Responding to Our Alumni Survey Results

Survey results can sometimes act as a “wake up” call. The recent MFCA survey sent out to alumni produced significantly different results than the same survey administered to active candidates. This could be explained by the fact that the alumni now have more ministry experience and the lens through which they view their MFCA experience has become more realistic. Another possibility is that the MFCA has been listening to candidates as they complete their exit interviews and our continued efforts to improve how we provide service to candidates is reflected in how our ministry is being perceived and received.

Never the less, we want these results to serve as a “wake up” call so that we can address deficiencies and improve the MFCA process. Many of the lower survey scores reflected an evaluation of the classis and may not be easy to remedy by action of the MFCA. The mandate placed on us will, however, require the cooperation of the MFCA with the many classes and will also require collaboration with the RCA seminaries since they play an equal role in the “Certificate of Fitness for Ministry” (CFM) process. The new team created by this year’s General Synod, identified as the Call, Care and Standards Committee (CCSC) will need to look at the results of these surveys and possibly take action at a denominational level.

Alumni gave the MFCA relatively high scores on “communication” and the “sense that they were known and heard by MFCA.” For many this was said in contrast to how classis did similar functions. This was validated by the comments. Alumni scored MFCA lower, more in the “average” mid-range category in the areas of “Spiritual Formation” and “Personal Wholeness.” The best rating was given in the area of “Denominational Identity,” an area where we should do well since that is certainly one of the priorities of the program and one of the more obvious and measurable products of the program. Yet, in this day and age denominational identity is not perceived as terribly important, especially when it is compared to spiritual formation and wholeness. The younger candidate especially tends to emphasize relationships with others and God as crucial to their ministry.  As one of the respondents wrote in the comments section:

“I definitely think MFCA is helpful, but still missing ‘something’ that can make it really strong. Don’t feel there’s enough unity perhaps… like people know each other’s ‘positions’ but not as ‘persons’ and so the work is just a duty rather than a joy of being together as God’s children.”

Other people wrote:

“My seminary was much more important and relevant than my Classis or MFCA. For my process, my Classis and MFCA would have been better focused on engaging me in contact with the RCA and the development of personal relationships within it.”

“Although I felt affirmed by both the Classis and MFCA, it was my seminary and personal pastor mentor who had the greatest impact on the formation of my personal identity and skills. Because I was distant geographically from both the Classis and MFCA, there were times I felt isolated from either of their processes.”

“I felt disconnected from MFCA when I was in the process. That was just something I had to do. Not sure how else MFCA can help candidates prepare for the ministries they will serve since every congregation and situation is different.” (stated AAR candidate)

The unique place and effort of the MFCA in the life of the candidate is certainly reflected in many of the comments. When there are supportive efforts on the part of the seminary, the supervised ministry site and mentors there is not as much of a need for the MFCA to provide the support. In situations where those other entities are not providing adequate support the onus is with MFCA and therefore we are obligated to provide program and resources for everyone in the process so that those who do not have the proper care will be looked after by the MFCA and its staff.

The fact that we have approximately 100 candidates at any one time in the process, and over 83% of those individuals reside east of the Rocky Mountains provides an enormous challenge. Communication remains extremely important and opportunities to gather folks together must remain a priority.

It is noteworthy to recognize that there were no negative comments about program requirements such as the courses and Clinical Pastoral Education (CPE). As a matter of fact there were several comments such as “My ‘highlight’ of my MFCA journey was completing CPE.” The CPE requirement is meant to address the “Personal Wholeness” and “Ministry Development.” It does not propose to connect folks more to the denomination but it does assist in making for healthier pastors who are self aware and have better defined boundaries. 

Another area that was highlighted by alumni in the survey was the psychological testing. This has become a more important part of the process and not only has the MFCA reduced the costs to candidates, the MFCA has also investigated other psychological services and added to our number those now able to provide useful and relevant diagnostic reports. We are diligent about providing candidates with the results and feedback of such assessments and candidates can rest assured that the committee members who participate in the interviews only read the summaries that the candidate also receives. No surprises and confidentiality is strictly maintained. We can confidently say to the person who wrote the following that “yes, we have improved and we are committed to continue to improve…”

“From what I hear, the psychological evaluation has been improved since I took it, but at that time it was done over the phone for those not in Michigan, DEFINITELY a BAD idea. I have seen enough of these tests to know that it is difficult at best to get an accurate picture of a person based on answers to questions and a short interview... This resulted in an evaluation that I felt did not give a very accurate picture of me. I was concerned about who would read it so I asked what was done with the psychological test results. I was told that the evaluation was simply filed away and would not be seen by others. Then when I received the packet of information that was distributed at my mid-term interview, parts of the summary page of the psychological evaluation was included.”

There will continue to be occasions where the psychological assessments will not be done in person but recent efforts to avoid that scenario has included bringing a psychologist to Holland, Michigan during the intensives so that candidates can meet in person with the psychologist. The addition of having Rev. Dr. Chuck DeGroat on the west coast with the Newbigin House of Studies has also been a welcomed option for psychological assessments.

The MFCA staff is more than open to hearing ideas from others about how we can improve our process. We will do our best to listen and avoid becoming defensive and make excuses. It is our desire to prepare individuals well for ministry. If you have not yet taken one of our surveys and would like to do so, please contact Kristen at kmcclain@rca.org or call at 800-435-5136. Comments to this blog are also welcome.

Cor

Professors of Theology: A New Future

The General Synod professors sing at the General Synod meeting in Orange City, Iowa - the occasion is the installation of Rev. Dr. Renee House.

The Professors of Theology, who hold the 4^th Office, are meeting in Holland, Michigan this weekend. The meeting will occur on the campus of Western Theological Seminary (WTS) and all ten professors hope to attend. This meeting will be somewhat historic in that there are once again ten (10) professors and for the first time, three of the ten are women. Dr. Carol Bechtel, the first woman ever to hold the office, Dr. Renee House and Dr. Leanne Van Dyk are the three women. Seven of the professors are from WTS and the other three are from New Brunswick Theological Seminary (NBTS).

This is the first meeting funded by the General Synod. Since the late 1990’s the MFCA has been funding and sponsoring the gatherings of the professorate. The MFCA’s stake in supporting the 4^th Office, other than the belief that this office, unique to the Reformed Church in America (RCA), serves the Church well, is that the professors have been critical to the success of the Approved Alternate Route (AAR) program, especially the implementation of the case study examinations.

The agenda for this week’s meeting has not been announced but it can be assumed that the professors will be reviewing the new definition of the 4^th office by the 2010 General Synod and, if ratified by two-thirds of the classes, they will have to design a strategy for living into the new definition. Two of the more significant modifications in the new definition are the 1) Broadening the eligibility criteria for the office by not restricting it to full time faculty at NBTS and WTS, allowing for part time faculty and individuals nominated by the MFCA; and 2) Requiring dual membership for professors—both to the General Synod and Classis.

The minutes of General Synod state the following: “These changes would allow for the appointment of General Synod professors who are not full-time teachers at one of the seminaries, but who play a major role in teaching the whole church and in preparing candidates for ministry and granting the certificate of fitness. It would also open the possibility of General Synod professors who are not in one of the Reformed Church in America seminaries, but who exercise major teaching and oversight responsibilities within the Ministerial Formation Certification Agency.”

Also the following is stated in the minutes regarding dual membership:

“• General Synod professors will be members of the classis in which they reside.

• General Synod professors will continue to be either regular or corresponding delegates to the General Synod as they have been in the past, in order to allow them to continue their ministry of teaching to the whole church, and to keep them in close contact with the synod in their crucial tasks of preparing and certifying candidates for ministry in the Reformed Church in America.

• General Synod professors will be amenable to the General Synod only in matters of doctrine, but in every other respect shall be amenable, as are all ministers of Word and sacrament, to the classis in which they hold membership (in this case, the classis of residence).

• In this more focused amenability to the General Synod, the only discipline that the synod will exercise will focus upon the office of General Synod professor. Its disciplinary options include admonishment, rebuke, or removal from the office of General Synod professor. Any other discipline that may be needed will be the responsibility of the classis, which will address the accused not as a General Synod professor but as a minister of Word and sacrament.”

The report of the task force which made the recommendations to General Synod, recorded the following explanations so as to provide context and explain the thinking behind the reasons for reconstituting this office…

“This approach has the additional benefit of allowing part-time faculty who are teaching in the seminaries or in the Ministerial Formation Certification Agency, but who also function as ministers of Word and sacrament under the oversight of a classis, to be considered for nomination as General Synod professors.

The task force is also addressing the collegiality and corporate identity of General Synod professors. Because of the broad Reformed conviction that the Spirit’s work in guiding the church expresses itself most fully within the church corporately, and not just in individuals, the task force believes that it may be helpful to recognize in our church order a corporate role for General Synod professors within the life of the church. This role should first of all concern oversight of the standards for the certificate of fitness for ministry, and the professors should work together to receive referrals from the General Synod with respect to the standards, and to formulate periodic reports and recommendations to the synod regarding the standards. Similarly, the professorate may be a useful resource to the General Synod from time to time, not replacing any of the existing commissions, but in some cases, receiving appropriate referrals from the General Synod, or offering reports to the synod on matters which touch upon the specific responsibilities granted to the professorate by the General Synod. The Book of Church Order changes implementing this corporate structure are included in this proposal.”

The MFCA Board of Trustees will be reviewing the recommended changes to the Book of Church (BCO) at its meeting in February and incorporating its new role into the bylaws of the agency. No plans have been made in relation to nominating individuals to the office at this time.