1. In March 2000, the Diocesan Synod voted without reservation that by 2005, 75% of the parishes in the Diocese should have a ministry team. How local Ministry develops will depend upon every particular situation in the light of the key function of the PCC to co-operate with the minister in promoting in the parish the whole mission of the church, pastoral, evangelistic, social and ecumenical (PCC [Powers] Measure 1956). The decision on how best to interpret the Diocesan vision for local ministry will be taken therefore at a local level. In striving to hold to the principle of working at a local level, individual parishes, ministering communities, Team and Group Ministries, and Local Ecumenical Partnerships are encouraged to decide what is best for themselves. Different situations have different priorities and call for different solutions. Therefore the basic question, to be answered is What form of local Ministry for mission is required here? Once that question is answered, we are assured that God will provide the necessary local resources, although it may be necessary to broaden what is meant by local?
2. The provision of partnership in ministry already exists in many forms of ministry team across the Diocese. The MAP initiative especially invites ministering communities to check how they can offer a wide range of ministries for the whole of God's mission as well as to ask questions about how these are lead, co-ordinated, educated, trained, encouraged, reviewed, and how continuity between incumbents or priests in=-charge is to be accomplished. In particular the Diocesan Local Ministry Group invites parishes to invite the involvement of the Archdeacon and Area Bishop.
3. Some of the key principles behind the strategy are the following:
a) The Christian church, created by the Holy Spirit, springs directly out of Calvary and the Easter events and from the earliest days saw its foundation embedded in the life of the triune God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Through all its members it is called to witness and live the world's own true calling as a sign and active agent of what God is seeking to bring about - his Kingdom.
b) Living in communion with God, all members of the Church are called to confess their faith and to give an account of their hope. They are to identify with the joys and sufferings of all peoples as they seek to witness in caring love. The members of Christ's body are to struggle with the oppressed towards that freedom and dignity promised with the coming of the Kingdom. This sharing in God's mission in the home, the neighbourhood, the workplace, the school and the Parish will vary depending on the varying contexts.
c) The risen Christ gives responsibility and resources for ministry to the whole People of God. Christ Jesus breathes the Spirit upon the whole disciple community. Baptism includes an authorisation to minister as a Christian. This is the fundamental commissioning for mission that all Christian people share. The Diocesan strategy is based on the fundamental conviction that baptism marks the beginning of Christian discipleship, and all disciples are called to ministry for God's Kingdom. (1 Corinthians 12 and Ephesians 4: 11-13).
d) For most Christians most of the time, their ministry is going to be exercised where they live and work, not in church. For too long, the church has tended to define ministry in churchy terms, not in terms of the kingdom of God. The Ministry of the baptised - children, young people and adults - is about giving outward expression to an inner faith in their own particular life situation using their own particular gifts. Our declared Diocesan purpose in Ministry as partnership is to give shape and strength to this vision.
e) In recent decades these insights have been growing and practised in this Diocese and throughout the world church. In various parts of the Anglican Communion terms such as Local, Total Ministry, Mutual or Common Ministry are used.
f) The strategy of the Diocese for Local Ministry has been summed up by the phrase Ministry as Partnership. The Diocesan Local Ministry group recognises that in itself is not the complete answer, but nevertheless believes that a great deal of what the parishes wish to achieve about mission and ministry can be encouraged and developed if the strategy is thoroughly adopted in the networks of diocesan life.
g) This involves fostering an increasing sense of partnership between all clergy, readers and laity generally. The clear aim is that we enable the continued development of what is already apparent in so many parishes.
h) To that end the Working Group encourages parishes and (and clusters of parishes, ecumenically where possible) to reconsider their present position and to enquire into the value of establishing Local Ministry Teams. The purpose of such Teams is:
• To further development of all lay ministries in partnership with clergy
• to further enable the development of missionary congregations- noting that the witness of the majority of laity through daily life and work.
TEAM & GROUP MINISTRIES
1. Team Ministries are established through procedures laid down in the Pastoral Measure 1983 as amended by the Team and Group Ministries Measure 1995. The Deanery Pastoral Committee makes recommendations to the Area and Diocesan Pastoral Committees. The Diocesan Pastoral Secretary circulates the proposals to all interested parties and when comments have been received the Diocesan Bishop signs them and they are sent to the Church Commissioners. The Church Commissioners put the draft proposals into their firm form and circulates them to all interested parties. Comments and objections are considered and when the Commissioners are satisfied they send the Scheme to the Privy Council. In due course it is published in the London Gazette.
2. The aim of a Team Ministry is to provide a structure that can enable Christians to collaborate in the areas of worship, fellowship, mission, service and ministry. Preparations for the establishment of a Team Ministry should, therefore, take careful note of the whole community and of ecumenical links.
3. A Team Ministry will consist of a Team Rector and of a number of Team Vicars. The Team Rector is appointed by a Patronage Board established under the terms of the Pastoral Scheme. The Team Vicars are appointed by the Bishop and the Team Rector jointly. Appointments are term appointments (usually seven years leasehold) and are renewable. Other clergy and laity can be part of the Team even though they are not named in the Scheme and are not of incumbent status.
A Team Ministry normally covers a benefice and the parishes can either be separate or united. Most Team Ministries cover one parish, but since 1983, provision has been made for some parishes to remain distinct.
6. It is strongly to be encouraged that a Team Ministry has a Team Consultant, who will meet regularly with the Team Chapter, listen, comment and advise.
7. The Pastoral Scheme establishing the Team Ministry will probably include a paragraph saying that the Bishop may by Instrument; establish District Church Councils for the various churches in the Team – in the case of the East Ham Team Ministry we have two DCC’s @ St Bart’s & St Mary’s, each of which have worked well for over 2 decades. Such an Instrument can make provision for separate representation on the Deanery Synod. Parishes will, in the first instance, decide whether they wish to have distinct DCC’s or whether they wish to operate under one PCC with local church committees dealing with local affairs.
8. A Team Ministry can be altered or dissolved by a further Scheme under the Pastoral Measure 1983.
9. Group Ministries can be established through the same procedures as those set out in paragraph 1 (above) for Team Ministries.
10. Each parish will continue distinct and with its own incumbent appointed by its patron, its own churchwardens and its own PCC. There is no loss of PCC sovereignty in a Group Ministry. But patrons must seek the goodwill of the other Parishes in the Group before making a nomination of a new Incumbent.
11.The aim of a Group Ministry is to encourage collaboration and co-operation between distinct parishes, particularly in the joint actions for mission and social responsibility. As churches work together so they will increasingly feel that they are partners in the Gospel.
12.The Pastoral Scheme establishing the Group Ministry may make provision for the establishment of a Group Council by Bishop's Instrument. Alternatively, a Group Council can be established under the Church Representation Rules. Members of the Group Council are appointed by the PCC from amongst their own number. PCC’s have power to delegate some of their powers to the Group Council if they wish, but the normal work of the Group Council is to plan for co-operation in the area of the Group Ministry.
The Pros and Cons of Team Ministry:
It offers a supportive fellowship, especially where the alterative might be daunting in terms of isolation or the enormity of the task.
• It combines resources to achieve a greater strength than the sum of the separate parts.
• It avoids duplication of effort, so that better use of people follows.
• It provides a wider area for the exercise of special gifts in the individual or in groups. Conversely, it relieves others of tasks for which they are not well-suited.
As well as such benefits, there are likely to be challenges for example:
• Loss of autonomy by individual churches, and a need to compromise on some important issues.
• A need for wholehearted commitment to collaborative ministry by all the Clergy involved.
• In short, the future team - laity as much as clergy - needs to define its role and be clear what it is there for.
• A Group Ministry may, or ay not be more attractive to a potential candidate for the post of a Team Vicar at St Bart’s on the hypostasis that it can offer a freehold, (in other words security of tenure – allowing them to stay here as long as they wish), as opposed to a contract for a Team Rector which is for a period of about 7 years, although can be extended by mutually agreement either side. However, the salary of a Team Vicar is less then that of a Team Rector, who would not only have responsibility for the pastoral care of a Church, (as with St Mary’s), but also the managerial responsibility of the St Bart’s Centre’ St Alban’ Christian Centre, and the Hartley Centre. Therefore, the lower salary may discourage people from taking on such a huge responsibility without proper and reasonable remunerative recognition.
• The introduction of a Group Ministry, and moreover the appointment of a Team Vicar with a freehold, essentially places the person at St Bart’s. It effectively means that St Bartholomew’s Church & Centre and other managerial responsibilities mentioned above would need to be absolute certain of the long term satisfaction of who they are appointing. If the person is found to be wanting, or not spiritually, past orally, and managerially found to be meeting the needs of the St Bart’s Church & Centre, its congregation, appointed officers + respective committee, St Alban’s and the Hartley Centre it would be greatly unfortunate and the people it directly affects would have to live with the situation in almost perpetuity until the incumbent and/or Bishop felt it was time for them to move on. In simple parlance, once we make our bed we will have to live and lie with it for an indefinite period and not or a contracted period of time.
• Why have a Team Rector when we are now only two churches and have just two Clergy in the Team? Historically the Parish, as a Team has experienced substantial reduction in Clergy and otter support – a picture that is replicated throughout the Church of England. During the mid seventies until the early eighties the Parish enjoyed some six Clergy, including a Team Rector, three Team Vicars and three Curates, plus three Lay Readers, plus an assigned Church Army Officer. This was not a ‘luxury’ but enable the Parish to delivery a large host of services to its community as one of the largest Parishes not only in the Deanery but also in the Diocese. The diversity of congregations and different forms of worship provided an exciting platform to Christian outreach and spreading the Good News.
The pre-planed devolvement of Mark’s Centre began to see the reduction, followed by the financial position of the Church of England and Diocese which saw the need to reduce the number of such people in Parishes. However, what has not changed is the size of the Parish – albeit that with change in composition of the people in the Borough there has been a marked and significant change in make-up of the people in the Parish – being far more multi-cultural with the inevitable consequence of other religions now being represented within the geographical areas involved.
The late eighties and early nineties saw a focus around the Ordination of women and other issues but in terms of the parish, and certainly at the St Bart’s Centre we experienced this at the expense of the building suffering in terms of works and finance. The Parish also experienced a deficit for the first time, which equally needed to be addressed. The change of Team Rector concentrated on the latter with the end product that we saw a real change with the Centre becoming far more used by the community, of realistic charges being made, and even of the Parishes biggest and longest single piece of ministry in night shelter becoming self-financing which collectively with no small part of faith, commitment, expertise and richness derived from both congregations and officers, has now seen a turnaround in this with the finances far more healthier and our buildings used far more positively, (as instruments of Christian outreach), within the community, (albeit that the future use of St Alban’s will need to be deliberated at some stage).
However, for all of this to be sustained, let alone any question of seeking growth within our congregation(s) the Parish needs to consider not only what it wants in the future, (especially those who are directly affected with no incumbent whatsoever for a possible protracted interregnum), but also the type of person who can discharge all the responsibilities that such a large Parish demands.
Congregations: We in this Parish in the past seven years have seen a significant change in Congregations and numbers. The issue of numbers is a larger one, not simply unique to us but none the less has a bearing on what we need in terms of a new Incumbent. St Mary’s has excitingly moved to a sustained growth in Congregation, especially in new young family members, children & young people. In contrast, St Bart’s, (who previously experienced the same), has for some years undergone a transient congregation and is geographically located in a catchment area which is far ore multi-cultural, than Anglican. That has slightly changed in the past 18 month with a more stable congregation of about 60 people plus; some areas of work touched on in terms of Stewardship; the introduction of “All Age Worship” services that has been received well, not by the Congregation but visitors including families for Baptisms who one several occasions have remarked on how surprised they found it more fun then when they were children. Although very much a ‘Parish’ enterprising involvement project, because of being actually located in the same building, we have also seen some thirty or so people become involved outside of Sundays from several other areas in the Night Shelter, introducing new people to our Church – some of whom only leave blocks, and one case, a few doors away from the Church in Navarre Road.
Clearly there is more that ‘could’ be done, but this requires people with the time and skills and needs to be led jointly between both the Clergy as well as laity to reach out to Anglicans in our catchment areas and help them feel that the ‘church’ is not a thing of the past, but a place which is ‘their Church’, where communities can come together – singling the underlying message that God, symbolically through the Church has its doors open to all the people of East Ham Parish.
As I, in recent months retorted to the Incumbent for St Paul’s, East Ham on another issue, some two decades ago I was directly involved with on of four re-developments at the time, – that of St Alban’s Church & Centre in East Ham. The then Curate, (later Team Vicar for St Alban’s, and now Bishop of Leicester), wrote an excellent report in support of the re-development which brought about the building. A part of his report had a profound sense of meaning to me which I have never forgotten. He quoted from Macquarrie on the ‘Principals of Christian Theology): “The abiding motive of mission is love….This always has been the fundamental motive for Christian Mission, the history of which abounds in examples of sacrifice an martyrdom. But, perhaps this fundamental motive has too often been combined with other motives which need to be looked at very carefully. There has been too much thought of gaining converts, of winning the world, of expanding the Church. The Church, like the individual Christian, and like Christ himself, is called to give itself. The end set before it is the kingdom in which it will lose itself. The aim of the Church is not to win the world, but rather to identify itself with the world, even to lose itself in the world, in such a way as to bring nearer the kingdom in which distinction of church and world will be lost”. I think that there are some principals which Churches, Christians and Christian Organisations can learn from the above.
Annually your District Church Wardens are charged with completing visitation form about the Church and any issue they feel need to be identified to the Archdeacon/Area Dean. This was completed by me in discussion with the District Church Wardens for St Bart’s. Coincidentally I did beged questions about the Team, before the Team Rector had resigned and the Archdeacon, in response has suggested an audit of the Church to look at its mission, work and where it should go from here. This is now happening as part of an overall Review.
Things have moved on significantly over the past seven years. Irrespective of whether we continue as we are with a Team Rector or move towards a Team Vicar for St Bart’s, in the short/medium term that post would embrace the duel role of ministry/pastoral care at St Bart’s Church, plus overall day to day managerial responsibilities for the St Bart’s Centre, St Alban’s and Hartley Centre. The time and energies the latter demands alone for whoever might be in post do tend to conflict with the time and energies needed to address the former of pastoral care and ministry. Long term we may wish to consider a 'Centre Manager' role who can undertake the responsibilities of the building and users under a pre-defined framework of Christian outreach. This would remove this element of time and energy or an Incumbent role enabling them to concentrate on the Church and its work, albeit managing the staff who carry out the other roles.
However, in the short term, (anything up to the next two years), we neither have a position for the management of buildings and associated work.
Team Ministries, with a Team Rector should ideally perhaps be of a size with more Churches then we now have pro-actively working together. Group Ministries, with a Team Vicar, provide for something similar, although significantly different in that each Church has its own autonomy, with the desolvement of DCC’s and District Church Wardens and having its own PCC’s. Such Group Ministries are already operating and is feasible in East Ham, if one views such as an appointment for the next 5 years or so. Neighbouring St George’s Church has an Interregnum.
Forward thinking and planning could help alleviate long term problems within the Deanery and perhaps bring together four Churches, each richly possessing riches in the Kingdom of God with its lay members, congregation, parishers, leadership skills, buildings and resources, that could potentially compliment and help each other to develop and grow in the future.
Whilst perhaps there could, as has been suggested to me, an information arrangement, this has the downside of not having a formal arrangement of working together as a Group and if one Church decides it wants to go in one direction there is nothing any other can do about this. It effectively works alone and not as a ‘Group’. If you will forgive the analogy, it is almost aliken to the difference between being married with a formal understanding of future relations, and living together where there is neither formal agreement, and if it does not work out simply call it a day. Because of the need in a formal arrangement for the relation to have to be worked on to work, just in a marriage, when there are indifferences, so with a formal Group Ministry, more effort is reasonable expected to try and do as much as possible together.
The concept and practice of Group Ministries is not a new one and has proved themselves to have positives as well as some negatives. There can be informal arrangements whereby each Church resolves to informally work together in their respective ministries and support each other when one or the other needs help. This, in effect is perhaps no different than understandings where relationship exists with other Churches already. Formal Group Ministries are supposed to have a more formal understand and arrangements to support and cover each other in times of need, although day to day continue as independent Churches. It poses no threat to Churches as each maintains their own autonomy, through its respect Team Vicars and PCC’s. If you will please pardon the analogy, it is the difference between a partner relationship and a marriage. The former, if things do not work out, the other can simply walk away. With a marriage there is a legal and certainly morale obligation to try and work things out to reach at the very least a compromise where there are any indifferences. Ultimately, however, each can still operate its own way according to its Incumbant and PCC.
OPTIONS:
1. We can remain as we are as a Team Ministry – looking for the appointment of a ‘Team Rector’ to oversee the Churches; plus responsibility for the buildings, its operational management and mission.
2. We can agree to start formal dialogue with our neighbouring East Ham Churches of St George’s and St Paul’s with the view of working towards an understanding a mutual agreement whereby we become a ‘Group Ministry’’. Once agreed in principal we can then work towards joint meetings of laity and Clergy to work out the mechanics of what will be shared.
3. We can ask to be devolved, (ultimate decision will have to be agreed by the PCC and ultimately the Diocese of Chelmsford); St Mary’s & St Bart’s become independent Churches, ceasing DCC’s and District Church Wardens and having its own respective Team Vicars, PCC’s and Parish Wardens to be responsible.
Yours in Christ
Gordon P Owen Parish Warden
Please also see the Diocese of Chelmsford web page at:-
Chelmsford Diocesan Synod - Coherence of provision as between each of the three Areas. The report encourages the Ministry as Partnership process in the Diocese • Download - [In Word .doc Format]:-
