Parish meeting 23rd June 2024 

Present - Father Jim. Rev Frances, Robert Coupland, Diana Rhodes, Andrew Powell, Margaret Neal, Maureen, David and Jenny Linnell, Yvonne Jewell, Jane, Sylvia Wilson, Rita Hendy, Soo Munnery, Sue Hazelgrove, Allen Ross, Janet Parker, Helen Luker, Vernia Mengot, Hazel Weaver, Sian Doyle

Apologies- Mary, Roger and Julia Newstead, Tony Lindell, Father Doug

Purpose of meeting - to discuss Archdeacon Moira’s Request to consider the establishment of a benefice with one other geographically close church. The meeting was a follow up to the earlier discussions at the APCM.

All present were given and had read a summary sheet outlining the proposal and the process this would involve.

Sian began by going through the questions and answers submitted by email to the Archdeacon by the PCC and her responses.

Vicarage • What is the time frame for purchasing a new vicarage? This purchase is pivotal to our consideration of your proposal.
The Vicarage is on the Diocesan Capital plan, for purchasing in the next year or perhaps into 2025.

Independent PCC • We need a binding assurance that if we do enter into a Benefice, we will remain an independent church with our own independent PCC, elected by our congregation, with clergy members restricted, as now, to our Priest-in-Charge and Assistant Priests.
While in a benefice the parish would have a separate PCC, the Vicar would be Vicar of both parishes, and so would be the chair of both PCCs.  It is not possible to be in a benefice without this.  However, they can delegate the day to day chairing of one PCC to an Associate Priest who would be the effective P-in-C of the parish of Salfords.  They would however still legally be the Parish Priest.

It is crucial that our finances remain completely independent of any other church or institution, under the control of our Treasurer and our PCC alone. We cannot be in a position where, as a member of a Benefice, we have any legal or financial liability for other churches Appointment of Priest-in Charge

In a benefice each parish makes their own offers to the Parish Support Fund and has a separate PCC.  No financial liability for another church can be sought from Salfords even within a benefice.  However, Salfords is not paying the full indicative costs for a House for Duty Priest in Charge at the moment, and so is relying on other parishes choosing to be generous and so support Salfords to have a priest. The advantage to us of a Benefice is that in the eventuality of a vacancy occurring within our Parish, the Church Wardens can seek the advice and help of the Vicar of the Benefice

Church to provide adequate cover to ensure the uninterrupted provision of services at Christ the King, mindful of our traditions. Such help would be much appreciated. However, we need an assurance that our Church Wardens, together with the PCC and the Archdeacon, would continue to be responsible for the appointment of a new Priest-in Charge. We wish, as an independent church, to remain responsible for the appointment. In a Benefice the whole benefice is involved in the appointment of clergy for the benefice. So if the Vicar post were vacant the Salfords PCC would appoint a parish rep to be involved in the appointment, likewise for the associate priest post the Salfords PCC would appoint reps.  Usually in a benefice with more than one parish the parish that will receive most ministry from a particular priest has two parish reps and the other one only one to ensure the parish most affected by the appointment has more say in the matter. 

If, as an interim measure or on an ad-hoc basis, we were offered the services of a Curate, who would be responsible for the costs involved?
If you had a curate, the housing costs would be borne by the Diocese since it was to be in place of a House for Duty post.  The expenses would be borne by both parishes, according to the split of time between the two parishes.

There was discussion about the importance of housing and the provision of a vicarage to enable us to find a replacement priest when a vacancy occurred. The consensus was that this was essential and although we have the Archdeacon’s written confirmation that this is what is intended, it was understood that this could be subject to policy changes within the diocese. It was felt that it is important for the Archdeacon to know of available properties in the immediate vicinity of the Church on the market.

Rita clarified that our Church had been dedicated not consecrated which does have an impact on future use of the building and the site.

There was some discussion about the likely parish that we would enter into a benefice with. It was explained that as the other parish had not been formally approached yet that the Archdeacon requested that we should discuss this proposal without naming a specific church but on the assumption that it would be one of our close neighbour churches.

There was also discussion about the importance of maintaining our tradition and style of worship – this was the most important consideration for those present. There was some concern about the possibility of losing some of our usual services and for changes in the type of services.

A vote was taken on the proposal to write to the Archdeacon agreeing to the exploration of the formation of a benefice whilst emphasising that we would strongly request to maintain our current tradition and emphasising the need to purchase a property to be a new vicarage. The letter will be drafted at the next PCC meeting in July and sent to the Archdeacon. There was one abstention otherwise all in agreement.

Following the meeting, it was agreed to draft this summary in writing for clarity and clarification.