We move on to discuss the report on the implementation of Journey of the Baptised and New Century New Directions.

Alison Peden begs us to stop sniping at TISEC telling us that it has received excellent reports from those who validate it for the Ministry Divison of the C of E.

[One wonders whether it is possible to drive from one’s mind the recollection that even during the horrors of one’s own TISEC training, it still in those days received excellent reports from its validators. Or, indeed, the recollection that some of us voted for New Century, New Directions specifically because it would stop TISEC teaching. Ex-students came from far afield (including Englandshire) for the celebration lunch after the report went through and we believed TISEC was no more.]

The Bishop of Brechin makes a plea for the church to provide university based training once again. He is also in favour of residential training. I support university paths but not residential trianing. However, I am pleased that his contribution is received well.

Gill Young speaks in favour of interim ministry. Or perhaps Interim Ministry, I’m not sure.

+Aberdeen then gets up to say that he is greatly concerned at the proposal to incorporate the move towards more collaborative ministry in congregational development rather than have an officer dedicated to LCM (with capital letters).

+Edinburgh then has a go as he is concerned that we have exceptional tallent in clergy and laity but wonders whether the talent mutually enriches us. We often get people from outside the province to help us. Should we do something structural. Do we need a “professional body” like the Royal College of Physicians who will act as experts to enable us to become a mutually enabling church.

Dean Fostekew speaks in favour of the report. It is good to be asked questions. We need to continue to have  reviews.

The synod agrees to receive the report and overwhelmingly agrees to appoint a task force set up by the Mission and Ministry Board to consider “appropriate” ways forward.

I vote in favour of receiving the report but abstain on the second motion. These matters are so important. Their appropriateness should be decided by Synod not by the Board. We should be giving direction to the Board not giving it free reign.