It has been a longer time than I realized or remembered.
Last time, I said I would get back 'into it.' Never did.
But now, I'm retired, and have had much time to reflect upon the past 40+ years. More reflection still to come.
One of the 'things' that keeps reappearing in written works that I've saved has been the need to work on recruitment of new clergy.
Even back in the early 1980's, The Church recognized that we were heading for a crash. Not enough people in the pipeline. Bishop Bill Swing wrote a short article asking "Where have all the Young Men Gone?" It wasn't just about young 'men,' but it was about young 'people!' He documented, and then Miller Cragon (Canon in Chicago for the COM) posted the following week that most of the applications were from middle aged people. One of his quotes was "Many come to the ordination process as a second career, not necessarily having been successful in their first career."
How true!
But the other part of it, and we have taken this on multiple times - is that we/The Church, sit back and wait for people to come forward.
In a brief article from April 1988, it says,
"The Church should recruit its clergy - identify the persons it wants and go after them - not just sit and wait to see who walks in the door.
That is the recommendation of the Board of Theological Education and the Council for the Development of Ministry.
In a recent meeting, the council made it clear that it is not recommending business as usual as regards the recruitment and training of persons for the ordained ministry. Both in the report of the theological Board and in the work of the committee charged with revising the canons on ministry, the Council underlined the need for the Church to turn anew in its approach to raising up the leadership of the Church.
"If theological education is education for mission," the report states, "then the Church needs actively to recruit the best prospects for such education."
Certain kinds of ministry are not being adequately developed, the report states, citing ministries in the inner city, small church ministries, rural and ethnic ministries and institutional ministries in particular.
Pointing out that theological education of teh clergy is a three-stage process - only the middle stage of which occurs in seminary - the report points to the 'paucity of such education' in the parish congregation, calling it a 'major handicap for our seminaries' which 'constitutes a serious weakness threatening the effectiveness of the ministry and mission of The Episcopal Church at large."
Are the seminaries preparing 'for maintenance or for mission? Are they providing an atmosphere conducive to growth in discipleship or are they encouraging cultural elitism and upward mobility in wordly terms? Are they preparing students to be faithful servants in God's ministry of Word and Sacraments or are they preparing them to be therapists, managers or professional specialists?"
"Such questions,' the report states, 'points to some real...problems not only in the seminary but in the Church."
And I recall Bishop Griswold asking me what specialty I had for ministry. I told him I did it all. He later admitted that we needed 'generalists' as well as specialists.
