- 29 -
fair ... which indicates that possibly they don't understand it"(C4).
And whilst it would not be justifiable to calculate statistical para-
meters such as correlations on such a sample, it does seem to emphasise
the organic link within the Church between the functional and the syno-
dical structures.
2.5.3.9 - C3 -
Views on diocesan share
This question produced perhaps the most interesting result of
any. Only two out of thirty saw their parish share as being a payment
for benefits received, a low figure considering that this is essentially
what it is. Of the total diocesan share, two-thirds is disbursed on
stipends and other provisions for clergy who operate almost exclusively
within the parish (see Appendix B), and much of the remaining third is
on services which are of an intra-parochial rather than a general benefit.
The high count (18) of treasurers who thought of their share as being a
contribution to the family purse may reflect a subjective bias (engendered
partly by deliberate diocesan policy) rather than an objective response,
particularly as it correlates so closely with those opining under C5
that the Diocese was a group of parishes. The Church of England operates
on an hierarchical, almost familial, structure and there is an underlying
feeling of togetherness which generates the large volume of goodwill pre-
viously noted. It could be reasonable to think of it as also disposing
treasurers to regard themselves as part of a diocesan family rather than
as customers for diocesan services. Converse reasoning possibly explains
the low count on 'tax on parochial income' - the word 'tax' is apparently
not liked within the church and has therefore been avoided throughout
this study - but the same idea under a different name ('levy') reached
a markedly higher count, perhaps suggesting that this was how some
treasurers saw their share, but that they disliked the phraseology
being used to describe it. Again there is possibly scope here for
further enquiry.
