- 31 -
to work", "At present it appears to me that synodical decisions are
totally individual rather than representing parish, deanery and diocese"
and "The main channel through which the parishes could have any influence
is the deanery synod. However, my experience of the deanery synod is
that most business discussed has already been decided by the diocesan
synod". There were also a few favourable comments but not as many as
might have been hoped for, but pending further research we should perhaps
not prejudge the degree of control (both up and down) which a fully satis-
factory synodical system could allow. Whilst the expressed opinions are
no doubt genuine they are not necessarily justified - it may be that the
parishes do have enough control and that what is needed is better commu-
nication. It should not be assumed too quickly that it is the system
which needs changing.
2.5.3.14 - D1 and D2 -
Methods of raising parochial finance
The voting showed that while nearly half the parishes relied
chiefly on weekly offerings, none relied chiefly on special events
(one in fact ticked all three boxes but this was counted as a vote
for 'both'), and the majority adopted a blend of systems. The com-
ents were both interesting and diverse and there were points both for
and against Christian Stewardship:
(Both) - "Stewardship does not meet with the approval of the
PCC."
(Weekly) - "Stewardship not popular. Insufficient response
to too many social events"
(Weekly) - "A planned giving scheme ... has proved ... very
successful indeed"
(Weekly) - " ... 90% of total income is raised in this way" .
