A letter from Cranmer’s Curate to the Revd Dr Simon Vibert, Vice Principal and Director of Preaching at Wycliffe Hall Church of England theological college in Oxford:
Dear Simon, You have a track-record as an effective and faithful Anglican Evangelical minister in front-line parochial ministry and are now part of exciting developments in theological training under the leadership of Richard Turnbull at Wycliffe Hall. As a parish incumbent in one of the lowest church-going areas in the United Kingdom - South Yorkshire – I am an enthusiast for what is happening at Wycliffe.
It is in that spirit that I am getting in touch with you following the letter in the latest Evangelicals Now by Matthew Swires-Hennessy expressing disappointment in EN for running my article in support of Oak Hill in July’s edition - Reasons for backing the not posh theological college.
This is not the place to engage with his possibly valid contention that the Wycliffe Hall Council can guarantee Reformed Evangelical succession in its principal as effectively as the independent Kingham Hill trust can for Oak Hill. I am writing to you because his letter is highly revealing of a certain mindset regarding theological training within our Anglican Evangelical constituency.
It is for that reason that I am making my letter to you public – what you do with your reply is up to you.
Mr Swires-Hennessy, whose letter indicates that he has done his theological training for ordained ministry at Wycliffe Hall, insists that his ‘involvement in college level sport has meant that I have spent a good part of my week outside the ivory tower with students, many of whom are not Christians. This involvement in the wider life of the university would not be possible if the college (Wycliffe) was located in a suburb in north London’ (as is Oak Hill).
This stated rationale for the choice of one theological college over another raises a significant issue. What is expected of those undertaking theological education? Or, to put the question more bluntly, what are we as the wider Church of England paying for in theological training?
Surely we are paying for those recommended for training in the Church of England to gain a theological grounding in preparation for a life-time of Word ministry normatively in a parish? And are we not also paying for them to gain some practical experience of the diversity of Gospel opportunities in the Church of England through the college placement scheme with particular emphasis on the local parish church, in preparation for their curacy and eventually God willing incumbency?
It would be very worrying indeed if theological training were geared towards preparing people for unusual settings in the Church of England, such as a large city-centre or university church with a significant student ministry or a fresh expression targeting a specific demographic group.
Whilst these opportunities exist, the Church of England remains overwhelmingly parochially-based and there are tremendous opportunities for the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ in these more normative settings.
Surely faithfulness to the Gospel demands that that process of transition and preparation begins during theological training. A large proportion of a working week spent in Oxbridge college sport strikes this parish plodder as a little rarefied.
Warmly in Christ,
Julian Mann
The Parish Church of the Ascension
Oughtibridge
www.oughtibridgechurch.org.uk
Monday, 24 August 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
Good Evening CC,
A very good point well made. Your own circumstances are as ever a refreshing change from the attitude one often notices among young keen evangelical ordinands, that they will all one day somehow manage to be appointed to one of the so-called "evangelical cathedrals" of this country, from whence many of them came.
This is of course unrealistic (but is not a reflection on their "quality" as ministers) so a good number of these chaps (and of course they are mostly men) end up in "sector ministries" such as school chaplaincy or camp-related intinerant ministry. These things in themselves (as you point out) are a worthy part of Anglican church life but are by no means the whole of it.
During my time in Oxford I certainly enjoyed life at Wycliffe, but it very soon became apparent that the other Anglican theological colleges were much better placed for a taste of real life - St Stephen's House in the inner city and Cuddesdon in a village. Wycliffe's geographical localtion in leafy North Oxford and close to many of the University's colleges only serves to re-inforce a culture and an outlook that is already in place for (I imagine) an increasing number of the ordinands who arrive there from suburban mega-churches.
I hope "The Vibe" can dispel our fears. Are you going to post his reply?
in peace
Tim
Thank you Tim - nice to hear from you. If Simon gives permission to publish his reply, I can.
Simon has a good varied background in parish ministry - Carlisle, Buxton in Derbs, latterly south London. I genuinely believe he & Richard T are trying to address the issues you highlight - whether the environment is stacked against them is the question. I wish them well.
J
Hi CC
I have always felt that (much as I admire and respect their predecessors,) the fact that Simon and Richard brought to Wycliffe a wealth of parish experience was a very good thing.
It occurs to me that Cuddesdon used to have an agreement with Sheffield, sending ordinands up there for the summer placement. Perhaps you could offer something similar to Wycliffe ordinands at Oughtibridge. I'd love to have them out here in the sticks too
cheers
Tim
Dear CC,
1. Why can't some of these questions be raised in private rather than published in front of the watching world? It strikes me that MSH's first paragraph makes a fair point, and I wonder if you might have addressed his major points rather than picking up on his (rather minor) comment about sport.
2. Are you sure that what MSH speaks about as his recreational habits (which even ordinands are allowed, I believe) are necessarily the same as his college ministry placements? And is it really fair to translate 'a good part' of his week involved with sport into 'a large proportion'?
3. Are you sure that MSH is representative of all students at Wycliffe Hall? Do you know how many students actually live on site at Wycliffe, and how many live off in other places around the city estates and local villages?
4. Is your tone meant to be that of a concerned yet supportive brother? It comes across as exasperated, condescending and bitter. I understand your passion, but the way you are expressing yourself doesn't make your argument very easy to hear. Which brings me back to point 1.
Yours,
John
Thank you John - I'm responding to a published letter in a prominent Evangelical journal, so it's already public. Mr Swires-Hennessy's comment about student ministry is presented as a rationale for choosing Wycliffe over OH, so it's hardly a recreational matter.
The fact is, this issue of training & deploymnent is very important for the Church of England & people are paying for it - so it's not right to play the unity card in order to brush it under the carpet.
Kind regards,
Julian Mann
Most excellent.
Thank you.
Philip Veitch
Eastern USA
Jolly hockey-sticks!
OK boom-boom Dr Jensen, but how can we tackle this essentially English class-based problem both theologically and practically for the sake of the gospel? Just a further thought please from down under.
Julian
I agree with many of your comments, but I think that the evangelical world needs BOTH Oak Hill and Wycliffe Hall to thrive - please follow http://metamorphe.wordpress.com
for a more detailed and considered response.
Simon
There really is no issue here. The fact of the matter is that both Oak Hill and Wycliffe offer academic residential training which is incredibly valuable for a ministry of leadership, preaching, evangelism and apologetics in any church. New mixed-mode options also offer wonderfully valuable ways of gaining contextual experience. Rather than playing off the merits of residential colleges against each other, perhaps we should spend our time supporting the whole concept of residential training (which is clearly better than night-school type courses), in preparation for a likely attempt by the CofE to sideline such institutions.
Post a Comment