The Fruitful Field – Seeing The Bigger Picture!

There are times in life when we are forced to admit that we may be wrong, times when if we are to have any integrity as Christians we must say publically that we have been wrong.  Today I have to do that, today I have to eat humble pie and it’s a pretty large and tough slice.

When The Fruitful Field consultation began I was a Student Minister at Wesley Study Centre (WSC) in Durham and I admit that the main concern of many students was how the proposal for a single Connexional hub would impact WSC; certainly that was my own concern.  Indeed, I spent some days preparing an individual submission to the consultation arguing for the retention of WSC, along with Queens Foundation, Birmingham and Wesley House, Cambridge.  I admit that my focus was firmly on pre-ordination training of Student Ministers and that I gave very little thought to the wider training proposals to open up more training opportunities for Local Preachers, Lay Workers and other members of the Methodist Church.  This was partly because I was commenting in the main on the type of training I was currently undertaking but mostly because my focus was on trying to influence the committee to the view that WSC should continue as a pre-ordination training institution.

More recently I have engaged in debate in the UK Methodists group on Facebook concerning The Fruitful Field and again have basically centred my arguments around the need for WSC to stay open and to continue residential training for ordained ministry in The Methodist Church.  I have done so out of a sense of loyalty to the institution that I believe has prepared me very well to take up my station as a Probationer Minister (subject to Conference) in September.  I have done so out of a sense of loyalty and deep respect for the Director and staff of Wesley Study Centre.  I have done so because I believe that WSC’s links with Durham University Theology Department are important.  I have done so, finally, because I believe that St John’s College benefits from the presence of Methodist Student Ministers in its community and that Cranmer Hall (the Anglican training institution) benefits from its close partnership with WSC.

Basically my personal opposition to The Fruitful Field report was focussed on the fact that it would mean the closure of WSC as a residential training institution for Student Ministers.  I hadn’t thought too much about wider issues of training in the Methodist Church for anyone other than Student Ministers; I was failing to see the bigger picture.

The bigger picture is that training in the Methodist Church must be about much more than training those to be ordained as both academic and practical theologians.  It must be about training Local Preachers, not only those ‘On Note’ and ‘On Trial’ but also those who are fully accredited.  It must be about training Lay Workers for the important ministry that they undertake and it must be about making available learning for any Methodist member who is interested in deepening their discipleship and understand of the scriptures and theology.

The bigger picture is that, like it or not, the Methodist Church has limited financial resources.  Whilst available resources should not be the sole factor influencing the type and amount of training we deliver as a church; indeed we should really consider what training we need and then how we resource that training: we cannot do what we cannot afford if we are to be responsible stewards of the resources God has currently given to us.

The bigger picture is that the Fruitful Field report was written in an atmosphere of prayer and theological reflection, as stated in the report itself.  It is easy to be cynical about this, but I know at least one of those who sat on the committee and he is a committed Christian with high personal integrity as, I am sure, are the other members of that committee.  I truly believe that as they have worked on The Fruitful Field report they have tried to discern God’s leading and guiding in all they have done.

I am still sad that the Wesley Study Centre, a fruitful field in its own right, will not be part of the new vision of training for the Methodist Church of Great Britain.  I value the training I received there and the fellowship and love I found in that community more than I can truly say.  I am sad that the committed staff team at WSC will eventually move on to other things, disrupting their lives and those of their families: some may even face unemployment.  My love is with them, as are my prayers for their future.  God raised up WSC for a reason and perhaps that reason no longer exists, perhaps it is the right time for closure, sad and perhaps angry though that may make staff and students and former staff and students feel.

I am sad, but also a little excited too.  Excited to be part of a church that dares to look at its whole system of training and education and do something new so that many more people can benefit from formation, learning, training, theological education, scholarship, research and development.

As a very good friend of mine said on Facebook, sometime we have to “prune the fruitful branches that the vine may be even more fruitful.”  As Jesus said in Johns gospel, “every branch that does bear fruit he (God) prunes so that it will be even more fruitful.

We have two choices as Methodists; we can either oppose the Fruitful Field or accept the democratic decision of our elected Conference representatives to make sweeping changes in the areas of formation, learning, training, theological education, scholarship, research and development and work as a church to ensure that in these areas, as we should in all others, we offer to God the very best we are capable of giving.