 |
Appendix 2A Scheme for Ministerial Review
The History
1. In 1997 General Assembly approved a scheme of ministerial accompanied self-appraisal which has since operated throughout the Church with varying degrees of success.
2.The original aims of the scheme were as follows: a) to affirm Ministers in their work and encourage them to follow God’s calling with a renewed sense of vision. b) to aid the continuing personal and professional development of Ministers in ways which are of benefit to them and the Church they serve as they:
3. These aims are still the necessary and relevant aims of any system of ministerial appraisal for both Ministers and Church Related Community Workers, whatever their particular role. For ease of reading, “Minister” will be used throughout this paper to refer to either a Minister of Word and Sacraments or a Church Related Community Worker. “Pastorate” will be used to refer to their sphere of service, whilst recognising that for some Ministers that is a post without a congregation and therefore another group would take the role described here for the Elders.
Reactions to the existing Scheme
4. It is true to say that feedback from Ministers and Appraisal Partners has become increasingly positive over the life of the scheme to date, to the extent that it is widely seen as an excellent and valuable tool for helping both reflection and forward thinking on ministry.
5. On the other hand, some have regarded it as unhelpful or of little value, and others have criticised the style and length of the guidance booklet Taking Stock. Many believe that there is a lack of connection to the actual ministerial tasks of a pastorate or post, and that the scheme lacks rigour because it is not obligatory and because the Minister is given the option of not involving the Elders and congregation(s) in the process.
Today’s Context
6. Before making proposals for a new scheme, which aims to address both positive and negative reactions to the present version, it may be helpful to set down the context in which those proposals are made. It is worth noting those elements of change in relation to ministry, and the culture in which ministry is exercised, which have taken place since 1997.
7. First, there has been a change in the attitude of many Ministers to the concept of appraisal and review. In 1997 there were many who still believed that appraisal did not fit comfortably with the exercise of a vocation. An optional scheme of ministerial accompanied self-appraisal was the only style that had any likelihood of being approved by Assembly. Since then, the proportion of our Ministers who have had positive experiences of appraisal in their working lives prior to entering the ministry has continued to grow.
8. There is increasing evidence of Ministers suffering long-term illness due to work-related stress. This stress has several causes but a mismatch of church and ministerial expectations of the Minister’s task is often a key factor. There is also the debilitating effect of working in an atmosphere of decline against which an individual’s best efforts seem to count for little. The ‘wilderness years’ are not comfortable. Now more than ever, support systems for Ministers are necessary. A scheme that requires clear, specific, and manageable objectives and responsibilities, within which ministerial service is exercised, coupled with a regular review and opportunity for development, can be one such system.
9. The Catch the Vision process envisages a Church that has purpose and commitment, with clear aims and objectives. This suggests an environment which should encourage Ministers to have a clear sense of purpose in their particular pastorate.
10. In addition, the proposed scheme is set against the background of the report Equipping the Saints. That report, accepted by Assembly, is based on the assumption that the Church’s ministry is the responsibility of the whole Church not just the task of a few hundred ordained people. The ministry and mission of each local church is a collaborative partnership with Minister, Elders and congregation all taking responsibility or having key objectives in relation to that ministry and mission. Furthermore, Ministers in the United Reformed Church have responsibilities beyond the local situation and any appraisal of their ministry needs to provide space for reflection upon the wider role and the nature of the calling itself. It was therefore proposed that a review of ministry must contain the elements of joint and self-appraisal as both Minister and pastorate reflect on the strengths and weaknesses, achievements and setbacks of the period under review.
11. In the United Reformed Church, those who are called by God to the ministries of Word and Sacraments or Church Related Community Work have that sense of call tested and acknowledged by the Church. The Church also gives the authority for the exercise of that ministry. However the ministry can only be properly carried out when Ministers recognise their mutual accountability within the community of Christ. Ministry is a shared experience through which the Ministers serve others, and in which they build up others as they themselves are built up in the Body of Christ. There has been an increasing acceptance of collaborative ministry and the mutual accountability that accompanies such a work style, although it is by no means a new concept. The basic theological concept behind this scheme is that all in ministry are accountable to God for the discharge of that ministry. A framework in which Ministers regularly stand back and reflect can be seen as a recognition of that basic accountability.
12. There are other New Testament discipleship themes behind this scheme. These include the full use of gifts in God’s service; the concept of stewardship; and the need for each Minister to play their proper part in the life of the Church, the body of Christ, so that it grows and develops.
13. Running parallel to the internal Church debates has been the consultation since 2002 that the United Reformed Church, along with other Churches, has had with the Department of Trade and Industry. In January 2005 the DTI produced a draft Statement of Good Practice in relation to the working conditions of both office-holders (such as Ministers) and employees. One area of this is the provision of a review and development policy. This makes our own review of the ministerial accompanied self-appraisal scheme all the more apposite.
The Proposed Scheme
14. With the above context and assessment of the present scheme in mind, the following draft scheme for ministerial review and development is proposed.
15. The scheme would become an obligatory part of ministerial service and would supersede the present scheme of ministerial accompanied self-appraisal.
16. It would continue to be known as Taking Stock since this title aptly sums up the review exercise.
17. It would provide the opportunity for each local church to identify key objectives for ministry and mission and conduct a regular review of those objectives.
18. It would require each Minister to have a role description setting out their key responsibilities and objectives as well as Terms of Settlement for their pastorate. This role description is to be worked out within the context of the mission and key objectives of the pastorate and the responsibilities and objectives of colleagues. The term “job description” is deliberately avoided here as a Minister’s role is more than a list of tasks and needs to include being as well as doing.
19. The scheme would provide an opportunity for confidential, accompanied self-appraisal for each Minister to:
i) review their role description, key responsibilities and objectives within the context of the particular pastorate; ii) reflect on the ways in which the work is an expression of their ministerial calling and the ways in which the different parts of the work complement or conflict with one another; iii) reflect on his/her personal life and integration of work with the rest of life, thereby affirming a holistic view of ministerial vocation.
20. It would include, as part of the process, conversations between Ministers, Elders and other key colleagues in order to: i) assess the objectives and key responsibilities of all concerned, the minister’s role description and Terms of Settlement; ii) identify future objectives and key responsibilities for the pastorate and the Minister; iii) amend the Minister’s role description if necessary; iv) make any necessary changes to the Terms of Settlement.
21. Taking Stock would lead to conversations with the Synod Training Officer about continuing ministerial education and development and any development needs identified within the pastorate.
22. It would operate within specified guidelines on confidentiality.
Role description, key responsibilities and objectives
23. A scheme that is designed to allow Ministers to review their objectives can only work if those objectives are clearly set out. Therefore all Ministers, in consultation with the pastorates, should draw up a list of key responsibilities and objectives. Where a pastorate is made up of more than one church or combined with another role, it would be for each pastorate/post to decide whether to draw up an overarching set of objectives or separate objectives for each component.
24. The pattern of ordained and commissioned ministries within the United Reformed Church has changed radically in recent years. No longer is the one-Minister-one-congregation a norm. A Minister may be the only ordained or commissioned Minister in a group or one of several, whether that Minister is serving in a stipendiary or non-stipendiary capacity. A Special Category post may be part scoped and linked with a part time pastorate – which may be a single congregation or a group. A part-time post may be supplemented with a secular job. It is intended that the ministerial review should be a support for all the patterns of ministry that exist. It is important that the review takes into account the entirety of the ministerial task and its several parts.
25. Following from the objectives of the pastorate will be a written role description incorporating key responsibilities and objectives for the Minister. Regardless of the number of constituent parts in any one appointment, each Minister will have only one role description which integrates all aspects of their specific ministry. The role description should: a) relate to the descriptions of the Ministry of Word and Sacraments and Church Related Community Work in the Basis of Union (paragraphs 21 and 22) as well as being post specific; b) recognise that the ministry and mission of a pastorate is collaborative and therefore it should contain a description of the individual responsibilities of the Minister as but a part of the responsibilities of the whole church.
26. For those moving into a new pastorate, these lists could be agreed prior to the Induction in the same manner and at the same time as Terms of Settlement.
27. Ministers in posts not involving pastoral responsibility for a church and congregation should use or agree a job description drawn up with the body which appointed them.
28. The lists of key responsibilities and objectives for the Minister and the pastorate would then become the basis on which to build the exercise of review.
The procedure for Taking Stock
29. The scheme would operate biennially as does the present scheme. The Synod would appoint an Appraisal Partner to work with the Minister and a Pastorate (or Post) Partner to work with representatives of the pastorate (or post).
30. Each review would begin with a consideration of the agreed key responsibilities and objectives and the extent to which, through the collaborative efforts of Minister and pastorate, they have been accomplished. This exercise would centre on conversations with Elders and others with key responsibilities within the pastorate, such as the Local Management Committee in the case of a CRCW. It might involve various informal consultations but thoughts would need to be gathered together at a meeting. This meeting should include the Minister, the Appraisal Partner and the Pastorate Partner, who would normally chair the discussion.
31. Following that meeting, the Minister would carry out a process of accompanied self-appraisal with the Appraisal Partner, using an amended version of the Taking Stock booklet. The Minister would prepare a confidential personal reflection on the key responsibilities and objectives for the Appraisal Partner to see in advance of their discussion.
32. The pastorate meanwhile would have a further meeting, without the Minister but with the Pastorate Partner, to reflect on the issues raised in the first meeting. The Pastorate Partner would normally chair this meeting.
33. The review would end with a final meeting between Minister and Elders and any other relevant colleagues to (a) set the key objectives and responsibilities for the pastorate for the next two years; (b) agree any changes to the Minister’s key objectives and responsibilities; and (c) agree any proposed changes to the Terms of Settlement to recommend to the District Council. The Pastorate Partner would normally chair this meeting. The intention would be to find agreed outcomes through prayerful working together and with no suggestion that the Elders have become the “line managers” of their Minister. The Minister would be free to invite his or her Appraisal Partner to attend if the Minister wished to do so, although the Appraisal Partner would need to be conscious of the confidential nature of the self-appraisal with the Minister.
34. After completion of the review, the Minister would contact the Synod Training Officer to talk about perceived training needs in the following two years. The Elders may also wish to contact the Training Officer about the training needs identified for others in the pastorate.
35. Where a pastorate involves more than one local church, the scheme will have to be adapted in ways appropriate to the relationship between the churches. In some pastorates the churches operate as a group with a clear group decision-making structure and with a recognised body capable of acting for the whole pastorate in a review.
36. In pastorates with several congregations that remain very independent, reviews in each place would need to be carried out within a time scale which allows for a coherent list of key objectives and responsibilities to be agreed by the Minister. Ideally the same person would act as Pastorate Partner in each church and would need to ensure that the aggregate of the expectations of the several congregations was reasonable.
37. In the intervening year between biennial reviews, the Minister and Elders should devote a meeting to an interim consideration of the key objectives and responsibilities.
Administration of the scheme
38. Although the scheme would become an obligatory part of ministerial service, there would still be a need for administration by the Synod. Appraisal Partners and Pastorate Partners would be nominated by the Synod and chosen with care: they would need to have shown an aptitude for careful listening and thoughtful interpretation of what they hear. Care would also have to be taken over the quality of the training and support they receive.
39. Ministers and pastorates would, as now, be offered the list of Partners and given a choice as to whom accompanies the review process.
40. Each Synod would appoint an Administrator for the scheme who would:
Introducing the Scheme
41. There are several reasons for introducing the scheme over a period rather than for every Minister at the same time. Synods have operated the existing Accompanied Self-Appraisal scheme in different ways and some could transition to the new scheme more easily than others. All Synods will need time to build up a team of high quality, trained Partners. And amongst our Ministers, some would welcome the opportunity to participate in a more comprehensive scheme as quickly as possible while others may not be so immediately confident of its value.
42. As a minimum it is suggested that, from a date set by the Church, the new scheme should become a standard part of the Terms of Settlement for every new pastorate or post. Therefore from that date newly ordained Ministers would all have reviews as a normal part of their service and existing ministers would join the scheme at their next move. Where Synods have the capacity, they might offer participation in the scheme on a voluntary basis to other Ministers prior to a move.
43. Well before the launch date, the Ministries Committee would make available a revised version of the guidance booklet Taking Stock. The Committee would also consider what help could be provided from the central offices to shape the training of Appraisal Partners and Pastorate Partners and in the drawing up of role descriptions, key responsibilities and objectives.
44. A decision to make review an obligatory part of ministerial service raises the question of what sanctions would apply if a Minister refused to participate. Clearly the hope would be that Ministers would see the advantages of the scheme and share the view of many lay people in the Church that a well-conducted review can be very beneficial to fulfilling a vocation as well as affirming personally. As review would become the major route by which training needs are identified, Ministers who had not participated might well find Synods reluctant to fund EM3 courses for them. In the last resort, however, the Church would be entitled to regard refusal to participate as a disciplinary offence.
A Final Word on Flexibility
45. The United Reformed Church is expressed in many different ways in different local settings. A scheme such as described here cannot fit every situation perfectly and would need intelligent adaptation so that the principles were honoured in ways that made sense locally.
46. In particular, there are local URC congregations, Local Ecumenical Partnerships and posts that are already working with objectives and used reviewing them regularly. There are also some Ministers of Word and Sacraments, and especially our Church Related Community Workers, already committed to regular review. Their pastorates and posts might migrate easily to the new Taking Stock scheme, but Synods would want to ensure that Taking Stock is dovetailed in with any other continuing systems of review and adapted accordingly. A clear objective should be that the same person should not be subject to a multiplicity of overlapping reviews from different directions.
47. The pattern of District visitations to congregations also varies from one part of the Church to another. The same principle of avoiding duplication should apply. Where those matters that visitations cover could be incorporated efficiently in a biennial review under this scheme, and without losing the focus of the review, there is little value in mounting a separate exercise.
|