• Click here to review the parallel report on the 2009 Convention.
• Click here to review the parallel report on the 2003 Convention.
• Click here to review the parallel report on the 1997 Convention. 

  All are organized in the same way.

©1996, 1997, 1999 by Louie Crew. Freely reproduce, but only if you acknowledge your source and send any URL's or hard copy to Louie Crew, Box 30, Newark, NJ 07101

• Deputy lists
• General Convention 2003.
• General Convention 2000.
• General Convention 1997.
• How to Read this Document.
• Background.
• New Deputies.
• Rank.
• Gender.
• Age.
• Birthplace & Mobility.
• Marital History.
• Parental Status.
• Internet Access.
• Education.
• Seminaries Represented
• Lawyers & Chancellors
• Publications.
• Participation in Ecclesiastical Organizations.
• Deputy Parish Size.
• Special Constituencies.
• Deputy Parish Location.
• Prior votes on Bellwether LBG Issues.
• Deputation Chairs.
• Effects of Disproportional Representation
• Email addresses for bishops
• Provincial Patterns
• Deputy Neighborhoods
• Clergy ordination patterns
• Clergy Assignments
• Standing Commissions & Committees
• Legislative Committees.
• Sign my guest book.
• View my guest book.
• Acknowledgments

I  will treat in the same way any alternates still to be elected and any shifts in deputations due to death, moves, or other causes. Such changes typically occur right through General Convention itself, yet with 97% of the deputation on record for this report, percentages are not likely off  much on any one tally.

Most of the statistical analysis restricts itself to the data for the 100 domestic dioceses of the Episcopal Church. The full listing of deputies includes the eight others dioceses.

The report depends heavily on data provided officially in The Episcopal Clerical Directory  especially editions for 1996, 1998, and 1999, The Episcopal Lay Leadership Directory, and several recent editions of  the Episcopal Church Annual.  Almost never is information merely transferred from one of these sources, but rather, data from those sources is put into a data base from one or more other sources and then relational questions are asked.  Data from all official sources is only as good as the data provided to them, typically supplied by priests in charge in parochial reports or both others affected, such as entry forms for those in the Lay Leadership Directory.  I welcome corrections, but will not correct the official sources, lest I 'doctor' the data.

A suggestion about how to read this document

I hope that you will respond to some of this material in ways that I can post to the www with a link from here.

Background

During the interim, the Presiding Bishop and Executive Council provide oversight at the national level. One principal bishop oversees each of the 100 domestic dioceses of the Episcopal Church, with much choice left to each diocese in terms of its liturgical and theological preferences, including choice of candidates for ordination.

General Convention governs the church through Constitution and Canons, and it advises the church through resolutions.

The House of Deputies is composed of up to 4 deputies in the clergy order and up to 4 deputies in the lay order from each diocese, elected at diocesan conventions at least a year in advance of the General Convention, unless special permission is granted to recognize elections after these deadlines. Dioceses typically elect up to 4 alternates in each order as well, but only 4 persons in each order may serve during any one half-day session. (I have criticized the undemocratic nature of this 'county unit system' in my article "The Countdown to Indianapolis," The Witness Magazine, March 1994, parts of which are on the web as Quean Lutibelle's Book of Numbers)

To keep the data manageable and to reflect the practice that prevails the vast majority of the time, I have restricted my report to deputies and first alternates. Most other alternates have to pay their own way to convention, and few actually serve except for half a day, if that.

This report monitors and correlates many variables about House of Deputies.  I wrote the first version regarding the 1997 General Convention.  I have completely re-done the manuscript for the General Convention of 2000.

Return to Table of Contents
 
 

New Deputies, and deputies not returning.

See the list of 1997 deputies not returning in 2000.
 

Return to Table of Contents
 
 

Rank

In 2000, fifty-eight percent of the deputies and first alternates served  also in 1997.  Of those, 67% had an equal or  higher rank in 2000 than they had in 1997, with lay and clergy being about equal in this distribution.

In 1997, seventy percent of all returning deputies and first alternates either moved up or kept their previous rank. Sixteen percent of the lay deputies and first alternates had lower rank in 1994, and 30 percent of the clergy deputies or first alternates were lower alternates in 1994.

Thirty-five percent of the deputies and first alternates  in 2000 served  also in 1994.  Of those, 70% had an equal or higher rank in 2000 than they had in 1994.

The evidence does not support the claim that deputies of color tend to be more highly represented in 3rd, 4th, and 5th positions. In fact, clergy deputies of color are under-represented in c4 and c5 positions; lay deputies of color are under-represented in the l5 position.

Return to Table of Contents
 
 

Gender

In 2000 women  hold 54% f the L1 positions (vs. only 50.5% in 1997).  In 2000 women hold 20 percent of the C1 positions (down 2 percent from 1997)  Click here to see a list of all female deputies.  Click here to see the most current summary statistics of gender in the House, not restrict just to the domestic dioceses as is this report.

In 1997 females constituted only 36 percent of the House; in 2000, 39 percent. See the graph of women's percent of the House of Deputies since they first served in 1970,  (50 years after women's suffrage in the U.S.A.), and have been eligible to serve as priests only since 1976, but women continue to gain a larger share of the membership, as they have done steadily since their enfranchisement.

In the 1996 The Clerical Directory, females were only 13.8% of those listed.. By 1999 females were 17.8% of 17,117 clergy listed in The Clerical Directory.   Click here to see their distribution diocese by diocese.

Thirty of the 108 dioceses have no female clergy deputies for General Convention 2000: Alabama, Albany, Arkansas, Central Florida, Central New York, Colombia, Dallas, Dominican Republic, Eastern Oregon, Easton, Eau Claire, Fond du Lac, Fort Worth, Haiti, Honduras, Mississippi, Navajoland Northwest Texas, Northwestern Pa, Quincy, San Joaquin South Carolina, Springfield, Tennessee, Texas, Virgin Islands, Virginia, West Tennessee, Western Louisiana, Western Massachusetts (Thanks to Marge Christie for telling me to notice these. -- L.)

Return to Table of Contents
 
 

Age

The average age of a deputy in 2000 is 55.1, of  deputies in 1997 was 53.9.  Those ages are computed for the age at opening day of each convention.

The median age of a deputy in 2000 is 54.5, of deputies in 1997 was  53.1 The average age for clergy in 2000 is 51.1, for lay deputies is 61.8, or 10.7 years older.   In 1997 the lay deputies averaged only  six years older than clergy.  Likely the difference is about the same this time; we simply have the ages of the older (returning) lay deputies more than we have them of the younger ones.

 
• In 2000, the average age of male clergy is 51.6, of female clergy is 51.0, six months younger.  Women clergy were younger in 1997 by 4.8 months.
• The oldest age known for any deputy in 2000 is 86; the youngest deputy is Nicholas Scott, 18, l2 from Albany, followed by Sarah Knoll, also 18 and only fourteen days older, l2 from Kansas, and then by Matt Holcombe, 19, l4 from West Virginia; Justin Chapman, 21, L2 from Minnesota; Sarah Harte, 22, L3 from Arizona; Louis Constant, 24, L5 from Massachusetts. Forty percent of all deputies are in their fifties.
• 62 is the average age of the 16,725 clergy in the 1998 Electronic Clerical Directory; 54.8  was the average age of the 13,580 clergy in the 1996 Electronic Clerical Directory.
• 54 was the average age of the 3,815 rectors in the 1998 Electronic Clerical Directory.  53.1 was the average age of the 4,002 rectors in the 1996 Electronic Clerical Directory
• Of the 16,811 clergy lists in the 1998 Electronic Clerical Directory, only 309 (1.8%) were under 35.  Of the 13,634 clergy listed in the 1996 Electronic Clerical Directory, only 2% were under 35. Some of the newest, youngest clergy are the ones least likely to have their data show up in these directories.

Return to Table of Contents
 
 

Place of Birth: Deputy Mobility

Gender differences appear minimal regarding clergy moves from their place of birth:

   Those who work in a state where they were not born:
 

   Those who work in a  province where not born:

          all clergy in 2000: 55% in 2000
 

Click here to see a map of the provinces.

Return to Table of Contents
 
 

Marital History

Twelve percent of the clergy deputies have never married, and only 4.4 percent of the lay deputies.

Those who report 'children' without reporting a marriage are usually currently divorced or widow(er)ed.   14.2 percent of the lay are in that category, but only 3.4 percent of the clergy.

Deputies married to clergy

5 percent of the lay deputies are married to clergy persons (cf. 5.5% in 1997); 2.8  percent of the clergy deputies are married to other clergy persons (cf. 1.7% in 1997).

Those "not married"

 Some deputies indicate that they have children but leave out date of marriage: these omissions are ambiguous -- possibly because the person is divorced, possibly because the person's spouse has died.... Very few divorced persons say so.(See  Phil Nicholson's strategy for interpreting divorce data on all listed in the Electronic Clerical Directory.)

"Single, but...."

Only 9.7% of the deputies have never married, compared with 12.8% of all ECUSA clergy.  Through private revelations from the deputies themselves I know 11 percent of those coded above as "not married"  are in fact in committed lesbigay unions, many of them of more than two decades duration, as are several others coded as heterosexually married but divorced.  Only since the 1997 General Convention has Church Publishing Incorporated, publisher of both clerical and lay directories, allowed clergy to indicate a life-partner of the same gender. With the 1998 Lay Leadership Directory it kept the  "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy for lay persons by abandoning marriage data for all persons listed.  This is but one small measure of the way that  the Church  treats monogamous and life-committed lesbigay relationships as the equivalent of   heterosexual promiscuity and anonymous sex.

Given  systemic stigma, undoubtedly other lesbigay deputies choose to closet their life commitments and thereby avoid other penalties, especially under bishops who refuse to license lesbigay clergy or affirm lay ministers.

"Re-Marriage"

Those proportions remain fairly close to those in 1997, when 9.7% of the clergy, 3.68% of the lay, 8.91% of the male, and 5.99% of the female deputies were involved in second marriages.

It is very difficult to learn who has and has not been divorced.  That is not information that persons like to share, especially in directories often used in preliminary screening of job candidates.  Only 3.7% of all deputies specify that they have been divorced.    Of those in second or third marriages, however, only 19% indicate that the first spouse was deceased.  If one counts as 'divorced' all the others in second marriages as having been divorced, and adds those who indicate that they have children but give no other marriage data, the divorce rate for the House in 2000 is 14.5%,   That is less than one percentage point different from the 15.1% overall divorce rate that  Phil Nicholson of DataPhile computed with a much more sophisticated statistical mechanism which he allowed me to report in my analysis of the 1997 House of Deputies.
 

Return to Table of Contents
 
 

Parental Status

In 2000, the average clergy family with children has 3.5 children (up from 2.35 in 1997).  In 2000, the average lay family has 4.3 children (up from  of 2.6 in 1997.   The largest families reported for 2000 are the families of three lay deputies, with 10, 9, and 8 children, followed by two more lay deputy families of 6 each.  In 1997 one clergy deputy had 12 children and the largest family reported by a lay deputy had 7 children.

In 2000  second marriages added  and average of 1.3 children, compared with the average of only .8 children added by second marriages in 1997.

Of 513 clerical deputies for GC, 69 (13.45%) are the children of priests.
16 (23%) of those 69 are female priests (24% of all clergy deputies are female).

The percent of all clergy who are children of clergy is much lower. Of 16,811 clergy in the Clerical Directory, 2,880 (17%) are females.

5.3% of the male clergy are the children of priests
2.1% of the female clergy are the children of priests.

I have been able to find only two clergy who are the children of female clergy:

The Rev. Victor Hanford Kazanjian, Jr., is the son of Rev Rosanna (Case) Kazanjian.

1 The Rev. Timothy John Vellom is the son of Rev Anne (Polhemus) Vellom.

There are likely others, but these are the only clergy children of female clergy whom I can find. I was not able to find clergy who are daughters of female clergy. The way that directories handle female names makes this kind of research impossible to do with great accuracy.
 
 

Return to Table of Contents
 
 

Internet Access

On December 10, 1999, 69.8% of the deputies had email addresses in the mailer for the House. (Several others have email addresses but asked out of the mailer. Check my most current statistics.

69.8% is up more than 50% from the 19% for whom I had email addresses in 1998.

Of the deputies whose ages I know (68.4%), younger deputies are almost 12% more likely to have email than are older deputies. 81% of the deputies younger than 54.85 have email, but only 69.5% of those younger than that have email.

Of the deputies whose ages I know, only 51.8% are 54.85 or younger.

Return to Table of Contents
 
 

Education

Compare these figures with those for all ECUSA clergy. Of 16,811 persons listed in the 1998 Episcopal Clerical Directory, the following have "terminal degrees":

7.0%    ThD
5.7%    PhD
4.1%    D.Min

See fuller analysis in my 1998 report of all Episcopal Clergy
 

See totals of degrees granted to deputies by all institutions in alphabetical order and in order of the number of degrees conferred.

Seventeen institutions conferred 32% of all the degrees reported by deputies to the Episcopal Clerical Directory and to the Lay Leadership Directory.  Witness deputy portions for these 17:

.

Ivy League Graduates

We have information regarding degrees for 71 percent of the deputies; of these,  11.5% graduated from Ivy League universities (compared with only 8%  in 1997).  In 2000 the Ivy League experience is manifested about equally in the clergy (11.7%) and the lay (11.5%), whereas in 1997  lay deputies were three percent  more likely to have studied at an Ivy League university.   (10.7% for the lay vs. 7% for the clergy).  As in 1997, male deputies are more likely to have studied at an Ivy League university than are female deputies, but by a smaller margin in 2000 (12.8% to 8.6%) than in 1997 (9% to 4.3%).

Honor Societies: Phi Beta Kappa & Phi Kappa Phi

Of the deputies for whom we have graduation data, only 3.4% (vs. 4.26% in 1997) graduated as members of Phi Beta Kappa & Phi Kappa Phi ­­ two major honors societies in USA higher education. (See the full list of all ECUSA clergy in Phi Beta Kappa.)

Clergy deputies are almost twice as likely to be members of these honor societies than are clergy at large -- 2,9% of the clergy deputies in 2000  vs. 1.8% of the 16,811 persons listed in the 1998 Clerical Directory.

Female deputies (4.5% in 2000; 5.67%  in 1997) are more likely to be members of these two honor societies than are male deputies (2.9% in 2000; 3.81% in 1997).
 

Lawyers & Chancellors

11.8%  (vs. 13% in 1997) of all lay deputies are known to be lawyers, and that figure is likely much higher, since only 32.6% of the lay deputies provided education data to the 1998 Lay Leadership Directory, from which I identified many, but not all of the lawyers. 18.4% of all diocesan chancellors are in the House in 2000.

Six clergy deputies (1.26%) hold law degrees, as do ten bishops, four of whem, 3%, are still active and not retired.

Three percent of the persons in the Lay Leadership Directory list law degrees, as do 1.9 percent of the persons in the Clerical Directory. See the names of all ECUSA leaders who list law degrees.

Return to Table of Contents
 
 

Publications

Return to Table of Contents
 
 

Participation in Ecclesiastical Bodies

Of all deputies in 2000, 18% were currently serving on Standing Committee according to the 1999 Episcopal Church Annual.  Only 15% of the female deputies were serving on Standing Committees, compared with 21% of the male deputies serving on Standing Committee.    Clergy deputies (23%) are more likely also be serving on Standing Committees than are lay deputies (14%), although Standing Committee and the House of Deputies are divided equally among clergy and lay.

As noted earlier, 18.4% of all diocesan chancellors are in the House in 2000.

Of all persons serving on interim bodies during the triennium 1997-2000 (excluding bishops), 37.5% have been elected deputy to General Convention in 2000.   Fourteen percent of all deputies to General Convention in 2000 currently serve on interim bodies.   Only 10.4% of the clergy deputies serve on interim bodies, compared with 17% of the lay deputies; excluding bishops, 61% of  the members of interim bodies are lay, 39% are clergy.  Only 12% of the male deputies serve currently on interim bodies, compared with 17% of the female deputies; excluding bishops, males are 55% and females only 45% of those who currently serve on interim bodies.
 
 

Memberships
 
 

Most clergy do not take the time to fill out this information when they complete their entries for the directory, and some do not want to invade their own privacy by announcing memberships to the whole world.  Many are aware that the Clerical Directory is often used by persons on search committees and others who review their choices.

I have restricted my report of memberships to the clergy, for theirs are better documented.  The Lay Leadership Directory is much too sparse for any quantification of membership listings there to have much value.
 
 

Return to Table of Contents
 
 

Special Constituencies

If deputies would like for me to post specialized lists for of other groups, please identify those deputies (see the full list of deputies and mail to me at lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu
 

• African American deputies
• alumni lists.
• birthday calendars for bishops and deputies.
• for any one particular day (updated just after midnight)
• for the year
• bishops.
• bishops online.
• chancellors.
• deacons.
• deputies of color
• Episcopal Asian Ministries
• Episcopal Peace Fellowship.
• Episcopal Society for Ministry in Higher Education.
• females.
• Hispanic/Latino deputies.
• Ivy League graduates
• Phi Beta Kappa & Phi Kappa Phi Graduates.
• lawyers.
• medically trained deputies
• military, deputies with connections to
• Native Hawaiian & Native American deputies
• All deputies listed in diocesan order
• All deputies listed in alphabetical order

Deputy Parish Size

The average parish size for all deputies in 2000 is 531 (up from 466 in 1997).  The ECUSA overall available to report with 1997 was 213, though note that the parish sizes for everyone are derived from data that is two years old by the time published and available for these reports.
 

See additional documentation, with maps, in my cyber articles The Small Church (at
http://newark.rutgers.edu/~lcrew/smallchu.html) and All Episcopal Churches in the U.S.A. Reporting 1,000+ Members (at
http://rci.rutgers.edu/~lcrew/biggest.html).
 

Deputation's Past Votes on Bellwether LBG Issues

Resolved, the House of ________ concurring, That this 72nd General Convention direct the Standing Liturgical Commission  to develop, after critical study of pertinent rites already in use by faith communities, a rite or rites for the blessing of committed relationships between persons of the same sex, and to present such forms to the 73rd General Convention for     inclusion in the Book of Occasional Services.

While we do not know how any individual deputy voted, we do know how each order of each deputation voted.  We also know who is not returning from 1997.   Of those not returning, 207 (45.9%) were in orders that voted: for C002;.  159  (35.3%) were in orders that voted against  it, and  85 (18.85%) were in orders that were divided.

Compare that with the overall distribution of 1997 deputies' vote:  400 (48.1%) were in orders that voted  for C002;  287  (34.5%) were in orders that voted against it; and   140 (16.85%) were in orders that were divided.   By my reading, the distribution is too close to give any shift in the patterns for voting on this issue.   Four dioceses that voted uniformly against us in both orders in 1997 are no longer part of ECUSA but have joined Costa Rica in creating the new Church of the Province of Central America:  El Salvador, Guatemala, Nicaragua, and Panama.    If every diocese voted the same way that it did last time, C002 would therefore pass by a significant amount.  That is a huge if, however.  New items that could influence the vote include  the Lambeth Conference of 1998 and a new Presiding Bishop who has called for a fallow time regarding legislation. (See ENS's report on the March 1999 House of Bishops Meeting, http://ecusa.anglican.org/ens/99-015.html

For earlier responses to lesbigay issues, see "Changing the Church," my detailed history of lesbigay issues in the Episcopal Church, published on the eve of the 1997 General Convention.

Return to Table of Contents
 
 

Deputation Chairs

As in 1997, ten percent of the deputies are "single," but now only six  percent of the chairs are single, compared with eight percent in 1997..

Deputies of color constitute twelve percent  of  the House (up 3% from 1997);  yet only five  percent of the deputation chairs are deputies of color  (down from nine percent in 1997).

Systems of privilege resist change.

Return to Table of Contents
 
 

Effects of Disproportional Representation

(General Convention in 1997 had one deputy for every 1,972 communicants, based on statistics for 1994, as reported in the 1996 Episcopal Church Annual.)

Since dioceses differ radically in size, deputies are not evenly distributed throughout the church membership. Under this system of disproportional representation, the Diocese of Texas, the diocese with the most communicants, has only one deputy for every 7,717 communicants, yet North Dakota, our smallest diocese (excluding Navajoland), has one deputy for every 186  communicants.  That difference is even greater than in 1997, when the Diocese of Texas had only one deputy for every 6,885 communicants, and North Dakota only one deputy for every 211 communicants.

Those who support disproportional representation often justify their position by noting that members of the House of Deputies are not called "representatives" but "deputies." As such, deputies are charged to vote our own consciences, not the conscience of our dioceses. Those making this case argue that the purpose of disproportional voting is to assure the activity of the Holy Spirit at convention, and not to encumber deputies to bring minds limited only to what they learned back home.

Systemic Injustice

This position suggests that the Holy Spirit is to blame that General Convention took fifty years longer to enact women's suffrage than did the U.S. congress. Others feel that the Congress moved faster because it has proportional representation.

Seventy-two percent of all African American deputies were elected in the dioceses under represented (up from 67 percent in 1997). Forty-six percent of the African American deputies serve in the top 25 of dioceses most under-represented -- i.e., the dioceses that would stand to gain the most in representation if the system were made just. Clearly the system itself discriminates against African American representation in the House.

Disproportional representation did not affect gender portions in 2000.. Fifty-one percent of the women elected were elected in the dioceses underrepresented, and forty-nine percent were elected in the other half.  In 1997 women fared better in the dioceses with more than their proportional share of the house, with sixty-four percent of the female deputies were elected by those dioceses.

See my Charting ECUSA.

Return to Table of Contents
 

Provincial Patterns

* At time of being compiled, deputations are not known yet from Navajoland, North Dakota, or Kansas
 ** For this line only, percents are of totals for 1997 deputations; all others are of the deputations for 2000.

 Click here to see a map of the provinces.

Return to Table of Contents
 
 

Deputy Neighborhoods

Dr. King used to speak of 11 o'clock on Sunday morning as the most segregated hour in America. In many places, many of us have learned to worship together, but 7 o'clock on Saturday night remains as a big problem. Few have yet learned to share our lives with one another across racial barriers. (Deputy Marge Christie)

Of the seventeen states that have higher than national average of 12.1 percent African Americans, some have done a better job of electing African American deputies and first alternates to General Convention than have others:

(Note: Not all states have an equal number of deputies, nor are all dioceses within the boundaries of any one state. 'State' here means the state in which the deputy resides, not necessarily the state of the See.)

White Privilege:
 

Of the twelve states where dioceses elected African American deputies in percentages equal to or greater than African Americans appear in the state population, not one is in any way connected to the Confederacy. (In 1997 dioceses in only nine states elected equal to or greater than the proportion within their population.)

Yet of the 10 states with the -12 percent or lower under-proportionate presence of African Americans, 8 of them were a part of the Confederacy:

In 1997 of the 12 states with the -10 percent or lower under-proportionate presence of African Americans, 9 of them were a part of the Confederacy.

The systems of white privilege remain intact in ECUSA.

See the lists of deputies of color.

See my report on Black priests in ECUSA.
 

Return to Table of Contents
 
 

Clergy ordination patterns

Deputies who are priests averaged .85 of a year, or 309 days, between being made a deacon and being made a priest (up only 5 days from the average in 1997).

Male deputies moved from the diaconate to priesthood in an average of 9.7 months, a shorter  interval than the 11.5 months for females  and the 14.3 months for deputies of color:
 

Clergy Assignments

Only 13% of the deputies serve on the interim bodies (up 3% from 1997), known variously as commissions, committees, and boards.
 

• 91.4% were also serving in 1997
• 71.9% were also serving in 1994

16.6% of the lay deputies currently serve on interim bodies.
10.0% of the clergy deputies currently serve on interim bodies.

    Typically have of the members of interim bodies are ordained; the presence of bishops fills out the ordained half.

17.2% of male deputies currently serve on interim bodies.
10.9% of female deputies currently serve on interim bodies.

21.8% of deputies of color currently serve on interim bodies.
12.1% of the Caucasian deputies currently serve on interim bodies.
 

Click here to see a complete list of all members of interim bodies in the triennium 1997-2000.

Return to Table of Contents
 
 

Legislative committees serve during General Convention. All proposed legislation is assigned an appropriate legislative committee. Committees typically hold hearings on and draft the final versions of all legislation considered on the floor of General Convention, responding to proposals from dioceses, deputies, bishops, and interim bodies.

Click here to see the list of legislative committees and their members .

62% of all deputies were appointed to committees; 38% were not.

83% of all who have been deputies 3+ times were appointed; 17% were not.
79% of all who have been deputies 2+ times were appointed; 21% were not.
33% of all new deputies were appointed; 67% were not.

77% of all deputies of color were appointed to committees, 23% were not.
64% of all female deputies were appointed; 36% were not.
60% of all male deputies were appointed; 40% were not.

61% of all Province 1 deputies were appointed; 39% were not.
72% of all Province 2* deputies were appointed; 28% were not.
67% of all Province 3 deputies were appointed; 33% were not.
65% of all Province 4 deputies were appointed; 35% were not.
65% of all Province 5 deputies were appointed; 35% were not.
58% of all Province 6 deputies were appointed; 42% were not.
54% of all Province 7 deputies were appointed; 46% were not.
57% of all Province 8* deputies were appointed; 43% were not.
33% of all Province 9 deputies were appointed; 67% were not.

52% of all Province X* deputies were appointed; % were not.

*I use Province X to indicate Prov. 2 deputies in VI, Europe, and Haiti and Prov. 8 deputies in Taiwan

Very Rev. George Werner (c1 from Pittsburgh and Vice-President of the HoD) wrote:

For six years, I had the privilege of serving on the Council of Advice to the President of the House of Deputies, David Collins. In the game of pigeonholing, David is an "Evangelical Conservative." More recently, I have served six years ion the Council of Advice of Pamela Chinnis, pigeonholed "Liberal."

I. Both struggled mightily to balance appointments to both General Convention legislative committees and to those commissions, committees and other bodies which exist between conventions.

II. Balance included Province, Diocese, ideologies, sex, age, ethnicity and experience. (i.e.When Ft. Worth was a new Diocese and therefore had little deputy seniority,a deliberate effort was made to name at least half the deputation to legislative committees.)

III. In all appointments, there are at least three identified and qualified candidates for each position available. (Remember that interim bodies are usually made up of six year terms meaning that each Triennium only one half of the appointments are made.)

IV. Certain committees and commissions are more popular than others. Combining music and liturgy for this General Convention meant that we had more returning deputies who had served on one of these committees at the last Convention than we did have committee seats. Another committee had 153 "first choices" from Deputies, approximately five times the number of seats.

V. It has been my experience that a brief letter from the candidate or from a colleague, outlining the specific gifts and experience for a particular committee or interim body can be helpful. Also, like the importuning servant, keep knocking.

Like all systems, this is not perfect. As sinners in need of God's Grace that should surprise no one.

Return to Table of Contents
 
 

Acknowledgments

All the errors here are mine, and I would appreciate continuing help with them as spotted.

Note: Census data comes from the 1990 U.S. Census, much of it from the Summary Tape File 3B on 3 CDs. Biographical data was derived from the Electronic Clerical Directory and the Electronic Lay Leadership Directory, available from the Church Hymnal Corporation. Data regarding parishes and dioceses was gleaned heavily from The Episcopal Church Annual of many editions, and this data was often then correlated with data from the other sources.

Individual deputies have helped enormously in providing information for this report.  Thanks to all of you.  I hope you find this information useful.

I owe special thanks to my husband Ernest Clay for his steadfast kindness and gentleness, without which I would have much less of an inkling about the patience and kindness of God.

Joy to absolutely everybody!

--Lutibelle/Louie, Chair
Deputation for the Diocese of Newark

• Profile of the House of Bishops at General Convention in 2000
• Profile of the 1997 General Convention. http://www.dioceseofnewark.org/GC97/mainms.html
• Louie Crew's General Convention site http://newark.rutgers.edu/~lcrew/gc.html
• Louie Crew's Anglican pages. http://newark.rutgers.edu/~lcrew/rel.html
• Louie Crew's home page. http://newark.rutgers.edu/~lcrew
• Send mail to: lcrew@newark.rutgers.edu

Please sign my guest book and view it. My site has been accessed times since February 14, 1996.

Statistics courtesy of WebCounter.