The stated purpose of the review is to foster co-operation between the Presbytery, as the regional Church court, and individual, local congregations. In our case, a committee of Presbytery is scheduled to visit us in the next month or so, to give us an opportunity, among other things, for 'self-assessment and for taking prudent measures to build up the cause of Christ over the years ahead'.
One of the requirements of the review is that I state the various aspects of my work, both within and outwith the congregation. These currently include writing a weekly column for the Gazette, of course, and a raft of other responsibilities.
They also involve my being an interim-moderator of one of our vacant congregations. Since I really didn't have too much to do, the Presbytery decided I should look after the congregation of Point as well as that of Back.
That's an interesting combination of roles. I look out from my study window every day of life (or at least every day I'm in my study) and see Point. Some people would think that is a bonus for the minister of Back. It is certainly a reminder to me that, until we find a minister for Point, my parish straddles both sides of Broadbay.
Actually, an interregnum can be a very interesting experience. I have got to know people in another congregation in a way I otherwise would not have known, and, apart from the fact that I spend my week asking people to do things for me, I have discovered that there is a stream of willing men out there who are happy to help with conducting services.
One of these days (I am ever the optimist), we shall provide that particular flock with its own shepherd, and it will be relieved of having to share a shepherd with Back. Not that I am sure where such a figure will appear from any time soon, given that the number of vacancies currently far exceeds the number of candidates for ministry.
Yet we have developed the rather bizarre situation in the denomination where some congregations – by no means the largest in the Church – have managed to obtain assistant ministers, notwithstanding the fact that other congregations have none. Given that if I have two cloaks Jesus expects me to give one to the person with none, one would have thought, mutatis mutandis, that a congregation with two ministers should give one to the congregation with none.
Of course, I am just being facetious there (perhaps even a little frustrated), and I mustn't be. It's just that quinquennial reviews do expect individual congregations to take prudent measures for the future; but I don't know how we can't apply that same standard across the board. Aren't there prudent measures we could take across the denomination and between our congregations?
Undoubtedly, and of course it is not just my own denomination which faces such questions. Other denominations face similar crises and issues, and if I know little about the workings of my own Church, I know next to nothing about others.
And this is probably not the best forum to discuss the ecclesiastical issues which concern me at the moment; it's just that sometimes it helps to fill twelve hundred words of column space by thinking out loud.
At the end of the day, however, reviews of congregations, the administration of vacancies, the organisation of denominational affairs, and all the other necessary responsibilities involved in being a Presbtyerian minister, are secondary to our main task of leading the people of God in their worship.
The management of a denomination is only the scaffolding within which the real work of the church occurs. And to get the definitive take on what that task involves we need to return to the Bible itself. We may find ourselves, in consequence of many different circumstances and misadventures, struggling to keep the organisational routine of the Church going; but at the end of the day, it ought to be a very simple business.
After all, when the Spirit came down at Pentecost, the newly formed people of God were characterised by four particulars.
First, they were marked out by their doctrine. The church was defined by its teachings and its beliefs. In spite of the downgrade of doctrine, and the anti-intellectualism that often characterises the modern evangelical church, the church can only be known by what it believes. Her creeds, catechisms and confessions, commit her to core, non-negotiable doctrinal positions.
To be sure, there can be debate and discussion on matters internal to these creeds, but the point is still valid: the New Testament church was nothing if not committed to fundamental articles of faith.
Second, they were distinct in their fellowship. The first generation of Christians was associated in unity with one another. That meant more than meeting together in a home for tea after a service; it was represented by a commonality which was affectionate and practical. The early disciples loved each other, cared for each other, and helped each other. In the magnificent words of the New Testament, 'they had all things in common'.
Sadly, that is no longer the case. Too often we have sacrificed fellowship for denominatonal in-fighting. Any attempt to cross denominational lines is seen as ecumenism, and that is taken as a bad thing. How do we apply Jesus' prayer for Christian unity across the divided denominational map of modern Scotland?
Third, they were recognisable as they 'broke bread' together. The covenantal meal which we call the Lord's Supper was a focal point of unity and fellowship.
The early apostles took communion, in the simplest of forms, and with the clearest of aims: to confess and highlight the indispensable necessity of the cross of Christ as the basis for all Christian service and Gospel preaching.
Fourthly, they were known by their prayers. The hallmark of Spirit-filled religion is dependence on God; and if our ministries, or administrations require anything today, they require to be bathed in prayer more than they are.
So as I muse on the various responsibilities and duties that fall to me as a Presbyterian minister, I simply long for our churches, even without organisational unity, to be characterised in these ways: as churches committed to core principles, caring practices, communal profession and constant prayer.
It would transform our churches just to go back to basics.

iaind@backfreechurch.co.uk