Codes were selected in the analysis of interview responses to identify categories within the research findings. Interview responses were subsequently segmented and grouped, using a combination of the following in vivo and deductive terms, prior to then formulating general categories of these codes. The codes that follow are therefore elaborated as thematic markers of the semi-structured interview data, using extensive quotations in the identification of key elements of ministry formation within the CRC. The story of CRC formation is therefore told through each of these items.
Despite some being small in the number of representative respondents, each forms a key part of the picture of the movement. While this section may present somewhat as a list of small items I have valued each one as indicators of the whole. They are not merely ideas or concepts, they give expression to the experience of a people and, in turn, reveal the insights of the CRC as the Church, the body of Christ. There is an evident overlap in some cases and others could be conveniently grouped under more inclusive headings (as below, 4.4.4 Categories of Formation) but this report offers each as a distinct piece, speaking in its own right. Broad categories, of necessity, lose some of the nuances and meaning within the codes that shape the category. The following code-descriptors enable subsequent categories to be more cohesive
148
and undergird validity. In this way, each contributing voice is clearly and distinctly heard, and not one voice forgotten. The inherent narrative suggests a mosaic rather than a list.
4.4.3.2 ‘Academic’
The ‘academic’ dimension of formation was referred to by nineteen of the twenty-five interviewees. Comments were mostly confined to assessments of current CRC formation approaches or personal preferences in associated training methodologies. They revealed that those having trained within the CRC and/or in unaccredited courses were more suspicious of assignment-based coursework. One such respondent, Colin Michaelson, a former senior leader within the movement, referred to a tendency for people to become “bogged down in academia” whilst nevertheless accepting the need for a broad range of academic training.30 This can be linked to tendencies in early Pentecostalism towards an anti-intellectualism concerned with a potential for stifling the Spirit-filled life. Chai notes a continuing observation that many Pentecostals oscillate between extremes of “appreciating higher education and scoffing at it.”31 Older interviewees such as Michaelson appeared to hint at this but reiterated a reservation over ministry that rewarded academic requirements if ministry skills were not also learned. Comments from older ministers did not expressly reject or disparage accreditation but rather acknowledged it as “vital” for equipping and a “ticket” to ministry authorisation.
Bella Laurie, widely consulted by prospective CRC ministers for formational coaching, identified the potential for desirable competency-based formation requirements to be interpreted with an excessively academic focus. Many comments revealed an appreciation for the need to develop authority, confidence and skill through academic engagement, especially through the completion of accredited training courses covering a range of essential disciplines. Two itinerant ministers and two former senior leaders within the CRC indicated, however, that examples of excessive workload in formation processes had discouraged some prospective ministers. Bob Roberts, who was positive about CRC training but had only undertaken unaccredited study, indicated that he had spoken with numerous ministry candidates suited to practical dimensions of ministry for whom unaccredited studies were more suitable than an academic pathway. He expressed concern, along with two other coaching ministers, Bill Phillips and Belinda Jamison, that those engaged in academic courses might believe themselves to qualify for ministry roles to which they were not otherwise suited if such courses minimised practical assessment. Claire Lee was, like Jamison, an experienced minister who had pursued
30 Hereafter, direct quotes from respondents are used to seed the text in coding the relevant data.
149
credentials to assist her husband and both women believed themselves to be too busy with the needs of ministry to prioritise academic coursework which, though preferable, would have interrupted their ministry service and thus been detrimental to ministry success. Interview respondents overwhelmingly showed a clear preference for formation which valued pathways to ministry necessitating practical engagement in mission rather than academic assessment instruments alone.
4.4.3.3 ‘Access’
As an in vivo code, ‘access’ was specifically addressed in terms of a desire for flexible delivery
of training options associated with effective ministry formation, therefore relating to the mode of academic engagement. “Accessibility” of online courses was deemed to facilitate the widespread availability of resources and training, often for those simultaneously engaged in secular education or employment whilst pursuing ministry advancement. Nevertheless, respondents were clearly appreciative of past or present opportunities for personal interaction with other ministry candidates and formators. This was especially evident in those undertaking online training, with Bjorn Nilsen interacting with many students through his national administrative role and reporting a significant need for the CRC to keep “the connectedness part” of ministry training. This was not without some sensitivity to cost implications and to geographical restrictions for rural churches. Bryce Davies, involved in the implementation of contemporary CRC training, similarly valued the “home grown access” to people with whom relationships were intentionally cultivated. Kingsley Corrigan, involved in state CRC leadership and ministry formation, compared present training favourably with an earlier unaccredited incarnation undertaken personally but similarly noted that, despite the “complexity of life” warranting delivery “alternatives,” there remained a need to foster relational links in optimised CRC formation.
4.4.3.4 ‘Affirmed by Leaders’
One code almost universally evident in comments concerning a call to ministry related to the need to be ‘affirmed by leaders,’ with all but four respondents articulating its place in developing confidence and clarity in their own formation journey. Whether affirmed in connection with rites, such as personal prophecy or water baptism, it was important that overseeing leaders, “believe this is what God has revealed to them,” and that, “potential and fruitfulness” should likewise be clear to such leaders. Several ministers revealed that senior leaders in churches encouraged the cultivation of the call through formal training and those who had not undertaken formal training prior to ordination were substantially less likely to
150
experience affirmation by leaders. Jamison believed that courses could “fully inform” people to better identify those called to ministry. Personal affirmation by leaders was typically associated with voluntary submission to the practical needs of a church and its Senior Minister, being particularly endorsed by those involved in state-wide implementation of CRC training within differing contexts. One of these, Brian Robertson, valued “submitting to what the Senior Pastor sensed and then invited [him] to do,” whilst Davies similarly suggested that: “Calling often looks like a job offer because people like you and offer you a chance to have a go.”
Nevertheless, the proactivity of ministers in affirming a candidate’s call was clearly important, too. Phillips, serving in a church led by a widely-respected CRC minister, believed that the call to “something magnificent and much bigger than us” was cultivated by him as he followed this with an intentional “[tap] on the shoulder,” saying, “I want to take you to the next level.” This same minister, Vic Borden, had himself valued “that conforming word by [his] pastor” when responding to a call to ministry some twenty years prior in a different CRC church. Such a rite of passage appeared to be an important heritage to preserve, with the younger minister saying that he could now “tap anyone in the church on the shoulder because [he was] one of the originals.” Michaelson also reflected that his senior minister had, some forty-five years prior, “channelled the desire for full-time ministry,” whilst his protégé, Alfred Majewski, also interviewed as a now-credentialed minister, felt similarly “recognised” with the authority to pursue his own call. Chris Samuels had become involved in a CRC church more recently after pursuing postgraduate studies in another movement and also felt that his call to ministry was legitimised by leaders speaking “into [his] life … as a confirmation of what God want[ed].” The voice of experience as a qualifying and authenticating element of formation cannot be underestimated within the CRC.
4.4.3.5 ‘Affirmed by Others’
Related to the code regarding the role of leaders was that of needing to be ‘affirmed by others.’ Credibility with church people and their verbal confirmation of calling, en masse, was an important qualifying voice variously interpreted as “making a difference,” or being “productive,” noting reflections concerning evident change whether immediately or over time, or more specific approval such as: “You’re really called to this.” This was irrespective of the nature of training undertaken. Davies, who had recently completed a postgraduate ministry course, observed: “People affirm that … I’ve said something, done something; it doesn’t get more complicated than that.” Laurie, who was more recently credentialed in a small rural church after completing unaccredited CRC training, noted that others could see something in
151
her and helped her to “step up when there was a leadership vacuum.” Saul Dodds, an older untrained minister of a small urban church, suggested that it took ten years to accept that God was showing him through others that he was gifted. This appreciation of call through the voice of the people appears to recognise the significance of the Christian community in shaping effective ministry formation and was an essential complement to ministry authorisation regardless of any training courses undertaken.
4.4.3.6 ‘Application’
The need for ‘application’ of the cognitive dimensions of formation was a code addressed by four out of five interviewees. They overwhelmingly affirmed the need for “focused application” of theology, leadership, and ministry skills “in a local church context,” which is unable to be divorced from the need for “hands-on mentoring” and a “transference of life skills” that enable leaders to “model Jesus.” The need for field-based assessments within training courses was seen as integral to the shaping of ministers who thereby become effective in the practical enactment of mission. Parsons undertook an early contemporary version of minimally-accredited CRC training and deemed that its practical application of the course content was a helpful first foray into training that was not subsequently improved in his later completion of an external ministry-focused Master’s Degree.
4.4.3.7 ‘Articulation’
‘Articulation’ of a call to ministry was a code associated with the manner of affirmation of that call. The need for training was a formational ‘next-step’ dimension that typically emanated from the affirmation of leaders and was then, in some cases, accompanied by the affirmation of others and by intentional coaching or mentoring processes. Articulation represented a “leap of faith” for Parsons who, despite his training, had yet to commit to a vocational leadership role. Others similarly identified it as the moment of getting “serious” about the call or the process of “stretching” or being “equipped” in response to that call (which included ongoing service to demonstrate faithfulness, as well as formal training). Nevertheless, the unfolding of the call was also “interpreted” in the light of current experiences, regardless of training undertaken, with the untrained Lee reflecting that this occurred in response to childhood reading about missionaries whilst for Dee Palmer, a younger degree-level trained minister, this was in response to television viewing and reading about ministry service within a Catholic convent. Michaelson similarly felt an initial call to missionary service due to his “frame of reference” which was later reinterpreted and validated as a call to pastoral ministry through engagement rather than education. He subsequently assumed the role of supervisor of another
152
of the interviewees who was therefore (allegedly helpfully) asked to verbalise his call for further exploration of its significance. For Andrew Peters, however, hindsight reinterpreted his call in terms of the pursuit of affirmation by others. To this end, Davies identified a need in prospective CRC ministry candidates for their call to be explored with greater intentionality so as to expose any misplaced motives, suggesting that: “Not enough was put into what [he was] hearing and what [he was] feeling.”
Identification of a call to ministry may therefore be prompted by others in the context of serving a church. Its interpretation in light of current circumstances, however, seems to warrant supervisory coaching to help articulate and clarify subsequent courses of action that serve to consolidate that call. It is then shaped by specific training, coaching and the outworking of an ongoing role within a Christian community.
4.4.3.8 ‘Called by God’
The universal prevalence of the importance of being ‘Called by God’ was associated with direct affirmation by leaders and others within church congregations, as described above. The call was typically interpreted, however, in alignment with one of the five ministry gifts in Ephesians 4:11, with Majewski seeing that he had been “sent to the body of Christ as one of these gifts,” and that anyone not so called was likely to waste any training efforts invested into them. As observed in the literature, CRC ordination constitutes formal call recognition through the identification of such gifts and this fact was identified in several interview responses. Whereas training was believed, by many, to shape or refine their calling, others believed the call to be evident to themselves and others through the investment of their passion or gifts within local churches. Lee reflected that she didn’t analyse the call but was “just caught up in doing it.” Several ministers associated the recognition of their call with a “mantle” of authority accompanying congregational recognition of “serious ministry as the point of the call.” Verbal descriptions of the call were framed in terms of a “prodding of the heart,” a “prophetic word,” God planting a seed, “encounter,” God acknowledging what was already being enacted, “divine conviction,” “God speaking,” being “led” by the Holy Spirit, “Baptism by fire in a real experience of God” at the point of no return, and God “shifting something.” These comments variously depicted a genuine sense of divine impartation, rather than merely denoting assent through religious symbolism or proactive study.
153
4.4.3.9 ‘Coaching’
As expected, ‘coaching’ was a code closely associated with the development of ministry competence and referenced by every interviewee. An integral part of the “total package” of formation, it was seen as inclusive of mentoring and essential to accountable ministry growth by most respondents. Nevertheless, church independence was seen to be a potential threat to effective coaching, whereby a system was needed to train coaches, use secondary resources, and ensure the accountability of coaches to deliver optimal formation. The voice of experience was valued in coaching relationships for Davies who appreciated that a person “further down the path” than themselves could speak “with great power.” However, the personal impact of a relationship by which strengths and weaknesses could be identified was suggestive of some necessity in tailoring any support offered. For Peters, this made coaching more effective after the completion of initial training courses. Minimal acknowledgment of existing CRC coaching processes was indicated by the absence of any significant links to the elements of stated value already currently offered, as well as by associated comments revealing limited awareness of competency-based coaching provisions within training courses. Nevertheless, several ministers affirmed the value of apprentice-style coaching to complement training courses and to both model and develop competence in the field. Importantly, this was also felt by Parsons to be a model enabling the development of coaching skills that could help to perpetuate effective formation. Impartation was similarly valued, where Borden identified specific values-shaping benefits from a formal mentoring process and Oscar Jackson similarly acknowledged the shaping of competence in alignment with CRC distinctives. Robertson also affirmed the capacity of experienced coaches to know strengths and weaknesses and to therefore best direct growth through a transfer of experience. It appeared that coaching, inclusive of mentoring, was highly valued overall as a means of providing tailored and relationally-validated enculturation and upskilling in any effective formation process.
4.4.3.10 ‘Competency’
Coding ‘competency’ required the identification of specific responses to stated elements of ministry success by ministers and by the CRC, as well as the preferred means of assessment of that competence. Competence was strongly framed in terms of quantifying the development of practical ministry skills and character attributes, although the qualification of coaches to assess competence was a significant factor in determining formation success. Petra Juliani, reflecting on her own recent CRC formation experiences, expressed concern as to whether ministers could articulate well enough in areas of competence to, in turn, transmit requirements to others. Integration of the CRC’s competency standards with current training processes was
154
nevertheless appreciated by several interviewees as “far superior,” “they identify what people haven’t done,” and “[they are] milestones and markers, not serendipity.” However, comments generally revealed less familiarity with their integration into existing CRC training courses than was expected. Nevertheless, Nilsen’s CRC administrative role had ensured connections with many examples of training implementation and he noted that training courses were “so closely aligned with the competencies” that this was “a stroke of genius.” The necessity of developing preaching skills was identified as a particular emphasis essential in developing ministry competence. Carlos Alejandro, a recent CRC course graduate and appointee to a rural ministry role, lamented that formation processes had seemed intent upon producing only pastors, although the multi-faceted nature of CRC training courses and competency standards were enforcing greater diversity. A general absence of comments by pastors linking CRC competencies to course content or of affirmation of the preferred elements of competence in courses nevertheless appeared to confirm the survey finding regarding a general lack of familiarity with CRC formation processes.
4.4.3.11 ‘Confident’
The in vivo reference to confidence was derived from statements reflecting the capacity to operate more effectively as a CRC minister when feeling both adequately prepared and relationally connected. Theology improved the sense of preparedness, giving “confidence to apply the learning in ministry,” even if this learning took the form of unaccredited study. A sense of belonging within the CRC was integral to sharing its values and vision, as referenced by Nilsen: “Coming into that relationship with CRC ministers was foundational to ministry confidence.” Diana Carroll reflected on her pre-formation aptitude: “You just don’t have