The other day a seminarian told me that she'd received a "yellow light" from her Regional Subcommittee on Candidacy (RSCC) because she hadn't acted on a "recommendation" from the Center on Ministry. The RSCC told her how to implement the Center for Ministry recommendation, and required her to do so before returning to see them again. Obviously, she did not know that Center for Ministry "recommendations" are requirements unless you can make a well-documented case that they are erroneous.
You may wish to fault this aspirant for her naïveté. However, it's likely that other aspirants have been similarly naive.
After the interview, a friend told the seminarian that therapists and counselors don't direct, they recommend. This leaves me wondering whether she shared her Center for Ministry report with others and obtained guidance in its interpretation.
As my mother used to say, "a word to the wise is sufficient." May these words be that for current and future aspirants.
Posts
Beloved Community?
11 years ago
Even a hinted recommendation from a Center on Ministry should be attended to. Even if it's not an "issue" but merely a suggestion, the RSCC will expect that you've responded to it.
ReplyDeleteIf you haven't, *that* is an issue.
It's about that simple.
Actually, Orge, I don't think it is that simple at all. Did the Center for Ministry mean for their recommendations to be "requirements"? Did the RSCC communicate to the aspirant that they were going to treat the Center's recommendations as requirements or did they just assume that she would learn that through the grapevine? It seems that they could have saved her and themselves some time and trouble by making their requirements and expectations clear beforehand. When, as in the Midwest, the RSCC only meets twice a year these sort of delays are extremely burdensome on the students--their are a lot of services and supports you cannot access until you are a candidate. Plus having to see people multiple times increases the already high workload of the Subcommittee. To hold up candidacy for real concerns is one thing, to hold it up just because you aren't communicating is problem.
ReplyDelete