Working with what we've got

The Kirk's at an exciting time, in my opinion. Yes, attendance at church (of any flavour) had declined significantly in my lifetime, but I would rather be minister to a small, committed congregation, than a group of people who feel they have to be there.

Yet, with the decline in numbers, coupled with those attending being older, there are fewer people young enough to train for full-time ministry. I know there's an investigation into why young people (and, unfortunately, in many congregations I am still regarded as young) aren't coming forward for training.

Look around - they aren't here. Yes, there are some, but no where near the numbers there were kicking about the church there was 20 or 30 years ago. And, for those who are here, are they called to be ministers or deacons? Maybe some are - I've sure some are, but it feels like, to me at least, there may be 'presure' placed on people under 30 (or 40?) to come forward for training, but who haven't been called by God.

That, IMHO, is a great way to put them off. And, when it sometimes feels there's so much negativity around about the decline, where's the positive message for anyone called to ministry to step up to the plate and follow God's calling.

There is the matter of finances too. Though Spot and I are not especially well off, we knew we could (just) manage on his salary. Not everyone is in that position. They may be on their own, with mortgage or rent, bills, food etc to pay on their own. Or, they may be the main (or sole) breadwinner in the household. How is the Kirk helping those who may not be able to keep the wolf from the door, if they gave up work, helping them financially? Well,  the advice is to take out a student loan, but that may not even pay a mortgage taken out in the last 5-10 years, never mind all the other basic living expenses associated with life, never mind ministry training.

But, getting away from finances, the Kirk is still face with a manpower (sorry, I can't be that PC - next you'll be wanting my to re-name manhole covers as person-entrance-exit-portal-covers) shortfall. The numbers being trained in no way make up for the numbers retiring. Yet it strikes me many presbytery plans are being drawn up without that fact in play. My home town has 4 town centre churches (that's just in the centre - there's around another 6 throughout the town). As far as I know none are earmarked for closure in their presbytery plan, but another church in the presbytery (which is the only CofS in town) relies on a reader or OLM to fill in. It strikes me that we need to really think as a Kirk how many churches we really need in towns in order rural parishes can benefit.

I think in the next 5-10 years ministers may be in oversight of a few churches (outside the towns, at least), using readers, OLMs and members of the congregations to lead worship on a week-by-week basis. It's not ideal, but looking at what we've got ministers wise, it may be the only way to ensure we remain a territorial parish church. The great thing (if it works) is we could be enablers of people, encouraging them to do what has traditionally been regarded as ministers' roles. A better reflection of the priesthood of all believers and, perhaps, might even sow seeds for those who are doing these things that they are called by God.

I very much see echoes of this in the handful of decades following the Scottish Reformation. There wasn't many ministers and they covered several parishes. Readers ensured worship happened on a weekly basis and the Kirk Session had a pastoral role. Yes, then Scotland was a Christian nation and may not be now, but if we could work with what we had then, why not now?