Father-Son Churches

• Messages sorted by:[ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

 Bro. Wel...ah? yeah..Welch:
 It's Welch, although up until the mid 1800's it was Welsh.
 
 Sorry about the misspell Brother.  If you have read many of my posts, you
already know it is not an uncommon occurrence.  Thank God spell check catches
most of it.
 
 Bro.  Welch:
 I've already received one public post and two private posts concerning
this, thinking that I was criticizing someone specific (and I don't know
ANY of those people), and I can think of FOUR Churches off hand that have
done this, so I don't believe that I am so far outfield with this.

 Me:
 I wasn't criticizing.  That was one of my feeble attempts at humor.
 
 Bro.  Welch:
 I don't believe it is necessarily wrong, but I find it highly unlikely
that of ALL the world to preach the gospel, the son is basically handed
the keys to the Church as if it is a family inheritance...
 
 Mike:
 I personally don't find it highly unlikely.  In the case of a son becoming
the pastor, it follows that the son would come from a home that does a great
deal of praying and seeking God's will.  It also seems likely that the
children in the household may feel part of the burden for the souls of the
congregation from just being brought up around parents that manifest a burden.
It also seems logical that if that young man felt a burden to preach the word
that he would get opportunities to be before the congregation and the
congregation would become comfortable with him. 
 Do I think the son or son-in-law is *always* the best choice?  Of course not.
Sometimes it is not only not the best choice but the wrong choice. 
 Mike Reed