A Look at Directories
Diocesan Press Service. April 7, 1965 [XXXI-11]
Ralph Dean, Executive Officer, Anglican Communion
With the Anglican Congress of 1963 now nearly two years behind us, this might be a good time to look at the matter of Regional Directories. Just in case anyone does not know what they are a word of explanation may help. A Regional Directory is a systematic presentation of the needs of a particular region or province in terms mostly of men and money. Of course, in principle, there is nothing new about directories. Wherever a need has been expressed and help sought the principle has been in effect. The beginnings of it can even be seen in the New Testament, for more than once St. Paul expresses thanks on behalf of one of the local churches for help received from another. And certainly as long as there have been missionary societies the process of making needs known and having them met has been going on.
What is new about Regional Directories, is that, under the stimulus of MRI, such needs have been carefully categorized, and as carefully screened, by the local church before they are sent to a central agency for distribution to the whole Anglican Communion. No one imagines that the present scheme is perfect or beyond improvement, but it does at least represent a careful attempt to be responsible and to be aware of the need of long range planning and strategy.
There are at the moment nine categories in which the needs of the local churches are made known, and the very categories themselves show something of the thought that is given to the whole matter of response to MRI. The categories are as follows:
(1) Ordination and Post Ordination Training
(2) Training of the Laity
(3) Areas of Primary Evangelism
(4) New Resources for New Areas
(5) Development of Episcopal and Diocesan Ministry
(6) The Church in Education
(7) Hospitals and Medical Resources
(8) Literature
(9) Provincial and Inter-Provincial Development
It is, of course, always possible to include emergency needs which may not fit precisely into any one of the categories. The very categories reveal the thought and care that is being taken. They give a series of snapshots of the life and work of the Communion and an indication of its outreach.
Let me say three things about the resultant directories. First, it must be said that the mere inclusion of a project in a directory by no means guarantees that it will be met. We must avoid the ever present temptation of thinking that either MRI, or a directory inspired by it, possesses any kind of magic. We cannot airily say -- in the face of a known need -- "Let's make a project of it and put it in a directory" -- as though that will automatically produce response. Such a process makes a need known, but by itself it does no more. What happens then depends upon the prayer and thought and sense of Mutual Responsibility of the whole Church -- of the church in the local area where the need is, no less than in the other parts of the Communion. As Bishop Bayne once said: "Every project is an invitation to mutuality." It is, by itself, no more than that, and it does not by itself guarantee response.
Secondly, let us say a word about the present position. Since Toronto 1963, fourteen Regional Directories including revisions and supplements have been issued. They have come from the provinces of Africa, from India, Pakistan, Burma and Ceylon, from Latin America and the Archbishopric of Jerusalem, from the South Pacific and from South East Asia. Of course we can expect directories from the United Kingdom, the United States, from Canada, from Australia and New Zealand. The needs of such areas no doubt will be different in kind, but they will be nonetheless pressing for all that. They certainly will be even more obviously "invitations to mutuality". Within the total number of directories already issued there are about 750 projects. As I write, 22 projects off the current lists have been fully met and 57 partially so, though of course a large number of others are being considered, and in many cases help has been promised. But the figures give an indication that so far not a great deal has been accomplished. For obvious reasons of geography and the impact of the Congress, response has been more swift in some areas than others, but that there is much more to be done is obvious. What is particularly serious is that some projects are of such immediate urgency that if they are not met soon the opportunity will have passed.
Thirdly, what are we to say about those projects to which, so far, no response has been made? It is a sobering thought to realise that there are about 350 of them -- a little less than one half of the total. How long should the diocese concerned be left in the hope that it will eventually receive help for such projects? Must the time come when we must say that there is no likelihood of support for them ?
These are searching and painful questions. It should be enough to make us understand that we have much still to learn about Mutual Responsibility and Interdependence. And if such reflections force us to deeper self-examination then that is what MRI is really all about.