homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Ship's Locker   » Limbo   » Purgatory: Wycliffe Hall in trouble (Page 26)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  ...  45  46  47 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Purgatory: Wycliffe Hall in trouble
Carys

Ship's Celticist
# 78

 - Posted      Profile for Carys   Email Carys   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
Yes - there are a wide range of skills expected of a church leader. The "standard" view in conservative evangelical places tend to take the Ephesians 4 model of having someone whose main job is some kind of Bible-centred preaching/teaching ministry, with the aim that they equip everyone else for "works of service". So the preaching and teaching is seen as enabling the people more gifted at pastoral care (or whatever) to use their gifts to build up the Body of Christ.

But should the vicar be the main preacher? Or maybe why should preaching be at the heart of the vicar's job? Others may preach too. But the vicar's role is much wider than that.

Carys

--------------------
O Lord, you have searched me and know me
You know when I sit and when I rise

Posts: 6896 | From: Bryste mwy na thebyg | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Thurible
Shipmate
# 3206

 - Posted      Profile for Thurible   Email Thurible   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The parish priest is the primary preacher, with the exception of the Bishop himself, surely?

Thurible

--------------------
"I've been baptised not lobotomised."

Posts: 8049 | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Carys

Ship's Celticist
# 78

 - Posted      Profile for Carys   Email Carys   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Thurible:
The parish priest is the primary preacher, with the exception of the Bishop himself, surely?

Thurible

Probably, but I'm still not sure I'd describe preaching as the heart of the priestly role.

Carys

--------------------
O Lord, you have searched me and know me
You know when I sit and when I rise

Posts: 6896 | From: Bryste mwy na thebyg | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Thurible
Shipmate
# 3206

 - Posted      Profile for Thurible   Email Thurible   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Neither would I but I would describe it as at the heart of it.

Thurible

--------------------
"I've been baptised not lobotomised."

Posts: 8049 | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Tubbs

Miss Congeniality
# 440

 - Posted      Profile for Tubbs   Author's homepage   Email Tubbs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
Having re-checked the Husband’s preaching module from his Baptist ministry course, the length of sermon they advise is 20 minutes, give or take a few minutes either side. On the grounds that it’s very difficult for even the most gifted of preachers to hold people’s attention for any longer. It seems odd that there’s such a fixation on 30 minutes sermons with sections of the CofE.

Some places expect 20, some 30 or 40. You're right that many people aren't good at holding attention for more than 20. But some are.

Yes - there are a wide range of skills expected of a church leader. The "standard" view in conservative evangelical places tend to take the Ephesians 4 model of having someone whose main job is some kind of Bible-centred preaching/teaching ministry, with the aim that they equip everyone else for "works of service". So the preaching and teaching is seen as enabling the people more gifted at pastoral care (or whatever) to use their gifts to build up the Body of Christ.

And yes - the preacher also needs a good knowledge and love of the congregation in order to get the application, pitching, etc right.

That's the theory, anyway.

The theory tends to collide with the reality that in certain situations, particularly pastoral ones, the pastor is expected by the congregation "to do it". Regardless of whether or not others are available. Or if s/he's any good at it [Biased] A mindset that I expect is just as prevelent (sp!) in con evo churches as everywhere else.

I agree that there are people out there who can preach for 30 minutes (or more!) and hold the congregation's attention. It's just that they're few and far between. And even they can't manage it each and every week. [Big Grin]

Tubbs

[ETA: The importance given to preaching depends on your churchmanship. For Baptists it's a Big Deal. Certainly, in churches where I've been involved in meetings connected with the ministerial selection process, someone usually wantS to wait for a candidate who can "preach better" than the one under discussion. And someone else will remind them that a not particuarly good preach with a view shouldn't be a deal breaker if the candidate is gifted in other ways. As there is more to being a minister than preaching. [Biased] ]

[ 27. September 2007, 11:23: Message edited by: 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
Archimandrite
Shipmate
# 3997

 - Posted      Profile for Archimandrite   Author's homepage   Email Archimandrite   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
If anyone wants to read the Review on PPHs, it can be found here .

I think it's generally available, rather than only on the University network.

--------------------
"Loyal Anglican" (Warning: General Synod may differ).

Posts: 1580 | From: Oxford | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Thurible
Shipmate
# 3206

 - Posted      Profile for Thurible   Email Thurible   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It is.

Thurible

--------------------
"I've been baptised not lobotomised."

Posts: 8049 | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636

 - Posted      Profile for BroJames   Email BroJames   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
ISTM that apart from some courteously phrased reflection on concerns about whether at Wycliffe "the strong emphasis on the evangelical tradition in some way inflects the teaching of theology and ministry into a narrow compass of interpretation", the report does not level any criticisms at Wycliffe that are not similar to those raised in relation to other PPHs. There is, however, (IMHO understandably) a concern about the Oxford experience of school leaver undergraduates who are admitted to institutions largely catering to the training of mature ordinands - a concern related both to Wycliffe and St Stephen's House.

It is certainly possible to quote from the report in a way which suggests that the University has a problem uniquely with Wycliffe, but doing so does require a certain amount both of supressio veri, suggestio falsi. Most of the concerns apply to PPHs at large. There are specific concerns about specific Halls: at Wycliffe there is concern about the impact of its evangelical tradition; at St Stephen's there is concern about whether its desire to increase admissions of school leavers and PGCE students represents a genuine desire to diversify, or a need to balance the books.

On the whole it's rather "move along there, nothing to see."

OTOH the questions about Wycliffe do bear a resemblance to the issue of whether Richard Turnbull is seeking to move the Hall in a more CE (rather than OE) direction.

[ 27. September 2007, 12:09: Message edited by: BroJames ]

Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged
Tubbs

Miss Congeniality
# 440

 - Posted      Profile for Tubbs   Author's homepage   Email Tubbs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Archimandrite:
If anyone wants to read the Review on PPHs, it can be found here .

I think it's generally available, rather than only on the University network.

Regent's Park have made their sections freely available on their website. From the PR, it sounds like some of the press coverage has caused concerns for all the Halls, not just Wycliffe. [Frown]

Tubbs

[ 27. September 2007, 12:19: Message edited by: 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
Charles Read
Shipmate
# 3963

 - Posted      Profile for Charles Read   Author's homepage   Email Charles Read   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
In reply to Custard and on Eph 4:
That's curious as I ragard that text as the lens through which I see ordained ministry but I do not see it saying that Bible teaching is the central thing - much as I enjoy exercising that ministry myself!

--------------------
"I am a sinful human being - why do you expect me to be consistent?" George Bebawi

"This is just unfocussed wittering." Ian McIntosh

Posts: 701 | From: Norwich | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
badman
Shipmate
# 9634

 - Posted      Profile for badman     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The appendix on Wycliffe Hall has been extracted for ease of reference here

It seems lukewarm at best. Some of it is outright criticism, and the rest falls well short of even faint praise.

For example:
quote:
The panel felt anxiety about the delivery of the degrees of BTh and MTh as well as other diplomas and certificates. It was led to understand that much is taught in whole or in part entirely within the Hall and it has concerns over the robustness of the monitoring of standards and syllabi (especially in the certificates).
This is a tactfully expressed doubt about all the teaching, not just the teaching of undergraduates.
Posts: 429 | From: Diocese of Guildford | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged
Thurible
Shipmate
# 3206

 - Posted      Profile for Thurible   Email Thurible   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
And it does the same thing about S. Stephen's House, insofar as it criticises the idea of most teaching being inhouse when you've got the University of Oxford on your doorstep. The report is not an-anti Wycliffe Hall because its evangelical principal happens to be a big bogey man who stands up for that which he believes in document!

Thurible

[ 27. September 2007, 14:56: Message edited by: Thurible ]

--------------------
"I've been baptised not lobotomised."

Posts: 8049 | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Scribehunter
Shipmate
# 12750

 - Posted      Profile for Scribehunter         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
There are quite a few issues raised by the Lucas Report. It is interesting to read the joint submission from the PPHs and note how the Lucas Report responds to them. Many of these responses are rather cautious about the supposed academic strengths of the teaching contribution of the PPHs (not to mention research contributions to the RAE).
E.g. Joint Submission Note 4. We make a great contribution to BTh and MTh teaching and we would like to be paid for it ('make adequate provision in resource allocation mechanisms').
Cf. Lucas Report Recommendation No. 20-22: the Faculty of Theology needs to get on the case to ensure the academic standards; it shouldn't let the PPHs make such a contribution.

Re Wycliffe specifically the biggest issue for them is simply to be able to make the case for a distinctively evangelical perspective in relation to Recommendation 7 (c): the licence of a PPH could be withdrawn if it "shall be shown to be departing from the values of a liberal education conducted in the spirit of free and critical enquiry and debate". It is important that this case is made, since it obviously underlies the general suspicion that is expressed in the Lucas Report. Wycliffe may find it more difficult to defend this both because the new leadership team seem less obviously enthusiastic about "critical enquiry" and because some of the departed staff would be more at home in making this sort of case.

Posts: 143 | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged
Tubbs

Miss Congeniality
# 440

 - Posted      Profile for Tubbs   Author's homepage   Email Tubbs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Thurible:
And it does the same thing about S. Stephen's House, insofar as it criticises the idea of most teaching being inhouse when you've got the University of Oxford on your doorstep. The report is not an-anti Wycliffe Hall because its evangelical principal happens to be a big bogey man who stands up for that which he believes in document!

Thurible

It says similar things about Regents Park, although it also goes onto say that the teaching there is very good.

From what's been said in the report, it sounds like the University has concerns with funding, academic standards and undergraduate provision in all the PPH's - reguardless of their stance and make-up. And, in all likelihood, even if everything else hadn't happened at Wycliffe the report would have said similar things in relation to that.

As for the other issue that scribehunter alludes to, it may be too soon to tell. Although that is something that the new staff will have direct imput into. But I suspect that to make a case to withdraw a PPH licence, the university is going to have come up with some a good deal more specific.

quote:
Re Wycliffe specifically the biggest issue for them is simply to be able to make the case for a distinctively evangelical perspective in relation to Recommendation 7 (c): the licence of a PPH could be withdrawn if it "shall be shown to be departing from the values of a liberal education conducted in the spirit of free and critical enquiry and debate". It is important that this case is made, since it obviously underlies the general suspicion that is expressed in the Lucas Report. Wycliffe may find it more difficult to defend this both because the new leadership team seem less obviously enthusiastic about "critical enquiry" and because some of the departed staff would be more at home in making this sort of case.
Tubbs

[ETA to correct name]

[ 28. September 2007, 12:23: Message edited by: 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
pete173
Shipmate
# 4622

 - Posted      Profile for pete173   Author's homepage   Email pete173   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
There's an excellent letter in the Church of England Newspaper this week, which blows the gaffe on what's been going on. Eeva John, Geoff Maughan and David Wenham have signed it. Can't yet dig up a link (CEN is subscription only). But it confirms what was already known about management style "heavy handed and abrasive"), the ignoring of staff requests, and the lack of due process in personnel procedures.

I imagine that the Council and the Principal will attempt to tough all this out, and won't admit to any shortcomings, in the hope that it will all blow over.

--------------------
Pete

Posts: 1653 | From: Kilburn, London NW6 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Tubbs

Miss Congeniality
# 440

 - Posted      Profile for Tubbs   Author's homepage   Email Tubbs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by pete173:
There's an excellent letter in the Church of England Newspaper this week, which blows the gaffe on what's been going on. Eeva John, Geoff Maughan and David Wenham have signed it. Can't yet dig up a link (CEN is subscription only). But it confirms what was already known about management style "heavy handed and abrasive"), the ignoring of staff requests, and the lack of due process in personnel procedures.

I imagine that the Council and the Principal will attempt to tough all this out, and won't admit to any shortcomings, in the hope that it will all blow over.

My emphasis. If that's true, it could all be aired in an unfair dismissal case as I'd guess whatever employment law dispensations the CofE has won't cover their academic institutions. If that's the case, anyone who hopes it will all blow over will be disappointed.

(Goes off muttering about why people always assume that the rule relating to unfair dismissal always apply to ... someone else [Disappointed] [Roll Eyes] )

Tubbs

[ 28. September 2007, 13:07: Message edited by: 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
Charles Read
Shipmate
# 3963

 - Posted      Profile for Charles Read   Author's homepage   Email Charles Read   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The Church of England's Colleges, Courses and Boards of Ministry, Education etc. are all subject to UK employment law just like e.g. Tesco or Norwich Union are (to pick firms at random).

All institutions must - yes must - have personnel procedures in place - as Pete 173 said has happened at the place of sound learning where he is Chair> I'm off muttering wirth Tubbs on this one - why is this so hard for institutions to grasp? (and I am not thinking of any in particular at this precise moment).

--------------------
"I am a sinful human being - why do you expect me to be consistent?" George Bebawi

"This is just unfocussed wittering." Ian McIntosh

Posts: 701 | From: Norwich | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402

 - Posted      Profile for Custard   Author's homepage   Email Custard   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The letter in the CEN is a useful contribution, as long as it is borne in mind that that is the point of view of the people most disaffected with the current management at Wycliffe.

Another point of view is that represented by Richard Turnbull's past comments, and another by my comments from the student point of view.

The truth is probably in the synthesis, which isn't that hard to do as there aren't major differences of fact, just of interpretation. So the staff were probably prepared for some changes, but not for the kind of culture changes in terms of level of consultation (for example) that Richard assumed.

--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.


Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
pete173
Shipmate
# 4622

 - Posted      Profile for pete173   Author's homepage   Email pete173   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The reality is that you can't get away with (inter alia)

1. Council refusing to meet the Staff
2. Not having a proper disciplinary procedure
3. Not having a proper grievance procedure
4. Dismissal of staff on grounds that are tenuous
5. Refusal to comply with statutory requirements

and still maintain credibility as a well-run institution.

You can be as nice as you like to the students, but the acid test is how you treat the people who work for you. Christianity doesn't just begin and end with theological positions and missiological emphases. It has to permeate through the life and behaviour of the people who have power and how they use that power. Same goes for bishops and vicars, so I'm preaching to myself in the here and now, as well as to you, Custard, in your future ministry.

--------------------
Pete

Posts: 1653 | From: Kilburn, London NW6 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Nightlamp
Shipmate
# 266

 - Posted      Profile for Nightlamp   Email Nightlamp   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
but not for the kind of culture changes in terms of level of consultation (for example) that Richard assumed.

Don't you mean the complete lack of reasonable consultation?

--------------------
I don't know what you are talking about so it couldn't have been that important- Nightlamp

Posts: 8442 | From: Midlands | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tubbs

Miss Congeniality
# 440

 - Posted      Profile for Tubbs   Author's homepage   Email Tubbs   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by pete173:
The reality is that you can't get away with (inter alia)

1. Council refusing to meet the Staff
2. Not having a proper disciplinary procedure
3. Not having a proper grievance procedure
4. Dismissal of staff on grounds that are tenuous
5. Refusal to comply with statutory requirements

and still maintain credibility as a well-run institution.

Is that slightly illegal?! [Eek!] In an employee tribunal case, if 2, 4 and 5 were found to be true, then the plantiff would win. Which would be expensive for the employer.

I always wonder if people would be quite so blasé about abiding by employment law if such things worked in the same way as corporate manslaughter. And the individual responsible for not following them was liable and had to pay costs from their own pocket instead of passing them onto either their insurer or their employer. [Snigger]

Tubbs

[ 28. September 2007, 15:11: Message edited by: 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
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402

 - Posted      Profile for Custard   Author's homepage   Email Custard   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Nightlamp:
Don't you mean the complete lack of reasonable consultation?

No, because "reasonable" is to an extent subjective. So it is quite possible, even probable, that the level of consultation might have been deemed reasonable by some and unreasonable by others.

--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.


Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Arrietty

Ship's borrower
# 45

 - Posted      Profile for Arrietty   Author's homepage   Email Arrietty   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It may be subjective but it's also a legal requirement in many cases eg 'reasonable force', and if it comes to that you don't get to decide what's reasonable, the court does.

--------------------
i-church

Online Mission and Ministry

Posts: 6634 | From: Coventry, UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402

 - Posted      Profile for Custard   Author's homepage   Email Custard   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Arrietty:
It may be subjective but it's also a legal requirement in many cases eg 'reasonable force', and if it comes to that you don't get to decide what's reasonable, the court does.

I was just about to post that. Yes, it's quite possible that in some cases there may be an objective "legal minimum consultation", which the law describes as "reasonable".

I am an expert, however, neither in employment law nor in exactly how much consultation went on.

--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.


Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
pete173
Shipmate
# 4622

 - Posted      Profile for pete173   Author's homepage   Email pete173   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
quote:
Originally posted by pete173:
The reality is that you can't get away with (inter alia)

1. Council refusing to meet the Staff
2. Not having a proper disciplinary procedure
3. Not having a proper grievance procedure
4. Dismissal of staff on grounds that are tenuous
5. Refusal to comply with statutory requirements

and still maintain credibility as a well-run institution.

Is that slightly illegal?! [Eek!] In an employee tribunal case, if 2, 4 and 5 were found to be true, then the plantiff would win. Which would be expensive for the employer.

Tubbs

But you do of course have to be able to afford the fees of m'learned friends in order to be able to take this route. Access to the justice that I believe that certain members of staff deserve may not be available to them, simply because of the cost of litigation.

--------------------
Pete

Posts: 1653 | From: Kilburn, London NW6 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Carys

Ship's Celticist
# 78

 - Posted      Profile for Carys   Email Carys   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by pete173:
But you do of course have to be able to afford the fees of m'learned friends in order to be able to take this route. Access to the justice that I believe that certain members of staff deserve may not be available to them, simply because of the cost of litigation.

That's what Trade Unions are for.

Carys

--------------------
O Lord, you have searched me and know me
You know when I sit and when I rise

Posts: 6896 | From: Bryste mwy na thebyg | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Pokrov
Shipmate
# 11515

 - Posted      Profile for Pokrov   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by pete173:
Access to the justice that I believe that certain members of staff deserve may not be available to them, simply because of the cost of litigation.

...and also the teaching of Jesus and St. Paul? (says he not on the receiving end of said injustice...)

--------------------
Most Holy Theotokos pray for us!

Posts: 1469 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
pete173
Shipmate
# 4622

 - Posted      Profile for pete173   Author's homepage   Email pete173   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I suspect that the way in which you work through the stuff about not going to law against your fellow Christians is

1. do all you can to settle without recourse to the courts

2. but if you are (say) not allowed to argue your case, and denied due process and just treatment, then you must have recourse to the civil authorities

And that the theology of this isn't "don't go to law", because we are not dualists, and we believe ourselves to be good citizens for whom the law also provides justice (cf. Paul's appeal to Caesar).

--------------------
Pete

Posts: 1653 | From: Kilburn, London NW6 | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
Arrietty

Ship's borrower
# 45

 - Posted      Profile for Arrietty   Author's homepage   Email Arrietty   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
If, as it seems, some staff have been removed when they didn't want to leave, then clearly that has already gone way beyond the 'sort it out among yourselves' principle, since a solution has been imposed by one party on the other without their agreement.

I think there are various organisations that support people in unfair dismissal cases if there is no union to call on.

--------------------
i-church

Online Mission and Ministry

Posts: 6634 | From: Coventry, UK | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636

 - Posted      Profile for BroJames   Email BroJames   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
If that's your point, I'm happy to agree with it. We as a student body didn't really know about the Wenham/Turnbull disagreement until the outcome was announced publically, for example - both sides behaved very well in that regard.

It is now obvious that even staff who have found themselves in very invidious positions have worked hard to minimize the impact of all this on the student body. However today's letter does make me rather review the way in which I read this post
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
David Wenham is a very lovely guy and a very good scholar, and we are all (Richard included) very sorry to be losing him.

George Kovoor (principal at Trinity Bristol) has been quoted as saying before Easter to the students at Trinity that he would do whatever he could to get David Wenham on staff there, having already got his brother (not from Wycliffe). I don't for a moment suspect Mr Kovoor of dirty tricks, and I'm happy for the folks at Trinity. But it's not a case of David just walking out.

It rather looks as though DW was the one who was keen to move and that actually it probably was a case of DW walking out as soon as suitable arrangements could be made - or at the very least he didn't have to think very hard about the offer from Trinity.
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged
Pokrov
Shipmate
# 11515

 - Posted      Profile for Pokrov   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Pete,

I don't disagree. I was just trying to 'sound out' the borderline.

Was Pauls appeal to Caesar because he felt an injustice against himself, or as a 'means to an end' to get to Rome under protection to proclaim the Gospel?

Probably both/and. As you say, we're not dualists.

--------------------
Most Holy Theotokos pray for us!

Posts: 1469 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402

 - Posted      Profile for Custard   Author's homepage   Email Custard   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by BroJames:
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
If that's your point, I'm happy to agree with it. We as a student body didn't really know about the Wenham/Turnbull disagreement until the outcome was announced publically, for example - both sides behaved very well in that regard.

It is now obvious that even staff who have found themselves in very invidious positions have worked hard to minimize the impact of all this on the student body.
Most of the staff. Even almost all of them.

If the CEN is correct in saying that the anonymous letter to the Guardian was written by a member (or former member) of staff, then that is, however, a counterexample.


quote:
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
David Wenham is a very lovely guy and a very good scholar, and we are all (Richard included) very sorry to be losing him.

George Kovoor (principal at Trinity Bristol) has been quoted as saying before Easter to the students at Trinity that he would do whatever he could to get David Wenham on staff there, having already got his brother (not from Wycliffe). I don't for a moment suspect Mr Kovoor of dirty tricks, and I'm happy for the folks at Trinity. But it's not a case of David just walking out.

It rather looks as though DW was the one who was keen to move and that actually it probably was a case of DW walking out as soon as suitable arrangements could be made - or at the very least he didn't have to think very hard about the offer from Trinity.
Yes. But he didn't just walk out immediately with nowhere to go. Richard had (I understand) waived the requirement for him to give a term's notice.

[ 28. September 2007, 16:32: Message edited by: Custard. ]

--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.


Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Scribehunter
Shipmate
# 12750

 - Posted      Profile for Scribehunter         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Good on you Custard. Always look on the bright side of life! How kind of the Turnbull to waive such a requirement. He must be the kindest Principal in the country.
Posts: 143 | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged
Scribehunter
Shipmate
# 12750

 - Posted      Profile for Scribehunter         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
David Wenham is a very lovely guy and a very good scholar, and we are all (Richard included) very sorry to be losing him.

With respect Custard, now we all know that this "Richard included", like your earlier insights into staff relationships, is complete bullshit.
Posts: 143 | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged
Archimandrite
Shipmate
# 3997

 - Posted      Profile for Archimandrite   Author's homepage   Email Archimandrite   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Scribehunter:
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
David Wenham is a very lovely guy and a very good scholar, and we are all (Richard included) very sorry to be losing him.

With respect Custard, now we all know that this "Richard included", like your earlier insights into staff relationships, is complete bullshit.
Gosh, you're sounding quite bitter. Why's it so important to you?

--------------------
"Loyal Anglican" (Warning: General Synod may differ).

Posts: 1580 | From: Oxford | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Scribehunter
Shipmate
# 12750

 - Posted      Profile for Scribehunter         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
He's a friend of mine. Quite a long time ago he freely helped me in a significant way.
Posts: 143 | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged
Nightlamp
Shipmate
# 266

 - Posted      Profile for Nightlamp   Email Nightlamp   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Archimandrite:
quote:
Originally posted by Scribehunter:
With respect Custard, now we all know that this "Richard included", like your earlier insights into staff relationships, is complete bullshit.

Gosh, you're sounding quite bitter. Why's it so important to you?
I think you will find he is giving his opinion in a blunt way. The facts would seem to support this as well.

--------------------
I don't know what you are talking about so it couldn't have been that important- Nightlamp

Posts: 8442 | From: Midlands | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Archimandrite
Shipmate
# 3997

 - Posted      Profile for Archimandrite   Author's homepage   Email Archimandrite   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Nightlamp:
quote:
Originally posted by Archimandrite:
quote:
Originally posted by Scribehunter:
With respect Custard, now we all know that this "Richard included", like your earlier insights into staff relationships, is complete bullshit.

Gosh, you're sounding quite bitter. Why's it so important to you?
I think you will find he is giving his opinion in a blunt way. The facts would seem to support this as well.
I'm quite aware that he's being blunt. However, there's blunt, and blunt with an axe to grind*, and I think people in the latter category ought to be a little more open about quite why they come across as so involved.

*I think that's a mixed metaphor, but I'm sure you understand the sentiment.

--------------------
"Loyal Anglican" (Warning: General Synod may differ).

Posts: 1580 | From: Oxford | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110

 - Posted      Profile for Barnabas62   Email Barnabas62   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:


(Goes off muttering about why people always assume that the rule relating to unfair dismissal always apply to ... someone else [Disappointed] [Roll Eyes] )


This has been the issue which has bothered me all along. Given the general level of "smarts" you expect in association with colleges of learning, I'd made a reasonable assumption that the Hall Council and Richard Turnbull would know the way the law affects due process in hiring and firing. Now there are some concrete reasons in the public domain which might make us doubt that.

pete173 has posted elsewhere - on another thread IIRC - about the hard work which was necessary to get good procedures in place where he is. I do not believe he would have posted his criticism lightly on a public discussion board. That's not the pete we know through his association with SoF.

So far as the Christian principle of not involving the law against other Christians are concerned, I'll listen to anyone who, faced with this or a similar situation has accepted the situation quietly. The dubious termination of someone's means of livelihood (or a part of it) is no small issue of righteousness. Seems to me those who have been dismissed would be behaving perfectly morally to consider offers of compensation or other remedies. After all, what do you do when all internal avenues of appeal have been closed or foreclosed? If the procedures are unjust, even if sincerely applied, there is still a wider responsibility to others still employed. That is easily overlooked.

I've worked in this HR area in the secular world. This really isn't over. And because there may be an issue of righteousness at the heart of this, this may be just as important as college vision, direction, management of change et al, as a test of the ongoing probity of the College.

I really hope this has always been clear to the Hall Council - if not, I hope it is becoming clear now. Issues like this between Christians should not have to go to the law courts because the Christian employer has the wider responsibility, to do right by the employees in accordance with the law. Not just their understanding of it at the time. And if they find out they have not, they have a duty to make good. Not "tough it out".

--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?

Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Pokrov
Shipmate
# 11515

 - Posted      Profile for Pokrov   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Re: Going to the law...

On second thoughts I read the teachings of Jesus/Paul as being either:

a) The realm of 'personal' ethics. So one might well seek 'justice' against RT through the law courts, but wouldn't hesitate to help him or bless him if/when in need

or

b) Specifically 'Church' matters - such as 'lay presidency' or such like. Taking an ecclesial/sacramental matter before the secular law courts would be wholly inappropriate.

As you were...

--------------------
Most Holy Theotokos pray for us!

Posts: 1469 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
Leprechaun

Ship's Poison Elf
# 5408

 - Posted      Profile for Leprechaun     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:


pete173 has posted elsewhere - on another thread IIRC - about the hard work which was necessary to get good procedures in place where he is. I do not believe he would have posted his criticism lightly on a public discussion board. That's not the pete we know through his association with SoF.

To be honest, I'm really not that sure on Pete's "We've got better procedures than Wycliffe ner ner ner ner ner" posturing when a fellow bishop is the chair of the hall council, is at all appropriate. Listing all the things that Wycliffe could get into legal trouble for on a discussion board doesn't really seem to display that much solidarity to me.

At least the law courts are a properly regulated environment with an accepted procedure for both sides of the story. Much better than "trial by internet" with the unedifying sight of a bishop joining in the dogpile.

[ 28. September 2007, 20:10: Message edited by: Leprechaun ]

Posts: 3097 | From: England - far from home... | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
badman
Shipmate
# 9634

 - Posted      Profile for badman     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by pete173:
There's an excellent letter in the Church of England Newspaper this week, which blows the gaffe on what's been going on. Eeva John, Geoff Maughan and David Wenham have signed it. Can't yet dig up a link (CEN is subscription only). But it confirms what was already known about management style "heavy handed and abrasive"), the ignoring of staff requests, and the lack of due process in personnel procedures.

A complete transcript of the letter has now been put up here
Posts: 429 | From: Diocese of Guildford | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged
Emma Louise

Storm in a teapot
# 3571

 - Posted      Profile for Emma Louise   Email Emma Louise   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Gosh. I was trying to hope that it wasn't as bad as feared based on their silence. Although it did seem pretty rough from the McGrath's writings.

I'm so sad for what Wycliffe has lost and for those lovely people forced to leave.

Posts: 12719 | From: Enid Blyton territory. | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Spong

Ship's coffee grinder
# 1518

 - Posted      Profile for Spong     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
quote:
Originally posted by Nightlamp:
Don't you mean the complete lack of reasonable consultation?

No, because "reasonable" is to an extent subjective. So it is quite possible, even probable, that the level of consultation might have been deemed reasonable by some and unreasonable by others.
There's a lot of this thread I have no worthwhile comment on, but if it ever comes to law, this assertion is incorrect. 'Reasonable' is essentially the way that the law looks at things objectively - given the facts and the situation concerned what would the ordinary man on the Clapham omnibus think?
quote:
Originally posted by Pete 173.:
But you do of course have to be able to afford the fees of m'learned friends in order to be able to take this route. Access to the justice that I believe that certain members of staff deserve may not be available to them, simply because of the cost of litigation.

The local CAB would be able to provide initial help, and there are then several people who might then take it further - for example the Bar Pro Bono unit.

--------------------
Spong

The needs of our neighbours are the needs of the whole human family. Let's respond just as we do when our immediate family is in need or trouble. Rowan Williams

Posts: 2173 | From: South-East UK | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
badman
Shipmate
# 9634

 - Posted      Profile for badman     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
The history set out in the letter makes some of the recommendations of the University review of PPHs look especially pointed now.

quote:
4. The University should require that the by-laws of each Permanent Private Hall are consistent with the statutes and regulations of the University, particularly in respect of the employment of staff, equal opportunities, harassment, and the protection of freedom of opinion and speech.

5. The governance arrangements of the Permanent Private Halls should contain adequate representation of the stipendiary staff in the decision-making processes of their Hall.

But in the short term, the letter is a serious challenge to the credibility of the Council. The staff relied on the Council to exercise its role of supervision and intervention and the Council let them down.

Surely Turnbull and the Council cannot simply try and brazen it out now? And, if they do, will they get away with it? And, if they do, at what cost to Wycliffe Hall?

Posts: 429 | From: Diocese of Guildford | Registered: Jun 2005  |  IP: Logged
Pokrov
Shipmate
# 11515

 - Posted      Profile for Pokrov   Author's homepage     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'd say that the CEN letter is probably the best 'measure' of the truth. Gracious where it needs to be and not shy of acknowledging that charity was lacking on all sides. However, this letter - along with RT's Reform performance has convinced me that RT's own theological perspective, along with his managerial 'style' has substantially eroded Wycliffe's broad consensus and disenfranchised significant 'stakeholders'.

--------------------
Most Holy Theotokos pray for us!

Posts: 1469 | Registered: Jun 2006  |  IP: Logged
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402

 - Posted      Profile for Custard   Author's homepage   Email Custard   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
While I think the CEN letter is blatantly only one side of the issue, it does raise some questions about the Council's handling of the whole thing.

I don't know the situation with the council anywhere near as well as I know it with things that happen inside the college. I know that there are two bishops on there (+Liverpool and +Birmingham), as well as quite a lot of business and church experience, so they ought to know what they are doing.

quote:
Originally posted by Scribehunter:
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
David Wenham is a very lovely guy and a very good scholar, and we are all (Richard included) very sorry to be losing him.

With respect Custard, now we all know that this "Richard included", like your earlier insights into staff relationships, is complete bullshit.
With respect, we don't.

There is a somewhat obvious way of reconciling the propositions "Richard valued David greatly" with "David did not feel valued by Richard" - viz that Richard did not effectively communicate that valuing to David.

--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.


Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged
Yerevan
Shipmate
# 10383

 - Posted      Profile for Yerevan   Email Yerevan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Here's how it looks to an outsider who doesn't give much of a toss either way....

Three former principals have gone public with serious concerns. Several respected members of staff have been sacked or resigned. A review of PPHs has been distinctly critical. No doubt Custard will be along in a minute to put the best possible spin on things, but all of the above adds up to an unholy mess and suggests that the current leadership at Wycliffe couldn't manage their way out of a paper bag (which means that its no different from quite a few Oxford colleges [Biased] ). On the other hand it doesn't look as if they're trying to pull off a covert shift to the right. Maybe I'm being unduly cynical, but Turnbull's famous speech on the subject just looked like an attempt to suck cash out of Reform.

PS I've heard rumours of discontent amongst ordinands at Wycliffe, but as they're "friend of a friend" stuff I have no idea how reliable they are.

Posts: 3758 | From: In the middle | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged
Yerevan
Shipmate
# 10383

 - Posted      Profile for Yerevan   Email Yerevan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
There is a somewhat obvious way of reconciling the propositions "Richard valued David greatly" with "David did not feel valued by Richard" - viz that Richard did not effectively communicate that valuing to David.

In fact he failed to communicate that valuing so badly that David resigned. Which really just confirms the idea that people management is not RT's strongpoint.
Posts: 3758 | From: In the middle | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged
Scribehunter
Shipmate
# 12750

 - Posted      Profile for Scribehunter         Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I do think Custard is right to point out that the most dramatic failure is the failure of the Council. Failure even to take note of successive letters - six letters from groups of staff acc. to John-Maughan-Wenham. Failure to step in early enough to open up the issue. Failure to do anything except "support the Principal" in the most fatuous way (it is surely possible to support the Principal by encouraging him to behave in a Christian manner). Failure to recognise the car crash happening right in front of them.
I suppose some sort of legal challenge or employment tribunal might make them sit up and start paying attention.
Does anyone know who is on the Council?

Posts: 143 | Registered: Jun 2007  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  ...  45  46  47 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools