View from the Pulpit

In mid-June 2000 a host of United Reformed Ministers found themselves looking at a computer screen which said:-

For those who don't know me, I minister to the Rochdale Central Pastorate; 4 churches serving three distinct communities around Rochdale and Rochdale town centre.

As part of an MA in Contextual Ministry that I am studying at Northern College I am looking at the nature of working within Multi-Church Pastorates (which I am defining as those with three or more churches). The eventual piece of work will be probably be entitled "A Postmodern Ministry?" and submitted as a website because I find the nature of work within four churches to be similiar to steering ones way around a website and its associated links. Hence in seeking other views about Ministry in such pastorates I am writing to those who according to the Year Book are or have in the past served in multi-church pastorates and have an e-mail address.

I hope that you will be able to spare some time to reflect upon ministry within a multi-church pastorate and e-mail your reply to me.

What is the make-up of the Pastorate you have served in?

What were the reasons for those churches creating a Multi-church Pastorate?

To what extent did the churches work together?

Do you think this is the best way for those churches to work? If yes, Why? If not, what alternative would you suggest?

Within any Pastorate, what do you see as the role of the Minister?

To what extent were you able to fulfill that role with the multi-church pastorate?

If you have experienced single or joint pastorates, what differences are/were there in your role and in the way you work/ed?

What do you see as the benefits for a minister working within a Multi-church Pastorate?

What are the problems?

Is this the best way for us to work in the future?

Are there any other observations that you wish to make?

Thank You for taking the time to answer and reply. Once the website has been uploaded I shall let you know and you will have the opportunity to post any additional thoughts or argue with my conclusions in the guest book.

Craig Muir

My thanks to everybody who replied, [1] What follows is not every response to every question but a selection which I hope give a flavour of the multi-church pastorates as viewed from the pulpit (or the study, or the car, or through the computer screen) [2].

What is the make-up of the Pastorate you have served in?

  • Three churches: Two ministers. One town centre ish; one less than centre ... small UM [United Reformed/Methodist] one village.
  • 5 congregation LEP (Baptist, CoE, Methodist, URC)- 4 Anglican & 1 United Reformed Minister
  • 50 member URC; 65 member URC/CoE LEP (Local Ecumenical Partnership); a village church and 3-way Ecumenical church plant. 1 URC Minister and an Anglican at the LEP's
  • 20 member village chapel; 70 member church and 30 member Presbyterian Church of Wales
  • Town Centre CoE/URC LEP; one village chapel; one small town church. One minister.
  • Three Church Joint Pastorate, 1 Minister
  • Four churches: two in industrial areas, two in villages.
  • Three church team -160, 60 & 40 members, one non-stipendary and two stipendary ministers.
  • Three congregations, 170, 25 and 35 members.
  • Three churches in two market towns and one village. The market towns are 18 miles apart and the village 12.5 miles from the Manse.
  • 3 churches 90, 25 and 40 members
  • 5 churches, 4 in the town, one in a neighbouring village, membership ranging from 10 to 80 - 2 stipendary and two non-stipendary ministers.
  • 1 town, 2 villages nearby.
  • Town Church (URC/UWI) 11 members; 2 village churches 22 and 12 members.
  • Three rural churches. I live in [A], It's 16 miles to [B] amd 9 to [C]

What were the reasons for those churches creating a multi-church Pastorate?

  • Historical
  • Ministerial deployment
  • Guarantee support and a slice of ministry
  • Expediency. To keep all three afloat
  • Large new mixed housing development ... Developers insisted on no more than one church building in each 'village' area, so Anglican, Baptists, Methodists and URC agreed to plant and build ecumenically
  • Financial
  • Falling membership numbers
  • To make it possible to provide a full-time stipendary minister

To what extent did the churches work together?

  • Not a great deal in either case - mostly just administrative, with a few joint services and activities
  • The pastorate was facilitated/enabled by a Pastorate Council (3 members from each congregation) which organised regular joint services and social events
  • We have been able to get people together for a limited number of social and worship events but sadly there is considerable resistance to this
  • Shared magazine
  • Each identifies with different larger communities and schools. There are 2 joint elders meetings per year, and on the 5th Sundays joint worship. I have concentrated on building up ecumenical relations in each community.
  • Shared a joint, key decision making council. Ministers worked very closely as a team. Monthly evening gathering for united worship. Occasional joint mission activities. Some parish wide training. A shared office and administrator.
  • The biggest link is financial [X] pay half the [assessment] for [Y] and [Z].

Do you think this is the best way for those churches to work? If yes, why? If not, what alternative would you suggest?

  • No. It would be better for local leaders to be appointed and for these leaders to be given oversight by a full-time minister.
  • Yes. Pooled resources make each component of the Pastorate stronger.
  • Probably. The problem is that none of the churches has a great deal of resources to share with the others. The group started from a position of weakness which meant that some kind of grouping was essential, but the benefits of a more positive grouping ... were always going to be difficult to achieve.
  • I am convinced the way forward is ecumenically in each village. 2 churches have sold their buildings and worship in their local parish churches.
  • At present I think the two remaining [churches] could only work like this.
  • Yes. The two smaller churches would not be in existence without the help of the larger.
  • No. Not on the traditional understanding and expectations of the minister's role. Given the rural nature of the pastorate I would suggest a different pattern of working for the minister. ...one way forward might be for the appointed minister to work for a set length of time with one of the churches at once with minimal oversight of the other two, to establish the next phase of mission in that church then to move to one of the remaining two and so on. This would mean perhaps three months intensive input and six months oversight for each church in turn.
  • A local united-church constitution, in which all previous congregations are dissolved and a new name found, preferably before the next minister is called would be preferable. Denominations have to face up to the absurdity of superfluous buildings housing tiny congregations within walking distance of each other, served by fractions of different, harassed ministers working up large travel expense bills.
  • I doubt it. The evidence of the Church censuses in England and Wales is quite clear - churches that grow need to have an identifiable local leader who is not shared with another church, and certainly not with another, different community.
  • Seems to work OK, but it is hard to ensure missionary edge.
  • Yes, because it gave more life to small churches.

Within any Pastorate, what do you see as the role of the Minister?
To what extent were you able to fulfill that role with the multi-church pastorate?

If you have experienced single or joint pastorates, what differences are/were there in your role and in the way you work/ed?

  • In the single pastorate there was the possibility to spend more time in outreach, although the members seemed to feel the owned the minister and family totally. In the joint church, the church in the area I lived in grew substantially in a number of ways, the other suffered in that it was a matter of keeping standing still, which cannot be done.
  • Discontinuity of worship makes 'series' of services difficult which I have done in previous (single) churches.
  • Having been in a joint pastorate (2 equal-sized churches) for nearly 6 years, it has been much easier to avoid "belonging" to one church at the expense of the others. ...I have enjoyed being able to offer a regular diet of worship week-by-week to both congregations rather than trying to co-ordinate a disparate band of non-stipendary and retired ministers and lay-preachers, not all of whom took kindly to being invited to preach on a theme! On the other hand, I have missed the variety of preaching in the variety of contexts/congregations offered by a multi-church pastorate.
  • Mainly a difference in focus. My first pastorate was a single church, so all three have been different. Put simply, I find it easier to develop relationships and fulfill my role, the more time I have to devote to any one congregation.
  • My last charge was as Community Minister in a large Market Town. I worked with a series of groups and teams. Here the infra-structure is fragile. The best team is the ecumenical one.

What do you see as the benefits for a minister working within a Multi-church Pastorate?
What are the problems?

Is this the best way for us to work in the future?

  • It is difficult to see what choice we have.
  • No. Unless we work ecumenically on a smaller scale we'll stretch our ministers so far that they will break.
  • I would like to see more imaginative ways of using ministers ... I think we should develop larger groupings with specialists to work in different areas i.e. one minister good at pastoral side, one evangelist, maybe a Church Related Community Worker to develop family and children's work. Pipe dreams I'm sure.
  • Only if we develop a local leader in each church within the pastorate and/or allow the minister to concentrate on one [church] offering support, guidance and training only to the others.
  • Absolutely not.
  • It needs more thought - I'm pleased Mission Council is consulting on the issue.
  • I wouldn't want to take on the same pattern again.
  • If the problem was tackled ecumenically each place could have it's own 'leader'.
  • No! No! No! If the URC is to continue much into this new century it has to move away from the multi pastorate model towards the idea of a trained local leader preferably from the local church.
  • I think it will be the ONLY way many churches will survive.

Are there any other observations that you wish to make?