|
- 105 -
which material management could take. This distillation of policy is not one on which an outsider can properly comment, the Diocesan Synod must be prepared to make it. But the issue to be decided is not whether or not material management qua management is to be adopted, but whether such management is to become centralised and strong or whether it is to continue to be diasporic and weak. Whether it chooses to recognise it or not, the Church is already heavily involved in the management of its material concerns, but that management is largely being conducted in a spirit of fuddled goodwill by unqualified laity and clergy who, when they meet a problem with which they are not fully competent to grapple, may not only fail to provide the Church with optimum benefit from its material resources but could even cause it direct financial loss. If this situation is to be remedied then the Diocesan Synod must, according to its own lights, consider the degree to which rational management techniques can properly be married to its own doctrinal policy and in so doing it should not be afraid at least to consider new ideas. To consider in this way does not necessarily mean that such ideas have to be adopted. If they really are found to be unsuitable then they need be pursued no further, but what is more likely is that they can, by a process of discussion and experiment, be adapted to the Church's particular needs. The Church of England is not completely unique. There are certainly parallels to be drawn with other Churches and with such public service organisations as local government and universities who are already using such techniques, and probably also there are useful lessons to be learned from a study of profit-oriented industry and commerce. Nor does the Church stand alone. As the recipient of public funds for purposes such as historic church renovation, it cannot |
| |
|
|