First you have to forget about the fuselage center line except as a purely arbitraty reference. I'ts the angles between the airfoil center line, the stabilizer center line and the engine thrust line that are important. So let's look at these.

First, the relative angle between the airfoild CL and the stab CL is known as the decalage angle. In this case it's the stab angle of +1 1/2 minus the wing's +2 1/2 to 3 (depending on what you find you've built it at) for a decalage angle of -1 to 1 1/2 degrees. You WANT this angle to be negative (as in stab negative relative to the wing) or you will need to add some up elevator to artificially increase the angle so the model will be stable in pitch. Now how MUCH positive is up to how you like to fly. Pattern models apparently fly at very close to zero or AT zero but they would need fairly constant minor inputs to maintain pitch heading when truly at zero. You probably don't want it that close. The angle you have will probably fly quite nicely but you'll also want to do the "dive test" as used by sailplanes to fine tune the CofG and resulting elevator trim so the model is stable without being TOO stable and making it hard to perform certain maneuvers. So that's decalage in a nutshell.

The downthrust angle is a little harder. I like to consider it relative to the airfoil CL but others like to consider it relative to the stab CL with the wing angle then being positive and the thrust line being negative. Yet others like to "split" the decalage angle so the wing is slightly +'ve and the stab slightly -"ve with the datum line sitting at a happy "0" (whatever that is).

And just to confuse the issue of geometry if you have a design that has a LOT of positive incedence in the wing it has the effect of LOWERING the thrust line at the same time it increases the downthrust angle. It does this by altering the angle that the fuselage flies at. See? An example of all this is Hank Cole's old time rubber model designs. Frank Zaic, in one of his yearbooks, determined that the 6409 airfoil gave it's best performance at +6 degrees of Angle of Attack. Now you must realize that the airfoil is still pointed nose down during the glide but the AIRFLOW is hitting the leading edge at that magic 6 degrees as the model settles earthward. So Hank set up many of his later designs with the wing sitting at +6 degrees relative to the fuselage center line and didn't add in any additional downthrust relative to that center line. His models all LOOK like they're diving during the glide but the intent was that the fuselage is pointed directly into that oncoming 6 degree airflow so there is minimum fuselage drag. But this setup automatically provides 6 degrees of downthrust. As a result it's a toss up whether the flier needs to add a tiny bit of down or UP thrust to the original design when it comes time to trim the model. Not that it will ever really BE upthrust but just that it's up relative to the fuselage centerline.

See how confusing it gets? Any officially trained aerodynamics types out there care to shed some light on this?