I'm at the annual gathering of the Scottish Episcopal Church Bloggers. Actually, it's the General Synod of the Scottish Episcopal Church, but it seems that just about all of the clergy bloggersare here, tweeting, blogging, texting and whatever. We've just been asked to keep the noise of our keyboard clicking down. I feel persecuted.
Two days or so in my old stomping ground of Haymarket in Edinburgh and the opportunity to catch up with old friends will also help to make it a worthwhile trip. I've just met Rev Dr Maurice Ellott, former verger at P's & G's in Edinburgh when I was there in the '80's, and now principal of the Church of Ireland Theological College in Dublin.
The gender audit will reveals that not enough women are getting to lead the Church. Apparently we need to stop stereotyping women as secretaries and men as treasurers at local level (I'm excited that during my time at St Silas' we've had more male secretaries than female and more female treasurers than male, therefore we break the mould. We've also always had a lot of very gifted women in leadership positions). The big issue will be the 'glass ceiling', where it's felt that there aren't enough women in senior clergy positions. I guess that there will be some kind of call towards positive discrimination. I understand the frustration if people feel that their gifts aren't being used, but then a lot of the blokes in ordained ministry can feel that too. Maybe we get too wrapped up in our rights or what we believe we should be doing, when we forget what a privilege it is to be called to any ministry. It ain't a job and it certainly isn't a career (and I worry about anyone who is in it looking for advancement, whether they are male or female). I'm concerned that we need an age audit and some solid attempt to get younger people to consider giving the whole of their lives in ordained service. We need a policy of getting 'the ungifted, shifted' (whether they are male or female) and then we need to ensure that the people with the gifts (whether they are male or female) are called and equipped to get the job done. 'Nuff said. Oh, and a wee bit of humility all round doesn't go amiss.
My position on all this can be summed up as follows:
We have different gifts, according to the grace given to each of us. If your gift is prophesying, then prophesy in accordance with your faith; if it is serving, then serve; if it is teaching, then teach; if it is to encourage, then give encouragement; if it is giving, then give generously; if it is to lead, do it diligently; if it is to show mercy, do it cheerfully.
Or, to put it another way:
If you preach, just preach God's Message, nothing else; if you help, just help, don't take over; if you teach, stick to your teaching; if you give encouraging guidance, be careful that you don't get bossy; if you're put in charge, don't manipulate; if you're called to give aid to people in distress, keep your eyes open and be quick to respond; if you work with the disadvantaged, don't let yourself get irritated with them or depressed by them. Keep a smile on your face.
I don't see any tweets by you on the #pisky# hashtag! Are you preferring #schismaticevangelicals# or something instead? ;-)
It's encouraging that you're pro-women bishops, but didn't you used to be opposed to them? What changed? It's a bit....odd...that Damascene conversions on this issue are considered unremarkable (and often - in others - explicitly couched in 'well, we need to appeal to today's women to fill the pews' terms) but (alleged?) 2,000 years of Church Homophobia is deemed to be Infallible Revelation of the Holy Spirit that mere mortals can't change, even if they wanted to. How does that work?
Are you speaking on the covenant? Hope you don't get heckled (much!) ;-)
Posted by: ryan | 10 June 2010 at 01:50 PM
'We need a policy of getting 'the ungifted, shifted'
Perhaps in this you could lead by example.
Posted by: Jimmy | 10 June 2010 at 11:59 PM
Jimmy,
Do you mean shifting me, or me shifting others?
Posted by: GadgetVicar | 11 June 2010 at 09:25 AM
You're a brilliant priest Fr.Gadgetvicar! The problem in churches (certainly st.silas) is all the .....worldy...types who think protestantism means that they should be allowed to excommunicate those they don't like(!)
Posted by: ryan | 11 June 2010 at 09:44 AM
Just haphazardly trying to point out the pitfalls of an idea that would quickly degenerate into the personal prejudices of those 'entrusted' with the decision making.
One man's 'ungifted' can be another man's 'rock'
Posted by: Jimmy | 11 June 2010 at 10:27 AM
I do think we need to be sensitive and caring, but we also need to be clear and give a good lead. When people are in the wrong jobs or not using their gifts, it causes a lot of frustration and pain. Isn't that one of the things we learn in the Romans 12 passage? I do get your point though.
Posted by: GadgetVicar | 11 June 2010 at 10:33 AM
"2,000 years of Church Homophobia is deemed to be Infallible Revelation of the Holy Spirit that mere mortals can't change, even if they wanted to. How does that work?"
Yes, that always strikes me as odd. If you are going to remain consistent, you should at least follow Paul's example and don't allow women to teach in church or hold authority over men. Yet, somehow, women are allowed into leadership roles, but gays aren't
Paul had a bit of a problem with women.
I think on the subject of "giftedness" the church often holds people who *think* they are cured, gifted, prophetic etc in too high esteem. I remember a friend that I brought along to a st silas weekend at Lendrick muir commenting "church is the only place where being a radge junkie seems to get you held in high regard. Am I the only one who can see this? Am I on crazy pills?" At the time, I thought that was a bit strong, but looking back, I think he had a point. Too many christians think they and other christians are in a better place than they actually are. This can cause problems, especially when you have folk who have not conquered their own demons "pastoring" to others. I'm not saying that everyone should be "perfect", but a dose of reality is needed.
I noticed a figure that only one third of the "church" is male. I'd be interested in knowing if that is a faith thing (less male believers?) or if the church just doesn't appeal to male christians. I know a few guys who have commented on the fact that they feel emasculated at places like st silas (I hope you take that in a positive way and not just as me having a go. It is based on the testimonies of others (and to a part my own). It's up to you whether you want to take that on board of course)
Posted by: Billy | 11 June 2010 at 11:49 AM
Can you enlighten me? What does gender have to do with it?
God calls, we follow. Sometimes for a lifetime, sometimes for a season, sometimes for a one off event. If we did it once well but can't do it again, it doesn't make us ungifted, it means our time is past.
All the best leaders (David, Abraham, Moses) had periods where they stuffed up and sucked as leaders. God still chose them. God still wanted them in leadership.
I'm seriously expecting there to be comment on 'performance related pay' for the clergy any minute - based on membership? attendence? those who stay to the end of the sermon? (with the spectre of preaching the popular message ever looming - please don't ever do that) - although I suspect we're not far off it with the idea of 10 x 10% tithing... Those who approve cough up.
Sigh. Why *does* the church spend time doing gender audits and the like? Is it another legal hoop through which all employers must jump? Anyone asked God to do one?
Posted by: Jen | 16 June 2010 at 01:51 AM
>>>I'm seriously expecting there to be comment on 'performance related pay' for the clergy any minute - based on membership? attendence? those who stay to the end of the sermon
Most pisky sermons are but 12 minutes (max!) so Fr.Gadgetvicar could rightly complain of discrimination if such a rule was brought in ;-)
Posted by: ryan | 16 June 2010 at 10:29 AM
>>>Can you enlighten me? What does gender have to do with it?
Well, the SEC is at least nominally concerned with being inclusive, hence the gender audit. The idea that gender isn't of concern seems to conflict with Driscoll-esque evangelical Christianity (he railed against the 'chickification' of Christianity, demonstrating his customary theological nuance and way with words)). It might seem depressingly worldly to have legal hoops for clergy, but plainly clergy should have the same rights and protection against bullying as secular employeess.
Posted by: ryan | 16 June 2010 at 02:48 PM