- 10 -
inflation"
(B15)
; "improvement of the general level of stipends must form
an integral part of a more equitable structure of remuneration"
(B7)
; and
was frequently mentioned in interviews as being the principal problem.
But what is a reasonable stipend? From which sources is it to be
derived? How is it to be allocated? What will be its future impact
on diocesan finances?
Questions such as these are being asked and all too rarely answered.
True there has been a good deal of well-directed study, so much so that
in 1972 a new national body - the Central Stipends Authority - was estab-
lished, specifically to "improve the stipends of clergymen.. . [and] bring
into being. . .a more coherent and equitable system of remuneration"
(B6)
.
A whole series of reports has ensued
(B6)
, but in all of them the one
thing that seems notable in its omission is any attempt to ask the
clergy themselves what they feel. Certainly inflation has been severe
but that alone does not automatically mean that financial anxiety is
being faced. It may be, but it cannot be stated as a fact on the
strength of only one such criterion. If pre-inflation pay had been
high enough then post-inflation, whilst more modest, may still be
reasonably adequate. Surely a more pertinent means of deciding whether
clergy pay is or is not realistic would be to compare that remuneration
with the needs it is required to meet? In other words to ascertain
from the clergy themselves how they see their remuneration in their
own personal circumstances? This seemed such a necessary step that
in the early stages of this study it was taken for granted that such
data would be somewhere available. When none came to light, the dio-
cesan secretary was asked whether any existed. "You're going to be
absolutely shattered when I say 'no', and I know why...if you ask any
clergyman, apart from one or two who are in it for the money, he won't
tell you. ...it's no good doing a confidential survey of the clergy
