within a church could have acting youth ministers and elders elected from the group, as a group within the church, as a teaching device and a way of creating a self-directed organization for the youth of the church etc., but the actual Church leaders, elders, deacons etc., should conform to scriptural guidelines, IMO. A child elder seems an oxymoron to me.

If a 16 year old who by God's grace was able to do all that, do you think that you would be in error or sin to refuse to ordain him?

If a wee boy or girl was all that at 16, they wouldn't need to be an elder to be a help and a guide to the congregation.

I'm speaking only in the abstract so as not to give offence, but you don't need to 'be' an elder to 'do what an elder does' - comfort, support, guidance, a shoulder, a rock, an example. Ask for help when you need it and look to give help whenever you can, be it pastoral or spiritual, whatever. As living saints, you don't need a badge of eldership to do good work and works for your church and your God.

Do your faithful, prayerful best and wait for God to use use you as He's planned, not as you want.

Ditto, without reservations.

Adding assistance to what Smunkeeville said, Titus 1
6An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient. 7Since an overseer is entrusted with God's work, he must be blameless—not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain. 8Rather he must be hospitable, one who loves what is good, who is self-controlled, upright, holy and disciplined. 9He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it.

A youth ministry group within a church could have acting youth ministers and elders elected from the group, as a group within the church, as a teaching device and a way of creating a self-directed organization for the youth of the church etc., but the actual Church leaders, elders, deacons etc., should conform to scriptural guidelines, IMO. A child elder seems an oxymoron to me.
Excuse me, both you and Smunkee, but excepting the point of being married to just one woman or having kids (which opens up the problem of women Elders and/or unmarried ones), can you point me a place there in scripture where it says a teen cannot be an Elder or possive of those qualities?

Excuse me, both you and Smunkee, but excepting the point of being married to just one woman or having kids (which opens up the problem of women Elders and/or unmarried ones), can you point me a place there in scripture where it says a teen cannot be an Elder or possive of those qualities?

no, I can't. I see a lot of verses that say that we should be discerning though, and in my own personal experience and discernment I haven't found many teens that would fit the bill to be church leadership.

(oh, and women can't be ordained in my denomination)

no, I can't. I see a lot of verses that say that we should be discerning though, and in my own personal experience and discernment I haven't found many teens that would fit the bill to be church leadership.
Well, like I said, it wasn't exactly picked out of a hat (At least I'm pretty sure I wasn't. There was a lot of prayer and thought invloved in picking the next youth Elder when I reached my term :p ).

Well, like I said, it wasn't exactly picked out of a hat (At least I'm pretty sure I wasn't. There was a lot of prayer and thought invloved in picking the next youth Elder when I reached my term :p ).

hey, I am not questioning your status at all, I just don't see someone who says "but I wanna do it too" as someone ready for a leadership position. I was a youth leader when I was pretty young, so I know that pressure and the way the "old people" look down on you, it's hard.

hey, I am not questioning your status at all, I just don't see someone who says "but I wanna do it too" as someone ready for a leadership position. I was a youth leader when I was pretty young, so I know that pressure and the way the "old people" look down on you, it's hard.
My Lord YES! It was very hard at the time (I wonder if I would be better at it now?).

But, in any case, I offered my experiance up as a youth Elder and Edwardis decided to reject it so...

My Lord YES! It was very hard at the time (I wonder if I would be better at it now?).

But, in any case, I offered my experiance up as a youth Elder and Edwardis decided to reject it so...

yeah, I did preface my original post that my advice might not apply, since my church does things differently.