<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Statement on the Voting Age of Members</title>
	<atom:link href="http://julianfreeman.ca/church/statement-voting-age-members/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://julianfreeman.ca/church/statement-voting-age-members</link>
	<description>Thoughts of a Christian Husband, Father, and Pastor</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Sep 2010 11:32:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Julian Freeman</title>
		<link>http://julianfreeman.ca/church/statement-voting-age-members/comment-page-1#comment-1423</link>
		<dc:creator>Julian Freeman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2009 17:22:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://julianfreeman.ca/?p=755#comment-1423</guid>
		<description>Derifter,

Always great to hear from you, brother. I especially enjoyed your comment on the &#039;ants&#039; post. I got quite a chuckle out of that. Thanks for your input here as well!

James, 

Great to hear from you! Thanks for stopping by!

I think what we&#039;re trying to say is that we want to evaluate a child&#039;s application for membership the same way we would anyone else&#039;s. We begin by examining conversion, baptism, etc. If the person is a believer, then regardless of age, status, capability, etc., we want them to be a full-fledged member of the community. Since commitment to Christ is the key factor there, then we examine children the same way we do with adults--it&#039;s always on a case-by-case basis. I don&#039;t know if I&#039;m answering your question or not...?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Derifter,</p>
<p>Always great to hear from you, brother. I especially enjoyed your comment on the &#8216;ants&#8217; post. I got quite a chuckle out of that. Thanks for your input here as well!</p>
<p>James, </p>
<p>Great to hear from you! Thanks for stopping by!</p>
<p>I think what we&#8217;re trying to say is that we want to evaluate a child&#8217;s application for membership the same way we would anyone else&#8217;s. We begin by examining conversion, baptism, etc. If the person is a believer, then regardless of age, status, capability, etc., we want them to be a full-fledged member of the community. Since commitment to Christ is the key factor there, then we examine children the same way we do with adults&#8211;it&#8217;s always on a case-by-case basis. I don&#8217;t know if I&#8217;m answering your question or not&#8230;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Shelley</title>
		<link>http://julianfreeman.ca/church/statement-voting-age-members/comment-page-1#comment-1422</link>
		<dc:creator>James Shelley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2009 17:12:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://julianfreeman.ca/?p=755#comment-1422</guid>
		<description>Interesting discussion. I&#039;ve always been intrigued by the idea of age segregation in church communities. Do I understand from your statement correctly that children will be considered for membership simply on a case-by-case basis?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting discussion. I&#8217;ve always been intrigued by the idea of age segregation in church communities. Do I understand from your statement correctly that children will be considered for membership simply on a case-by-case basis?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: derifter</title>
		<link>http://julianfreeman.ca/church/statement-voting-age-members/comment-page-1#comment-1377</link>
		<dc:creator>derifter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2009 17:47:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://julianfreeman.ca/?p=755#comment-1377</guid>
		<description>I think on the whole it sounds like you came to the right conclusion. The process that leads to membership (I&#039;m thinking especially of the review by the elders) would probably make an age requirement redundant. If God were to save a child at a young age and grant them amazing discernment or an incredible gift of wisdom or what-not, that would hopefully be apparent to the elders, thereby meeting the membership requirements and being a member, then, the child would be eligible to vote.

By not adding an age requirement that seemingly isn&#039;t needed, you also leave the door open to God surprising you through a child.

And in the end, you&#039;re talking about voting. If there is a concern that a young person holds there is nothing at all to keep them from bringing those concerns to staff or the laity, who should give it all the importance it deserves, including a vote if necessary.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think on the whole it sounds like you came to the right conclusion. The process that leads to membership (I&#8217;m thinking especially of the review by the elders) would probably make an age requirement redundant. If God were to save a child at a young age and grant them amazing discernment or an incredible gift of wisdom or what-not, that would hopefully be apparent to the elders, thereby meeting the membership requirements and being a member, then, the child would be eligible to vote.</p>
<p>By not adding an age requirement that seemingly isn&#8217;t needed, you also leave the door open to God surprising you through a child.</p>
<p>And in the end, you&#8217;re talking about voting. If there is a concern that a young person holds there is nothing at all to keep them from bringing those concerns to staff or the laity, who should give it all the importance it deserves, including a vote if necessary.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
