Priest-in-charge?

Tigger45

Romans 12:2…be transformed…
Supporter
Aug 24, 2012
20,713
13,149
E. Eden
✟1,264,086.00
Country
United States
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Constitution
Hello all.

Upon visiting our local Episcopal cathedral today I noticed the presiding celebrant was listed as ‘Priest-in-Charge’ in their service bulletin.

Not being very familiar with Anglican ministerial terminology I researched it myself but would appreciate any feedback for clarity.

Is this a title signifying an interim position appointed by the bishop rather than the congregation itself?

When and why is this title used within Anglicanism?

Thanks in advance;
 

Philip_B

Bread is Blessed & Broken Wine is Blessed & Poured
Supporter
Jul 12, 2016
5,382
5,501
72
Swansea, NSW, Australia
Visit site
✟602,036.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
I don't suppose anyone can speak for all of Anglicanism these days, but I will have a stab.

Rector: traditional title (the word means ruler) generally signified the one who was licensed by the Bishop and held the Parish - cure of souls - as the living. For many of us this was the term we most encountered growing up. Generally the Rector had tenure, which mean that if the Bishop wanted him out and he didn't want to go it could become quite difficult. Many Bishops then started to require a priest to promise to resign on any request of the Bishop.

Curate: was normally an assistant (Priest or Deacon) who was licensed by the Bishop to assist the Rector. Often these days they may be referred to a the Assistant Priest, or some such similar.

Priest in Charge: Sometimes the Bishop took the approach of licensing someone as the Priest in Charge rather than the Rector, so the could avoid the problem. Beyond Tenure, the rights duties and responsibilities of a Priest in Charge are the same as a Rector.

There has been a trend in some of the Australian Dioceses to licence someone as Priest in Charge, and then after a year of so, assuming everything is tickety boo, then to issue the license as Rector. This is sometimes also done when the appointment is not expected to have any longevity, though may perhaps be longer than a perceived normal interregnum.

So, as far as any reality in terms of day to day ministry, a Priest in Charge is the same function a Rector, with a little nuance at the backend which has to do with managing the Diocese.

Vicar: of course is the other term that gets bandied about a bit, and refers to someone who vicariously exercises the duties and functions of the Rector. This may be because the Rector has other duties to perform perhaps elsewhere, or because the Bishop has retained the cure of souls and simply wants the job done without ceding tenure. In practical terms there is even less difference between a Vicar and a Priest in Charge, than there is between a Rector and a Priest in Charge.

Hope that helps - of course everything may be different in America!
 
  • Useful
Reactions: Tigger45
Upvote 0

Arcangl86

Newbie
Dec 29, 2013
11,072
7,400
✟343,063.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
The term isn't used consistently in the Episcopal Church, but it's normally used to describe somebody who is appointed by the Bishop on an interim basis. It's an unusual situation that is often used when there is seen by the Bishop a need for major work within the congregation before the calling of a rector.
 
  • Useful
Reactions: Tigger45
Upvote 0

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,110
19,005
43
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,473,140.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
I am licensed as priest-in-charge of my parish. In my case, it's intended to be for three years; if after that long, the parish, the bishop and I all want me to stay, I would be issued a new license as incumbent which would (I understand) make it harder for me to be moved on if I wanted to stay.

Colloquially I'm the "vicar" whether priest-in-charge or incumbent, though.
 
Upvote 0

Naomi4Christ

not a nutter
Supporter
Sep 15, 2005
27,958
1,264
✟269,195.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Private
Here, a priest-in-charge is appointed by a bishop to take temporary charge of a beneface and is licensed for certain duties, ie preaching, sacraments and pastoral care. A vicar/rector is basically licensed for life (or at least to a normal retirement age) and has more autonomy over the parish, and is less protected from secular employment law.

In a cathedral, the Dean is the head honcho, and the clergy are known as canons (a title they keep for life).
 
  • Useful
Reactions: Tigger45
Upvote 0

Deegie

Priest of the Church
Supporter
Jul 22, 2011
283
167
✟401,365.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
As to the "why" of Priests-in-Charge...it can often be hard for parishes to effectively find the right fit for a new rector. I mean, resumes and interviews can only go so far. So in some places, the norm has been to hire a Priest-in-Charge for a 1-2 year term in order to judge whether they will make a good rector. If the fit isn't good, then the priest moves on and they start over. If everyone agrees the fit is good, then it can be made permanent. This is as opposed to an interim rector, who is usually there for 6-12 months and generally is not eligible to be considered for the rector opening.
 
  • Useful
Reactions: Tigger45
Upvote 0

Arcangl86

Newbie
Dec 29, 2013
11,072
7,400
✟343,063.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
It's also worth mentioning that all these various titles; vicar, rector, curate, priest-in-charge, dean, etc...are all administrative titles, not theological ones. All priests have the same sacramental authority and exercise that authority at the direction of their bishop.
 
Upvote 0

Arcangl86

Newbie
Dec 29, 2013
11,072
7,400
✟343,063.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
I feel a bit uncomfortable at the concept of “try before you buy”. The vacancy system is robust, and you get the vicar you pray for.
The vacancy system might be robust i England, but not necessarily that case elsewhere.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,110
19,005
43
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,473,140.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
It's also worth mentioning that all these various titles; vicar, rector, curate, priest-in-charge, dean, etc...are all administrative titles, not theological ones. All priests have the same sacramental authority and exercise that authority at the direction of their bishop.

Mostly. Some do have authority that others do not. (The example that comes to mind is that most of us do not have authority to perform exorcisms).

I feel a bit uncomfortable at the concept of “try before you buy”. The vacancy system is robust, and you get the vicar you pray for.

Where I am, the priest-in-charge thing is most often used for someone going into his or her first parish. So although I'm priest-in-charge now, if I'm here for ten years or so, my next appointment I might go straight to being an incumbent. I think there is a wisdom in recognising that despite our best efforts at training and formation, some people are not actually going to be great vicars, and having a system that lets that be handled relatively painlessly (on all sides).
 
Upvote 0

Arcangl86

Newbie
Dec 29, 2013
11,072
7,400
✟343,063.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
Mostly. Some do have authority that others do not. (The example that comes to mind is that most of us do not have authority to perform exorcisms).
That is a good example. But I think even that one falls under my explanation. At least in the US, any priest can do an exorcism if so directed by the Bishop. It's not like you have to be a super-priest to do so.
 
Upvote 0

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,110
19,005
43
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,473,140.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
That is a good example. But I think even that one falls under my explanation. At least in the US, any priest can do an exorcism if so directed by the Bishop. It's not like you have to be a super-priest to do so.

Agreed; you don't need some extra grace to be given, or something.

But since authority is about what the bishop permits you to do, not about what you have the ability to do, I thought it was worth pointing out that the bishop is not required to permit all of us exactly the same scope in ministry, and does not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MichaelEric
Upvote 0

Arcangl86

Newbie
Dec 29, 2013
11,072
7,400
✟343,063.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
Agreed; you don't need some extra grace to be given, or something.

But since authority is about what the bishop permits you to do, not about what you have the ability to do, I thought it was worth pointing out that the bishop is not required to permit all of us exactly the same scope in ministry, and does not.
That is an excellent distinction. Thank you for that.
 
  • Friendly
Reactions: Paidiske
Upvote 0

PloverWing

Episcopalian
May 5, 2012
4,338
5,024
New Jersey
✟332,494.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
some people are not actually going to be great vicars
While we're talking about titles, I've wondered about the term "vicar" as used outside the U.S. In the (American) Episcopal Church, the difference between a "vicar" and a "rector" is the financial well-being of the congregation being served. A congregation that is too small to be financially self-supporting, and that needs financial assistance from the diocese, is a "mission" and is served by a "vicar". A congregation that is financially self-supporting is a "parish" and is served by a "rector". (I learned these nuances of terminology about 20 years ago, when our congregation moved from being a mission to being a parish.) Is this how the terminology is used in the UK and Australia, or are the words used differently there?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,110
19,005
43
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,473,140.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
I think in the UK, historically, the difference was between someone who had a right to the tithes of the parish and someone who lived on a set stipend. These days that doesn't pertain any more.

In Australia it seems to just be diocesan habit. In Melbourne, there are no rectors but those of us in charge are all "vicar," in most other dioceses they all seem to be "rector."

We do, I think, have the distinction that a parish which can't pay a priest full-time will only have one appointed as priest-in-charge, rather than incumbent, so I guess that sort of functions the same way?
 
Upvote 0

Arcangl86

Newbie
Dec 29, 2013
11,072
7,400
✟343,063.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Green
While we're talking about titles, I've wondered about the term "vicar" as used outside the U.S. In the (American) Episcopal Church, the difference between a "vicar" and a "rector" is the financial well-being of the congregation being served. A congregation that is too small to be financially self-supporting, and that needs financial assistance from the diocese, is a "mission" and is served by a "vicar". A congregation that is financially self-supporting is a "parish" and is served by a "rector". (I learned these nuances of terminology about 20 years ago, when our congregation moved from being a mission to being a parish.) Is this how the terminology is used in the UK and Australia, or are the words used differently there?
What confused the hell out of me is that Lutherans use it in a completely different way. In American Lutheranism at least it means a pastoral intern.
 
Upvote 0

Naomi4Christ

not a nutter
Supporter
Sep 15, 2005
27,958
1,264
✟269,195.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Private
Mostly. Some do have authority that others do not. (The example that comes to mind is that most of us do not have authority to perform exorcisms).



Where I am, the priest-in-charge thing is most often used for someone going into his or her first parish. So although I'm priest-in-charge now, if I'm here for ten years or so, my next appointment I might go straight to being an incumbent. I think there is a wisdom in recognising that despite our best efforts at training and formation, some people are not actually going to be great vicars, and having a system that lets that be handled relatively painlessly (on all sides).

It’s not painless when children have to move schools, and spouses gave up their jobs, etc.

10 years is a long curacy, with your family’s life on hold.

The system in my diocese works really well. A three year curacy will usually end with the person becoming a team rector elsewhere. Only an experienced vicar would become the incumbent of a larger church, in reality. The level of scrutiny from the bishop/archdeacon, patron, rural dean and parish reps is high.
 
Upvote 0

Naomi4Christ

not a nutter
Supporter
Sep 15, 2005
27,958
1,264
✟269,195.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Private
While we're talking about titles, I've wondered about the term "vicar" as used outside the U.S. In the (American) Episcopal Church, the difference between a "vicar" and a "rector" is the financial well-being of the congregation being served. A congregation that is too small to be financially self-supporting, and that needs financial assistance from the diocese, is a "mission" and is served by a "vicar". A congregation that is financially self-supporting is a "parish" and is served by a "rector". (I learned these nuances of terminology about 20 years ago, when our congregation moved from being a mission to being a parish.) Is this how the terminology is used in the UK and Australia, or are the words used differently there?

Historically, a rector received tithes from his parishioners, whereas a vicar received tithes via the landowner. Nowadays, the only way to tell the difference is whether they live in a rectory or vicarage.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Paidiske

Clara bonam audax
Supporter
Apr 25, 2016
34,110
19,005
43
Albury, Australia
Visit site
✟1,473,140.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
It’s not painless when children have to move schools, and spouses gave up their jobs, etc.

10 years is a long curacy, with your family’s life on hold.

The system in my diocese works really well. A three year curacy will usually end with the person becoming a team rector elsewhere. Only an experienced vicar would become the incumbent of a larger church, in reality. The level of scrutiny from the bishop/archdeacon, patron, rural dean and parish reps is high.

I'm confused... who's talking about a ten year curacy?

The question of the impact on your ministry on your family is real, and something I think most of us wrestle with, but I don't see that as an argument against having (in effect) a probation period. The fact is that until you're in a parish, you don't really know what it's going to be like, and they don't really know what you're going to be like. (Heck, I have one colleague who discovered in his first month in a parish that they'd lied about being able to pay him a full stipend!) What looked good to all parties on paper might not work in practice. Having a system which makes that easier to acknowledge, and remedy, can be a really good thing.

I don't know whether I'd say the system in my diocese works "really well," as I think that it is struggling to adapt to a changing society and changing church. But I have no real issue on this point.
 
Upvote 0