Bishops, more or less

In the general Synod meeting at the end of this week, "there is a diocesan synod motion from Bradford. The diocese wants to reduce the number of bishops and other senior clergy. It points out that, while the number of stipendiary parochial clergy has fallen, there has been no fall in the number of suffra�gan bishops, archdeacons, and other senior clergy.
It asks whether there could be part-stipendiary or self-supporting dignitaries, or whether their work could be shared between teams of parochial clergy. The motion asks the Archbishops’ Council to formulate proposals for a reduction, and bring them to the Synod in three years."
I think we should be asking the kind of question this motion throws us into. My own view is that this is the wrong way to go about the issue. We do need to cut costs, but I can't see how reducing the number of bishops etc will help without a change in their roles. So if we have to consider what bishops etc are for then let's have that debate and decide on that basis. Practicalities impinge: if we stick with episcopal confirmation, then is there a danger that fewer bishops become more focussed on dispensing that particular sacramental?

My preference is to start with the 10 provinces idea which effectively takes a look at the geography and also gives a framework for cutting back on some senior posts and offers savings to dioceses in the form of sharing resources at provincial level. Now, if we baulk at creating more provincial level issues, then I'm comfortable with replacing the idea with that of having 'archdioceses' (like those urban dioceses where they have episcopal areas) but with the aim of sharing across the archdiocese.

I would like to encourage us to consider whether we should do two things instead (and this is a different proposal from the 10 provinces one, though not exclusive of it): one is to extend the equalisation of stipends to all clergy, bishops, archdeacons, deans of cathedrals. I see no argument for calling a salary a 'stipend' if it is going to be differential according to hierarchical status rather than need. Then we can look more sanguinely at the proposal that we actually need more bishops. I would suggest that either bishops cover a deanery-sized area or something the size of about half a dozen deaneries. The aim being to allow bishops to be real supports and coaches to their fellow presbyters (recall, they are still so ordained), they might be also involved in some kind of ministry in a parish or chaplaincy too. Consider that Italian bishops are effectively, I'm told, the bishop for a town or city. That seems a reasonable way forward.
Church Times - July Synod to be leaner, but, with any luck not meaner: