Focus Group Data

The focus group in which only half of the ministers had previously been interviewed believed that churches were responsible to create an environment in which the call to ministry could be identified and explored through the initiative of leaders with the ministry gift capacity to reproduce similar leadership viability and competence in others. Bob Roberts, previously interviewed, expressed a belief that called ministers have the capacity to train people for ministry. Ben Newman, a rural pastor undertaking training only after first being approved to lead a church, affirmed the need for proactivity in cultivating a call to ministry with training, suggesting that, for him, “a call [had been] recognised but nothing was done … it was never pursued or driven toward study.” Henry Johnson, had observed within churches during his years of state-based CRC leadership the importance of “creating an atmosphere where people can discover the call.” The encouragement to pursue study was therefore via a pathway committed to growing the local church, rather than accruing unapplied knowledge. It also required some degree of formative duplication due to the necessity of a personal “on-the-job” coach, whose experience and expertise would nevertheless determine the quality of ministry outcomes. Effectiveness was difficult for this group to quantify, preferring a focus on qualitative measures such as character and faithfulness which, if well established, were felt to ensure growth through the practices of ministry to people within churches. This was to be observed by experienced practitioners, as restated by the previously-interviewed Bella Laurie. Newman more specifically affirmed that this would be achieved by means of competency standards, making favourable comparison of ministry supervision to competency determination in other industries. Hilary Jefferson, an associate minister in a church engaged in formation of ministry candidates, subsequently identified this “coaching on the job” as essential for learned application of skills. Both formal and informal training were valued, the latter with regard to

186

character formation that undergirded success and the former for “confidence building.” For this group, effective ministry formation was a natural extension of spiritual formation, but where formators and ministry candidates would be trained to facilitate enhanced ministry outcomes, rather than see training as an end in itself.

The focus group in which all ministers had previously been interviewed addressed the need for calling to be affirmed by a congregation and leaders, in keeping with the findings of the semi- structured interviews. Alfred Majewski reiterated his earlier view that this form of feedback was essential to “identifying,” “recognising,” and “developing” the call. Coaching involved closer connection for this group to the everyday life of candidates, in preference to seeing it as a more detached, professional relationship. The need for focused engagement by a range of formators impacting enthusiastic ministry candidates was seen as a key ingredient to developing successful ministry training. Indeed, Andrew Peters described the integration of key elements and personnel involved in formation as “synergy,” whilst Claire Lee more purposefully sought an intentionality in “doing life together,” so as to best enculturate learning within a formative community. To this end, the use of tailored formal training would complement informal training likely to be limited by the coach’s own predispositions and strengths, but enhanced by his or her life experience. Theoretical, practical, denominational, and Pentecostal dimensions were all valued in contemporary CRC training, but with an added regulator of its practical relevance. Ministry effectiveness involved having a genuine love for the people who candidates were currently serving, although this needed to be “measured,” and “benchmarked” by coaches capable of developing people and working to clear expectations. Although this group likewise failed to mention competency standards as an explicit determination of this ministry effectiveness, the data was again suggestive of their desirability, albeit with a need for greater intentionality and awareness in formation.

The focus group in which no ministers had previously been interviewed highlighted the importance of local church leaders identifying calling, but then being readily available to mentor and train ministry candidates. Cora Norris, engaged extensively in accredited local church formation as a senior minister, believed that “training should be within the local church and as hands-on as possible within the context of a mentoring relationship.” One senior minister, Charles Pinnock, similarly stated that “local church leaders are the ones to identify and equip [whereby] training is an additive only to support locals.” This training, however, being inclusive of informal modes of delivery, was required to commence prior to engaging in significant ministry roles. This enabled local churches to utilise specialised formation resources

187

while maintaining a strong local coaching focus. Coaching was less easily separated from the role of church leadership for this group and was particularly relevant to purposefully developing church people engaged in practical service. It was ideally aligned to the approved CRC competency statements to allow the safe practice of ministry in accordance with agreed standards with new CRC minister, Bert Graham, affirming their formalised use in his own coaching of others despite not having used or received this approach in forty years of prior ministry. Ministry success was felt to be multi-faceted, but with quality outcomes dependent upon the foundational presence of sound Christian character and the influence of local church culture. As for the focus group of previously interviewed ministers, fruitfulness was contingent upon the nature of one’s gifts and calling which would be in evidence when assessing in accordance with ministry competencies. Training options were felt to need flexibility and diversity, inclusive of pathways for those less academic, whilst prioritising a blend of theological, leadership and denominational distinctives. One associate minister, Olivia Jansz, was involved in formation with several ministry candidates in her local church, and expressed a preference for local flexibility in coursework assessment being used to determine competence. These were believed to make best use of verbal skills and practical tasks for “committed” candidates being appropriately supervised, notwithstanding the need to standardise approaches, perhaps by enhanced coach training and support. Itinerant minister, Roy Adamson, affirmed the intentional use of observation along with extensive “encouragement.” Newer minister, Lavinder Singh now identifying future ministry candidates in his own congregation, made use of informal training inclusive of incidental ministry tasks or mentoring alongside formal training pathways for those adapting well to the needs of his local church.