Thanks for the comment about ‘quiet ministers’ – I’m one! Glad to hear also that your theme preaching worked well. I had mixed experiences of it in my last circuit. In an LEP where the Anglican and Methodist ministers planned it together with the Readers, it usually worked quite well. In a ‘normal’ circuit church where we planned the series locally and then assigned particular themes to visiting Local Preachers, it worked less well. I suppose there was less ownership of the vision that way. That church then asked for a continuation of themed preaching, but solely by me, or at least not by ‘outside’ preachers.

Theme preaching is quite possible, using whoever is planned, regardless of whether they were minister, LPs or from other denominations. We have just had a successful series on ‘What is God saying to you?’ When the Plan came out, each preacher was contacted and asked if they were willing to preach on this theme and given the question that would fall to them in due course. It worked very well.

Yes, there is ‘too much room for sin’ in the current invitation system. I’ve heard too many horror stories about what goes on at the Stationing meetings. Even if you have a good relationship with your District Chair, you’re very vulnerable. Heaven help you if you don’t have a good relationship with her or him.

I think you make excellent suggestions about the invitation system, and I agree with you that team preaching is possible. It’s just that the culture of the system militates against it.

Handful of thoughts:
- I agree that 5 years is daft. Somne of us have been arguing for ages that we need to dump this system. The usual defence is that it does provide a face-saving exit for both sides if things aren’t working. Not good enough. It can disable long-term planning and vision, it can focus too much on the negative (we want a change because we don’t like…) rather than the positive. It seems to me that the current stationing system is a bigger sacred cow, and one in more need of the abbatoir. A wise old Anglican colleague once said “It gives too much room for sin…” I know what he meant.

Beware though of the grass looking greener on the other side. Those of us chafing under the British Methodist system have looked longingly at other systems, but have often been told that Anglicans, URCs, etc look longingly at ours. Some systems are too biassed in favour of the clergy, others too much in favour of the churches. Ours (allegedly!) has the best compromise. Hmmm.

The biggest issue is the default that we move after 5 years, unless a positive decision is made to stay. I have to win my reinvitation. If the default was to stay, say for the first 10 with a review built in at 5 or 7, so that it needed a positive decision to leave before 10 years, that might be more useful. After 10, it would need a positive decision to stay. That would build in a bias to longer more fruitful ministry, but not make it permanent.

Continuity of preaching can be achieved. Team preaching, theme preaching, arranging the plan to allow a focus as appropriate – it can be done. It just requires people prepared and able to make it work.

A segue – thanks! Next up, two in a row from Van Morrison …

Will, FP,

I think you’re both raising the important point of pastoral continuity. I agree entirely that this is a substantial part of the issue. Local Preachers can certainly be used within a framework of continuity of preaching. We don’t need to despise the ministry of LPs.

But the circuit system as practised here is a problem. It is a sacred cow that needs a visit to the abbatoir. While it has many benefits in fellowship and support (I don’t know what I would have done sometimes as a minister without a regular circuit staff meeting), it disrupts continuity. Those in traditions outside Methodism look at us and despair at that disruption.

It is exacerbated by at least two problems, in my opinion. One is that the decline in the number of congregations has been slower percentage-wise than the decline in the number of worshippers. Mathematically, that leads to ministers chasing around several small churches, rather than having one large church. Suggest mergers and try to escape with your life!

But that is linked to the second issue, which I’ve blogged about before, and that is the doctrine of presbyteral ministry. We still have a Constantinian Christendom mindset that what everyone needs is a pastor who will administer the sacraments. It’s not fit for a missionary situation. I hope to explore this more during my sabbatical next year.

I sometimes think that the problem here is exacerbated by the circuit system in which a minister is never at her church but once or twice a month. That doesn’t give much time to get to know the people and makes near impossible preaching on topics/themes one would like to keep in front of the congregations. I realise I am in part treading on the sacred cow of British Methodism local preaching, but my friends who have turned around churches in the US have done so because they are with their churches week in and week out.

Of course, I may be trying to answer the wrong question! I am willing to listen!