Letter to the Editor: Response to the Last Editorial

Letter to the Editor Response to Last Edition’s Editorial Dear Editor, Thank you very much for your Christian charity and spirited editorial, Friday 8th October 2021, ( E.C. No.8090).  Also thanks are due to you for reprinting so much excellent reformed evangelical...

Letter to the Editor: The Murder of Sir David Amess

Murder of Sir David Amess Dear Editor, I grieve at the loss of a friend and former Party colleague Sir David Amess, MP who was murdered in an increasingly dangerous world. In the 70s I worked with David in the Young Conservatives before he became an MP and he was...

Reformation Sunday Advert

LETTER TO THE EDITOR:                        15 October 2021. My ‘Advert’ titled “Reformation Sunday 31 October” said, “The Church of England should still celebrate this 500th year since Martin Luther declared at the ‘Diet of Worms’ in 1521, “Here I stand. God help...

Leicester Diocese Illogical

Letter to the Editor Leicester Diocese Illogical   Sir, Leicester Diocese’s decision on 9 October to replace its traditional Parishes with ‘Minsters' is both spiritually and financially illogical.  The Church of England’s own growth report ‘From Anecdote to...

Barnabas Fund Reports: Turkey Escalates Airstrikes Against Christians in Syria & Iraq

Barnabas Fund Reports Turkey Escalating Airstrikes Against Christians and other Minorities in Syria and Iraq Turkey has escalated a supposedly anti-terrorist military campaign in Syria and Iraq which appears to be targeting Christians and other minorities. A spate of...

Should I Stay or Should I Go? Gospel-Driven Anglicanism Part 4

Should I Stay or Should I Go? By the Revd Dr Mark Pickles Part 4 Gedaliah is appointed governor and we read that Jeremiah purposely chooses to live amongst “those of the poorest of the land who had not been taken into exile in Babylon” (40:7). Things have taken a turn...

466th Anniversary of the Martyrdoms of Latimer & Ridley

466th Anniversary of the Martyrdoms of Latimer & Ridley Saturday, 16 October marked the 466th anniversary of the martyrdoms of Bishops Hugh Latimer and Nicholas Ridley.   They were burned at the stake after being found guilty of heresy due to their refusal to...

Clive West Memorial Trust Lecture: John Yates III to Speak

Clive West Memorial Trust Lecture  Revd Dr John Yates III to Speak The annual Clive West Memorial Lecture will be held on Thursday, 11 November at 19:30 at St Nicholas’ Church, Lisburn Road in Belfast.  This year’s speaker is the Revd Dr John Yates III, Rector of Holy...

Book Review: Bleeding for Jesus

Bleeding for Jesus John Smyth and the cult of the Iwerne Camps Andrew Graystone Darton, Longman and Todd, 2021 (ISBN: 9781913657123, 250pp, £12.99) This book is the latest instalment of a long-running tragedy. It comes six years after the author was first made aware...

School Pupils Across the Country Memorise Passages from BCP for £1,000 Prize

School Pupils Across the Country  Memorise Book of Common Prayer Passages  £1,000 Prize for Winner By Tim Stanley Hundreds of school pupils across the country are busy this term studying prayers and readings from the 1662 Book of Common Prayer in a bid to win a prize...

Do the Archbishops Know that Leicester Diocese is About to Close 234 Parishes?

Do the Archbishops know that Leicester Diocese is About to Close 234 Parishes?

An Analysis and Commentary 

By Emma Thompson

This Saturday, 9 October, Leicester Diocesan Synod is expected to vote on a scheme to replace Leicester’s 234 parishes with 20-25 ‘Minsters’, each with at least four leaders.  This would reduce Leicester Diocese’s stipendiary clergy posts from 100 to 80 by 2026.  The scheme’s proposal document suggests that paid positions would mostly go to stipendiary clergy, ‘but our aspiration is for increased lay ministry’.  Each Minster would have a new Operations Director, introducing another layer to Leicester’s diocesan bureaucracy (recently estimated at 179).

Post-pandemic, Leicester Diocese predicted a 2022 deficit of around £1m.  It outlined to its parishes, in a webinar, three options for eliminating this deficit: (i) reduce Diocesan administration costs by 10%; (ii) increase Parish Share by 10%; or (iii) reduce stipendiary priest costs by 5%, increase Parish Share by 2% and decrease Diocesan administration costs by 2%. 

Since the problem is diocesan overspending, the first appears the obvious solution.  However, the third was chosen: hence the Minster scheme.  The proposal document alleges that such changes would be needed even if the Diocese had ‘enough money’, in order to engage ‘seriously with questions of mission’.  

I cherish the Church of England’s breadth.  However, this plan is bureaucratically worded (‘embodies the mutuality of ministries as a priority value…’) and short of convincing detail.  

The Minster model would, it asserts, be: “rooted in our Anglican tradition…’. Except that, actually, it wouldn’t.  A Minster may be lay-led, indeed in theory the whole ministry team may be lay.  This involves abandoning the Church of England’s theology of ministry in favour of congregationalism – a change which is surely beyond the whim of a Diocesan Synod.  Moreover, it seems anti-democratic to propose the scheme during a General Synod election period, with attention elsewhere.  

It is unclear how Leicester Diocese legally has the right to impose such changes on all its parishioners.  Did it also consult ‘hidden’ interest groups, such as patrons (who have legal property rights of appointment) and bellringers?  

Subsuming parishes into Minsters is countercultural.  With lockdown and more home working, the national trend is towards localism.  

The cost analysis is weak.  Will these Minsters be sustainable?  Why cut front line clergy, rather than diocesan bureaucrats?  How can Leicester hope to increase giving by cutting clergy numbers?  The CofE’s own studies (including ‘From Anecdote to Evidence’) show the opposite outcome.   

How can the pastoral ‘cure of souls’ fit into this model?  The plan is uncosted, unstaffed and short on predictions of the consequences for local communities.  The document claims to be ‘grappling with questions as to how to best be present as Christian community within the parish and locality’ – but supplies no answers.  

The Archbishop of Canterbury recently told the Church Times: ‘We are absolutely embedded in the parishes’.  In a lecture, the Archbishop of York said that he was ‘aghast’ and had ‘sleepless nights’ over not being viewed as supporting the parish.   Some lay members of Save The Parish have written an open letter, asking them, if they mean what they say, to overturn this Leicester scheme. 

To join Save The Parish, please visit: