The Glen Waverley Uniting Church PSALTER|
Size: 2837
Comment: refine comments
|
Size: 3229
Comment:
|
| Deletions are marked like this. | Additions are marked like this. |
| Line 5: | Line 5: |
| Present: AlisonClarkson, JudithWatkins, JulieRoss, StevenTerrell, JohnHurst, DonCheyne, GeoffParham, GregFry, GavinFaichney | = Monash North Regional Group = == Notes from Meeting == === 7:30pm, Wednesday, 27 Oct 2010 at Glen Waverley Uniting Church === '''Present:''' AlisonClarkson, JudithWatkins, JulieRoss, StevenTerrell, JohnHurst, DonCheyne, GeoffParham, GregFry, GavinFaichney |
| Line 7: | Line 10: |
| Reflection on previous meeting: some confusion over what was decided at the last meeting. 5 (MW: St Luke's, High St Rd, St John's, St John's Fijian, St Marks) churches have been working collaboratively, and felt that there was not a great need to meet in regional groups. These churches meet every six weeks or so. One mtg a year for the wider group (MonashN) purely for fellowship seemed like a good idea (perhaps during the day, rather than evening?. Complement, rather than double up, on interchurch council. | '''Reflection on previous meeting:''' some confusion over what was decided at the last meeting. 5 churches (from Mount Waverley: St Luke's, High St Rd, St John's, St John's Fijian, St Marks) have been working collaboratively, and felt that there was not a great need to meet in regional groups. These churches meet every six weeks or so. One meeting a year for the wider group (MonashN) purely for fellowship seemed like a good idea (perhaps during the day, rather than evening?) These activities should complement, rather than double up, on interchurch council activities. |
| Line 9: | Line 12: |
| Noted that MonashS felt they were too small, and wanted to rejoin - in contrast to first mtg (of all Monash) that said we were too large! | Noted that MonashS felt they were too small, and wanted to rejoin - in contrast to the view expressed at the first regional group meeting (of all Monash), which said we were too large! |
| Line 13: | Line 16: |
| MW congs are doing various things already, it seemed to make sense to coordinate them. | Mount Waverley congregations are doing various things already, it seemed to make sense to coordinate them. |
| Line 17: | Line 20: |
| JR: General feeling that we don't want another meeting! MW doing things like C&F ministry, mental health, together. People are committed/passionate about these ideas. Cultures are different, and of different sizes, some are multicultural, some are not. | JR: General feeling that we don't want another meeting! Mount Waverley doing things like C&F ministry, mental health, together. People are committed/passionate about these ideas. Cultures are different, and of different sizes, some are multicultural, some are not. |
| Line 19: | Line 22: |
| JH: The synergy of the MW churches against the regional church notion for GW may be a better regional g. split? | JH: The synergy of the Mount Waverley churches against the regional church notion for GW may be a better regional g. split? |
| Line 21: | Line 24: |
| ST: Reg. Groups need to be thinking as agents of P. | ST: Regional Groups need to be thinking as agents of Presbytery. |
| Line 27: | Line 30: |
| ST: The issue of regional churches: SOME DISCUSSION: ST Marks perhaps marginal between neighbourhood and regional. GW wrestling with this - would there be some value in meeting with e.g., Frankston to dialogue regional ministries? | ST: The issue of regional churches: (some discussion) St Marks perhaps marginal between neighbourhood and regional. Glen Waverley is wrestling with this - would there be some value in meeting with e.g., Frankston to engage in dialogue about regional ministries? |
| Line 29: | Line 32: |
| GF: Topics such as food voucher ministries would be of broad interest - Harrisons have GW as a church that does these, but each church needs experience and skills to also deal with them. | GF: Topics such as food voucher ministries would be of broad interest - Harrisons have Glen Waverley as a church that does these, but each church needs experience and skills to also deal with them. |
| Line 33: | Line 36: |
| ST: regionals act as a hub of resources for surrounding churches. RCs can become a 'gift' to other churches. | ST: regionals act as a hub of resources for surrounding churches. Regional Churches can become a 'gift' to other churches. |
| Line 35: | Line 38: |
| All: Could Alanee be used as a Presbytery resource for say one day a week? GWCC could take an initiative here! | All: Could Alanee be used as a Presbytery resource for say one day a week? Glen Waverley could take an initiative here! |
| Line 37: | Line 40: |
| ST: Frankston could be a good model for GW (as a RC). | ST: Frankston could be a good model for Glen Waverley (as a Regional Church). |
Monash North Regional Group
Notes from Meeting
7:30pm, Wednesday, 27 Oct 2010 at Glen Waverley Uniting Church
Present: AlisonClarkson, JudithWatkins, JulieRoss, StevenTerrell, JohnHurst, DonCheyne, GeoffParham, GregFry, GavinFaichney
Reflection on previous meeting: some confusion over what was decided at the last meeting. 5 churches (from Mount Waverley: St Luke's, High St Rd, St John's, St John's Fijian, St Marks) have been working collaboratively, and felt that there was not a great need to meet in regional groups. These churches meet every six weeks or so. One meeting a year for the wider group (MonashN) purely for fellowship seemed like a good idea (perhaps during the day, rather than evening?) These activities should complement, rather than double up, on interchurch council activities.
Noted that MonashS felt they were too small, and wanted to rejoin - in contrast to the view expressed at the first regional group meeting (of all Monash), which said we were too large!
Need to identify the "point" of these meetings - what is our mission? (Noting that we do also include several agencies: Connections, Wesley College, St Mark's Day Centre, with whom we don't always connect well.)
Mount Waverley congregations are doing various things already, it seemed to make sense to coordinate them.
ST: The tasks are to be driven by the regional groups (bottom up), not by Presbytery (top down).
JR: General feeling that we don't want another meeting! Mount Waverley doing things like C&F ministry, mental health, together. People are committed/passionate about these ideas. Cultures are different, and of different sizes, some are multicultural, some are not.
JH: The synergy of the Mount Waverley churches against the regional church notion for GW may be a better regional g. split?
ST: Regional Groups need to be thinking as agents of Presbytery.
JH: Perceptions of transparency across congregations-presbyteries-synod need to be clarified.
ST: The risk taking should be happening at the congregational level, even though the legal framework is driven from the synod.
ST: The issue of regional churches: (some discussion) St Marks perhaps marginal between neighbourhood and regional. Glen Waverley is wrestling with this - would there be some value in meeting with e.g., Frankston to engage in dialogue about regional ministries?
GF: Topics such as food voucher ministries would be of broad interest - Harrisons have Glen Waverley as a church that does these, but each church needs experience and skills to also deal with them.
JR: Affinity groups rather than geographic groups?
ST: regionals act as a hub of resources for surrounding churches. Regional Churches can become a 'gift' to other churches.
All: Could Alanee be used as a Presbytery resource for say one day a week? Glen Waverley could take an initiative here!
ST: Frankston could be a good model for Glen Waverley (as a Regional Church).
JR: Presbytery and Council met as a coolamon as a place to gather and share stories
GF: Thanks to Steve for coming - it has helped!