Another thought-provoking post Michael, thanks.

I met a guy a couple of weeks ago who is being sent to college next year by his church, with the intention of returning to serve at the same church. Is that typical or atypical of the sending process?

Steve
it wouldn't be typical.
his intention (& that of church) would not be determinative of his posting if he is a candidate.
it may be that part time Moore opens the door to more people being recruited from within churches to return, in a non-ordained capacity

I was told by some students at Anglican Youthworks College that they had specifically decided to go to AYC over Moore College because AYC actively encourages them to do the practical part of their training in ministry at their home church.

I'm not sure if that's a misperception of MTC's training policy or not.

Are these policy or culture issues?

I realise there's some kind of policy about not returning to your home church if you're a candidate.

But is there anything stopping MTC grads from being a long term assistant minister if they would like to be? Even creatively negotiating a housing allowance and buying into the suburb?

Over at my blog, Chris Little said:

Why not make students move, MK?

That’s the time of learning heaps, and (IMO) many of us start formal theological education with wide ideas but narrow experience. I reckon the wider experience helps heaps.

Yes, the rationale has been more placements give wider experience.
That comes at a cost though - students can't form great relationships in Sunday only student positions, and by the time they start to, they need to move again.
If the system were more flexible, then some students could continue at their home church and keep ministering to those they are in relaitonship with. They'd also be much better placed to recruit the next generation of gospel workers and sell the vision of training to the sending church. Instead sending churches say goodbye to their students and they are parachuted into a strange new place. IMO having one less major change at the time you start college (ie church) would make for a better student experience.

Jeremy

I'm not sure if that's a misperception of MTC's training policy or not.

Maybe someone from MT&D;, MTC or Youthworks could clarify the policy here.
From what you say, the perception is affecting decisions.

But is there anything stopping MTC grads from being a long term assistant minister if they would like to be? Even creatively negotiating a housing allowance and buying into the suburb?

Not from my observation, except for real estate prices in many parts of Sydney.

Ben asked:

Are these policy or culture issues?

Good question. I think the policy helps create the culture.
Long term assistants do exist, and some do buy, but none have any kind of tenure.

but none have any kind of tenure.

I'm pretty ignorant about these things Michael, but am I right in thinking that assistants can sometimes feel a bit at the mercy of a change in rector?

This could be totally wrong: but is it true that ordained assistants (ie deacons) don't even have the basic IR protections that lay assistants have by law? e.g. unfair dismissal, redundancy etc etc ...

Ben
I'm not qualified to answer the legal questions you raise.
But a new rector does need to re-appoint the assistants within (I think) a 3 month period. So in that sense, they are at the mercy of a new rector. If he doesn't they'd need to find a new position.
I only raised it because people make long term decisions about housing partly on the basis of job security.

Thanks for your reply MIchael,
would a change in rector make the contract of a lay assistant void in the same way? or do ordained assistants have a unique kind of job insecurity?

Ben
we may be straying off topic here - I'll send you a pm

am I right in thinking that assistants can sometimes feel a bit at the mercy of a change in rector?

Basically right - to quote an old ad: 'One flick and their gone'!

Di

The other factor that needs to weighed up insofar as Anglican candidates is concerned is one's theology of ordination. Even in Sydney my understanding is that presbyters at least are being ordained with a view to ministry across a denomination and not just a particular congregation (although that ministry has to be carried out within a congregation). If this is the case, then those responsible for ordination clearly have an interest in seeing whether candidates are able to minister in a variety of settings outside the particular dynamics and idiosyncracies of their home church. Of course, this need must be balanced against other factors such as the wellbeing of the candidate and their family.....

Maybe an issue worth exploring is whether there are other ways in which 'flexibility' in ministry can be tested apart from shifting people around every year or two?

Moving does have its downside. We have been married 35 years and have lived in three Australian states and seven towns. Part of this was through being a school teacher and part was changing horses and going to theological college, into the ministry and then joining the RSL [the Returned School Teachers League ... boom, boom], but while it has been disruptive, we have also experienced the country and the city and several different sorts of churches [even an Anglican one].

Contrast this with folk who were born in Newcastle, did primary, secondary and tertiary study in Newcastle and were then desperate to stay in Newcastle when they went out teaching. I think they missed something. I also know they experienced something I've never experienced.

A few people have done remarkably staying in the one place. Did you know All Soul's was John Stott's home church? Fortunately his wonderful ministry extended beyond that part of London to almost every corner of the world.

At Moore College students have to have ministry positions approved by me. I am happy for some students to remain in their home churches the whole time at College. Many I encourage to move, because it is likely they will end up in a place like the one they came from, but the best way to understand that place is to have seen others.

Diocesan candidates have additional requirements that are applied to ensure the people the Diocese ordains can serve well in the Diocese. If you don't want that, you don't need to be ordained.

A bigger issue theologically is the role of the minister. I subscribe to the idea that they are, unless they be the ones who planted the church, more like the missionaries we see in Timothy, Titus and Paul. The long term pastors are the congregational leaders like Wardens.

I often refer to being in ministry like being part of the witness protection program - 14 houses so far and counting (my wife is at 17!)

One of the issues is that until recently there has been little thought to long term assistants.

Assistant ministers were "rectors in training" who helped out at a church until they became rectors themselves. The legacy of this culture is still with us, though the winds of change are blowing. My understanding is that the diocese may require deacons (like me) to have a breadth of ministry experience (ie serve at more than 1 church) before they are ordained as priests (I like the old-school term!).

Interestingly, most strong and growing churches (esp. non-Anglican) seem to have a more stable leadership team with longer tenure for 'rectors' and other ministry staff.

Talking to people in our area, some are reluctant to be involved in our church as they think, "what's the point? You'll only be here for 3 years and then we will have someone else." That is, they don't see that we are truly committed to the area.

It can be really hard to continually re-establish roots in your community and this is vital if you want to reach out to that community.

witness protection program

LOL
anyone beat 17?

There are pros and cons either way. I too have found moving around difficult(6 houses and 6 different churches in 11 years). You just get to know people and begin to make progress, and you have to start again.

However, the upside is I have learnt much about how different churches and people work. I have developed skills and intuition about analysing different situations, all of which have assisted my ability to serve.

Thanks for the topic Michael. An important one indeed.

Those interested in the topic might want to consult the last Synod report into the question of Assistant Ministers' tenure. It was received by Synod in 1998, and it led to amendments in the Assistant Ministers Ordinance in 2000 which created the new category of Senior Assistant Minister, with stronger and longer terms for tenure.

The report is here.

The Assistant Ministers Ordinance 1990 (as amended) is here.

What follows is this bush lawyer's reading of the ordinance...

Senior Assistant Ministers (SAMs) can be entitled up to 9 months worth of notice, and have the additional protection that Parish Council must be consulted by the Rector before notice can be given to a SAM.

Further, upon a new incumbency, and unlike with AMs, SAMs are not automatically on 90 days notice, and indeed cannot be given notice in that initial 3 month period.

Further the ordinance by agreement of SAM with Abp, Rector & PC, gives the possibility of another period of notice being agreed as the minimum required (not less than 3 months). Presumably this gives the option (if agreement can be obtained) of building in greater amounts of notice being required for SAMs, which would carry over into new incumbencies.

All this makes it worthwhile for a person eligible to be a SAM to ask to be licensed as an SAM.

I agree there should often be the option at least considered of students staying in a home church for part or all of college. Although as noted there are additional considerations in the case of ordination which implies portability across the diocese, and requires breadth of suitability.

But I think there is already considerable flexibility for Assistant Ministers to stay in one place. I graduated in 1993, and stayed for 5 years as an Assistant. One bloke from my year stayed for almost 15 years in one place as an Assistant, before becoming a rector. There are many other long term Assistants.

I would suspect one main (but not the only!) reason for Assistants having more than one position is to do with relational struggles between Rector and Assistant, or some other unhappiness with the position.

I think Parish Councils and Nominators could also take more initiative in this area by encouraging Rectors to look towards longer term Assistants where possible and by stipulating their desire to a potential new Rector that (without hamstringing a wise provision for the Senior Minister to appoint and let staff go), they do not want existing staff to be given notice lightly, and by seeking to negotiate agreements (or gentlemen's agreements as appropriate) for longer periods of notice for Assistants.

I guess I am saying there may already be more flexibility than we realise in the system to permit or encourage some of the changes Michael wants at least some of the time.

Hi Michael,

I think that you've raised some valid points, but I think that one of the benefits to forcing student ministers to leave their home church hasn't been discussed. Having done a year at Moore College, you become aware that a disproportionate percentage of theological students tend to come from big churches on the North Shore, the Shire, the Hills & Uni minstry. A side effect of your proposal would be to concentrate gospel workers in the areas where our penetration of the community is strongest, and keep them away from the areas where they're needed the most. The strong would get stronger, whilst the weak would struggle even more to find the ministry staff they require.

No system's perfect, but here's a good example of how the existing system can work well. A mate of mine was converted through a church with a large youth group. Having learnt leadership skills there, he moved to my church for work reasons. We're (by Sydney Anglican standards) large & wealthy, but our youth ministry isn't large, and he was invaluable in helping grow the youth ministry and train & disciple new leaders. He's now at theological college, and ministering at a small Anglican church in the inner-west, where he's starting their children's ministry.

If we want to see all parts of Sydney Diocese (let alone the rest of Australia & the world) get reached with the gospel, then people need to leave their comfort zones and go where they're most needed. I don't think your proposal would do this.

P.S. There was some method to the movement of clergy in the Armidale Diocese under the previous Bishop. New ministers would be sent to the smallest parishes first, and over time would be given larger and larger parishes to run. One aim was that by the time clergy had high-school aged children, they would be based in the larger towns, which tended to have the best high schools. I suspect that he hoped that this policy would reduce the potential for his most experienced clergy to be poached by Sydney.

Sandy
thanks for clarifying the tenure question.
I guess you'd need to also consider the difference between law and custom. It would be a brave rector who would come in and put off an assistant who was keen to stay.

Roger,
I wasn't having a go at Armidale Diocese - just a recollection of a conversation on a college mission, and memories of growing up in the bush myself. The same situation exists here.

I don't think I like Archie's idea of ministers being like "the missionaries we see in Timothy, Titus and Paul." and "The long term pastors are the congregational leaders like Wardens." For a start, the kind of long term pastors he describes are often the "patriarchs" who resist all change in a parish and are often the thorn in the side of the minister. Lyle Schaller's research in the US across many denominations suggests that you don't get the best from your minister until after his 5th year in a church and while he acknowledges the need for special short term pastorates, he encourages the long term.
Personally, I think there is value in a couple of short term assistant positions although it does not really prepare you for what often then follows, namely being on your own in a small parish. The differences in being part of a team, even if it is only two, in a parish which is big enough to afford one, compared to being on your own in a small perhaps struggling parish, is something for which we simply do not prepare men. But that is probably another topic.

Roger you say:

a disproportionate percentage of theological students tend to come from big churches on the North Shore, the Shire, the Hills & Uni minstry. A side effect of your proposal would be to concentrate gospel workers in the areas where our penetration of the community is strongest, and keep them away from the areas where they're needed the most. The strong would get stronger, whilst the weak would struggle even more to find the ministry staff they require.

This is an important point - and one I want to take up in a future post. I'd argue pretty strongly that the disproportionate representation of some churches is something to give thanks for. That we have some churches so committed to identifying, recruiting, and training the next generation of gospel workers does (with time) lead to people being sent to lead other churches and ministries.
I was at Carlingford for 7 years. The MTSers that were trained while I was there are now going out into world mission, western suburbs church planting, presbyterian ministry etc.
There is more to be done (& more to write) on this subject.

Would my proposal mean that strong gets stronger at expense of weaker? I don't think so. I think it would strengthen the weaker by having staff who were around longer. They may struggle to get students (although people would be free not to stay at their home church - I'm just arguing for flexibility at this point).

I don't think I like Archie's idea of ministers being like "the missionaries we see in Timothy, Titus and Paul." and "The long term pastors are the congregational leaders like Wardens."

Archie,
would you like to write this idea up in one of your future posts?
It seems like a really important idea, but one that probably challenges how most people would understand the role of minister & warden.
What do you say?

Barry, Schaller's conclusions need to be examined. "get the best out of" needs to be defined. At least two dynamics come into play.

1. There are phases of ministry that change over time. For example, the early days bring excitement, and sometimes change that while the implications haven't been thought out, sets the congregation on a growth spurt.

2. It depends on the person and the congregation. Five years lets you know how thongs work, and so you can take those positive to you along with you, but it can also be a a time where stagnation sets in, not to mention the dissaffected congregation members withdrawing from ministry.

(I write this as someone who was grateful for every minute of the 20 years I spent ministering in one congregation, and didn't want to leave those I loved so much.)

My comment on missionaries is that there is the danger in longevity that both minister and congregation expect our ministers to do the ministry, rather than help us all engage in what God has for us to do.

Hi Michael,

I think it's great that you are raising the issue of the importance of putting down ministry roots. For most of us 'ministry professionals' I believe that a long term ministry is the goal, however it isn't necessarily always the best thing for the growth of the kingdom.

I think that sometimes people stay too long - especially Rectors. Especially in smaller churches without assistant ministers the senior minister needs to carefully consider whether staying more than (say) ten years might not be detrimental to the church. Often what may be needed is a younger person (at a different stage of life) to move the church the next stage in its journey. But try suggesting to someone with kids in high school that they need to move .

The need for flexibility is another reason that I think we ought to discourage younger ministers (ie. under 50) from buying their own home. (Of course the main reason is the long term opportunity cost to a parish of paying a housing benefit to the minister rather than buying the house themselves.)

With regard to moving too often, I had the experience of four churches (and more homes) over 10 years (including MTS). Unfortunately this did make it hard to 'put down ministry roots' and to really be committed to one thing. I think the key is to have people move BEFORE college - perhaps to do MTS - then if there is any fruit in their ministry they can remain where they are and continue to work at it while they get the training they need.

Archie, I wonder whether you have read Schaller's books. If not can I recommend them. His comments about the 5 year turn around have certainly been true in the three parishes where i have served over that time. He actually deals with some of the issues you raise. Not only does it take five years to come to understand a particular parish and develop the relationships with the people but it takes those five years for the most disaffected, and there will always be some who don't like the new rector's approach, to leave, and sufficient new people who are more supportive and have joined during his ministry, to form the support base he needs. Schaller discovered that there is a period of disallusionment around five years where things have not progressed as expected and often this is when a man is offered a move. It is tempting but things are just about to get better. This particular pattern has been pretty close to the five years in all three of my ministries. It does depend on the person and the parish of course but I suspect that those who have stayed in a parish around 8 to 10 years can probably look back and see that pattern.

Thanks Barry, I have read Schaller (although he is so prolific there may be ones to which you refer that I haven't read)and like much of what he says.

I tell our students that they need to be willing to be in a place for the rest of their lives, although there are good reasons not to be so, so I am with you on longevity.....but I still want to warn of the dangers of thinking the professional we employ does the ministry. This can either be overcome of worsened by longevity.

@Archie, whilst I agree with the general principle you espouse concerning the role of the minister and that of the local leadership (elders) I don't think it is right to think of wardens in the Anglican system as elders. Wardens have reponsibility for property and money, subject to the policies set by the Parish Council. The only 'eldership' function they have is to report false doctrine or disgraceful conduct on the part of the minister to the bishop, and even in this matter they report only, they do not make determinations as to whether the minister is in fact guilty of false teaching. Wardens may be men or women, and 2 of them are elected.

In the Anglican system there is no formal way of recognising the 'elders' of that parish. For this reason, some parishes (Kurrajong, Lower Blue Mountains) set up an eldership. Other churches regard the Bible Study leaders and lay preachers/evangelists as the eldership. Sandy Grant successfully saw Synod 2 years ago pass a motion to investigate this issue, which I think is helpful.

Now to the subject at hand. I have to say that the current system has become too inflexible, in my view. It is assumed that more appointments to different churches in the training years equals ministers more capable of serving anywhere. I am unconvinced; it is true in some cases but not others. We need a less bureaucratic and more flexible approach to the training and placement of ministers, in my opinion.

For this reason, some parishes (Kurrajong, Lower Blue Mountains) set up an eldership.

Just to clarify, the Lower Mountains Anglican Parish does not have a formal elder system anymore (although we have, and encourage, lots of lay ministry!!). We do have Congregational Leadership Teams that are selected by the Minister of the congregation to help serve and direct the life of each congregation.

We're probably getting off the original topic here, but just to clarify further, I didn't get a resolution passed, but asked a question. From the record of questions asked at the 2006 Synod...

14. Local lay eldership

The Rev Canon Sandy Grant asked -

In light of -
(a) Policy 4 of the Diocesan Mission invoking reform of our customs and ordinances, and
(b) developments in the way men are ordained to the presbyterate in our diocese, and
(c) the observation that the New Testament consistently seems to envisage plurality of local eldership in oversight of local churches,

what advice can the Archbishop give regarding legitimate and wise ways for Anglican rectors and parishes to explore the appointment of a plural local lay eldership alongside the ordained Anglican presbyter in a parish?

To which the President replied -

The question raises important issues which I will refer to the Mission Board. My own initial view is that the natural giftedness and maturity of certain members of congregations can be recognised and encouraged without formal appointments other than those already incorporated in our structure.

I am willing to supply info about how - informally within Anglican polity - an Anglican Presbyter might voluntarily share his eldership responsibilities with suitable and godly laymen if anyone cares to PM me.

I can't be the only one who giggled when Archie wrote:

"2. It depends on the person and the congregation. Five years lets you know how thongs work, and so you can take those positive to you along with you"


ps. I'm an Assistant Minister (well, Stipendiary Lay Worker in a 2IC role) who informed the Rector during the interviewing process that he intended to put down roots in whatever church he ended up in. Although we've only been here two and half years, I have already put in a veggie patch. (Although the Wardens refused to let me claim it against my MEA!)

Great article Michael - I hope this issue continues to attract this kind of discussion.

Regarding Archie's point about ordained ministers in the Sydney diocese being less like church elders, and more like Paul, Titus and Timothy – teachers who periodically travelled between churches: I reckon that of all the things these guys model to us about ministry, it seems a bit odd that this is one we would copy.

Firstly, these guys were going to churches who lacked teachers (or were pioneer missionaries in themselves) – it’s not as though this is the case in the Sydney diocese.
Secondly, these guys were either apostles or mentored by an apostle, making them a pretty scant resource – of course you would share them around the churches.
Thirdly, because of point two, they had their own natural authority. A new rector or assistant minister in the Sydney diocese often needs years to be afforded the kind of authority these guys would have naturally had when they walked into a room (except, perhaps, if Paul walked into a church gathering at Corinth!).

Also, can anyone here point to any evidence of a diocese/denomination who has achieved growth with a structure the same as ours? Or – more pointedly – could anyone even point to a church which has achieved growth (greater than just population growth) with a new senior minister every five or so years?

Howdy Folks,

Long time lurker, first or second time poster, etc etc. FWIW, I've just been through a pretty long process of thinking this stuff through, and despite much temptation and some advice I've recieved to move on (to 'bigger and better'), we've decided to put down roots here in the 'backwater' of Helensburgh.

Even though its been v fruitful here in 1st 3 1/2 yrs, I can see clearly that the 'traction' I've got in town and within congregation is just beginning. So although at some levels the temptation of something new and fresh is very real (almost overwhelming at times!), we're staying put. Trying to buy a house at the moment (c'mon bank!).

BTW I've heard Archies line via Phillip J, and am not convinced (as noted above: weaknesses of seeing wardens this way, etc etc). Is there a danger its simply or partly a concession to our predisposition to move on (I think the ave is 7 yrs for rectors?).

Anyrate, main thing I was going to say was that if anyone wanted to get my no doubt feeble outline of the decision to lock in, they're welcome to call.

Gary.

ps: writing must've been on wall: vegie garden went in in the first year!

Only time for a quick response -
Gary - thanks for the post - great to have your comments
It'd be worth coming back to the idea of ministers as missionaries - maybe Philip or Archie would point us to something or write something up for as later.
For me, whatever your take is on that - the issue which is still raised is should ministers stay longer?
The answer is - it depends. I think it is a wisdom call.
The problem is - our structures work against the wisdom of someone staying long term. Yes, they are more flexible than they were (as Sandy notes). But the general pattern is still one of move, move, move again.
So Gary & Tom - great to hear aobut the vege patches. Hope the putting down of roots bears great ministry fruit.
And let me repeat Tom's challenging question - which is a great one:

Also, can anyone here point to any evidence of a diocese/denomination who has achieved growth with a structure the same as ours? Or – more pointedly – could anyone even point to a church which has achieved growth (greater than just population growth) with a new senior minister every five or so years?

So I am coming to the end of my 7th year at NCACHURCH. This was the position I took straight from College in 2003 and I have lived in the same house now for 7 years. I can think of only one person who has been at the church they went to straight out of college for longer than me. I could be wrong.
I have become an SAM but in the end, the only benefit of that for me is that were Rick a new Senior Minister to be appointed he could not get rid of me easily! LOL.
I agree with many of the things said, but most of all I want to say,
(1) it took 5 years for those who did not like what we were doing at Cammeray to move on.
(2) it took 5 years to gain traction in the community
(3) it took 6 years before we really started to face opposition
(4) it too 2 years for us to plant a vege patch

So now, we are looking forward to the next (?) years.
Bring it on!

I have friends that find it hard to keep moving as assistant ministers and that's been made clear already. But I don't think anyone's commented from a "general" member of the congregation.

I don't see our wardens as head of my church. I see the 2 wonderful pastors who lead my church as the head. I would be devastated if either of them left.

Somewhat sinfully, I find it hard when people come for 2 years from Moore College. By the time you feel like you've gotten to know them, they leave.

Mark! You have tricked me by going from SLW to R in the same Parish!! I did not check Rs in my count!! Well, I can still think of one other who remains an AM or SAM. Perhaps there are more. Perhaps we should all get together for coffee!!