Participating in God s Mission as Disciples and Apostles. by The Taskforce for Reimagining the Episcopal Church in Connecticut (TREC-CT)

Transcription

1 URCH IN C Participating in God s Mission as Disciples and Apostles by The Taskforce for Reimagining the Episcopal Church in Connecticut (TREC-CT)

2 Participating in God s Mission as Disciples and Apostles by The Taskforce for Reimagining the Episcopal Church in Connecticut (TREC-CT) And the Word became flesh and lived among us, and we have seen his glory, the glory as of a father s only son, full of grace and truth. (John 1:14) i INTRODUCTION John s gospel situates God s Word, incarnate, directly into the human experience. The social, economic, political, and cultural context in which Jesus lived was unique to 1st century Palestine. Yet, the Body of, comprised of believers covenanted through baptism (1 Corinthians 12: 12-31) continues to renew itself in every age through Jesus followers who faithfully respond to their baptismal promises. The ian is called to participate alongside God in the restoration and renewal of the world deeply within i.e., incarnated into the particular culture and context in which s/he lives. A Changing World Our world is changing rapidly. From global politics and economies (deepening income inequality, rising geostrategic competition, intensifying nationalism, persistent jobless growth ii ) to shifting worldwide cultural trends (technological development and the advancement of connectivity, collapse of majorities and the rise of multi-culturalism, expansion of ideological polarities with the solidification of subcultures iii ), to climate change and the subsequent realities (damage to property and infrastructure, lost productivity, mass migration, security threats and an informality that defies institutional structu es) to the demise of religious relevance (notable in the U.S. with the decline of ianity, rise of the nonaffiliated, or nones, and the inc eased share of Americans who identify with non- ian faiths iv ), our world resonates change. The Episcopal Church in Connecticut (ECCT), gathered in its 230th Annual Convention in 2014, again acknowledged the reality of our changing world 2

3 TREC-CT was charged to explore how we can transform the way we structure and govern ourselves to more effectively catalyze, connect, convene, and build capability as the Body of in Connecticut in support of God s Mission. and God s on-going invitation to imagine how the 21st century church must be transformed to participate more faithfully in God s mission. In other words, how does our collective community of Connecticut Episcopalians prayerfully discern God s invitation to embrace this dramatic change? If God is incarnate in and through us, how then are we being formed as disciples and sent as apostles in God s mission? How do we faithfully gather in prayer, reflect on the scriptures, receive sacramental nourishment, and lend a hand to what God is up to in the places where we live and work? (See Appendix I) An Engaged Response Convention 2014 resolved to convene a Taskforce for Reimagining the Episcopal Church in Connecticut (TREC-CT) and to continue the work initiated by the Faith & Order committee in In the resolution s explanation, TREC-CT was charged to explore how we can transform the way we structure and govern ourselves to more effectively catalyze, connect, convene, and build capability as the Body of in Connecticut in support of God s Mission. (See Appendix II) In December 2014, the bishops selected a new slate of participants to represent the broad spectrum of voices from across ECCT for this next phase of work. Before year s end, TREC-CT established its schedule and work began in earnest in January (See Appendix III) Meeting monthly, often more frequently, TREC-CT began by examining how we currently relate to one another as individuals and as parishes and worshiping communities. We identified our resources and governance structures, noting those that substantively sustain our common life and those that may appear redundant or obsolete. Between January and October 2015, we convened churchwide listening sessions and participated in the Joint Leadership Gatherings (quarterly meeting of the Commission on Ministry, Executive Council and Board of the Missionary Society, Trustees for Donations & Bequests, and Standing Committee) and Clergy Days. We received feedback from parishioners in the pews, seasoned church leaders, and senior staff of ECCT. We embraced our work in a posture of listening, striving to be open to the Spirit s movement. We prayed, imagined, argued, and agreed to disagree, building consensus with confidence, and always inviting God to bless us with enough vision, hope, and joy to prevent the scope of Convention s charge from overwhelming us with anxiety and crippling our efforts. A Change in Governance Early on it became apparent that 3

4 It is our hope that by privileging voices of those who actively engage in collaborative ministry, our governing council will more readily ensure that every ECCT member has a voice... We delineate six geographic regions parsed by the natural boundaries suggested by Connecticut s rivers, mountains, and roadways. our current deanery system is cumbersome, largely ineffective, and unsustainable. While a few deaneries work remarkably well, overall the sheer number of deaneries diminishes the collective strength that a larger geographic region might afford. As it stands, our governing body between Conventions, the Executive Council, is unwieldy and consistently fails to garner leadership across ECCT as the deanery system is designed to provide. Unity By Ministry Our proposal seeks to raise up those who are already participating in God s mission through 30+ ministry networks from ECW, hospital chaplains, UTO, and Faith Behind Bars to Camp Washington, ConnECA, anti-violence efforts, and Shoreline Youth Group. It is our hope that by privileging voices of those who actively engage in collaborative ministry, our governing council will more readily ensure that every ECCT member has a voice in how we make decisions about our common life and service in God s mission. Unity By Location In addition to valuing the collective voice of our network of ministries, our proposal esteems voices from across our parishes and worshiping communities that span Connecticut. We delineate six geographic regions parsed by the natural boundaries suggested by Connecticut s rivers, mountains, and roadways each sending one clergy and one layperson, chosen from each of the six regions as determined by each region. Interestingly, TREC-CT notes that the region structure reclaims the system established in 1877 when six Archdeaconries structured the diocese into roughly the same areas to more easily facilitate ministry and service. In addition to reclaiming this historic parsing of parishes, we endeavored throughout this proposed provisional structure to retain our historic standing as a missionary society and as the Episcopal Church in Connecticut. (see Appendix IV) Unity By Leadership To assist in this lively engagement of Episcopalians across Connecticut, we propose that a Missionary serves each, recruited and selected as determined by each. The Missionary assists in convening members, supporting connections within and across ECCT, shaping collaborative activities, and helps build the collective capabilities of the community to engage God s mission in meaningful ways. This structural platform is intended to be enduring yet adaptable, strong yet in many ways provisional. It is designed to support our participation in God s mission, affirm our identity as Episcopalians, and provide an efficient system that is inclusive and agile. 4

5 This structural platform is designed to support our participation in God s mission, affirm our identity a Episcopalians, and provide an efficient system that i inclusive and agile. In addition, we are committed to improving our methods of communication through various media, with special attention given to diversity of gifts, cultures, and languages. As we live into this provisional time of transition, we avidly encourage missional experimentation by actively engaging our imaginations and exploring new initiatives, daring to risk failure without expectation of perfect outcomes, and enthusiastically sharing stories and cheering each other s efforts. At the same time, we value accountability for planning and programming by exercising thoughtful oversight of the use of our common resources. Adaptive Challenges & Adaptive Leadership The adaptive challenges ECCT faces today loss of membership, declining financial support and political influence, abundance of buildings and land is shared across all ian denominations. Not the least among these challenges is that of understanding our individual roles of discipleship and apostleship in a culture that finds the ian way of life irrelevant. Before us lies an adaptive challenge that defies a technical fix. Engaging the adaptive challenge requires adaptive leadership, which calls us to: 1. Identify the challenge 2. Inspire change without disabling the human spirit by openly debating issues, clarifying our assumptions, defining values initiating creative responses, etc. 3. Maintain disciplined attention 4. Share the work with the entire community 5. Protect the voices of leadership that arise from within Through the combined efforts of our Missionaries, leadership, lay and ordained leaders within our parishes and worshiping communities, and partners within our communities, we hope to creatively respond to these adaptive challenges. We are all God s missionaries. Five Baptismal Marks of Mission The Five Baptismal Marks of Mission, identified at Convention 2012, guide, shape, and order our recommendations. These help us faithfully engage God s mission as discerning disciples and active apostles, through: 1. Worship & Prayer: teaching, baptizing, and nurturing new believers 2. Repentance & Forgiveness: resisting evil and safeguarding the integrity of creation 3. Evangelism: proclaiming the good news of God in 4. Service: responding to human need by loving service 5. Justice & Peace: seeking to transform unjust structures of society and challenging violence 5

6 A Provisional Path Forward In this proposed new governance structure, we strive to remain true to our history as a collective missionary society. We note this core characteristic in the revised Preamble to our Constitution, stating that ECCT convenes as a missionary society to participate ever more fully in God s mission of restoration and reconciliation, to employ faithfully the resources with which we are continually blessed, to promote solutions to challenges shared across our State, our Nation and the world, to foster our lives as disciples and apostles of, and to enrich our common worship. (see Appendix IV) TREC-CT recognizes that if these recommendations are ratified by Convention, this will influence the shaping of the common culture of ECCT. We joyfully acknowledge that the proposed changes build on the substantial cultural refinements that by God s good grace, are already afoot within ECCT. We present this report with a spirit of openness and a sense of adventure, inviting members across ECCT to try on this flexible evolving structure. It is designed to help us imagine a new way of being church and joining what God is already up to in our neighborhoods. As a provisional way of life, each of us is invited to trust that God is up to something in ECCT. We also hope that through our collective experimentation and subsequent gatherings to witness to what is happening among us, we may more readily adapt to our changing world, focusing our attention and efforts on God s creative work of restoration and reconciliation. In Jesus promise we find comfort and courage, acknowledging the indwelling of the Spirit as our counselor and teacher: the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything, and remind you of all that I have said to you. Peace I leave with you; my peace I give to you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled, and do not let them be afraid. (John 14:25-27) Conclusion With this report, the TREC-CT Taskforce has completed its work as charged by ECCT s 230th Annual Convention. If passed by this 231st Convention, the work of transitioning into this provisional period shall commence. That endeavor will require convening a Transition Team whose members are equipped with the knowledge and skills to assist ECCT as we evolve into this new structure. 6

7 EPISCOPAL CHURCH IN IN CCONNECTICUT PARTICIPATING IN GOD S MISSION PROPOSED STRUCTURE ADOPTED NOVEMBER 14, 2015 ANNUAL CONVENTION Convention will continue as the main governing body of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut (ECCT), convening annually for collaborative decision-making. Convention will also serve as a primary forum for missional conversations, ongoing formation, and worship. In addition, election of leadership, ratification of appointments, and implementation of canonical changes will occur at Convention. MISSION COUNCIL The Mission Council will replace the Executive Council and Board of the Missionary Society, and will serve as ECCT s governing body between Conventions. The Mission Council will include Bishops and Officers of ECCT and 21 elected members with voice and vote: 9 members elected by Convention from Ministry Networks 12 members selected from within the six s (two each, one lay and one clergy) Bishops, Treasurer, Chancellor, Secretary of Convention, Secretary of the Diocese Executive Council will continue to serve until the new Mission Council is convened up to but not beyond July 1, Of note, Council members are selected from within s and the Ministry Networks, from both a particular constituency (e.g., a s or Ministry Network) yet as members (i.e., not representatives) applying vigor and attention to the common life and resources we share as members of the missionary society. Terms of service: Members will serve for staggered three-year terms and may be re-elected for one additional three-year term Vacancies: Vacancies will be filled by nomination of the bishops, with ratification by Council 7

8 MINISTRY NETWORKS: Though not formally recognized as such, Ministry Networks enjoy a long history across ECCT. There are dozens of groups made up of impassioned Episcopalians from all areas of life within our membership. These groups vary in size, scope of ministry, years of service, and include those: Borne out of our historic structures (e.g., Camp Washington, ECW, UTO, Liturgy & Music, D&B, etc.) Hybrids serving a particular ministry within ECCT (e.g., Social Justice & Advocacy, Spanish Speaking Ministry, Chaplaincies, Women s Global Mission Network, etc.) Rising as affinities and organically organized (e.g., Daughters of the King, Sts. Francis and Hilda s Houses, ConnECA, Food Pantries, Gardening, Human Trafficking, Anti-Violence, etc. Ministry Networks are: 1. A collective of folks who are impassioned about serving God s mission through a particular ministry 2. In regular collaboration, gathering as a whole to pray, share stories, evaluate common structures and support, discuss best practices, shared challenges, etc. 3. Comprised of like-minded individuals or ministry groups situated in/or shared among more than one Episcopal parish or worshiping community, and are encouraged to include ecumenical, inter-faith, and crosscommunity organizations Ministry Network Mission Council Members: Any Episcopalian who is a member of ECCT and participates in a Ministry Network may serve as a member of Mission Council. The bishops will nominate a varied and robust slate of candidates that shall stand for election at Convention. Convention will elect Mission Council members from the slate provided. REGIONS: ECCT will be divided into six s to establish efficient and sustainable spaces for collaboration, sharing of best practices, formation, and fellowship that is focused on serving God s mission. Proposed s and the parishes and worshiping communities named therein are provisional. Parishes and worshiping communities may select another than the one assigned if it better fits its culture and practice. Each will establish its own leadership structure to engage in God s Mission, to work with its Missionary, and to allocate resources for its programs. (see Appendix VII) ECCT s regions span the diversity of our state across culture, class, race, gender, identity, economic status and each particular boasts its own character of place and common life. Initially, the s working with the bishops, Canon for Mission Collaboration, and Transition Team will assemble, select Council members, develop a Missionary job description, and recruit, and nominate its choice for its Missionary. Mission Council Members: Two Mission Council members from each one clergy person (deacon or priest) and one layperson will be raised up locally, in a process to be determined by each. 8

9 REGION MISSIONARIES: Each will identify a candidate, clergy or lay, to serve as its Missionary. Missionaries are funded through the Convention budget, with resources provided by the Missionary Society. Funding for a half-time position is available and each Missionary is accountable to the and Council, under the supervision of the bishops or their designee. The Missionary will assist the in substantive conversation, planning, and support to participate more fully in what God is up to within the. Responsibilities include helping the to: Catalyze with imagination, innovation, and ideas, unite parishes, worshiping communities, and ministry networks within and across s to serve God s mission Convene as parishes, worshiping communities and ministry networks Connect with others across ministries and geographies Expand Capabilities of all Episcopalians as disciples (formed) and apostles (sent) to participate in God s mission The Missionary will be an Episcopalian in good standing with the proven talent and skills to inspire collaboration and build community. S/he will serve as a primary resource in helping the and Ministry Networks imagine, experiment, test, and refine ways to engage God s mission within the and across ECCT. Assembling worshiping communities (Episcopal, inter-denominational, inter-faith) in collaborative efforts, expanding alliances within civic and social agencies, supporting networks of ministries, and encouraging communities of practice are a few examples of the Missionary s work. Should a prefer and have the capacity to fund additional hours and benefits and increase the position from half-time to three-quarter or full-time (through grant writing, fundraising, etc.), it may do so. TRANSITION PLAN If Convention accepts these proposals, a transition process will begin immediately with the following contours: 1. December 2015 Name/convene Transition Team. 2. January - July 2016 Executive Council governs ECCT: The faithful participation of current Executive Council representatives is valued and will continue until Ministry Networks and s have gathered and discerned their Council members, which Executive Council shall confirm. The Executive Council will retain responsibility for the ongoing oversight and evaluation of the processes required for full transition to our new governance structure. 3. Convene current and potential Ministry Networks, explore collaboration, nominate Mission Council slate The Transition Team, Bishops, and Canon for Mission Collaboration will convene a gathering of existing and potential Ministry Networks to acknowledge active Ministry Networks, imagine new collaborative adventures, and explore missional initiatives. The Bishops and Canons will consider candidates from existing and organizing Ministry Networks and 9

10 nominate an initial slate to stand for service as members of the Mission Council, which the Executive Council shall confirm. Convene s, elect Council members, and hire Missionaries: s will gather with bishops, the Canon for Mission Collaboration, and the Transition Team to prayerfully and diligently determine how to conduct governance, raise up (select, elect) Council members, explore desires for participating in God s mission with particular geographies and ministries, begin to develop a Missionary job description, define recruitment and hiring parameters, outline Mutual Ministry Review processes and goal-setting metrics, etc. 3. July - Convention 2016 s recruit and hire Missionaries and Ministry Networks gather and collaborate. Across ECCT, God s people, parishes, and worshiping communities live into our provisional governance structure. Together, we celebrate risk and failure, engage each other with courage and hope, and strive to creatively explore how to more faithfully participate in God s mission. At Convention 2016, we embrace storytelling and holy listening, sharing the stories of our common life, celebrating how we ve served God s mission, reviewing what s working and needs tweaking, contributing our best practices, worshiping together, resetting and recharging so we re ready to reengage! CONCLUSION We believe that by adopting the proposed changes presented in this report, ECCT will be well served as we take this important first step into what will likely be an ongoing process of adaptive and cultural change. We trust that by actively exploring how to employ and share our common resources, expertise, and story within God s story, we shall be more responsive in this rapidly changing world that we share with all creation. The Task Force for Reimagining The Episcopal Church (TREC) was charged by the 77th General Convention to prepare recommendations to the 78th General Convention for reimagining and restructuring the church (Resolution C095). Insofar as the work of TREC-CT mirrors that of TREC, it is worth noting here how this provisional proposal reflecting the particular history, culture, and context of ECCT mirrors TREC s final report to the 78th General Convention. The report invites The Episcopal Church to imagine a new Church responding to the needs expressed in this new century. Their recommendations are intended to help everyone in the Church participate more fully in God s mission. Imagine All of our congregations are so spiritually vibrant and missionfocused that they consistently inspire their parishioners in new ways and appeal to new generations and populations; Our Church changes shape as existing parishes merge and reinvent themselves to meet local needs while new parishes emerge in new places and new ways; 10

11 Episcopal clergy and lay people are renowned for their leadership, including transforming the Church, building communities, and organizing them for [God s] mission Episcopalians collaborate more easily across the Church, forming communities of interest and working together to share knowledge, resources and ideas The Church-wide structure serves mainly to enable and magnify local mission through a collaborative network while it lends its prophetic voice. (Reference VI) The Spirit is urging us. Together, we can more faithfully share our common resources and vocation as Jesus disciples and apostles, formed and sent into our neighborhoods to serve God s mission more faithfully in the 21st century. O God of unchangeable power and eternal light: Look favorably on your whole Church, that wonderful and sacred mystery; by the effectual working of your providence, carry out in tranquility the plan of salvation; let the whole world see and know that things which were cast down are being raised up, and things which had grown old are being made new, and that all things are being brought to their perfection by him through whom all things were made, your Son Jesus our Lord; who lives and reigns with you, in the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God, for ever and ever. Amen. Good Friday Liturgy, Book of Common Prayer, Page 280 i Biblical quotations from The New Oxford Annotated Bible with Apocrypha, 4th ed., (New York: Oxford University Press, 1977). ii Gore, Al, Top 10 Trends for the World in (World Economic Forum, weforum.org, November 7, 2014). iii Crouch, Andy, 10 Most Significant Cultural Trends of the Last Decade. (Q Ideas, qideas.org, December 2010). iv Lipka, Michael, 5 Key Findings About the Changing U.S. Religious Landscape. (Pew Research, pewre-search.org, May 12, 2015). v Heifetz, Ronald A. and Laurie, Donald L., The Work of Leadership, Harvard Business Review (December 2001). vi The Taskforce for Reimagining the Episcopal Church, Engaging God s Mission in the 21st Century, General Convention of the Episcopal Church in the United States, New York: NY, 2015, pg

12 APPENDIX I: The Reimagining of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut (TREC-CT): Re-forming Our Identity and Structures for the 21st Century The Rt. Rev. Ian T. Douglas, Ph.D. I. INTRODUCTION From the way we communicate to the places in which we find community, the world is being reinvented.the advent of the digital world has radically altered how relationships are formed. Yet, our need to relate one to another and have a sense of belonging is as strong as ever. The Church is not immune from changes in the ways by which we relate one to another. That the Church faces profound questions of identity in the 21st century should not be surprising or overly feared. The ways by which individual Episcopalians and parishes have shared in our common life as the Episcopal Diocese of Connecticut in the 20th century were rather clear-cut and understood. In recent times, particularly with the decline of endom, the efficacy of the received ways of relating one to another and sharing our common life as ians has diminished. Inherited structures in the Episcopal Church in Connecticut, such as Deaneries, the Executive Council, and Diocesan Convention, have begun to be questioned. Yet God in Jesus through the power of the Holy Spirit is always making things new. We are thus invited to ask: What is God up to at this time in our common life? How does God want us to relate one to another so that we can better serve God s mission together as The Episcopal Church in Connecticut and beyond? This paper seeks to outline some of the features that have bound our Church together from colonial times to the present day. It discusses various ways by which we have been related one to another as Episcopalians in our past. It then offers a few questions to facilitate discussion and discernment. Our goal is to offer this brief primer on our identity and structures so that we can reimagine together who we are and how best we can serve the mission of God in Connecticut and beyond in the 21st century. II. CONNECTICUT S COLONIAL ANGLICANISM The Puritan (Congregational) Church was the established religion in Connecticut and the official state church from 1662 until Congregationalism was the order of the day governing much of Connecticut s cultural and institutional life. Connecticut Yankees primarily understood themselves as belonging to the local meetinghouse, and the village was the locus of identity and economic life. Adherents of the Church of England were subject to their Puritan village leaders and were influenced by the realities of congregationalism. At the same time, as catholic ians, Anglicans (later Episcopalians) also believed that their religious identity was always something greater than the local parish. The fact that Connecticut was one of the earliest, if not the first, foreign mission field of the Anglican Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts (SPG) reminded colonial Anglicans that they were connected to and part of the Church catholic. Priests in the colonial Anglican Church in Connecticut were often SPG missionaries and all, while usually born in the colonies, had to go to London for ordination since there was no bishop in the Americas. The close connection with London through the SPG and affiliation with the Church of England meant that most Anglicans were Tory identified. The Revolutionary War thus caused a crisis for Connecticut Anglicans and their numerous colonial parishes. What were they to do? 12

13 APPENDIX I III. THE BIRTH OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH IN CONNECTICUT Bereft Anglicans in Connecticut had to adapt or disappear, given the radically changed circumstances after the Revolution. They embraced the new cultural context of democratic America and elected Samuel Seabury as their bishop in This electoral process for bishops was a profound structural innovation by Connecticut Episcopalians. Seabury called the first clerical Convocation in Middletown in This marked the first meeting of what would become, with the addition of laymen in 1792, our Diocesan Convention. A council of advice for the bishop was formed in 1790, when the Convocation of clergy in Connecticut established a College of Doctors of Divinity. At the 1796 Diocesan Convention, five of these senior clerics were named, thus laying the foundation for our current Standing Committee. In the early 19th century, Connecticut Episcopalians organized their own missionary society to extend and support local churches and beyond. In 1813, the Diocesan Convention formed the Missionary Society of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the State of Connecticut as a voluntary society to support missionaries and new parishes. The General Convention of 1821 would follow suit and organize the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America (DFMS). IV. 19TH CENTURY GROWTH The 19th century saw profound expansion of The Episcopal Church amid an increasingly industrialized United States. In 1835, the constitution of the DFMS embraced a far-reaching and innovative change that made every Episcopalian, by virtue of baptism and not voluntary subscription, a member of the Missionary Society of the national church, which thus grew nationwide. Similarly, the Constitution of the Missionary Society in Connecticut was changed in 1866 to accept all its baptized as members of its Missionary Society. In 1863, our diocese secured a State charter for Donations and Bequests for Church Purposes (D&B) to help manage the growing financial assets of the diocese and parishes. In 1877, the work of the Missionary Society was divided into six archdeaconries that spanned across the state, including Fairfield, New Haven, Litchfield, Hartford, Middlesex, and New London regions. V. THE BIG CHURCH OF THE 20th CENTURY At the turn of the 20th century, The Episcopal Church sought unity as a national church. The General Convention of 1919 passed sweeping canonical reforms that created the National Council to oversee the church s united work in missions, ian education, and social service. The National Council was to be led by the Presiding Bishop (who would now be elected) and a newly developed funding program that collected regular support from the church s dioceses. The DFMS became subsumed under the National Council as the holding company of the church s assets. The Episcopal Church finally had a nationally centralized program to match its national church ideal. With this new corporate model, The Episcopal Church grew in the United States and in its overseas missionary districts. 13

14 APPENDIX I Not surprisingly, Connecticut followed suit. In 1921, our Diocesan Convention created a large Executive Council with a Secretary to oversee a variety of departments. The Missionary Society, like the DFMS, became the holding company for the diocesan assets. The diocese was managed by the bishops with a sizable professional staff. The many programs of the diocese were administered through fourteen deaneries that replaced the six archdeaconries. This centralized structure required a corporate center, and in 1952, Miss Mable Johnson gave her stately home in Hartford to become Diocesan House. In the latter 20th century, the corporate-styled church would give way to a more regulatory church which witnessed a profound increase in such things as the number of Committees, Commissions, Agencies and Boards (CCAB) of the national church. This was the beginning of a turning tide. VI. 21ST CENTURY CHANGES Change is happening apace in the Episcopal Church in Connecticut. In 2009, the diocese elected its first ever bishop from outside of Connecticut in 225 years. Beginning in 2013, the four major boards (Executive Council, Standing Committee, D&B, and Commission on Ministry) have met together quarterly. The 2013 Diocesan Convention updated the Canons of the Diocese - the first significant revision in over three decades. The diocesan staff has been greatly reduced in size and changed in shape. A new operations and finance team seeks to better serve our 168 parishes. Diocesan headquarters have been moved from Hartford to Meriden. Above all, Episcopalians in Connecticut are embracing the concept of a missional church, prioritizing our common service in God s mission of restoration and reconciliation in Jesus through the power of the Holy Spirit. NB: Details of the organization of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut are taken from: Burr, Nelson Roland, The Story of the Diocese of Connecticut: A New Branch of the Vine. (Hartford: The Church Missions Publishing Company, 1962) p. 170 ff. 14

15 APPENDIX II: 230 th Annual Convention Resolution #9: Charge to TREC-CT Submitters: The Committee on Faith and Order Bishop Laura Ahrens The Rev. William Loring Mr. William Hart Mr. Bradford S. Babbitt Mr. Norman Holland Ms. Shirley Wick The Rev. Matthew Calkins Ms. Danielle Gaherty Mr. Bates Lyons The Rev. Molly James The Rev. Kris Lewis Rev. Adam Yates Resolved, that the 230th Convention of the Episcopal Diocese of Connecticut charges the Committee on Faith and Order to form an ad hoc committee consisting of its members and members of the Church designated by the Standing Committee and the Bishops to be known as the Taskforce for Reimagining the Episcopal Church in Connecticut ( TREC-CT ); And Be It Further Resolved, that this Convention charges TREC-CT to develop recommended revisions to the organization and structure of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut consistent with the discernment of this Convention and the guidance of the Bishops, Executive Council, and Standing Committee, to engage the Church in Connecticut in discussion of the recommendations in advance of the 231st Convention of the Episcopal Diocese of Connecticut, and to present its recommendations to that Convention. Explanation: The central focus of the second day of the 230th Convention of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut is discernment over how we can more effectively catalyze, connect, convene, and build capability as the Body of in Connecticut in support of God s Mission. Our discernment process will culminate, in Session III, in the presentation of a report that synopsizes our table discussions of these questions. That report will form the charge to a committee formed to reimagine the organization and structure of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut, TREC-CT, which will present its recommendations at the 231st Convention in How does this resolution further God s ministry of restoration and reconciliation with all creation? Reimagining how we live together as the Body of in Connecticut is intended to help us more effectively pursue God s Mission. Statement of Requirements To Implement: The members of TREC-CT will serve without financial remuneration. It is expected that the work of the committee will impose negligible incremental expense to the Church in Connecticut. 15

16 APPENDIX III: TREC-CT Taskforce Members BISHOPS Ian Douglas Laura Ahrens STANDING COMMITTEE Bates Lyons Diana Rogers EXECUTIVE COUNCIL Ron Kolanowski Shirley Wick FAITH & ORDER Brad Babbitt Kris Lewis ECCT CANONS Karin Hamilton Tim Hodapp Audrey Scanlan CATHEDRAL DISCERNMENT TASK FORCE Tim Cole Harlon Dalton CAMP WASHINGTON BOARD Suzy Burke Bart Geissinger COMMISSION ON MINISTRY Nancy Horn Molly James AT LARGE Danielle Gaherty Hilary Greer Miguelina Howell Rowena Kemp Amy Welin TREC-CT STAFF Sandra Cosman 16

17 APPENDIX IV: ECCT Historic References Concordat Between the Scottish Bishops and Dr. Samuel Seabury 1784, Aberdeen (from the Preamble) the Bishops of the Church in Scotland, whose names are underwritten, having had full and free Conference with Bishop Seabury, after his Consecration and Advancement as aforesaid, agreed with him on the following Articles, which are to serve as a Concordate, or Bond of Union, between the Catholic remainder of the ancient Church of Scotland, and the now rising Church in the State of Connecticut...the Bishops of the Church in Scotland and Bishop Seabury agree in declaring that the Episcopal Church in Connecticut is to be in full communion with the Episcopal Church in Scotland... The Missionary Society of the Diocese of Connecticut: Charge for Its Use of Assets 1818 (from the Introduction) The objects of said society are hereby enlarged so that it may establish, carry on, and support any missions and parishes within the Diocese of Connecticut...and do any and all acts which may be necessary to conduct and extend the general missionary work of said church in said diocese. Proposed Preamble and Article I of the Constitution of the Diocese of Connecticut (as resolved for the 231st Annual Convention of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut) Preamble The Episcopal Diocese of Connecticut, historically and again today known as the Episcopal Church in Connecticut, consists of every member of every Episcopal Parish and Worshiping Community in our State. Together, we convene as a missionary society to participate ever more fully in God s mission of restoration and reconciliation, to employ faithfully the resources with which we are continually blessed, to promote solutions to challenges shared across our State, our Nation and the world, to foster our lives as disciples and apostles of, and to enrich our common worship. Article I. Diocese The Diocese of Connecticut, coextensive with the boundaries of the State of Connecticut, as a constituent part of the body known as the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, accedes to, recognizes and adopts the Constitution of that Church, and acknowledges its authority accordingly. The Diocese of Connecticut may be known by its historical name, the Episcopal Church in Connecticut. 17

18 APPENDIX V: Graphic Illustration OVERVIEW OF PROPOSED STRUCTURE Intended to support our participation in God s mission, affirm our identity as Episcopalians, and respond to the changing world in ways that are inclusive and adaptable. EPISCOPAL CHURCH IN CONNECTICUT (ECCT) PARTICIPATING IN GOD S MISSION A. continues as the main governing body of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut (ECCT), convening annually B. makes decisions collaboratively about our common life and our common resources C. serves as a primary forum for missional conversations, ongoing formation, and worship A. facilitates collaboration within a B. helps catalyze, connect, convene, and build capability to engage God's mission in meaningful ways C. supports connections within and across ECCT D. accountable to s and to Mission Council ANNUAL CONVENTION REGION MISSIONARIES MINISTRY NETWORKS REGIONS MISSION COUNCIL A. a collective of individuals who are engaged in God's mission through a particular ministry B. who are collaborating C. from more than one parish or worshiping community within ECCT, and may additionally extend to ecumenical, interfaith, and service sector organizations D. may vary in size, scope of ministry, years of service, origins REPLACES EXECUTIVE COUNCIL A. includes: 1. bishops and officers of ECCT (Treasurer, Chancellor, Secretary of Convention, and Secretary of the Diocese) 2. nine members from Ministry Networks, elected by Annual Convention 3. twelve members from s, one clergy and one lay selected by each B. serves as ECCT's governing body between Annual Conventions ensuring that the decisions of the Convention are implemented and makes additional decisions as needed REPLACES 14 DEANERIES A. parsed by the natural boundaries of the state B. selects one clergy and one lay person to serve on the Mission Council C. recruits and is served by a Missionary 18

19 APPENDIX VI: Overview of Proposed Changes, Terminology, and FAQs OVERVIEW OF PROPOSED CHANGES Ministry Networks: Recognize Ministry Networks as significant current and emerging organizational structures and include in governance structure. s: Reorganize parishes from 14 Deaneries into six s, to provide deeper possibilities for collaboration. Missionaries: Raise up in each a Missionary to work with them on the four Cs (from the charge to TREC-CT): catalyze, connect, convene, and build capability. Mission Council: Replace the Executive Council and Board of the Missionary Society that draws members from Deaneries with a Mission Council that draws members from s and Ministry Networks. TERMINOLOGY Q: What is a Ministry Network? R: A Ministry Network is defined as more than one individual or groups wh are (1) engaged in God s mission; (2) collaborating; (3) from more than one parish or worshiping community within the Episcopal Church in Connecticut (and may additionally extend to ecumenical, interfaith, and service sector organizations). Q: What is a? R: A is the common witness of a geographic area in the Episcopal Church in Connecticut and is served by a Missionary. There are six proposed s and each will establish its own leadership structure. Q: What is a Missionary? R: A Missionary is a lay or ordained person whose job is to help the region to catalyze, connect, convene, and build capability. Each will define a job description for its Missionary, specific to its particul context and culture. Q: What is the Annual Convention? R: Annual Convention is a yearly gathering of all the clergy and two elected lay delegates from every parish, together with ECCT officers, to make decision about the common life and resources of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut, and to serve as a forum for missional conversation, ongoing formation, and worship. Q: What is the Mission Council? R: The Mission Council is the body charged with ensuring that the decisions of the Annual Convention are implemented and also makes decisions as needed between Conventions. Its membership includes two members from each and nine members from the body of Ministry Networks, along with the Bishops and officers of ECCT 19

20 APPENDIX VI MINISTRY NETWORKS Q: How does one create a new Ministry Network or join an existing one? R: If you currently collaborate with individuals or groups from more than one Episcopal parish or worshiping community, and are engaged in a ministry serving God s mission, you self-identify as a Ministry Network. If you aren t collaborating with others in your ministry and are engaged in God s mission, learn who else is doing similar work and have a conversation about creating a Ministry Network. Q: How do I find a Ministry Network? R: Ways to find existing Ministry Networks include word of mouth, online searches, conversation with parish or region leadership, your Missionary, the Canon for Mission Collaboration, the Episcopal Asset Map, the ECCT website, among others. Q: Who convenes Ministry Networks? For what purpose? R: Ministry Networks designate their own convener and set their own expectations and organization. They may convene to share best practices, offer support, plan a public forum or workshop, invite a guest speaker to build their knowledge, nominate someone to be a candidate for the Mission Council, develop a coordinated public response to a study just released or an event taking place that is related to their ministry, and more. Q: What kind of funding will be available to Ministry Networks? R: Ministry Networks are not automatically funded from the Budget of Convention. All Ministry Networks can submit requests for funding, as many currently do. Some Ministry Networks will identify and apply for non-ecct funding that may be available specific to the ministry Q: Can there be space for an Historical Deanery category of Ministry Network? R: As long as it meets the three criteria, certainly. Q: Which Ministry Networks will have members on the Mission Council? R: Once a year Ministry Networks will have the opportunity to let the Bishops know that they would like to be considered for nomination to the Mission Council. The Bishops in consultation with others will propose a slate of at least double the number of open spaces and Convention members will elect three to serve on the Mission Council for three-year terms. Q: Who is eligible to run for election to the Mission Council from a particular Ministry Network? R: All Mission Council members must be members of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut (Canon I Section (A)) and must be prepared to serve the whole of ECCT rather than solely represent their specific Ministry Network (o ). Q: What are the terms of service (term length, maximum number of consecutive terms, interlude between subsequent service) for Ministry Network and region members on the Mission Council? R: A term is three years, with no more than two successive terms. 20

21 APPENDIX VI Q: What is the mechanism for establishing an initial class of Mission Council members from Ministry Networks, then selecting members in year two and beyond? R: The Bishops, in consultation with Ministry Networks and the Canon for Mission Collaboration will nominate an initial slate to serve through 2016, and the Executive Council, at its June 2016 meeting, will vote on that slate. The Bishops, in consultation with Ministry Networks and the Canon for Mission Collaboration, will nominate up to 18 members to stand for election at the Annual Convention in The Convention will elect nine, three of whom will serve one year; three for two years; and three for three years. Their terms of service begin in January Starting in 2017, Convention will elect three Mission Council members annually. Q: Do Ministry Network members represent their own Ministry Network s interests? R: No, not specifically. All members of the Mission Council are to serve th whole of ECCT. REGIONS Q: Are s defined by geography? Population density? How are the boundaries established? R: s are primarily defined by geography. Q: Can our parish change its? R: Yes. The Mission Council will determine a process. Q: How are s different from Deaneries? R: Deaneries served an administrative function in moving information and directives from the bishop to the parishes. Deanery Councils were directed by canon to foster cooperation among the parishes and develop programs deemed desirable. Their organization was spelled out, and they were to elect one lay and one clergy person to serve on the Executive Council and Board of the Missionary Society. In a minority of deaneries there was great collaboration among its parishes around a specific ministry, and each of those are invited to continue that work as a Ministry Network. s, while still geographically-based, recognize and support multiple local ministries and by their larger size, allow for a deeper level of collaboration among more possible partners. They are served by a Missionary whose work is to help them catalyze, connect, convene, and build capability. They select one lay and one clergy person to serve on the Mission Council alongside members from Ministry Networks. Q: Who convenes the s? For what purpose? How often? R: Each will identify its own leadership, organization, and method for convening. s will convene at least once each year and, in the manner determined by each, will raise up/select members for the Mission Council. s may convene more often for learning, celebration, etc., as it chooses. Q: When and how will we get our s started? R: A Transition Team will be established after the 2015 Convention. From January through June of 2016, members of the Transition Team, together with 21

22 APPENDIX VI the Bishops and the Canon for Mission Collaboration, will meet with parishes in each to support and facilitate their work to establish basic organization and governance structure, select one lay and one ordained member to serve on the Mission Council, and develop a job description for their Missionary. Q: How will members from the s for the Mission Council be selected? Who is eligible to run for election from a? R: The method of nominating and selecting a clergy member and a lay member to serve on the Mission Council will be determined by each. All Mission Council members must be members of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut (Canon I Section (A)) and must be prepared to serve the whole of ECCT rather than as a representative of a specific (or Ministry Network). Q: What are the terms of service (term length, maximum number of consecutive terms, interlude between subsequent service)? R: A full term is three years and members may serve no more than two successive terms. Q: What is the mechanism for establishing an initial class of Mission Board members from s, then selecting members in year two and beyond? R: s will select an initial class to serve through The Mission Council, at its September 2016 meeting, will identify two s to select one lay and one ordained person to serve for one year starting January 2017; two s to select members to serve for two years, and two s to select members to serve for three years. Terms of service for all those begin January REGION MISSIONARIES Q: Will we have paid Missionaries? R: Yes. The Budget of Convention, with resources provided by the Missionary Society, will provide a level of funding as approved by Convention. Parishes and worshiping communities may choose to provide more funding. Q: Are they full-time or part-time? R: The Budget of Convention will initially fund a part-time position. Parishes and worshiping communities in a may choose to provide or identify additional funds to increase it beyond that. Q: What is their job description? R: A Missionary s job is to help the people, parishes, worshiping communities, Ministry Networks, and other Episcopal entities in a to catalyze, connect, convene, and build capability. Each will define a job description for its Missionary specific to its particular context and culture. Q: What is the mechanism for selecting them? R: s will raise up Missionaries, and their appointment will be confirmed by the Mission Council and the Standing Committee. 22

23 APPENDIX VI Q: Who are they accountable to? R: Practically speaking, Missionaries are each accountable to their and to the Mission Council, which includes the Bishops. They are also accountable to all of ECCT because of their funding from the Budget of Convention through a line item under the Mission Council. Missionaries will be supervised by the Bishops and/or their designees. Q: How will we facilitate cooperation between Missionaries? R: The Bishops and the Canon for Mission Collaboration will regularly gather the Missionaries for conversation and sharing. OVERALL IMPLEMENTATION/SUPPORT Q: Why are we doing this? R: We re doing this because the structures and organization we had in place aren t matching what we re doing and what we need to do to more fully participate in God s mission in the 21st century. Some structures weren t functioning well, and others weren t being recognized and incorporated. Our existing structures assumed a level of centralized, top-down programming that didn t match the local, context-driven ministry taking place. Q: What resolutions will be presented to Convention? R: The resolutions call for changes to our constitution and canons to enable the proposals to be implemented. Q: What is the timeframe for this work? R: A Transition Team will be established after the 2015 Convention. From January through June of 2016, members of the Transition Team, together with the Bishops and the Canon for Mission Collaboration, will meet with parishes in each to support and facilitate their work to establish basic organization and governance structure, select one lay and one ordained member to serve on the Mission Council in 2016, and develop a job description for their Missionary. Also in the first half of 2016, the Bishops, in consultation with the Ministry Networks and others will create an initial slate of nine Ministry Network members to serve on the Mission Council in 2016, and the Executive Council will vote on this slate at their June 2016 meeting. Deaneries, and the Executive Council, will continue to meet through June The first meeting of the Mission Council will take place in September Among its tasks will be to choose which will elect members for which Mission Council class. Two s will elect for one year; two for two years, and three for three years. Each will then select its lay and ordained member to serve on the Mission Council starting January Q: What happens to me as a deanery delegate or officer? R: You continue to serve in that role through June

24 APPENDIX VI Q: What happens to deanery bank accounts, endowments, etc.? R: Leaders of the parishes involved will make recommendations regarding these, and the Bishops and Canon for Mission Finance and Operations will be available as needed for consultation. Q: How does this help our parish, which is struggling to survive? R: This has the potential of helping your parish find new partners for collaboration, which could affect your options, perspective, needs, and ministries. Q: How does this help me, as a lay member of ECCT? R: This recognizes and supports existing and emerging Ministry Networks, which have extensive lay participation, as integral to the life of ECCT and its participation in God s mission, and it invites them into ECCT s governance structure. Also, Missionaries will work with laity and clergy in parishes and worshiping communities, as well as in Ministry Networks, in each to help them catalyze, connect, convene, and build capability. Q: Is any other diocese in The Episcopal Church doing this? R: Yes. The Episcopal Church itself has been looking at its own organization and governing structures for many years and voted in favor of some of the proposed changes at its General Convention in June Other denominations, including the United Methodist Church, ELCA, UCC, and the Presbyterian Church USA are also looking at changes in their structure and governance. The Episcopal Church in Minnesota is an example of a diocese that adopted structural changes to better facilitate their participation in God s mission for the challenges and opportunities we face in the 21st century. Q: What happens to the Cathedral? R: A Cathedral Discernment Task Force helped it to identify and claim its place in the life of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut. These proposals don t speak specifically about the Cathedral. Q: What happens to Camp Washington? R: The Camp and Conference Center has a new board and new executive director and like the Cathedral, they have been actively working to identify and claim their place in the life of the Episcopal Church in Connecticut. These proposals don t speak specifically about Camp Washington. 24

25 APPENDIX VII: Maps and Parish Listing After reviewing historical documents for precedence and using a variety of data to parse ECCT s (e.g., geography, number of parishes or worshiping communities, Episcopal population, etc.), the following proposal is set forth. Again, a parish or worshiping community may self-select another if it is better suited for any reason, and inform Executive Council of its decision. S h e r m a n S a lliis b u r y S h a r o n K e n t N e w M iill f o r d C a n a a n C o r n w a llll Northwest W a r r e n N o r t h C a n a a n W a s h iin g t o n R o x b u r y G o s h e n L iit c h f iie lld N o r f o llk M o r r iis B e t h lle h e m W o o d b u r y T o r r iin g t o n C o lle b r o o k W iin c h e s t e r W a t e r t o w n H a r w iin t o n T h o m a s t o n M iid d lle b u r y H a r t lla n d B a r k h a m s t e d N e w H a r t f o r d P lly m o u t h W a t e r b u r y C a n t o n B u r llii n g t o n W o llc o t t B r iis t o ll G r a n b y S u f f iie lld North Central A v o n S o u t h iin g t o n S iim s b u r y F a r m iin g t o n P lla iin v iilllle B llo o m f iie lld B e r lliin E a s t G r a n b y W e s t H a r t f o r d W iin d s o r L o c k s W iin d s o r H a r t f o r d N e w W e t h e r s f iie lld B r iit a iin N e w iin g t o n R o c k y H iillll C r o m w e llll M iid d lle t o w n E n f iie lld E a s t W iin d s o r S o u t h W iin d s o r E a s t H a r t f o r d G lla s t o n b u r y P o r t lla n d M a n c h e s tte r S o m e r s E llllii n g t o n E a s t H a m p tto n V e r n o n B o llt o n M a r llb o r o u g h T o lllla n d H e b r o n S t a f f o r d C o v e n t r y A n d o v e r C o llu m b iia C o llc h e s t e r W iillll iin g t o n Northeast L e b a n o n U n iio n A s h f o r d M a n s f iie lld W iin d h a m B o z r a h C h a p lliin F r a n k lliin N o r w iic h W o o d s t o c k E a s t f o r d H a m p t o n S c o t lla n d S p r a g u e P o m f r e t B r o o k lly n C a n t e r b u r y L iis b o n T h o m p s o n P lla iin f iie lld G r iis w o lld P u t n a m K iillll iin g lly S t e r lliin g V o llu n t o w n N e w F a iir f iie lld D a n b u r y R iid g e f iie lld B r iid g e w a t e r B r o o k f iie lld B e t h e ll R e d d iin g Southwest N e w t o w n E a s t o n S o u t h b u r y M o n r o e T r u m b u llll O x f o r d S h e llt o n N a u g a t u c k S e y m o u r D e r b y B e a c o n F a lllls O r a n g e M iillf o r d P r o s p e c t C h e s h iir e South Central B e t h a n y W o o d b r iid g e A n s o n iia N e w H a v e n W e s t H a v e n H a m d e n N o r t h H a v e n M e r iid e n W a llllii n g f o r d E a s t H a v e n N o r t h B r a n f o r d B r a n f o r d M iid d lle f iie lld D u r h a m G u iillf o r d M a d iis o n H a d d a m C lliin t o n C h e s t e r K iillll iin g w o r t h D e e p R iiv e r W e s ttb r o o k E a s t H a d d a m E s s e x Southeast L y m e O lld S a y b r o o k S a lle m O lld L y m e E a s t L y m e M o n t v iilllle W a t e r f o r d N e w L o n d o n P r e s t o n L e d y a r d G r o t o n N o r t h S t o n iin g t o n S t o n iin g t o n N e w C a n a a n W iillt o n W e s t o n W e s t p o r t F a iir f iie lld B r iid g e p o r t S t r a t f o r d N o r w a llk S t a m f o r d G r e e n w iic h D a r iie n Proposed s November

26 APPENDIX VII S u f f i e l d North Central E n f i e l d Holy Enfield S o m e r s S t a f f o r d Grace Stafford Springs U n i o n W o o d s t o c k T h o m p s o n W i n d s o r L o c k s W i n d s o r R o c k y H i l l East Windsor E a s t W i n d s o r S o u t h W i n d s o r East Hartford E a s t H a r t f o r d Grace Broad Brook St. Peter's South Windsor M a n c h e s t e r All Saints East Hartford St. James' Glastonbury G l a s t o n b u r y St. Luke's South Glastonbury E l l i n g t o n V e r n o n St. Mary's Manchester Vernon B o l t o n H e b r o n To l l a n d St. George's Bolton C o v e n t r y A n d o v e r St. Peter's Hebron C o l u m b i a W i l l i n g t o n A s h f o r d Northeast St. Mark's Chapel Storrs M a n s f i e l d St. Paul's Willimantic C h a p l i n W i n d h a m St. Paul's Windham E a s t f o r d S c o t l a n d H a m p t o n Pomfret P o m f r e t C a n t e r b u r y B r o o k l y n Brooklyn P u t n a m St. Philip's Putnam P l a i n f i e l d St. Paul's Plainfield K i l l i n g l y St. Alban's Danielson S t e r l i n g M a r l b o r o u g h L e b a n o n S p r a g u e C r o m w e l l P o r t l a n d Southeast F r a n k l i n L i s b o n G r i s w o l d V o l u n t o w n Proposed Northeast November 2015 PARISHES BY TOWN Bolton Broad Brook Brooklyn Danielson East Hartford East Hartford East Windsor Enfield Glastonbury Hebron Manchester St. Ge orge s Grace St. Alban s St. John s All Saints Holy St. James St. Peter St. Mary s Plainfield Pomfret Putnam South Glastonbury South Windsor Stafford Springs Storrs Vernon Willimantic Windham Center St. Paul s St. Philip s St. Luke s St. Peter s Grace St. Mark s St. John s St. Paul s St. Paul s 26

27 APPENDIX VII S a l i s b u r y Salisbury Lime Rock N o r t h C a n a a n C a n a a n Transfiguration Norfolk N o r f o l k C o l e b r o o k St. James' Winsted H a r t l a n d B a r k h a m s t e d G r a n b y E a s t G r a n b y S u f f i e l d Sharon S h a r o n Chapel of All Saints North Cornwall C o r n w a l l Northwest G o s h e n W i n c h e s t e r To r r i n g t o n Torrington Pine Meadow N e w H a r t f o r d C a n t o n S i m s b u r y W i n d s o r B l o o m f i e l d K e n t D a n b u r y N e w M i l f o r d S h e r m a n St. Mark's Bridgewater N e w F a i r f i e l d St. Andrew's Kent St. Andrew's Marble Dale W a r r e n B r o o k f i e l d St. Paul's Brookfield Milton W a s h i n g t o n Washington New Milford R o x b u r y Roxbury B r i d g e w a t e r St. Paul's Bantam L i t c h f i e l d St. Michael's Litchfield M o r r i s Camp Washington Morris B e t h l e h e m Bethlehem W o o d b u r y St. Paul's Woodbury S o u t h b u r y Epiphany Southbury W a t e r t o w n M i d d l e b u r y O x f o r d H a r w i n t o n St. Peter's Thomaston T h o m a s t o n Watertown All Saints Oakville St. George's Middlebury P l y m o u t h W a t e r b u r y Waterbury N a u g a t u c k B e a c o n F a l l s B u r l i n g t o n W o l c o t t B e t h a n y B r i s t o l All Saints Wolcott Waterbury P r o s p e c t A v o n North Central C h e s h i r e South Central F a r m i n g t o n S o u t h i n g t o n B e r l i n M e r i d e n W a l l i n g f o r d W e s t H a r t f o r d N e w B r i t a i n N e w i n g t o n M i d d l e f i e l d D u r h a m Proposed Northwest November 2015 PARISHES BY TOWN Bantam Bethleham Bridgewater Brookfield Kent Lime Rock Litchfield Marble Dale Middlebury Milton Morris New Milford Norfolk North Cornwall St. Paul s St. Mark s St. Paul s St. Andrew s St. Michael s St. Andrew s St. George s Camp Washington St. John s Transfiguration All Saints Oakville Pine Meadow Roxbury Salisbury Sharon Southbury Thomaston Torrington Washington Waterbury Waterbury Watertown Winsted Wolcott Woodbury All Saints St. John s Epiphany St. Peter s/ St. John s St. John s St. James Al l Saints St. Paul s 27

28 APPENDIX VII N o r f o l k C o l e b r o o k H a r t l a n d G r a n b y S u f f i e l d North Central E n f i e l d S o m e r s S t a f f o r d G o s h e n W i n c h e s t e r Northwest T o r r i n g t o n B a r k h a m s t e d N e w H a r t f o r d C a n t o n Collinsville St. Alban's Simsbury Tariffville S i m s b u r y E a s t G r a n b y W i n d s o r L o c k s Old St. Andrew's Bloomfield W i n d s o r Grace Windsor B l o o m f i e l d St. Stephen's Bloomfield E a s t W i n d s o r S o u t h W i n d s o r E l l i n g t o n V e r n o n Northeast T o l l a n d W i l l i n g t o n L i t c h f i e l d M o r r i s B e t h l e h e m W o o d b u r y W a t e r t o w n M i d d l e b u r y H a r w i n t o n T h o m a s t o n P l y m o u t h W a t e r b u r y N a u g a t u c k B u r l i n g t o n W o l c o t t Bristol B r i s t o l P r o s p e c t C h e s h i r e A v o n F a r m i n g t o n St. James' Farmington P l a i n v i l l e Our Saviour Plainville S o u t h i n g t o n St. Paul's Southington St. Andrew's Meriden All Saints Meriden W e s t H a r t f o r d St. James's West Hartford Grace Newington N e w B r i t a i n St. Mark's New Britain B e r l i n St. Gabriel's East Berlin The Commons Meriden M e r i d e n H a r t f o r d N e w i n g t o n R o c k y H i l l Wethersfield Holy Middletown St. Andrew the Apostle Rocky Hill C r o m w e l l M i d d l e f i e l d E a s t H a r t f o r d W e t h e r s f i e l d Portland M i d d l e t o w n G l a s t o n b u r y P o r t l a n d M a n c h e s t e r St. James' E a s t H a m p t o n B o l t o n C o v e n t r y A n d o v e r H e b r o n E a s t H a d d a m St. Stephen's C o l u m b i a L e b a n o n St. Monica's St. Martin's W e s t H a r t f o r d H a r t f o r d Church Cathedral St. Paul's Mission for the Deaf C o l c h e s t e r West Hartford Good Grace Shepherd College Chapel S a l e m Proposed North Central November 2015 PARISHES BY TOWN Bloomfield Bloomfield Bristol Collinsville East Berlin Farmington Hartford Hartford Hartford Hartford Hartford Hartford Hartford Meriden Meriden St. Stephen s Old St. Andrew s St. John s St. Gabriel s St. James Grace St. Monica s Good Shepherd St. Martin s Church Cathedral College Chapel The Commons All Saints Meriden Middletown New Britain Newington Plainville Portland Rocky Hill Simsbury Southington Tariffville West Hartford West Hartford West Hartford Wethersfield Windsor St. Andrew s Holy St. Mark s Grace Our Saviour St. Andrew s St. Alban s St. Paul s St. Paul s Mission for the Deaf St. John s St. James s Grace 28

29 APPENDIX VII s t p o r t R o x b u r y N e w t o w n Southwest E a s t o n F a i r f i e l d Northwest S o u t h b u r y M o n r o e T r u m b u l l M i d d l e b u r y O x f o r d Quaker Farms S h e l t o n S t r a t f o r d B r i d g e p o r t S e y m o u r Ansonia Immanuel St. James' Derby N a u g a t u c k St. Michael's Naugatuck B e a c o n F a l l s Seymour A n s o n i a D e r b y St. Andrew's Devon Good Shepherd Orange M i l f o r d O r a n g e St. Peter's Milford P r o s p e c t B e t h a n y Bethany W o o d b r i d g e N e w H a v e n W e s t H a v e n St. Peter's Cheshire South Central Grace & St. Peter's Hamden Holy Spirit West Haven C h e s h i r e H a m d e n North Haven & The Epiphany East Haven W a l l i n g f o r d N o r t h H a v e n E a s t H a v e n M e r i d e n St. John the Evangelist Yalesville St. Paul's Wallingford B r a n f o r d St. Andrew's Northford N o r t h B r a n f o r d Branford M i d d l e f i e l d Zion North Branford Epiphany Durham D u r h a m North Guilford G u i l f o r d Guilford M i d d l e t o w n M a d i s o n H a d d a m Southeast K i l l i n g w o r t h C l i n t o n St. Paul's & St. James' E a s t H a m p t o n C h e s t e r St. Thomas' St. Andrew's N e w H a v e n St. Luke's The Episcopal Church at Yale D e e p R i v e r St. James' Fair Haven Proposed South Central November 2015 PARISHES BY TOWN Ansonia Bethany Branford Cheshire Derby Devon Durham East Haven Fair Haven Guilford Hamden Milford Nauguatuck New Haven New Haven New Haven St. Peter s Immanuel St. James St. Andrew s Epiphany and the Epiphany St. James Grace and St. Peter s St. Peter s St. Michael s St. John s St. Luke s New Haven New Haven New Haven New Haven New Haven North Branford North Guilford North Haven Northford Orange Oxford Quaker Farms Seymour Wallingford West Haven Yalesville St. Thomas St. Paul-St. James Episcopal Church at Yale St. Andrew s Zion St. John s St. John s St. Andrew s Good Shepherd St. Peter s St. Paul s Holy Spirit St. John s 29

30 APPENDIX VII A A nn dd oo vv ee rr St. James' Wethesrfield Glastonbury St. Paul's Willimantic Windham Northeast G G ll aa ss tt oo nn bb uu rr yy Plainfield Scotland Sterling Canterbury Hebron St. Gabriel's East Berlin Marlborough LL ee bb aa nn oo nn S S pp rr aa gg uu ee Franklin LL ii ss bb oo nn P P oo rr tt ll aa nn dd E E aa ss tt H H aa m m pp tt oo nn Grace Yantic Colchester Bozrah Norwich Southeast Middlefield East Haddam Haddam Durham m M M aa dd ii ss oo nn North S S tt oo nn ii nn gg tt oo nn St. David's Gales Ferry Ledyard W W aa tt ee rr ff oo rr dd LL yy m m ee Deep River Guilford Westbrook Clinton Holy Advent Clinton St. Paul's Westbrook G G rr oo tt oo nn St. Mark's Mystic Calvary Stonington St. James' New London O O ll dd LL yy m m ee O O ll dd Saybrook Niantic St. Ann's Old Lyme Grace Old Saybrook S S tt oo nn ii nn gg tt oo nn New LL oo nn dd oo nn East LL yy m m ee Essex E E ss ss ee xx All Saints Ivoryton St. Andrew's Madison St. James' Poquetanuck Montville Chester Killingworth P P rr ee ss tt oo nn S S aa ll ee m m St. Stephen's East Haddam St. James' Higganum Emmanuel Killingworth V V oo ll uu nn tt oo w w nn Norwich Middle Hadam Middletown Griswold St. Mary's Chapel Fenwick Proposed Southeast November 2015 PARISHES BY TOWN Clinton Holy Advent Mystic St. Mark s East Haddam St. Stephen s New London St. James Essex St. John s Niantic St. John s Fenwick St. Mary s Chapel Norwich Gales Ferry St. David s Old Lyme St. Ann s Higganum St. James Old Saybrook Grace Ivoryton All Saints Poquetanuck St. James Killingworth Emmanuel Stonington Calvary Madison St. Andrew s Westbrook St. Paul s Middle Haddam Yantic Grace 30

31 APPENDIX VII B r o o k f i e l d S o u t h b u r y O x f o r d B e a c o n F a l l s B e t h a n y D a n b u r y St. James' Danbury R i d g e f i e l d Southwest St. Stephen's Ridgefield W i l t o n R e d d i n g B e t h e l St. Thomas' Bethel W e s t o n Emmanuel Weston Newtown Redding N e w t o w n 's Easton E a s t o n Sandy Hook M o n r o e Tashua St. Peter's Monroe Grace Trumbull T r u m b u l l S e y m o u r Good S h e l t o n Shepherd Shelton St. Paul's Huntington Trumbull S t r a t f o r d A n s o n i a D e r b y M i l f o r d South Central W o o d b r i d g e O r a n g e N e w H a v e n W e s t H a v e n H a m d e n N E St. Barnabas' Greenwich G r e e n w i c h Greenwich St. Paul's Riverside St. Francis' Stamford the Healer Stamford S t a m f o r d St. Andrew's Stamford N e w C a n a a n St. Mark's New Canaan St. Paul's Darien D a r i e n St. Luke's Darien Iglesia Betania l'eglise de l'epiphanie Stamford St. Saviour's Old Greenwich St. Matthew's Wilton N o r w a l k St. Paul's Norwalk East Norwalk St. Timothy's Fairfield & Holy Westport W e s t p o r t F a i r f i e l d St. Michael's Fairfield Southport St. Paul's Fairfield B r i d g e p o r t Stratford B r i d g e p o r t Calvary St. George's St. Luke's & St. Paul's St. Mark's Proposed Southwest November 2015 PARISHES BY TOWN Bethel Bridgeport Bridgeport Bridgeport Bridgeport Danbury Darien Darien Easton Fairfield Fairfield Fairfield Greenwich St. Thomas Calvary-St. George s St. Mark s St. Luke s/st. Paul s St. John s St. James St. Paul s St. Luke s s St. Michael s St. Timothy s St. Paul s St. Barnabas Greenwich Huntington St. Paul s Monroe St. Peter s New Canaan St. Mark s Newtown East Norwalk Norwalk St. Paul s Old Greenwich St. Saviour s Redding Ridgefield St. Stephen s Riverside St. Paul s Sandy Hook St. John s Shelton Good Shepherd Stamford the Healer Stamford Stamford Stamford Stamford Stamford Stratford Tashua Trumbull Trumbull Weston Westport Wilton Southport Eglise De L Epiphanie Iglesia Betania St. Andrew s St. Francis St. John s Grace Emmanuel and Holy St. Matthew s 31