THE season of annual parochial church meetings (APCMs) is a chance to draw attention to what this newspaper has described as “a remarkably dedicated lay army” (Features, 15 March 2024). As we reported, however, this “army” is dwindling. In Truro diocese, for example, in 2024, 87 of the 212 parishes had one churchwarden, and 12 had none — a situation far from unique. The same article quoted a diocesan secretary in a mainly rural diocese as saying: “Anecdotally, I’d suggest 50 to 60 per cent of our parishes are struggling to fill PCC posts. It simply is getting harder . . . [and] there has been a general decline in the pool of available volunteers in general in the last few years.” In such a climate, it is strange that the numerous rules and regulations governing lay-officer posts make life more, not less, difficult for lay office-holders, and stipulate that there should be regular changes of personnel.

The reforms introduced by the 2001 Churchwardens Measure, for example, laid down that a churchwarden was not to serve six or more years without a break (although an APCM with enough nerve could vote a year in advance for the rule not to apply). But it sends a message that longevity of service is not welcome, which poses a problem for churches with declining electoral rolls, who are far from inundated with lay people who have the time or inclination to take on this vital post. Since Covid, parishes have increasingly found themselves in such a predicament, even taking into account modest growth in attendance during the past few years.

Similarly, it is not clear to us that numerous people are standing for election to PCCs as they were in the past, when “election” on the agenda meant just that — more candidates than seats. This calls into question some of the present requirements, such as limiting to three years, which presents a headache for smaller congregations, in particular. It also makes little sense, given that PCC members are technically charity trustees. Such a time limit does not apply to other charities, where longer periods of service provide continuity and stability; so it could well be time to reconsider this requirement for PCCs.

We would suggest that the rules and regulations be reviewed as soon as is practicably possible; and a review group’s membership should be well represented by members of the laity, and especially those drawn from parishes that might be described as “ordinary” or “struggling” rather than from larger and prospering eclectic congregations in university cities. Such smaller parishes are, after all, the norm — and they are those that rely most heavily on lay officers to enable the Church’s ministry to survive, let alone to flourish.