Memorials to the Conference - Methodist Conference

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Memorials to the Conference therefore contained within the resolutions of the Conference relating to these reports. M5 Ecumenical relationships in ministerial training Wesley’s Chapel works extremely closely with other churches and is totally committed to the ecumenical agenda. The City Road (35/1) Circuit Meeting (Present: 23; Voting: unanimous) regrets, therefore, the decision of the Plymouth Conference to end ministerial training in Durham and Cambridge and to withdraw from the mature ecumenical arrangements in these places. We find it difficult to explain these decisions to our brothers and sisters in the other churches we work with. Therefore, we urge the Conference: a) to furnish the Methodist people with an explanation of the discussions which took place with our ecumenical partners in Durham and Cambridge before last year’s decisions were taken; and b) to inform the Methodist people what steps are being taken to repair the reputational damage which has been the consequence of those decisions. Reply The Conference thanks the City Road Circuit Meeting for its memorial and recognises its concerns about the decisions made at the 2012 Conference in relation to initial ministerial formation at the Wesley Study Centre, Durham and Wesley House, Cambridge. In answer to point (a) the Conference would like to assure the Circuit that conversations took place at both of these institutions last year prior to the recommendations made by the Ministries Committee to the 2012 Conference and refers the Circuit to paragraphs 34 and 35 of The Fruitful Field Project report to the 2012 Conference. Consultation documents were sent to a wide variety of ecumenical partners and offers were made to hold additional conversations. Submissions were received from representatives of a range of bodies, including the College of Preachers, the Ecumenical Stakeholders Forum, the Arthur Rank Centre, the Church of England Bishops of the West Midlands Region, Cranmer Hall, Durham, Anglia Ruskin University, the Cambridge Theological Federation, the University of Cambridge, St John’s College, Durham University, and the Education and Learning Committee of the United Reformed Church. All submissions were seen by the Ministries Committee, subject to the scrutiny of the Revd Dr Brian Beck and the Revd Alison Tomlin as detailed in paragraph 40 of The Fruitful Field Project report to the 2012 Conference. Subsequently, individual conversations were held with all those organisations who requested them. Further conversations have continued this year between members of the Ministries Committee, members of the Implementation Executive and representatives of the Wesley Study Centre and Wesley House. To ensure constructive ecumenical relationships and in response to point (b) 8 Methodist Conference 2013
Memorials to the Conference the ecumenical relationships at Durham and Cambridge do not depend on these being places where initial ministerial formation takes place, and discussions are in place between the Ministries Committee and the Implementation Executive, and the Trustees of Wesley House, Cambridge and the Management Committee at the Wesley Study Centre, Durham about ways in which these institutions may contribute to the Discipleship and Ministries Learning Network. The Methodist Church is working closely as a partner with the Church of England to deliver the Common Awards validated by the University of Durham (see the Ministries Committee report). The Conference wishes to reassure the City Road Circuit Meeting that ecumenical relationships continue to be of the highest priority in the work of the Discipleship and Ministries Learning Network and will remain a key focus of the ongoing work of the Network. The Conference does not believe that further action, beyond that contained in the Ministries Committee and Discipleship and Ministries Learning Network reports, is needed at this time. M6 Configuration of initial ministerial training The Darlington District Synod (R) (Present: 104; Voting: 83 for, 3 against) draws attention to the contents of the report MC/13/38 to the April 2013 Methodist Council on the implementation of the recommendations of The Fruitful Field Project report to the Conference of 2012, from which it is clear that some of the key objectives set out in The Fruitful Field Project and adopted by the Conference will not be achieved. Specifically: ●● ●● ●● ●● There will not be a unified staff team for the Discipleship and Ministries Learning Network because tutors at the Queen’s Foundation will not be employed as part of the Network. The control of Methodist training at the Queen’s Foundation will continue to be indirect, because its existing governance structure will remain in place. Cliff College will also continue to employ its own staff and (as originally envisaged) will not offer initial ministerial training. In consequence, there will be no single Network and no centre under direct Methodist control which provides initial ministerial training. It is the Synod’s understanding that the advantages intended to flow from the substantial dismantling of existing ministerial training arrangements and their replacement by the proposed Network arrangements therefore cannot be achieved. This calls into doubt the assessment that the adverse consequences of such dismantling, which were noted in The Fruitful Field Project, are a price worth paying for those advantages. The Synod therefore requests the Conference to set up an urgent review to reconsider the issue of how ministerial training should be configured with the aim of establishing an alternative, robust Methodist Conference 2013 9
Page 1: The Methodist Church Memorials to t
Page 4 and 5: Memorials to the Conference as that
Page 6 and 7: Memorials to the Conference by, the
Page 10 and 11: Memorials to the Conference configu
Page 12 and 13: Memorials to the Conference Since t
Page 14 and 15: Memorials to the Conference The Con
Page 16 and 17: Memorials to the Conference Budget,
Page 18 and 19: Memorials to the Conference better
Page 20 and 21: Memorials to the Conference Team by
Page 22 and 23: Memorials to the Conference fresh e
Page 24 and 25: Memorials to the Conference own acc
Page 26 and 27: Memorials to the Conference The Con
Page 28 and 29: Memorials to the Conference The Cir
Page 30 and 31: Memorials to the Conference around
Page 32 and 33: Memorials to the Conference The Joi
Page 34 and 35: Memorials to the Conference Methodi
Page 36 and 37: Memorials to the Conference We ther
Page 38 and 39: Memorials to the Conference (Presen
Page 40 and 41: Memorials to the Conference British
Page 44: ©Trustees for Methodist Church Pur

Memorials to the Conference - Methodist Conference

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?