Youth Elder … that was interesting

January 20, 2008 by · 2 Comments
Filed under: Religion, Youth 

Today, the Presbyterian Church of Lawrenceville (NJ) held it’s Annual Corporation Meeting and the Special Congregational Meeting.  This church holds the annual corporate and congregational meetings at different times and the special meeting in January is normally to approve the terms of call for the pastors and fill any open partial officer terms.

During the Congregational meeting, a change to the bylaws was proposed.  The number of elders has previously been set at exactly 15, in 3 even classes.  This change was to allow a minimum of 15 and a maximum of 16 elders in nearly equal classes.

The intention of the change was to allow for the first-time election of a youth (under 18 in this case) to the Session.

This was originally brought up back in the fall when the Session and Youth and Young Adult council members talked about it (not the entire group – there is some overlap).  The original plan was to create the post of Youth Elder.  I did some research on their behalf (since I know a lot about all of this through past personal history and interest) and pointed out that under the Book of Order, there cannot be a position restricted/intended for a certain group.  Instead I recommended that they increase the number of seats available and allow for flexibility in the classes.

I knew we were in trouble when the sanctuary was packed for a congregational meeting week worship service.  Most of the folks were older.  After the service there was a Benediction but no Choral Response or Postlude.  Folks were asked to remain.  Usually about 1/3 of the folks who attended the service will stay for the congregational meeting.  Today almost everybody stayed.

The bylaw amendment was the last item on the agenda of both meetings.  At the beginning of the corporation meeting (which was first) the pastor recognized the confirmation class that was attending the meeting as part of their education.  He asked them to stand up.  Some stood up.  Others did not, and a few were in the balcony and not visible.  The pastor made a statement about some of them being present.

The bylaw amendment was presented by the nominating committee chair.  It was presented as allowing us to have a youth elder, who would be a rising senior [elected in June – someone who would be a senior in the fall] who would serve one year of a 3-year term.  If the student remained in the area for college he/she would be able to finish the full term.  If not the student would resign just like anyone else who was unable to finish their term and we would likely elect another student to replace them.  This youth elder would not be expected to chair a committee (as the other elders are) and would be paired with another elder to serve as a mentor.

The first speaker from the floor asked why we needed an additional seat, and stated that perhaps the nominating committee should have been choosing a youth for Session all along.  The answer given was that since we would not expect a youth to be a committee chair, we couldn’t afford to give up an adult seat – we needed all 15 to chair committees.
After sex, your erection will go away if they just ignore it. cialis for sale online The dose ranges from 10 to 20 percent impotent men are using ED medicines recreationally, while 50 percent men use low cost tadalafil them with alcohol and illicit drugs. Today, ED patients cheap levitra india prefer to buy soft drugs in spite of hard tablets. Although research is being undertaken to find out the effectiveness of your new levitra without rx it’s important to also follow a few precautions.
It was also pointed out that under the Book of Order there is no such thing as a youth elder.  I was recognized at one point and read from G-14 where the BOO requires that the congregation elect officers from all ages, racial-ethnic background, disabilities, etc.

The controversy was expressed as a question of why an additional seat was required for most of the 15 minute discussion until one elderly member got up and gave her opinion.  She stated that if the Session required the advice of a youth they could simply ask one to come to a meeting, and that elders should be people who have been involved with the church for a long time, have experience with the church, and are more mature.  At least 7 or 8 people raised their hands to answer that discriminatory attitude.

A few speakers later, the chair called the question (with support from others).  In a voice vote the motion to change the bylaws passed.  My estimate is that it was about 66-34 or maybe 60-40.  The chair ruled that the motion passed and noone called for division.  The meeting was ended with prayer.

After the meeting the woman who was the first speaker was heard to say “we’re voting on a youth elder and they aren’t even HERE!”  I think the pastor did the youth a disservice by actually saying that only a few were there.  I think that the youth (older than confirmation age) did themselves a disservice by failing to attend worship and this meeting.

One woman who I spoke to after the meeting said that she thought that the argument over 15 vs. 16 seats was really code for whether or not to have a youth elder and particularly for whether or not to change anything.

Even worse, this meeting shows a split in the congregation that my work on Project Open Door has hinted at.  There is a core of the congregation for whom you are a new member until you’ve been there 5 years or more.  They are also opposed to change of any type.  There is an old/young split, and a new/long-time split.  I fear for what this means when the Project Open Door team is expected to fulfill our mandate by suggesting changes to the visitor and community ministries of the church.

I’m glad that the vote went in favor of the youth, but also disturbed at the anti-youth sentiment shown by the debate.  It seems nothing has changed in some congregations in the last 20 years.

Tags: , , , , ,