date: Sun, 12 Mar 2000 17:16:16 +0000
from: Alan Strange <bigal@paston.co.uk>
subject: Re: Missionaries
to: Mike Hulme <m.hulme@uea.ac.uk>

Thank you very much indeed for this - incredibly useful.

Alan

At 09:39 12/03/00 +0000, you wrote:
>Alan,
>
>The reason I suggested the need for an 'additional' person, over and above
>your three 'support' people (finance, Link Manager organiser,
>communications; the designation of which I agree with) is that I see a lack
>of opportunity for 'initiative'.  These three people only report to MG and
>not to PCC and therefore will not feel that they have any delegated
>responsibility to initiative new activities in the Mission area.  We are
>already seeing the consequences of this over the last 6-9 months I believe
>- to my view very little has been initiated in this area ...... some basic
>support tasks have been done in a minimalist and unco-ordinated way, but
>where are new ideas/suggestions etc. coming from?  Mission (as distinct
>from evangelism) has slipped down the church's agenda in recent months).
>
>Of course, the natural response is to say that such initiation (such
>'championing') should come from the PCC's Mission Group - indeed, such a
>role is more in keeping I think with your idea for PCC groups, keeping the
>specific tasks outside the PCC domain.
>
>This is fine but:
>
>a. MG membership changes regularly because it is a PCC group.  Continuity
>is hard to build and in any case who ends up on the MG (and all PCC groups)
>is just too random (the problem with democracy!).  There is no guarentee
>that anyone with any ability/experience to champion the Mission cause will
>end up there.
>
>b. And even if there were such a person, there is a danger that this MG
>person would be operating in a different sphere from the three support
>people.  Yet the initiater needs to be in close contact with his/her
>support people because only then will things be able to happen, i.e., this
>'champion' needs to know they have delegated responsibility and the freedom
>to initiate (i.e., the 'power'; this implies a close relationship to
>PCC/Leadership), but also the connections into the support people and the
>Link Managers, etc., knowing enough of the detail to be able to make
>visions/ideas turn into reality (a PCC MG person who gets elected for 1,2
>or 3 years will not necessarily have this 'earthing' in what can be done
>and how).
>
>This is my analysis, but what best to do?  Options:
>
>1. the MG co-ordinator (currently Liz Parfitt, but whoever it ends up
>being) takes on that role.  But is this too much to take on as well as
>other MG co-ordinator duties?
>
>2. someone else on the PCC MG is asked to specifically take on the role
>(but this is highly dependent on an 'appropriate' person being elected to
>the PCC).
>
>3. an independent person is 'appointed' to take on the role (this is back
>to the notion of the old Mission Sub-group Co-ordinator I guess) and given
>some authority to represent Mission within the church and PCC.
>
>4. one of the three support people is given the 'lead' role in initiating
>and liasing with the MG/PCC, and given visibility in the church.
>
>
>Whichever solution is found this 'vision' person should:
>
>a. be appointed and not elected.
>
>b. take a lead in awareness raising, promoting Mission in all its forms and
>initiating activities in the Church that help do this.
>
>c. be responsible for making sure the three support people know what their
>jobs are, are fulfilling those jobs; this would require meeting regularly
>with them.
>
>d. act as the known and visible contact person in the Church to whom the
>wider congregation can make representation, make suggestions, etc.
>regarding Mission activities.  This role and person must be widely publicised.
>
>
>Hope this helps.  But the who?  I have no great suggestions here.  I have
>lost track a little in recent weeks of Brian and Mary, but I wonder whether
>Brian Ashton might be such a person?
>
>Mike
>
>At 02:30 PM 3/6/00 +0000, you wrote:
>>Dear Mike,
>>
>>You mentioned a while ago the need to have someone nominated almost as the
>>"Champion" of the Missionary Activity Group work. I asked then if you would
>>have time to put down some thoughts. Our recommendation is ready to go to
>>the PCC, but we would like to include these thoughts, because we realise
>>the gap in our current approach. Any chances? 
>>
>>Hope you're not too bugged by travelling.
>>
>>All the best,
>>
>>Alan
>>
>>