So what is going wrong exactly?

The thriving parish from which I have just retired is being forced towards merger, which the evidence shows will drive decline…
By Revd Richard Campbell Paget

I recently had my 70th birthday and therefore retired from my post as stipendiary vicar of a thriving, single church Kent parish.  Rather than replace me immediately, my former Churchwardens are being told our parish will be merged, which the evidence shows drives decline.  They recently attended a diocesan ‘Interregnum Committee’ briefing on ‘vacancies’.  Apparently, every parish now needs a period following an incumbent’s departure to ‘grieve’; the suggested period is c.12 months. During this grieving period the parish can prayerfully overcome its loss and consider its future ‘being’ and ‘purpose’. Oh, and, yes, during this grieving period the parish is expected to pay to the diocese as if it did have an incumbent to be paid for!

Last week in the Church Times I offered some reflections on an instance of diocesan overbearing and intransigence that left the lay people on the receiving end in my former parish angry and disillusioned. There may be those who seek to dismiss those reflections by deeming them too ‘parochial’ – i.e. missing the bigger picture; too cynical – i.e. misconstruing good intentions; too idealistic – i.e. unrealistic given the current scenario and available resources; or possibly all three and more.  Let me make some comments.  

That my former parish was not an isolated case has been painstakingly researched and amply demonstrated by the Save The Parish movement.  Save The Parish seeks a rebalancing of resources which have been redirected away from the parishes.  STP comprises volunteers who have had to endure being accused of being meddling and unhelpful by those in the Anglican hierarchy who fail to appreciate the value of scrutiny and critical evaluation. Yet given the strength of feeling, the numbers  and the amount of money involved, not to mention the personal hurt and detriment to local ministry and mission throughout the land, the current failing strategic and financial situation surely demands close, objective, informed examination and correcting.  

Three areas for such scrutiny and change sit at the top of what is not a short list.  These three are: (1) pastoral care; (2) funding and strategies for growth; and (3) effective leadership. 

Most instructively here, permeating all three, albeit counterintuitively given the Church’s calling, are some astonishing misunderstandings about human nature, needs, and interactions. It is eyebrow-raising enough to read the compelling evidence that recent new initiatives have not delivered on what they promised – indeed failed by a long way; but it beggars belief that such fantastical schemes were ever allowed any traction in the first place. 

As for oversight ministry and “enabling” the laity, did those who conjured up these flights of fancy honestly think that pastoral care – the kind which reassures, resurrects, and renews people – could be exercised by a fleeting clerical visit or a telephone call from an unknown voice twenty miles away, or that already hard-pressed local church members could simply be asked to take on a role for which the great majority themselves know they lack the training, the gifts, or the time to perform it in any way adequately? This is not to belittle either the time offered, the willingness, or the gifts of local laity; but very few possess all three (and, especially in a cost of living crisis) those who are young are likely to be fully employed. 

We should not undervalue the priestly role. It takes time, trust, and track record to build not only individual relationships but also community and commitment.  

And it is not as if the funding to resource the necessary staffing of parishes is not available: the c£10 billion held by the Church Commissioners is no mean pot, and, from a long-term strategic point of view, far better invested in priests and parishes than pie-in-the-sky projects or put away for a rainy day. 

Do the bishops not realise that the rainy day will become inevitable unless they reject the suicidal policy of ‘managed decline’ and start investing in frontline clergy rather than fanciful initiatives, however well-meaning or imaginatively designed?  Having worked in international business and consulted with others who have successfully faced similar ‘market’ challenges, we would argue that the level of current funding for parish ministry is unquestionably inadequate. The funding priorities being favoured over parish ministry are ill conceived and thoroughly mistaken, to all intents and purposes quite hopeless. 

Above all, the present malaise begs serious questions about the competence, character, and commitment of the present leadership. What skills, experience, and expertise do they possess to reverse the current decline in membership? Do they have the character both to inspire people and to be brave enough to make the tough decisions? Are they committed both to the Founder’s original commission and to their flocks? Granted these are awkward questions, but the gravity of the situation demands that they be put. 

Throughout the country, churchwardens, church treasurers, and PCC members, speaking of their engagement with their dioceses, tell of leadership that is paternalistic, doctrinaire, unbending, and all too often not only ignorant of the realities but unwilling to engage with local knowledge, experience, and alternative solutions. Such an arrogantly authoritarian approach to leadership – one that refuses to listen, refuses to delegate, refuses to accept that it might be wrong, has a devastatingly negative affect on those being led. And in a voluntary institution, one that is supposed to be a large ‘family’, this approach just will not work; and all the evidence clearly shows that it is not working. 

The truly great sadness is that the great majority of local priests and laity would be ready and willing to work together with their diocesan officers if they felt that they were being heard and their suggestions and solutions properly considered. But, when any engagement is but a token one because the decisions have already been made in advance, however confident people are in their Lord and Saviour they will very quickly lose confidence in their diocese and its officers. 

The sheep are not being properly tended; the pastures into which they are being led are proving to be the valley of the shadow of death; a radical revision is needed, now.