For all kinds of historical reasons (our friend Tom Rightmeyer could, I’m sure, expand on this) the polity of the Episcopal Church from the 18th C. on has been characterized by stronger parishes and a weaker episcopate. This trend has been reversing in the latter half of the 20th century, and the observation here about the increasing number of congregations without canonical parish status and the increasing number of clergy serving congregations without the tenure of a settled ministry as rector is a part of the picture. Another important element is dilution of the impact of settled rectors in the clerical order at diocesan conventions–with the infusion of larger and larger numbers of deacons, appointed ministers (vicars/priests-in-charge), and non-parochial priests, whose ministry situations are largely in the control of the bishop. This is a sea-change in terms of our culture of governance, and it seems to me that it has occured more or less under the radar and without serious discussion.
Where the cost of living is low, it takes a minimum budget of $150,000 (no mortgage) to support a marginal congregation with a full-time, seminary-trained priest. Work through any diocese at the church charts site and see how many TEC congregations have sunk below this level.
The reverse side of 2 is that out of many clergy that are nominally available to become rectors, very few are actually qualified [i]and mobile[/i]. When you go across the Mississippi and outside of CA into ‘fly over country’, I can certainly see how ‘local priests’ are more and more prevalent as described. Add to that the professional issues associated with the “Anglican Wars” and it sometimes is hard to call somebody compatible with a parish. The fact that bishops and Canons for Deployment are often less than helpful in this respect apparently weighs in the balance as well.
Not that any bishops ask me for advice, but in management there is a proverb originating with Machiavelli’s [i]The Prince[/i] that a leader is only as good as the men he surrounds himself with. As bishop, attracting good rectors and staffing his parochial clerical positions should be the bishop’s first job, not growing the diocesan staff.
As I look through the demographics that the link in #2 noted, our parish numbers look pretty accurate and static. “Static” numbers in growing region is not a good sign. It was interesting to see the percentage of our population who might prefer contempory services and music.
In my former diocese…….when I lived in upstate New York (Central New York) many years ago, it wasn’t, and still isn’t……from what I’ve been told lately……uncommon for three or four missions to be served by one priest…..and part-time at that!
You’ll find exactly the same thing here in South Dakota. Look to the Episcopate in each diocese, their actions and inactions. Look at the verbatim comments from the Dio MN 2007 diocese-wide survey (http://www.episcopalmn.org/bcms) to reveal what the people currently in the diocese think of -Jelinek’s reign. I have to give -Jelinek some credit…. -Creighton (Dio SD) wouldn’t have the guts to distribute a survey like the one completed in MN. And….back to the point….WHO would want to work for or with EITHER of them?
The link to the diocesan survey was fascinating and I agree with # 6 that it was a refreshingly honest account of a situation of systemic failure. One thing troubled me, though: the plan for action passes swiftly from Spiritual Growth which is said to be the key, to dwell at some length on planning and structures. Oh dear. First of all I doubt all diocesan plans to lead spiritual growth from the centre. (RCs are equally prone to try this, BTW.) Secondly, the disproportion between the brief section spiritual growth and the lengthy section on structure is telling.
I think that Gator is absolutely correct. In 2005, 80 parishes out of a total of 107 parishes had Plate & Pledge of less than $150,000. That would leave 27 parishes with Plate & Pledge large enough to support a “rector”. From 1996 through 2002 the diocese lost about 11 percent of its membership and from 2002 through 2006 lost another 11 percent. From 1996 through 2002 Plate & Pledge increased a robust 44 percent but from 2002 through 2006 Plate & Pledge increased a meager 12 percent. Statmann
Given that the writer is a priest in the diocese I would imagine that she can’t say what should be obvious: liberal dioceses (like MN, Newark, CNY, Rochester, others) are places of small and declining parishes.
BMR+ I totally agree with your observations on the appalling decline in full-time, experienced, ‘life-time’ priests in parish ministry. They are being assaulted on all sides, it seems.
I have observed the same dilution of parish priests in several different dioceses over the years, as seminary-trained, full-time ‘career’ priests are supplanted by ‘locally’ trained priests, deacons, etc. Attend ‘school’ part-time or even on-line, and you, too can be called ‘Father’ (or ‘Mother’). Your struggling parish will love you — because they don’t have to pay pension or health care benefits! Have you noticed that most in this category are second-career types, with a secure pension (often from the taxpayers). Regardless of the quality of their ‘training’, all are granted equal voice and vote at convention with full-time rectors. All wear ‘dog collars’, all are granted clergy ‘status’. Deacons (the ‘servant-order’, right?) serve in positions of great pastoral and secular power, including Standing Committees and as General Convention Deputies. Result: The concerns (especially financial) of clergy families has dropped to the bottom of the list in most conventions. “After all,” as I was told by one layperson, “The really dedicated priests work for free. We aren’t paid to be on the Vestry, so I don’t see why they should be, either.” Believe me, this attitude is very real and growing throughout TEC.
And we wonder why young people don’t want to bother with a three-year program at a seminary? We wonder why the quality of TEC sermons is so poor? Why the clergy at our conventions are so ignorant of the tradition of the Bible, Church tradition and theology? And why people in the pews as well as many clergy are heading for the exits?
#11, thanks, and I concur with most of what you say here. My main concern is simply that we’ve seen and continue to see a shift in the center of, well, power in our polity. It’s not just about these clergy issues–but that these clergy issues signal a deeper shift. We were a church of parishes, settled congregations served by longer-tenure clergy, and we are becoming a church of “transitional ministries,” with the center of institutional focus shifting from the parish to the diocesan office. Once upon a time bishops who came up with their whimsical program ideas could be checked, balanced, by the efforts of the clergy and seasoned lay leadership of parishes–those who would in nearly all situations be the ones who would be writing the checks to fund the budget, after all. These days bishops tend to get more of what they want, as larger and larger percentages of voters in diocesan conventions are not intimately tied to assessment paying parishes.
I would mention that I see this shift toward the episcopate as much in reasserting dioceses as in reappraising dioceses, and that it is very much a characteristic of the emerging non-TEC Anglican bodies in North America. Bishops whose pervasive, assumed, often extra-canonical authority in day to day matters of congregational life would send good 18th and 19th century American churchmen running for the exits at top speed.
When I visited Wyoming a few years ago, the Episcopal priest at Sundance divided his time between Sundance and Newcastle, alternating weeks with Morning prayer when absent, Eucharist when present.
The congregations didn’t seem to have a problem with that.
In the midwestern parish Episcopal church, that my wife and I worship in, our rector is now an 80%-20% pastor. We are fortunate to be the 80% part. To me it is indicative that the “dam” is developing a bad crack. To my knowledge the Diocese of Western Michigan(WM) has 17 parishes out of 70(?) that no longer have a rector. The MW Bishop had to let the Cathedral go so that funds wold be made available to keep the MW Diocese functioning. To add to the misery of those parishes that remain the upper powers that be are asking for a 20% parish assessment to keep the Diocese alive. I am wondering how long this Diocese will be able to function?
For all kinds of historical reasons (our friend Tom Rightmeyer could, I’m sure, expand on this) the polity of the Episcopal Church from the 18th C. on has been characterized by stronger parishes and a weaker episcopate. This trend has been reversing in the latter half of the 20th century, and the observation here about the increasing number of congregations without canonical parish status and the increasing number of clergy serving congregations without the tenure of a settled ministry as rector is a part of the picture. Another important element is dilution of the impact of settled rectors in the clerical order at diocesan conventions–with the infusion of larger and larger numbers of deacons, appointed ministers (vicars/priests-in-charge), and non-parochial priests, whose ministry situations are largely in the control of the bishop. This is a sea-change in terms of our culture of governance, and it seems to me that it has occured more or less under the radar and without serious discussion.
Where the cost of living is low, it takes a minimum budget of $150,000 (no mortgage) to support a marginal congregation with a full-time, seminary-trained priest. Work through any diocese at the church charts site and see how many TEC congregations have sunk below this level.
http://www.episcopalchurch.org/growth_60791_ENG_HTM.htm?menupage=50929
TEC is dying slowly and has no message on the national level different from Civitan Club to revive it.
The reverse side of 2 is that out of many clergy that are nominally available to become rectors, very few are actually qualified [i]and mobile[/i]. When you go across the Mississippi and outside of CA into ‘fly over country’, I can certainly see how ‘local priests’ are more and more prevalent as described. Add to that the professional issues associated with the “Anglican Wars” and it sometimes is hard to call somebody compatible with a parish. The fact that bishops and Canons for Deployment are often less than helpful in this respect apparently weighs in the balance as well.
Not that any bishops ask me for advice, but in management there is a proverb originating with Machiavelli’s [i]The Prince[/i] that a leader is only as good as the men he surrounds himself with. As bishop, attracting good rectors and staffing his parochial clerical positions should be the bishop’s first job, not growing the diocesan staff.
As I look through the demographics that the link in #2 noted, our parish numbers look pretty accurate and static. “Static” numbers in growing region is not a good sign. It was interesting to see the percentage of our population who might prefer contempory services and music.
In my former diocese…….when I lived in upstate New York (Central New York) many years ago, it wasn’t, and still isn’t……from what I’ve been told lately……uncommon for three or four missions to be served by one priest…..and part-time at that!
You’ll find exactly the same thing here in South Dakota. Look to the Episcopate in each diocese, their actions and inactions. Look at the verbatim comments from the Dio MN 2007 diocese-wide survey (http://www.episcopalmn.org/bcms) to reveal what the people currently in the diocese think of -Jelinek’s reign. I have to give -Jelinek some credit…. -Creighton (Dio SD) wouldn’t have the guts to distribute a survey like the one completed in MN. And….back to the point….WHO would want to work for or with EITHER of them?
The link to the diocesan survey was fascinating and I agree with # 6 that it was a refreshingly honest account of a situation of systemic failure. One thing troubled me, though: the plan for action passes swiftly from Spiritual Growth which is said to be the key, to dwell at some length on planning and structures. Oh dear. First of all I doubt all diocesan plans to lead spiritual growth from the centre. (RCs are equally prone to try this, BTW.) Secondly, the disproportion between the brief section spiritual growth and the lengthy section on structure is telling.
Minnesota is simply too cold for this old boy.
I think that Gator is absolutely correct. In 2005, 80 parishes out of a total of 107 parishes had Plate & Pledge of less than $150,000. That would leave 27 parishes with Plate & Pledge large enough to support a “rector”. From 1996 through 2002 the diocese lost about 11 percent of its membership and from 2002 through 2006 lost another 11 percent. From 1996 through 2002 Plate & Pledge increased a robust 44 percent but from 2002 through 2006 Plate & Pledge increased a meager 12 percent. Statmann
Given that the writer is a priest in the diocese I would imagine that she can’t say what should be obvious: liberal dioceses (like MN, Newark, CNY, Rochester, others) are places of small and declining parishes.
BMR+ I totally agree with your observations on the appalling decline in full-time, experienced, ‘life-time’ priests in parish ministry. They are being assaulted on all sides, it seems.
I have observed the same dilution of parish priests in several different dioceses over the years, as seminary-trained, full-time ‘career’ priests are supplanted by ‘locally’ trained priests, deacons, etc. Attend ‘school’ part-time or even on-line, and you, too can be called ‘Father’ (or ‘Mother’). Your struggling parish will love you — because they don’t have to pay pension or health care benefits! Have you noticed that most in this category are second-career types, with a secure pension (often from the taxpayers). Regardless of the quality of their ‘training’, all are granted equal voice and vote at convention with full-time rectors. All wear ‘dog collars’, all are granted clergy ‘status’. Deacons (the ‘servant-order’, right?) serve in positions of great pastoral and secular power, including Standing Committees and as General Convention Deputies. Result: The concerns (especially financial) of clergy families has dropped to the bottom of the list in most conventions. “After all,” as I was told by one layperson, “The really dedicated priests work for free. We aren’t paid to be on the Vestry, so I don’t see why they should be, either.” Believe me, this attitude is very real and growing throughout TEC.
And we wonder why young people don’t want to bother with a three-year program at a seminary? We wonder why the quality of TEC sermons is so poor? Why the clergy at our conventions are so ignorant of the tradition of the Bible, Church tradition and theology? And why people in the pews as well as many clergy are heading for the exits?
#11, thanks, and I concur with most of what you say here. My main concern is simply that we’ve seen and continue to see a shift in the center of, well, power in our polity. It’s not just about these clergy issues–but that these clergy issues signal a deeper shift. We were a church of parishes, settled congregations served by longer-tenure clergy, and we are becoming a church of “transitional ministries,” with the center of institutional focus shifting from the parish to the diocesan office. Once upon a time bishops who came up with their whimsical program ideas could be checked, balanced, by the efforts of the clergy and seasoned lay leadership of parishes–those who would in nearly all situations be the ones who would be writing the checks to fund the budget, after all. These days bishops tend to get more of what they want, as larger and larger percentages of voters in diocesan conventions are not intimately tied to assessment paying parishes.
I would mention that I see this shift toward the episcopate as much in reasserting dioceses as in reappraising dioceses, and that it is very much a characteristic of the emerging non-TEC Anglican bodies in North America. Bishops whose pervasive, assumed, often extra-canonical authority in day to day matters of congregational life would send good 18th and 19th century American churchmen running for the exits at top speed.
When I visited Wyoming a few years ago, the Episcopal priest at Sundance divided his time between Sundance and Newcastle, alternating weeks with Morning prayer when absent, Eucharist when present.
The congregations didn’t seem to have a problem with that.
Jim Elliott <><
#13 – that is “business as usual” (BAU) here in SD, and has been for years. They call those priests “circuit riders”.
In the midwestern parish Episcopal church, that my wife and I worship in, our rector is now an 80%-20% pastor. We are fortunate to be the 80% part. To me it is indicative that the “dam” is developing a bad crack. To my knowledge the Diocese of Western Michigan(WM) has 17 parishes out of 70(?) that no longer have a rector. The MW Bishop had to let the Cathedral go so that funds wold be made available to keep the MW Diocese functioning. To add to the misery of those parishes that remain the upper powers that be are asking for a 20% parish assessment to keep the Diocese alive. I am wondering how long this Diocese will be able to function?