Agenda Volume 3 - Methodist Conference

57. The Fruitful Field Project
supported by members of the
Connexional Team, accepted a
number of invitations to meet with
staff teams and governing bodies at
the institutions within the remit of
the project. A residential conference
of District and regional postholders
(District Development Enablers,
District Evangelism/ Mission
Enablers, Participation Project
Managers and Training Officers) and a
meeting of oversight tutors were also
able to dedicate time to a discussion
of the consultation document. Each of
the Regional Training Forums held a
special meeting to make a response
to the consultation, as did many other
groupings throughout the Connexion.
Meetings with ecumenical partners
were also held. The consultation
document was discussed by the
Methodist Council, and at a meeting
of past Presidents and past Vice-
Presidents. Some of the Ministries
Committee’s wider reflections were
also shared through a series of
podcasts/ vodcasts, which were
able to respond to some frequently
asked questions and requests
for clarification raised during the
consultation period.
35 The Committee received five hundred
and eighty consultation submissions,
running to nearly a thousand pages
and containing over half a million
words. Submissions were received
from 382 individuals and postholders.
The remaining 198 submissions
came from Circuits, Districts, forums,
institutions, ecumenical partners
and other bodies. The Committee
is particularly conscious of the
volume of submissions received
during the consultation period, and
wishes to note its thanks to all who
spent a significant amount of time
preparing considered, detailed,
creative, impassioned and informative
submissions. The Committee is
also grateful to all those who raised
awareness of the consultation period
and who encouraged others to share
their views and experiences.
Responding to the consultation
36 Each submission made during the
consultation period was seen by
every member of the Committee. The
Committee met residentially in late
January 2012 so that members could
discuss their reflections and their
analysis of all that had been shared
within the consultation submissions.
On the basis of these deliberations,
the Committee issued, on 21
February 2012, an interim response
to the consultation. Electronic
copies of the Committee’s interim
response were sent to all those who
had made submissions during the
consultation period (unless those
making a submission had done so
by post, in which case hard copies
were sent). Electronic copies of the
interim response were also sent to
all those institutions and postholders
whose work was discussed in the
consultation document, to all District
Chairs, and to the members of the
Methodist Council.
37 The interim response contained
656 Conference Agenda 2012