|
Collaborative Ministry
I have spent some of my sabbatical time exploring the idea of Collaborative Ministry (CM). I felt led to do this as a result of the paper produced by myself and Langley Mackrell Hey ‘Pastoral heart, Mission Mind' and the recognition that shortage of ministers and finance in the church requires a rethink of the way we 'do church'.
The one resource we have always had (although decreasing, perhaps in part, because of the catch 22 nature of the structure of church) is people. Unfortunately we have managed to produce an unbalanced church society which can be likened to the football ground where 10,000 people in need of exercise watch 22 people in need of a rest. It is estimated that 20% of a congregation does 80% of the work in any one church. Somehow, I believe, we need to redress this balance and rediscover the role and responsibility of every Christian and stop being so ‘minister dependent'. Likewise, as I have read more on the subject I realise that we need to rethink what it means to be the church of Jesus Christ , reaffirm him as head and reconsider how we can become more akin to the church Jesus set out to establish.
Two books to which I am indebted are ‘Skills for Collaborative Ministry' by Sally and Paul Nash and Jo Pimlott published by SPCK; and ‘Collaborative Ministry' by David Robertson published by BRF.
The latter of these is a particularly good Biblically based study of CM and I have drawn much on the process and Bible Study material to produce this suggested ‘way ahead' for those who might consider putting CM into practice.
In addition to the reading I have talked with some practitioners of CM including John Folmer, Senior Pastor of the United Christian Church in Dubai who, ministering in a non-Christian culture, inevitably has to structure and work differently (appendix 1); and Loraine Mellor who gave a presentation to Ministerial Conference 2009 the summary of which appeared in MET Connexion Autumn 2009.
So what have I discovered from my sabbatical reflections on CM? Here are some of my thoughts:
I realise that as Methodists we are so entrenched in a pyramid style of leadership with the ordained minister, usually a presbyter, in charge (politely called ‘in pastoral charge') that we would need a complete rethink of the way we are called to be church – congregation and ministers - in order to become a collaborative ‘organisation'. This rethink includes not only managerial styles but theology too, for CM is not merely a ‘nice idea' it is the fulfilment of the intention of Jesus in establishing the church through his disciples.
Time and again we read in the Bible that Jesus is the head of the church, the body of Christ; that every member of the body has a part to play; that every follower of Jesus is given gifts by the Holy Spirit to build the Kingdom of God . Nowhere in the NT do we see one individual exercising all the gifts, doing all the work and making all the decisions. Yes, Paul advised the churches he had established but he was not their leader, and when he and Peter differed in decision making it was to a collaborative decision making body he turned – the Council of Jerusalem.
John Wesley, I think, had a grasp of the difference between the Biblical model and that of the church of his day and in the formation of the Methodist society he was encouraging Christians to take their responsibilities seriously and to move away from the priestly nature of the church, whilst still recognising the role of an ordained minister.
The Deed of Union seeks to define the relationship between those who are ordained and the whole Church:
“Christ's ministers in the church are stewards in the household of God and shepherds of his flock. Some are called and ordained to this sole occupation and have a principal and directing part in these great duties but they hold no priesthood differing in kind from that which is common to all the Lord's people and they have no exclusive title to the preaching of the gospel or the care of souls. These ministries are shared with them by others to whom also the Spirit divides his gifts severally as he wills.
the Methodist Church holds the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers and consequently believes that no priesthood exists which belongs to a particular order or class of people, but in the exercise of its corporate life and worship special qualifications for the discharge of special duties are required and thus the principle of representative selection is recognised .
For the sake of church order and not because of any priestly virtue inherent in the office the ministers of the Methodist Church are set apart by ordination to the ministry of the word and sacraments.”
Although this statement seems to be very clear it has somehow become less obvious in its outworking as time has elapsed. Maybe the desire to be more in line with the Anglican priesthood has added to our confused thinking and practice, but certainly it is far more the norm in Methodist Churches today that the minister is seen as the head of the church, to whom all ideas, decisions, and questions should be directed, to be ratified by the Church Council.
This is a sad reflection for a denomination set up to enable the local congregation to make the decisions and to influence national thinking through representation to Circuit, Synod and Conference.
The Methodist Church has not been unaware of this and in 1986 the report on ‘The Ministry of the Whole People of God' was sent to Conference. In it the following observations were made:
‘The pluralist nature of the contemporary Methodist Church and the history of the Methodist tradition can be used creatively only when the church enables to flourish both those who discern the church's calling in a focal person and those who perceive the church's calling in conciliar or collaborative models of leadership. The ordained ministry should be exercised in a personal, collegial and communal way'.
Under the subject of the professionalism of ordained ministry the report continues:
‘the gap between the training and competence of the professional and the relatively undeveloped gifts and skills of those who are not professionals is so large that co-operation becomes difficult if not impossible. Non professionals easily become unduly dependent upon professional expertise and lose confidence in their own gifts and skills.'
In 1986 there was clearly an awareness of the problem and nothing appears to have redressed the balance in the intervening years. The said report was criticized for having too great an emphasis on the ordained – suggesting a new Order of Mission and Ministry' – the apparent solution being to professionalise even more people.
The 1988 Conference saw a report attempting to redress the balance with an emphasis on Lay Workers and in 1990 a further report to Conference ‘The Ministry of the People of God in the World' attempted to bring to fore the role of every Christian in the world, in the workplace, wherever God had called them to live their daily lives. A recognition that there was more to being a Christian than attending church, every Christian has a part to play in building the Kingdom of God and has been gifted accordingly.
Twenty years later where has all this taken us? Well we probably have more lay employees, a more diverse paid staff in many circuits, but we still have a mostly ‘consumer' minded membership who look to the ‘professionals' for everything – pastoral care, mission, leadership of worship, preaching, teaching, even property development. Occasionally they look elsewhere for administration and finance!
For pragmatic reasons alone this situation cannot continue indefinitely. Ministerial burnout is increasing and numbers of ordained ministers are decreasing. But more importantly we are far from the church of Jesus Christ – we look far more like the Jewish religious set up in the time of Jesus. If we do not return to allowing Jesus to be the head of the church we cannot expect him to keep ‘bailing us out'.
Interesting, to me at least, as all this is, to raise the issues without a suggested way ahead would be to have embarked on a purely academic exercise. I set out to try to produce some materials to help local churches, circuits and ministers to explore CM for themselves and consider taking some steps to implement change. However in discovering ‘Collaborative Ministry' by David Robertson I found someone had already done this. The book is in three parts: part one compares CM approach with existing church leadership structures; part two explores Biblical themes of leadership and membership; part three deals with the practicalities of rebuilding leadership structures. In addition (especially pertinent to me) there are a number of Bible studies designed for groups to consider both the Biblical and practical elements of CM.
I have therefore decided not to reinvent the wheel, but to recommend the book – it can be borrowed from me or it can be purchased (isbn 9781841014937) from BRF or Amazon.
It would seem that a possible starting point would be for ministers to take a look at CM first – following a pyramid structure! – so perhaps a way forward would be to invite Rev David Robertson to come and address the Ministerial Synod sometime next year after which interested ministers might like to meet to explore some of the material and think further through the issues – I would be happy to facilitate this and share in the discussions.
To establish CM style of working is clearly a long term ‘project', it will take time and energy on the part of ministers and needs to begin with Collaborative Leadership among staff, but if it succeeds it will allow the 22 football players to rest while the spectators take on the game for themselves.
So that is my reflection on CM. I am no expert, I haven't attempted (yet) to implement it, I have probably read , talked about and thought about it a little more than most people in the District and I offer myself to talk with you about it further if this has whetted your appetite for doing things differently in your church or circuit.
Liz Childs
|
