How Readers are valued in some parts of the Church of England

26 Responses to “How Readers are valued in some parts of the Church of England”

1. Paul G says:
   

   As a Reader – and working for the diocese you live in Dave – so I followed the links in case I was somehow implicated. Couldn’t work that out, but did notice that the important pouint seemed to be that the vicar in Spike’s parish is the one refusing to countenance his reinstatement, not some faceless diocesan policy. This looks like a good old-fashioned breakdown of working relationship – which is unfortunately not that uncommon between vicars and Readers, but isn’t really an example of diocesan bureaucracy gone mad, as you imply.

   November 27th, 2006 at 11:57 am
2. Dave says:
   

   Paul – I’m not sure. I had read it as being the Diocese not renewing the licence for the misdemeanour of not filling in the form on time. I’m not sure how these things work. If my heading is misleading I will change it.

   November 27th, 2006 at 12:03 pm
3. Paul G says:
   

   Spike’s blog says “my Vicar had no option but to suspend my licence, which was no more than I deserved. The bombshell that hit me though was that he is not prepared to renew my licence in the future…” (My emphasis.)

   Perhaps I’m being touchy, but blaming “the diocese” is all too common in the good old CofE, and not always fair…

   November 27th, 2006 at 12:27 pm
4. Dave says:
   

   Paul – Yes, fair enough. I accept that it is wrong of me to blame a diocese if it is a more local issue. I’ve therefore changed the title as I think some doubt remains. I was taking the ‘had no option’ to mean that the entire process was dictated from above, but you may well be correct.

   November 27th, 2006 at 12:48 pm
5. jody says:
   

   I read Spike’s blog and I thought it sounded like the vicar’s call.

   made me sad for your friend.

   

   jody x

   November 27th, 2006 at 12:50 pm
6. Richard says:
   

   It’s interesting the problems that Readers often have. For example I was surprised to read in our Diocesan newspaper an article trumpeting that licensed lay ministers (Oxford Diocese speak for Readers – ours decided to change their title to avoid confusion with those reading the lessons) in Bracknell were being allowed to take funerals to help out the local clergy, and yet a large part of the work my Mum does as a Reader in her parish St Albans Diocese is taking funerals, and she has done pretty well all the time she has been a Reader.

   With regards to your particular story, I agree with Paul that it seems like the Vicar is not supporting the Reader. Although on paper the Diocese licenses Readers, the also Reader needs the support of their local Church. My Mum was until last year one of the senior Readers in St Albans diocese, sadly a large part of her time was spent dealing with this kind of relationship problem between Readers and Clergy.

   November 27th, 2006 at 12:53 pm
7. Paul G says:
   

   Thanks Dave

   The underlying point – that many Readers feel undervalued, that many are at the mercy of their vicar as to the extent they are able to exercise ministry, and that working relationships are sometimes poor – is well documented in responses to some research currently being carried out about Reader ministry. A former chair of the house of laity on General Synod (and principal of a theological college) is wont to say that the Cof E has a threefold order of ministry: bishops, priests and Readers.

   Positively in the past week I’ve run two training days for newly licensed deacons and Readers alongside each other in my diocese: so we may in future have a more genuinely collaborative model of ministry in practice.

   Oh and I broke off to type this, from signing about 35 CRB forms – so I also have some sympathy with action following on from not taking the process seriously. (It’s not unimaginable – to speak entirely hypothetically and not about this case – that repeatedly losing/forgetting a form might be the action of someone who is trying to buy time to work out what to do about what might be disclosed by the search…

   November 27th, 2006 at 1:04 pm
8. ash says:
   

   Paul- I, through negligence, business and generally having better things to do; not to mention needing my principle forms of ID for more interesting things like getting into nightclubs and getting visas for trave… successfully managed to not fill in a CRB form for about 12 months. And I wasn’t at all worried about what might come up in it- I have a completely clear record, as the 3 CRB checks i’ve had this year for various organisations have pointed out.

   neglect or laziness in filling out boring forms doesn’t indicate that one has anything to hide, anymore than, say, refusing to carry a biometric ID card does, or refusing to let some spotty face teenager rifle through your backpack for cameras at the cinema does…

   November 27th, 2006 at 1:27 pm
9. ash says:
   

   the fact is that CRB checks provide security for institutions, not individuals, and they are a pain in the bottom to fill in all the time. If you were ever accused of a misdemeanor, the first thing the police would do is check your criminal record themselves.

   Far more useful to individuals is training in things like Child Protection etc. which, i would imagine, many churches are very bad at providing.

   Of course I understand the importance of CRB checks to institutions- it means they can safely say that they have done everything they could to make sure people are safe- but i do think, if they want to burden people with constant influx of forms, the least they could do is give you a free pen and some sweeties.

   November 27th, 2006 at 1:32 pm
10. Peter O says:
    

    This isn’t a surprise OR a shock at all. The Church of England insists that all it’s clergy and licenced layity are CRB checked (mostly an enhanced check) and we for one at our church do not let ANYBODY work with children or vulnerable adults in any capacity unless they also have a completed check.

    The bottom line is that this Reader didn’t fill in the form and so he doesn’t have CRB clearance. The church, in the interests of protecting vulnerable people, was quite within it’s rights to suspend him from work as most Reader’s work DOES bring them into the kind of contact described above.

    Added to that, without anything from the vicar we don’t know the reasons for him refusing to reinstate his licence. Perhaps Spike is a lousy preacher? Heretical preacher? Perhaps he’s useless pastorally? I obviously don’t know the people in question so can’t pass definite comment, but there’s obviously been a breakdown in the relationship involved something else apart from the CRB check for this to happen.

    It’s unfortunate Dave, but it feels like a non-story to me.

    November 27th, 2006 at 3:03 pm
11. Paul G says:
    

    Ash
    I wasn’t suggesting that slowness in filling forms was proof – or even indicative – of guilt of some kind – merely that it wasn’t unreasonable of an organisation to expect co-operation: and that one possibility among many is that someone who may have found a nice safe position of trust to abuse – before any checks were available – might respond to a request for such a check with prevarication…

    You’re dead right that safe practices are much more important than forms – and it worries me silly that people and churches may think they don’t need the former if they’ve done the latter. And everyone will benefit if the post Bichard proposals for a system of checking comes in that doesn’t require multiple or repeated forms, but does monitor any fresh information on those in positions of trust.

    November 27th, 2006 at 3:39 pm
12. Mary says:
    

    But he did complete it, just failed to meet the deadline.

    I can only presume there was some underlying reason, meaning that the vicar used the opportunity to get rid of him. Its a bit underhand though.

    I wasn’t allowed to start training without a completed CRB check.

    November 27th, 2006 at 6:33 pm
13. Spike says:
    

    Well, from a simple blog entry saying what’s been going in my world recently, I hadn’t quite expected this! Perhaps I should explain a little further.

    Some years ago, when the whole CRB thing first came about, I sent a form off to the diocese. It was only when I was asked more recently if I was CRB cleared I mentioned this only to find that the original forms had ended up in someone’s desk never to be seen again. In the meantime, I’d had CRB clearance from another diocese with regard to some youth work I’d done there a while ago. At the time, I didn’t realise that this wasn’t valid in my own diocese. Anyone who has ever dealt with the CRB will know just how beaurocratic the whole thing in. If someone is a Scout Leader and has CRB clearance and then also wants to become a Sunday School teacher IN THE SAME CHURCH, he/she must get CRB clearance all over again. If he/she then adds anothe string to his/her bow applies fort a job as a teacher or clasroom assistant, then guess what form he/she has to fill in again? This I suppose is where the confusion in my case started.

    The form that went astray earlier this year was NOT the fault of the diocese. The form was sent to the home address of the diocesan Registrar of Readers. I posted the form, but she never received it so, if anyone is to blame, it must be the Royal Mail.

    It was my Vicar who revoked my licence. I had been warned and I cannot deny it. As others have said, a suspension of my licence would have been fair and I accept it was the only option available. Even and “extended” suspension for a couple of months to “teach me a lesson” I’d have understood.

    In reply to Peter, you are quite right and life experience has taught me that there are always two sides to any argument. However, as far as I am aware, in the 13 years I have been a Reader I’ve never knowingly said anything heretical. It’s not for me to say whether or not I’m any good in the pulpit, but my sermons have generally been well received (including compliments from the Vicar who suspended me). In fact, I was very concerned that perhaps there was something about my conduct or theological viewpoint that perhaps made me unsuitable for the role and that the Vicar had been looking for an excuse to get rid of me, which is why, at a later date when I’d got my head together, I asked him directly if this was the case. He assures me that he had no problems at all with anything to do with my work within the Parish, but simply the dragging of my feet in sorting out the paperwork. As far as I am aware, there is nothing whatsoever to stop me applying for a licence in another parish (obviously with CRB clearance )( and one of the options offered to me was from the Area Dean who was prepared to grant me a Deanery Licence which would mean I could be sent to any church within the Deanery as and when required to cover holidays or Interregna, but this is an option I have chosen not to take as this would make me feel very much like a “spare part”

    I hold my hands up and admit that I am crap at filling in forms (I moved house 3 months ago and finally got around to sending off my Driving Licence to change the address last week). I still think that the decision to permanently revoke my licence in the parish was extreme, but hopefully this reply has added some perspective.

    November 28th, 2006 at 12:26 am
14. Mary says:
    

    Thanks Spike for coming forward and giving more details. I agree, the decision does sound extreme – I still find it difficult to believe that revoking your license just for that is a just and valid reason. I hope and pray that you can find a role elsewhere, as the church can’t afford to lose good people.

    How do I see Yellow’s blog?

    November 28th, 2006 at 7:39 am
15. Dave says:
    

    Spike – thanks for the extra details.

    Peter – ‘non-stories’ are what we do best here. But having said that I’m still of the opinion that permanently revoking Spike’s licence was, as Spike says, ‘extreme’.

    November 28th, 2006 at 9:43 am
16. Peter O says:
    

    Spike – the Deanery licence is a goldmine for you – take him up on that and for God’s sake, do the paperwork straight away.

    November 28th, 2006 at 2:19 pm
17. John Cooper says:
    

    I am more intreigued by the underlying lack of apreciation of what a CRB cirtificate is.

    I think they are a very helpful, useful tool that are a legitimate and clear way of ensuring that everyone who is working with vulnerable adults/young people/children are safe to be with.

    I don’t think there is anything wrong with this and, in reality, the CRB form is rather easy to fill in.

    As for the multiple disclosures, yeah it can be a fagg to fill in but in ensures that each relevant body has the necessary paperwork and also, there is no “auto update” so if your arrested for anything that should appear on your ceritificate (once issued) it won’t be updated. What is also worth noting is the level (standard or enhanced) differs between many roles as well. This doesn’t mean a new one per role should be required but just one per organisation.

    The nub of this individual matter is it all does look rather odd and like an excuse to get rid of this poor chap. The only reasoning I could think of would be that the Vicar in question used to be a beuracrat and has at last been able to get revenge (by example) for years of wading through late forms etc from everyone!

    I would suggest persuing an appeal with to your Bishop. Whilst the deanery liscence may be nice, there is a fundemental principle at stake which is also worth taking up!

    Regards
    john
    regards
    John

    November 28th, 2006 at 8:08 pm
18. Elaine says:
    

    Alas paperwork is a necessity. We need to care about the children and the vulnerable.

    I am interested that Spike admits his paperwork is naf. Well those of us who have to chase paperwork get totally fed up we those who feel unable to obey the rules.

    I hate all this stuff but recognise that if the C of E is to maintain a good profile with all it is a necessity.

    Yes I suspect Spike was lacking in other departments, but it was not beyond the wit of man to check everything had gone through okay.

    I would say well yes Spike has held his hand up, so go to another parish and rebuild and show you can be responsible

    November 28th, 2006 at 8:23 pm
19. Steve says:
    

    Spike,

    I’m sorry you find yourself in this situation. I hope that you find grace in it, and find a way though. It sounds very much like it sucks…

    Steve

    November 28th, 2006 at 11:40 pm
20. joe says:
    

    Well I must say, the whole thing leaves me feeling rather bewildered.

    I can understand teachers being CRB checked. I can understand scout leaders and sunday school teachers.

    But what exactly is the role of a Reader that means he should be? Is he not a preacher – is there ever an opportunity whereby a lay Reader would ever be in a position of power over a vulnerable person? Surely he just preaches (… intentional pause.. ) doesn’t he?

    I admit to being rather in the dark about the finer points of Anglican ministry, perhaps someone could enlighten me.

    If Spike is able to preach elsewhere in the Deanery, one would think the sensible thing (if indeed the CRB is essential) that the Vicar said Spike could not do his Reader-ing duties until the CRB has been completed.

    November 29th, 2006 at 8:41 pm
21. Steve says:
    

    Hi Joe,

    To answer a couple of questiosn about CRB. CRb is for anyone who has the potential to be working with children or vulnerable adults.Readers, as above seem to preform a lot of duties, and as with many organisations, it seems sensible for all to be checked. In organisations such as NCH, every members of staff is checked as standard. Given that, it does seem appropriate for readers, and all who work within churches.

    On a point above, many organisations are now running CRB checks, as spike suggests, even when someone takes a different position inthe same organisation. This runs up to the government’s aim to have an ongoing CRB process for those checked, which can notify those who need ot know if something untoward happens.

    In the past, CRB checks have only been valid for six months, now things are genberally being taken much more seriously. I have had 4 in 28 months.

    November 29th, 2006 at 9:17 pm
22. Mary says:
    

    Joe,

    Regarding what a reader actually does (I’m a trainee), as well as preaching, it can involve leading worship – such as family services, and teaching, such as confirmation classes. There is also a pastoral side, such as visiting parishioners, which may include families. Lots of opportunities to come into contact with children and vulnerable adults, but it does depend on the parish and its needs.

    On Sunday, I was asked if I’d help out with Sunday school, as I’d been CRB cleared for church, and as one of the leaders hadn’t turned up (but she turned up just in time!).

    There are probably lots of other examples I could give you, but I’m sure you get the gist!

    November 30th, 2006 at 5:28 am
23. joe says:
    

    Fair enough Steve and Mary.

    Mary, it appears from what others have said that you should have needed to have been CRB checked specifically for the sunday school. Maybe I’m reading that wrong (as it doesn’t sound much like sense).

    Whilst I acknowledge the need to protect children and the vulnerable, I think there is a considerable amount of misplaced faith in the CRB system. It can only tell you if a person has convictions, for example. It doesn’t tell you someone’s potential to abuse others, or things that nobody knows about.

    It also takes much too long and costs too much.

    November 30th, 2006 at 9:40 am
24. Mary says:
    

    Joe, who knows? I know when I completed my CRB form, my employer was the diocese I’m in, so I (and everyone else) assumed I was covered.

    Anyone know for sure? My job title was “Reader”

    November 30th, 2006 at 6:06 pm
25. gerhard says:
    

    Hi there

    Considering how they loose their offenders I wonder what the effort is worth?

    I try to obtain that funny clearance form for sunday club work. As the process has changed I need to apply for a new clearance. As my new vicar hasn’t got a form and the CRB want’s a form signed by the organisation on behalf of which I have to apply for clearence – but doesn’t provide a form on the internet- were did you get your beloved forms from? Anyone who can email / link me to a blank?

    Thanks

    Gerhard

    January 10th, 2007 at 1:19 am
26. gerhard says:
    

    Eventually found the instructions on the St Albans website. You seem to have to phone -the chaps as they haven’t heard of email- and give them diocesan ref. number. But they seem to have generous opening hours (8 to 20 and saturday 10 to 17o’clock)
    apparently you now have to do that every 6 month – what a drag. Hope they accept a standing order.

    Regards
    Gerhard

    January 10th, 2007 at 1:35 am