Helen King ViaMedia.News Share and Share Alike? Living in Love and Faith and Funding the Church of England
Rachel Starr ViaMedia.News Behold the Men: Identifying Risks, Reconsidering Relationships
Mark Clavier Well-Tempered Can Something Good Emerge from the Crisis of Clergy Burnout?
Johanna Stiebert ViaMedia.News Marriage and the Bible: It’s Complicated
Marc Clavier says “Neglectful or incompetent clergy often remain unchallenged, not because no one cares but because the system resists their correction.”
That sounds about right to me. As soon as anyone begins to suggest that some clergy might not be trying very hard, people leap to their defence.
I totally agree with this. We do need more rigour and accountability with many clergy who are simply treading water and doing the basics without any challenge. Equally, I think there need to be more support as well as more challenge. The two have to go hand in hand. I find many clergy just unmotivated – almost that they have lost their vocation. Which then leads to others who work their socks off and then don’t get the support they need because they are seen to be doing well.
Greater accountability should mean that those who are doing well are recognised. A good start would be to publish Statistics for Mission at parish level.
I once got a phone call from the department in London which deals with Statistics for Mission. The baptism numbers had gone up dramatically from the previous year. They were calling not to recognise this but to suggest that I must have got the numbers wrong. I think it’s fair to say that we don’t have much of a culture of celebrating when things go well but I can see why. So much of success in ministry is hidden and the biggest achievements are sometimes the things that don’t happen. The rows that don’t erupt because of the tact, discretion… Read more »
I had a similar experience during the pandemic. The number of funerals that my parish undertook increased dramatically in that period, and I had an e-mail asking if the numbers I had submitted were correct. When I confirmed that the numbers were correct I had another e-mail saying how sorry the person in the diocesan ofice was that I had had to do so many funerals, revealing just how little central office staff understand parish ministry.
Actually, in the circumstances I am more inclined to receive that comment as kind and considerate towards you. As you say, the numbers of funerals had dramatically increased, and therefore the burden on you.
How do you measure spiritual growth? How do you measure faithfulness in adversity, or the careful work to overcome suspicion of the Church in a hostile community?
It’s impossible to measure these things Janet, but they are all likely to lead to greater church attendance, which is a good reason for measuring it.
Attendance is measured – and regularly. And published. You are apparently not aware of this.
I am a being of little brain and am just a jobbing vicar. It does seem to get more confusing as I get older. On the one hand, I receive all sorts of hints about courses, initiatives and mission led ways of being church; underpinned by statistics of all kinds. On the other hand, I am informed that clergy well-being is very important and to be taken seriously. You can then top all of this off with ministerial reviews and also studies which show how stressed we all are. HELP!
Graeme Buttery
Poor you Graeme. Have people been dropping hints to you to get some training. How you must have suffered. Perhaps we should get Amnesty International involved.
Have you ever been an incumbent, Oliver?
I know what you mean, Graeme. When a busy working life (and increasingly so, as volunteers age and numbers dwindle) means that just keeping the wheels turning leaves little time in the week for considering new initiatives, the promotion of relentlessly upbeat ideas about how to grow the church, accompanied by photos of wonderful successes elsewhere, can become a bit demoralising!
It’s complicated. But should it be? At my age I am starting to think about the day I meet my Maker and He asks me why I did such-and-such, and do I think I was right to do it? Now it could be like the High Court (Biblical analysis) and quoting the chapter and verse of a Statute (aka book of the Bible) and precedent (aka Christian tradition) will be expected, but I doubt it. My guess – my hope – is that He will be wanting to understand what broad principles guide my life and how, with the benefit… Read more »
Hi Kate, I guess you are now living according to the broad principles that guide your life here and now, and that these are carefully thought and prayed through Christian values and principles that over time you have understood to be your fundamentals. It is enough! I believe that is what all of us are called to, within our own awareness and culture and community. There’s no High Court or Biblical chapter and verse Statute or precedent in tradition in the here and now, let alone in the whatever comes after or in the “mind” of an unconditionally loving God,… Read more »
Thank you Colin.
In the rest of our lives we are increasingly forced to parse texts very carefully. We have all been caught out by a purchase which wasn’t what we expected because there was some small print we didn’t read. It’s very easy to start reading the Bible in the same way and that’s a temptation we need to avoid.
There’s an old Rabbinic tale about a particularly well regarded Rabbi, who once said that when he met his Lord, God wouldn’t ask him why he wasn’t more like Moses, Isaiah or Ezekiel; rather he’d ask him why he hadn’t been more like himself. Like you and Colin (I suspect we’re all of similar age) I too wonder about meeting my saviour and, like you, can only acknowledge that I’ve lived according to the broad principles he laid down, in faith and obedience to the promptings of the Holy Spirit. Maybe the judgement will take the form of unpacking our… Read more »
For additional context to Helen King’s noting that “The Charity Commission gives the total income for the OGST in the year ended 31 December 2023 as £448,099”, I’ve worked in the charity sector for years and years now, and anything under about £1m is a small charity, and even up to about £5m a charity might really struggle to make an impact. Now the OGST is only working in the Diocese of Oxford and not the entire country, but it’s not a lot of money in charity terms.
Helen King focuses on one type of church, those wishing not to support so-called “sinful churches”. Yet in my own diocese of Sheffield I am aware of a neighbouring parish church, St Marks Broomhill, a member of Inclusive Church, that is withholding part of its parish share as it disagrees with the vision of the diocese and the bishop’s views on SSM and PLF.
How is that Inclusive?
See below. It is Fantasy rather than Inclusive.
I am aware of suggestions from some clergy that their parishes might withhold parish share over other, entirely unrelated, matters. How likely that is, I don’t know, but the fact that it is being suggested perhaps reflects that well-known truth that money talks.
Hi Bob, I’m the Vicar of St Mark’s Broomhill. I’m not sure where you have heard that we are withholding our parish share. We have paid our parish share each year, in fact we often contribute extra money on top of a parish share contribution. When the Diocese set up an in-house restricted fund to enable churches to pay into that rather than the Ephesian fund, we were asked whether we would like an alternative restricted fund. We said, no, we would like to continue to contribute to the normal Diocese fund. We are working with the Diocese to explore… Read more »
St Marks annual report for 2022-23, page 4. In the public domain on the website.
“Finance is no small part of every idea and decision and how to match expenditure and income. Painfully we decided to reduce our contribution to the Common Fund to balance our books; it was felt that we were out of kilter with the diocesan vision and as part of a Mission Area, our vicar is also Priest in Charge of St Mary’s Walkley. The PCC wrote to the Archdeacon outlining our rationale for this and mentioning several other areas of disquiet including suggesting that the faculty process is not working.” Taken from Annual Report 2022-23, page 4, on website of… Read more »
I did a little more research on this. Bob. If you look at the minutes from the APCM in 2022, https://www.stmarkssheffield.co.uk/Publisher/File.aspx?ID=332682, you will find this: “Sue [previous incumbent] noted all the hard work and effort by everyone involved in making the decisions needed for balancing the budget and the difficult decision to reduce the additional amount we give to the common fund over and above that requested by the diocese. It is important however that the time that we contribute to other churches in the diocese such as St Mary’s and St Cuthbert’s should also be counted in terms of… Read more »
Hi Bob, at the time we were paying our full parish share, plus contributing extra money into the Diocese. The incumbent had also become incumbent of another church, who were also paying a significant parish share, without having the provision of a vicar. Together the two churches have continued to pay significantly above the full parish share. There are very few churches in Sheffield Diocese that do pay full parish share and we have been one of the highest givers into the Diocese for quite some time. To suggest we are withholding parish share, or asking for a restricted fund… Read more »
I have not stated that St Marks was asking for a restricted fund separate from the common fund. The church warden clearly stated that St Marks was out of kilter with the diocesan vision, which is what I have stated.
You also asserted they withheld parish share over LLF, which is clearly untrue. Will you apologise?
Bob, would I be right in assuming you are also a PCC member of a church in Sheffield? In the interests of full disclosure would you be able to share which church that is, its annual income, its annual parish share payment and the number of stipendiary clergy at the church paid for by the diocese, and also whether it has decided to restrict who can benefit from its parish share payments either through using the Ephesians Fund or an arrangement with the diocese. It would be useful to know the full context of your concern for parishes paying (or… Read more »
I am not a PCC member, just a member of the Church of England.
Could you share which church do you attend, its total annual income, how much it pays in parish share, the support it receives from the diocese in terms of stipendiary ministry and does it restrict who can receive from the parish share payments it makes. It would be useful to know the context you are coming from.
Bob. Given Beth’s response below I am perplexed at your comment. I very much hope you will substantiate or withdraw your comment. If not, I hope higher authorities will act accordingly. Despite differing views we try to search for some ‘truth’ here. Alastair
I am glad Bob actually named the church he makes these allegations about. They have been able to respond here with the actual facts. We may hope Bob goes back to his sources to say so. Meanwhile, as Helen King relates, some conservative churches are withholding their diocesan share and insisting their money is given to those they agree with on issues of human sexuality – a pot called the ‘Ephesians Fund’. Quite why the church of Ephesus finds itself named in this context is not clear. The misleading implication is that such a giving scheme was in place among NT… Read more »
Helen King’s article is excellent: detailed and showing her workings. Ernest Hemingway wrote in The Sun Also Rises that people go bankrupt slowly, and then suddenly. The problem with attempting to hypothecate taxes, which is what’s going on here, is that once the premise is accepted, everyone can have a go. Payment into a common pot works if everyone agrees to it: the moment it stops, you end up with in effect dozens, hundreds of private charities, each funded by individual payments and making small payments in turn. It is chaos, and other than in the worst fantasies of small… Read more »
Anthony Archer in the thread below talks about the different parts of the C of E having become politicised . In the Interview no-one mentions Justin Welby spoke of being unable to lead as he has wanted because of Synod .
Can the Church of England survive- or indeed should it if this is the level of double dealing which is going on?
IIRC, in the ‘unmentionable interview’, Justin Welby made a couple of mentions of decisions of General Synod which had not, as it might be thought, bent to his will. Had not the House of Bishops determined a ‘line to take’ regarding the order in which numbered Amendments were to be taken, and Options consifdered and voted upon. Was ‘the Leadership’ poorly advised or unaware of how General Synod business is ordered and undertaken. Is the former ABC laying blame on those who elected members of clergy and/or laity to Synod? I seem to recall the Bishops did not vore ‘as… Read more »
Someone from a very top-down culture is likely to be a square peg in a round hole when asked to lead a distributed culture with many committees – and its own legislature.
“funding the undifferented C of E” this reminded me of Alec Vidler’s description in Soundings of “un-hyphernated anglicans”. I hope they are still the majority.
I wonder whether the Stiebert article provides the best route to more fully understanding Christian marriage. Stiebert appears to try to do this by deconstructing the church’s current understanding. This leads the author down some difficult paths including: dismissing Genesis 2 as mythological, thereby overlooking that myth can have profound meaning; seemingly claiming to have a better understanding of Genesis 2 than does Jesus; and criticizing the church’s understanding of marriage as being too idealistic while criticizing some Old Testament descriptions of marriage as being very unideal. It may be more productive to acknowledge that the early church had a… Read more »
How relevant is it that (if?) the early church had a clear understanding of marriage? The early churches were so, erm, diverse in their doctrine that St Paul and others kept having to write to them to correct things. It doesn’t seem like a particularly secure foundation on which to base a modern philosophy.
In a nutshell, why would anyone want a Christian marriage if it was the sort of mess Stiebert describes? And if it isn’t a mess and is in fact good, then the best way of widening it while keeping its essence is to show that the new version is an authentic extension of the original.
Were I to marry I would want my family and best friends there so equally I would want my Heavenly Father there. Isn’t that what a Christian marriage is about? All talk about authenticity seems irrelevant to me.
Thank you for this Kate. It has always struck me as bizarre that the Early/ New Testament Church is viewed as normative (apart from Acts 2:44-45 obviously) as if Christians have been unable since to develop or increase or deepen their understanding. A bit like refusing to let someone grow up and insisting that what they said as a child will be always what they will say. And, as you point out, this view assumes the ‘early church’ was with one voice on everything.
A key question is whether the early church had broadly the right idea for its time, which might be further developed for new times. Or whether it actually had the wrong idea which needs over-turning.
If the Christian church got the basic idea of marriage wrong, surely it should stop doing marriages and leave them to the civil authorities. But if there’s something sufficiently good about Christian marriage to make it worth continuing in an evolved way, then it’s important to work through how the evolved form maintains the good elements of the initial form.
I don’t think the early Church was in the marrying business at all, was it? They accepted the marriage defined by the state. Only when that state disappeared did the Church begin to take over officiating at marriages. And legal marriages were perhaps largely for the wealthy — those who needed legitimate heirs to inherit their property. Not until Lord Hardiwcke’s Act of 1753 did English statute law require a formal ceremony of marriage.