An Executive Summary and Key Questions for the Diocese

The Church in Wales Review

An Executive Summary and Key Questions for the Diocese

I have sought to summarize the key point of each of the recommendations in the report, and to articulate one question which is intended to evaluate our response to the recommendations. Although these questions could be answered with a simple “yes” or “no”, it would be preferable to generate a more descriptive answer. It would be helpful if all members of Standing Committee and Governing Body came to our meeting having read the report and having given some consideration to their answers to the key questions.

+GLl

Recommendations on Church Governance

The review begins by thanking all those who participated in the evidential process. It notes that there is a desire for change in the Church in Wales, and reminds us that structure in the Church is designed to support mission. It suggests that the Church in Wales has been too used to a culture of deference to the bishops, and wants to see a more collaborative style emerge. It proposes that a new attitude could be introduced into the Church, which enables resolutions on all sorts of issues to be generated at parish and diocesan life and passed up the diocesan and provincial level, in order to involve people more in the governance of the Church. (Recommendation 1) It believes that the process of election would be energised if those standing offer a short manifesto (Recommendation 2)

Question 1

Do we wish to affirm this vision of a more energised, collaborative and issue based model of church governance?

Recommendations on Ministry Structures

The report believes that we need to move to wider structures of ministry based on units larger than the parish. The report calls these “Ministry Areas”, but they could be similar to deaneries or “major Rectorial Benefices”. Each ministry area would need a ministry team. All parishes becoming vacant should be suspended until a Ministry Team has been formed and appointed (3) Every congregation needs its own designated leader, whether clerical or lay. (4) Teams would balance each other, and most congregations would be led by a non-stipendiary leader. There needs to be a Lay Chair for each deanery in the transition period (5) but the post of Area Dean should be abolished (6) and replaced with the “Ministry Team Leader”. An Archdeacon would have oversight of ten to a dozen ministry teams (7). Leaders for the ministry teams need to be actively identified and supported by training in collaborative leadership. (9) This training programme should be led by a bishop. (10)

Question 2

Do we accept this model of ministry areas and teams for the future structure of the church’s life in St Asaph? Is it compatible with the development of deaneries in which we have been investing?

Cathedrals can be centres of excellence integrated into the mission of the diocese. (8)

The system of appraisal for clergy needs to be renewed (11).

Two trained full time youth workers should be appointed for each archdeaconry in the Church in Wales. (12) In time, one trained youth minister should be appointed to each ministry area. (13)

Each ministry area should have a weekly service oriented in style and content towards those outside the Church. (14)

Question 3

Are we supportive of the use of central funds to sustain an initiative of work with young people as outlined in the report?

Recommendations on Training

There needs to be an integrated approach to all training. (15, 19) St Michael’s College should still be the normal college of training for all ordinands, although the pattern of training may have to change. (16) Greater clarity is required about the training process, and St Michael’s needs to reflect a wider range of traditions. (17) The training programme adopted by the Church of Ireland needs to be considered. (18) Ordained stipendiary, NSM and Reader training should be integrated into a single training scheme. (20) Readers should be renamed “Licensed Lay Ministers” (21).

Question 4

Do we support the development and integration of training as proposed in the report?

Recommendations on Diocesan Structures and the Archiepiscopal See.

Diocesan administration should be reduced to three centres. (22) Dioceses served by these centres should also form joint committees (23) The northern administrative centre could also take on provincial responsibility to match those areas covered by the Welsh Government departments based in Llandudno. (24) After three years, consideration should be given to the creation of three dioceses, served by three diocesan and four Area Bishops. (25) A number of functions could be administered centrally: the payroll for diocesan office staff (26.1), diocesan investments (26.2), safeguarding (26.3), parish share (26.4), IT (26.5) and database (26.6). Processes for faculties should be streamlined. (26.7)

Question 5

Are we willing to commit ourselves to explore co-operation and possible merger between the dioceses of St Asaph and Bangor?

The Archiepiscopal See should be permanently located in Llandaff (27). The Archbishop should be assisted by an Area Bishop (28), and by a Vice-Chair of Bench (29).

Question 6

Do we support the report’s proposals for the archiepiscopal see?

Recommendations on Church Buildings and Parsonages

Each ministry area will need to work to rationalise the number of Church buildings it maintains (30.1) The current six parsonage board managers should be reduced to four, with two redeployed as managing Church buildings across the Province (30.2) There should be new provincial resources to think through alternative deployment of church building stock (31,32) There should be a feasibility study evaluating selling off all parsonages to be compensated by the raising of the stipend or the provision of a housing allowance. (33)

Question 7

Will we support a radical review of the use of our church buildings and parsonages?

Recommendations on Finance

Each ministry area needs to become self-sufficient with respect to ministry costs and contributing to diocesan costs (34) The endowments of the Church in Wales should be used for pensions, to finance the episcopate, national priorities and new initiatives. (35) Central finances would also be used to pay for archdeaconry youth ministers (36.1, cf 12) Leadership training and review (36.2, cf 15-20) and the cost of training curates, years 1-7 (36.3). Growing congregations should be allowed to retain income above a specified level (37) The balance between the use of historic funds and present giving should be reviewed (38) The establishment of a separate pension fund should be considered (39) The presentation of accounts should be simplified (40) and the model of tithing more widely disseminated (41).

Question 8

Are we in agreement with the broad outline of the relative responsibilities of central and diocesan/parochial funding?

Stipends should be calibrated with neighbouring Anglican Churches (42.2) and occasional fees paid towards parish share (42.1). There should be a responsibility allowance (43), and differentials, especially in pensions, should be reconsidered (44).

Question 9

Are we supportive of the proposals relating to the remuneration of the clergy?

Recommendation on the Welsh Language

The report “Each in our own Language” was commended; priority should be given to nurturing Welsh speakers, proper provision made in St Michael’s, and the place of Welsh medium schools. (45)

Question 10

Are we supportive of the recommendations with respect to the Welsh language?

Recommendations on Mission and Ministry

A Board of Mission and Ministry with a Director of Mission and Ministry should be reconstituted. (46) Ministry teams should be committed to working in schools (47) and several comments are offered on aspects of the mission of the Church in Wales.

Question 11

Can we support the recommendations with respect to “mission and ministry” in the report?

Recommendations on Episcopal Elections

The current system should be replaced with a nominations committee of 19 persons, which would interview, shortlist and nominate a name to Standing Committee or for the approval of Governing Body (48).

Question 12

Do we wish to support the reform of the electoral system for bishops along the lines proposed in the report?

Other Recommendations

A working party should be established to revise the Constitution in order to shorten and simplify. (49) The Standing Committee of Governing Body should be responsible for the implementation of this report. (50)

An annex to the report gives an overview of previous reviews and the context of the present review process.

+GLl

July 2012

Church in Wales Review: A summary and Key QuestionsPage 1