The Guide contains how-to-do-it advice on starting, developing and sustaining fresh expressions of church based on shared experiences.
More about The Guide
The Guide contains how-to-do-it advice on starting, developing and sustaining fresh expressions of church based on shared experiences.
More about The Guide
Posted by Andrew Wooding on 13 July 2010
A recent series of blog posts by Kester Brewin (Has What Emerged Retreated?) wonders whether the radical church engagements with contemporary British culture in the 1980s and 1990s are now being institutionalised. For Kester, pioneer ordination may be a contradiction in terms for those Christians leading a creative revival.
Kester's point is well made but is in danger of making institution per se the bugbear. With all its faults, frustrations, bureaucracies and sheer awkwardness of diversity, church simply has to offer a deep connectivity between the old and the new, the creative and the inherited. Pioneers cannot afford to 'go it alone' without defeating the essence of what church is. Inherited patterns of church cannot afford to ignore the vast gulf between the worshipping community and society without failing the vocation of the church.
My contention, though, is that a far more radical reappraisal of pioneer ministry is required. Jonny Baker has reflected on the approach to training that CMS are offering through their own pioneer stream. Jonny observes that many institutions are providing a pioneer package that is essentially 'priest-plus': the existing ordination route with an added 'mission' extra. The CMS pattern, by contrast, is learning 'on-the-job'. My own experience, too, has been, as with many other pioneers, a 'mixed mode' package of ministry and reflection. Yet, even here, the question repeatedly arises of: 'What extra do we need to give you that supports your pioneer track?'
The truly innovative step would be to offer training that is wholly related to the context of mission. A retired colleague in the world of Christian-Muslim relations attempted to re-order the syllabus for an Anglican theological college some 20 years ago. His ambition was to ensure that whenever students were taught doctrine, church history, liturgy, homiletics, hermeneutics et al, ordinands were asked: 'Now what does this mean for the church as it engages Islam?'
Naturally, this failed ambition was a consequence of his desire to raise the profile of Christian-Muslim relations. We could equally replace Christian-Muslim relations with 'youth' or 'young professionals' or 'sink-estate families'. The proposal reveals a profounder principle of the relational and missional nature of the Christian faith, though. Surely, all ordinands need to learn in a cycle of action-reflection, without compromising the benefits for some of concentrated academic study. Surely, all ordinands need to root their appreciation of church history, for example, in the contemporary relevance of what is to be retrieved from the past. How can the standard offerings of ordination training not be related to missional contexts?
Pioneer ordination is a wonderfully permission-giving step forward for the Church of England. Paradoxically, I would like to assert that it is neither institutional enough, nor radical enough. The motifs of diversity in unity that should characterise the church mean for me that CMS's exciting proposal is as second-best as the current pioneer track offered by dioceses.
The best, surely, is a situation where there is a root-and-branch reappraisal of all ordination training practices. I cannot think of any contemporary church context that does not demand a 'missionary theology', and I would suggest that it is a missionary theology that serves the story of which we are a part. That missionary theology will also be attentive to those parts of the body that will struggle with change and even be dying.
The laudable but incomplete enterprise of pioneer ordination seems to suggest that there is a 'core' learning required for church ministry with 'added extras' for those entrepreneurial specialists. The answer is not to argue for pioneers to be unsullied by the contamination of the institution but to reframe the entirety of the institution around the demands of contemporary mission.
Richard J Sudworth, Pioneer Curate in Muslim-Majority Birmingham.
If you would like to comment on this blog entry, go to 'Comments' at this bottom of this page.
If you have something burning to say and want to contribute to the Share weekly guest blog, please contact Karen Carter. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and are not necessarily shared by the Church of England, the Methodist Church, the United Reformed Church, Church Army, Fresh Expressions or any of its partners.
Comments
Priest plus? Hmmmmmm
Posted by Pam Smith on 19 July 2010 - 15:55
I think I was fortunate in training for ordination before the pioneer track had been invented. I did a standard theological college training and a standard urban parish curacy while at the same time pursuing an interest in online ministry and in fresh expressions which all came together in my current role as a 'web pastor'.
Undoubtedly training has to adapt to the needs of the churches that are sponsoring it but one thing that does sometimes alarm me is an expectation that training should somehow input every bit of information and every skill that will be subsequently required. (It's not just pioneers who expect this.) Whereas of course it can be completely unpredictable what contexts people will end up in.
It has also bothered me when talking to some (not all) pioneer ordinands they have not been too sure why they need to be ordained. Far from seeing OPM as 'priest plus' they seem to be seeing priesthood as 'pioneer leadership plus.'
This view presupposes that the pioneering is somehow separate from the priesthood - but if you are called to pioneering as a priest the two things need to be integrated.
I'm often asked why I need to be ordained to run an online community - this seems to echo a functional view of priesthood that is also present in the idea that priesthood is a 'bolt on' that you need to make your fresh expression a 'proper church.'
If we are really, seriously still training *anyone* to go into 'maintenance mode' leadership at the end of their training then they are going to have to start learning about pioneering ministry on the hoof because God can call anyone to pioneering just as he can call anyone to ordination.
Indeed
Posted by Andy Campbell on 15 July 2010 - 16:59
Excellent and (in my view) balanced and informed.
As a current student of 'the system', training towards OPM status, I have to say that I have had many conversations with others in a similar position who have expressed disappointment and dissatisfaction with the training we presently receive. This is mediated slightly by the fact that the whole area of OPM is new, as indeed are many of the training courses, and so we should expect some significant teething problems.
But I do agree that there could and should be movement both ways. Those who are being trained for more traditional parochial roles have commented that they have received little explicit missional training; OPM candidates that the more general training does not connect well with the mission field as they see it.
And this is all complicated by the reality that hardly anyone has a clear idea of what an OPM really looks like, nor even what 'counts' as a Fresh Expression of / Emerging church. Where I study, some of the more 'traditional' church-planting models have been proffered as the above, and we have had little experience of more radical ideas.
It's not rocket science
Posted by John Drane on 13 July 2010 - 10:34
You are right of course - if we don't ask useful questions (of the Bible, church history, philosophy of religion ...) then we don't get any useful answers. From what I can see, we mostly only know how to ask historical/exegetical/doctrinal type questions, not missional questions. So no surprise then that we don't find any missional answers. The problem isn't with the tradition, it's with theological educators who tend to have a limited toolbox when it comes to anything connected to mission or cultural change. And many of them really haven't a clue how to change any of that, so it's easier just to sit tight and hope it will all go away (or stay the same long enough for them to get their pensions). Am I cynical? Yes, but sadly my cynicism is borne out of experience and some recent conversations with these very people.
Posted by David Beales on 16 July 2010 - 19:12
So let's get the training into the mission field itself, where the missional questions emerge on a daily basis. Then we look to the Bible, church history, etc to engage in a dialogue about the questions we face and seek some guidance. There's nothing like a series of burning questions direct from the missionary encounters to motivate the serious pursuit of theology.
Posted by Andrew Wooding on 19 July 2010 - 09:07
Great idea! Sounds like the ideal way to train pioneers. Well, it already exists...
This is how Church Army trains pioneers in the Church of England:
http://www.churcharmy.org.uk/pub/action/training/Mission-based_Training....
I'm probably biased, but I thoroughly recommend all people who see themselves as pioneers in the Church of England to consider this form of training.
Andrew