Below you will find my most recent response to “A Church for All People,” written for my Middler Review in April of 2012.
Unfortunately, as I wrote, I realized that I had far more to say than I had originally thought, and due to time constraints and a number of other life-related difficulties, I have been forced to rush to complete the document you see here. I am not at all happy with the results, particularly with the last third of the paper, which I will readily admit was patched together hastily and halfheartedly. At the moment, I have given up on the hope of this paper being a good representation of my writing ability, at least as it stands.
I truly do hope to revisit this paper after my Middler Review and completely rewrite those last few pages to be more in line with where I was hoping to go. In case you are interested in what that direction might look like, I’m also including for you the remainder of the working outline I have been using as I write. (Keep in mind that it’s a rough outline and that the paper itself may already reflect some of the ideas included in it, just not in the manner or to the degree that I would like it to do so.)
In the meantime, I offer my most heartfelt apologies for the substandard product you’re about to encounter.
A Church for All People
Jack Reese
9:15 pm, 04.10.12
I appreciate your work on this case, Laura. It’s clear there has been significant growth since your first go at it, though I thought you had done some very good work in version one. I think you did some very good things in this piece. My strongest suggestion is that it be more significantly focused. It felt unnecessarily long, which is to say, overly broad, insufficiently focused. Some of the analysis was somewhat cliched. Be careful about that. But I also thought your theological and pastoral instincts are quite good. You have all the gifts necessary to be a highly effective minister. I’m anxious to see what’s in store for you in the years ahead!