At a recent meeting of diocesan synod (the body that governs the church) I outlined some figures in respect of parish share- the amount parishes pay towards the cost of ministry.
Since then I have been asked for the figures by a number of people, so here they are.
Last year rural parishes were asked to contribute just over £48,500 per paid post. Urban parishes were asked for just under £34,000.
There is no "rocket science" in them. I have simply allocated parishes as "rural" or "urban" (mainly following government descriptions). I have added up the amount paid by rural parishes and the amount paid by urban ones.
I have used the electronic diocesan database to add up the number of stipendiary (paid) posts in urban and rural. I have divided the amount paid by urban parishes by the number people paid to work in urban parishes and likewise for rural.
The difference is significant and thought needs to be given to where stipendiary posts are allocated. That's not to say that only parishes that are rich enough to pay should have a vicar, but urban churches should realise the extent to which they are being supported by the rural. And according to the Commission for Rural Communities, disposable incomes are less in rural areas.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
A countrywide average of disposable incocting like theme between rural and urban areas is hardly a blanket judgement. Not only would day to day experience suggest that it's unlikely to be true in Worcester diocese (Dudley, Sandwell, etc versus Feckenham, Ombersley, etc), but the diocesan allocation takes postcode wealth statistics into account.
Produce some more precise figures, and then we might have a conversation.
That first sentence got a bit garbled, but you can work out what I mean :)
Doug, I am not aware of the data being available other than on a national level. However it's unavailability doesn't mean it's not true!
The diocesan parish share formula takes into account average income - and in rural areas these averages frequently cover some very wide extremes. It does not take into account essential costs & the CRC figures show this is where rural areas are hit. Housing, transport, food all are more expensive in rural.
"Day to day experience" may be misleading. Many in farming are (like the CofE) asset rich and income poor. Average income per farmer last year at £18,200 is less than a clergy stipend and many are significantly worse off than the average - not something we as clergy have to worry about!
My day to day experience includes some very hard up people living cheek by jowl with some very affluent. What that does to them emotionally & socially is hard to comprehend.
I think the questions that the figures raise is whether the urban areas have any idea of the extent to which they are being subsidised by the rural and whether the allocation of clergy between urban and rural is equitable.
Post a Comment