 |
|
Appendix 1 The Scottish Church Initiative for Union Proposal1. Introduction
1.1 The Scottish Church Initiative for Union is a child of its time. It began its work in 1996 in the closing years of what has been called the ecumenical century of the Christian Church. That century saw Christians from different traditions, often bitterly and even violently divided, begin to talk to each other, work and witness together, and even re-unite after long separation. Three of the participating churches, the Church of Scotland, the Methodist Church and the United Reformed Church are, in their present form, the result of 20th century unions.
1.2 The Scottish Church Initiative for Union is, more precisely, the child of the Multilateral Church Conversation. This Church of Scotland initiative was inspired by the 1964 British Council of Churches Conference on Faith and Order, held in Nottingham, which had challenged the churches to “covenant together to work and pray for the inauguration of union in appropriate groupings, such as nations”. In 1968 five churches accepted the Church of Scotland’s invitation to begin to work towards the unity of the Christian Church – the Churches of Christ (later to become part of the United Reformed Church), the Congregational Union of Scotland, the Methodist Church, the Scottish Episcopal Church and the United Free Church. The Baptist Union of Scotland and the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland were observers.
1.3 For 25 years the Conversation worked at clearing the doctrinal ground through a series of reports. In 1985 it published what it hoped would be its final report in which it requested permission to proceed to the drawing up of a Basis and Plan of Union. That report, Christian Unity – NOW is the time, recommended to the churches that there was significant agreement on all points of doctrine and that where disagreement persisted it was not sufficient to justify continued separation. However, the Church of Scotland and others wanted more work done, especially on episcopacy. The Conversation’s final report in 1992, entitled Who goes where?, sought a new mandate for the task that remained:
“Our task is clear. We are to discover how to bring our churches together, so that members and ministries are reconciled and mutually recognised, in order to pursue effective common witness and service within the wider jurisdiction of a united church.“
1.4 The Scottish Episcopal Church, believing that it had changed in ways which would remove some of the remaining obstacles to unity, took up the challenge. In a paper entitled Who goes forward with us? it described the changes in its life which, it thought, would remove some of the past obstacles to union. It had developed a permanent diaconate and had agreed to ordain women to the priesthood. Reassurances were given concerning the role of bishops. It was made clear that the Scottish Episcopal Church understood the episcopal succession of bishops as a sign, but not a guarantee, of the unity and continuity of the Church. There were moves to a more conciliar structure of church government in which bishops served in council. It was also specifically stated that there could be no union which denied the fullness of the grace of God in the worship, fellowship, evangelism, service and ministry of any of the participating churches. In the light of these changes and reassurances the Scottish Episcopal Church invited the other participating churches “to set up direct negotiations for union.” The representatives on the Multilateral Conversation asked their churches to discharge them, thus bringing the Conversation to a close. This left the churches free to accept or reject the new invitation on the specific question of union.
By 1995 five of the six original participating churches had accepted the invitation to draw up a Basis and Plan of Union. Only the United Free Church declined the invitation. They were invited, along with the Roman Catholic Church, to be observers of the new Scottish Church Initiative for Union. It began its work in January 1996 with four representatives from each church and, in addition, a Convener from the Scottish Episcopal Church and a Secretary from the Church of Scotland.
The group has made every effort to share its work as it has developed, producing two interim reports on which the churches, locally and nationally were asked to comment. Group members have responded to every invitation to speak to and listen to denominational and ecumenical bodies, both local and regional, throughout the length and breadth of Scotland. The Church of Scotland set up a reflection panel for ongoing reflection throughout the period. It is difficult, however, to communicate the experience of the group members over these years, of growing mutual understanding, of discovery of unexpected common ground and of wrestling with the limits of diversity within a united Church.
2. The basic premises of the proposal
2.1 As a child of the Multilateral Conversation SCIFU inherited the years of work of doctrinal clearing of the ground and was able to start with a working assumption that there was as much significant agreement on most points of doctrine between the participating churches as was to be found within each of those churches. SCIFU was, therefore, able to base its work on the building blocks of the Conversation, and turn its attention immediately to the task it was given of preparing a Basis and Plan of Union. The following are the basic premises which have come, over the years of discussion, to under-pin the SCIFU proposal.
2.2 The first is a fresh understanding of the essential nature of Christian unity in terms of the Trinity. Past generations over this ecumenical century have rightly insisted that the Church is already one in the body of Christ and the Church is urgently called to live that reality. Jesus’ prayer for his followers on the night he was betrayed “that they may all be one. As you, Father, are in me and I am in you, may they also be in us” has been a key text of the ecumenical movement, often with the emphasis on the first half of the quotation. An important development in the West over the past thirty years has been a recovery of the picture of God as community rather than as isolated being – a community of love, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, into which we are invited and to which we are called to witness in the life of the Church. This has given a new emphasis and depth to the words “As you, Father, are in me and I am in you, may they also be in us.” This picture of God in terms of unity-in-relationship, unity-in-diversity, a community of love, a community without hierarchy is good news for today’s Church if we have the courage to model that kind of unity and that kind of community.
2.3 The second is that the Church is made for mission. As God, the Trinity, models this community of love, so God wills that for the world. God’s plan, as declared in Scripture, is to gather all creation under the Lordship of Christ and to bring everything in heaven and on earth into communion with God. And this is a God who embraces all people, freely offering love and the good news that individuals matter and matter enormously. This is urgent good news for today’s Scotland where it seems “things fall apart, the centre cannot hold.” Traditional patterns of work and leisure have broken down: fewer and fewer people attend Sunday worship and yet 76% of the population of Britain confess to having had a spiritual experience: the local is paramount yet we are more aware than ever of being part of a world-wide network: choice is idolised yet globalisation threatens to eliminate cultural difference and particularity: privatised lifestyles and dispersed working practices are increasingly prevalent and people have ceased to join mass organisations, yet they hanker after community. The Church, as the body of Christ, as a community of love modelled on the Trinity, is called to be an instrument of God’s plan to gather all creation under the Lordship of Christ. The current divisions between (and within) the churches and the failure of their members to live in true communion with each other damage the mission of the Church.
2.4 The third is that the Church has always been called to be a pilgrim people, in continuity with the past but responsive to God’s calling in changing times. The SCIFU proposal honours the treasured features of the participating churches while recognising that those features too have often been developed in response to former ‘changing times’. At the same time each participating church is on pilgrimage, seeking to recognise the ‘new thing’ that God is doing. SCIFU seeks to bring those churches together into one pilgrimage, sharing our various treasures and resources, encouraging one another in this time of numerical decline, helping one another to travel light, trusting that if we are faithful to our calling to be one, as God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit, are one, then God will show us the ‘new thing’ he is doing through the Church for the world. 2.5 The fourth is a key emphasis on the ministry of the whole people of God. This is in continuity with the Multilateral Conversation which, in its 1990 report Deacons for Scotland says:
“There is a fundamental question of perspective to be settled…… It is all followers of Christ, not just the tiny minority of them who are ordained, who are charged by Christ to be salt to the world, light to all the world, yeast to leaven the whole lump of dough.” (p 36)
The publication of two interim reports of work in progress, often at a tentative stage, for full consultation throughout the churches is evidence of the SCIFU commitment to listening to the voice of the whole people of God.
2.6 The SCIFU proposal speaks of mutuality in ministry, bearing in mind the corporate calling of all the baptised which is reflected in the phrase “ the priesthood of all believers”, the individual calling of every Christian reflected in Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians “To each is given the manifestation of the Spirit for the common good.” (12:7), and the particular gifts which are given to some and not to others within the one body of Christ. In New Testament times the words presbyteros and episcopos and diakonos were used for those exercising certain ministries. Throughout the history of the Church these New Testament roles have developed and expanded in various ways in the different church traditions. The words used today among the SCIFU participating churches include elder, class leader, lay preachers, deacon, minister, priest and bishop. The SCIFU proposal gives careful attention to the various orders of ministry, as this is an area of great sensitivity, but it always returns to the basic premise that all these particular ministries are derived from the ministry entrusted to the whole Church.
2.7 The fifth is a commitment to unity in co-ordinated diversity. This comes, on the one hand, from reflection on God, the Trinity, as a communion of joyful mutual responsibility whose source is the Father, whose focus is the Son and whose energetic distribution is the Spirit. Thus the SCIFU proposal offers a sign of the unity and catholicity of the Church, while also offering the possibility of local variety yet harmony between people from different traditions and backgrounds. On the other hand, this commitment to unity is also a response to the needs of our times where choice and variety for some seem only to lead to loss of community for all. The SCIFU proposal, therefore, begins from a missionary concern for each natural local community. Time and again, it suggests that the pattern of relationship between the churches in that community and the pattern of church government, of frequency of meetings and of leadership team should depend on the local situation. However, the proposal is also committed to ‘co-ordinated diversity’ and therefore seeks to hold together unity and diversity, and the local and the wider Church.
A Church shaped for mission
A note on
terminology
3. A Church shaped for mission: the local
3.1 The SCIFU proposal begins with the local and with a missionary concern for natural local communities. At the heart of the proposal is the maxi-parish, a natural geographical area of a suitable population size in which the local worshipping communities from the SCIFU participating churches will work together under one leadership body. The number of congregations in a maxi-parish will depend on the make-up and size of the natural communities. In cities, the maxi-parish might cover one part of the city, such as Pollokshields in Glasgow. In a small town, the maxi-parish might cover a whole town, such as Thurso or Kelso. A rural area such as the Morven peninsula might form one maxi-parish.
3.2 The maxi-parish will hold responsibility for initiating and co-ordinating outreach and mission to the whole community. This might include community-wide events, youth projects, community care projects and mail shots. It will be responsible for promoting good relations with those denominations not, as yet, part of the united Church. It will also be responsible for taking the initiative in relations with other faith communities and with secular bodies. Shared resources, such as a mini-bus or an office with appropriate equipment, will also be the responsibility of the maxi-parish.
3.3 The maxi-parish will support and advise the ministry team and play an important part, in consultation with both the congregational and the regional councils, in the appointment of new members of the ministry team and in the allocation of duties for that team.
3.4 Preparation for membership or confirmation of candidates from all the congregations will take place at maxi-parish level, as will the initial training and continuing development of new elders. Joint celebration of worship on special occasions, such as the reception of new members or the ordination of new elders, or a national event, will also be maxi-parish events.
3.5 The maxi-parish will make sound financial provision for its life and work by agreeing with the congregations their contribution to the costs of ministry and mission and by meeting the maxi-parish assessed contribution to the work of the wider church. It will also be responsible for keeping and having audited accounts in accordance with constitutional provision and for ensuring that the accounts of the congregations are similarly maintained.
3.6 The maxi-parish will carry out these functions through a maxi-parish council and a ministry team. The maxi-parish council will be made up of representatives appointed by the congregations, the number depending on size of membership, together with the members of the ministry team. The maxi-parish council will normally meet four times a year. The council may choose to delegate some matters to sub-groups, but they will remain answerable to the council. The council may choose its chairperson from within or outwith the ministry team. The initial composition of the council, and the question of who takes the chair, will be decided by a meeting of members of all the congregations when the maxi-parish is being set up. Subsequent changes will be decided by the council after consultation with the church meetings of the congregations.
3.7 The maxi-parish ministry team will consist of ordained and lay, stipendiary and non-stipendiary, full-time and part-time members according to the size and resources of the maxi-parish. Ministers of Word and Sacrament, and possibly others, will have primary responsibility for particular congregations. With the advice of the ministry team, the maxi-parish council will review, from time to time, the appropriate distribution of the resources of the team. The ministry team will meet regularly for consultation and mutual support. It will be for each ministry team, when first formed, to decide on whether to have a designated leader of the team or team members taking turns to lead, or a leader chosen for a particular project or discussion because of expertise or particular gifts. Any subsequent change in leadership pattern will only be made in consultation with the maxi-parish council.
3.8 Maxi-parishes may seek to broaden the ministry team by the appointment of professionally qualified youth or community workers or by requesting the services of a deacon. When a new minister of Word and Sacrament is being sought, the maxi-parish council, in full consultation with the bishop and the regional council, will set up a search committee representative of the congregations, with extra representation from those congregations most affected. The ministry team will also be consulted and the aim will be to build up a team whose complementary talents and interests enrich the parish and strengthen effective mission. A representative of the regional council will act as adviser throughout the vacancy. The bishop, with her or his particular responsibility for pastoral care and mission in the region as a whole, will have both an informal role in consultation and advice as well as a formal role in the ordination and/or induction.
3.9 Within the framework of the maxi-parish, each congregation (including its leadership) will be responsible for its local work and worship. There is room for considerable diversity in the life of each congregation, especially its worship life. These proposals do not recommend any less diversity than already exists both among and within the participating churches. Distinctive practices, such as lay presidency, the use of the reserved sacrament and an equal respect for infant and believer’s baptism, can be accommodated provided there is a mutual recognition of ministry and provided that those leading worship carefully respect the practices of the particular congregation.
3.10 The responsibilities of the congregation will be to encourage the ministry of every member, through providing opportunities for fellowship and service, for education and training, for study of matters of faith and practice with special reference to the mission of that congregation, and for consideration of matters referred to the congregation by the maxi-parish council.
3.11 The congregation will be responsible for the pastoral care and regular visitation of homes. It will be responsible for arranging for regular worship, and for encouraging and overseeing the work of those who lead groups within the fellowship and those organisations based there.
3.12 The congregation will be responsible for appointing representatives to the maxi-parish council, for recommending to the maxi-parish council names of people wishing to be prepared for membership/ confirmation and for electing its leaders, officially to be known as elders.
3.13 The congregation will also be responsible for the maintenance and development of buildings and land, and for meeting assessments, providing for local costs, advocacy of stewardship and Christian giving, and having audited accounts.
3.14 Fundamental to the life of each congregation, and in line with the SCIFU commitment to the ministry of the whole people of God, will be the church meeting. This meeting of all the members will meet twice a year, or more frequently according to local decision, to consider the life and work of the congregation and to share in decisions about its direction. Congregations with large memberships will need to develop ways of enabling the effective participation of everyone at the meeting. Either through this meeting, or by some other agreed means, the members will elect a group of leaders, officially known as elders, chosen for their Christian maturity and wisdom who will form the congregational council. It will be for each congregation to decide on the apportionment of the responsibilities of that congregation between the congregational council and the church meeting. Such a regular meeting of all the members is a particular treasure of the Congregational tradition and is to be found today in the United Reformed Church.
3.15 To enable each congregation to carry out its responsibilities there will be a congregational council. Diversity of tradition will be preserved in that each congregation will decide on the name of the body, its size and its frequency of meeting.
3.16 The maxi-parish, with its unity in co-ordinated diversity, has potentially many practical benefits. The pooling and sharing of resources will enable, in some places, the employment of specialist workers. New forms of worship can be developed while the distinctive worship styles of the various traditions can be continued in each congregation: thus the Church can both value diversity and tradition, while stepping out on pilgrimage. Smaller congregations, which cannot afford full-time ministry but which have gifts to offer to the whole church as a community of faith, can continue, in some cases sharing the building of one of the larger congregations. Again diversity, and the witness of the small, is being valued. A shared assessment of the needs of the community can be made and the Church’s strategy for service and outreach be therefore more holistic. The ministry team can overcome the current isolation of many ministers. The Methodist Church has traditionally ordered its life in groups of churches called circuits. Although in Scotland these groupings are not directly related to the natural communities because of the congregations are so widely scattered, the Methodist experience of circuit life in terms of shared resources, mutual support, and the collegiality among ministers and Local Preachers, has made a significant contribution to the SCIFU process.
4. A church shaped for mission: the regional
4.1 The mission of the Church in one community cannot be seen in isolation from other communities within the same country. The nature of God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit is a community of love which is both unity-in-diversity and unity-in-relationship. The Church is called to proclaim this in its very being, regionally just as much as locally. The community rivalries and inequitable sharing of resources to be found in every church, as well as the old divisions between the churches, damage the Church’s witness to the reconciling love of God. The present needs of our mobile society, where so many people live in one community and work in another, and where people move frequently, call for a co-ordinated Church response.
4.2 The SCIFU proposal envisages maxi-parishes grouped together in regions which have a natural significance, based on geography, population and local government administration. The region will be responsible for oversight of the life of the maxi-parishes and for determining and implementing overall pastoral and mission policies for the region. The office of bishop will be located at this level and his or her role in relation to the responsibilities of the region will be described in a later section.
4.3 Firstly, the region will encourage each maxi-parish in mission in its particular context while also setting it in the context of the region and its nature and needs. This will mean that the region, with its greater resources, will offer training, trained personnel, and a forum where maxi-parishes can share good practice and learn from other parishes.
4.4 Secondly, the region will provide pastoral care for the maxi-parishes, both for the ministry teams and the maxi-parish and congregational councils. It will be responsible for encouraging the development in Christian faith, life and witness of individuals and councils and for addressing difficulties. It will, therefore, be responsible for the regular, perhaps five-yearly, review of the life of the maxi-parishes.
4.5 Thirdly, the region will have a significant role, but in relationship with the maxi-parishes, in the process of selecting and nominating candidates for the ministry of Word and Sacrament and for the ministry of deacon, in approving the appointment of a minister or a deacon, and in arranging for his or her induction to a maxi-parish. The ordination of ministers and deacons will be the responsibility of the region. The region will be responsible for the continuing education of ministers, deacons and elders. The region will also be responsible for encouraging, selecting and supervising the training and use of lay preachers and for providing for their continuing development through study and fellowship.
4.6 Fourthly, the region will determine the boundaries of the maxi-parishes and arbitrate in any dispute. The initial determination of the shape of the maxi-parishes will take place in careful consultation with the church meetings of all the congregations. Subsequent changes will be the responsibility of the region, in consultation with the maxi-parish councils affected.
4.7 Fifthly, the region will offer, from time to time, events where Christian people from a wide area can meet to work, worship and relax together and thus experience, on a larger canvas, what it means to be the body of Christ. The region will be the administrative link between the national and local levels, carrying out the supervisory tasks transmitted to it in the areas of finance, statistics and staffing. The region will be responsible for the appointment of representatives to the national council. It will also provide the forum where issues raised by any of the three levels can be discussed by all the maxi-parishes.
4.8 The region will carry out these responsibilities through a regional council. This will consist of representatives from each maxi-parish council and then additional representatives in relation to the parish size. All the members of the maxi-parish ministry teams and the regional office-bearers will be members of the regional council. The regional council will be responsible for ensuring that ministers of Word and Sacrament do not comprise more than half the council. Maxi-parishes sending more than one representative will be encouraged to give due attention to gender balance and to the inclusion of a young person in their representation.
4.9 The frequency of meetings, the appointment and terms of the person who chairs the council meeting, the number of office bearers required to carry out its tasks effectively, and what powers it would delegate to sub-groups will be decided by each regional council in response to the needs and nature of the area.
5. A Church shaped for mission: the national
5.1 Although the SCIFU vision of unity has grown out of the local concern for mission and for the local and regional credibility of the Church’s witness to the reconciling power of God, it is clear that the Church at national level must also demonstrate that unity-in-diversity, and must enable unity at regional and local level to be effective.
5.2 SCIFU envisages a national council, meeting annually. Its responsibilities will be to act as the chief locus of authority in the Church, able to declare the mind of the Church in matters of life and witness. It will be the final court of appeal in matters of discipline, order and doctrine, and will settle disputes at regional level or between the regional and local levels.
5.3 It will be responsible for inspiring and encouraging the Church and directing its strategy for mission at the national level. It will establish and dissolve committees responsible for particular areas of work, will be responsible for appointments to them, and will receive reports on their work. It will consider and adopt policies and programmes for the future and, as appropriate, instruct the committees to implement the decisions taken.
5.4 It will approve the budget for the united Church and specify the sums available for the various areas of work. It will also appoint representatives and delegates to national and international ecumenical bodies, the national assemblies of other churches and such organisations as may invite representation from the united Church.
5.5 It will be the responsible employer of such staff as are required to carry out the work of the national council and its committees.
5.6 It will be responsible for reviewing, at every level, the progress in implementing the new structures for a united Church.
5.7 The membership of the national council will comprise representatives appointed by each regional council, together with an agreed number of clergy, of whom one will be the bishop. The office bearers of the national council and one representative from each standing committee will be ex officio members.
5.8 The method of nomination, selection and period of office of the chair of the council will be determined by the council at its first meeting. The ceremonial and representative functions often associated with this role require further thought prior to drawing up the Act of Union.
5.9 The bringing together of the work of the present national committees of the participating churches will be an important part of the uniting process.
Ministries for mission
6. Ministries for mission: the ministry of all the baptised
6.1 The ministry of the whole people of God underpins the SCIFU proposal for particular ministries in the united Church. As Deacons for Scotland?, the 1990 report of the Multi-lateral Church Conversation, states:
“Relatively very few of the Christians are ordained, and they are ordained in order to serve, build up and equip the whole community of the baptised for its mission ….. It is all followers of Christ, not just the tiny minority of them who are ordained, who are charged by Christ to be salt to the world, light to all the world, yeast to leaven the whole lump of dough.” (p 36 – also quoted above in 2.5)
6.2 Appendix one to the SCIFU proposal, entitled “Servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God” (1 Corinthians 4.1): A SCIFU reflection paper on the ministry of Word and Sacrament, shows how much broader and more inclusive the Church’s understanding of ministry has become over the last half-century and how baptism has come to be recognised as the real entry into ministry.
6.3 This ministry of all the baptised is expressed corporately, as a ministry of the whole Church, sent both to preach the Gospel to all nations and to be, in the quality of its life, the product of that Gospel. The priesthood of all believers is one of the Biblical images which depicts the corporate responsibility of the Church to stand before the face of God as representative of all humanity and to speak to the human race from God.
6.4 There is, however, also the ministry given to every individual member of the Church, none being without gifts from the Holy Spirit (see 1 Corinthians 12:7). This ministry includes the worship of God both in private and in public, Christian loving service both within the family of the Church and to the community at large, and the spread of the Gospel of Jesus Christ through evangelism.
6.5 In the very passage in which St Paul asserts that “in each of us, the Spirit is seen to be at work for some useful purpose,” he goes on to give nine examples of gifts of the Spirit which are given, not to all Christians, but to particular individuals – ministries which are to be exercised for the sake of all. Throughout the history of the Church, as at the present, the gifts of the Spirit are generously bestowed by God and those gifts are exercised, in the vast majority of cases, by Christians who are not ordained.
6.6 Nevertheless the SCIFU proposal also recognises that the Church has never been without persons holding specific authority and responsibility (see above 2.6) and the sections which follow make proposals for those particular ministries in a united Church.
7. Ministries for mission: elders
7.1 All the participating churches recognise in their present life that there is in every local congregation a group of Christians who are mature in faith and who share with the minister of Word and Sacrament in the leadership and pastoral care of the congregation. Some are called elders, meeting together in the Kirk Session, some pastoral visitors, some class leaders, some members of the Vestry, some stewards. How these people are chosen, what authority they have, how that is recognised and for how long they remain in office varies between the church traditions, and even within one church. What is clear is that these people, separately and corporately, make a vital contribution to the life and witness of the Church.
7.2 These leaders are also the pool from which the congregation chooses its representatives to the wider Church, precisely because of their maturity in faith and their experience of local leadership and pastoral care. Because these people are such a vital part of the ministry of the church not only locally but also regionally and nationally, SCIFU proposes that they should have one name – elder – which will enable them to be recognised throughout the united Church.
7.3 Eldership is a treasured inheritance from the Presbyterian tradition in both the Church of Scotland and the United Reformed Church. It is a corporate ministry, with the minister as both leader and as part of the body. It is a ministry of leadership and pastoral care in the life of the local congregation. In the united Church, those chosen by the church meeting to form the congregational council will be regarded as elders. Local congregations may choose, locally, to call them and to call the council meeting, by a name from their present tradition. However, the representatives of the congregational council who are then chosen to serve on the maxi-parish council, and those chosen by that council to serve on the regional council, and those chosen by the regional council to serve on the national council, will be known as elders.
7.4 Eldership is not simply about function. It is a particular ministry, related to the ministries of deacons, ministers and bishops and, like them, derived from the ministry entrusted to the whole Church. Elders are chosen for their Christian maturity, which may already have shown itself in youth or children’s work, in pastoral care, in wise financial work, in thoughtful administrative skills, in authorised lay preaching, in community work, in the world of work, in the encouragement of the music of the church, in being an encourager of others. In the Church of Scotland and the United Reformed Church elders are set apart by prayer in the context of worship and thus ordained to this service. In some parts of those churches elders serve for as long as they are physically able. In other parts, they serve for an agreed term, and then, following a sabbatical period, may be chosen again for active service. However, in both churches the elder remains an elder, whether currently serving or non-serving. Christian maturity does not end with a term of service.
7.5 It will be for each congregation to decide on its pattern of eldership. All members of the congregational council will, however, be set apart with prayer in the context of worship and recognised by the whole Church as elders – although they may be known in the congregation by another name. (see 7.3 above) That setting apart will be life-long, although service on the congregational and maxi-parish councils may be termed.
7.6 As the representatives of the congregational councils work together in the maxi-parish council and in the regional and national councils, they will bring the riches of all their traditions of lay leadership with them. This will contribute to the ongoing development of the ministry of the elder.
8. Ministries for mission: deacons Note: this section does not refer to those in both the former Congregational Church and the Church of Scotland who were called ‘deacons’ and had or have leadership or practical management roles in the local congregation. This section refers to the order of deacons in three of the churches, and the Church Related Community Workers in the United Reformed Church.
8.1 The question of how the united Church might reflect the various traditions of leadership both in the local and wider Church is a very sensitive issue because it is part of every member’s local church experience, and perhaps part of many members’ family history. The question of the place of deacons in the united Church is far less emotive. This is for several reasons. Firstly, there have been significant changes in the nature and role of deacons in all the churches during the past 40 years and so there is no long unbroken tradition to defend. Secondly, and related to the first, there is an eager ferment of new thinking in all the churches about the particular ministry of the deacon. And, thirdly, deacons work singly, fulfilling a great variety of roles within particular ministry teams and so variety need not be a problem in the united Church.
8.2 The advice of the 1990 Multilateral Conversation report Deacons for Scotland? was:
“The churches should not seek to reach an agreed definition of an amalgamated office of Deacon prior to union, but should agree to take a variety of kinds of Deacon into the united Church, in the expectation of further understanding, convergence and renewal after union.” (Introduction page x)
Deacons are, at present, ordained in three of the participating churches but the expectations of their role in the worship life of the church are very different. Nevertheless, there is today a marked convergence in what might be called ‘the spirituality of the diaconate’. All the participating churches understand deacons as being servants of the Kingdom with all its radical critique of worldly power: all understand deacons as go-betweens between the church and its surrounding communities, on the margins, outward-facing: all understand deacons as agents of change, called to a ministry of prophetic action, seeking to transform unjust structures.
8.3 The SCIFU proposal envisages that there might be a deacon in every maxi-parish team. His or her tasks will include encouraging links between the congregations and their local communities and equipping the members for their pastoral outreach, care and prayer. She or he will have a particular ministry to stir up the consciences of the whole people of God with regard to issues of justice, peace and the integrity of creation, encouraging them to get politically involved with issues of justice and environmental concern at every level. The deacon will bridge the divide between worship and work, life and liturgy, by her or his own contribution in worship and by encouraging others to make those same links.
8.4 The ministry of the deacon is one strand of the woven fabric of the one ministry of the Church. The deacon will not take over the pastoral visiting, nor encroach on the particular pastoral role of the elder, but will equip and enable those whose role it is. The deacon’s role in worship will be complementary to the role of the lay preacher. The deacon will serve the whole maxi-parish, be part of the ministry team, and be available to all.
8.5 As part of the ministry team, deacons will be members of the regional council. Their selection for training, their deployment and their ordination or commissioning will be the responsibility of the region in consultation both with the local and the national as appropriate.
9. Ministries for mission: ministers of Word and Sacrament
9.1 An understanding of God as Trinity, a loving dynamism of Father, Son and Holy Spirit in relationship, informs the entire SCIFU proposal for the united Church. This understanding points to a church which will echo in its ministerial relationships the Trinitarian pattern of mutually deferential and non-hierarchical communion. This does not refer to parity of ministers, but to each particular ministry sharing in the others. It follows, for example, that the ministry of the elders is not the sole concern of the elders, nor is the ministry of Word and Sacrament the exclusive business of those so ordained. All these particular ministries are derived from the ministry given by God to the whole Church. The Church, in turn, entrusts particular ministries to those with the gifts and calling for them.
9.2 In 1972 The Multilateral Church Conversation formulated A Scottish Consensus on the Presbyterate, recording agreement on the seven-fold role of the Presbyter/Minister/Priest. That consensus is quoted in full and set in the context of the SCIFU group’s theological reflection on the ministry of Word and Sacrament in appendix one. The SCIFU group affirms much of that consensus, but adds, before all the other seven aspects of the role of the minister of Word and Sacrament, the role of serving the Church in leadership in mission. That role will be exercised through the maxi-parish ministry team, as well as through the particular congregation(s) for which the minister has special care, and through the regional and national councils.
9.3 Ministers of Word and Sacrament in the united Church will normally work in ministry teams and will be called to maxi-parishes, although with primary responsibility for particular congregations. The pattern of leadership within the maxi-parish ministry team will be established when the maxi-parish is first set up and will vary from parish to parish. A new flexibility will be necessary, as ministers may be called to lead worship in a tradition not their own. Working with a church meeting in every congregation may be a new experience for some ministers. Others may find the traditional relationship between the congregational council and the minister to be a somewhat different one to that to which he or she is accustomed. The principle of local diversity for congregations and maxi-parishes will demand a breadth and catholicity from ministers, but will also offer the support of a team and refreshing new ways of being the Church.
9.4 The minister of Word and Sacrament and any family, along with the rest of the ministry team, will receive pastoral care from the bishop. Advice, encourage-ment, spiritual counselling, and support in times of difficulty will be offered through regular meetings.
9.5 A critical question for the establishment of the united Church is the mutual recognition of the present ministers of Word and Sacrament from the four churches, and the agreement on procedures so that ordinations after union will be fully acceptable to all four traditions.
9.6 Since 1984, those churches participating in the Multilateral Church Conversation, with the exception of the Scottish Episcopal Church, have agreed a Joint Statement on Mutual Recognition of Members and Ministries which permits ministers of each church to “exercise all aspects of their ministries, including the celebration of the sacraments, in any of these churches, when invited to do so and in accordance with the recognised procedures of these churches.” A similar provision is now also available through Canon 15 of the Scottish Episcopal Church which permits someone who has not been episcopally ordained to celebrate the Eucharist/Lord’s Supper in a Local Ecumenical Partnership. At the point when the churches first agree to the uniting process, it is expected that this provision will be extended throughout all the participating churches as a sign and expression of the Scottish Episcopal Church’s commitment to union.
10. Ministries for mission: the bishop
10.1 Mutual responsibility for one another, personally and corporately, within the Body of Christ is the sign of a Church which is modelled on God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This interweaving, this mutuality and reciprocity within the Godhead is the basis for the patterns of ministry proposed by the SCIFU group for the united Church. These patterns are predicated on an understanding of church order as mutual co-responsibility rather than ascending levels of authority.
10.2 All the participating churches have developed, over the centuries, structures of oversight to ensure the peace and unity of the church, to facilitate its mission, to guard its faithfulness to the Gospel, and for the good ordering of its life. For example, the participating churches all recognise the personal leadership of ministers of Word and Sacrament which is then shared with those members identified in each local church as having the Christian maturity for that task. The minister also shares his or her ministry with the whole people of God among whom he or she serves.
10.3 The Scottish Episcopal Church treasures the personal leadership in ministry of the bishop in each of its dioceses. This ministry too is a ministry of personal leadership which is then shared more widely, in this case with both the ministers/priests of the diocese and with the synod. It is another strand in the woven fabric of the ministry of the whole people of God. Although the United Reformed Church, through its experience of Synod Moderators, and the Methodist Church, through its experience of District Chairs, also value personal leadership at the wider church level, it is the Episcopal Church’s particular tradition which provided most of the seed-corn for the SCIFU proposal in this area. However, as in the rest of the SCIFU proposal, the united Church will seek to be open to the ‘new thing’ to which God is calling his people.
10.4 The focusing of oversight responsibilities in one person (whether local minister or bishop) has both benefits and dangers for the Church. Conflict resolution and trouble-shooting can often be most effective when done, confidentially, by one person with authority. A personal leader can, on occasion, give a more prophetic challenge than a council, and society is more likely to listen to a recognised church leader than a council. The SCIFU group, well aware of the dangers of the abuse of authority in the Church, whether by individuals or councils, propose a church order based on mutual co-responsibility for the faithful life and witness of the Church between those called to particular ministries and the synods and councils with whom they share those ministries. (see appendix 2 for a SCIFU reflection paper on the ministry of oversight.)
10.5 The work of the bishop, according to the SCIFU proposal, will be focused at the regional level. He or she will work closely with the office bearers of the region and share his or her authority with the regional council. The particular role of the bishop will, therefore, be closely related to the responsibilities of the regional council. (see section 4 above)
10.6 The bishop will be expected to give personal leadership and inspiration to the region’s work of evangelism, fostering and nurturing communities of faith and articulating the demand for social justice for all in the name of Christ.
10.7 The SCIFU proposal sees the bishop as not only a pastor to the pastors and their families, but as extending his or her pastoral care to the maxi-parish ministry teams, and to consultations with the maxi-parish councils.
10.8 He or she will have a particular responsibility, through preaching and leadership of worship throughout the region, and through speaking and writing, to guard, transmit, proclaim and interpret the faith evangelically and prophetically in the contemporary world. A personal voice is more likely to be heard in society than a corporate one.
10.9 A significant part of the role of the bishop will be as a focus of unity for the united Church in the region. She or he will preside at all ordinations of ministers of Word and Sacrament and of deacons. Because of her or his personal knowledge of all the maxi-parishes, the bishop will have an important role, along with others, when there are vacancies in a ministry team. The bishop may also have a role in developing contacts and networks with significant regional institutions.
10.10 Administrative leadership and participation in the government of the united Church will be two more of the bishop’s functions, each exercised at regional, national and possibly also international levels.
10.11 Bishops will be elected by the regional council to serve for a specified period yet to be decided. The bishops will meet collegially twice a year for mutual support, consultation and consistency of practice.
11. Conclusion
11.1 The SCIFU group, consisting of duly appointed representatives of each of the four participating churches, offers this proposal to those churches. It is the fruit of seven years’ work. The group was instructed to prepare a Basis and Plan for Union. This proposal offers only a few first steps on the way to union, but the group believes it gives a sufficiently clear picture of a model of a united Church for the churches to be able to decide whether or not they wish to pursue this model of unity. The group also believe there is enough local detail for churches in a locality to begin to try to live this model of unity.
11.2 During the seven years there have, inevitably, been some changes in the membership of the group. The list of those who have served and their dates of service appears below.
11.3 The group would like to pay special tribute to Duncan McClements whose untimely death in 2001 deprived the group of a tough presbyterian visionary, a good friend and a committed ecumenist.
11.4 As the group has offered its work at each meeting to God, so now, with the words of a prayer written for the group, it offers this proposal to God.
O God, Trinity of unity and love, we hear you calling us to leave behind the divisions of the past and find our true unity in you. Forgive our fears and faithlessness; open our eyes to your future for your Church; give us the strength and courage to turn the vision into reality; that together we might reveal your redeeming love to our land. Amen.
12 Recommendations
This report calls on the four churches
1. to reaffirm their commitment to the goal of full visible unity.
2. to welcome the theological principles of the SCIFU report, which are an expression of that commitment.
3. to approve the SCIFU proposal in general terms as an appropriate model for pursuing full visible unity in Scotland, recognising that there are many stages in the process.
4. to initiate consultation throughout the life of the four churches, and not excluding other churches, in order to share resources and integrate structures, grasping the opportunities arising from the many changes currently occurring in all of them.
5. to promote and facilitate the piloting of the model locally and more widely where relations between any of the participating churches are sufficiently developed.
6. to continue the search for full visible unity through a new group appointed by the four churches with the remit to complete the unfinished business of the SCIFU proposal and prepare a Basis & Plan of Union.
SCIFU PARTICIPANTS 1996-2003
Church of Scotland Ms Moyra McCallum (1996-2003) Revd Duncan McClements (1996-2000) Revd Marjory Maclean (2001-2003) Revd Prof George Newlands (1996- 2003) Mrs Sheilah Steven (1996-2003)
The Methodist Church Revd Alan Anderson (1996-2001) Revd John Dolling (1996-1998) Mrs Jennifer Easson (1996-2003) Revd James Jones (2001-2003) Revd Andrew Mackenzie (1998-2001) Revd Gordon Murray (2001-2002) Mrs Jean Peacock (1996-1999)
Scottish Episcopal Church Prof. David Atkinson (1996-2003) Rt. Rev Robert Halliday (1996-2003) Revd John McLuckie (1996) Revd Ian Thompson (1997-2003) Revd Dr Anne Tomlinson (1998-2003)
Scottish Congregational Church (1996-2000) Revd John Arthur (1996-2000) Revd Fiona Bennet (1996-1998) Revd Alan Paterson (1996-2003) Pastor Linda Rice (1996-2000)
United Reformed Church in the UK (1996-2000) Revd Peter Arthur (1996-2000) Revd James Breslin (1996-2000) Revd Fleur Houstin (1997-2000) Revd Sheila Maxey (1996-2000) Revd John Smith (2001-2002)
United Reformed Church (2000+) Revd John Arthur Revd Sheila Maxey Revd Alan Paterson Revd John Smith (2001-2002) Revd Mary Buchanan (2002-2003)
Convener Rt. Revd Michael Henley (Scottish Episcopal Church) Secretary Revd Sheilagh Kesting (Church of Scotland)
Observers: Roman
Catholic Church in Scotland
United
Free Church of Scotland Revd Arthur Lawless (1999-2003)
APPENDIX I
“Servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God” (1 Corinthians 4.1) A SCIFU Reflection Paper on the Ministry of Word and Sacrament
A brief study of the history of ecumenism and proposals for Church union quickly reveals that the question of the ordained ministry, and the way in which leadership in ministry is ordered, have, over the years, proved to be the rocks on which hopes for organic unity have run aground. This has been particularly true in those conversations that have involved the Reformed, Anglican and Roman Catholic traditions and, within a Scottish context, in those discussions and negotiations for union that have brought members of the Reformed tradition – especially the Church of Scotland - and the Scottish Episcopal Church into dialogue 1. On the international ecumenical scene, the publication of the seminal text Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry 2 in 1982 caused great excitement but, as the responses to the text began to filter through, it became clear that some of the most difficult problems arose out of the dialogue on the ordained ministry 3. The Church in Scotland was already aware that this was the case for when, in 1957, the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland commended the report entitled “Relations between Anglican and Presbyterian Churches” to Presbyteries for study and discussion, the clear view was expressed that the main obstacle to unity lay in the inter-related questions of ministerial orders and intercommunion 4. In 1984, the Anglican-Reformed International Commission reported that, “Ministry, which is properly a sign of unity and continuity, has become the most obvious symbol of division’5 and, in 1986, similar views became evident following the publication of the report Christian Unity – NOW is the Time by the Multilateral Church Conversation in Scotland. Now, sixteen years later, the Scottish Church Initiative for Union is finding that, although questions of intercommunion have been resolved, issues concerning ministers and the ordained ministry remain amongst the most difficult that it has to tackle.
The Church’s understanding and definition of ministry has evolved greatly since the first World Conference on Faith and Order (held in Lausanne in 1927) stated that ‘Entrance into the work of ministry is by an act of ordination by prayer and the laying on of hands to those gifted for the work, called by the Spirit and accepted by the Church’. Today the predominant understanding of ministry within the Church is both broader and much more inclusive than that. All the partner churches within the SCIFU conversations would agree “that ministry is the service of the whole people of God, sharing in the one ministry of Jesus Christ, sent by the Father in the power of the Spirit to fulfil God’s mission to the world”6 and that, as a result, “this ministry is exercised by and through the entire membership of the Church in the course of their daily work in the world.”7 This paradigm shift in the theology of ministry indicates that ordination is no longer viewed as the route to ministry – baptism is, and it points towards an ecclesiology that sees baptism as the fundamental sacrament within the life of the Church. In baptism, believers are, through the power of the Holy Spirit, joined to Christ, grafted into Christ, in a mystical and spiritual union and called to deny themselves, take up their cross and follow in Christ’s way. Through baptism God “forms us into the laos, the people of God, who as signs and agents of God’s reign participate in God’s mission of reconciling humanity and all creation to God.”8 The baptised thus become “servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God” (1 Cor 4.1).
The concepts of service and stewardship are vital to a proper understanding of the role and purpose of the Church within the mission of God. Stewardship is inextricably linked to ownership – but the steward is not the owner. To the steward is given the custody and care of that which belongs to the master. Stewardship involves trust and the steward is expected both to comply with the owner’s instructions and look well to the owner’s affairs. The church has been given stewardship of “the mysteries of God” which, in Paul’s understanding, involves secret knowledge of God’s saving purpose revealed in the mysteries of the incarnation, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.9 These things lie beyond the scope of our unaided reason and imagination for they belong to the “secret and hidden wisdom of God”(1 Cor 2.7) yet God has chosen to make them known in the Gospel and, having done so, calls the community of the baptised, to “proclaim and prefigure the Kingdom of God…by announcing the Gospel to the world”10 – and to do so as servants of Christ.
Servanthood is not a popular model in today’s society. It is “counter-cultural” in an individualistic age where the pursuit of wealth, status, dominance and power are frequently the motivating factors of human activity - yet it is at the heart of the Gospel. Christ, whose ministry the Church is called to share, “came not to be served but to serve and to give his life a ransom for many” (Mark 10.45) and, if the Church is faithfully to prefigure the coming Kingdom of God, she must emulate that ministry of sacrificial service. The followers of Christ, in taking up their cross, are called upon to abandon self-interest and follow on the road that leads, ultimately, to Calvary. Doing so, according to Kenneth Mason, plants “an anti-structural mine under the foundations of normal social relationships”11 because of the Gospel’s counter-cultural nature. As the SCIFU group h as stated elsewhere,
It is a Gospel of radical reversal in which the last are first and the humble exalted, the underdogs valued and the weak made strong; a Gospel with a world-view where power resides in weakness and money and might do not reign supreme.12
This then is the Gospel entrusted to the “servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God”, the Gospel we are called to make known through the proclamation of the Word and the celebration of the Sacraments. Understanding baptism as the sacrament through which the people of God are called to share in this ministry affirms, according to Louis Weil, “that the gifts of the Holy Spirit are given to all members so that ministry can be understood as shared by all the people, whether lay or ordained, each according to the nature of the gifts that the Spirit has given.”13 Weil also argues, however, that this theology of baptism exposes the fact that, over the years, the Church’s distinction between clergy and laity “has led to an implied difference of status within the liturgical assembly…contradicting the unity that baptism creates.”14 His views echo those of John Macquarrie who argues that
…all have received in their baptism a vocation to follow in the way of Jesus Christ, and have received the gift of the Holy Spirit to guide and sustain them in that way…There is no sharp distinction between clergy and laity; they are, in Paul’s metaphor, all members of one body, though they contribute to its life in different ways (1 Cor. 12).15
The members of the SCIFU group would want to affirm this baptismal ecclesiology for it undergirds the theology that informs all the group’s proposals for the united Church – not least those relating to its ministerial relationships - a theology that understands “God as Trinity, a loving dynamism of Father, Son and Holy Spirit in a mutually deferential and non-hierarchical communion.”16 However, if lay and ordained all share in a common life and ministry by virtue of their baptism and if, as Louis Weil suggests, “all the baptized are equal and integral participants in [the Church’s] common life”17, we cannot ignore questions about the nature and necessity of any ordination other than the “ordination of baptism”. Such questions are not new. As far back as 1969, Steven Mackie wrote
The question ‘Why Ordination’ is being asked pointedly by an increasing number of theological students, laymen, and younger ministers all over the world. In discussions in Europe, North America and Asia…the view is expressed that the concept of ordination is no longer helpful in understanding the Church’s ministry and planning its work…if it means, as the churches have hitherto taught, the conferring of a different status and a permanent function on a select group within the Church, it is both unnecessary and undesirable.18
The SCIFU group would want to deny any suggestion that there is any such difference in status between those clergy and laity but, at the same time, would want to challenge the claim that, because ‘every member has a distinctive gift to offer and service to render to God’, then ‘every member can fulfil the particular calling of the ordained ministry of Word and Sacrament’. This, it is argued, is an ‘all-too-prevalent contemporary distortion of the recovered New Testament emphasis on the ministry of the whole people of God’19. The distortion arises from a misunderstanding of the nature of ordination to the ministry of Word and Sacrament - for which the Church herself is largely responsible20 - which the baptismal ecclesiology referred to above seeks to challenge and refute. It cannot be denied that ordination has been (and still is) frequently seen as elevating the ordained above the laity but
…understanding baptism as the foundation of the life and ministry of the church…leads us to see ordained ministers as integral members of the body of Christ, called by God and discerned by the body to be signs and animators of Christ’s self-giving life and ministry to which all people are called by God and for which we are empowered by the Spirit.21
Within this context, the ministry of Word and Sacrament becomes a ministry of service rather than a ministry conferring status for ‘the ordained ministry must always be in service of the ministry of the whole people of God’22. Having said that, it is equally important to remember that the ministry of the whole people of God has never been undifferentiated or egalitarian. Macquarrie points out that
The church, from the beginning, was a community, not just a crowd. A community is not a mere aggregate of persons, but a structured body in which there are organs for oversight and other essential functions. Paul’s metaphor of the body, in which the different organs contribute, each in its special way, to the life of the whole, continues to be a profound insight into the nature of the church.23
Within the community which is the Church, ordination to the ministry of Word and Sacrament is, therefore, an integral part of ‘the ordering of the Church’s serving’24 and its purpose ‘is to keep the Church faithful to its nature and calling as the people of God in worship and witness, fellowship and service.25 This echoes the agreement reached by the Multilateral Church Conversation in Scotland in its ‘Concensus on the Presbyterate’ in 1972. That report acknowledged that there was ‘significant agreement…on the content of the office of Presbyter’ (much of which the SCIFU Group would want to affirm) and stated that,
In our Churches, people are ordained to a multiple role including the following: -
1. Sacramental – in all our Churches a Presbyter is the normal president of the Lord’s supper and normal officiant in Baptism. In none of them does the ordained minister fulfil these roles in isolation, but in an act of worship in which other Christians have their proper ministry.
2. “The Ministry of the Word” – In all our Churches a Presbyter has at congregational level the major responsibility for the Ministry of the Word. In none of them is the work of preaching restricted to the ordained ministers, nor the Ministry of the Word restricted to preaching.
3. Liturgical – In all our Churches the ordering of the worship of the local Church is the responsibility in the first place of the Presbyters; but this responsibility as discharged includes fostering numerous other liturgical ministries, e.g., those of organists, members of choirs, lay people preaching and reading the Scriptures, office-bearers on duty at a Service.
4. Pastoral – In all our Churches the Presbyter has at congregational level the major responsibility for ensuring that the congregation builds itself up in love. In none of them is his (sic) own work of caring regarded as sufficient on its own.
5. Pioneering – In all our Churches, the Presbyter has not only a responsibility for the furtherance of aspects of the Christian mission already being undertaken in the congregation, but also a prophetic role of discerning what needs doing that is not being done, and of fostering new insights and new forms of service within the Church.
6. Universal – In all our Churches, the Presbyter is not simply an official of the local congregation, but “is both Christ’s ambassador and the authorised representative of the whole people of God” (the 1969 and 1970 reports to the Methodist Conference of its Commission on the Church’s Ministries in the Modern World). It is in this context that ministerial continuity – the orderly transmission of authority, within and by decree of the Church, through those already being ordained to those being ordained – can be seen as it was seen in the early Church: not as a mechanical guarantee of Apostolicity, but as one outward and visible sign, among others, of the continuance of the Church in the Apostle’s faith and fellowship.
7. Reconciliation – In the experience of all our Churches, the Presbyterate is constantly used by God to convict those in error, to bring sinners to repentance, and to convey to the penitent the assurance of God’s forgiveness. This ministry of reconciliation has to some extent taken different forms in our Churches.26 The implication of this report and other documents produced subsequently is that those ordained to the ministry of Word and Sacrament are, in the words of Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry, “persons who are publicly and continually responsible for pointing to [the Church’s] fundamental dependence on Jesus Christ”27 - and it is only in so far as the Church is dependent upon Christ that she can be faithful to her calling. Further implications arise from this; firstly that, “ordination involves as part of its essential nature the entrusting of authority to the ordained person to act focally and representatively for the whole Church” and secondly that the ordained ministry is therefore “both a sign of unity in the Church and a means of maintaining it.”28 Such leadership authority is never unregulated, however, and those who exercise it are accountable in two directions for, as an aspect of the ministry of Word and Sacrament, the exercise of authority remains a ministry of service,
…derived from, and accountable to, God, exercised through the gifting and enabling of the Spirit. Moreover, the fact that service is the calling of the whole church means that those who lead do so as a part of the church, with an accountability towards the whole church.29
It should also be noted that, within that accountability to the whole Church, those ordained to the ministry of Word and Sacrament are accountable to each other in the exercise of their ministry of leadership authority – as was the case in the earliest days of the Church (see Acts 15). This model of the ministry of Word and Sacrament reflects “the character of God as revealed in the incarnation” for,
As God in Christ deals with us in a personal way, so all ministry must have a personal character, providing in a specific person a focus for unity and witness to the community. As God calls us into a reconciled fellowship, so all ministry must have a collegial character – exercised not by one person alone but in shared responsibility with colleagues. As the Church is the body of Christ quickened by the Spirit, so the ministry must have a communal character so that every member is enabled to exercise the gifts which the Spirit gives and so that the whole community is, as far as possible, associated in the process of teaching and decision making. And as the work of Christ was that of the servant Lord who gave his life a ransom for many, so these three characteristics must combine in a ministry of service to the world for which Christ died.30
The SCIFU group believes that this “mutually deferential and non-hierarchical” model of the ministry of Word and Sacrament would not only present a faithful witness to God the Divine Trinity but would also best serve the Church in her God-given task of proclaiming and prefiguring the coming Kingdom of God.
APPENDIX II
“Keep guard over yourselves and over all the flock of which the Holy Spirit has given you charge” (Acts 20.28) A SCIFU Reflection Paper on the Ministry of Oversight
Members of the Scottish Church Initiative for Union Group are only too well aware of the difficulties and tensions that surface in ecumenical discussions when questions concerning ministry and ministerial order are discussed. Within the Scottish context, these are brought into sharp focus whenever the issue of oversight (episcopé) is considered and, more particularly, whenever the issue of authorising an individual to exercise the ministry of oversight on behalf of the Church, is raised. It is this subject more than any other that arouses passions, hinders progress and frequently results in stalemate in inter-denominational dialogue. Many of the reasons for this are rooted in the conflicts that raged in the 16th and 17th century Scottish Church and the denominational identities that grew out of them – not least those of the Scottish Episcopal Church and the Church of Scotland.
The SCIFU Group is convinced that the Church in Scotland must endeavour to set aside the divisions and schisms of her history and seek to give tangible expression to the unity and identity that all the baptised share in Christ. In line with an indigenous Scottish voice that can be traced back through Robert Leighton of Dunblane (1611-1684) to John Forbes of Corse and the Aberdeen Doctors of the early 17th Century 31, and along with Frederic Deane, Bishop of Aberdeen in the mid 20th Century, members of the Group share ‘a profound belief in the feasibility of a reunion of our Scottish Churches in days to come whereby no fundamental principle which we cherish would be sacrificed.’32
Recognising the ‘fundamental principles’ that are involved has led the Group to engage seriously with the question of the place and function of Elders within a united Church as well as the proposed role and ministry of Bishops. In considering these matters, the Group has been seeking to continue the work called for by the General Assembly of the Church Scotland in 1985. That Assembly, when considering Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry 33, resolved ‘to examine the Church’s structure to see whether the communal, the collegial and especially the personal dimension of oversight are adequately discharged’, commended ‘to episcopal churches the eldership as one historical embodiment of that principle’ and undertook ‘to consider whether further development of personal leadership in ministry at area and regional levels would be beneficial for the life of the Church and the prosecution of its mission to the world’ 34.
In the past, some quite unjustifiable claims have been made about the nature and structure of the ministry within the Church and appeals have been made to scripture and tradition in an effort to prove the God-given nature of both presbyterian and episcopalian forms of church government. Thankfully, the churches have moved a long way since the days when they glowered at each other across the battlements of their respective citadels of certainty and today most would agree that, ‘[t]he New Testament does not describe a single pattern of ministry which might serve as a blueprint or continuing norm for all future ministry in the Church.’35 The results of this consensus can be seen in the mutual recognition of baptism, opportunities for intercommunion, and the acknowledgment of the validity of each other’s ordinations. The significance of these developments should not be underestimated.
The SCIFU Group has concluded that ministry at all levels within the united Church should have a personal, collegial and communal character 36 and that, in respect of the ministry of oversight, this would involve the retention of the ministries of both Elders and Bishops within the one ministry of Christ that is shared by the whole people of God. There is also general agreement across the Church that baptism lies at the root of all ministry 37 and that ‘all the baptized are equal and integral participants in [the Church’s] common life.’38 This fundamental principle undergirds all aspects of the SCIFU Group’s theology of ministry for ‘just as there is no subordination of being within the triune God, nor, by extension, can there be difference of value of persons before God within the communion of the Church by virtue of our baptism in the triune name.’39 It has to be acknowledged, however, that, within the Holy Trinity, there is differentiation of a relational and functional nature. There is ‘an interweaving of various mutually dependent patterns of saving activity’ 40 but it is an interweaving that takes place within relationships that
are fully mutual and reciprocal:.constituted by mutual interaction, giving and receiving. The obedience of Jesus to the Father is a freely given commitment, not resigned submission or servility to a greater power. The Father’s identity and role in the Trinitarian life is dependent upon loving and free acceptance on the part of the Son and the Spirit.41
This interweaving, this mutuality and reciprocity within the Godhead is the basis for the patterns of ministry proposed for the United Church which ‘are predicated upon an understanding of church order as mutual co-responsibility rather than as ascending levels of authority.’42 It is imperative that this principle is borne in mind when questions relating to the ministry – and particularly the ministry of oversight – are being discussed.
The variety of gifts which God has bestowed upon the Church is her greatest resource in fulfilling her calling ‘to be an instrument of God’s plan to gather all creation under the Lordship of Christ’43 - but these gifts need to be co-ordinated and their effective use enabled so that ‘the whole body, joined and knit together by every joint with which it is supplied, when each part is working properly, makes bodily growth and upbuilds itself in love.’44 This co-ordinating and enabling is the function of the ministry of oversight, episkopé. It is
a caring for the life of a whole community, a pastoring of the pastors and a true feeding of Christ’s flock in accordance with Christ’s command across the ages and in unity with Christians in other places. Episcope (oversight) is a requirement of the whole Church and its faithful exercise in the light of the gospel is of fundamental importance to its life.45
The members of the SCIFU Group acknowledge that the ministry of oversight has been exercised, in different ways, within each of the partner churches and that, in all of them, the personal, collegial and communal aspects of this ministry are clearly evidenced at the local level 46. In considering proposals for the exercise of this ministry in the united Church at the regional level, it has become clear to the Group that the collegial and communal elements would be adequately expressed but that, without the ministry of oversight to be exercised by the ‘bishop in presbytery’, the personal element would be lacking at this level of the Church’s life. It is emphasised that this personal ministry would be that of a ‘Chief Pastor’ and that it would not in any way be a superior, separate or higher form of ministry but would be one exercised within the communal and collegial structures of the Church 47. It should also be noted that, as an aspect of the ministry of Word and Sacrament, the exercise of the personal ministry of oversight remains a ministry of service,
…derived from, and accountable to, God, exercised through the gifting and enabling of the Spirit. Moreover, the fact that service is the calling of the whole church means that those who lead do so as a part of the church with an accountability towards the whole church.48
Furthermore, the Group recognises that the ministry of oversight, as with all ministry, should be exercised in ways that are communal, collegial and personal for:
1. The communal exercise of oversight is an expression of the essential conciliarity of the Church. 2. The collegial exercise of oversight is an expression of fellowship (koinonia) in oversight. It gives an authority beyond that of the individual in oversight…It presupposes conciliarity, the communal form of oversight, complementing and upholding it. 3. The personal exercise of oversight gives proper place to leadership in the Church and to the special gifts and callings of individuals…The personal dimension presupposes the collegial and the communal, complementing and upholding them.49
In proposing a personal ministry of oversight at the regional level in the united Church, the SCIFU Group acknowledges that there is much work still to be done before the Scottish Consensus on episkopé it called for in its Second Interim Report can be produced - and it recognises (and itself struggles with) the anxieties and fears that frequently cloud any debate on this issue in Scotland. In doing so, the Group has recognised that many of these fears are, in fact, ‘ghosts of ancient feuds and controversies which in the twentieth century ought to be packed off to the charnel-house to which they rightly belong’ and calls on the participating churches to seek to build a ‘branch of the One Catholic and Apostolic Church in which all that is best in Presbyterianism and Episcopacy [and Methodism and the traditions of the United Reformed Church] will be preserved.’50
Footnotes: 1. It is worth remembering that these issues were, by and large, the cause of the mid-17th century disputes that eventually led to the split in the Scottish Church that current discussions are seeking to heal.2. Faith and Order Paper 111, World Council of Churches, Geneva 1982.3. See BEM 1982-1990: Report on the Process and Responses, Faith and Order Paper 149 WCC, Geneva 1990 p74.4. See Reports to the General Assembly of 1959 Edinburgh, The Church of Scotland, 1959 p69 §2.5. God’s Reign & Our Unity – The Report of the Anglican-Reformed International Commission 1984 London, SPCK, 1984 p55.6. See Reports to the General Assembly of 2000 Edinburgh, The Church of Scotland, 2000 p17/4 §2.2.1.7. God’s Reign & Our Unity p47.8. Anglican Ordination Rites The Berkeley Statement: ‘To Equip the Saints’ Findings of the Sixth International Anglican Liturgical Consultation Cambridge, Grove, 2002 p4.9. See Barrett C K The First Epistle to the Corinthians Black, London, 1971 p100.10. BEM p2011. Mason K Priesthood and Society Norwich, Canterbury Press, 1992 p71.12 See ‘The Scottish Church Initiative for Union: Uniting for Mission’.13. Weil, Louis A Theology of Worship Cambridge MA, Cowley, 2002 p14.14. ibid p19.15. Macquarrie, John A Guide to the Sacraments London, SCM, 1997 p175.16. See SCIFU – The Final Report §8.117. Weil ibid p19.18. Mackie S G Patterns of Ministry – Theological Education in a Changing World London, Collins 1969 p 57/8.19. See Reports to the General Assembly of 2000 Edinburgh, The Church of Scotland 2000 p17/7 §2.3.2.2.20. See Mackie op. cit. Part I Chapter 5.21. ‘To Equip the Saints’ p5.22. ibid.23. Macquarrie op. cit. p176.24. ‘The Doctrine of Ordination – The Report of the Panel on Doctrine to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland of 2000’ Edinburgh, 2000 p10.25. Reports to the General Assembly of 2000 p17/4 §2.2.2.26. See ‘Interim Report of the Multilateral Church Conversation in Scotland’ in Reports to the General Assembly of 1972 Edinburgh, The Church of Scotland, 1972 p611/2.27. BEM p21 para 8.28. God’s Reign & Our Unity p55.29. ‘Ordination in the Church of Scotland – The Report of the Panel on Doctrine to the General Assembly of 2001’ Edinburgh, 2001 p8. NB: Although dealt with elsewhere in the SCIFU documents, it is important to note that the leadership authority exercised by ‘bishops in presbytery’ within the collegiality of the ministry of Word and Sacrament would be subject to exactly the same accountability.30. God’s Reign & Our Unity p59.31. In the mid-17th Century, writing on a moderate episcopacy, Leighton wrote, ‘Oh when shall the loud and harsh noises of our Debates be turned into the sweeter sound of united prayers for this blessed Peace, that we might cry with one heart and voice to the God of Peace, who alone can give it, Pacem te poscimus omnes! And if we be real supplicants for it, we should beware of being the disappointers of our own desires, and of obstructing the Blessing we pray for, and therefore should mainly study a temper receptive of it, and that is, great Meekness and Charity. And certainly whatsoever party or opinion we follow in this matter, the badge by which we must be known to be followers of Jesus Christ is this, that we love one another: and that Law unquestionably is of Divine right, and therefore should not be broken by bitter passion and revilings, and rooted hatreds one against another for things about which the right is in dispute betwixt us.’ The Whole Works of the Most Reverend Father in God Robert Leighton DD (West W, Longmans, Green & Co, London, 1870) p192. His words are equally relevant today.32. Frederic Llewllyn Deane (1868-1952) quoted by W G Sinclair Snow in Frederic Llewllyn Deane (Edinburgh, Blackwood, 1953) p96.33. Faith and Order Paper 111, World Council of Churches, Geneva 1982.34. See Reports to the General Assembly of 1985 p312. (Edinburgh, The Church of Scotland, 1985)35. Baptism, Eucharist and Ministry p2436. For an outline of the Anglican-Reformed agreement on this see, God’s reign & Our Unity – The Report of the Anglican-Reformed International Commission 1984 p59 (London, SPCK, 1984). For an outline of the Methodist view on the Communal, Collegial and Personal aspects of the ministry of oversight see ‘EPISKOPÉ AND EPISCOPACY’, the report of the Faith and Order Committee of the Methodist Church to the Conference of 2000.37. See An Anglican-Methodist Covenant (Methodist Publishing House & Church House, Peterborough, 2001) p45; God’s Reign and Our Unity p47; Torrance, T F Royal Priesthood – A Theology of Ordained Ministry (T & T Clark, Edinburgh, 1993) p63ff; “‘Servants of Christ and Stewards of the mysteries of God” – A SCIFU Reflection Paper on the Ministry of Word and Sacrament.38. Weil, Louis A Theology of Worship (Cambridge MA, Cowley, 2002) p14.39. Eucharistic Presidency – A Theological Statement by the House of Bishops of the General Synod of the Church of England (Church House Publishing, London, 1997) p22.40. See ‘The Scottish Church Initiative for Union: Uniting for Mission’.41. Eucharistic Presidency p23.42. ‘The Scottish Church Initiative for Union: Uniting for Mission’.43. ‘The Report of the Scottish Church Initiative for Union’ §2.3.44. Ephesians 4.16 (RSV)45. Together in Mission and Ministry – The Porvoo Common Statement (Church House Publishing, London 1993) §4246. See God’s Reign & Our Unity p58-6147. For further details of how this would work in practice see ‘The Scottish Church Initiative for Union Proposals’ §10 and Appendix II and III of the Scottish Church Initiative for Union Second Interim Report (2000).48. ‘Ordination in the Church of Scotland – The Report of the Panel on Doctrine to the General Assembly of 2001’ (The Church of Scotland, Edinburgh, 2001) p8.49. An Anglican-Methodist Covenant p56. |