Ministerial
Development
Review
Interim Guidance
Ministry Division
Church House
Great Smith Street
London SW1P 3AZ
Tel: 020 7898 1412
Fax: 020 7898 1421
Published 2008 by the Ministry Division of the Archbishops’ Council
Copyright © The Archbishops’ Council 2008
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be
reproduced or stored or transmitted by any means or in any
form, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying,
recording, or any information storage and retrieval system,
without written permission which should be sought from the
Copyright Administrator, The Archbishops’ Council, Church
House, Great Smith Street, London SWIP 3AZ.
Email: copyright@c-of-e.org.uk
Cover design by Visible Edge
ii
Ministerial Development Review
Interim Guidance
Contents
Foreward ....................................................................................... v
1 Introduction .............................................................................. 1
2 The suggested three-step framework for review ....................... 2
Step One – Reflection Review the context of your ministry and
your role ..................................................................................... 2
Step Two – Preparation Reviewing the recent past and looking
ahead to the future ..................................................................... 4
Step Three – Discussion The review discussion and summary .. 6
3 Models of review preparation questions ................................... 8
4 Giving Feedback ...................................................................... 9
5 Acknowledgements and Additional Resources ....................... 11
Appendix I Illustrative models of review preparation questions .... 12
Questions for reflection and review based on the Ordinal ............ 12
Questions for reflection and review based on a Diocesan Mission
Plan ............................................................................................. 15
Questions for reflection and review based on promises made by
Readers as they are licensed ...................................................... 17
Questions for reflection and review based on Learning
Outcomes .................................................................................... 19
Questions for reflection and review based on core competencies 21
Questions for reflection and review based on objectives.............. 24
Appendix II Illustrative feedback pro-forma .................................. 26
iii
Appendix III Illustrative review summary pro-forma...................... 32
Appendix IV – The Ministerial Development Review Principles illustrative material from GS 1637-9Y .......................................... 37
Appendix V – Excerpt from Servants and Shepherds:
Developments in the Theology and Practice of Ministerial
Review ABM Ministry Paper No. 19 ............................................. 43
Appendix VI – Excerpt from Ministerial Review: Its Purpose and
Practice ABM Ministry Paper No. 6 .............................................. 47
iv
Foreword
The following interim guidance is offered to assist dioceses in
their preparations for the implementation of The Ecclesiastical
Officers (Terms of Service) Legislation. We find ourselves at a
very important juncture and are being presented with a real
opportunity to equip and develop our clergy for the challenges of
the twenty-first century. This guidance draws on a great deal of
existing practice in the dioceses. I hope that it will help us realise
the potential of development review.
+ Richard Kingston
Chair of the Continuing Ministerial Education and Development
Advisory Panel
March 2008
v
vi
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Chapter 1
Introduction
This booklet is intended as an interim guide for diocesan
Ministerial Development Review leads, those who will undertake
reviews, and other interested parties. The principles upon which
these guidelines are based are subject to final approval by the
House of Bishops; accordingly this booklet will be reviewed
before the legislation comes into force. Notwithstanding its
interim status, the booklet illustrates how dioceses may meet the
legislative requirements.
Ministerial development review is founded on the assumption
that all office holders are responsible to God for the ministry
entrusted to them and that they are accountable to the Church
and to one another for the way in which it is exercised. Ministry
is a gift and a trust for which each individual holds account.
Accountability is about preparedness to grow and develop on the
basis of experience and the learning gained from it. It is also
about how the work is done and how individual ministry can
make a real difference. It is about affirmation and
encouragement as well as challenge.
Ministerial development review facilitates a guided discussion
framed around an office holder’s ministry. The purpose of the
review is to look back and reflect on what has happened over the
last year or two of ministry and, informed by that, look forward to
plan, anticipate and develop a clearer vision for what lies ahead.
In looking back there is an opportunity to acknowledge all there
is to be thankful for, and in looking forward to anticipate the
changing demands of the role and explore areas for
development.
1
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Chapter 2
The suggested three-step
framework for review
Each ministry has its own features and nuances. This guidance
is not intended to imply one model for discharging
responsibilities. Rather, this flexible three-step framework
acknowledges and respects the rich variety of ministry, whether
it be parochially focused or no, self-supporting or stipendiary, lay
or ordained. Indeed, it provides multiple models that will assist
in the design, delivery and development of any existing diocesan
practise. The three steps are:
Reflection
for the office holder to reflect on the context of their own
ministry and role;
Preparation
to review the recent past and look ahead to the future; and,
Discussion
to hold a review discussion and record a summary of it.
Step One – Reflection
Review the context of your ministry and
your role
Dioceses are expected to have arrangements for notifying the
office holder that a review is approaching and for allocating a
reviewer. It is recommended that an element of continuity be
maintained in who conducts an individual office holder’s review,
where practicable. The reviewer will have been authorised and
trained for this role and be conversant with the Bishop’s vision
for the diocese (if the office holder has had no input into this
2
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
allocation they will have a right to make a reasoned objection).
At this stage it is helpful for the office holder to reflect on the
following:

their responsibility for, and roles within, the structures in which
they operate both within their primary context of their ministry
(e.g. Parish(es) or workplace) and within the wider church;

their responsibilities to colleagues in ministry;

their responsibilities and roles outside the Diocese in both
public and Church life;

their responsibility for the unfolding of their vocation in relation
to themselves and others;

their responsibility for themselves, their health and wellbeing.
If they do not already done so, it is helpful for them to produce a
written role description that sets out the particular needs and
opportunities of the office they hold. Developing this role
description in collaboration with their colleagues and partners in
ministry can help to ensure that expectations, whether the office
holder’s, or others’, are reasonable.
(Guidance on preparing role descriptions is currently being
prepared by the Terms of Service Implementation Panel)
In addition to describing the responsibilities, a reflection should
also reflect the changes that have shaped the office holder’s
ministry since the last review. For example: changes of key
people within their primary context of ministry and diocese;
discussions and debates within the Church and society which
have impacted their ministry; changing family and domestic
circumstances. Office holders should also be encouraged to
explore how these have affected the context in which they work,
the nature of their role, and whether the role description may
need to change to reflect this.
3
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Step Two – Preparation
Reviewing the recent past and looking
ahead to the future
General preparation
Once the office holder and reviewer have made arrangements
for the review they will need to do some detailed preparation. It
is expected that review papers will be provided to assist in this
process, including questions for reflection and review (a number
of illustrative models can be found at the end of this guidance in
Appendix I below). The purpose is to assist the process of
reflection on the various areas of ministry in the light of the office
holder’s work in the past year or two. It is recommended that this
process complements the office holder’s personal spiritual
direction as well as any work consultancy arrangements they
may have. During this preparation two or three key areas will
usually emerge that will become the focus of the review meeting.
It is not expected that detailed answers to all questions are
prepared. Indeed, a number of questions may be of limited
relevance depending on specific contexts. Rather, the questions
are there to help identify those key areas that may become the
focus of the meeting. It is helpful if the office holder makes brief
notes of these to share with the reviewer.
Progress in relation to objectives
Whatever model of review preparation is prepared or adopted by
the diocese (see Annex I below) the office holder should spend
some time reflecting on their progress towards the objectives set
at their last review, or at appointment. They are recommended to
ask themselves:

How far have the objectives been met, or have they changed?

How fruitful have the objectives been in the life of the
parish/benefice/the focus of ministry?

How have the objectives fitted in with the objectives that the
local church has set for itself?
4
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance

How have the objectives supported the mission of the
diocese?

How fruitful have the objectives been for the postholder
personally?
Feedback from others
An essential part of the review process is to help the office
holder to reflect on the impact their ministerial practice has on
others. Written feedback from lay and clergy colleagues is
intended to assist with this and is a required element of the
review. Example forms that could be used for obtaining feedback
can be found at the end of this guidance in Appendix II, below.
Refreshing your objectives
In advance of the review discussion the office holder should start
to identify their objectives for the coming year or two. These
should be ‘SMART’ (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic
and Time-based) and kept to a maximum of three personal
objectives and three ministry objectives. These are not
necessarily to be the final objectives but should function as a
starting point for the discussion with the reviewer in which they
may be refined, further developed or altered.
In this context some of the following questions may be asked:

what change does the office holder want to bring about?

is it congruent with their role description?

how will it support the parish/deanery or diocesan mission
strategy?

how will they do it?

do they need support, training or development to facilitate this
change and what steps will they take to receive this?

how will they know whether the objective has been met?
(what will success look like?)
5
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance

what are the milestones to success? (an action plan)

how will they keep track of progress? (arrangements for
monitoring)
Step Three – Discussion
The review discussion and summary
The reviewer’s role is to guide the office holder through a
discussion of the various aspects of the Ministerial Development
Review and to help them to consider the input gathered from lay
and clergy colleagues.
The expectation is that the office holder will do the majority of the
talking during the review discussion, the reviewer is there to
facilitate, to probe, to challenge, to attend to the gaps in the
conversation, to understand and to encourage.
Part of the Review process is to identify objectives for the
coming year or two. Building on their preparation the office
holder and the reviewer will identify and agree these. They might
range from developing priorities and strategies for personal and
spiritual development to a project on working with teenagers.
They will cover areas the office holder wants to prioritise in their
ministry, responsibilities to be fulfilled and skills and disciplines
to be developed. They should be ‘SMART’ (Specific,
Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and Time-based) and kept to
a maximum of three personal and three ministry objectives.
A written summary must be agreed and written up. Objectives
should be described in sufficient detail to be useful and will
include a timescale for completion. Short-term goals might be
part of a wider strategy or longer term plan, and may well
emerge in discussion as the office holder and reviewer reflect on
insights gained during the process. The written summary should
be sent to the Bishop and kept in the office holder’s blue file (the
file held by the Bishop and which is passed on if the office holder
moves between dioceses); an illustrative review summary proforma can be found at the end of this guidance in Appendix III,
below. The minimum information that must be recorded is: date;
6
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
office holder’s name and reviewer’s name; review of past
objectives and completion/movement towards them; new
objectives; any changes to the role description; relationships with
others; continuing ministerial development needs; summary of
input from lay people and response to this; and a note of
particular ministerial skills that might be made more widely
available.
7
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Chapter 3
Models of review
preparation questions
A number of illustrative models have been prepared and can be
found in Appendix I, at the end of this guidance. These do not
cover every particular, each ministry has its own features and
nuances. The models are variously based on:

The Ordinal

Initial Ministerial Education Learning Outcomes

Incumbent Competencies

Objectives

Readers’ licensing promises

Diocesan mission plans
Dioceses may choose to use one of these or develop questions
of their own. Indeed, it is not envisaged that the same set of
questions should be used in perpetuity. Rather that they would
periodically be reviewed and revised, as appropriate for the
particular context, e.g. the model based on a diocesan mission
plan.
8
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Chapter 4
Giving Feedback
Receiving feedback is an integral part of the review process. It is
recommended that individuals asked to provide feedback receive
some simple guidance. The person being asked to give
feedback should be identified as someone whose views would
be valued as part of an office holder’s ministerial development.
They should try to

Act as a ‘critical friend’, giving feedback that will both
encourage and affirm, and identify areas where there are
challenges that may need to be faced.

Give feedback based on their own experience, not what
others have said.

Be honest. Feedback will help the office holder gain
understanding of his or her strengths and weaknesses. The
focus of this process is development and improvement.

Express their feedback sensitively.
The should try to avoid

Letting any recent, exceptional, events influence their
feedback either positively or negatively, i.e. they should try to
reflect typical performance.

Letting a single incident or experience disproportionately
affect the feedback they give.

Letting their personal relationship with the person
disproportionately affect the feedback they give, i.e. they
should try to focus objectively on performance.
9
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance

Giving bland responses that avoid positive or negative
comments.
(Examples of simple forms that could be used for obtaining
feedback can be found in Appendix II below)
10
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Chapter 5
Acknowledgements and
Additional Resources
These interim guidelines have been developed by the Continuing
Ministerial Education and Development Advisory Panel, following
initial work by the Terms of Service Implementation Group. They
are informed by consultation with all dioceses. Their production
has been greatly assisted by the efforts of members of the
Panel, a sub-group of the Central Readers’ Council, and
numerous diocesan officers who have contributed both materials
and critical insights.
Further reading on ministerial development review may be found
in:
Servants and Shepherds: developments in the theology and
practice of ministerial review. ABM Ministry Paper no. 19, 1998.
Available from the Ministry Division Church House.
Ministerial Review: its purpose and practice. ABM Ministry Paper
no. 6, 1994. Available from the Ministry Division Church House.
If you have questions regarding these guidelines and would like
to discuss how they relate to current or developing practice in
your diocese we now have a national adviser who will be
pleased to assist you.
Dr Tim Ling
National Continuing Ministerial Development Adviser
Email tim.ling@c-of-e.org.uk
Telephone 020 7898 1408
11
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Appendix I
Illustrative models of
review preparation
questions
Questions for reflection and review
based on the Ordinal
This model of review preparation is designed to encourage
exploration of the fulfilment of your vocation and how this is
demonstrated and lived out in you ministry. It is based on
the Ordinal and the promises made by priests when they are
ordained. It is set within the context of a changing and
evolving church. It is only a guide and is not intended as a
definitive list. The context of your own ministry and your
own understanding of your vocation will shape your
preparation and the review discussion, in addition to the
priorities that you established in your previous review and
those arising from current diocesan strategies.
Will you be diligent in prayer, in reading Holy Scripture and in all
studies that will deepen your faith, and fit you to bear witness to
the truth of the gospel?

Consider your patterns of prayer, personal and corporate
ministerial development and study, and their sufficiency in
sustaining you as a minister of Christ. How have you
implemented what you learned/discovered from these?
Will you lead Christ’s people in proclaiming his glorious gospel,
so that the Good News of salvation may be heard in every place?

12
Observations about initiatives in evangelism and mission that
have continued or been started and observations about the
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
overall situation within your parish or primary context of
ministry
Will you faithfully minister the doctrine and sacraments of Christ
as the Church of England has received them, so that the people
committed to your charge may be defended against error and
flourish in the faith?

Observations about the patterns of worship and teaching in
the parish(es) over the last year/two years and about ministry
associated with the occasional offices
Will you, knowing yourself to be reconciled with God in Christ,
strive to be an instrument of God’s peace in the Church and in
the world?

During the last year/two years, what joys and difficulties have
occurred in working with any of the following:
ordained colleagues?
lay colleagues in or outside the church?
ecumenical and inter-faith partners?
the local community, with its resources and needs?
Will you endeavour to fashion your own life and that of your
household according to the way of Christ, that you may be a
pattern and example to Christ’s people?

Consider the relationship between your work and your
personal/family life during the last year/two years.
Observations about the relationship between your work and
the maintaining of friendships.
During the last year/two years did you
take sufficient opportunities for time/space for yourself?
take regular days off, retreat, and sufficient time for
holiday?

Do you have any particular concerns about your own health
and that of your family? How might this have affected your
ministry?
13
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Will you work with your fellow servants in the Gospel for the
sake of the kingdom of God?

Observations on the way in which you have been able to
discern, develop and deploy the gifts of others in the service
of God.
Will you accept and minister the discipline of this Church and
respect authority duly exercised within it?

During the last year/two years have you had concerns about
the church structures you work within: the parish (PCC
etc)/other primary context of ministry, deanery, diocese,
national church?
In what ways were you supported by the Bishop(s);
Archdeacon; Diocesan Departments; Diocesan Office;
Deanery?
Were there any difficulties or constraints you experienced
from them? In what ways are you a resource to them? How
have you supported them? What gifts do you / can you offer
to them?
Will you then, in the strength of the Holy Spirit, continually stir
up the gift of God that is in you, to make Christ known among all
whom you serve?

How far have the objectives you set at your last review been
realised? What general objectives do you have so far for the
coming year/two years in your ministry?

What hopes do you have for your ministry in the longer term?
Is there any significant change in direction that you would like
to make now - in twelve/twenty-four months?

What training or study would assist your ministerial
development?

What significant local opportunities have there been for
mission?

Where do you believe God is working in your deanery or
broader context of ministry?
14
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Questions for reflection and review
based on a Diocesan Mission Plan
This model of review preparation is shaped by the fact that
your ministry can be helped or hindered by the
opportunities opened up in the life of your local church; in
the communities where you serve; and by the focus and
resources of your diocese aimed at building up effective
ministry.
1. If your diocese has a ‘mission statement’ how is its form and
content reflected in the ‘mission statement’ of the church(es)
you lead and how this is worked out in the realities of their
fellowship, witness and actions?
‘Receive this charge which is both mine and yours’.
2. Would you say that since your last review your experience of
ministering in fellowship and partnership with your Bishop
and other key resource people in the diocese has been
increasingly real or otherwise? What practical suggestions
would you like to make that could serve to strengthen this
fellowship and make it more effective and fruitful from your
point of view?
3. Who are the main mission and ministry partners with whom
you work regularly among the other Church of England
churches in your area? What practical suggestions would
you like to make that could serve to strengthen this
partnership and make it more effective and fruitful from your
point of view?
4. Who are the main mission and ministry ecumenical partners
with whom you work regularly among the churches in your
area? What practical suggestions would you like to make that
could serve to strengthen this partnership and make it more
effective and fruitful from your point of view?
5. What ‘twinning’ or ‘link’ arrangements do you have between
your church(es) and church(es) or people in your diocese’s
15
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
overseas link dioceses or with other churches elsewhere
whether Anglican or among the wider fellowship of
Christians? If you do have such links, how have they been
expressed recently and what could be done further to
strengthen them?
6. What informal or formal partnerships does your church have
with non-church voluntary and statutory organisations that
serve the communities where you minister; and what
diocesan or other church-based resources do you need to
strengthen these partnerships and make them more fruitful?
7. Where do you and your church(es) mainly look to find
inspiration, spiritual renewal and new ideas for the exercise
of mission in the places where you serve; and what plans
have you got in hand to build on the good experience of
other Christians in ways that are relevant and realistic for the
communities your work within?
8. What do you know about the suffering experienced by the
people of the communities where your church(es) is / are
based – whether in terms of personal difficulties; economic
struggles and other factors that lead to the sense of
powerlessness or of ‘marginalisation’; and what strategies
are you able to use in promoting your church’s awareness of
and responses to them? What diocesan or other resources
are you able to access to help with this?
9. What are the main challenges for you personally in relation to
the role of the priest in leading their church(es) forward in
mission and evangelism; and what aims could you set for
yourself for you to be strengthened in meeting some of these
challenges?
10. If there were to be one or two suggestions you could make
for practical change that could increase the effectiveness of
the churches of your diocese more effective in mission and
evangelism what would your suggestions be?
16
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Questions for reflection and review
based on promises made by Readers as
they are licensed
This model of review is designed to encourage
exploration of the fulfilment of vocation, and how this is
lived out in parish, work and community. It is based on
the promises made by Readers as they are licensed.
The review is intended as a guide and not as a definitive
list. The context of your own ministry and your own
understanding of your vocation will shape the
discussion.
Do you believe that God has called you to this ministry?

Am I being true to the vocation that has brought me to this
point?

Is my ministry flourishing and growing - can I set objectives
for the future that will develop my ministry and help me to fulfil
my vocation further?

Does my ministry include elements of evangelism and
mission that seek to further the kingdom of God?
Will you be faithful in leading the people of God in worship,
and in preaching the word to them?

Are there areas of public worship in which I need further
training?

Is the feedback I receive from my colleagues and members of
the congregation helpful, constructive, revealing points that
need addressing?

Do I give enough time and attention to preparation and
background reading to preach?
Will you be diligent in prayer, in reading holy Scripture, and
in all studies that will deepen your faith, and fit you to bear
witness to the truth of the Gospel?

Are my patterns of prayer, personal reflection and study
sustaining and challenging me as a minister of Christ?
17
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance

Has the CME I have undertaken in the last year helped me to
grow and contributed towards my development and personal
objectives?

Have I implemented what I have learned and discovered over
the last year/two years?
Will you endeavour to fashion your life according to the way
of Christ?

As I reflect on my daily life does it honour the pattern I know
to be true to the Christian gospel, and take account of the
relationships within it.?

I give sufficient opportunity for time and space for myself and
my family, with days off, a retreat, holidays?

Are there concerns for my own welfare and that of my family
or colleagues?
Will you promote unity, peace and love in the church and in
the world and especially among those whom you serve?

As I reflect on my daily working life, how do I take my ministry
to the people among whom I find myself?

Is my ministry effective in environments other than church and
public worship and are my relations with the world reflective of
the gospel?

Is my pastoral ministry in the community adequately
resourced?

Where are the points of tension in my ministry and how do I
set about relieving them?
Will you work closely with your colleagues in ministry and
encourage the gifts of others?

How are my relationship with my ministry colleagues - do we
encourage growth in each other?

Are there ways in which we could improve our working
relationship and methods of working?

What gifts can I/do I offer to others in their spiritual journey?
18
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Questions for reflection and review
based on Learning Outcomes
This model of review preparation is based upon the
learning outcomes for ordination training, published in
‘Shaping the Future’ (Ministry Division 2006) and agreed
by the House of Bishops.
Vocation

In want ways have you been able to help your Church
community to fulfil its vision over the past year? How has
your vision for your ministry and that of your
congregation/community developed within the last year? In
what ways will you seek to further that development?
Ministry within the Church of England

What opportunities have you had for ministering in a public
and representative way during the last year? In what ways
has this ministry been effective? How could its effectiveness
be improved?
Spirituality

In what ways has your life been sustained by public and
private prayer during the last year? Have you made time to
see a Spiritual Director/soul friend/members of a cell group
over the last year?
Personality and character

In what ways have you developed or maintained sustainable
patterns of life and work over the last year? Have you gained
new insights into your own personal leadership style?
Relationships

In what ways have you been able to foster the formation of
corporate life within your church community? In what ways
have you been able to foster community within your
locality/sphere of work? Can you identify pastoral
relationships that have been effective over the last year? In
what ways will you seek to build on these relationships?
Leadership and collaboration

In what ways have you demonstrated effective, collaborative
leadership over the last year? What have you done to
19
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
empower others to develop further in their mission and
ministry? In what areas of your ministry or in what ways do
you need to develop this further?
Mission and evangelism

In what ways has your ministry over the last year
demonstrated an understanding of contemporary society and
the relevance of the gospel? In what ways have you been
able to engage in mission/evangelism in a range of contexts?
How do you enable and encourage others to engage in their
witness and mission? Where do you see opportunities to build
further on this in the coming year?
Faith

What new insights into the Christian faith and your
relationship with Christ have you experienced? In what ways
has this related to your engagement in ministry over the last
year?
Quality of mind

20
What opportunities have you been able to make for study,
and reflection on your ministerial experience, over the last
year? In what ways has this helped develop your ministry
and/or your discipleship?
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Questions for reflection and review
based on core competencies
This model of review preparation uses the core
competencies that may be expected of an Incumbent.
Leadership
An incumbent is called to lead their church in articulating and
holding its vision.

How are you inspiring, motivating, and empowering members
of the church, individually and collectively, to understand and
realise that vision?
Working Collaboratively
An incumbent is called to work with others (including clergy
colleagues, church wardens, PCC, staff & volunteers).

Who are you currently working with? How do you ensure their
gifts and talents are identified and used effectively to build up
the community of faith? What is the quality of this working
community?
Communications
An incumbent is called to communicate effectively and
appropriately with people of all ages and situations, in society,
inside and outside of the church.

What are you hearing? How do you know you have been
heard?
Parish Management and Organisation
An incumbent is called to work with the PCC and churchwardens
to put in place appropriate structures and resources for parish
organisation.

Do you have clear boundaries and accountabilities of roles?
What processes and policies in relation to services, weddings,
baptisms and funerals, health and safety, finances, fabric,
staff management etc do you have in place? When did you
last review them? Do they meet diocesan and legal
requirements?
21
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Outreach
An incumbent is called to develop a ministry that encourages
new people to Christian faith.

What relationship with people and communities do you have
outside the church? How do you support existing Christians to
engage in evangelism and discipleship?
Worship
An incumbent is called to lead worship prayerfully, competently
and confidently.

How does your planning, organisation and conduct of worship
support the vision and needs of ministry in your context?
What resources, music, teaching and preaching have you
found particularly helpful?
Preaching
An incumbent is called to reflect, interpret and preach the gospel
in a way that encourages faith development.

How confident are you that you can adapt your preaching for
different audiences, occasions and purposes? When was the
last time you received structured feedback on your
preaching?
Teaching
An incumbent is called to teach in support of faith development.

What courses, e.g. confirmation preparation, Lent,
introduction to Christianity, have you taught in the last twelve
months? What are you planning? Who are you planning it
with? What is your educational model and why?
Pastoral Care
An incumbent is called to identify pastoral care needs and put in
place appropriate structures.

What are the pastoral needs in your community? How do you
know? What structures do you have in place to provide
pastoral support and care in relation to baptism and marriage
preparation, care of the sick and dying, bereavement, and
other needs?
Self-Management
An incumbent is called to follow and appropriate pattern of work
to meet the demands of ministry.

22
How do you order your week? When do you attend to
planning and organisation? Do you take a regular day off?
What is your pattern?
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Personal Development
An incumbent is called continually to develop personal skills
and knowledge in relation to ministry.

What study, reading, consultancy, training courses or
workshops have you recently attended, or are planning to
attend? What would you describe as having been an
important moment of learning for you in the last twelve
months?
Spirituality
An incumbent is called to maintain a prayerful spiritual life with
appropriate support networks.

When did you last go on retreat? Do you have a spiritual
director or equivalent? How is your capacity for theological
understanding and spiritual reflection developing?
23
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Questions for reflection and review
based on objectives
This model of review preparation focuses on objectives
1. How far have you achieved the objectives you set at your last
review? (Consider the objectives identified, summarize
achievements and note objectives still in progress.) Overall,
were the objectives you set realistic and achievable?
2. In the past year what have been the most
rewarding/satisfying experiences in your ministry? Are these
the most fruitful areas or not? What has gone well? Have
there been some pleasant surprises? What factors (in the
situation and/or in yourself) contributed to these rewarding
experiences?
3. What experiences of ministry in the past year gave you
dissatisfaction? What have you enjoyed the least? What
factors (in the situation and/or in yourself) contributed to this
dissatisfaction? What problems/barriers have you faced?
How have you overcome these? What would you do
differently next time? How?
4. How will you discern / how have you discerned if these are
areas which simply require persistence, require other people
to have involvement or need to be brought to a finish?
5. Where do you discern the activity of God in the experiences
of the past year and how might this influence your
understanding of what God is asking of you in the next year
or two?
6. What do you see as the priorities in your ministerial vocation
for the coming period?
7. What are you reflections on the lay input to this review? What
was helpful? How could you maximise this? How do you
assess your relations with others e.g. colleagues and
parishioners during the year? Could these have been better?
How?
24
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
8. What do you want to improve/build on? How?
9. What else have you learnt? About yourself, about other
people, about God and about God’s calling to you and God’s
work through you?
10. How has your spiritual life developed over the last year/two
years? Where have you seen the ministry of others develop?
25
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Appendix II
Illustrative feedback pro-formas –
Example 1
Seeking and gathering feedback is a real opportunity to learn
more about what works well and what is not working. Think
carefully about how you can make the most of it. Who will have
the confidence and skill to act as a critical friend? Who is
touched by aspects of your ministry you want to develop further?
Who could comment on an area of your work whose impact you
would like to understand better?
FEEDBACK FRAME
What is your relationship to the reviewee?
Which particular areas of their ministry are you commenting on?
What isn’t working yet?
What is working?


What is possible?
What is missing?


26
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Illustrative feedback pro-forma –
Example 2
Consultation before Ministry Review
Feedback offered by
Name
Position or role
Date
Generally speaking, how do you think I am getting on in my ministry?
Please tell me what you think are my gifts as a minister
Are there ways I could use these gifts more effectively?
Please tell me where you think my ministry needs to grow and change
Do you think those amongst whom I minister have significant needs I am not
meeting?
Please tell me if you think there are any relationships I should try to improve
Have you other comments, which could be helpful in my preparation for my
Ministry Review?
27
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Illustrative feedback pro-forma –
Example 3
Feedback Form
Name of person on and for whom you are providing
feedback:
Your name:
Return to:
By date:
Delegation
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Comments:
Delegation lacks clarity and clear authority Delegation is expressed with clarity and
for decision-making by those to whom work clear authority for decision-making is given.
delegated
Team Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Comments:
Does not take responsibility for ensuring
that the team receives effective support.
Takes responsibility for ensuring that the
team receives support, which is effective
and efficient.
Communication – listening
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Comments:
Poor listener lacking skills of empathy and
appropriate response.
28
Good at listening and responding in a clear
and appropriate manner.
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Communication - presentation
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Comments:
Poor skills, attitudes and practices of
presentation.
Good skills, attitudes and practices of
presentation.
Diligence
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Comments:
Often fails to complete agreed tasks
adequately or fails to serve others in the
mundane.
Hard-working, servant heart, committed to
seeing tasks through to their completion.
Vision
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Comments:
Has no sense of direction or motivating
vision.
Is clearly strongly motivated by a clear
vision for the future even though the steps
may be less clear.
Time Management
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Comments:
Rarely punctual. Unable to prioritise work
or maintain deadlines.
Always punctual and prioritises work to
meet deadlines.
29
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Balance
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Comments:
Fails to observe a rhythm of work and rest
resulting in poor physical, emotional or
spiritual health
Always maintains a good rhythm of work
and rest.
Compassion
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Comments:
Shows in adequate appreciation of needs
for comfort and help, or develops
inappropriate emotional involvement.
Always appreciates needs for comfort and
help, but avoids inappropriate emotional
involvement.
Integrity
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Comments:
Lack of appropriate conduct, honesty and
trustworthiness.
Always shows exemplary conduct, honesty
and trustworthiness.
Responsibility
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Comments:
Does not accept responsibility for own
actions and decisions, blames other
professionals.
30
Fully accepts responsibility for own actions
and decisions.
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Motivation
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Comments:
Does not motivate and engender loyalty of
others.
Motivates and engenders loyalty of others.
Endurance
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Comments:
Easily deflected by opposition, difficulties
or suffering
Often perseveres in the face of opposition,
difficulties or suffering.
Walk with God
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Comments:
Does not demonstrate evidence of a
Demonstrates a commitment to personal
personal relationship with God in
bible study, prayer and fellowship with
commitment to personal bible study, prayer others.
and fellowship with others.
Security
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Comments:
Often in need of reassurance and
affirmation; tends to focus on self rather
than God.
Secure in identity first and foremost as a
child of God rather than achievements.
31
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Appendix III
Illustrative review summary pro-forma
This is an example of how the requirement to keep a written
record can be met. The key thing to remember is that whatever
format you choose that as a minimum the following are noted:
date; your name and your reviewer’s name; review of past
objectives and completion/movement towards them; new
objectives; any changes to the role description; relationships with
others; continuing ministerial development needs; summary of
input from lay people and your response to this; and a note of
particular ministerial skills that might be made more widely
available.
32
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Review of objectives set last time.
Take each objective in turn. Review how far they have been met
or refined. How fruitful have they been in the life of your
parish/benefice/the focus of your ministry? How fruitful have they
been for you personally?
Ministry Objectives
Measure of progress
Review/
completion
date
1.
2.
3.
Reflections at the end of the year
Personal Objectives
Measure of progress
Review/
completion
date
1.
2.
3.
Reflections at the end of the year
33
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Summary and reflection on feedback.
Summarise the feedback received from others including
feedback offered by your Reviewer, and your response.
34
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Objectives for the coming two years.
Ministry Objectives
Measure of progress
Review/
completion
date
Measure of progress
Review/
completion
date
1
2
3
Personal /
Developmental Objective
1
2
3
Summary of development needs.
From the objectives you have set above what learning and
development needs have you identified?
Learning and development needs identified
How can these learning needs be met? What action are you going to take
by when?
A copy of this page will be sent to the CME Officer
35
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Reviewee comments
Reviewee
name and
signature
Date of Review
Reviewer
name and
signature
After you have made your comments the Reviewer will send the
completed form to the Bishop for any comment and for filing on
your blue file (the file held by the bishop and which is passed on
if you move between dioceses). The Reviewer and you should
keep copies. You are responsible for following up the objectives
and actions agreed in the review.
Bishop’s comments
Signed…………………………………Date……………..
36
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Appendix IV
The Ministerial Development Review
Principles - illustrative material from GS
1637-9Y
NB These are the current draft guidelines for Ministerial
Development Review (known as the MDR principles). They are
subject to final approval by the House of Bishops before the
legislation takes effect.
INTRODUCTION
11. These guidelines recognise:

the responsibility of the Church to assist in developing the
skills, talents and abilities of those who have been selected
and trained for the ministry so they are better able to meet the
demands of ministry today and in the future;

the relationship between the bishop and his clergy and their
shared cure of souls;

that clergy are called to be deacons, priests and bishops, but
are appointed to exercise particular offices;

that bishops, clergy and those they serve are accountable to
each other;

that clergy should have protection from unreasonable
expectations;

that ministry takes place in different contexts;

that clergy should be free to exercise their ministry in a way
that is sometimes prophetic.
37
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
MINISTERIAL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW GUIDELINES
(THE MDR PRINCIPLES)
1. Ministerial Development Review (MDR) gives expression to
theological principles which underpin relationships and
behaviour within the Church as the Body of Christ.
2. There is already much good practice in dioceses. These
guidelines are intended to build on this by ensuring
consistent and good practice and ensure that clergy moving
from one diocese to another experience some continuity of
review. These guidelines will be a minimum requirement.
3. MDR is an opportunity for the priest or deacon concerned,
‘the reviewee’, to reflect on the period since the previous
review and to identify objectives and development needs for
the future. It takes place in the context of the particular
ministry of each participant, their CME needs and any
diocesan strategic plans. It assists dioceses to plan relevant
and effective CME.
4. MDR is episcopally led. The bishop may wish to delegate
some of his functions in this area to others.
5. The bishop is responsible for ensuring that MDR is provided
in his diocese. Dioceses may wish to devise their own
schemes, which must, however, be in accordance with these
guidelines as amended from time to time by the House of
Bishops. The sample schemes which have been made
available accord with these guidelines and are offered for
use by dioceses.
6. All clergy on common tenure are required to participate in
MDR. It is good practice for MDR to be offered to all clergy,
including those with the freehold. Special factors apply in
some cases.
i. Particular care will be required in cases in which clergy
hold two different appointments with responsibilities in
different fields to ensure clarity about the review
procedure and who is to conduct it. These matters
should be agreed as part of the conditions of service on
appointment and reviewed when circumstances change.
38
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
ii. Any minister with a contract of employment (e.g., a
sector minister) is likely to be covered by his or her
employer’s scheme; a person employed by an outside
body but licensed by the bishop will normally be within
the MDR scheme in respect of the licence.
iii. Clergy in their title post are subject to review as part of
their on-going training. They may benefit from
participating in full MDR in their final year of IME4-7.
iv. There is a special scheme for bishops.
7. It is recommended that some form of review take place every
year but MDR in accordance with these guidelines must be
carried out not less than once every two years. Within that
framework, bishops may wish to implement a review cycle in
their diocese with different forms of review in alternate years.
Interim review may be carried out as part of the induction
process on moving post or assuming additional
responsibilities.
8. It is for the bishop to decide who will conduct reviews in his
diocese. He will appoint reviewers and ensure that they are
trained and continue to meet the required standard. The
bishop will decide whether he wishes to conduct reviews
himself. In most dioceses he is unlikely to be able to conduct
all reviews himself but is likely to want to conduct the reviews
of his senior clergy.
9. MDR will be conducted on a one-to-one basis. The bishop
will ensure appropriate pairings of reviewers and reviewees
and will direct how this is to be done in his diocese. The
reviewer will need to be able to take an objective view. The
reviewer will need to be conversant with the bishop’s vision
and expectations of his clergy in general and this
parish/group of parishes/area of ministry in particular. The
reviewer will need to be authorised to agree personal
objectives with the reviewee, bearing in mind parish and
diocesan objectives and strategy. If the reviewee has no
input into the choice of reviewer there will be a right to make
a reasoned objection.
39
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
10. The MDR is expected to be searching and requires both the
reviewer and the reviewee to prepare beforehand.
11. MDR needs to recognise the context in which the reviewee is
ministering. It is recommended that prior to the first MDR in a
new post, or following introduction of the scheme, a
statement is prepared setting out the basic facts of the parish
or focus of ministry. This should be reviewed and updated by
the reviewee if necessary before the MDR each year.
Existing role descriptions and statements of expectations
should also be reviewed and updated if necessary at the
MDR each year. It is useful to try and make these as clear as
possible. Input from others may be required.
12. The MDR will include an assessment of how far past
objectives or priorities have been met or refined and how
fruitful they have been in the life of the parish/benefice/area
of ministry and of the participant. This will help to identify
whether the objectives were useful, realistic and achievable
and whether some form of additional help or support is
needed. Some objectives will be long-term and the fact that
little progress has been made in reaching such an objective
in one particular period should not necessarily be seen as
failure on the part of the reviewee: it may prompt reflection
and perhaps re-statement of the objectives.
13. Following prayerful reflection before the MDR and within the
light of discussions within the MDR, fresh objectives or
priorities for the forthcoming period will be agreed. These
should include both personal development objectives and
ministry-focussed objectives. It is recommended that
normally no more than six should be agreed - three of each.
They should be flexible. If they have been achieved during
the period, further objectives should be set. It may be that the
same objective will occur over several years. Longer term
development and ministry objectives may also need to be
considered. Ministry focussed objectives will normally need
to be shared with and owned by those with a part in the
relevant ministry, e.g. the churchwardens or PCC.
14. Before the review takes place, comments will be sought from
a representative range of others who have knowledge of the
40
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
reviewee’s ministry including lay representatives in the
parish/area of ministry and these comments will be recorded.
These views on performance in relation to role and planned
objectives should have a developmental focus and may
usefully include reference to specific ministerial skills
identified for particular comment. Depending on local
arrangements, these may be collected by the reviewee or by
a designated MDR administrator. The reviewee has the right
to suggest the names of some who should be approached for
comment and has a right to object to any of those suggested
by the bishop or reviewer. Any difference of opinion or
exercise of the right of veto should be formally noted.
15. The MDR process might usefully include a specific section
on ministerial skills, which are often identified through the
feedback from the lay representatives. Where people have
particular skills these could be identified for particular
comment, not just in terms of offering affirmation and
encouragement to the cleric concerned, but also when
appropriate to recommend that these skills be made more
widely available within, say, a deanery or within the diocese.
16. A written summary of the MDR will be made by the reviewee
or the reviewer. The minimum information to be recorded will
be:
i. Date;
ii. Reviewer, reviewee;
iii. Review of past objectives or priorities and completion /
movement towards them;
iv. New objectives or priorities;
v. Any changes to the role description
vi. Relations with others;
vii. CME needs;
41
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
viii. Summary of input from lay people and colleagues and
reviewee’s response to this;
ix. A note of particular ministerial skills that might be made
more widely available;
The reviewee ideally should be involved in the writing of the
summary, and, as a minimal requirement must be given an
opportunity to see the written summary. The reviewee and the
reviewer will each have the opportunity to note any areas of
disagreement. Copies of the MDR summary will be kept by the
reviewee and the bishop. The bishop will arrange for a copy to
be placed on the reviewee’s blue file (the file held by the bishop
and which is passed on when there is any change of diocese)
and for a note of the development needs to be passed to the
CME officer.
i. The primary responsibility for follow-up action after MDR
lies with the reviewee and the bishop. The bishop may
delegate aspects of follow-up to designated officers in
the diocese but ultimately the responsibility is his.
ii. MDR is part of the pastoral care a bishop gives to the
clergy and does not preclude time being requested and
given on specific pastoral matters or for advice about a
move.
42
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Appendix V
Excerpt from Servants and Shepherds:
Developments in the Theology and
Practice of Ministerial Review ABM
Ministry Paper No. 19
Accountability
24
Some clergy may see ministerial review as a threat to their
traditional independence, or as a way of identifying (and
punishing) those whose ministry is at worse ineffective or
dead, or at best slipping into negativity and despair.
(Jacobs 1989, p62) A clear distinction needs to be made
between ‘appraisal’ (normally used to review past
performance) and ministerial review which is futureorientated and looking at development needs.
25
As stressed in ABM Ministry Paper No 6 (paras. 6 & 8)
mutual accountability is intrinsic to ministry, ‘Clergy can
never consider themselves in private practice. All are
under authority and accountable to one another as
interdependent members of the body of Christ.’ (1
Corinthians 12:4ff).
That accountability should be seen as supportive, rather
than threatening, with times of growth celebrated, times of
weakness or failure put into perspective and new
resources and encouragement for the future formed. A
delightful theological perspective for review is provided by
the United Methodist Church of America (quoted in Ministry
Today No 9 February 1997):
43
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
‘Evaluation is natural to the human experience.
Evaluation is one of God’s ways of bringing the history
of the past into dialogue with the hope for the future.
Without confession of sin there is no reconciliation;
without the counting of blessings there is no
thanksgiving;
without the acknowledgement of accomplishments
there is no celebration;
without awareness of potential there is no hope;
without hope there is no desire for growth;
without desire for growth the past will dwarf the
future.’
We are called into new growth and new ministries by
taking a realistic and hopeful look at what we have
been and what we can still become. Surrounded by
God’s grace and the crowd of witnesses in the faith, we
can look to our past unafraid and from its insights
eagerly face the future with new possibilities.
26.
In reviewing the development of schemes since the 1994
report, great emphasis has been put on accountability in
ministerial review. There has been some scepticism
regarding ministerial review expressed, with clergy
reluctant to be drawn into what might appear as
bureaucratic or hierarchical ‘interference’ (‘I’m only
accountable to God’ is a typical expression of this
scepticism). However, the encouraging aspect of many of
the new schemes has been the recognition that this is not
the introduction of a management tool for its own sake, but
a means of ensuring that clergy and laity alike are aware of
the wider accountability within the Christian family, based
on biblical models.
27.
Where in Scripture might there be examples of and
reflection upon accountability and mutual help in reviewing
ministry? There are many examples of private discussion
44
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
and explanation between Jesus and the disciples. There is
a clear familial relationship between those who do the will
of God (Matthew 12:50). According to Matthew we are
being Christ to one another when we receive from one
another (Matthew 10:40). There are several parables to do
with servants being brought to account and the importance
of being both shrewd and trustworthy. We are encouraged
not to judge one another (Luke 6:37), to listen carefully
(Luke 8:18) and not to conceal things (Matthew 10:26 and
John 3:20)
28.
Paul is perhaps a rather unhelpful model at first sight since
he clearly regards himself as accountable to no-one but
God (cf 1 Corinthians 4.2.5) and his anxiety not to be
subordinate or answerable to the Jerusalem apostles
(Galatians 2). However, it is clear from the beginning and
end of several of his epistles that ‘partnership in the
gospel’ (Philippians 1.5) was important to him. The list in
Romans 16 includes both slaves (v.9) and more affluent
householders (v. 3) as fellow workers. Rufus’s mother has
also been ‘mother’ to Paul (v. 13). 1 & 2 Corinthians,
Philippians, Collossians, 1 & 2 Thessalonians are written
as from Paul and a colleague(s).
29.
All this evidence of Paul living the ‘body of Christ theology’
he expounds in Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12. ‘In
Christ we who are many form one body and each member
belongs to all the others’ (Romans 12.5). This is not only
the basis of the co-operation of ministries and gifts but also
the mutual acceptance which comes from not living to
oneself (Romans 14.5-8). The Corinthian development of
body imagery emphasises the parts of the body having
equal concern for each other. If one part suffers all parts
suffer. If one part is honoured all parts are honoured (1
Corinthians 12). 2 Corinthians 1.5-7 speaks of an
overflowing or inter-relationship of experiences which
illustrates this. In Galatians he talks of bearing one
another’s burdens (6.2) as the way of fulfilling the law of
Christ. His famous injunction in Philippians 2.12 to ‘work
out your salvation with fear and trembling’ is addressed to
the whole community and not to its members as
45
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
individuals. In Collossians 3.16 the members of the
community are instructed to teach and admonish one
another ‘ with all wisdom’. Finally in the non PaulineHebrews (13.17) there are references to their leaders who
‘keep watch over you as those who must give an account’.
30
46
In the Johannine teaching, upon which much of our
understanding of the Trinity is based, it is clear that Jesus
sees himself as part of a sustaining relationship with the
Father in which nothing that he does comes from himself.
That relationship he seeks to recreate with and among the
disciples. They are to wash one another’s’ feet, to serve
and care for another, to be the friends of Jesus as of one
another, persecuted together and together guided into truth
by the Spirit. Apart from Jesus they are scattered (John
16.32); together they are witnesses of the resurrection.
Jesus prays that they may be one as he and the Father are
one (John 17:11). ‘May they be brought to complete unity
to let the world know that you sent me and have loved
them even as you have loved me’ (John 17:23). In what
way might the ordained ministry of the Church be changed
if the ‘college’ of bishops, priests and deacons, put all this
into practice for one another, as well as in their ministry for
the wider Church?
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Appendix VI
Excerpt from Ministerial Review: Its
Purpose and Practice ABM Ministry
Paper No. 6
GIFT AND RESPONSIBILITY
Some Ecclesiological and Theological Considerations
Prompted by Ministerial Review
Two particular issues relating to Ministerial Review invite further
consideration in the light of our theology and understanding of
the Church. First is the nature and appropriate expression of
accountability, and second is the meaning of development when
applied to ministry.
I. ACCOUNTABILITY
St Paul’s image of the body is central to the Church’s selfunderstanding, in particular in the way it expresses the
relationships between individual members and their relationship
to Christ. In his use of the image in 1 Corinthians 12 Paul
sought to express the essential relatedness of the individual
members of the Church in a Christian community whose practice
appeared to deny this relationship. His understanding of
Christians’ essential relatedness, presented through the body
image, provides crucial illumination for our current concerns
about accountability. For Paul, the body of Christ is the body of
a distinctive individual, but it is a corporate body made up of
other distinctive individuals. As in a physical body with limbs and
organs each with a part to play, so in the body of Christ each
member has a particular role, but one which enables the whole
body to function properly. Individual members exercise their
own roles, but for the good of the whole.
47
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Christians are joined in this body through the bond of baptism (1
Cor 12:13), which makes our relatedness essential to our being
Christian. By our baptism we acknowledge and accept God’s
gifts and call to participate in the work of Christ’s body, taking
our own particular part. We are accountable to God for how we
live out our calling, but God does not call us alone or in isolation,
but into participation in a body. We are therefore accountable to
one another. There are thus two aspects to our accountability
before God: our individual responsibility for the part we have
been given to do, and our accountability to one another for
exercising our part for the good of the whole.
Christians, ordained and lay, are aware of the tension in their
own lives between the individual and corporate roles. Much of
our day to day witness and ministry is conducted in relative
isolation, hidden probably from many with whom we gather to
worship and renew our commitment “to live and work to your
praise and glory”. God entrusts us with ministry to our particular
circumstances, and we work this out both individually and
corporately.
Individual Responsibility
Our individual responsibility is made clear in baptism when we
are instructed, “Do not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ
crucified. Fight valiantly under the banner of Christ against sin,
the world and the devil…” (ASB. P230). Individual responsibility
is inherent in our understanding of repentance and forgiveness.
We each take responsibility for our sins when we confess them,
and when we receive forgiveness we receive back the
responsibility to live our lives in the way of Christ. We do not
blame others for our wrongdoing, nor are we told that whether
we sin or not does not matter any more.
The need for individual responsibility is also expressed at
ordination. The particular responsibilities of the deacon, priest
and bishop are spelled out in the Declarations (ASB pp 344, 356,
and 388). Each individual being ordained makes particular
promises in relation to these. Those promises will be carried out
in many ways, and they will take various expressions within the
ministry of each person. Individual responsibility in the
faithfulness of our response to God’s continuing call includes the
48
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
need regularly to attend to, and reflect on the way ministry is
exercised. The development of such self-reflection and
examination is intrinsic to faithful ministry and the practice of
ministerial review can foster this.
Mutual Accountability
As members of the body of Christ we are also accountable to
one another. This might generally be expressed as support, yet
with the recognition that support can involve criticism as well as
encouragement. Parents and godparents are accountable for
their commitment to help the newly baptised grow in faith (ASB p
247). The people promise to uphold the newly ordained in their
ministries (ASB pp 344, 356, 387). In various ways we are
accountable for the support of one another in our growth in faith
and practice of ministry, for the good of the whole.
Patterns of accountability take specific forms for the ordained. A
deacon “is called to serve the Church of God, and to work with
its members …A deacon assists the priest” (ASB p 344). At the
ordination of a priest the bishop declares, “A priest is called by
God to work with the bishop and with his fellow priests” (ASB p
356). At the consecration of a bishop the archbishop states, “As
a chief pastor [a bishop] shares with his fellow bishops a special
responsibility….” (ASB p 388).
These specific relationships suggest more than just support. If
people are to work together, in even the most general terms,
then some exchange of information is necessary between those
involved concerning each one’s contribution. This enables each
to take their part for the good of the whole. Various informal and
formal exchanges exist between clergy at a local level, although
for many reasons they may be far from adequate in sustaining
mutual accountability. The mutual accountability between clergy
and bishop and between bishops requires disciplined attention,
and ministerial review can offer this.
Qualities and Resources
Mutual accountability before God requires the ability to listen to
and learn from the perceptions of others, and to speak truthfully
to each other. It also requires us to honour each other as fellow
members of the body of Christ and to endeavour to show one
49
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
another the unconditional regard that God shows each of us. At
a consecration we pray that the new bishop be given humility,
“that he may use his authority to heal, not to hurt; to build up, not
to destroy” (ASB p 394). That same quality is needed of each of
us as we exercise mutual accountability.
The word “mutual” is important. Paul made it clear in his use of
the image of the body in 1 Corinthians 12 that every member’s
function is essential for the benefit of the whole regardless of
what that member’s function is. “The eye cannot say to the
hand, ‘I do not need you,’ or the head to the feet, ‘I do not need
you.’…God has combined the various parts of the body…so that
all its parts might feel the same concern for one another” (vv. 21,
24, 25). In this sense there is no hierarchy of function, but each
is dependent on the others, thus requiring mutual accountability.
In this way clergy, for example, are accountable to their bishop
for the exercise of the particular ministry entrusted to them, and
bishops are accountable to their clergy for the exercise of their
ministry of oversight.
The bishop is to “watch over and pray for all those committed to
his charge, and to teach and govern them…” (ASB p 388). This
does not mean doing the clergy’s work for them, nor directing the
specific content of a person’s ministry. It does mean the bishop
ensuring, to the best of his ability, that his clergy have the
resources to exercise the ministry with which they have been
entrusted. It also means ensuring, through the deployment of
clergy and lay staff and through other provision, that the ministry
of the diocese is carried out as well as possible. It necessitates
praying for his clergy. Ministerial review can provide the
information to assist the bishop in these tasks, thus enabling him
better to exercise his part in the body of Christ, for the good of
the whole.
II. DEVELOPMENT
Many ministerial review schemes indicate “ministry
development” as a chief goal. We all need education and
training to enable us to continue to exercise ministry. The
context of changing demands and expectations in which ministry
is exercised today makes this more necessary than in the past.
There are skills to learn, processes to understand, and
50
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
techniques to acquire. But “to grow stronger and more mature”
(ASB p 357) in ministry is not simply about the acquisition of
knowledge and techniques and there is a danger if we allow
such “development” demands to be separated from the
fundamental demand to grow in the faith, of which our ministry is
both expression and response. We need to understand
development, therefore, in theological terms and ask what this
might mean in the context of ministerial review.
Responding to God’s Gifts
God’s gifts of love, life and salvation are, we believe,
unconditional. We may consider ourselves unworthy of them,
but they are still and will always be offered to us. God wants us
and invites us to accept and respond, and to do so with love
expressed through praise, thanksgiving, devotion and service.
Baptism and ordination are two of the ways we accept the
invitation to receive God’s gifts, and to make commitments to
respond to those gifts. In neither case, however, is it suggested
that we can respond out of our own resources alone. Indeed,
the divine gifts themselves enable our response. In the baptism
of children, for example, we pray “that they may walk with us in
the way of Christ and grow in the knowledge of your love” To do
this we pray that God will “Surround them with your love; protect
them from evil; fill them with your Holy Spirit; and receive them
into the family of your Church” (ASB pp 244f). The necessity for
God’s gifts is made clear in the ordination of priests when the
bishop declares, “Because you cannot bear the weight of this
ministry in your own strength but only by the grace and power of
God, pray earnestly for his Holy Spirit” (ASB p 357). A similar
necessity is expressed in the making of deacons and the
consecration of bishops.
We are reminded, then, at the outset of Christian life and
ministry, lay or ordained, that we do this in God’s strength. Our
faith deepens as we grow in our realization of this, not denying
our responsibility but recognizing that God desires to work with
and through us, as members of the body.
51
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Walking with Christ
We are reminded that the fundamental way of the Christian life is
to walk with Christ and to grow in God’s love. We may bring all
sorts of talents, abilities and experience to Christian ministry, but
how they are used is to be rooted in and fashioned by the faith
we have. The nurture and development of faith, of our walking
with Christ, is essential to all else.
This therefore raises basic questions when we use a word like
“development” which, in current usage, carries the connotations
of improvement, building up, acquiring or adding skills in a linear
and progressive fashion. If the primary dimension of the
“development of ministry” is our growth in faith and its
expression in our lives we find ourselves concerned with
something more basic than “development” as it might apply to a
skill or technique.
Obviously, there are skills we need to learn to participate in the
life of the Church and exercise ministry. Training can help us
with these. But if we see “ministry development” primarily in
terms of identifying training needs then we have lost sight of a
fundamental aspect of our Christian calling, which is not to
success or the achievement of goals but to allowing God to work
in us corporately and individually. The vocation to be a Christian
is more fundamental than that to ordained ministry. To confuse
the two is to run the risk of seeing “development” purely in
relation to ministerial roles and tasks, rather than in growth in
maturity, wisdom and Christlikeness.
Obedience and Faithfulness
Following the way of Christ involves losing ourselves rather than
building ourselves up. It is about letting go rather than taking
hold. We run away, and then are found. We make mistakes; we
fail. If we are anything like the disciples, the closer we walk with
Christ, the bigger our failures can be. We resist and wrestle,
even deny. But we are still called to trust and to risk God’s love.
The one who buried his single talent was rebuked not for
business incompetence but for not taking a chance with the gift
he had received.
52
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
Growing in faith does not involve a predictable, straightforward
and planned progression pursued by our own efforts, but rather
a deepening assent and commitment to a way that can lead us
in many directions, including towards the Cross. We are called
in this not to effectiveness but to obedience, not to being better
functionaries but to being faithful disciples.
Furthermore, if we constitute the body of Christ, growing in faith
is corporate as well as individual. The way of Christ is the way
of the Church as well as the way of each disciple. So the
Church bears wounds, experiences failure, as well as finds itself
drawn into new life. We all share in the Church’s experience of
being the body of Christ.
Ministerial Review
If we accept that we exercise ministry in response to and
because of God’s gifts, and that the foundation of our calling is to
walk with Christ as members of the one body, what bearing
might this understanding of development have on ministerial
review?
Firstly, it leads us in ministerial review to assess our priorities
and place primary value on our attention to following the way of
Christ. It encourages us to explore how our experience and
understanding of God have changed through our practice of
ministry. It invites the crucial tasks of asking theological
questions about the exercise of ministry.
Secondly, this understanding of development provides the
context and perspective in which all the tasks of ministry should
be considered in ministerial review. Why we are doing what we
are doing becomes clearer. We determine which skills or
abilities need development to exercise ministry, doing so as a
response of faith, of loving God with all our heart, mind, soul and
strength.
Thirdly, we are helped to see weakness and failure not as
occasions for self-chastisement, but as events in which Christ is
encountered. They are inevitable and essential experiences of
all who seek to follow the way of Christ, both because it is the
53
Ministerial Development Review: Interim Guidance
way of the Cross and because we fall short. In such
experiences in our ministries we share in Christ’s Passion and
know his forgiveness. It is difficult to talk with another about our
failures in these terms without trust, both of ourselves and of the
other person, yet it is by doing so that we can encounter the
power of the Resurrection.
Fourthly, this understanding of development reminds us that our
motivation for ministry is rooted in our relationship to God and
the call to which we have responded. Goals and aims are
important, but as guides to our work and not as reasons for it.
Ministerial review can help us identify which goals are really
idols, and which may be risks we believe we are being invited to
take in the exercise of faithful ministry.
54