Support the Café

Search our Site

Don’t restructure for mission, restructure through mission

Don’t restructure for mission, restructure through mission

The Rev. Lauren R. Stanley has written an opinion piece on the restructuring of the Episcopal Church for Center Aisle, a publication and, this time around, a website, offered by the Diocese of Virginia.

Stanley is not impressed by proposed legislation requesting that the church convene a Special Convention (something the House of Bishops can do on its own if it so chooses). She writes:

A special convention apparently would not have the authority to make any changes. Article XII of the Constitution says that “no alteration or amendment of this Constitution shall be made unless the same shall be first proposed at one regular meeting of the General Convention and be sent to the Secretary of the Convention of every Diocese, to be made known to the Diocesan Convention at its next meeting, and be adopted by the General Convention at its next succeeding regular meeting.”

These resolutions ask for $100,000 for implementation of the special commission, but there is no mention of where the money for a special convention – in the neighborhood of $2 million, according to the Rev. Canon Dr. Gregory Straub, executive officer and secretary of the General Convention – would come from. And that $2 million? That’s just the cost to the General Convention budget. It doesn’t include the costs to the dioceses, or to the deputies who have to pay their own way.

Her own preference for finding our way forward is embodied in Resolution A073, and you will need to read the entire essay to find out why. But here is a snippet that begins with a quote from the explanation supporting the resolution:

“Structures are important and necessary, but they must be flexible enough not to inhibit the proclamation of the Gospel by faithful Episcopal communities, and they have to be re-evaluated as mission conditions on the ground shift. By creating these stations for mission enterprise, and then by studying them, we will know what structures to create to recognize and encourage the growth of new and redeveloped faith communities.”

The resolution calls for $1 million in funding in the next triennium – far less than the cost of a special convention – so that dioceses can apply for a matching grant of up to $20,000 to help develop the Mission Enterprise Zone.

Amid all the calls the restructuring, instead of setting up a new special commission to study what could be done and calling a special convention to recommend canonical changes, perhaps the Church would be better served by implementing A073, which focuses on the actual doing of mission.


Café Comments?

Our comment policy requires that you use your real first and last names and provide an email address (your email will not be published). Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted.

Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Michael Russell

A special convention will be a huge waste of time and money. If we cannot be nimble enough to spend time discussing it at this general convention we are surely NOT the people or the leaders who can make a Special General Convention create any new more nimble structure.

The cost would be closer to $7 million dollars when all things are taken into consideration.

But our institutional leadership is fixated on this proposal. We could deal with it by firing Bp. Sauls and installing someone who could just do the job of say, getting a competent budget made.

Jim Naughton

Kevin, I think the problem is that even if you are “organizing” a team to go somewhere, the team probably meets, no? So if we think of the church as a big team, or collection of teams, or something along those lines, even if it is organizing to go somewhere–and let’s hope it is–it still needs to meet.

The paradox of our present position is that we may need more meetings and inward focus in the present to move us toward fewer meetings and an outward focus in the future.

At least that is one way of looking at things. Another way is to say: We can’t think our way out of our current situation, let’s leave enough money in the diocese for local congregations to experiment, tear down the national apparatus and see what the heck happens.


I don’t get it….

Some of us hear the word “mission”, and we think about organizing a team to go somewhere and do something.

Some others of us hear the word “mission”, and they think about organzing a meeting???

Help me out here…exactly what do they think “mission” means?

Kevin McGrane

Support the Café
Past Posts

The Episcopal Café seeks to be an independent voice, reporting and reflecting on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican tradition.  The Café is not a platform of advocacy, but it does aim to tell the story of the church from the perspective of Progressive Christianity.  Our collective sympathy, as the Café, lies with the project of widening the circle of inclusion within the church and empowering all the baptized for the role to which they have been called as followers of Christ.

The opinions expressed at the Café are those of individual contributors, and, unless otherwise noted, should not be interpreted as official statements of a parish, diocese or other organization. The art and articles that appear here remain the property of their creators.

All Content  © 2017 Episcopal Café