Well, we've not have much recently on the Blog-front from the Very Rev'd Provost of Glasgow, but boy has he let rip today. See http://www.thurible.net/20070512/collecting-things/#comments

It would appear that he is suggesting that I am a power crazed meglomaniac. (I'll let you guess which side I'm on!) I am certainly in favour of a local church, and a collaborative one, and one that does ministry - even by all the people. What I don't get is the Alpha-like passion that some have for LCM. And who is training all these local ministers? The preachers, the catechists, the pastoral carers, etc. If I had to do four years at University, three years at Theological Institute (and it was like an institute in oh so many ways) then why do they just have to read a handbook? Oh so many questions could be asked. The sort that you'd ask at a Synod in fact, if it ever came up properly.

His comments on IDPs were interesting too. (That's Individual Development Plans for the uninitiated.) We fill them in as ordinands, then we are ordained and we fill them in again (or not, as the case may be) and then we fill them in once more if we want any further training. I think it's all about assessing what our own training needs are. That should be very empowering really, if it works. Although I've never been very sure how much a student knows about their future needs when they don't yet know what they need, if you know what I mean. Of course, what happens is that you fill it in and you take it to someone who tells you to source the sort of training you need and they might help fund one third of it.

Now here's something revolutionary to think about... how about if our Church offered regular training for clergy? Instead of us having to pay thousands to the Mennonites in London to get training in Conflict Resolution, we get someone to come and train all the clergy here together in it? It would save a fortune. I mean I'm all for lifelong learning - in fact, I crave it. But you know, if I've got to travel half way round the country and pay a fortune to do it, then it starts to lost its appeal. And another thing... the reaction after our annual Clergy Conference is always that it was so good to just spend time with other clergy. Wouldn't training for all do just the same?

We do have a tendency to hold on to things in the Church, right enough. It all began with eight hoovers. But it seems like we are reluctant to let go of lots of things. I reckon everything should be on 2 year contracts and then be re-assessed. If the hoover is not working in 2 years, then ditch it. If the training is no good after 2 years, move on to something else. If this Mission experiment has run its course, let it go. If your priest is not working out how you expected after 2 years... on second thoughts. Actually, why not?