Until I “read it all” I thought this was either a joke or KH+ had linked the wrong web page. But sure enough, when I looked closely, every single page was labeled “Statement of Mission.” Comment beyond that is almost unnecessary- it is obvious what they see their mission to be. It would appear to be more or less the same mission as the average real estate investment trust.
My “wow” moment was when I saw the line item amount for “Bishop’s Stipend.” No vows of poverty here. The phrase “prince of the church” comes to my Calvinist mind.
Fairly typical; just the change of title from budget to mission statement. You know, because “the budget IS the mission statement.”
As far as the bishop’s stipend is concerned, I’ve seen larger given to bishops who are now retired — and that didn’t include a separate housing allowance.
What is tragic and even morally questionable from a stewardship perspective is the massive administrative overhead for so many years that has overseen decline, when so much money was available for “other kinds” of personnel, and ministry endeavors, who and what actually could have turned things around no matter what the makeup of the diocese.
My educated guess would be less than 10% of TECUSA congregations have the same opportunities with such potential assets. The rest of the Church is quite dependent on dioceses such as this to do the development (domestic mission) work they can’t. Begs the question of what kind of mission, whose mission, to whose glory. It ends up being wastefully selfish.
I could make a lot of comments about where DUSC has gone since 2003, but I won’t. One thing, however, in fairness to Bp. Waldo, Bp. Henderson started calling the budget the “Statement of Mission” in 1997. I never liked that, but Waldo inherete it and this is his first one. Maybe he will re-name it down the road. I do note there is a $419K deficit.
I think it is strange to call it a Statement of Mission, but not too bad. “For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.”
The problem is, it is incomplete without saying WHAT the budget is trying to accomplish. I see value in have the HOW you are going to accomplish your mission included with WHAT you are trying to accomplish. Have the HOW you are going to accomplish your mission without WHAT you are trying to accomplish seems strange.
JustOneVoice, it seems clear by where the treasure is in the Diocese of Upper South Carolina, that the most vital parts of our diocese’s mission are [in order of magnitude by largest single line-item] 1) active clergy insurance, 2) pledge to the National Church, 3) bishop stipend, 4) retired clergy insurance, and 5) Diocesan House admin expenses.
It is to the above inspiring vision that parishioners are to give to their own local parishes so that those parishes may contribute a percentage of pledges to the above glorious future.
One wonders why we are in a deficit, given the inspiration that parishioners must receive by just glancing at the excel spreadsheet of our diocesan “mission.”
I’m reminded of the response of Henry Higgin’s mother to her son after his command to Eliza Doolittle of “Get out and come home and don’t be a fool!”
[blockquote]Mrs. Higgins: Very nicely put indeed, Henry. No woman could resist such an invitation.[/blockquote]
JOV, Yes.
I just won’t say it in such an underhanded, backbiting and sarcastic manner as Sarah did. Ohhh, where did she ever receive her Anglican manners.
The problem with calling budgets “Statements of Mission” is that the budget is a tool to acheive a mission. If the mission is not being fulfilled, then the tools need to be adjusted. If the tool is revered and worshipped, then to heck with the mission. And that reversal takes tough, decisive, and bold leadership. Hunh.
#7–Kendall–While I am mostly out of the loop in DUSC, I do know there was a small movement on Diocesan Executive Council three years ago to reduce the National payment to a very low amount, or even zero, and put that money into dioceasn program budget. For most of the rest of them, including Bp. Hendrerson, they would rather have killed and eaten their first born than cut the national asking. That probably speaks more about where DUSC is than the “Statement of Mission”. And don’t forget this is a first draft. They have no idea how bad things will be on the income side yet.
Bookworm,
I looked, too, but didn’t see anything hidden in as separate housing allowances. The term “stipend” is thus confusing, since the generally accepted term for such included amounts would have been “compensation” or “stipend and housing”. The phrase Total Compensation Package, or something like that, would include everything including benefits, except perhaps for “hospitality” and “auto allowance” (unless auto allowance means more than the reimbursement of gas).
RE: “I just won’t say it in such an underhanded, backbiting and sarcastic manner as Sarah did. Ohhh, where did she ever receive her Anglican manners.”
Now Rob Eaton, you must admit that my comparison of our diocesan budget to Henry Higgins’ irresistible “invitation” to Eliza is pricelessly apt. Surely you are simply jealous for not having thought of it first!
; > )
#11 & 13–When I was on the Diocesan Trustees of DUSC, we included everything under “stipend” and let the clerics take the maximum portion out of the “stipend” the IRS would allow as a housing allowance. I assume that is what they still do.
Until I “read it all” I thought this was either a joke or KH+ had linked the wrong web page. But sure enough, when I looked closely, every single page was labeled “Statement of Mission.” Comment beyond that is almost unnecessary- it is obvious what they see their mission to be. It would appear to be more or less the same mission as the average real estate investment trust.
My “wow” moment was when I saw the line item amount for “Bishop’s Stipend.” No vows of poverty here. The phrase “prince of the church” comes to my Calvinist mind.
Fairly typical; just the change of title from budget to mission statement. You know, because “the budget IS the mission statement.”
As far as the bishop’s stipend is concerned, I’ve seen larger given to bishops who are now retired — and that didn’t include a separate housing allowance.
What is tragic and even morally questionable from a stewardship perspective is the massive administrative overhead for so many years that has overseen decline, when so much money was available for “other kinds” of personnel, and ministry endeavors, who and what actually could have turned things around no matter what the makeup of the diocese.
My educated guess would be less than 10% of TECUSA congregations have the same opportunities with such potential assets. The rest of the Church is quite dependent on dioceses such as this to do the development (domestic mission) work they can’t. Begs the question of what kind of mission, whose mission, to whose glory. It ends up being wastefully selfish.
I could make a lot of comments about where DUSC has gone since 2003, but I won’t. One thing, however, in fairness to Bp. Waldo, Bp. Henderson started calling the budget the “Statement of Mission” in 1997. I never liked that, but Waldo inherete it and this is his first one. Maybe he will re-name it down the road. I do note there is a $419K deficit.
I think it is strange to call it a Statement of Mission, but not too bad. “For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.”
The problem is, it is incomplete without saying WHAT the budget is trying to accomplish. I see value in have the HOW you are going to accomplish your mission included with WHAT you are trying to accomplish. Have the HOW you are going to accomplish your mission without WHAT you are trying to accomplish seems strange.
JustOneVoice, it seems clear by where the treasure is in the Diocese of Upper South Carolina, that the most vital parts of our diocese’s mission are [in order of magnitude by largest single line-item] 1) active clergy insurance, 2) pledge to the National Church, 3) bishop stipend, 4) retired clergy insurance, and 5) Diocesan House admin expenses.
It is to the above inspiring vision that parishioners are to give to their own local parishes so that those parishes may contribute a percentage of pledges to the above glorious future.
One wonders why we are in a deficit, given the inspiration that parishioners must receive by just glancing at the excel spreadsheet of our diocesan “mission.”
I’m reminded of the response of Henry Higgin’s mother to her son after his command to Eliza Doolittle of “Get out and come home and don’t be a fool!”
[blockquote]Mrs. Higgins: Very nicely put indeed, Henry. No woman could resist such an invitation.[/blockquote]
Of interest note the year over year giving to the National Church budget.
JOV, Yes.
I just won’t say it in such an underhanded, backbiting and sarcastic manner as Sarah did. Ohhh, where did she ever receive her Anglican manners.
The problem with calling budgets “Statements of Mission” is that the budget is a tool to acheive a mission. If the mission is not being fulfilled, then the tools need to be adjusted. If the tool is revered and worshipped, then to heck with the mission. And that reversal takes tough, decisive, and bold leadership. Hunh.
#7–Kendall–While I am mostly out of the loop in DUSC, I do know there was a small movement on Diocesan Executive Council three years ago to reduce the National payment to a very low amount, or even zero, and put that money into dioceasn program budget. For most of the rest of them, including Bp. Hendrerson, they would rather have killed and eaten their first born than cut the national asking. That probably speaks more about where DUSC is than the “Statement of Mission”. And don’t forget this is a first draft. They have no idea how bad things will be on the income side yet.
Are the housing allowances for the bishop, CTTO, and Canon for Deployment included in the stipend? If not, you’re looking at bigger financial hits.
Bookworm,
I looked, too, but didn’t see anything hidden in as separate housing allowances. The term “stipend” is thus confusing, since the generally accepted term for such included amounts would have been “compensation” or “stipend and housing”. The phrase Total Compensation Package, or something like that, would include everything including benefits, except perhaps for “hospitality” and “auto allowance” (unless auto allowance means more than the reimbursement of gas).
RE: “I just won’t say it in such an underhanded, backbiting and sarcastic manner as Sarah did. Ohhh, where did she ever receive her Anglican manners.”
Now Rob Eaton, you must admit that my comparison of our diocesan budget to Henry Higgins’ irresistible “invitation” to Eliza is pricelessly apt. Surely you are simply jealous for not having thought of it first!
; > )
Possibly “stipend” is salary + housing, but I think they should have made that clear.
#11 & 13–When I was on the Diocesan Trustees of DUSC, we included everything under “stipend” and let the clerics take the maximum portion out of the “stipend” the IRS would allow as a housing allowance. I assume that is what they still do.