Bishops leave questions unanswered as On The Way roadshow continues: next stop St Austell
Next stop for our Cornish Bishops' On The Way Roadshow is St Austell on 18 March from 4pm to 6pm. On Saturday afternoons during the Six Nations rugby championships, the Bishop of Truro, the Rt Rev Philip Mounstephen, and the Bishop of St Germans, the Rt Rev Hugh Nelson have been touring Cornwall's deaneries following the 'approval' of On The Way plans. The curious timing of these meetings means that attendance has been confined to keen churchgoers - excluding people with young families, sports fans and in fact anyone with a busy weekend diary.
The carefully choreographed events are intended to constitute consultation. Those who have managed to make the meetings have found that less than less than a quarter of the time (only 25 minutes) is allocated for questions, the balance being used for ministry and sharing good news stories.
Key questions unanswered concern the Diocese's hastily written booklet “Next Steps On The Way Frequently Asked Questions”:
• The section entitled “Vicars” includes the statement “Overall there will be fewer clergy” but in an article in the Western Morning News from 10 February 2023 it is reported that the diocese expects that by the end of the year there will be 10 more clergy than there were at the end of 2022, over and above the proposed new pioneer and lay ministers suggested in the deanery plans. Most of the deanery plans indicate a reduction in clergy numbers. Where are these 'new' priests to be deployed?
• There are frequent mentions in the leaflet of finances, the general suggestion being that the diocese is spending as much on clergy as it can afford. What is the source of the funds for the ten new clergy?
• The booklet states that vicars are paid for by a mixture of MMF, diocesan support and national funding. Where is a breakdown of the sterling amounts paid by each category?
• It further states that the DBF tops up MMF to support parish ministry , mainly using Glebe, rental etc but these funds were originally generated by the parishes. What other use should parish originated funds have?
• At a number of points the booklet suggests that the plans were made locally but this is misleading. How many people were engaged in developing the deanery plans compared with how many people are resident in each deanery or indeed are regular church goers? Who chose the people who developed the plans?
• This in turn leads on to the issue of Churchmanship. The booklet states that the deanery plans were created by local parishes and deaneries and thus reflect the churchmanship in the area. What measures were put in place to ensure that the composition of the Steering Committees accurately reflected the churchmanship of the deanery congregations?
• The document implies that the deanery plans were built on the basis of consultation; this is simply not the case. The East Wivelshire plan was presented to the parishes by the Steering Group as a fait accompli; the initial release containing the words “… it is important to note we are not seeking opinions on God’s given vision.” A review of the questions posed in the survey carried out in 2021 shows that very few bore any relation to the ideas subsequently laid out in the deanery plan. Are the Bishops able to explain this disconnect?
• In the section on Plans & Projects it is suggested that as the plans are not far advanced it is not possible to make any evaluations. Would it not be prudent to pause the roll out of the deanery plans until such time as it has been possible to make suitable evaluations?
The carefully choreographed events are intended to constitute consultation. Those who have managed to make the meetings have found that less than less than a quarter of the time (only 25 minutes) is allocated for questions, the balance being used for ministry and sharing good news stories.
Key questions unanswered concern the Diocese's hastily written booklet “Next Steps On The Way Frequently Asked Questions”:
• The section entitled “Vicars” includes the statement “Overall there will be fewer clergy” but in an article in the Western Morning News from 10 February 2023 it is reported that the diocese expects that by the end of the year there will be 10 more clergy than there were at the end of 2022, over and above the proposed new pioneer and lay ministers suggested in the deanery plans. Most of the deanery plans indicate a reduction in clergy numbers. Where are these 'new' priests to be deployed?
• There are frequent mentions in the leaflet of finances, the general suggestion being that the diocese is spending as much on clergy as it can afford. What is the source of the funds for the ten new clergy?
• The booklet states that vicars are paid for by a mixture of MMF, diocesan support and national funding. Where is a breakdown of the sterling amounts paid by each category?
• It further states that the DBF tops up MMF to support parish ministry , mainly using Glebe, rental etc but these funds were originally generated by the parishes. What other use should parish originated funds have?
• At a number of points the booklet suggests that the plans were made locally but this is misleading. How many people were engaged in developing the deanery plans compared with how many people are resident in each deanery or indeed are regular church goers? Who chose the people who developed the plans?
• This in turn leads on to the issue of Churchmanship. The booklet states that the deanery plans were created by local parishes and deaneries and thus reflect the churchmanship in the area. What measures were put in place to ensure that the composition of the Steering Committees accurately reflected the churchmanship of the deanery congregations?
• The document implies that the deanery plans were built on the basis of consultation; this is simply not the case. The East Wivelshire plan was presented to the parishes by the Steering Group as a fait accompli; the initial release containing the words “… it is important to note we are not seeking opinions on God’s given vision.” A review of the questions posed in the survey carried out in 2021 shows that very few bore any relation to the ideas subsequently laid out in the deanery plan. Are the Bishops able to explain this disconnect?
• In the section on Plans & Projects it is suggested that as the plans are not far advanced it is not possible to make any evaluations. Would it not be prudent to pause the roll out of the deanery plans until such time as it has been possible to make suitable evaluations?
Comments