|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Permanent Interim Ministers
|
jeremiad
Apprentice
# 17435
|
Posted
My Anglican Diocese is finding itself in steady need of trained interim/transitional clergy. As a consequence, we are considering the possibility of having one or two diocesan-salaried interim priests on staff to provide interim and transitional ministry to parishes as needed. These interims could be anywhere from 6 months to 2 years.
I'm wondering whether anyone out there has any experience of a model like this -- where the ministry of interim and transitional work becomes one's life's calling, and so the priest moves from interim to interim in an intentional way. In my experience, interim ministry has often been provided by retired clergy or clergy who are awaiting more permanent appointments. What if interim ministry *were* the permanent appointment?
I would love to hear of any dioceses that have tried this. If you have experience of this model, please tell us about the strengths and pitfalls. Also, any discussion of the practicalities of this sort of position (conversations around salary/stipend/benefits and such) would be most welcome.
I'd also welcome hearing any relevant experience from other denominations.
Thanks!
Posts: 2 | Registered: Nov 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
My brother-in-law is an interim pastor for the Lutheran church in central Texas. He is essentially a permanent interim guy -- the church he is at was all set to offer the job to a guy, who decided that he didn't want to live in central Texas, so now he is being interim while they grind through the entire search process once more.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
I think there are times when an interim pastor/minister is simply someone to provide some form of cover in a vacancy between long-term ministry - so that there is someone to preach on Sunday and administer the sacraments, and for pastoral support as needed.
But, I think there is also sometimes a need for a very different sort of interim minister. A church where the previous minister left in difficult circumstances, or where the process of finding a new minister opened unexpected issues. Sometimes if a church is wounded it needs healing, and the person to do that may well be someone who isn't also working towards settling down to ministry there for the long term. In that case an interim minister called to help that church for 4 years (give or take) and them move on leaving a church that has healed for someone else to minister to makes a lot of sense.
I think it takes a special sort of person to do that. But, at the same time I'm not sure it's an occurrence that's frequent enough to justify someone being permanently employed at a diocesan level (or similar for other denominations).
--------------------
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
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
My b-i-l looks to be an interim pastor for 5 years or so. He may only have 2 parishes in that time, of course.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Holding
Coffee and Cognac
# 158
|
Posted
My only experience was with an intentional interim, supposedly trained for the job. As an interim, preparing the parish for what came next, he was a disaster. Training alone can't make an inappropriate person into a good interim. As a regular parish priest (in a very different parish) he was, I am told, just fine.
The idea of a couple of trained interims on diocesan staff is a good one in theory, but the chances that they work out well in practice, in a wide variety of situations, are, IMO, very low.
John
Posts: 5929 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
Interim. When all the knives come out as people (politely but fiercely and sometimes deceitfully) battle over the future direction of the church. Someone wants a career of that environment? Wow.
The guy who was our most recent interim thought it would be a good "retirement career" but after a year or whatever it was with this church in full (superficially polite) battle, he said never again.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
The title used here is Intentional Interim Minister. It's a course which is not often used, but has its place where there has been some very real difficulty with the preceding rector, or an instance of abuse involving either the rector or within the congregation, and the Intentional Interim comes in especially to help heal the damage done. Another possible use would be where a rector has been in place for many, many years and the parish wants time to think about the future direction. The usual maximum is 3 years, preferably less. I can think of one at the moment in this state, but do not know why this particular method was adopted. What I do know is that the Intentional Interim chose the role, has been particularly trained for it, and is supported by the diocese.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cathscats
Shipmate
# 17827
|
Posted
The Church of Scotland employs interim ministers on roughly the basis Alan Cresswell outlined above, although I don't think they usually stay as long as four years, one or two might be more normal. There aren't many of them, but they are never unemployed, as far as I know! They are not used in most vacancies, but only where the congregation needs special help or up-building. Of course the church always states that they are not trouble-shooters, and of course that is how many people see them!
--------------------
"...damp hands and theological doubts - the two always seem to go together..." (O. Douglas, "The Setons")
Posts: 176 | From: Central Highlands | Registered: Sep 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
The thinking in the CofE is radically different.
The official line is that parishes should not have a single interim person during an interregnum but that the task of taking services should be spread among available clergy with permission to officiate (PTO) as widely as possible. Administrative matters, such as arranging for PTOs to take weddings, funerals, sunday services, etc, are left in the hands of the Churchwardens and a small committee.
The rationale behind this is that the parish won't transfer its allegiance to any interim and so the new incumbent can, effectively, take over where the last person finished off - and, of course, the mantra is always that no significant changes should be made during the interregnum.
In practice this means that the parish is officially rudderless. On the ground it frequently results in division, especially if there are any frustrated priests among the congregation or, worse still, on the interregnum committee.
To give an example: the parish where I live had a year long interregnum 6 years ago during which- services were altered and home-produced liturgies became the norm
- an organist was dismissed
- the choir was disbanded, then reinstated (but two-thirds of the membership had by then gone elsewhere
- Junior Church (Sunday School) withered away to nothing
- the Youth Club was given 'new direction' resulting in the leaders resigning and the children going elsewhere
- there was no marriage preparation other than form-filling and rehearsing the service in church
- baptisms were taken out of the main service and private ceremonies in the afternoon offered instead
- pastoral care to do with funerals was non-existent
The end result has been that a formerly thriving parish has seen its electoral roll reduced by three-quarters. Clustered around the 'new incumbent' (who stuck it out for 3 years) was a rump of die-hards who were all on the interregnum committee and who were determined to continue running the parish as they saw fit.
Representations to the Archdeacon during the interregnum met a blank wall; concerns expressed by parishioners during the interregnum resulted in people being advised to worship where you may feel more comfortable and the new PP was given no support by the Archdeacon or then bishop.
So the new priest left and the parish is once again in an interregnum; so far this one has lasted for just over a year and the same group is being allowed to run their own little fiefdom because, although the bishop has changed the Archdeacon hasn't and so we just watch helplessly as a parish that once had around 250 on its electoral roll and around 150 at parish communion every Sunday now has a roll of 62 and numbers attending 'Morning Praise' are at about 45.
Yes, I do have experience of a model where a proper interim priest was appointed - would that my diocese was so blessed.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Galloping Granny
Shipmate
# 13814
|
Posted
The Presbyterian Church in Aotearoa-New Zealand currently has intentionally trained transition ministers, of whom we are enjoying one whose appointment is, I think, rather over half time for about nine months – we also have an Interim Moderator who is a member of the congregation. As I understand it, this was first heard of after the Christchurch earthquakes, when many churches were destroyed and congregations had to consider what their mission was, whether they should or could afford to rebuild, whether changing population patterns made amalgamation with a neighbouring parish a good idea, and so on.
We are involved in this because our 1975 church requires expensive strengthening (we're worshiping in the much older wooden building), our income will no longer run to a full-time minister (our last minister moved on after 10 years), and two neighbouring suburban parishes are in similar situations.
So far our 'transition manager' is doing a great job of getting everyone on board, though we've never had power struggles and infighting that I've sometimes read about on these boards. We've developed a 'hub' of co-operation with the other two parishes involved and are beginning to join for major events and house groups (slowly!). They are considering uniting into one parish but not us – perhaps because there's a deep valley in between us! (Christchurch is mostly flat.)
I have used my age and health concerns to stay out of active participation but the congregation as a whole have been very involved. It's working well.
GG (Just back from a parish weekend camp, total relaxation and fellowship with none of the concentrated studies and lectures we used to have. But I was the only real oldie there.)
[ 23. May 2015, 09:31: Message edited by: Galloping Granny ]
--------------------
The Kingdom of Heaven is spread upon the earth, and men do not see it. Gospel of Thomas, 113
Posts: 2629 | From: Matarangi | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zacchaeus
Shipmate
# 14454
|
Posted
L’organist’s experience of the CofE is not mine- I know of no such official policy, so if L’organist has come across it may be local to her diocese.
True the cover is down to the churchwardens to arrange, but in many cases they arrange 1 person or just a few to cover, if they can. They are certainly not encouraged to spread the cover as far and as wide as possible. We don’t have official interim ministers (though I do know somebody who is considering it). So it may be that the wardens have to take cover from whoever and whenever they can get it, though there is parish near nine who are being covered by a local NSM for most of their services in their interregnum. And in our last interregnum my parish was covered by a local retired clergy person.
The interim ministry the person I know is considering is to go into parishes where there is a difficult situation of some sort to prepare them for a permanent minister, but it is a new concept around here though I have known it happen on a couple of occasions without it being so named.
Posts: 1905 | From: the back of beyond | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
The thinking in the CofE is radically different.
The official line is that parishes should not have a single interim person during an interregnum but that the task of taking services should be spread among available clergy with permission to officiate (PTO) as widely as possible. Administrative matters, such as arranging for PTOs to take weddings, funerals, sunday services, etc, are left in the hands of the Churchwardens and a small committee.
The URC, probably a practice very similar to the CofS, would not normally appoint an interim minister. During a vacancy (interregnum) ensuring Sunday worship occurs is the duty of the Elders (but, then that's their duty even if there is a minister), and the Elders/Church Meeting would also still handle all the day to day matters. Normally, in that (usually) 12-18 month period between one minister leaving and the new being called the church has to rely on members and pulpit supply to lead worship, and many pastoral matters where having a minister is a benefit that will fall on other local ministers or the moderator (another minister appointed to the task of overseeing the vacancy, but would be very definitely part time - as in a few hours per week).
An interim minister will be called by the congregation like any other minister, though with a much stronger recommendation from the Synod moderator, for a limited period to steer the church through a particular, and often very unusual, difficulty following the departure of the previous minister.
I know one example of this used for a joint pastorate where one church voted to call a minister, and the other didn't, creating a very unfriendly atmosphere between the two churches. In that cases there was also the added complication of the retiring minister having been in place for an extraordinarily long time (25 years) and still living in the town.
--------------------
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
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The URC, probably a practice very similar to the CofS, would not normally appoint an interim minister.
Although I do know of one URC Minister (not in our Synod) who "specialises" in doing interim ministries where there have been problems in the last person's ministry.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Getting a church over a problem ministry is a specialist task. Therefore, it makes sense if someone has the particular gifting to do that that they can exercise that speciality.
Fortunately, I think the requirement isn't needed that often. For the majority of churches a minister leaving isn't an event accompanied by serious difficulties, and an interim minister for the period until the next minister is called is unnecessary.
Probably the most common would be when a minister has been in post too long, and whoever is called will be told at every turn "that's not how Rev X did it". If Rev X had been in place for a reasonable time (IMO, less than 10y) then many of the congregation will remember that Rev X did things different from Rev W who'd been there before, and not be as concerned about the changes. But, for those times when X was in place too long, there may be a lot of benefit in calling a minister for a short period (less than 5y), recognising that they'll have to spend their entire ministry there under the shadow of their predecessor, but after that allowing someone else to come in and minister there for the next 5-10 years without that looming presence of "how Rev X did it".
--------------------
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
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
My b-i-l seems very conscious of the need to hand over the church in as good a shape as he found it. So he doesn't feel he can make major changes, no elaborate building campaign or important reshuffles. He has specifically told me that he doesn't want the church to shrink while he's at the tiller!
On the other hand, he's trying to fix things that are clearly wrong or neglected, so that the new pastor won't have to deal with them. (A handicapped ramp, for instance.)
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
I agree. I've never heard of this before but it sounds like an excellent idea, if you have the right people, properly trained.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
I think that there is a strong case for interim ministers in the C of E.
I know of two parishes where a newly appointed incumbent stayed in post for less thana year. The stress on the wardens and those proving cover during yet anotrher interregnum plus a skilful handling of 'wtat went wrong' suggests the need for specialist help.
I agree. I've seen too many cases in the C of E where parishes need special help in an interregnum period for a variety of reasons. And too often, an interregnum results in a couple of local retired priests stepping in and keeping things ticking over in an informal capacity.
Since moving to Canada, I have come across a number of instances of interim ministry, some more successful than others. On the whole, though, I think that they are a great improvement over the C of E haphazard way of dealing with an interregnum. I would certainly tend to support the idea of people being trained become permanent interim minsters, although there are a number of caveats to that. Firstly, it needs a special kind of person who can go into a church for 12-24 months and then move on. They will need to be properly supported. Secondly, such ministers need to come with a certain amount of experience already under their belt. I don't think it is something someone can do straight from seminary.
In my diocese, the bishop has made it clear that interim ministry appointments will now all come with some specific tasks for the minister to achieve. In other words, it is NOT going to be simply "keeping the engine ticking over" until a new permanent minister is appointed. I think that this is a good way to go.
At the moment, I am very in favour of interim ministries (in theory, at least. The practice is - as always - variable) and would encourage a more conscious and deliberate training and development of the people who take on these roles.
Why the C of E continues to dig its heels in against them remains a mystery.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zacchaeus
Shipmate
# 14454
|
Posted
I don't think it is digging its heels in - I think they have just been slow to take it up. As I said I know somebody who is considering this and other cases wehre it has happend without being called that.
Though there were cases of difficult parishes/particular issues, not just as a matter of course for all interega..
Posts: 1905 | From: the back of beyond | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
I do rather suspect that the CofE beancounters actually like interregna as a way of saving money.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
A few years ago, when I was in the clergy union, we raised the issue of problem parishes and especially inquired about the idea of having properly trained, experienced priests who could go into such parishes for 2 years to deal with the specific problems (especially surrounding bullying of clergy by parishioners). I have to say that we received an extremely lukewarm response to the idea (which was offered with the best of intentions).
I would be glad to know that the C of E was seriously reconsidering its position on this. I have to say that I am not terribly optimistic, though.
(In passing, I might be interested in moving into such a ministry some time in the future. But not just as a wind-down to retirement or as something to do once I have actually retired.)
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
I do rather suspect that the CofE beancounters actually like interregna as a way of saving money.
Most (all?) dioceses have budgets that assume a certain amount of vacancies each year. If such vacancies were filled with interim ministers instead, the budgets would have vast holes in them.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Quite. It would be interesting to know, by the way, how long it generally takes to fill a 'frontline' vacancy (parish clergy or equivalent) as opposed to a 'back office' one (Bishop's Adviser on this or that, and so on). But that would be a tangent we should not pursue here.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
I do rather suspect that the CofE beancounters actually like interregna as a way of saving money.
I thought it was fairly well known that the length of interregna was a matter of deliberate policy and partially served as a cost-saving measure. 9 months is the figure I recall being bandied about around 20 years ago but I wouldn't be surprised if it were longer now.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by jeremiad:
My Anglican Diocese is finding itself in steady need of trained interim/transitional clergy. As a consequence, we are considering the possibility of having one or two diocesan-salaried interim priests on staff to provide interim and transitional ministry to parishes as needed. These interims could be anywhere from 6 months to 2 years.
I'm wondering whether anyone out there has any experience of a model like this -- where the ministry of interim and transitional work becomes one's life's calling, and so the priest moves from interim to interim in an intentional way. In my experience, interim ministry has often been provided by retired clergy or clergy who are awaiting more permanent appointments. What if interim ministry *were* the permanent appointment?
I would love to hear of any dioceses that have tried this. If you have experience of this model, please tell us about the strengths and pitfalls. Also, any discussion of the practicalities of this sort of position (conversations around salary/stipend/benefits and such) would be most welcome.
I'd also welcome hearing any relevant experience from other denominations.
Thanks!
A couple of comments...
a) Personally, I think that an interim period of 6 months is always likely to be too short. A church needs time to say goodbye to a minister, go through a readjustment period and then think seriously about the kind of person they want as a new minister. Then they have to start advertising and interviewing. Doing all that in 6 months is probably going to mean that it is rushed and not done well.
b) Contracts for interim ministry should be clearly marked with the period of time expected - which both sides should respect. I have come across a couple of occasions where an interim minister quit after a couple of months because they had found a full time job. This left the church back in a big hole. Obviously, an interim minister who was doing that permanently would be less likely to do something like this, but I think it is worth emphasising.
c) There should be a clear agreement about the amount of time that an interim minister should be spending in the parish. Is it a full-time job? 3 days a week? Only once this has been agreed, can you begin to be clear about what exactly the minister can be expected to do. To put things bluntly, if you're paying for half a minister, you don't get to demand that they work 6 days a week.
d) As I've already indicated, I think it is a good idea if the interim minister has clear guidance on what they are expected to achieve. Do they need to do some work with the parish on finances and giving? Are there any other specific issues in the life of the congregation that need to be addressed before a permanent full-time minister can begin?
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
jeremiad
Apprentice
# 17435
|
Posted
quote:
The Church of Scotland employs interim ministers on roughly the basis Alan Cresswell outlined above, although I don't think they usually stay as long as four years, one or two might be more normal. There aren't many of them, but they are never unemployed, as far as I know! They are not used in most vacancies, but only where the congregation needs special help or up-building. Of course the church always states that they are not trouble-shooters, and of course that is how many people see them!
It is your comment about them "not being unemployed" that makes our diocese wonder about having them permanently on staff. Perhaps we could make their positions permanent at a diocesan level, rather than moving from contract to contract.
quote:
Since moving to Canada, I have come across a number of instances of interim ministry, some more successful than others. On the whole, though, I think that they are a great improvement over the C of E haphazard way of dealing with an interregnum. I would certainly tend to support the idea of people being trained become permanent interim minsters, although there are a number of caveats to that. Firstly, it needs a special kind of person who can go into a church for 12-24 months and then move on. They will need to be properly supported. Secondly, such ministers need to come with a certain amount of experience already under their belt. I don't think it is something someone can do straight from seminary
Yes! It is because the job is temporary and itinerant that we are wondering about putting such clergy on diocesan staff. Otherwise, the job is insecure in the extreme. This deters people with particular gifts for interim ministry to consider it as a life-path. We hope that the financial security of being on diocesan staff might make this ministry more attractive to gifted priests who are not yet retired.
Also, I absolutely agree with you about the need for these interim clergy to be experienced. We are thinking about this as a possible mid-career move for an experienced parish priest - one who has seen a lot of parish life, both its wonders and its horrors.
quote:
In my diocese, the bishop has made it clear that interim ministry appointments will now all come with some specific tasks for the minister to achieve. In other words, it is NOT going to be simply "keeping the engine ticking over" until a new permanent minister is appointed. I think that this is a good way to go.[quote]
Oscar the Grouch, your bishop and I are on the same page. The sort of interims we are imagining are the ones where there are goals and tasks.
[quote]A couple of comments...
a) Personally, I think that an interim period of 6 months is always likely to be too short. A church needs time to say goodbye to a minister, go through a readjustment period and then think seriously about the kind of person they want as a new minister. Then they have to start advertising and interviewing. Doing all that in 6 months is probably going to mean that it is rushed and not done well.
b) Contracts for interim ministry should be clearly marked with the period of time expected - which both sides should respect. I have come across a couple of occasions where an interim minister quit after a couple of months because they had found a full time job. This left the church back in a big hole. Obviously, an interim minister who was doing that permanently would be less likely to do something like this, but I think it is worth emphasising.
c) There should be a clear agreement about the amount of time that an interim minister should be spending in the parish. Is it a full-time job? 3 days a week? Only once this has been agreed, can you begin to be clear about what exactly the minister can be expected to do. To put things bluntly, if you're paying for half a minister, you don't get to demand that they work 6 days a week.
d) As I've already indicated, I think it is a good idea if the interim minister has clear guidance on what they are expected to achieve. Do they need to do some work with the parish on finances and giving? Are there any other specific issues in the life of the congregation that need to be addressed before a permanent full-time minister can begin?
Thank you for this, Oscar the Grouch. These are some of the types of ideas I was hoping my OP might generate.
I'm beginning to get the sense that my diocese may be blazing a new trail here.
However, I'm still hoping to hear from places that have tried this.
Posts: 2 | Registered: Nov 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by jeremiad:
It is because the job is temporary and itinerant that we are wondering about putting such clergy on diocesan staff. Otherwise, the job is insecure in the extreme. This deters people with particular gifts for interim ministry to consider it as a life-path. We hope that the financial security of being on diocesan staff might make this ministry more attractive to gifted priests who are not yet retired.
I think that this is a very interesting idea and worth pursuing. Another thing in its favour is that by having such ministers employed by the diocese rather than the parish, the minister should have a certain degree of independence, which may make it easier for them to make tough decisions if needed. If the parish is paying you, you might think twice before pissing off a powerful parishioner.
I'd be interested to hear how things develop.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
I don't know if it was 'official' or not, but after the collapse of communist regimes in Eastern Europe many of the old chaplaincies were re-opened/ reinstated by the same couple of priests. One in particular was seen as a "safe pair of hands" and was also used in some inner London parishes with small populations by +London up to the early noughties.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Philip Charles
Ship's cutler
# 618
|
Posted
My paid ministry ended with a string of six interim ministries of about 12 months. They were all half time and three involved 400km round trip per week for which I was paid.. The contract was clear, half pay, half time. One parish was a dream, They could and did run themselves well and when I offered to attend their vestry meeting they told me not to bother. This freed me up to do pastoral work with no administrative worries.
Another had a cabal that needed to be kept integrated - the people involved had a lot to offer.
A third had a cabal that wanted to take over, this parish had had a history of this kind of problem. So I told myself "be a b*st*rd" and this was followed by targeted inactivity.
My training? Parish experience. And I did read a book. I was getting fed up towards the end and I was also aware that there were parishes where I would not be effective.
Posts: 89 | From: Dunedin, NZ | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eirenist
Shipmate
# 13343
|
Posted
L'Organist's experience doesn't surprise me. During our last but one interregnum/vacancy, the Wardens were firmly advised that there should be no changes in worship or churchmanship. Despite this, the NSM Curate was persuaded by an enthusiastic parishioner to sanction an Alpha course. Result: about a third of those who participated ceased (after the 'spirituality' session) to attend at our moderate-to-high Anglican-Methodist LEP (Local Ecumenical Partnership) Parish Church.
--------------------
'I think I think, therefore I think I am'
Posts: 486 | From: Darkest Metroland | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
Does that actually count as changing the worship or churchmanship of the church? To me it seems that a small number of people moved to another church, presumably because the church didn't change worship style to fit the way their faith had developed.
Would it have made any difference if the Alpha course was run a year later with the church having a new minister? Except that presumbably he would be in a position to change the worship to retain that small number of people had he wanted.
Though I'm speaking in a bit of ignorance of the CofE system for vacancies. Within the URC the Elders are responsible for worship, and that doesn't change depending on whether or not there is a minister. If the Elders decide they want to change the worship style, and the Church Meeting agrees, then that's what will happen - and if the minister doesn't like it then perhaps that's God calling and saying it's time to move on.
--------------------
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
|
|
Zacchaeus
Shipmate
# 14454
|
Posted
It is not expected that we make any changes during an interregnum.
It stops factions fighting or vested interrsts trying to take over during these times (well in theory). And I suppose it makes sure that the church is the same one that the parish profile is wirtten about..
though I wouldn't call running an alpha course as changing chruchmanship..
But this issue has nothing to do with who takes services during an interregnum
Posts: 1905 | From: the back of beyond | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eirenist
Shipmate
# 13343
|
Posted
The Alpha Course was totally out of key with the existing ethos of the church. But you are right, this is a bit of a tangent.
--------------------
'I think I think, therefore I think I am'
Posts: 486 | From: Darkest Metroland | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Zacchaeus:
It is not expected that we make any changes during an interregnum.
I think that this is the attitude I find most damaging, especially when most interregna last 12 months or more these days. Once you factor in that the last 6 months of an incumbent's time in a parish will be spent focusing on the move and preparing the parish for the interegnum, and that even once a priest is appointed, it will be some months before they can really understand a new parish and what is needed, then you are looking at a period of some 2-3 years when the parish may just be "marking time". And once that happens, it can get harder for a new incumbent to get things moving again.
It seems to me that having an interim minister enables the church to continue looking at new developments, whilst at the same time considering what it wants from a new minister.
So having someone who is trained and gifted in such a ministry might well be extremely valuable. Wouldn't it be great if every new minister started their new post with a church already moving forward in a number of areas and eager for her/him to join them in the adventure, rather than facing a church which just looks at her/him and says "OK - what are you going to do?"
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Or (i) recognise that prolonged interregna are almost always undesirable and (ii) go back (in the CofE) to letting the patron of the living send you someone rather than have all this sodding about with the 'parish' (i.e. those of the parishioners who actually attend church, and quite likely mostly really the more enthusiastic or forceful or opinionated of those) deciding what 'it' needs. But then I suppose you might expect me to say that.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eirenist:
The Alpha Course was totally out of key with the existing ethos of the church. But you are right, this is a bit of a tangent.
It should be added that Alpha has a reputation for being geared towards Evangelical low-church worship and ethos, but that is not necessarily the case. It is an evangelism tool and has been commended as such by ++Rowan Williams; I have heard of it being used by various very 'spikey' Anglican parishes as well.
So, I'm not sure that hosting an Alpha course necessarily means that a church's ethos is being affected.
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eirenist
Shipmate
# 13343
|
Posted
I was referring to the ethos of this particular Alpha Course - the charismatic element in particular.
--------------------
'I think I think, therefore I think I am'
Posts: 486 | From: Darkest Metroland | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
posted by Albertus quote:
...(i) recognise that prolonged interregna are almost always undesirable and (ii) go back (in the CofE) to letting the patron of the living send you someone rather than have all this sodding about with the 'parish' (i.e. those of the parishioners who actually attend church, and quite likely mostly really the more enthusiastic or forceful or opinionated of those) deciding what 'it' needs...
It made sense to me when that was the routine and it makes even more sense now.
After all, in the old days it could be that the Patron only found out about the vacancy when the bishop told him but now the Patron (or at least co-patron) is invariably the bishop there really is no excuse for the old routine being used and interregna reduced to weeks.
At my shack we're very fortunate: the Archdeacon washed his hands of us, saying if we wanted a priest we could find our own, so we did. As a result we had an interregnum of 4½ months when the diocesan average is 15 months.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
It made sense to me when that was the routine and it makes even more sense now.
After all, in the old days it could be that the Patron only found out about the vacancy when the bishop told him but now the Patron (or at least co-patron) is invariably the bishop there really is no excuse for the old routine being used and interregna reduced to weeks.
I think you're looking through some deeply rose-tinted spectacles. The "good old days" produced innumerable examples of the utterly wrong person being dumped on a parish. Sometimes, it was a friend of the Patron's family, being found a convenient place. Or it may have been a misfit who needed to be moved on from yet another disastrous appointment. Or it may have resulted in an Anglo-Catholic priest finding himself in a low church parish, with catastrophic consequences for all concerned.
As you have noted, more parishes now either have the bishop as patron, or have the patron delegating patronage to the bishop. Do you really want yet more power placed in the hand of bishops who already seem to be fixated on control? One of the biggest (and most problematic) tendencies in recent years in the C of E has been the sweeping centralisation of power and the increasing marginalisation of the voices of the parishes and their people. Giving bishops carte blanche to make appointments would only exacerbate this.
The solution is not to remove the ability of the parish to have a significant say in the appointment process, but to improve how it works. Properly trained and deployed interim minsters could make a powerful difference in how appointments are made.
(In my time in the clergy union, a considerable number of problems could be traced back to poor appointments, which had had devastating impacts upon the lives of the clergy and their families and also upon the whole life of the parish. The system undoubtedly needs to be improved. But to be perfectly blunt - I wouldn't trust the bishops to be able to do that.)
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Well, as the person who raised it, I was thinking more of lay and institutional patrons, actually.
But- if this is too much of a tangent then don't follow it- when the 'parish' is consulted about appinting a new incumbent in the CofE, does this ever actually mean the parish or is it just the congregation? Are there ever efforts to gather the views, if any, of people in the parish who aren't regular churchgoers, and if not- given that in CofE ecclesiology the incumbent is there to serve the whole geographically defined parish and not just the congregation- shouldn't there be?
[ 03. June 2015, 20:14: Message edited by: Albertus ]
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Albertus:
...when the 'parish' is consulted about appinting a new incumbent in the CofE, does this ever actually mean the parish or is it just the congregation? Are there ever efforts to gather the views, if any, of people in the parish who aren't regular churchgoers, and if not- given that in CofE ecclesiology the incumbent is there to serve the whole geographically defined parish and not just the congregation- shouldn't there be?
That's a good question. The simple answer is "no". The parish (ie the congregation) is consulted - and sometimes even that is not really done. I know of plenty of places where the parish selection committee produced its own specification on what the new incumbent should be like, with no real consultation with the rest of the congregation. And I know of at least one parish where an appointment was disastrous because the parish reps were utterly unrepresentative of the wider congregation.
Should the wider parish be consulted? It would be nice to think so. What a great way of making a link with the local community, by saying "what kind of person might YOU want to be the new vicar?" The whole exercise could be quite creative in itself, in getting the congregation talking to the wider community and listening to how the community perceives the church.
But such an exercise would be rather time-consuming. I could easily see it being one of the tasks that an interim minister could undertake on behalf of the parish. But I couldn't see many C of E parishes (as things presently stand) having the energy or resources to carry out such a consultation during an interregnum, even if they had the desire.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
That's pretty much what I thought, on all counts. Could be a really good thing to do, though how you do it would depend of course on where you were, and I'm not sure it would necessarily take much more effort than consulting the congregation. Depends on the type of parish of course but notices in local websites and in local papers, well-advertised public meeting, contacts through families of kids at church school if there is one, social media, and so on. I suspect that in most cases it's just that no-one has ever really thought of doing it. It's only just occurred to me. But although you might or might not get much interest, it would absolutely fit in with what the CofE ought to be about.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
