First Impressions of a CE(D)O

Background

 
Starting as a County Ecumenical Development Officer, one brings the wealth – and the poverty – of one’s own unique experience. The particularities of each CEDO’s context will also vary, though there will be many common features in each person’s situation. What follows is the impression of one CEDO, new to the ecumenical scene, reflecting on the first few months in post. It is provisional, in that it does not even do not even cover a full annual cycle; besides which the landscape is constantly changing, as people move on and legislation changes to enable more opportunities for working together. Nonetheless, it is offered as a guide and, hopefully, as an inspiration to those who are starting out on this ministry of encouragement.

Initial Priorities

From the outset, I have made it a priority to try to meet in person and get to know everyone associated with my intermediate body: Church leaders, Ecumenical Officers, ecumenical partners, others who work or have worked closely with the County Body. This building of relationships has been at the centre of this early work. It has given me a glimpse of what may or may not be possible, of some doors being easier to open than others. I have also come to realise that there is actually a lot of good work being done across the county, largely unsung, often undervalued and yet excellent ecumenical practice.

I have been left with a sense that the CEDO role is first and foremost a ministry of encouragement. Before any consideration is given to initiating new work, there is a valuable task to be undertaken in enabling the better, the more confident, the more enthusiastic ecumenical working of countless Christians across the county.

 
People

 
This ministry of encouragement is to be carried out among various groups.

Church Leaders
 
In my county, the heart of intermediate body is the personal Covenant signed by the Church Leaders. It was important and good for me early on as CEDO to be present at a residential retreat of Church Leaders and to sense the strength of relationship and trust among those who attended. My task is so to encourage and support Church Leaders that the County Body is seen as the vehicle for achieving their own ecumenical aspirations.

One of the issues discussed was the public profile of the Church Leaders when acting together. There was a desire to act together in a way that made a difference to society. Specifically, they wanted to make a joint public statement on the plight of asylum seekers. It would be my job to make this happen, to become well-informed on the issues, to meet some incredibly dedicated volunteers involved in asylum-seeker support, and to work out the logistics and the media involvement for the public statement itself.

LEPs

First impressions are that the County’s Local Ecumenical Partnerships are in a variety of different places in their own journeys. Some are strong, others fragile. Some churches are setting out on their journey together, others for various reasons seem to be approaching the end of that stage of their journey.

The process of review, formally and via information gathering from Ecumenical Officers, continues. Can a review of one situation affect another situation? E.g. Does the model of university chaplaincy in one city have anything to say for other university chaplaincies in the County?

It is also apparent that historically the intermediate County Body has engaged with some LEPs more than others. Having discovered, for instance, that one LEP file has no entries for 10 years, I think I had better arrange a visit... Sometimes those dusty files are an asset. I have no experience of setting up a LEP, but the filing cabinets are full of the records of those who have gone before me, and a valuable resource.

I was delighted to discover that my predecessor had already arranged a LEP consultation for soon after I started, and this was a good opportunity to meet those who live and breathe ecumenical realities in their local being. It was also rather daunting, as I was the least knowledgeable person in the room. As the intention, though, was to enable and build up mutual support between LEPs, that did not need too much specialist knowledge. In any case, it was possible to respond positively to stories or hope and achievement, and to give much-needed recognition and encouragement to those who are the local flag-bearers of Christian unity. It can’t have gone too badly, as everyone agreed to hold another consultation in six months time, by which time I would hope to have become more aware of issues being faced by LEPs. I have let it be known that it is a priority for me to meet people and get to know them, and I am beginning to receive invitations to visit / preach / lead worship at LEPs. These are daunting – for some traditions are far removed from my own – but they give a great opportunity for giving LEPs encouragement, for talking them up, for building up self-esteem and a sense of self-worth.

For example, I preached at the 25th anniversary of one LEP, where, I think, the people had felt a little ‘stale’. Yet their formation had predated that of the County Body and helped to shape the ecumenical scene in which the County Body was formed. They were amongst the pioneers of LEPs with a prophetic message to the churches. I hope that, by the time I’d finished, they might have got the sense that they were loved, that they were noticed, that they were and are important, that they had made a difference and that their very existence mattered.

Churches Together groups

This, I think, is where the main thrust should be. I am looking for lots of opportunities and excuses to make contact with Churches Together groups. This is where most ecumenical activity is taking place, where there are some great initiatives under way about which one area could learn from another. My feeling at the moment is that one of the key functions of the annual newspaper that I will soon have to produce for my County Body will be to celebrate the work of Churches Together groups, to encourage those that are doing good things and to nudge the hesitant into trying to copy some of those initiatives themselves (‘We could do that...’) Indeed, inviting contributions for the newspaper has enabled me to have a number of positive conversations with different CT groups and flag up that the County Body is an active, and, I hope, supportive institution.

Again, the mood music is about encouragement. In some places, Churches Together seems central to the life of a community, whereas some Churches Together groups can be lonely places for a handful of tired enthusiasts. In the best instances, there may be opportunities for the CT group to grow into Covenant relationship.

As with the LEPs, I inherited a gathering of Churches Together representatives in one district, organised by my predecessor. Having heard and myself been inspired by, some of their stories, I am minded to set up similar gatherings in other parts of the county.

There are a couple of cities in the county where the situation seems more complex, where other city-wide bodies have been (or are being) set up that bring CT groups together. There may be some need for sensitivity here, as I would want to make it known that the County Body is keen to encourage all CT groups, but I must make sure that I don’t tread on anybody else’s toes in the process. Careful listening and good communication seem to be called for.

The priority is letting it be known that I want to visit and to engage with as many CT groups across the county as possible. Being new, I have a curiosity value for some, and so invitations have come quite rapidly as groups try to check me out. There have been preaching opportunities and speaking engagements, but mainly I have just been invited to attend a CT group’s regular meeting, and given a ten minute slot to explain who I am and what the County Body is about. I’ve tended to take with me a pack of useful leaflets for everyone attending; at the very least it’s been a helpful prop for a nervous CEDO!

Networks

On the principle that it is even better to do things ecumenically than simply to do ecumenical things, a recent review of my County Body recommended the creation of a series of networks. This will take time and diplomacy and will be more successful in some quarters than in others.

• I have already engaged with the Social Responsibility Officers (at least in one part of the county; I have yet to discover why it has been more difficult to motivate those involved in similar work elsewhere.) 
• I have a date to visit a group of education / training officers
• I have convened a meeting of some press and media officers 
• I have had an exploratory discussion with some of the agencies active in urban ministry; 
• There may be scope for exploring other networks: ministerial training, safeguarding, even denominational secretariats to see whether new networks might be possible. In each case, it would be necessary to get to know the individuals concerned, to explore with them how any benefits from ecumenical working might outweigh any costs (in time, especially), and whether there would be an appropriate role for the County Body. I will continue to explore many of these avenues, but visible progress will be slow in the near future.

The difference here, compared to LEPs and Churches Together groups, is that I would not necessarily be working with those who are already committed to ecumenism. Even more encouragement might be required.

Having said that, part of my role here is to be an irritant, to be the one who keeps saying ‘how can this be done ecumenically?’ At a time of general belt-tightening, there could be more strategic thinking. Personally, I wonder if it might be possible to explore how Church Leaders and their representatives might look together at particular geographical communities: how can we work together to further Christian mission in this place? What are the staffing requirements to satisfy our own denominational needs and those of the wider Church? What are the building needs in this community (maybe it’s the wrong church building that is earmarked for closure)? Would ‘shared building’ agreements reduce building pressure and release resources for mission? Etc.

Denominational Ecumenical Officers

The Denominational Ecumenical Officers are under-appreciated stars. The amount of time, energy and commitment they put in seems to me to be largely unrecognised, yet they are the ones who are doing most of the vital work, not just with LEPs but in keeping the ecumenical flag flying in their church in their area. They know the small print in their own denomination’s regulations, they know the local history, and they are a fantastic resource for the churches (and for me).

Having said that, I found that the two DEOs’ meetings that were held in my first few months had very full agendas and covered a lot of business. The item for general discussion about the strategy of the County Body and my role within it was squeezed out on each occasion. There is a need for DEOs to have space for more strategic thinking, to share, to get the bigger picture, and for the opportunity to inform each other about the key developments in their own churches. I would also anticipate that such a gathering may well generate new ideas and new directions. Accordingly, we have booked an overnight gathering of DEOs to give space both for the building of relationships and the opportunity to explore more strategic issues.

Profile

There is a pressing need for the County Body to be better known, even, especially, within the churches. The issue is how to raise the profile in order to enable the County Body to promote unity more effectively. I have had several helpful conversations with denominational communications officers. One denominational newspaper has already proved to be a useful vehicle. Not only did it give good coverage to my commissioning, but I have been allowed to contribute to a subsequent edition of the paper. I have also been interviewed for a diocesan newsletter. I know from feedback received, that large numbers of people have seen and read these articles.

There should be wider publicity opportunities generated by several planned activities of the Church Leaders: 

• a positive response to the Islamic scholars’ report, A Common Word
• a tree-planting photo-opportunity to celebrate a centenary of a local city
• the proposed statement and action on asylum seekers.

There is a recent practice of supplementing the annual newspaper with simple quarterly newsletters. That seems a good idea, though a simple photocopy does nobody any favours. The quality affects how a reader views the County Body, and a higher quality is required to give the impression of a serious and professional organisation. However, there will be cost implications to negotiate with the treasurer. I understand the denominational communication officer who wants everything to be email and web-based, but that could be even more expensive. I have spent some time making the website as good as possible, though it’s not exactly state-of-the-art.

Until I have had an opportunity to see its achievements and failings first hand, I feel it is worth continuing with the annual newspaper and to try to make it a major celebration of ecumenical working, a resource to be used throughout the year. The challenge will be to ensure optimum distribution. There is bound to be some trial and error in distribution, and I anticipate a steep learning curve in the course of the overall process.

One suggestion that has arisen is that I should purchase some display boards and develop a travelling exhibition. This would then be available for churches, synods, etc. This has been included in next year’s budget.

In the past, there have been special events organised by my predecessors, including a day pilgrimage, that have helped to energise some individuals and groups and also helped to raise the profile of the County Body. Whilst I would not rule out such activities in the future, I suspect that in the short term they could prove a distraction from the main core of CT support, etc. outlined above, and so I do not feel at this stage that they are an immediate priority.

However, there is considerable expertise and experience within the county of the wider ecumenical scene, and that reservoir of riches could be exploited for all our benefit. Within the county there are those who have participated, or continue to participate, in significant inter-denominational dialogue. Elsewhere in the county there are those who attended the recent European Ecumenical Assembly in Sibiu. I am persuaded, therefore, that at some stage it would be appropriate to explore day conferences (or longer) to inform and encourage debate on the bigger picture. For example, one suggestion from CTE is a study day on ARCIC; other subject matter could be handled similarly. There are no immediate plans for such events, but I would not rule them out in the future. 

 
Conclusion

I started with building up relationships, not least with Church Leaders and DEOs, and that continues apace with meeting key figures in the churches across the county.

This model is expanding to include building up relationships with LEPs, and will expand further to build up relationships with CT groups, who are central to any ecumenical progress. In due course, this will also enable better communication between CT groups and Church Leaders.

In the context of LEPs and CT groups, the fundamental approach is to develop a ministry of encouragement.

More important than undertaking new initiatives immediately is to promote recognition of the not inconsiderable amount of ecumenical activity that is already taking place across the county. This ministry of encouragement is intended to give a boost to those who may not otherwise feel that their efforts are valued, to celebrate examples of good practice, and to enhance the profile and reputation of the County Body. 



Clive Barrett 
23 January 2008