Episcopal Church Foundation Vital Practices - Blogs

February 22, 2011

Responding to the Call, Part 2

Back in November, I wrote about forming the fourth mutual discernment group in my four years as rector as another member of our church seeks clarity on a call to priesthood. In the intervening months our bishop and Commission on Ministry have drafted an entirely new set of procedures for discernment that shows how seriously this diocese takes this process. Those drafts are now being finalized.

The biggest changes are to require two years of discernment (absolute minimum of 18 months) in the parish before a vestry vote and recommendation to the diocese that the person be considered for postulancy. Six months to a year is in the more traditional setting of a small group doing mutual sharing. This group, however, is not the group to recommend the person to the vestry.

During a second year, working very closely with the rector and a number of others, the aspirant will interview people in the congregation, identify weaknesses or gaps in their readiness for ordained ministry, then do intentional work in those areas. The draft guidelines read:

After some significant progress has been made on the goals and after the Rector is in support of the person going forward to the vestry/bishop’s committee, the Rector will invite a team of people from the parish, two of whom are current vestry/bishop’s committee members, to begin an intensive time of meeting with the person a) to review his or her story of his or her call, b) to hear about the goals the person has been working on and what progress and learning has occurred, and c) to make a recommendation to the vestry/bishop’s committee about whether the congregation should support this person in his or her process for ordination to the priesthood/diaconate and entry into the broader diocesan process.

So, basically, an individual seeking to become a priest (or a deacon) in our diocese has a two-year process with two different committees, plus extensive “homework” and supervision by the rector. The vote on supporting the person must be taken at a special vestry meeting, not a regularly scheduled one.

All of this shows how seriously Bishop Rickel takes his responsibility for raising up new priests. It also changes the balance between parish and diocese in the process by requiring a great deal more work in the parish setting than was previously expected. I am sure there will be several more changes before all this is final.

Because the guidelines are just been developed, the new mutual discernment group I appointed in November has had to wait until tonight to meet with representatives of our Commission on Ministry. It should be a fascinating meeting.