|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Young members of synod?
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
As requested by Hosts concerned comment posted here from All Saints
quote:
Originally posted by The Weeder:
To give you the background. I am a Licensed Lay Minister and although I am very new to the Church, I am known, as I live in the Parish. The Vicer also knows me from a project we worked on back in the day.
The lad is new, but eager. I will be looking after him- taking him to meetings, helping him to understand what is going on.
I see it all as very positive.
All well and good but ...
1. From a Safeguarding point of view I have serious concerns about you taking him if you are travelling alone. I'm also concerned that he is being placed in a situation where he will either be ignored or treated as a "trophy": neither of those are acceptable and constitute inappropriate behaviour.
2. It still doesn't answer the question why a church has nominated a 14 year old to Synod. Not only is it daft - just what will he think/do - it's also proscribed under the legislation.
Spike did enquire as to your location? is it possible to know by PM where this has happened?
However well the Vicar knows you what on earth is a church doing in electing someone who's only been a few weeks and presumably isn't even on the electoral roll? You both may have changed since "back in the day" [Whatever that ghastly phrase means ...]
[edited thread title for clarity. Again]
[ 14. April 2014, 11:28: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
In response to SvitlanaV2's comments on the All Saints thread ...
Yes some 14 year olds get involved in leading etc. but in their own church and under supervision of SS/youth leaders.
It's happening here today. But that is appropriate behaviour: electing a first attendee 14 year old to represent the church denominationally with no training, little understanding of the nuances and even the agenda involved, and being ferried to meetings under the care of The Weeder, is not. Very very far from it.
Has parental permission been obtained? Has safeguarding protocol been followed? Has no one but no one in the church raised any questions at all? Are they blind to the needs and ability of 14 year olds or just starry eyed at the possibility of having the youngest Synod member?
We're not told but the implication is that the 14 y/o will travel with The Weeder, alone. That, on its own, is a disclosure of inappropriate expectations and behaviour.
There's lots of children involved in our church life here - we had 77 of them plus 40 adults at messy church yesterday. But, we are very very careful about expecting unrealistic things from them. That doesn't seem the case here, sad to say - I just hope and pray that it doesn't end in tears.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spike
Mostly Harmless
# 36
|
Posted
The reason I asked about location was because I wasn't sure if Weeder is in England or not.
This lad may well be very eager, and Weeder may well be known to,the Vicar, but it seems the parish isn't terribly concerned with the legal aspect. As Imsaid on the other thread, a candidate for Deanery Synod must be over 16, a communicant member of the church and to have been on the Electoral Roll of the parish for a minimum of six months.
Putting age aside, I have a problem with anyone wandering into a church for the first ever to "see what it's about" immediately being elected to a tier of church government. This is potentially damaging to the person concerned as they will almost certainly find themselves out of their depth.
I'm sure the church members and the Vicar are very well meaning, but they really haven't thought this through properly.
I would be interested to hear the Area Dean's reaction to all of this.
--------------------
"May you get to heaven before the devil knows you're dead" - Irish blessing
Posts: 12860 | From: The Valley of Crocuses | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
The details given in The Weeder's profile suggest that s/he is just within England.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
I see that The Weeder is a retired child protection worker - that should give background knowledge of what's sensible behaviour. I'd be very surprised if giving a 14 year old lifts to and from church functions unaccompanied came within the local rules as to what is sensible. It certainly would not here. If for no other reason than self-protection, The Weeder should ensure that there's another adult around all the time.
As to the young fellow - 14 sounds far too young to be representing the parish at a synod. He could not do that here, no matter how many years he had been at the church. It makes you wonder quite what's going on with the rector and congregation that they could think it appropriate.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
sophs
Sardonic Angel
# 2296
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
2. It still doesn't answer the question why a church has nominated a 14 year old to Synod. Not only is it daft - just what will he think/do - it's also proscribed under the legislation.
Whatever the legalities of synod (which I have no experience of), I'm concerned that you seem to think that including the future of the church in deciding the direction of the church is daft and (from the other thread) doomed to failure.
Posts: 5407 | From: searching saharas of sorrow | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spike
Mostly Harmless
# 36
|
Posted
He's not saying that at all. In fact a few posts up, he is saying explicitly that the young people in his church have an active role.
--------------------
"May you get to heaven before the devil knows you're dead" - Irish blessing
Posts: 12860 | From: The Valley of Crocuses | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
I find it odd that business meetings are seen as attractive to enquirers anyway.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
hosting/
The hostly invitation for a new thread in Purgatory rather than All Saints was to discuss the issues involved. The invitation was not to discuss the individuals involved.
If anyone has concerns about the specific situation described on the thread in All Saints, they can express them via PM (note that the Ten Commandments apply to PMs too though).
Anyone continuing to bear down on the personal aspects on this thread is going to attract less benign hostly attention.
/hosting
[ 13. April 2014, 12:06: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
He's not saying that at all. In fact a few posts up, he is saying explicitly that the young people in his church have an active role.
Absolutely. The young people here have had a significant input into the vision of this church and the expression of the vision, including, on occasion, leading groups of adults.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Surely a 14yo would be elected to the Youth Synod? I don't know what the minimum age is though. Certainly, young people getting a say on the future of the church they are full and important members of is of vital importance.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Surely a 14yo would be elected to the Youth Synod? I don't know what the minimum age is though. Certainly, young people getting a say on the future of the church they are full and important members of is of vital importance.
I would've thought youth synod yes. And yes - involvement of and listening to young people is vital.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
I can't think of any reason why a young teenager (under 16) couldn't make a contribution to the deliberations of the church at a regional or national level. There may be practical issues relating to child protection legislation, accommodation during the meeting etc. But, in principal a young teenager is as much a member of the church as an adult, and should be able to have as much of a say as an adult.
I can understand guidelines that say any representative at such meetings should be a member of the church they represent, and have been active in the committees of their home church. That makes a lot of sense for anyone - someone who is not active in church committees and a member of a church isn't in a strong position to represent that church.
Just saying "they should be at the youth forum" is equivalent to forcing them out of the service to Sunday School, and IMO just as wrong. It defines them as something other than members of the church. If young people have the desire to participate in the running of the church they are a full part of then they most certainly should be given the chance.
The usual complaint of church committees is "we can't get any young people involved". Fobbing the young people off when they want to be involved is a sure fire way of making sure they end up not wanting to be involved.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jay-Emm
Shipmate
# 11411
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Surely a 14yo would be elected to the Youth Synod?
How well publicized is that? I've never heard of one and while obviously vicars and (if present) youth leaders are more likely to have than me...I don't know if it's certain.
Posts: 1643 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jay-Emm:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Surely a 14yo would be elected to the Youth Synod?
How well publicized is that? I've never heard of one and while obviously vicars and (if present) youth leaders are more likely to have than me...I don't know if it's certain.
The Youth Synod (or rather, the CoE Youth Council, the official name escaped me before!) runs alongside General Synod as a national forum for young people in the CoE, analogous to the Youth Parliament. It isn't particularly well-publicised though and seems to mostly be clergy children (my housemate is a former member, that's how I first heard of it!).
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I can't think of any reason why a young teenager (under 16) couldn't make a contribution to the deliberations of the church at a regional or national level. There may be practical issues relating to child protection legislation, accommodation during the meeting etc. But, in principal a young teenager is as much a member of the church as an adult, and should be able to have as much of a say as an adult.
I can understand guidelines that say any representative at such meetings should be a member of the church they represent, and have been active in the committees of their home church. That makes a lot of sense for anyone - someone who is not active in church committees and a member of a church isn't in a strong position to represent that church.
Just saying "they should be at the youth forum" is equivalent to forcing them out of the service to Sunday School, and IMO just as wrong. It defines them as something other than members of the church. If young people have the desire to participate in the running of the church they are a full part of then they most certainly should be given the chance.
The usual complaint of church committees is "we can't get any young people involved". Fobbing the young people off when they want to be involved is a sure fire way of making sure they end up not wanting to be involved.
I definitely wasn't saying 'they should be at the youth synod', rather that I didn't know if a 14yo would be able to be elected to the adult synod and that it might automatically for the youth one for age reasons. I personally have no issue with a 14yo sitting on General Synod and think it is a good thing.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Spike
Mostly Harmless
# 36
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I can't think of any reason why a young teenager (under 16) couldn't make a contribution to the deliberations of the church at a regional or national level. There may be practical issues relating to child protection legislation, accommodation during the meeting etc. But, in principal a young teenager is as much a member of the church as an adult, and should be able to have as much of a say as an adult.
I agree with you 100%. The issue I have isn't about age. My concern is whether it's a good thing, either for the church or the individual concerned, for somebody (whatever their age) who has never been inside a church before to immediately be pounced on to take up a leadership role.
--------------------
"May you get to heaven before the devil knows you're dead" - Irish blessing
Posts: 12860 | From: The Valley of Crocuses | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican't
Shipmate
# 15292
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The usual complaint of church committees is "we can't get any young people involved". Fobbing the young people off when they want to be involved is a sure fire way of making sure they end up not wanting to be involved.
If church committees are anything like Conservative Party associations, the cry of 'we can't get any young people involved' describes everyone from about 15 - 50.
Separately, surely teenagers can lose interest in things as quickly as they discover interest in things? Appointing an inexperienced teenager to an important position so quickly can mean that you'll be finding someone else for the post very quickly?
Posts: 3613 | From: London, England | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I can't think of any reason why a young teenager (under 16) couldn't make a contribution to the deliberations of the church at a regional or national level. There may be practical issues relating to child protection legislation, accommodation during the meeting etc. But, in principal a young teenager is as much a member of the church as an adult, and should be able to have as much of a say as an adult.
I agree with you 100%. The issue I have isn't about age. My concern is whether it's a good thing, either for the church or the individual concerned, for somebody (whatever their age) who has never been inside a church before to immediately be pounced on to take up a leadership role.
Which is why my post went onto say I recognise that guidelines that people representing a church are members of that church and otherwise involved in church committees were good.
I think it's upto the church who they appoint as their representatives, and there may be times when someone who doesn't qualify according to the guidelines would be the best person. But, if the church decides that someone who's not been a member for very long is qualified then they should be able to support that choice when challenged. Almost certainly much better than "no one else volunteered" (which IME is the usual basis for selecting someone to a committee).
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
The issue I have isn't about age. My concern is whether it's a good thing, either for the church or the individual concerned, for somebody (whatever their age) who has never been inside a church before to immediately be pounced on to take up a leadership role.
I must admit that the example given in the OP is rather unusual. But, as a general principle, if anyone of that age shows an interest it's important to try to accommodate it as far as possible. Perhaps it's rather similar to a role in the church choir, where a good singer could be given a solo almost immediately if he showed promise, regardless of how much he understood of the Christian faith. We are happy to accept any singers into the church choir - they can always pick up the religious understanding on the way.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tulfes
Shipmate
# 18000
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
The issue I have isn't about age. My concern is whether it's a good thing, either for the church or the individual concerned, for somebody (whatever their age) who has never been inside a church before to immediately be pounced on to take up a leadership role.
I must admit that the example given in the OP is rather unusual. But, as a general principle, if anyone of that age shows an interest it's important to try to accommodate it as far as possible. Perhaps it's rather similar to a role in the church choir, where a good singer could be given a solo almost immediately if he showed promise, regardless of how much he understood of the Christian faith. We are happy to accept any singers into the church choir - they can always pick up the religious understanding on the way.
I'm not sure singing in a church choir can be equated with representing a church/parish in a denominational governing body. In a choir you are singing the words of someone else, not writing the hymns or worship songs.
Posts: 175 | Registered: Feb 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
I'm thinking that "a denominational governing body" is a fairly grand term for most such bodies. At any given meeting very few decisions will actually be made there and then. Lots of recommendations to pass a matter to one of the working groups that will exist. Lots of revisiting discussions from previous meetings, or discussing what working groups have come up with about what they were given at previous meetings.
Yes, there may be "rogue members" with an agenda set on changing the church to their image. But, the nature of passing things on for deliberation elsewhere and coming back to review them, often for years, is a process that is inherently self-correcting. The final decision, if it's ever made, may not be right but it's very rarely something that doesn't carry with it the acceptance, if not support, of the majority.
The influence of a young man, younger than the recommended minimum age and with limited church background, on the decision making process will be minimal. The impact of being trusted with such a responsibility on him, however, could be considerable.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
My primary concern on the youth's behalf is boredom. I've never been to one of these meetings but I assume they are mostly boring, otherwise it would be easy to find volunteers. Attending a major boring event doesn't seem like a great way to entice someone into long-term church membership. More like the opposite. "I went to the biggest event they have - dullsville!"
My primary concern for the adult is vulnerability to false assumptions or false accusations, from being alone with a child not his own. Organist used to give lessons and if there was a noisy meeting in the hall he would close the door. One man, one child, alone together in a soundproof room for an hour. I didn't worry about the kid, I worried about the man, his reputation, what people might think even if no outright accusation. (He was fired two years later. Ignoring safe child policies wasn't the specific cause but didn't help him appear to respect the church and it's ways!)
As to the church, I doubt a 14 year old understands the issues even while thinking he does, but he probably won't make any worse decisions about votes than adults have made for centuries.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Spike:
My concern is whether it's a good thing, either for the church or the individual concerned, for somebody (whatever their age) who has never been inside a church before to immediately be pounced on to take up a leadership role.
Pardon the double post but yes I have seen this before.
In civil rights days a friend's church practically pounced on a black couple who came to the church. Get him on the vestry, get her on a committee. They wanted to look like a progressive church to the community. Or maybe they just wanted to be assuring to the couple "we really do believe black people can be competent leaders." That they didn't know THIS couple at all kinda undercut whatever the message was suppose to be. My friend said the black couple were embarrassed by the enthusiastic attention and declined the invitations to public roles.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
My primary concern on the youth's behalf is boredom. I've never been to one of these meetings but I assume they are mostly boring, otherwise it would be easy to find volunteers. Attending a major boring event doesn't seem like a great way to entice someone into long-term church membership. More like the opposite. "I went to the biggest event they have - dullsville!"
If he's been told that it's a business meeting with all the usual finances and stuff, then he'll know a lot of it will be tedious.
It's not an "event" - at best, a place to organise events.
quote:
My primary concern for the adult is vulnerability to false assumptions or false accusations, from being alone with a child not his own.
I'm not really in a position to comment on this specific instance. But, there are levels of risk. I think someone who describers herself as a retired child protection worker would be a considerably lower risk than many people - and more aware than most about child protection issues.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
In a different situation (not child protection), I have experience of someone with all the right credentials, and they happen to mean fuck-all. I say if something alarms your gut instincts, trust yourself.
[ 14. April 2014, 06:26: Message edited by: Autenrieth Road ]
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Putting aside credentials. Afterall, we only have what people put in their profiles to verify those.
Taking a general point. If a middle aged man spends time alone with a boy people will start to think he's abusing the lad. Change that for a woman in her 60s and the general assumption changes, people think of their grannies rather than potential abuser.
I don't know the stats as to whether middle aged men really are more likely to be abusers than little old ladies. The (very small) risk to the child may not be that much different. But the risk to the reputation of the adult is vastly different.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
But, there are levels of risk. I think someone who describers herself as a retired child protection worker would be a considerably lower risk than many people - and more aware than most about child protection issues.
More aware of the issues and potentially more aware of how to get round things. Didn't we once assume that children were safe when placed in the care of children's homes? All those nice kind people looking after those broken, hurting children?
Please don't assume anything where children are concerned: that's a key idea in Safeguarding Training.
It may be that everything is innocent, if a trifle daft. But, it may not be and having had some experience of dealing with such issues irl - it's right IMHO to be concerned. In the day job, I'd be following certain other protocols at this point.
[code]
[ 14. April 2014, 07:03: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I think it's upto the church who they appoint as their representatives, and there may be times when someone who doesn't qualify according to the guidelines would be the best person. But, if the church decides that someone who's not been a member for very long is qualified then they should be able to support that choice when challenged. Almost certainly much better than "no one else volunteered" (which IME is the usual basis for selecting someone to a committee).
It was his first visit if the post is to be believed! The church knows nothing about him other than he's breathing ... and he knows nothing about the church other than it's people who meet.
I'm all for encouraging young people - and it happens here on all sorts of levels but we must be realistic. What's described as having taken place is just wrong from almost every pov.
Granted that's possibly true in a lot of other cases too but this is compounded by age and all sorts of concerns about the appropriateness of such an appointment and The Weeder's self nomination as his mentor. Do the child's parents know?
Either we are being misled - in which case it's time for the Weeder to own up - or it's the truth. In which case, in most organisations - schools and churches and uniformed groups included - you're looking at numerous breeches in Safeguarding on the information provided.
[code]
[ 14. April 2014, 07:09: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
1. I must admit that the example given in the OP is rather unusual.
2. ....a general principle, if anyone of that age shows an interest it's important to try to accommodate it as far as possible.
3. Perhaps it's rather similar to a role in the church choir, where a good singer could be given a solo almost immediately if he showed promise, regardless of how much he understood of the Christian faith.
1. One of the most unusual I've ever seen.
2. True - but notice your words "as far as possible." This is too far because he'd hadn't expressed an interest - just, according to the OP, found himself elected. I agree that we accommodate and encourage young people and I've had teenagers lead and speak here. But, like the rest of us it has to be in proportion to gifts, experience and potential. They haven't known him long enough to establish any of these.
3. Yes that example is fine and illustrates 2 above. There's a gift, it's recognised and affirmed in use. I would though be concerned about the issue of faith and belief: it's not a question of how much he understands but of how little.
[code]
[ 14. April 2014, 07:28: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I think it's upto the church who they appoint as their representatives, and there may be times when someone who doesn't qualify according to the guidelines would be the best person. But, if the church decides that someone who's not been a member for very long is qualified then they should be able to support that choice when challenged. Almost certainly much better than "no one else volunteered" (which IME is the usual basis for selecting someone to a committee).
It was his first visit if the post is to be believed! The church knows nothing about him other than he's breathing ... and he knows nothing about the church other than it's people who meet.
Well, I was discussing a general issue rather than a specific individual, about whom we know practically nothing.
And, as I've said, if it was his first visit with no prior connection to the church then that does raise questions of his suitability as a representative. It doesn't IMO automatically follow that all 14 year old young adults should be
excluded from participating in church committees at all levels.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Taking a general point. If a middle aged man spends time alone with a boy people will start to think he's abusing the lad.
And he leaves himself wide open to possible false allegations by the lad.
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
hosting/
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Either we are being misled - in which case it's time for the Weeder to own up - or it's the truth. In which case, in most organisations - schools and churches and uniformed groups included - you're looking at numerous breeches in Safeguarding on the information provided.
ExclamationMark, pursuant to my previous host post here, please stop commenting on the specifics and individuals involved in the original scenario. Now.
To repeat: this thread is not the right place to discuss the specific instance originally described. That includes speculation about the truthfulness or otherwise of the poster describing it.
If anyone feels they need to address the personal situation, on any level and for any reason whatsoever, they are invited to do so by PM.
To be crystal clear, Alan and Boogie are doing a fine job of addressing the general case. Let's keep it that way here on the thread, please.
/hosting
[ 14. April 2014, 07:41: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
This is a terrible idea, and the Incumbent, the PCC, and the Weeder (as a Licensed Lay Minister and as a retired child protection worker) should really have known better.
A 14 year old cannot be a member of Deanery Synod, and a retired child protection worker ought to know enough not to be ferrying him around unaccompanied. Since the necessary enhanced CRB checks aren't transferable, s/he would, in any case, need to be recertified for this parish.
Above all, though, the whole scenario suggests that this parish is more desperate for new blood than a starving vampire. It suggests an exhausted PCC, Wardens, and Incumbent shutting their eyes and grasping at straws.
[ 14. April 2014, 07:46: Message edited by: Amos ]
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
hosting/
quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
This is a terrible idea, and the Incumbent, the PCC, and the Weeder (as a Licensed Lay Minister and as a retired child protection worker) should really have known better.
Amos, seeing as how you posted within minutes of my host post, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you hadn't read it. But now you have.
Everyone, for the last time, lay off the personal references or expect attention from an admin.
/hosting
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
A 14 year old cannot be a member of Deanery Synod,
Why not?
Other than the rules don't permit it - because, if a hypothetical 14 year old with the necessary other credentials (eg: long standing membership of the church, previous involvement with church business, respect of the congregation) was to be the best person for the job I don't think the mere letter of a rule should be a problem that can't be surmounted.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
Sorry, Eutychus: I was editing my post: you're right that I didn't see your hostly warning.
Put generally, my point is that people coming for the first time to a particular church, or to church in general, should not be immediately co-opted as representatives of the church in wider church bodies. The very fact of it being done is a sign that that particular church is in bad shape.
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tulfes
Shipmate
# 18000
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
A 14 year old cannot be a member of Deanery Synod,
Why not?
Other than the rules don't permit it - because, if a hypothetical 14 year old with the necessary other credentials (eg: long standing membership of the church, previous involvement with church business, respect of the congregation) was to be the best person for the job I don't think the mere letter of a rule should be a problem that can't be surmounted.
What age would be too young by your reasoning? What about a 8 year old with a super-high IQ? Surely, as in most things, an arbitrary age limit has to be set?
Posts: 175 | Registered: Feb 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eutychus:
hosting/
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Either we are being misled - in which case it's time for the Weeder to own up - or it's the truth. In which case, in most organisations - schools and churches and uniformed groups included - you're looking at numerous breeches in Safeguarding on the information provided.
ExclamationMark, pursuant to my previous host post here, please stop commenting on the specifics and individuals involved in the original scenario. Now.
To repeat: this thread is not the right place to discuss the specific instance originally described. That includes speculation about the truthfulness or otherwise of the poster describing it.
If anyone feels they need to address the personal situation, on any level and for any reason whatsoever, they are invited to do so by PM.
To be crystal clear, Alan and Boogie are doing a fine job of addressing the general case. Let's keep it that way here on the thread, please.
/hosting
Eutychus
Sorry - I've written in haste and without thought to your advice. Apologies - confining myself to PM's now on specifics.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Smudgie
Ship's Barnacle
# 2716
|
Posted
I recall a young man who was desperate to become a volunteer at the local hospice day centre, doing simple things like helping with the garden, pushing the coffee trolley round, sitting and chatting to people and playing board games with them. He was exactly right for the role, as was recognised by the staff there, and may have turned out a much different young man later in life if he had been given the opportunity to develop a sense of purpose in this way. The lady who organised the volunteers was devastated to have to turn him down because he was deemed too young by the powers that be...... especially as the same day a leaflet arrived on her desk about avoiding age discrimination (obviously aimed at encouraging OLDER people to become involved in volunteering). Her view was that it should always depend purely on aptitude for the task in hand.
Personally I think young people, and people of any age who are experiencing church for the first time, have a lot to give in situations where many of the people involved may have become set in their ways or immune to the impression they give to newcomers. Indeed, the hardest part sometimes is to get the others to listen. I have no real knowledge of deanery synod and do wonder whether it's the best forum for newcomers to represent the church, but certainly I think it important that a range of people be involved in decision making and discussion and that that should include a range of ages and experience.
I've experienced the rather ironic situation of my own young people being TOLD what they want to experience in church!
--------------------
Miss you, Erin.
Posts: 14382 | From: Under the duvet | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amos
Shipmate
# 44
|
Posted
Alan, I agree with you that all baptised Christians, of whatever age, are fully members of the Church. The general rule that representatives to Deanery Synod need to be communicant members of a Parish's Electoral Roll, and at least 16 years of age, may exclude some people who would make good representatives. It seems to me, though, that some kind of a rule is needed. Sixteen is the age at which a minor can join the armed forces in this country or get married (with parental consent). Would you extend your argument about age to child brides and child soldiers? Or is this just child Deanery Synod reps?
--------------------
At the end of the day we face our Maker alongside Jesus--ken
Posts: 7667 | From: Summerisle | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
frin
Drinking coffee for Jesus
# 9
|
Posted
I'm trying to remember how old I was when I first went to the URC's regional (provincial, as was) Synod meeting. I think I was 16, but maybe 15. Our denominational structures had an explicit expectation that 2 members of a church council were below the age of 25, and I was already regularly attending the local area church council (district, we called it) from 14 onwards, to report on things coming from the Youth structures of the church. I first went to the General Assembly when I was 18, representing the regional synod. At that level, somewhere around 6-10% of the gathered assembly was an under 25 year old. With good support from youth workers, we often followed the agenda and the issues better than a newcomer 50+ year old would.
I was a committed and engaged member of any meeting the church sent me to. I saw major changes and policies driven by thoughtful engagement by young members of the church at all sorts of levels of the church.
That the young man is very new to a church and ends up representing it throws up more questions for me than his age. But in one of my past (Anglican) churches, I ended up on the PCC within 2 visits to the church, because I stayed behind for the meeting...
--------------------
"Even the crocodile looks after her young" - Lamentations 4, remembering Erin.
Posts: 4496 | From: a library | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Thyme
Shipmate
# 12360
|
Posted
Sometimes I feel that when it comes to church matters people will often find acceptable things that would not be in 'Real Life', maybe because there is this subconscious feeling that if it's church it doesn't matter very much. In fact I think this has been expressed further up the thread. here here if I've managed to link correctly. Maybe that's not the point Alan Cresswell was trying to make, but that is how I read it.
I am wondering in what other adult organisations it would be considered appropriate to elect an unknown 14 year old with no experience or knowledge to a position of public governance.
I'm trying to think of an example. Maybe a Parish or Town Council? Member of a Planning Committee?
--------------------
The Church in its own bubble has become, at best the guardian of the value system of the nation’s grandparents, and at worst a den of religious anoraks defined by defensiveness, esoteric logic and discrimination. Bishop of Buckingham's blog
Posts: 600 | From: Cloud Cuckoo Land | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
North East Quine
Curious beastie
# 13049
|
Posted
If my 14 year went to - well, anything, really, and on their return home their account of their experience included being elected onto a committee as a representative, I'd be astonished and concerned.
Posts: 6414 | From: North East Scotland | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tubbs
Miss Congeniality
# 440
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by North East Quine:
If my 14 year went to - well, anything, really, and on their return home their account of their experience included being elected onto a committee as a representative, I'd be astonished and concerned.
That would be my reaction as well ... And I'd be sharing that with the vicar.
It seems bad practice to elect a completely unknown person of whatever age to a position of responsibility in church. In our place, to be elected as a deacon you have to have two year's continuous membership if you joined here and one year if you transferred from elsewhere. That gives everyone a chance to get to know each other and discern if you're a suitable person to lead in this place. Previous experience is a bit of a red herring as well, as someone who works as a leader in one place might not work in another.
Tubbs
--------------------
"It's better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than open it up and remove all doubt" - Dennis Thatcher. My blog. Decide for yourself which I am
Posts: 12701 | From: Someplace strange | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
The problem with this thread ... is that we all agree!
So there's not really much left to say, is there?
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
The Church Representation Rules which are enacted by Statutory Instrument under the Synodical Government Measure 1969 require that a person needs to be sixteen or over to be on a church's Electoral Roll.
For a person to be elected to Deanery Synod (which also makes them an ex officio member of the PCC (and a trustee of PCC assets)), they need to be an actual communicant under Rule 54 which means they need to have quote:
received communion according to the use of the Church of England or of a Church in communion with the Church of England at least three times during the twelve months preceding the date of election…
have their name on the Electoral Roll, and be sixteen or over.
So, a 14 year old elected to Deanery Synod can't have been validly appointed.
There is room for argument about what lower age limit is appropriate, but I would think some rule of thumb about a general level of maturity is a good idea, and Deanery Synod business etc. is structured around an assumption that people function more or less as adults, and know something about, and are answerable to the church in their own parish.
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Weeder
Shipmate
# 11321
|
Posted
Sorry for causing all this fuss. I was wrong about his age- he is actually 16.
I have been 'police checked', as required in the UK for adults in Church who have a leadership role. As I have moved Church, my new Vicar will need to renew my 'police check'.
My professional background is in Child Protection, at a Senior level.
I am old enough to be the young mans grandmother.
I will take on board your concerns about me ferrying him to meetings and will ensure we travel with someone else- the Vicar, perhaps.
--------------------
Still missing the gator
Posts: 2542 | From: LaLa Land | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Tulfes
What age would be too young by your reasoning? What about a 8 year old with a super-high IQ? Surely, as in most things, an arbitrary age limit has to be set?
A very intelligent eight-year-old is still an eight-year-old. Intelligence and maturity are two different things.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
