Mike's musings

Just listening

Sometimes that's all that being a priest needs to be. I was with some work colleagues tonight, and having told them that I'm a priest, one of them just wanted to talk, and to know that I wasn't going to judge. She's not had good experiences with church before, and a different encounter was what she needed. I'm not suggesting she's about to become "churchy" (her word), but she was grateful to be able to talk about her father, her grandfather, and her brother. Sometimes it's just about listening.

Labels: ministry

And home - and away again. Oh, and a clown. Really

(backposting) Home's always the good bit, and I got there around 1400, mainly because the plane had been delayed by over an hour. I had a quick bath, got changed, and headed off to pick up Miri, who was with Victoria as Moo had a governors' meeting. Moo brought Jo back around 1530, and I had about two hours with all of them before they headed off to Moo's parents, and I headed off to the High Leighs Conference Centre for a CME weekend.

This really wasn't what I needed. I was really quite jet-lagged, and the fact that we had a session with a priest/clown in the evening did little to make me less grumpy. Remember that Grumpy was a dwarf: I was a full-size, 6ft 2in grump giant. Although I got the point about leaving work, and enjoying ourselves, where exactly were God and Jesus and the Holy Spirit? Nowhere very obvious, is the problem.

Great to see lots of friends, and particularly good that we had all 3 years of curates there. Less grumpy by the time I got to bed, and went to sleep nice and quickly.

Labels: family, humour, ministry

CME - "mixed economy"

A CME session this evening in Chelsmford. It was on Fresh Expressions, or "the mixed economy church". There wasn't much that was new, to be honest, but it was good to see folks (and have a lovely supper).

I decided that today would be a very good day to tidy my office, but luckily some things came up which distracted me.

Oh, and I've got a silicone case for my mobile phone, which I'm pleased about, as it's a little less vulnerable now.

Labels: ministry

A very good day

Lots of things I can't really blog about today, including some pastorally sensitive ministry-related activity, but it's been a really good day. We also had our first parents' evening for Jo's school, which was exciting at one level, and administrivial (is that a real word) on another.

Had a good walk, too, and Moo's got a new phone, the sim of which will be activated over night. She has a day at home tomorrow, so she's quite excited.

Labels: ministry, phone, school

Eucharist

In 24 days, I'll celebrate my first Eucharist. We had a CME day today to help us prepare. I had some issues with at least one of the speakers - a "Forward in Faith" priest who referred to the Pope as "the Holy Father", said that he's the only true vicar, and admitted to using the Roman Missal (completely illegally), but had some other good theological points - but it was a very useful day. Afterwards, my parents arrived to spend the weekend with us. Dad (who's a priest) had written me a letter in preparation for my first Eucharist which raised a number of the questions we'd discussed today, as well as some others, and we had a good discussion about a number of them. More to come, I'm sure.

And Dad gave me a white stole. He gave me one for my deaconing, too, which his mother had given him. But this is a C18th stole, with gold thread, and is just stunning. I think I'm going to wear it for my ordination, and ask him to wear the other one which he gave me. Really - it's beautiful.

Labels: eucharist, ministry

More ordination practice

(backposting) This time, everyone made it. Oh, and I had a meeting with some people about a burial of ashes: one of those occasions where things are difficult, and you feel that you're ministering just by being there, and listening.

The girls got back this evening, and went straight to bed, which was good.

Labels: ministry

Miscellaneous catchings-up

So, what's today been about? Well:

• we went to see Kirsty and Matt for an early lunch in Cambridge
• I discovered (yesterday, actually) that the Samsung i8910 HD will be out in the UK soon. I covet it, in a wholly unhealthy way.
• I've had 8 comments so far on my blog post from Friday: A problematic ontology of ministry: employment - and gender. Two of these are from bishops who have kindly taken the time to comment: I value their thoughts particularly, as part of the issue I'm addressing is about the episcopy
• I've been playing with Gnome-Shell, and offering some opinions. I don't pretend to any expertise in UI design, but I'm definitely a power user, in terms of how much I use the desktop and what I tend to do with it. I do like Gnome-Shell, and it's exciting to be working on the future of the Operating System that I know and love.

Labels: blogging, friends, linux, ministry, miscellaneous

A problematic ontology of ministry: employment - and gender

I recently asked couple of questions on Twitter and Facebook:

• What is it to be clergy in non-church employ?
• Is our ministry ontologically different?

These are questions I've been interested in for a while, for obvious reasons: I'm what the Church of England calls a "Self-Supporting Minister" (and used to call a "Non-Stipendiary Minister"). In other words, I'm not employed by the church, but make my living elsewhere, giving time and ministry to the church. There are probably as many models for this as there are SSMs: some have a ministry firmly rooted within their secular employ; some work part-time and give lots of time to the church; some give what time they can, exercising some ministry within their secular job, some ministry within a typical church context, and some ministry in other contexts (this blog and various other online activities being examples from my life). But we all have in common that we neither receive a stipend from the church nor does it employ us full-time.

Before we go into any detail, I'd note that I've done little or no reading in this area, and that this brief essay is the result only of some thinking and discussions I've had. If you have some thoughts about further reading, I'd be interested to hear them.

How "part-timers" are seen

Yesterday we had a CME (Continuing Ministerial Education) seminar, just with some of the SSM curates in the diocese, and we had some interesting stories. We considered three constituencies: congregations, clergy and diocese. Some members of our congregation "get" it - some, indeed, welcome it, but the main questions (of a negative nature, at least) that arose within the congregational context seemed to relate to the amount of time that a non-full-time member of clergy can give to the church. From the stories we shared, there seemed to be little questioning of the legitimacy of the idea of self-supporting clergy. Indeed, some congregations seem to welcome the shared perspective which they may feel that "working" member of clergy can deliver in preaching and pastoral situations.

Although most of the interactions that we had experienced from clergy colleagues were positive, there were reports that some clergy colleagues see us as not committing ourselves to ministry to the extent that they do. Resentments that self-supporting clergy "cherry-pick" the best services and jobs within a team were backed up with one report of a member of clergy saying that "you lot haven't had to give up on a career like we have". Still, however, there seemed to be little suggestion over the legitimacy of self-supporting ministry, though suggestions of lack of commitment suggest lingering questions around a life which is defined by ministry.

In many ways, we, as group, didn't feel convinced that the diocese really knows how to deal with us in all contexts. The stories around how deanery and diocesan synods, chapter meetings, training events and the rest are routinely scheduled with little or no thought for those who work full or even part-time were greeted with resignation and recognition by all. Despite the growing reliance by all Church of England dioceses, self-supporting ministers don't seem to feature highly in the thoughts of many of them. This is, surely, partly because the needs and offerings of SSMs are - in some ways, at least - more diverse than those of the "typical" parish priest or curate.

None of this is new: my father has been an NSM for around 40 years, and I've heard similar stories from him over the years.What is it to be clergy in non-church employ? Is our ministry ontologically different? A word about that word: "ontologically". I'm using sense 2 of dictionary.com's definition of ontologically: Of or relating to essence or the nature of being. In other words, what I mean by the question "is our ministry ontologically different?" is "is there something about the nature of our ministry (that of clergy not employed by the church) that is different to that of those who are in the full-time employ of the church that exists because of that difference?"

A couple of clarifications here:

1. there's a big (and fascinating) question that's not unrelated about the nature of the ministry of those who are not ordained. I'm going to duck this question because I don't want to be diverted from this question, and not because I don't think it's important. Maybe another time.
2. although I've not been entirely clear above, what I'm really talking about is those who not "full-time" clergy: they have other responsibilities and activities which take up much of their time.

The Church of England has been part-addressing this question for over 40 years now, with NSMs and, more recently, the renamed SSMs. The view is that our ministry is equally valid as those who work full-time for the church. This doesn't mean that it's always easy to get this right, nor for everyone (lay or ordained) to appreciate it all the time, but that's the official story.

I think there's a problem with it, however - not with the answer, which I believe to be right - but in the theology that supports it. First let me note that I very much like the theory of ministry presented by Steven Croft in Ministry in Three Dimensions: A Theological Foundation for Local Church Leadership. The fundamental basis for his argument is that all ordained ministry is based on three qualities: diakonos (loosely: service), presbyteros (loosely: leadership) and episkope (loosely: oversight). That these three qualities provide the basis for the three generally accepted ordained orders (deacon, priest (or presbyters) and bishops (episcopals)) is no surprise, and acts as the starting point for his argument. But he is keen to point out that members of each order must possess each of the three qualities, though the amount to which they will be required will vary from person to person, from role to role, and from situation to situation - and through time. I don't think that this is particularly contentious theology, and I've certainly found it very helpful in my journey through discernment, to ordination, through my deacon's year, and in preparing for my ordination to the priesthood in June, God willing.

Being a bishop

But it raises a question: a big one, I think. "Is there something ontologically incompatible about being a bishop, and not full-time clergy?" Admittedly, as the role of bishop is currently figured, there is a great deal of time required for administration, visiting, etc. - and that's part of the oversight. But is that what oversight _needs_ to be about? And surely we should be figuring the bishop's role from first principles, rather than making the role fit what the job has become over the centuries? Why does this matter? Well, it doesn't matter to me - certainly at the moment! - in terms of preferment: I'm not even a priest yet, and thoughts of bishoprics are rather far off, and would be even if I were full-time. There are questions about how easy it is to become a bishop if one has not been a full-time priest, though: how can one "serve one's time" and move up the greasy pole? Well, _why_ should that be required? There are enough examples of brilliant bishops - and archbishops - who moved very quickly into their posts, without all the kerfuffle of parish incumbencies, becoming an archdeacon, a canon, a dean, etc.. And why do the diakonos, presbyteros and episkope exercised by those not in the church full-time not "count" towards the criteria required to become a bishop? Well, they're beginning to, I hope.

But there's something deeper going on here: something more ontological. If the church is not ready to accept that someone who is not full-time can enter the order whose defining characteristic is episkope - oversight - and become a bishop, then that casts grave doubts over the legitimacy of the episkope that is exercised by all those in the _other_ orders who are, likewise, not full-time. How can we figure a legitimate, and fully accepted diaconate and priesthood? To be clear, what I'm saying is that it is difficult to base an ontological understanding of the theology of the orders of the diaconate and the priesthood if there is no corresponding ontological understanding for the episcopal order.

Gender

So far, this entry - or essay - has been about the issue of employment, but the more I thought about the issues being discussed, the more I realised that we can't ignore the issue of gender. In the Church of England, we have not only no self-supporting ministers who are bishops - that is, no self-supporting bishops - but we also have no women ministers who are bishops: we have no woman bishops. Now, many self-supporting ministers - including me - maintain the option to move to full-time ministry. Although the nature of our role as ministers seems somewhat compromised by what comes down to our employment status - if you accept the argument presented above - we have the option to change that.

The same does not follow for women: the nature of the ontological problematic for them is more fundamental. For there is a corresponding problem about the legitimacy of woman deacons and woman priests if there are no woman bishops: the correspondence seems very close. Some members of the Church of England will accept that women can be priests and deacons, but cannot exercise "headship" (for which we can probably fairly safely substitute our word "episkope"), and therefore cannot become bishops. Others will not accept women and priests, but will accept them as deacons, whereas some will not accept them in any of the ordained orders. Given the argument above, I would argue that only the last set holds a consistent position, but a good deal of the work being done with regard to finding a settlement around the issue of woman bishops in the Church of England seems to centre around the group that will accept deacons and priests, but not bishops.

My view - and it's a strong one - is that the ministry of women is entirely legitimate, and I have no problems whatsoever with the ontological basis for it. More important, I don't believe that the lack of any woman bishops impacts on that legitimacy. However, the lack of the capability for there to be a woman bishop _does_ impact on the continued legitimacy of the ministry of women in the Church of England. Until we, as a church, can overcome this problem, ontological problems will remain, and will continue to allow doubts to remain about legitimacy.

A brief conclusion

I have no conclusion to offer, really, beyond to ask for more theological discussion around the ontology of ministry. We've avoided the question of non-ordained ministry, but even with a restricted scope, have identified what I believe to be two major - and growing - issues for ministry within the Church of England and the Anglican church as a whole. Part of the question, of course, revolves whether we accept in detail Croft's view of ministry in 3 dimensions, but whether we do or not, in the Anglican church we consider that there is a coherence between the 3 orders of ministry. This, then, casts concerns over how legitimate the church considers the ministry of self-supporting and woman ministers to be. I would stress that it does not matter whether this consideration is explicit or not: what matters is if the theology around which the ontology of ministry is based is coherent, and whether it introduces concerns over legitimacy.

Labels: church, ministry, theology, women

The funeral

So, the funeral was today. In the end it went better than it might have done. These things certainly aren't easy, and this was particularly hard because the husband of the lady whose funeral it was had died on Tuesday. So, very difficult for the family. I didn't preach as well as I would have liked - I think the theology could have been firmer - but the service went well, and hopefully it helped. That's what the ministry is about.

Labels: funeral, ministry

Walk of witness

(backposting) Today, I took Jo to the Methodist hall at the bottom of town, where a number of people were due to meet from the different churches in Halstead for a Walk of Witness. I think it's important to witness to our faith, particularly on a day like today, and I encouraged people, for instance, to have "I am a Christian" as their first status of the day today. I found the walk difficult, though. Jo was the only child there (out of around 40 mainly middle-aged plus Christians), and as we walked through the town, stopping for prayers and readings - through a megaphone - I felt uncomfortable, and deeply ambivalent. One of the things that I feel called to do as part of my ministry is to examine whether if I were myself - but outside the church - I'd feel interested in being within it. Today was one of those occasions. It didn't feel right to me. That doesn't mean that it shouldn't happen - maybe it's right for other people - or that I shouldn't be involved - my ministry is broader than just to people "like me", after all - but I struggled with it.

In the evening, we went to Si and D's for supper with Andy and Zae. We were pretty tired though, so left soon after we'd finished watching Red Dwarf: oh, the joys of parenthood...

Labels: friends, ministry, vocation

The Life and Work of a Priest

A few days ago, I finished The Life and Work of a Priest, by John Pritchard, Bishop of Oxford. I've been meaning to review it, as it's an excellent book, right up there with standard works such as Ministry in Three Dimensions, by Steven Croft. It's got a strong Anglican bias, given the authorship, but I'd say it was applicable to all those considering priesthood or ministry. I even rang up the head of ERMC, my theological college to tell him about it, and was very pleased to discover that they already recommend it to their students.

It's a very realistic approach to priesthood, with real humour and humanity. I particularly liked the discussion on prayer, but most important was the realism. Pritchard knows that none of us can be perfect, and neither does he pretend that we can ever expect to be. The priests he's talking about are broken individuals who are hopefully striving to something closer to godliness. There was a little about MSEs (Ministers in Secular Employment), but I'd like to have seen more about ministers like me - those in "normal" 9-5 jobs, who have little opportunity for explicit ministry in their employment, and whose main ministry is elsewhere. Still, a very, very rewarding book, and I'd heartily recommend it to anyone involved in ministry in any way.

Labels: books, ministry

Confidences

(backposting) Today a colleague asked me for spiritual guidance with a personal issue. They were concerned about some very negative emotions they have, and how to deal with them. I gave what perspectives I could, and it seems to have helped, at least a bit.

I am always astonished and humbled when people seek to confide in me, and ask for guidance: particularly at work. But it does highlight how my ministry _does_ extend beyond the obvious church-based work I do, and how people are aware of my ministry within the work context. It's so buoying up, and shows how the SSM ministry model can work, even when - as in my case - my work is not officially classed as part of my ministry. I'll be praying for this person, but also for my ministry.

Labels: love, ministry, work

A bad decision

I made a bad decision today. CME (Continuing Ministerial Education) day in Chelmsford on Funerals and Bereavement. Jo threw up at 0900. I left, after consulting Moo, at 0940.

I got to the meeting at 1025, 5 minutes before I thought it was due to start. I'd had an unhappy drive. When I got there, they were well underway, and I was nearly in tears. I knew from the second I walked into the room that I was in the wrong place, and 15 minutes later, at the first opportunity, I excused myself and headed home.

This was the right thing to do. Things are getting too close to wrong, Moo and I are very tired, and she's been spending too much time looking after the girls while I've been spending too much time doing things which aren't being with her and the girls.

My first ministry is to my family.

Labels: family, ministry, Moo

Christmas

As I'm going to be away from my home parishes, staying with my in-laws, I've been in contact with their local priest, and it looks like she'll be able to use me for something. I'm pleased about that, as it's difficult juggling work, family and ministry. And Christmas is an important time.

On a different note, I'm supposed to be preaching on "stewardship". This is what the Church of England means by "encouraging our congregations to give to the church". This is a hard thing to preach about for me, and I need to work hard on it.

Labels: Christmas, ministry, money

Curates get-together

This evening, we had a meeting of the 6 curates in our diocesan area. That'll be me, Terry, Mandy, Iain, Mark and Paul. It was convened by Tim, who's our CME (Continuing Ministerial Education) Advisor, at his place. We used the first meeting to get to know a bit about our stories, and wow: some of us really _do_ have stories. I don't count myself as one of them. One great snippet, which I don't think the relevant person will mind my mentioning:

"So I had my meeting with the bishop, and he said, 'so it says here that you were a mercenary in Africa. Obviously that's a misprint for missionary. So I said, 'actually, no...'."

A good meeting: we're going to have three a year, and use them to discuss whatever we feel is important or useful, rather than going over-structured.

Labels: curacy, ministry

Men only

(backposting) That was what the invitation on the "Come & See week" flyer said. It was at the Five Bells in Colne Engaine, which seems like a lovely pub: definitely worth going to. It _wasn't_ at the Lion in Earls Colne, where I first went. Anyway: around 50 men, tables of up to 7, and a member of clergy or ordinand per table to facilitate discussion. Each table looked at 2 questions over the evening, and people could choose which table they went to.

I found it fascinating, and lots of discussion seems to have ensued. There were lots of non-churchgoers, not to mention non-Christians, and we tackled some good questions. Among them were:

• how can we differentiate between a delusional/hallucinatory experience and a spiritual one?
• why Jesus - why not someone else?
• if Christians generally believe in evolution, at what point did humans get a soul?

So - good stuff. I see that there are plans to repeat it, which I look forward to.

Labels: ministry

Supervision

My first supervision with training incumbent: John. All went well, and we're settling down nicely, I think. We're going to do some work on funerals over the next couple of months, as it's one of the first CME (Continuing Ministerial Education) topics I'll be tackling. It's an area which is difficult for SSMs and NSMs (both part-time ministers), as most funerals take place during the week, when we're working, so it's important to see if we can find some opportunities to work on this.

Now, why can't I get ssh to work properly with public keys under CentOS? Hmmm.

Labels: geekery, ministry

Buster's dead

(backposting) We were up at 0200: Buster was barking, and not well. Panting, drooling so much. I ended up calling the emergency vet number. I spoke to a very nice female vet, who was very reassuring, and we agreed that Buster clearly had a temperature. She said that other than giving him painkillers, she wouldn't be able to give him much more than the medication we already had, given the symptoms that I'd described. She encouraged me to give him his medication a little early, and to try to get him to have some food as well. I got the medication down him, but not the food. And though I went upstairs, I was down again a few minutes later, as he was clearly very upset. I let him outside, as it was cooler out there. We went to bed.

I was up at 0630 to deacon at the 0800 communion service. After getting dressed and some food, I went outside. I called Buster, and he padded down the drive, though he didn't look well. He had knocked over his water bowl, so I filled it up, and he came to drink from it, but then collapsed. I went and got Moo, and we put the water in front of him, but he really couldn't drink from it. I phoned the emergency vet again, and as I was on the phone, he tried to get up again, and failed. They said to bring him in to the surgery in Witham - about 30 minutes away.

I brought Moo's car down, we put some towels in it, and I had to manhandle poor Buster into the boot, because he couldn't give me any help at all.

I drove there faster than I should have done, in places, though I think I drove safely. And I chatted to Buster from time to time, through some tears. When I got there, I rang the bell, and the receptionist/assistant came out. But when we opened the boot, I was unsurprised to find that Buster was dead. The vet came, and confirmed it.

They'd had a terrible night. Buster was not the first dog to turn up dead. They'd had to put another one down, and other things had gone badly. I felt for them very much. They were great, though, and I don't think that there would have been anything they could have done if I'd turned up earlier. Nor do I blame our vets - I think that, given the symptoms, all was done that could be done. Sometimes, animals die. Particularly Newfoundlands, I'm afraid.

Moo hadn't expected that he'd be dead when I came back and told her, and Jo didn't quite get it, though she's been saying on and off that she's sad. Her first reaction was to try to cheer us up - I cried when I told her. And Miri's been waving at the French windows from time to time, as if she was looking for him.

Oh, I'd told John, my training incumbent, that I'd not make the 0800, and he was very understanding. I made the 1000, and it was marvellous! I performed the deacon's role, including reading the Gospel, preparing the altar and the elements, inviting people to the Peace, and the dismissal. As I walked up the the nave with New Testament, I realised that I had a new home, and it was very emotional.

We went out to lunch - we felt we deserved it - and then went to RSPA Danaher, where we got Buster. We told them about him, and then went to look at kittens. We could pretend that it was for the girls, but that would be a lie.

And in the late afternoon, Si and D came around with Morgs and Boo and their kids. And their dogs. We had a good barbecue, and it was good to have dogs around.

I really loved Buster. But I find it easier to accept his death than I thought. Partly because we've been through it before with Suzy. Partly because I have not the slightest doubt that Buster and Suzy are both in heaven. With Meg. And, as Jo said tonight, when we were saying prayers, let's pray that Meg and Buster are playing together.

Labels: buster, diaconate, ministry

The zoo (and Lambeth)

(backposting) This morning, we went to one of our favourite places for the girls: Colchester Zoo. Dad came along as well, and we all had a good time. Miri's now at an age where she can start to enjoy the animals, and she seemed particularly interested in the sea lions and piglets.

In the afternoon, Dad and I drove down to the Lambeth Conference, taking place at the University of Kent's Canterbury campus. I managed to get online, and a good connection to SL, and then we headed off to get some supper. Gareth (also on the SL ministry team) and I passed over 50 flyers around different bishops at their supper tables: I've never seen so much episcopal purple in one place. Lots of senior people, including, I noticed, the bishop of Sudan, who's in the news at the moment.

Here's a couple of paragraphs I wrote today to be read out at one of the SecondLife Anglican Cathedral services today:

Last night, members of the ministry team had the opportunity to speak to attendees at the Lambeth Conference. Numbers were small - as for many of the fringe events - but discussion was committed and deeply thoughtful. I can report that the Anglican Church is taking us very seriously, as well as the opportunities for mission in other online media. We need to think hard about what kind of church we want to be, with what responsibilities and duties, but the Church is listening, and will continue to listen. The attendees were unanimous in their opinion that our mission is both truly Christian and vital to the Church's future.

We have lots of work to do: but it's God's work, and he will give us strength and guidance! Hallelujah!

I still need to do lots of thinking about what's come out of this, but it's very positive. Thanks be to God!

Labels: family, ministry, secondlife, zoo

Despair

Not mine. But someone who's very strong, usually, showed me a moment of possible despair. They didn't want anything more than a confirmation that things can get better, but I was immensely flattered that they felt they could drop their guard in front of me, just for a few seconds.

I don't know if they would have done the same if I didn't have "The Rev." as a title, and that's interesting, but I think it's the Christian commitment - and, hopefully, integrity - that was the more important factor.

Labels: ministry