Initial Survey Data

The survey respondents represented a range of ages and levels of ministry experience. Although twenty-nine per cent had been involved in ministry within the CRC for fewer than five years (the vast majority of these holding Trainee credentials), twenty-four per cent had also been in CRC ministry for at least twenty-five years. Forty-five per cent of all respondents held the highest level of credential, that of a National Minister, generally recognising service to the movement beyond the local church and also, generally, greater ministry experience. This figure was slightly higher than anticipated from CRC credential statistics, though offered the perspectives of ministers comparing contemporary training with their own formation experiences.27 Similarly, thirty-six per cent of respondents served in the role of Senior Minister in a local church, despite this number being thirty-one per cent in the national statistics.28

Fifty-four per cent of all respondents had completed either unaccredited study or no formal study in ministry or theology before becoming ordained with the CRC. This included thirteen per cent of ministers having completed no formal training, whereas nineteen per cent had completed higher education. More than half of those surveyed completed their studies at an accredited institution, although twenty per cent undertook formal training within their local church. Generally positive experiences were reported for personal training undertaken prior to ordination, with seventy-four per cent rating its usefulness as essential or quite essential for ministry. This compared slightly more favourably with studies undertaken by eighty per cent of ministers after first receiving CRC ordination, where equivalent ratings were offered by sixty-three per cent of ministers.

CRC training was generally viewed positively, based on sixty-seven per cent of respondents affirming its clarity in addressing the overall mission and purpose of ministry. This figure was slightly higher in regard to a positive assessment of the thoroughness of training in the CRC by seventy-one per cent of ministers, which may be accounted for by the view that its training

27 _{Author Unknown, CRC Ministry Guidelines, 8. This represents a slightly higher number (43% compared with}

37%) of national ministers in the CRC in Australia according to the 2015-2016 CRC annual report: Author Unknown, “Statistical Report,” 25-27. The finding that other credential levels were very similarly

represented (with 29% of Ministers compared with 29% overall in the annual report and with 15% of Trainee Ministers compared with 16% overall in the annual report) may be explained by the inclusion of a smaller number of retired ministers (7% compared with 12% in the annual report).

134

is more broadly inclusive of elements beyond formal courses and formal coaching arrangements. When compared with alternative training options, thirty-eight per cent felt that CRC training was superior or far superior, with only seven per cent believing it to be inferior or very inferior and fifty-six per cent believing it to be adequate. Several optional supplementary comments (free data), however, indicated a lack of familiarity with the material, including: “I am uncertain as to what it actually does address,” “I have had little or no contact with the CRC training programme,” “[I have a] lack of contact with CRC training,” “I don’t know what the training tasks are,” and “I am not personally up to date [on CRC training].” Interpretations of its effectiveness therefore warranted further assessment from subsequent interviews.

Eighty-four per cent of ministers believed a blend of ministry, theology and leadership materials to be essential priorities in effective training. This perhaps reflected, for some, the status quo with the recently developed vocational course options incorporating this balance. The use of existing competency statements to define the requirements of successful ministry in each of these skill areas was deemed effective or very effective by sixty-nine per cent of respondents. Twenty-five per cent rated them as adequate, suggesting that this finding should be further explored in the subsequent semi-structured interviews.

Supplementary survey comments clarified that there was some minor dissatisfaction with the CRC ministry competencies as being too restrictive or helpful only with supplementary coaching. Having been involved with their formulation, this response was anticipated in anecdotal discussions associated with their release. The sub-committee developing these competencies believed that insufficient resources for developing more comprehensive guidelines had meant that the prescriptive requirements used would be more likely to ensure that appropriate standards were more consistently met. The tasks described were not believed to be too onerous and the CRC’s National Training Team also believed that course-based assessment tasks met appropriate auspicing guidelines, these having also been referred to the National Executive of the movement for final authorisation. Nevertheless, several survey comments reflected occasional earlier verbal feedback that requirements were sometimes too academic and therefore inaccessible and impractical, a claim that appeared to reflect past or isolated expectations within individual churches given the aforementioned lack of awareness of current courses and their minimal academic requirements.

Fidelity to the distinctive value of Spirit baptism was high, with ninety-four per cent of ministers agreeing or strongly agreeing with the classical position of its characterisation by

135

evidential tongues. When considering its necessity for maximum ministry effectiveness, however, this number was reduced to seventy-four per cent. Several supplementary comments pointed to examples of effective ministry not associated with Spirit baptism or speaking in tongues, but without specific reference to CRC ministry competencies, an observation worthy of further substantiation or clarification in semi-structured interviews.

In regard to the relationship between the CRC’s College of Ministry and local churches, just one respondent indicated a desire for local exclusivity in training. Eighty-nine per cent preferred a partnership between a college and the local church, but with sixty-three per cent stipulating the CRC College of Ministry to be their provider of choice, whether for accredited or unaccredited training. Supplementary comments indicated some degree of interest in utilising formation gifts within the movement and in preserving distinctive values. Some commentary also indicated a belief that coaching according to the existing competency standards ensured appropriate enculturation of candidates without the need for a CRC College to facilitate this goal, possibly reflecting a historical suspicion of centralisation to be explored in subsequent interviews.

Seventy-two per cent of ministers believed the support for coaching was helpful, although many comments revealed a lack of awareness of, or need for, available support. This possibly related, again, to the under-resourcing of communication and assistance, but was possibly also suggestive of a need for targeted offers of support, perhaps through the agency of the reinstated office of a state coach supervisor. Ministers were slightly more indicative of a need for support with leadership and coaching skills over theology and ministry skills. With fewer than six per cent indicating self-reliance in such coaching, there appeared to be scope for a loose hierarchy of formation in the spirit of the Pauline discipleship model espoused in 2 Timothy 2:2 and discussed in the next chapter. Ministers’ supplementary comments were indicative of a need for greater clarity with the expectations and intentions of competency standards, perhaps therefore offering a basis for instigating such assistance.

Universal support was expressed by survey respondents for the notion that training enhances effectiveness for every Christian, inclusive of ministers, thus suggesting a need for ongoing, detailed evaluation of formation practices and a commitment to their widespread use. If effectiveness is understood in terms of the CRC’s ministry competency standards it is anticipated that this will be reflected in the semi-structured interview and focus group data.

136