THE Church of England is one of many institutions in which there is a temptation to believe that human fallibility can be eliminated by adopting suitable processes. There are circumstances in which this is true: routine checks in the cockpit and operating theatre save lives. But it is much complicated when the institution depends on trust: trust in individuals to perform their duties faithfully, trust in leaders to enable them to do so. Too much instruction, too much process to be dutifully followed, harms trust as much as neglect and indifference.
One of the freedoms that should come with parish ministry is the freedom to discern how to be a “parson”, that is, a “person” in a particular community. For many, that means (along with preparing and taking services, offering pastoral care, and the relentless flow of paperwork) being seen around, engaging in casual conversation, and even what used to be innocently called “loitering with intent”.
Yet many clergy find using time in this relaxed but intentional manner extremely difficult, partly because they come with previous experience of work where the use of time is more clear-cut; partly because of the potential clash with family commitments; and also because any training they get over the use of time is designed to ensure that they take the right amount of time off rather than what they actually do with it.
Years ago, the prescription was two “sessions” out of three (morning, afternoon, and evening) to be worked, with a full day off once a week. This then changed to four sessions out of five (early and late morning, early and late afternoon, and evening).
But, in the end, the use of time is a matter of discernment. There are those who can lope about in a relaxed but productive way, without apparently taking much time off at all. Others are at their desk without fail at 9 a.m., out on parish business in the afternoons, at meetings most evenings, with the phone firmly switched off once a week for 24 hours. When I was in parish ministry, I produced an annual pie-chart showing how my time had been spent. It was revealing, to me at least.
Too often, the freedom of the clergy to do the job as they best discern is encroached on by diocesan expectations. Some welcome this, because it helps them to feel secure and approved of, but others are hindered by the sense that they are being judged. It worries me to hear of clergy being given targets for growth in numbers or income, or being told to focus more on “mission” when they are already busting a gut running foodbanks and warm spaces. There is not much point in parish ministry when the diocese knows better how it should be done. Oh dear, have I said something?
