Warning - this a long one...
My meeting on Tuesday night didn't go especially well. Badly probably isn't the correct expression, but it wasn't uplifting, positive or even especially challenging for me. After the meeting I had lost some of the respect I had for my supervisor. I think you may understand why once I've finished this post…
Something happned to a family of my supervisor's family at the start of our meeting. This mad me feel really awkward and uncomfortable - I was in the way when, as far as I was concerned, he was needed by his family. I told my supervisor I was happy to re-schedule our meeting. He didn't accept my offer, so I assumed he'd want to have a very quick meeting to discuss what I would be doing over the coming weeks and leave any other issues to another meeting. No, the meeting lasted an hour and three-quarters.
I have now discovered my supervisor doesn't listen either. He has asked me several times how busy my work is and the answer has always been the same, as the work I do relates to the property market. Also, he contradicts himself. At our first meeting my participation in worship his feedback was positive - I am a clear confident speaker. On Tuesday, he was telling me I was very quiet when I started, but my speaking has improved. One version is incorrect. It would be nice to know which on. That said, he (or members of the congregation) should have given my feedback about my quietness at the time. To me feedback should be given as soon as possible, not 3 months down the line.
Among the various forms I had to fill out at the beginning of my co-ordinated field assessment was a background form. Basically, a little bit of personal information about me. I'm not sure of the question, but my answer was "God can use me to serve other despite my flaws". None of us are perfect and sometimes I think God uses the most "flawed" characters for His glory.
My supervisor brought this up and asked me what I thought those flaws were. Okay, I suffer from foot-in-mouth disease, also known as speak first, think second. I was brought up to be honest, but as Thumper said in Bambi "if you can't say something nice, don't say nothing at all". I know there are times when I've said something that maybe should not have been said or been a little too up front. Oh, you'd think I was from the west coast!
My supervisor then went onto tell me how I had said things that may have been better unsaid (remember this is the church that likes to lock doors…), but without giving a specific example. He then lectured me (yes, I do mean that as I had very little opportunity to say anything) about how people expect ministers to be. Perhaps that's part of the problem with the Church of Scotland. Congregations and the general public perceive ministers as being above them; better people, but out of touch and talking a different language to ordinary Joe Public. I didn't say that to my supervisor as I know it would have been taken totally the wrong way - as a criticism of him.
He then went on about my sense of humour. He asked if I hid behind it. Perhaps sometimes, I agreed, but not that often. I like making jokes (usually involving myself) and having a laugh. I also think humour can be a great leveller.
Next on his list of criticisms was that I tend to fill silences with talking. Err, doesn’t everyone? Has he not heard of uncomfortable silences, where everyone in a group is trying to think of something to say? I admitted I do. Then another question - if you were visiting someone who was dying and unconscious, would you fill the silence? No, not if it felt inappropriate. It would depend on the circumstances; my relationship with the person, their friends, relative and carers. Pretty obvious if you ask me, even for someone who likes to talk.
Throughout this discussion, it felt that if I contradicted him or tried to get a word in edgeways, it would have confirmed his opinion of me. I decided that was a moment when saying nothing was the better course of action. After all, some things are better left unsaid, according to my supervisor!
I was also criticised for making comments/suggestions about how my placement church does things. Okay, initially I did mention my home church a little too often, but I don't anymore. My supervisor seems to think because I have only been a member of one church that my opinion is formed from what they do and nothing else. This despite me telling him I attended other churches at university (although not as much as I should have) and while on holiday. I get the impression he thinks I have no ideas of my own. I now feel I cannot say anything which may be taken as a negative comment about my placement church as he will think I am comparing it to what I am used to. This is not the case. Now I am going to keep quiet about it, just to keep the peace.
I am well aware of my flaws; probably more so than my gifts. Although I did say to my supervisor I don't mind people telling me when I've put my foot in it (in the right way, I think he didn't need to go on about is as much. It may have been diferent if I wasn't aware of this flaw.
Also, I must admit, I'm not feeling especially streched or challenged by my placement. So far apart from 1 children's address, I have only done readings and prayers during services. This is something I hav done numerous times before. Giving this process is supposed to be exploring my call to ministry, I thought the meetings with my supervisor would also be disussing the implications of my call; looking at different challenges the call may bring and whether I felt I could deal with it; what I would do in certain situations. So far, there has been none of this.
I am also supposed to meet with my supervisor once a forthnight. I'm lucky if it's once a month. I will mention this at my next meeting (which isn't until half way through next month).
Well, that's the rant over. I was really down when I got home as it felt he'd told me nothing positive. Also, the way he treated his family made me less interested in his criticism.
Maybe this is all part of my testing? I know I was discussing with my husband at the weekend whether I should pursue this process, as I didn’t want it to interfere with our relationship. After Tuesday's meeting, I am more determined than ever…
As a non-church-go-er one of the major things that puts people off is the holier than though attitude. I can't see how trying to preserve a nostaligic version of the minister is going to help anyone in or out of the church.
ReplyDeleteSorry my OpenID didn't work well :( trying this one
ReplyDeleteI have been there - I feel for you. But I've come out the other side.
ReplyDelete“Giving this process is supposed to be exploring my call to ministry, I thought the meetings with my supervisor would also be discussing the implications of my call; looking at different challenges the call may bring and whether I felt I could deal with it; what I would do in certain situations. So far, there has been none of this.” I thought this too -my journal for that period reads very much like your blog! Then a sympathetic minister who knows me and the process pointed out that this is exactly what is happening.
It all goes back to the selection criteria – that little beige handout! They want to find out how we deal with criticism (openness to learning) and our self awareness; how we deal with change and difference (different practices in different churches) etc. This is their sneaky way of getting info! It’s about how we respond to these issues. Once I realised that, (and that took some doing!), I found the CFA much better – but it’s hard! Good luck! Call him out on the meetings - once a month is no use, I did and it got better.
I had two goes at getting accepted and both field assessments were like chalk and cheese. In the first my participation in services was minimal and in the second I was doing something most weeks. Yet both contributed to the exploration of my call - there's no necessity to be 'doing' during field assessment. In fact, from what I've seen/heard, it's relatively unusual. But you do need to be proactive I think, defining what aspects of ministry you'd like to explore and also being able to say which areas you want to experience or just give thought to without 'doing'. The candidate placements are for getting experience and fine-tuning your 'performance'. I'm not convinced that the field assessment is the place for training and feedback on your preaching, children's address and so on. Rather, it's the place to explore how you feel about doing them.
ReplyDeleteBut it's also about exposing you to other areas of ministry - pastoral, social and so on. It's about whether you have an awareness of 'warts and all' ministry. Training you to deal with the warts and all is what happens during later placements and probation (and even then, I doubt you're ever prepared for 'real' ministry).
And yes, some ministers play to the 'expectations' and try to put on the appropriate mantle. However, there are just as many who are 'real'. Knowing where you stand is the key. And that reminds me of one of the crucial elements of this process - self-awareness. It sounds like you know yourself well and that's a good thing because many people don't and I think it's through self-awareness that we can bring integrity to our call.
There will be ups and downs in the process, but make sure you analyse them honestly and work out why you are reacting the way you are, because ultimately that what the assessors are looking for.
I did very little during enquiry and field assessment as that part of the journey was about me exploring my call... so it was more about reflection and less about 'doing' stuff. I did prayers and readings and one children's address and I only attended my placement church a maximum of 2 Sundays a month.
ReplyDeleteThat said I was very proactive and one of the things that really helped me explore my call was talking to people who were in ministry. I arranged to meet parish ministers, hospital/hospice chaplains and probationers for a coffee and I asked them to tell me why they were in ministry. All the people I spoke to (some of whom I'd never met before) were happy to share something of their journey and they also asked me in turn about how I felt about 'call' and potentially becoming a minister.
Not all supervisors are as helpful as they could be and actually their input is quite limited, the local review will (hopefully) be more concerned with who you are and your articulation of your call than what you have been doing on this placement. So if you are still struggling with your sense of call, I would recommend doing what I did and talking to people who have been through 'the process' and out the other side. Choose people who are passionate about the church and about ministry...not those with negative experiences to share. Speak to those who will uplift and enthuse you.