Mission Council meeting, 20 - 21 November, latest updates

Share this article

voting cardMission Council, the United Reformed Church’s (URC) executive body, met online from 20-21 November.

Related papers are published online and can be found here.

Decisions taken at Mission Council are reported below and can be found on the URC’s Facebook and Twitter pages and in the February 2021 edition of Reform.

Fifth session – Saturday 21 November (afternoon)

Single use plastics

Sarah Lane Cawte, Convenor of Mission Committee, presented paper G1 in an amended form. The paper urges churches to reduce their use of single use plastics. The amendment was brought after consultation with URC Youth, and involves adding a second paragraph to the resolution:

Mission Council notes with alarm the huge increase in the use of disposable items during the Covid-19 pandemic, especially single-use plastics. While there are occasions during this pandemic when it is impossible to avoid the use of single-use plastic items, their use should be kept to an absolute minimum. They should also be carefully disposed of in a way that minimises their impact on the environment.            

Ms Lane Cawte noted that a guide to avoiding single use plastics in churches was available on the URC website. Download it here (PDF)

After discussion of the wording, the resolution was passed unanimously.

Towards being an anti-racist Church

Sarah Lane Cawte, Convenor of Mission Committee, presented paper G2 which commits the URC to a journey towards becoming an anti-racist Church.

Ms Lane Cawte drew Mission Council’s attention to the difference between being non-racist (which is passive and accepts the status quo) and being anti-racist (which actively challenges racism). She also noted the use in the paper of the phrase ‘Black Lives Matter’, saying it is insufficient to affirm ‘all lives matter’, when black lives particularly have been treated as if they do not matter.

In response to questions from members of the Council, Ms Lane Cawte said that because the process was open-ended she would not specify what kind of progress she expected to see by March 2021, but that it was important nevertheless for Mission Council to monitor it.

Karen Campbell, the URC’s Secretary for Global and Intercultural Ministries, answered further questions from members. She said it was not necessary to specify that the process would look at unconscious bias, as it is better to keep things open at this point.

Ms Campbell said that the phrase ‘Black Lives Matter’ in the paper was intended to refer to the ethos, not to suggest the URC was aligning itself with the political movement. It was noted that capitalising the phrase in the paper could make that ambiguous, but that is not the intention of the committee.

One member commended racism awareness training as valuable. It was also recognised that the committee needs to consider how painful it can be for people to share about their experiences of racism.

Two amendments were made by Mission Council to the resolution: in the first section, the word ‘leadership’ was added to the phrase ‘structure, leadership and processes’; and in the second section, the phrase ‘theology and relationships’ was added to the phrase ‘structure, theology and relationships’.

The amended version of the resolution was passed unanimously.

Closing worship and induction of Karen Campbell and Jenny Mills

After thanks to those who took part in the meeting and those who facilitated it from Moderator Peter Pay, the Revd Helen Everard, Chaplain to the Moderators of General Assembly, led the Closing Worship which included the induction of Karen Campbell as Secretary of Global and Intercultural Ministries and the Revd Jenny Mills, Secretary for Education and Learning.

In her reflection, the Revd Clare Downing, one of the Moderators of the URC General Assembly, said that Karen and Jenny had chosen the Bible passages, both of which deal with difficulties!  

“As we meet Jacob he’s alone again, going off to face Esau, and he has a strange encounter with the man. He holds on for a blessing, something which keeps coming up with Jacob. In the passage from Isaiah, the message is do not be afraid, I called you by name.

“Jennifer means fair one, Karen means pure. You don’t need changes of name. Like all of us you were created by God and continue to be formed by God. I hope that happens with the joyful times as well as those times of difficulties, and not metaphorically wrestling with the Church.

“We hope and pray that the ministries will be joyful and fulfilling. There will be times when you feel alone, struggling with God and with other people and fears. The Boggarts in Harry Potter take the form of your greatest fear. May your Boggarts be few, and like Jacob, hang on for a blessing.”

Karen Campbell’s statement

Karen started by explain that this was not a post she had expected, but that God had started to speak to her through different people at different times, until she had to start taking notice.

“One of those voices said: ‘God’s time can’t be the right time’ and trusting in God that the outcome was the right one, ‘Here I am, Lord’. I know it won’t be easy, and I don’t face the path alone.” Karen shared the poem ‘The Path’.

Jenny Mills’ statement

Jenny started by seconding everything Karen had said! At her ordination 12 years ago, she wrestled with a variety of things that had got her there ‘kicking and screaming’ at times.

“If ever we need to wonder if God has a sense of humour, here I am! During my sabbatical last year, God called me to stay where I was, and then this post became available. I give thanks that God has enabled me in tough times, with strength, blessing and fellowship.”

The Statement of the Nature, Faith and Order of the United Reformed Church was read and after promises made by both Karen, Jenny and members of Mission Council, the service concluded with the hymns, prayers, the Lord’s Prayer and a blessing.

Next meeting

The next meeting of the Mission Council is 15-17 March 2021.

Fourth session – Saturday 21 November (morning)

The Revd Helen Everard, Chaplain to the Moderators of General Assembly, led opening worship with an Advent antiphon, saying she knew it was ‘jumping the gun’ but that it was fitting for where we found ourselves today as it looks forward to the dawn.

Safeguarding Training Framework

Mission Council generally welcomed the framework for safeguarding training for the whole church set out in paper L1, but questions revealed that some more work would be helpful to develop some of the details in the paper, in order to make it as good as Mission Council wanted it to be. 

Therefore the proposers sought permission of Mission Council, which was given, to withdraw the paper today and bring it back in March 2021 with the improvements everyone wished, rather than redrafting during the meeting. Safeguarding training will of course continue as normal for the time being.

Many questions were raised about the detail of the paper, the framework and its implementation. They included how does the safeguarding of mental health and wellbeing fit into this framework? Does the framework acknowledge the unique situations in Scotland and Wales, and with ecumenical partners and ministers following specific patterns of ministry? At what levels (local or at Synod level) will the training be regulated, and who will administrate this? Is there a minimum age for completing this training, which could inadvertently exclude, for example, 16-year-old leaders who organise volunteer-run church activities? How long before an appointment should the training take place?

Both Mr Athanasiou, the URC Safeguarding Adviser, and the Revd Dr John Bradbury, URC General Secretary, responded and Dr Bradbury acknowledged the trickiness of the subject, particularly around accountability, which he described as quite difficult in URC polity as it stands at the moment. “We can’t clarify now but that shouldn’t undermine the operation of the framework,” he said.

Mr Athanasiou confirmed that safeguarding colleagues at Church House wold be responsible for recording training and for generating, validating and distributing certificates of attendance. He also confirmed that risk assessment and specific self-care modules for training were being developed and said that he'd welcome further consultation with URC Youth about developing a tailored training for younger volunteers and leaders. “We want your input,” Mr Athanasiou said.

Responding to the query about the timing of and age criteria for training, Mr Athanasiou said that some roles would be required to complete training within six months, others would have it listed as a prior requirement to starting their job, and yet others may need to complete the training within two weeks, dependent on the context. The current age minimum for training is 18 but a specialist module will be developed for younger people, he continued.

The Revd Simon Walking, Moderator of the URC's National Synod of Wales, commented that he welcomed the idea of the framework and appreciated the hard work that had gone into it. “But the number of questions raised makes me think it might not be ready to be adopted,” said Mr Walkling. Stressing that the framework has to work for a URC context and within URC polity, Mr Walkling favoured drafting a policy for training that aims to change understandings and behaviours rather than simply meeting required criteria.

Mr Walking said that we was also unsatisfied with the idea of creating a specialist module for self-care: “It should be shot through [the training] at all levels,” he argued, highlighting a tension too between central, Synod and local responsibilities. “Some small churches may end up doing everything,” Mr Walkling said.

The Revd Helen Everard, the Assembly Moderators' Chaplain, was invited to pray for the meeting.

Andy Middleton, the URC's legal advisor, raised concerns about sections of the paper where the wording about job roles should be clarified. Other Council members also recommended wording changes too.

Dr Bradbury suggested that the paper be withdrawn, had further work done in it and brought back to Mission Council at a later date. The Council voted on this, and the decision was carried. Dr Bradbury invited Mission Council members to email him and Mr Athanasiou with comments and suggestions that would inform the changes to the training framework.

Mr Pay thanked both Mr Athanasiou and Dr Bradbury for their work, saying: “It’s important, and we must get it right.”


Following feedback from the July meeting of the Mission Council and the General Assembly, and at the request of the Equalities Committee, auto generated subtitles were available for those that wanted to use them. However, as with TV channels, the app didn’t always get it right, according the Revd Michael Hopkins, the Clerk of the General Assembly who was described as the Clock of the Michigan Counsel!

URC 50th anniversary

Mission Council was updated on the work of the 50th anniversary planning group and was consulted about the form of the celebrations and the legacy of the jubilee.

Since March, when the consultation was originally the Walking the Way steering group has appointed a 50th anniversary planning group. The group will serve as a project co-ordination group and will oversee the jubilee planning in its overall direction.

The Revds David Cornick and Robert Pope are working on a book to mark the 50th anniversary as is Steve Tomkins, editor of Reform and author of the critically acclaimed book Journey to the Mayflower.

The Revd Anne Sardeson is looking at a book about the hymnody and hymn-writers of the URC, and as Reform magazine will be celebrating its 50th anniversary too, the team are starting to plan a series of articles about the anniversary of the URC.

Mission Council was asked what form should celebrations take? The planning group is envisaging a combination of local, regional and denominational events throughout the jubilee year in 2022.

The first event to mark the celebration will be the URC Youth Assembly, taking place in January 2022. URC Youth’s theme for 2022 is Jubilee.

A provisional booking for Saturday 1 October 2022 has been made with the Methodist Central Hall in London, where on 5 October 1972 the Uniting Assembly took place. The day will include a programme of activities, culminating in an act of celebration and worship.

It is also exploring the possibility of holding a service of worship at St Mary Undercroft at the House of Commons on Tuesday 21 June 2022, marking exactly 50 years since the URC Bill was approved in the House of Commons.

The group hoped that the October event would be surrounded by regional events and activities run by Synods and local churches across the denomination. Ideas that have been put forward include the encouraging of local churches to host a birthday party, having regional events that could be linked up online and events that build up to the October event.

Thinking about worship for the jubilee, resources to help local churches, regional events and a central event will be important. The idea of a hymn/song competition has also been raised.

In groups, Mission Council was asked if a combination of local, regional and denominational events would work; for suggestions about these events and ideas and how they could be linked, both in content and practically; and because the marking of the jubilee would be an opportunity for looking back, giving thanks, and for looking forward, what would the URC like to see as the legacy of the year of celebration. 

Third session

Improving integration within education and learning in the URC

Alan Yates, Convenor of the Education and Learning Committee, played Mission Council a video in which people who had been through the Stepwise programme talked in glowing terms about how useful it had been to them.

Mr Yates then introduced paper C1. The background to its proposals is that, in 2005, General Assembly resolved to cultivate ‘a church committed to life-long learning where there is integrated education and training offered to the whole people of God’.

The committee is aware that this goal has not been achieved, though Mr Yates said that Stepwise had made a useful contribution to it. The resolution therefore proposes consultation with a wide range of stakeholders as to what integration might look like.

In response to questions from members of Mission Council, Mr Yates agreed to include the URC’s safeguarding team in the list of those to be consulted. However, consultation with wider URC membership and other denominations, Mr Yates said, was for phase two of the process.

Mission Council agreed to the resolution by a majority vote.

Church Ministerial Capability Process

To reflect best practice, the URC has updated its ministerial capability process – a method for reassessing a minister’s skills, if they are called into question.

The changes agreed impact the terms and conditions of service for both Ministers of Word and Sacrament and Church-Related Community Workers, making it easier for performance concerns to be dealt with fairly. Mission Council passed the resolution, set out in Paper F2, by a clear majority.

The Revd Paul Whittle, convenor of the URC’s Ministries Committee, introduced the paper saying: “Happily we don’t need to use this process very often, but life can be messy, and the Church needs the tools to tackle when this is the case.”

Mr Whittle stressed that the proposal in Paper F2 did not introduce a new process – an existing process is already in place – but that it improves on what the URC already has.

The Revd Ken Howcroft, who attended Mission Council as a representative of the Methodist Church, commented on the parallels and differences between the two denominations over this type of process (reviewing minsters’ skills).

Replying to other comments about the wording, Mr Whittle reminded the Council that, as the proposed process improves on the existing one, the Council could support the improved process and amend it in later meetings.

After Mr Whittle’s feedback, the resolution linked to Paper F2 passed by a clear majority.

Ministries Committee - Non-stipendiary Church Related Community Work ministry

Paul Whittle, Convenor of the URC’s Ministry Committee, introduced paper F3, which had been removed from en bloc voting. The resolution removes training restrictions that face locally called non-stipendiary CRCWs.

Members of Mission Council who had asked for the paper to be debated, rather than passed en bloc, explained their reasons. One question was whether there would be proper checks and balances for consistency of training when moving between one model and another. Mr Whittle assured Mission Council that ministers making such moves would need re-assessment.

Another question was whether non-stipendiary ministry was no longer to be viewed as equivalent to stipendiary ministry. Mr Whittle shared some thoughts on the matter but suggested that it raised issues that could not be dealt with in this discussion.

The resolution was then passed unanimously by Mission Council.

Second session

Finance Committee – 2021 Budget

Ian Hardie, the URC Treasurer, introduced the paper from the Finance Committee and told Mission Council that he would probably not be the only convenor to talk about the impact of Covid-19.

The URC faces significant uncertainty about likely levels of income in 2021 (and beyond) the report from the Finance Committee said. Therefore, the budget has to be more tentative than usual.

Significant actions are proposed to curtail expenditure next year, including no increases in stipends or salaries and even though substantial deficits in both 2020 and 2021 are expected, there were no further proposals for drastic action rather a strategic review of denominational activities once a clearer picture about future income is available.

 The impact of Covid-19 has rendered past experience of limited relevance; where our ability to forecast the outcome for the current year is much more problematic than usual. The draft budget was presented on the understanding that the budgeted M&M contributions figure may be less reliable and had been reviewed by URC trustees.

The committee wanted to express its deep gratitude to churches and Synods for their commitment to honouring their covenant with the wider church at this difficult time. Over the six months to June 2020, M&M contributions were around £350,000 below budget expectations. It is uncertain what will happen in the second half of the year; but our present forecast is that the Church may have a contribution shortfall approaching £900,000.

The Church’s investment income has remained surprisingly buoyant to date and our investment managers are confident of maintaining our current level of dividend income through 2021.

The net effect of the reduced income budget and the limiting of expenditure, including the non-payment of any general cost of living increases to stipends and salaries, is a budgeted deficit for 2021 of around £358k.

Mission Council adopted the budget for 2021.

URC Pension scheme

John Piper, the URC Deputy Treasurer, introduced the update to Mission Council, updating it about the ongoing process since the meeting in July, with a hope to provide a more substantial progress report to the March 2021 meeting.

The report from the Finance Committee said that the Pensions Regulator is wanting the trustees of all defined benefit schemes, all in independent bodies, all with different circumstances, in the URC to focus primarily on the Long-term Objective (LTO) which is the estimated date at which the scheme will become ‘significantly mature’. The latest estimate from the actuary is that the total cost to the LTO in ten years will be around £45 million of additional funding.

A significant proportion of this figure will be reflected in the deficit as at 1 January 2021. Because of the relatively short time to the LTO, it is the overall total rather than the 2021 deficit to be the main focus.

A resolution of Mission Council in July 2020 made clear that the Church remains committed to providing good pensions for its Ministers and its staff. The Pensions Committee is overseeing work, with external advisors, to establish what good, well designed defined contribution schemes might look like.

The aim is to enable the Church to take an informed decision about whether to stay with the current schemes or change to different arrangements. The hope is that an in-principle decision by the Church will be possible by the summer of 2021.

Watch the pensions presentation from July on the URC’s YouTube channel.

Moderator of Synod of Scotland

The Revd Paul Whittle was formally appointed Moderator of the URC’s National Synod of Scotland during November’s Mission Council meeting. Mr Whittle will serve in this role from 1 January 2021 until 31 December 2023.

Paper N1 was introduced by the Revd Dr John Bradbury, the URC’s General Secretary, who provided some background to the appointment. Mr Whittle’s appointment has arisen in an unexpected fashion, Dr Bradbury explained, so it was felt that a separate paper was necessary.

The URC’s National Synod of Scotland has faced difficulties that include governance issues so it felt right to the general secretariat that the possibility of an Interim Moderator ministry for Scotland be explored. Such a ministry would enable a quicker resolution to some of Scotland’s issues.

This unusual approach worked well for the Northern Synod, said Dr Bradbury, and the secretariat is confident that it can work well in Scotland. A permanent appointment to Scotland’s Moderator role will take place in due course.

“Our minds were drawn to Paul because of his experience, because he began is ministry in Scotland, and because of the term of his Eastern Synod appointment,” explained Dr Bradbury before moving the resolution within Paper N1.

The resolution passed unanimously. After the vote, Peter Pay, Moderator of the URC General Assembly, congratulated and thanked Mr Whittle for this ministry.

Nominations – Moderator of the Thames North Synod

Mission Council, acting on behalf of the General Assembly, appointed the Revd George Watt as Moderator of the Thames North Synod from 1 June 2021 until May 31, 2028, following the retirement of the Revd Andrew Prasad. Peter Pay, one of the Moderators of the General Assembly, greeted Mr Watt on his appointment.

Risk Review Process

Alan Yates, a former URC Assembly Moderator who is part of the URC’s risk process review panel, introduced Paper K1, which identifies the major risks faced by the URC.

Mr Yates started by dedicating this work to the late Revd Michael Davies, who ran the risk review process ‘painstakingly for many years and was a willing and able member of the task group’.

Mr Yates then gave some the background to the paper, explaining that before last summer, when the process was transformed, the URC’s risk process had become unwieldy, and had focussed on reporting, rather than managing, risks. The process is now improved, thanks to notable encouragement and contributions from other councils and committees of the Church, Mr Yates said. There is a now a two-page summary from what was a document of more than 30 pages.

‘The new process, while a huge improvement, is not perfect,’ explained Mr Yates. ‘We still have some concern with identifying what should be issues and what should be risks,’ he said. After moving a small amendment to resolution B – changing the word ‘biannual’, in two instances, to ‘biennial’ – which was carried, Mr Yates then moved the resolutions of Paper K1.

Mission Council members contributed several questions and discussion points about this paper. Views were expressed that the URC should ‘address the underlying problem rather than apply a sticking plaster’ when it comes to mitigating risk.

Drawing on the example of the Nominations Committee having to find suitable people for more than 500 roles – a risk noted as ‘major’ in paragraph 11a of Paper K1 – Helen Lidgett, of East Midlands Synod, called for a consultation on how to best achieve this: can some of the recruiting be done at local level? Can we reduce the number of committees and the people on them?

Commending the consultation process that took place in her own Synod, and the results of that process, Ms Lidgett, argued that outcome of such a process would focus the work of the Nominations Committee, reduce financial cost and help the Nominations Committee better do its job.

Agreeing, the Revd Fran Kissack, of Yorkshire Synod, said: ‘Let’s prune, to enable best flourishing.’ Peter Pay, Moderator of the URC General Assembly, acknowledged the strength of feeling about this, and the Revd Dr John Bradbury, URC General Secretary, thanked Ms Lidgett for the comment.

Committing to attend to the matter personally, Dr Bradbury said: ‘We all recognise this issue, and it’s one we need to begin to face head on.’ Dr Bradbury said that he hoped to initiate an Assembly process to address the point Ms Lidgett raised.

Commenting on the risk ‘that might seriously affect [the URC’s] financial wellbeing, its structures and consequently its ability to proclaim the Gospel’, another member asked whether risk could be reviewed sooner than every two years.

Mr Yates replied to this point by highlighting that the risk process review panel has asked for committees to add their associated risks to the agenda of each meeting.

Asked why the Council was being asked to accept a paper that acknowledges potentially catastrophic risk, Mr Yates said: “These very high risk levels could well be catastrophic if we do not manage them.” He assured the Council that by passing the resolutions suggested in Paper K1, it would be commending the risk management process, and not the risks themselves.

After substantial discussion, resolution A of Paper K1 was carried by a 99% majority. Mr Yates then proposed resolution B, which passed by a 96% majority.

Mission Council then met in smaller groups to discuss the URC’s risks. Looking at specific risks, groups were invited to consider three questions:

  • Do you agree that this is a risk to the URC?

  • Is the suggested mitigation adequate? (If not, please suggest alternatives.)

  • Are there structural changes that will help the URC to manage this risk better?

Mr Yates asked designated people from each group to email him with their group’s responses, which will be noted for future biennial reviews of the URC’s risk.

Opening session 

The virtual meeting of Mission Council November 2020 began with the Moderator of General Assembly, the Revd Clare Downing, welcoming newcomers to the Council, including a number of new Synod Clerks.

The Revd Helen Everard, Chaplain to the Assembly Moderators, led opening worship, on the theme of ‘Common Ground’. This is the theme chosen by the Moderators, Clare Downing and Peter Pay for their term of office, following the Children’s and Youth Work theme for the year. Helen reflected that in this virtual meeting we are each on our own ground, united by technology to find common ground together.

Maria Lee, a Church-Related Community Worker in Chelmsford, Essex, offered a reflection on common ground in time of Covid. She said that although there is much we miss about life before the pandemic, surveys show that people do not want life to go back completely because of all the things we have gained.

Church buildings have closed but the people of God have been active, finding common ground with community in ways that offers hope. Maria shared the story of establishing the Little Free Pantry in Chelmsford, where people are invited to give what they can and take what they need, and how that project became a common ground for sharing.

The General Secretary of the URC, the Revd John Bradbury, explained the Standing Orders adopted earlier in the year. They involve decision making on the basis of two-thirds majority rather than consensus, because of the limitations of online discussion. Group work will feed back via email.

The minutes of Mission Council November 2019 and July 2020 were approved unanimously.

Emergency resolution

The day after a meeting of the Joint Public Issues Team Strategy and Policy Group (JPIT SPG), an Emergency Resolution was brought to the Mission Council about the government’s commitment to its spending on international development.

The Revd Steve Faber, Moderator of the URC West Midlands Synod and member of the JPIT SPG, told Mission Council that General Assembly has supported 0.7% of GDP as early as 1973, and affirmed that target in 1989, 1992 and most recently in 2018.

“We believe we should be holding the government to account about this, despite the economic shock caused by the Covid pandemic. The shrinking economy will cause a reduction in of almost £3bn this year which will hit the poorest parts of the world. A reduction in the percentage rate would cause a significant further reduction to around 60% of current aid levels. Caring for the poorest matters a very great deal, and we should not shrug our responsibilities,” Mr Faber said.

The resolution, which was amended to encourage churches and members to contact their MPs about the issue, was passed unanimously:

Mission Council is concerned by reports this week that the government is preparing to break its manifesto pledge and abandon Britain’s long-standing commitment to spending 0.7% of national income on international development;

believes that a commitment to the poorest in the world should not be an optional extra but at the heart of our country’s responsibilities, especially in the context of a global pandemic and a climate emergency;

instructs the Moderators of General Assembly to make these concerns known to government in the strongest possible terms and encourages people and local churches to contact their MPs about this important issue.

En bloc resolutions

The following resolutions were passed en bloc. En bloc resolutions are voted on without debate, having been deemed uncontroversial. This has no reflection on their importance.

A1 Business Committee: Mission Council/Assembly Executive and General Assembly

An update on arrangements for future meetings of General Assembly and Mission Council.

B1 Children’s and Youth Work Committee: response to Covid-19 update

A report the work of the CYDO+ team and CYW staff to support local churches during Covid-19 restrictions.

B2 Children’s and Youth Work Committee: URC infant feeding policy for local churches

This paper offers local churches a policy to support breast feeding.

C2 Education and Learning Committee: Environmental Statement - Working Towards a Green Charter

Update on the development of the committee’s ‘Green Charter’ to move towards net zero emissions. 

C3 Education and Learning Committee: Carbon Calculator

Update on the development of a ‘carbon calculator’ to track the carbon content of the committee’s travels.

D1 Faith and Order Committee: Update

An update on the recent work of the committee. 

F1 Ministries Committee: Guidelines on conduct and behaviour of Ministers of Word and Sacraments, Church Related Community Workers and Elders

Amendments to the guidelines on behaviour of ministers, CRCWs and elders to include on mandatory pastoral supervision.

H1 Nominations Committee: List of Nominations

H2 Nominations Committee: Supplementary (resolutions 1 and 2 only)

Updates regarding nominations to Assembly-appointed roles.

I1 Pastoral Reference and Welfare Committee: Update to terms of reference

An amendment to the committee’s terms of reference to broaden its remit

J1 Human Resources Advisory Group: Review panel for the renewal of the appointment of the Principal of Westminster College

A statement on the body responsible for reviewing the appointment of the Principal of Westminster College.

M1 Walking the Way Steering Group: Continuing the Way of Jesus

An update on the recent work of the steering group.

Reporting by Charissa King, Steve Tomkins and Andy Jackson.

Updated: 20 November 2020

Share this article