Good morning God,
The point was made yesterday that the handing on of Mr Wesley's Field Bible was in effect a form of Methodist Apostolic Succession. In bygone days there is no doubt that the power of the President was such that they could and did represent and embody the Conference in a highly symbolic and practical way - particularly the ministerial session of Conference. The changes in both Conference and the role of the President over the last decade mean that this may no longer be the case. The President retains the power to persuade, to preach and to visit, but the leadership, discipline and decision making of the Church is now far more diffuse. The power of President is no longer a reflection of the power of the Conference.
There is nonetheless, in my opinion, a more historical, lasting significant and powerful sign of our apostolic succession, and it is embedded in the order of business for the second day of the ministerial session.
The day begins with consideration of those candidates for ministerial training, and reviews the stage of each of our 'preachers' in their journey with our Church. This is no rubber stamping job, Conference can and has in the past, overturned some decisions regarding particular preachers. It is however a moment of joy as the Church acknowledges the renewing of the call, and the graciousness of God's Spirit in equipping people for ministry.
Later that day, a very moving service of remembrance is held. The families of those ministers who have travelled to higher service, are invited to join with the ministerial session to share in the worship and hear proclaimed again, our conviction of the truth of the Good News, Death is not the end. As the roll is called each person is recognised and honoured. It is almost a 'sacramental' moment, for their lives are the outward and visible sign of the inward invisible grace that countless thousands have received through their ministry.
It may seem too small a sign of our thanks and deep appreciation for the personal sacrifices that we know each family will have made in order to enable their loved one to serve, but when the entire body stands in respectful silence, not for their grief, but in thanks and appreciation of THEIR ministry, it is impossible not to be moved.
Following the afternoon's business, a buzz begins, quietly at first, as in ones and two's the ordinands arrive straight from the ordinand's retreat. Their joyous anticipation mingled with nervous trepidation is a powerful reminder to the gathered presbyters of their own ordination and the days leading up to it.
For me, the cycle of the whole day embodies a model of apostolic succession that is far more powerful than the handing on of Wesley's Bible.Especially as the day culminates with a celebration of Holy Communion. We gather, from every stage of the Journey, to hear and respond to the call, to worship God and be bound together as the Body of Christ. We receive what has been handed down to us, that on night on which he died, our Lord Jesus Christ, took bread...
Like many, I miss the arrival of the Deacons who used to share in the same service, but the powerful symbolism of the Vice President as preacher reminds us all of our calling to be a part of the Whole people of God, not separate from them, but raised up by them.
All of which leads me to conclude that Methodist apostolic succession is not (and perhaps never has been) ensured by the laying on of hands nor is it embodied by the President of Conference; rather, it is ensured by our faithfulness to our doctrines as they have been handed on from generation to generation and embodied in the real presence of Christ and the means of grace.
Showing posts with label methodism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label methodism. Show all posts
Saturday, July 2, 2011
Monday, June 20, 2011
The sins of the Fathers...
Good afternoon God,
I had always puzzled at how a loving God could, as Scripture so often tells us, visit the iniquity of the father onto the Children to the third and fourth generation.. sadly I now understand that what is meant is that the consequences of the initial 'sin' will reverberate and enslave subsequent generations.
It is in that light that I have come to view our current ecumenical situation.
I fully understand the origin of the dreams of ecumenism that once fired the young ministers of the Methodist and Anglican Churches during the 1960's and 70's - especially following the 'death of God debate'. I appreciate all that they managed to achieve with their zeal and enthusiasm.. but I have also come to believe you gave your answer - firmly and emphatically. You have made it clear that your 'broken body' is not ours to try and lump together again by our petty politics and power games. It is broken - to serve your purposes, not ours.
But the next generation of ministers, and those that have followed have nonetheless had to pay the price of those dreams. The amount of energy and money that has been spent on seeking so called 'Church unity' - ie on Church order, instead of on evangelism, social justice and pastoral care is - quite simply - frightening - and sinful.
And no - I do not understand it.
I am repeatedly told that full organic unity will better serve the mission of your Church - but the fastest growing churches in the world, both historically, and currently are those interested in mission and ministry, not those obsessed with bishops and clerics. They are those with people and salvation in mind, not Church order and interchangability of ministry. They are focused on worship and discipleship, not with whether a service of the Eucharist is 'proper' or 'authorized'.
The Pentecostal Church today is not interested in whether the world thinks it is 'orthodox' or 'respectable' it IS interested in saving souls. In Asia and Africa the Methodist Church is not concerned with whether it is part of the apostolic succession or not, it IS concerned with saving souls..
I am tired of being told that the Methodist Church once claimed that it was willing to take the historic episcope into its system - we once claimed a lot of things! Wesley believed in Witches, and thought tea was the devil's brew - we no longer do. British Methodists were once almost all members of the Temperance society - few are today, we once thought Roman Catholics were not even Christian - we no longer think so today - we MAKE MISTAKES in our discernment!
At the start of this century, we made it clear that we were no longer so willing to take the historic episcope into our system when Conference and the Methodist people declared that NONE of the possible options presented (including that of the president of Conference being made a Bishop) was acceptable.
Surprisingly God, you have shared with us some crucial revelations: You have shown us that that there is no difference in your eyes between laity and clergy, and that the Church really does not need bishops to engage in mission and ministry. You have revealed to us that the diaconate is a separate unique and complementary form of ordained ministry; that the laity can baptise and preside over the Lord's table without either acts losing their sacramentality or efficacy before You. That discipline and discipleship belong together. That Christian perfection is the goal you set before us, and most of all - that predestination in any form is not part of your Gospel of love and grace.
The longing of some Methodist men to be Bishops was/is I believe, another sickness and a sin in our church that some in this generation are growing a little tired of paying for. I believe you have made it clear that churches can work together without denying the gifts of grace that you have given to each. It should be possible for any church seriously committed to your gospel, to work for your glory without being made to adopt Bishops first!
So - yes, I am appalled at the re-writing of Methodist History in the JIC report coming before our Conference - Methodism divided after Wesley's death over church structure - and in particular over the doctrine of the Priesthood of all believers - ie over the equality before you, God of the laity and the clergy. Once again, our history is paraded as something shameful, when the truth is quite the opposite.
Lay and clerical equality is not an event in our past, but in our present. We have only recently finished restructuring our own Conference so that there is parity of representation between clergy and laity.
And where in the report is the recent Anglican history over this same period ? What of the flying bishops from other parts of the Anglican world brought in by London Churches to ordain the homophobic, or the success of the ordinariate and the dissent against women bishops -
The JIC report dares to suggest that the Covenant is a plan for greater Church unity but the Anglican Church has demonstrated a frightening inability to maintain its own internal unity.
A large part of what distresses me is the ignorance that has been perpetrated by our ecumenical work leading to the lie that there is little difference between Methodists and Anglicans. Most Methodists and Anglicans have no idea that the Church of England does not recognise Methodist orders. They have no idea that the Church of England will only allow a Methodist minister to conduct a 'Methodist' service in an Anglican Church - that we are not deemed worthy or 'holy' or 'ordained' enough to lead an Anglican rite - even though we train with Anglicans, share in various mission and social justice programs with Anglicans. And few will know - especially if these new ecumenical areas are implemented - that the difference is based not just on canon law - but on theology and doctrine.
I suspect that the proposed 'ecumenical areas' or 'local covenants' are intended to lead still more people to believe that there is no difference really - even though the actual difference cripples Methodist ministry and mission, further erodes Methodist identity and negates the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers, and the revelation Methodism has received of the equality of lay and ordained. (To say nothing of gender equality)
I do not want to be a part of a church where so called 'unity' is more important than equality before you God. Please God, is there no way you can persuade the Anglican Church to focus on sorting out its own divisions and schisms and let this be the last generation required to wrestle with the consequences of the 1972 debacle?
Can we not just get on with the task of saving souls?
I had always puzzled at how a loving God could, as Scripture so often tells us, visit the iniquity of the father onto the Children to the third and fourth generation.. sadly I now understand that what is meant is that the consequences of the initial 'sin' will reverberate and enslave subsequent generations.
It is in that light that I have come to view our current ecumenical situation.
I fully understand the origin of the dreams of ecumenism that once fired the young ministers of the Methodist and Anglican Churches during the 1960's and 70's - especially following the 'death of God debate'. I appreciate all that they managed to achieve with their zeal and enthusiasm.. but I have also come to believe you gave your answer - firmly and emphatically. You have made it clear that your 'broken body' is not ours to try and lump together again by our petty politics and power games. It is broken - to serve your purposes, not ours.
But the next generation of ministers, and those that have followed have nonetheless had to pay the price of those dreams. The amount of energy and money that has been spent on seeking so called 'Church unity' - ie on Church order, instead of on evangelism, social justice and pastoral care is - quite simply - frightening - and sinful.
And no - I do not understand it.
I am repeatedly told that full organic unity will better serve the mission of your Church - but the fastest growing churches in the world, both historically, and currently are those interested in mission and ministry, not those obsessed with bishops and clerics. They are those with people and salvation in mind, not Church order and interchangability of ministry. They are focused on worship and discipleship, not with whether a service of the Eucharist is 'proper' or 'authorized'.
The Pentecostal Church today is not interested in whether the world thinks it is 'orthodox' or 'respectable' it IS interested in saving souls. In Asia and Africa the Methodist Church is not concerned with whether it is part of the apostolic succession or not, it IS concerned with saving souls..
I am tired of being told that the Methodist Church once claimed that it was willing to take the historic episcope into its system - we once claimed a lot of things! Wesley believed in Witches, and thought tea was the devil's brew - we no longer do. British Methodists were once almost all members of the Temperance society - few are today, we once thought Roman Catholics were not even Christian - we no longer think so today - we MAKE MISTAKES in our discernment!
At the start of this century, we made it clear that we were no longer so willing to take the historic episcope into our system when Conference and the Methodist people declared that NONE of the possible options presented (including that of the president of Conference being made a Bishop) was acceptable.
Surprisingly God, you have shared with us some crucial revelations: You have shown us that that there is no difference in your eyes between laity and clergy, and that the Church really does not need bishops to engage in mission and ministry. You have revealed to us that the diaconate is a separate unique and complementary form of ordained ministry; that the laity can baptise and preside over the Lord's table without either acts losing their sacramentality or efficacy before You. That discipline and discipleship belong together. That Christian perfection is the goal you set before us, and most of all - that predestination in any form is not part of your Gospel of love and grace.
The longing of some Methodist men to be Bishops was/is I believe, another sickness and a sin in our church that some in this generation are growing a little tired of paying for. I believe you have made it clear that churches can work together without denying the gifts of grace that you have given to each. It should be possible for any church seriously committed to your gospel, to work for your glory without being made to adopt Bishops first!
So - yes, I am appalled at the re-writing of Methodist History in the JIC report coming before our Conference - Methodism divided after Wesley's death over church structure - and in particular over the doctrine of the Priesthood of all believers - ie over the equality before you, God of the laity and the clergy. Once again, our history is paraded as something shameful, when the truth is quite the opposite.
Lay and clerical equality is not an event in our past, but in our present. We have only recently finished restructuring our own Conference so that there is parity of representation between clergy and laity.
And where in the report is the recent Anglican history over this same period ? What of the flying bishops from other parts of the Anglican world brought in by London Churches to ordain the homophobic, or the success of the ordinariate and the dissent against women bishops -
The JIC report dares to suggest that the Covenant is a plan for greater Church unity but the Anglican Church has demonstrated a frightening inability to maintain its own internal unity.
A large part of what distresses me is the ignorance that has been perpetrated by our ecumenical work leading to the lie that there is little difference between Methodists and Anglicans. Most Methodists and Anglicans have no idea that the Church of England does not recognise Methodist orders. They have no idea that the Church of England will only allow a Methodist minister to conduct a 'Methodist' service in an Anglican Church - that we are not deemed worthy or 'holy' or 'ordained' enough to lead an Anglican rite - even though we train with Anglicans, share in various mission and social justice programs with Anglicans. And few will know - especially if these new ecumenical areas are implemented - that the difference is based not just on canon law - but on theology and doctrine.
I suspect that the proposed 'ecumenical areas' or 'local covenants' are intended to lead still more people to believe that there is no difference really - even though the actual difference cripples Methodist ministry and mission, further erodes Methodist identity and negates the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers, and the revelation Methodism has received of the equality of lay and ordained. (To say nothing of gender equality)
I do not want to be a part of a church where so called 'unity' is more important than equality before you God. Please God, is there no way you can persuade the Anglican Church to focus on sorting out its own divisions and schisms and let this be the last generation required to wrestle with the consequences of the 1972 debacle?
Can we not just get on with the task of saving souls?
Friday, June 10, 2011
Methodism and the Nunc Dimittis
Good morning God,
It's an odd thing to say, but the General Secretary has helped me understand the Nunc Dimittis in a way I could never have believed possible before.. and its bitter-sweet. The same thing that makes me feel I really can die in peace, also energizes me and makes me long to live and see more of what you have granted us just a tiny glimpse of. I wonder if Simeon felt that strange mix of elation and peace, excitement and anticipation, longing and regret on seeing Jesus?
Ok, Ok the General Secretary's report is not quite in the same league in one sense - but it DID let me see Jesus - it DID open my eyes and offer me a glimpse of your salvation and filled my heart with hope - and dread - for the future.
The report is written in clear and accessible Godly language that draws on the riches of our tradition and the experiences and inspiration of past presidents - yet is still clearly profoundly prophetic. That it is YOUR word I have no doubt. Yes, it shows evidence of careful editing, there is no desire here to upset or offend, but this report also makes no apologies for the fact that should the Connexion be persuaded to follow the vision that you have given to the General Secretary and the Connexional team, it will be radically changed from what it is now.
Alleluia!
No minister likes to think that their ministry, their service to you God has been in vain. As with so many I have been more than disillusioned about the 'Church' and its seeming loss of passion for the gospel, commitment to mission, obsession with structure and form rather than Scripture and prayer.
The seemingly slow inexorable slide into Anglicanism, institutionalism, officialdom etc has depressed me beyond belief. The lack of godly language or the use of Scripture in our public communications, the absence of any real sense of direction other than a parroting of 'the priorities' had left me seriously questioning my vocation.
The words of the Easter liturgy spring to mind..
The General Secretary's report captures what Methodism once did best - move forward into the future, taking the risk of being different, radical, even passionate in a desire to serve You in obedience and truth. It then dares to spell out how that might still possible today before providing just a few small illustrations of what Methodism might look like if it chose to follow that route. And for the first time since the whole 'Team Focus' process started - I feel a part of the team again, as though the Connexion includes me in, rather than writes me off as a circuit minister.
THANK YOU TEAM
Yes, I know, this will be incredibly risky and painful for many in our Church to accept and adopt.
Yes, this runs the risk of initially at least losing us almost as many members as it potentially creates,
yes this takes us further than ever away from the careful steering towards respectable ecclesiology that has eaten up so much of our energy and vitality over the last 30 years -
but
by grace, by your wonderful powerful spirit God, we could actually do this - we could actually become a mission minded people once again, more worried about You than about our committees, buildings, titles, and personnel departments!
Provided we don't procrastinate.
I really want to be a part of this Lord.. not just witness the birth of it!
It's an odd thing to say, but the General Secretary has helped me understand the Nunc Dimittis in a way I could never have believed possible before.. and its bitter-sweet. The same thing that makes me feel I really can die in peace, also energizes me and makes me long to live and see more of what you have granted us just a tiny glimpse of. I wonder if Simeon felt that strange mix of elation and peace, excitement and anticipation, longing and regret on seeing Jesus?
Ok, Ok the General Secretary's report is not quite in the same league in one sense - but it DID let me see Jesus - it DID open my eyes and offer me a glimpse of your salvation and filled my heart with hope - and dread - for the future.
The report is written in clear and accessible Godly language that draws on the riches of our tradition and the experiences and inspiration of past presidents - yet is still clearly profoundly prophetic. That it is YOUR word I have no doubt. Yes, it shows evidence of careful editing, there is no desire here to upset or offend, but this report also makes no apologies for the fact that should the Connexion be persuaded to follow the vision that you have given to the General Secretary and the Connexional team, it will be radically changed from what it is now.
Alleluia!
No minister likes to think that their ministry, their service to you God has been in vain. As with so many I have been more than disillusioned about the 'Church' and its seeming loss of passion for the gospel, commitment to mission, obsession with structure and form rather than Scripture and prayer.
The seemingly slow inexorable slide into Anglicanism, institutionalism, officialdom etc has depressed me beyond belief. The lack of godly language or the use of Scripture in our public communications, the absence of any real sense of direction other than a parroting of 'the priorities' had left me seriously questioning my vocation.
The words of the Easter liturgy spring to mind..
If we have fallen into despair. If we have failed to hope in you, If we have been fearful of death, If we we have forgotten the victory of Christ. Lord, forgive us.'But on the eve of Pentecost you have answered my prayer by giving me a glimpse of a possible future..
The General Secretary's report captures what Methodism once did best - move forward into the future, taking the risk of being different, radical, even passionate in a desire to serve You in obedience and truth. It then dares to spell out how that might still possible today before providing just a few small illustrations of what Methodism might look like if it chose to follow that route. And for the first time since the whole 'Team Focus' process started - I feel a part of the team again, as though the Connexion includes me in, rather than writes me off as a circuit minister.
THANK YOU TEAM
Yes, I know, this will be incredibly risky and painful for many in our Church to accept and adopt.
Yes, this runs the risk of initially at least losing us almost as many members as it potentially creates,
yes this takes us further than ever away from the careful steering towards respectable ecclesiology that has eaten up so much of our energy and vitality over the last 30 years -
but
by grace, by your wonderful powerful spirit God, we could actually do this - we could actually become a mission minded people once again, more worried about You than about our committees, buildings, titles, and personnel departments!
Provided we don't procrastinate.
I really want to be a part of this Lord.. not just witness the birth of it!
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Penis Envy
I have never wanted equality with a man - why settle for less than you already have has been my motto. But now I find I have a peculiar case of Penis Envy It's a little late in developing I know, but previously I have never had a real problem with being a woman in a man's world. Whether in Information Technology or Lecturing, it was always easy to deal with sexism simply by being better at my job than the other 'guy'.
It took the Church to make a sort of feminist of me!
I confess that I have tended to play down feminist theology as a 'red herring' theology - one of those side-avenues that 'real theology' can dally around in whilst it muses over the real questions of who YOU really are and why You have any interest in us, and who on earth Christ was, and what in heaven's name has happened to the trinity as a result.. you know the sort of things I mean.
Feminism always seemed so stamp-the-foot angry, and, if I am honest - too one-sided for me. What's the point in making women into men? What's the point in being so aggressive that we lose who we are? I can't be a man hater - I love too many of them! From my experience training and working with male ministers, I just can't believe women are any more caring or creative, loving or flowingly liturgical(?) than any male minister fulfilling their calling to love Christ's flock.
Moreover, feminism has always seemed keen to categorise and define women as a group of people I didn't belong too. I am highly creative, but wouldn't know how to wear a scarf around my neck properly or apply a modern mascara. I enjoy a soak in the bath, but can't be bothered with make-overs or make-up (the very expression says it all for me!) I prefer mixed company where possible - but to be honest I don't care what the gender or sexuality of the person is - as long as they can laugh and converse, preferably about theology, but I'll settle for anything cultural, political or scientific as a substitute!
I hate the very notion of Network or as it is now renamed 'Women in British Methodism' and the assumption built into it that just because I wear knickers I belong to a special group which the Church must pander to by allocating a place at Conference to a women who dares to claim she speaks in my name (as though I lack the ability to speak for myself!!!)
I am a woman not a wimp - I can speak for myself thank you - and I hate the very notion that such women's groups are based on - that women are so waspish and wimpish that in order to succeed they have to have special consideration of their needs.
So that's my prejudices nailed to the mast - but what then of my anger and righteous indignation of the state of the Church? Of the disgusting male exclusivity built into every element - from the liturgy with its conditional offering, to the priesthood!
I could of course, take the attitude suggested by the David Hallam in a comment on my last post and simply thank God that I am a Methodist and a product of the Reformation..
Except, of course, as most women in Methodism know - the problem of exclusivity is as much a Methodist problem as a Catholic one.
Do the figures..
what percentage of an average congregation is male, what percentage is female.
Now.. what percentage of our Connxional Team is Male? What percentage of our District Chairs is Male? what percentage of our Circuit Superintendents is Male? And of our ministers.. our district officers, or our new Pioneer Leaders?
The only place where the ratio of male to female even begin to match the Congregation is in terms of local preachers... but even here I still hear complaints from women about women local preachers with their high pitched screachy voices!
I am incensed at how delighted everyone is that we have a female president and vice president - why so delighted? this should be NORMAL - we don't experience the same joy when we have the usual twosome - or when (increasingly more common) we have a male president and a female Vice president
Our very delight in the elections of Alison and Eunice show how much this is OUR problem as well as the catholic Church's problem.
What - did we think having women ministers was enough?
we have prided ourselves on the idea that no office in our Church is barred to women - but we have our own glass ceilings, they may not be in CPD - but the figures make it clear that they do exist in the hearts and heads of those who appoint and select our ministers, officers and pioneer leaders (albeit, I grant, perhaps subconsciously).
BUT Gender justice is a gospel issue - not just a Church structure issue.
Our structures are but a reflection of our underlying theology and liturgy (we are what we pray as a Church)
So for me this cannot aford to be about helping the little woman out - I demand gender justice, and although, yes, I am little(!) I am not wanting special privileges or special consideration. I dont want a different job, I don't even want women to want access to the sort of jobs men in Methodism currently hold - I want a more radical change. I want the underlying theology exposed so that we see how we got into this mess and are more able to use the gospel light to find a way out of it.
I want for myself and for other women in our Church what you God, have given to all - full and unconditional access to your grace, to your love and to your power to change what is wrong, to transform the world and assist in the building of a kingdom of justice and peace. I want everyone to have what my male colleagues have, the theological and biblical freedom and confidence to be who they are, and to grow fully in grace and holiness in a Church which follows Christ's example and celebrates both genders. I want for everyone to have the same access to authority, the same rights within our Church, the same respect and the same consideration as every man is granted naturally - and I want it without anyone having to stamp a foot to get it.
I want an end to theological Penis envy..
Ironically God, the Vatican is full of male statues, each with the penis chopped off... there's got to be a feminist sermon in there somewhere!
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Five things I love about Methodism
Good morning God,
Micky, Dave and Richard, are all pointing to The Road to Elder-ado: 5 things I love about Methodists. In her post however, Micky also raises the challenge: So - go on then, why do you love Methodism?
So here's my response:
Five things I love about Methodism
1. Evangelical Arminianism
The amazing news that you are not the God of the elect few but are the God of the poor and the God of the ruling classes, chattering classes, (even Methodist classes) needs to be shouted out in a country where Church is still equated primarily with the ageing white (respectable) middle-classes. Such news just has to be shared, how can we keep it to ourselves? Wherever this truth is understood it leads to passionate preaching - in some peculiar places, throughout the whole world: outdoors, indoors, in graveyards, on hilltops, in tent meetings, cafes, basements, market-squares, gyms, at the sea side, in city halls, and on top of plinths! Oh.. and sometimes in Churches too!
2. Social Holiness
Without social justice the church simply makes a liar and a hypocrite of you and your love of us God. You cared enough about us to get down and get mucky – how can we do less and still claim to be your disciples? Methodists don’t believe salvation can be earned by good deeds, but neither do they believe that someone can be saved and not respond to your call to help end the injustice, ignorance, hatred and fear that still enslaves and demeans your creation.
3. Growth in grace
Salvation is just the start of it..
There’s more… !
No matter how ‘good’ we think we are,
No matter how ‘good’ our knowledge of Scripture or theology is
no matter how ‘good’ our relationship with you is God,
The more we respond to your grace – the more grace abounds
It just keeps getting better…
Sanctification – here we come…
4. Worship
Extempore prayer, high quality preaching, and the best hymns in Christendom – what’s not to like?
5. Connexionalism
Not to be confused with what is termed ‘The Connexion’ and never to be reduced to a team, Connexionalism is the Methodist way of being Church.
Using the circuit as the centre for local mission and the Conference as the centre for national Conferring, Connexionalism (spelt with an X to represent the Cross at the centre of our belonging) allows us to express our equality before you and our assent to our common calling: it promotes and resources our mission and diversity by actively encouraging our non-conformity! It's quirky and problematic at times, its a disabled body rather than a perfect magisterium, but that's what makes it work so well - it keeps us dependent on your grace for our survival rather than on a bishop or two, (or even a whole house of them). It is how you have bound us together in love.
Ok.. I KNOW this might read like an ideal image of Methodism. It's true that it varies from place to place.. but the things that I love are still recognisable in more places than people might think. From the work I do in ministerial training for example, I know that there is a real hunger in those you are calling to minister to be allowed to BE Methodist. It's also possible to detect an increasing longing amongst the membership for Methodists to rediscover their own identity and practices.
Maybe you haven't finished with us yet God.
Sunday, July 26, 2009
Let no one suffer hurt through your neglect
Good morning God,
It will be a joy to Baptise Carmel this morning, but my preparations for this service combined with some of the events of this weekend, have prompted me to revisit the Presidents charge to me at my ordination. I have baptised and confirmed so many young people, a rare and wonderful privilege. I have shared with them in their journey of faith and exploration of what it means to have a God of justice and peace, of passion and persuasion.
But I want to know how, God, under our Methodist system of itinerancy, we are ever to keep the command 'let no one suffer hurt through your neglect. We forgot to add the words 'as long as you are their minister' or some other get-out clause and I don't know how to find the off switch.
Letting go and letting YOU, God do your work, trusting in YOU God, and having confidence that the seeds that were planted... all the usual platitudes just don't quite cut it when what I really want to do is vent my anger - because when young people leave the Church I really don't believe it's good enough to dump it on you God.
I guess it is about how congregations keep the promise which they make at a young person's baptism 'to so maintain the Church's life of worship and service that their young people can grow in grace and in the knowledge and love of God and of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord..
as well as how ministers heed the charge given to them at their ordination.
So, given how many young people are leaving or have already left your Church, I'd appreciate some help God, for me as I wrestle with what it all means, for the Children I have and will baptise in your name but above all - for the Church, for each one of us to keep our promises.. so that it really might be the case that no one suffers harm by our collective neglect.
Thursday, July 23, 2009
Trivial Pursuit
At the Local Preacher's meeting last night, following the announcement of my diagnosis of cancer, the Superintendent asked for help in ensuring that all my appointments were covered. It was this, I believe which led to my interesting nightmare last night.
I dreamt that some members of the Church, a few local preachers and the all Circuit staff were playing a game of trivial pursuit. The dream was a nightmare because I absolutely loathe the game of trivial pursuit. Just the idea of having to waste my time in a game of chance, elevating snippets of trivia to a position of prime importance is my idea of hell. The only thing that ever redeems the game for me is the companionship of good friends.
It was a horrifyingly accurate nightmare of what is troubling me most; having to watch and participate in the all too human tendency to trivialize what IS important as a means of coping, and to dice with chance rather than trust to God's providence in our lives as disciples and preachers of God's Word. My revulsion is, I think, a natural consequence of my calling as a theologian and preacher. Last night it was all about worship and mission.
I know that worship is not trivial, but when the preaching plan has to be made, it is all too easy to slip into thinking that as long as we have the right preacher or type of service in place, then we have it covered. In my nightmare scenario, the preachers were the players, the services the squares on the board. The dice - the element of chance driving the game, was my illness and the unpredictability of when I would need to take time out for surgery etc. The trivia that was pursued at each roll of the dice were the questions: Who is available to preach on this particular Sunday? When did the preacher preach last at that Church ?(heaven forbid they should be at the same Church two Sundays in a row), and, What sort of service is it that needs to be 'filled'?
And it was all so desperately wrong. In my nightmare, I was forced to watch the relationship between mission and worship which, as a church we have been deliberately trying to strengthen, being threatened for no other reason than the need to 'fill the plan'.
Now of course, dreams exaggerate - but my anguish stayed with me when I woke fed by the knowledge that worship should never be a game of chance based on who is available to preach on a particular Sunday. It shouldn't be about the preachers at all, but about the people of God and God's provision of the means of grace.
We all KNOW that Worship is NOT trivial - so surely this means that the preaching plan should reflect this? The Superintendents who are required to 'make' the preaching plans that govern Methodist worship up and down the Connexion are, nonetheless, put in an almost impossible situation. My concern is not with them, they are working hard to fulfil the demands made of them. My complaint is against those congregations and ministers alike who simply refuse to even consider the question - What is the preaching plan for? Is the purpose of the plan to put a preacher in every pulpit every Sunday - or is it to assist in furthering the missio dei?
Local preachers have an essential role to play in Methodist worship and in mission. Through their familiarity with both the local Church and the surrounding community, they can help to embody the principle of incarnational ministry and contextual mission. When people hear their own concerns directly related to the Gospel message in a way that they can immediately understand, they are much better able to respond. But when a local preacher is no longer really 'local' to the Church or has no direct contact with the local community then their ability to bridge the gulf between those particular secular and sacred worlds becomes more difficult. The missional dimension of local preaching changes. This does not mean that their preaching is no longer valid, or important. But the link between mission, context and worship is something that is too important to ignore.
If the worship in a circuit is to reach out in mission and aim to do more than satisfy the spiritual needs of existing congregations then the local Church and/or Circuit leadership team has to give serious thought (if they haven't already) to the direct relationship between the purpose of worship and the plan.
WHY should THAT preacher be in THAT pulpit on THAT Sunday - by God's providential ordering, or by the vagaries of holidays, family commitments, work, the number of times they are already on the plan, or simply because they haven't been there that quarter yet..?
God forbid that it should be because there isn't anyone else.
We proclaim as much by what we do as by what we say - and the preaching plan, more than any other circuit document, proclaims our priorities. Surely therefore we need to demand of ourselves, that the preaching plans in our circuits are written in such a way that they are not about the trivial pursuit of preachers and pulpits, but are about the essential need for the people of God - churched, dechurched, and unchurched to encounter and Worship God and so grow in grace and holiness.
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Being free to minister..
Good morning God,
Carrying on our conversation from yesterday, you've had me thinking about the way in which church members may need to dissent from their own, and sometimes their minister's understanding of ministry in order to be able to be Church. It's sad really how quickly we can slip into blind obedience to unwritten expectations which make ministry more like wading through mud than liberating the soul.
Do you recall that one brilliant ministerial student asking me in utter panic when she had just been stationed - ' but what will I DO all day?' She was so concerned that she didn't know how she would be expected to spend her time (the same soul was later repeatedly told that she was a workaholic!)
The mistake we make, I think God. is assuming that ministry is like any other 'job'. It isn't a 'job' it is a vocation, a way of being, and as such it can't be broken down into a set of achievable outcomes or tasks. I think you have taught me over the years that ministry is simply a way of being with your people such that they know your presence and can be led into your truth by the power of your holy Spirit.
Of course, there are certain set times which we try and set aside by to be with you and with the minster in order that together we might delight in 'being' Your people, might offer you our thanks and praise, and seek to learn how to be more like you. These are times which may be 'planned', and which may well end up in a diary but which are sadly all too often squeezed or crowded out by a whole host of other things which actually have nothing to do with the ministry or the ministerial vocation.
They are, if we are honest, often more about power-plays than about people, more about status and systems than about the Spirit , and more about ego's and feathers than souls and salvation. And these things cripple the work you have called us to do God.
So before September starts, and a whole new round of ministerial expectations set in - here are a few suggestions which I think you would endorse God, for members of those Circuits which have asked on their circuit profile for a pioneer minister or a minister with experience of Fresh Expressions.
Suggestion number one : Let the minister you have asked for - be the minister you have asked for.
Take a GOOD look at the diary you are busy creating for them - and for every meeting that is already in it which CPD does not require a minister to Chair - try and find someone else to chair it. (for reference - the minister is only required to attend Church Council meetings, the General Church meeting, the Pastoral Committee Meeting and the Circuit meeting. and the Worship consultation meeting if one exists) Learn to ask - WHY do we need the MINISTER to chair this meeting - what will they bring to the meeting which nobody else can. If (as is so often the case) the only answer is to know whether or not the minister is free to attend another meeting/event/occassion - then ask the minister for some date BEFORE the meeting - and agree to one of those.
Suggestion Number Two: Expect the unexpected.
If you have asked for a pioneer or a fresh expression practitioner do not expect them to be the same-old-samo. They will not BE in the office every Monday, or pastoral visiting every Tuesday, at lunch club every Wednesday, Mother's and Toddler's and writing sermons every Thursday, doing hospital visits every Friday, hosting coffee mornings every Saturday and leading Church Services every Sunday.
They are more likely to be in schools, in pubs, in restaurants, in gyms, in the street, on the buses, in the sanctuary, in the cafe's, They are more likely to talking to a bunch of prostitutes than to the Woman's meeting, leading a street healing service on a park bench than leading a guild meeting in the Church hall, and being a pub philosopher/theologian than being in the vestry for a fixed hour once a week. They will be wherever those who do not know God are, and will create a different form of Church with them which may, but probably will not, lead to greater Sunday attendance.
Suggestion number three: SHARE in the work of God.
We have become frighteningly dependent on the clergy in our Churches over the last three decades, and I really think that this more than anything, stifles the ministry of the Whole People of God. Experience teaches us that its only when we begin to share in ministry that we begin to grow ourselves and discover the joy of our own calling. Here are a few obvious things that Church members can begin to reclaim a shared responsibility for: Class leadership, pastoral visiting, Baptismal and wedding preparation classes, leading WORSHIP, leading fellowship, PRAYING.. When these are part of a shared ministry, the Church is a vibrant, Spirit filled community which can't help but grow in grace and holiness.
I'm really thankful that in Methodism, the laity really can have a shared ministry - if they want it; a ministry which is not confined to attending meetings, stewarding or handing out bibles (important as these things are)
A Methodist lay person can be enabled to:
1) Take extended communion to the housebound
2) Baptise
3) Preach
4) Lead worship
5) Lead Bible Study and Fellowship
YES of course, training is needed - these things are important - but the first step is realising that this ministry is not only possible - but is essential to the future life of the Church.
What do you think God - would it work - could we do it?
Could we set our ministers free to minister and begin to share in the ministry of the whole people of God ourselves?
Carrying on our conversation from yesterday, you've had me thinking about the way in which church members may need to dissent from their own, and sometimes their minister's understanding of ministry in order to be able to be Church. It's sad really how quickly we can slip into blind obedience to unwritten expectations which make ministry more like wading through mud than liberating the soul.
Do you recall that one brilliant ministerial student asking me in utter panic when she had just been stationed - ' but what will I DO all day?' She was so concerned that she didn't know how she would be expected to spend her time (the same soul was later repeatedly told that she was a workaholic!)
The mistake we make, I think God. is assuming that ministry is like any other 'job'. It isn't a 'job' it is a vocation, a way of being, and as such it can't be broken down into a set of achievable outcomes or tasks. I think you have taught me over the years that ministry is simply a way of being with your people such that they know your presence and can be led into your truth by the power of your holy Spirit.
Of course, there are certain set times which we try and set aside by to be with you and with the minster in order that together we might delight in 'being' Your people, might offer you our thanks and praise, and seek to learn how to be more like you. These are times which may be 'planned', and which may well end up in a diary but which are sadly all too often squeezed or crowded out by a whole host of other things which actually have nothing to do with the ministry or the ministerial vocation.
They are, if we are honest, often more about power-plays than about people, more about status and systems than about the Spirit , and more about ego's and feathers than souls and salvation. And these things cripple the work you have called us to do God.
So before September starts, and a whole new round of ministerial expectations set in - here are a few suggestions which I think you would endorse God, for members of those Circuits which have asked on their circuit profile for a pioneer minister or a minister with experience of Fresh Expressions.
Suggestion number one : Let the minister you have asked for - be the minister you have asked for.
Take a GOOD look at the diary you are busy creating for them - and for every meeting that is already in it which CPD does not require a minister to Chair - try and find someone else to chair it. (for reference - the minister is only required to attend Church Council meetings, the General Church meeting, the Pastoral Committee Meeting and the Circuit meeting. and the Worship consultation meeting if one exists) Learn to ask - WHY do we need the MINISTER to chair this meeting - what will they bring to the meeting which nobody else can. If (as is so often the case) the only answer is to know whether or not the minister is free to attend another meeting/event/occassion - then ask the minister for some date BEFORE the meeting - and agree to one of those.
Suggestion Number Two: Expect the unexpected.
If you have asked for a pioneer or a fresh expression practitioner do not expect them to be the same-old-samo. They will not BE in the office every Monday, or pastoral visiting every Tuesday, at lunch club every Wednesday, Mother's and Toddler's and writing sermons every Thursday, doing hospital visits every Friday, hosting coffee mornings every Saturday and leading Church Services every Sunday.
They are more likely to be in schools, in pubs, in restaurants, in gyms, in the street, on the buses, in the sanctuary, in the cafe's, They are more likely to talking to a bunch of prostitutes than to the Woman's meeting, leading a street healing service on a park bench than leading a guild meeting in the Church hall, and being a pub philosopher/theologian than being in the vestry for a fixed hour once a week. They will be wherever those who do not know God are, and will create a different form of Church with them which may, but probably will not, lead to greater Sunday attendance.
Suggestion number three: SHARE in the work of God.
We have become frighteningly dependent on the clergy in our Churches over the last three decades, and I really think that this more than anything, stifles the ministry of the Whole People of God. Experience teaches us that its only when we begin to share in ministry that we begin to grow ourselves and discover the joy of our own calling. Here are a few obvious things that Church members can begin to reclaim a shared responsibility for: Class leadership, pastoral visiting, Baptismal and wedding preparation classes, leading WORSHIP, leading fellowship, PRAYING.. When these are part of a shared ministry, the Church is a vibrant, Spirit filled community which can't help but grow in grace and holiness.
I'm really thankful that in Methodism, the laity really can have a shared ministry - if they want it; a ministry which is not confined to attending meetings, stewarding or handing out bibles (important as these things are)
A Methodist lay person can be enabled to:
1) Take extended communion to the housebound
2) Baptise
3) Preach
4) Lead worship
5) Lead Bible Study and Fellowship
YES of course, training is needed - these things are important - but the first step is realising that this ministry is not only possible - but is essential to the future life of the Church.
What do you think God - would it work - could we do it?
Could we set our ministers free to minister and begin to share in the ministry of the whole people of God ourselves?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)