Today our two dioceses made history. Never before have two dioceses in the Episcopal Church “junctioned” together. So, today we begin a new journey to create a new Diocese in northern Wisconsin.
Bishop Russ and I will meet face to face next week to begin to outline our next steps. Following that meeting I will meet on Wednesday with our (Eau Claire) LIFT task force to futher develop these initiatives.
Then on the Friday before the week end of our November 4-5 Hudson Convention, I will meet with the Diocesan leadership (Standing Committee, Executive Committee and Trustees).
Those meetings will set the stage for our Annual Convention in Hudson, where we will begin to move into the next steps for creating a new Diocese. We will have 13 months to continue on as separate Dioceses, then on January 1, 2013 we will become a NEW Diocese with a new name and with a new sense of identity. All of this will also require validation from our July 2012 General Convention, and our national Executive Council.
How ’bout “Eau Claire au Fond du Lac”?
Fond au Eclaires? Eau de Claire? Du Claire Lac Eau? I could go on, but…
Lac du Funds?
I’m Fond of Eclairs but not when there’s a clair lac of Fonds.
#3 Thanks. I needed a chuckle.
I doubt “Northern Wisconsin” manifests the same wit as the above. But based on recent numbers, it will be a struggle for the two even after the merger. 2009 ASA was 3138 combined.
In Pittsburgh after the realignment vote in 2008 the minority remaining in TEC briefly considered the idea of merging with the Diocese of NW PA but it seemed neither diocese really had the heart to make it happen.
Statmann seems to be off for the weekend so I thought I’d run some numbers for the putative diocese.
In terms of ASA/parish, we’re scraping the bottom of the barrel here. Eau Claire is tenth from the bottom at 39.6 attendees/parish, and I should note that the competition for the bottom includes three overseas dioceses, Navaholand, the two Dakotas, Alaska, West Kansas, and in dead last place, Northern Michigan with a mere 24 worshipers/parish on an average Sunday. Fond du Lac is in better shape with 62.9 ASA/parish, but this is still bad enough to put it at 82nd out of 114 dioceses.
The putative Diocese of N. Wisconsin would have 58 parishes with ASA/parish of 54.1, dragging it down to 89th place in this category. In terms of overall size it would be 56th in parishes, making it the median diocese in that category; it would rank 75th in ASA.
Given the near-basket-case of N. Mich it makes a certain sense to roll it into this. The putative Diocese of N. Mich. & Wisc. would have 84 parishes with ASA/parish of 448, putting it just out of the bottom ten. It would be 29th in # parishes and 69th in ASA.
I would note that the rates of decline in all of these dioceses is a only little worse than that of the national church one you take Ft. Worth and Pittsburgh out of the picture (together they account for about a 1% loss of national ASA).
As far as merging Quincy to Chicago, that is a pretty dumb idea. The latter, at 119 parishes, is in the top ten for size; it’s already too big for one bishop if everyone is expected to get a visitation on a Sunday each year. Combining Springfield and Quincy would give the putative Diocese of Southern Illinois 61 parishes and a total ASA of 3012 with ASA/parish of 49.4– not great but at least out of the basement.
Recently, I’ve been thinking that it would make total sense to merge NW Texas with Ft. Worth, with the seat of the merged diocese in Abilene at Heavenly Rest, which is big enough to serve as a cathedral. Abilene is equi-distant to Lubbock, Ft. Worth, Amarillo, and San Angelo.
I’d further note that NW Pa. needs Pittsburgh, rather than the other way around. The former is smaller and is in the bottom 20 for ASA/parish at 49.1; rump Pittsburgh by contrast has 88.6 ASA/parish, which puts it above average. Rump P.’s ASA of 2481 keeps it out of the bottom 25– barely. (BTW these are 2009 numbers; one assumes that the 2010 numbers will be worse, of course, but it looks to me as though the relative rankings aren’t likely to change much.)
Sorry but I can’t resist
“Oh, Claire, are you fond of lace?”
🙂
#11: or, describing an Alpine restaurant with fine natural furnishings but no food: ‘Oak lair, fondue lack.’ 🙂
RE: “Recently, I’ve been thinking that it would make total sense to merge NW Texas with Ft. Worth . . . ”
Yes, then NW Texas could be afflicted with all the frothingly angry revisionists remaining in Ft. Worth. They’re a piece of work — I can imagine one or two of the more heretical bloggers sweeping around in the NW Texas diocesan convention, strewing odes-to-Pelagius and Arius resolutions.
Sarah,
NWT is and has been liberal clergy wise over the last 30-40 years. The area it encompasses is probably the most conservative in the state, but the conservatives are probably Baptist, Catholic, Church of Christ, etc. It was amazing that +Ohl was elected in ’97, as he is much more orthodox than his predecessor. Their new bishop is much more in line with what they are and have been about. As someone who lives in the Diocese of Dallas, I’d much prefer the remnant in Forth Worth go with NWT as it would keep both going and keep the heresy to the west of us.
RE: “NWT is and has been liberal clergy wise over the last 30-40 years.”
Yes, I know.
And I *completely* understand and agree about Dallas. I would run far far away if I were the leadership of the Diocese of Dallas as all that would happen would be the importing of massive dysfunction and unhealth.