The saga of why the Rev David Easton was not "extended" in the Isles of Scilly is a constant question that lead people to this blog. Just a sample from the google searches in the last hour:
rev david easton
scilly vicar problem
island parish methodist minister
island parish why did minister had to leave?
why was "david easton
why did the methodist minister have to leave the isles of scilly
Sadly the Methodist Church hasn't got over the message that this is part and parcel of being a Methodist Minister - few stay longer than six or seven years.
The denomination is in denial. Despite valient efforts locally this series has had a detrimental impact on the image of Methodism.
A few months ago there was a spate of letters in the Methodist Recorder from several people saying there were lessons to be learnt. I popped a letter in suggesting that there was a need for the denomination to to undertake a "lessons learn t" exercise.
My letter wasn't published and the near weekly letters suddenly ceased. I think in some quarters they call this "moderation". I call it censorship. Why are we so afraid of open discussion in today's church?
To those who know little about Methodism but have found themselves on this site, let me say that it is one of the most wonderful expressions of the Christian faith that has ever been created - even if us Methodists are not up to it on occasions.
In you wish to know more about this story click on the "An Island Parish" label below.
Posts
6 comments:
David, Having hardly ever missed an episode of Island Parish I'm currently finding it painful to watch the long drawn out departure of David Easton. And I'm sure others might feel the same.
Next weeks episode brings us the final chop. And as we saw, there will be tears as David sails off to new pastures on The Scillonian.
Just to have been allocated such a Methodist posting on those beautiful Islands is a dream job in itself. But to have it taken away from you after seven years must be awful beyond words. I cant even think why David's position was put to a vote. Was it his annual Island Pantomime Dame histrionics? Or was it the fact that he was a confirmed bachelor, as indeed many Churchmen are.
How can any man find his roots if he's being thrown about every few years from one Parish to another.
I have to say that I found Rev Steve Wild's 'Guilt' visit to the Islands somewhat embarrassing, and I say guilt because thats what it was... as sort of 'Sorry we instigated David's departure.'
Sitting in a room with four friends watching a recent episode when Steve Wild brought out his frog puppet to a crowd on the green overlooking St Mary's Harbour was embarrassing beyond words. Watching our tv's we stared in amazement and disbelief as Steve Wild turned into some end of pier vaudeville act. I know you say this is a practice in The Methodist Church but I and my friends found it quite unbelievable.
I can only hope that David Easton has by now settled in his new Parish in Wales and that hopefully his book about The Islands will be successful. I wish him well but perhaps The Methodist Church needs to review it's policies on uprooting it's Ministers. Whatever happened to job postings for life.
David (North London).
Thanks David of North London (there's a lot of David's here). When David Easton took the position in Scilly it was originally for five years. He would have been given an extension sometime in his fourth year for a further two years. My understanding is that the bar at circuit meetings lets lower as time progresses ie in the first year and extension is based on a 50% vote, a second extension requires a 60% vote in favour (I'm not absolutely certain of the exact proportion but I know it tapers).
Therefore the presumption is that Methodist Ministers will move on and it becomes increasingly difficult to extend.
You can see that in a small circuit such as the Scilly Isles a meeting could possibly consist of just ten people. It would only need one or two to vote against David to deny him the size of the majority he required. For all we know (we weren't told) the majority of the people at the meeting may have wanted him to stay.
I think we need to rethink the itinerant ministry. We need to create centres of excellence and build on them. I've seen situations where a good minister has built a church only for it to be destroyed within a couple of years by a very poor Minister with different ideas.
There in one other aspect to this. At anyone time about one in six Methodist churches have a Minister who is soon to leave or has just arrived. Given the very tenuous nature of the sustainability of many churches this built in instabilty is a luxury we can now longer afford. An itinerant ministry could be sustained when we had congregations of several hundreds (in some cases like the big city Central Halls, thousands), but can't be where the total Sunday congregation of 150 or so may be spread over four churches. We just have to change very radically and I feel the current issue is that part of the Methodist Churh wants to but doesn't know how, another part knows that we must but refuses to change.
One final point about Steve Wilde. He is a lovely God centred man. I don't think it was "guilt" that bought him to Scilly and I am very certain that there have been other less public visits. You arn't the first person on here to say that you found the puppet a bit of am embarrassment but I suspect the cameras shied away from the more serious spiritual work that Steve would have done, which is probably right because counselling people in ones and twos and praying with them is not where the cameras should be.
To echo David's comments to David (confused yet?) the vote was nothing to do with anything David had said or done - it was part of the normal revue and reinvitation process of any Methodist minister's job. Nobody is appointed to any place forever, and it is important to have these points where decisions are taken.
Where I agree with the other David is that this system of itinerancy is now past its sell-by date. It was appropriate for a 18-19th C revival movement, but not for a 21stC settled church. The initial appointment is for 5 years, which is fair enough - not too long, not too short. The problem is that the default position is that after 5 the minister will move unless a positive decision is taken to stay. Wrong way round, IMHO. All the church growth stuff that I've heard suggests that the most productive years of ministry are 6-9, so the default at 5 years should be to stay, and the default at 10 should be to go, with the option to decide otherwise if appropriate. I wrote saying this to the General Secretary, and he liked it and passed it to the Stationing Review Group, where it seems to have disappeared. I also wrote to the Recorder, and it was published. But we're still doing it the old way.
The public response to Island Parish indicates that most people do not understand Methodism. Well, here's an update - most Methodists don't understand it, either.
Interesting responses. Perhaps through watching Island Parish we have suddenly become more aware of The Methodist Church and the way it works. I know that it has quite a history down there in Cornwall.
Perhaps I was lucky in that our very popular Catholic Priest was there for most of my upbringing, from about age 8 right up to turning 16.
David (North London).
I live on the isles of scilly, i'm not a methodist so dont understand as to why david had to leave scilly but I would like to say, as an islander who has lived here for as long david that he is very much missed, david was a very unique minister who made the whole island feel at ease and he is sorely missed.
As far as I am led to understand it is up to the Chapel Stewards to vote 'representatively' as to whether or not a minister should stay in the post. As Christian people involved in this voting process, this should not be a problem, however on this occasion the votes against David were not 'representative of the congregation or community in general' but were personal. This is why the system should be changed.
Post a Comment