The Diocese of Coventry

What is a Deanery for?
Do they work?
Are they the right size?
What is the role of the Rural / Area Dean?
What is the role of the chapter?
Communication needs to be 2 way :  Diocese  Deanery
We should not forget the ecumenical context

What is a Deanery for? To help the church worship God, transform communities, and make new disciples. (Why isn't this on the website?)

Do they work? Some do. The best deanery I have ever worked in is the present one, Southam. A major factor in its success is, I believe, its small size. The number of clergy means that the deanery chapter is a small group, a family size in which every individual is important, and there is mutual support rather than point scoring, competition or jealousy. The relatively small number of parishes means that negotiating parish share is feasible, for the parishes can know one another and understand each other's situation.

Are they the right size? Some are. The right size is not a geographic area measured in square miles or population size, but the size that is most appropriate for collaboration and mission in that particular area. To my mind, it would make sense for a city or large town to be a single deanery, for that would be a natural area for mission. Other deaneries may be grouped differently. History may also be important: if a group of parishes with nothing in common has learnt to work together in mission, then let them stay together. If parishes do not feel that their deanery is a natural grouping for them, then by all means explore new groupings, and while doing so look at the boundaries of other denominations and local authorities.

What is the role of the Rural / Area Dean? In a small deanery, to be a chair of deanery and chapter meetings, to be a channel for communication with the bishop and the diocesan staff, and to act on behalf of the archdeacon or bishop as required. In a large deanery where mutual support is not so easy, and it is not easy for parishes to get to know one another, the Dean will have a much more difficult job and will have to be more managerial.

What is the role of a Chapter? Support and collaboration. Easier in a small deanery chapter; a larger one may need to divide into clusters to be most effective - but that is to introduce yet another administrative layer.

My feeling is that redesigning deaneries to devolve responsibilities downwards smacks more of administrative convenience than enabling mission. If it is not patently obvious why a change will better enable worship, transformation of communities and making new disciples then it may be difficult to persuade people of its value, and they may believe that their missionary energies are being restricted not released. Let the vision and motivation for mission and ministry spring from and be resourced by local communities of faith!!

I'm sure you are right, Tim, in saying that the geographic organisation of the Church needs to be sensitive to context - including culture and history. I was struck that Bishop Christopher chose to discuss the reorganisation of deaneries in his Visitation Charge because it seemed rather a clerical-organisational place to begin. It would be good to hear more about his reasons for adopting this strategy. It felt rather 'top down'. My sympathies are more 'bottom up' as your concluding comment suggests, though in saying that I am wary of congregationalism which thrives in the Church of England no matter what the official formularies say.

I'm not sure the questions being asked about Deaneries are the right questions to ask in relation to the Signposts document. The point is not 'Do Deaneries work' (in what respect are we meant to understand 'work'?), but 'Could a (different) model work better for mission'? I think there are other perhaps more important questions which need addressing at this stage. My concern is that if we don't ask the right questions we'll get the wrong answers.

I'm being summoned for tea so perhaps I'll return in due course!

As a former senior Civil Servant with bitter experience of endless new initiatives in Government, my sympathies lie with Tim Britton and Oliver Simon. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. No doubt some of our Deaneries work better than others. They certainly work differently; I don't know Nuneaton Deanery at all well but it is clearly going to be a very different animal from Fosse or Shipston, and probably it should be. The great Parish Share debate has brought people together, certainly here in the southern Deaneries (though again to better effect in some than in others!) Maybe some of the latter would be more viable as administrative units if they were larger, but I would need some convincing of that. The Diocese is perceived by some down here as a bit top-heavy, and in that sense there might be some real attractions in abolishing one Archdeacon post and delegating more to rural/area deans; but would any money be thereby saved? Little or nothing, if there has to be even a minuscule enhancement of staffing at deanery level. The cost could even rise. In that case, would the greater local ownership - and hence, hopefully, giving - compensate for that? I don't know.