quote:

---

Quoth leo:
Also, where are the children supposed to go during a 15 minute Litany?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I would say that the answer is different for Eucharist-centred churches than it is for preaching-centred churches. If a sermon is half an hour - or longer! - then it makes sense for children to be in Sunday school for that time. However at my church, since the sermon is short and we only have babies and toddlers anyway, we just have an area at the side with toys, books, colouring materials etc for the parents to sit with the children during the service. The children are therefore around for the whole service. I do object to junior church/Sunday school where kids are out of the service for pretty much the whole service.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Prester John:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I would say that the answer is different for Eucharist-centred churches than it is for preaching-centred churches. If a sermon is half an hour - or longer! - then it makes sense for children to be in Sunday school for that time. However at my church, since the sermon is short and we only have babies and toddlers anyway, we just have an area at the side with toys, books, colouring materials etc for the parents to sit with the children during the service. The children are therefore around for the whole service. I do object to junior church/Sunday school where kids are out of the service for pretty much the whole service.

---

The tyranny of low expectations. I grew up in and currently attend churches that had/have 30 minute sermons. Children learn to adjust.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hart:

quote:

---

Quoth leo:
Also, where are the children supposed to go during a 15 minute Litany?

---

Not to pick on leo, but I wonder what presuppositions underlie the asking of that question, and the answers we might give.

---

• Ya got action—There's a whole crowd of folk walking around.
• Ya got visuals, plenty to look at—Vested acolytes carrying processional cross and candles, including adults & children their own age: 7 years to 18 years. Vested choir, including adults & children their own age: 7 years old to 18 years old, plus adults. Not to mention the folk wearing the fancy, eye-catching dresses (tunicle, dalmatic, and chasuble).
• Ya got smoke and fire—What's not to like here? Thurifer with a steaming incense pot, plus a boatbearer of about age 7 or 8.
• Ya got music—Plus responses that soothe the savage child^h^h^h^h^h I mean beast that are easy to learn and easier to sing.
• Pop in a banner or two and then take the whole shebang outside for a walk around the block.

quote:

---

Originally posted by PD:
I often wonder whether when we started shunting the kids off to Sunday School during the liturgy all we in fact succeeded in doing was teaching them not to attend church, or that church is boring.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Being bored shitless isn't very conducive to children growing in faith.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by PD:
I often wonder whether when we started shunting the kids off to Sunday School during the liturgy all we in fact succeeded in doing was teaching them not to attend church, or that church is boring.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mousethief:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
Being bored shitless isn't very conducive to children growing in faith.

---

Or adults, which is why I no longer attend sermon-centered churches. But that's another thread, perhaps.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
[QUOTE] Being bored shitless isn't very conducive to children growing in faith.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ExclamationMark:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
[QUOTE] Being bored shitless isn't very conducive to children growing in faith.

---

That can also happen in a church with short sermons - no the sermons don't bore but the lack of teaching to enabvle adults to grow does.

Sometimes those churches with short sermons and eucharistic liturgy aren't as welcoming as they make out. Woe betide the toddler who takes one step out of a pew at the "wrong" moment or a baby who cries because it's time for a meal. Looks of dagger sharp intensity aren't the worst of it - some pretty cutting comments are voften expressed about "disturbing the peace" within earshot of the parents.

Result? No Sunday School because you don't need it - you've a pretty effective way of keeping the service to adults only even if you have a short sermon. How do I know - well it's happened to me in more than one denomination and I don't think my children were any worse than any other. Getting glared at for joining in hymns wasn't the half of it .... ok a 3 year old can't sing well but what is a complaint saying about how we see God's view of it all.

I don't pretend to preach short sermons - and we are a growing all age fellowship. We are fortunate in having a good number and % of the church fellowship under 18. Soem stay in for the sermon and it seems ok - soem don't. At least we're pretty relaxed about children and maintain a reverence for God. It wouldn't be the 1st time if a crying baby was silenced - not by glares - but by his or her mum feeding discretely in the service. No one minds - at least no one has said they do (and I think they would). They'd get pretty short shrift if they said anything negative.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Frankly we eventually gave up with mainstream church with our kids. Didn't matter what it was, they were bored shitless. Regardless of the supposed excitement of a sung litany, I know that my three would rather eat their own earwax than sit through one. They just weren't interested in what the grown-ups were doing at the front.

Mrs LB took them to a hands-in-the-air happy clappy shack once just to see if that suited them any better. They hated that as well.

I don't think it's just ours - the church we used to attend now has no children's work because it doesn't have any children.

---

Purely out of interest - what kind of church would your kids enjoy?

Also, how old are they? Not all kids are going to be interested in church full stop, and if they're old enough (or one is old enough to look after younger siblings), I don't think it's wrong to leave the kids at home (this is meant generally, not to you personally!).
 

---

Posted by Heavenly Anarchist (# 13313) on :
 
Our church is happy clappy and has about 70 children, we are currently producing over 10 babies a year. This is because the church is very large and the majority of the congregation is in the 20s- 40s age range. Large numbers do help an awful lot, the children feel part of a group which makes them far more comfortable and more likely to be happy whatever they sit through, as they know there will be friends nearby.
We have a very organised Sunday school but children are involved in worship too, with signing of songs for those who can't read. Children are welcome to stay in for the sermon which is 40 mins but most go out to Sunday School, we have babies and a few toddlers still around though. My 12 year old sits through these sermons every week with no problem, sometimes he even looks up from his kindle to listen but my 9 year old would sit through a sermon too. out of term time the kids just stay in and do activity sheets and quietly sit or play, or their parents take their younger kids to one of the school rooms. The parent and baby room has the sermon piped in for the parents. The church is very relaxed about the presence of children.
Obviously a lot of these things won't work with most churches' structures. But I do think the key is to make children feel wanted and part of what is happening, whether in church or in Sunday School. When my eldest was much younger we were at our local Anglican and it was very tough to maintain a Sunday school with just a handful of kids, sometimes they might be the only one there which is no fun for any child. But as a 3 year old he loved the liturgy, especially Agnus Dei, and would sing it on the bus. So I think often kids can learn to adapt to whatever the church environment and become part of it. Hearing liturgy might become comfortably familiar to them.
 

---

Posted by Ad Orientem (# 17574) on :
 
Kids usually have short attention spans. Whatever way we worship kids will probably find it difficult, yet I'm strongly of the opinion that kids should not be segregated and herded off to some other place, nor should worship be dumbed down for them. So what if a baby cries or a kid runs about? Fortunately it's never been an issue in the places I've been to, not in my former RC parish and not in my current Orthodox parish. It was just accepted as being part and parcel of worship being for all. It's a sign of a vibrant, living congregation for which we should be grateful.
 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Frankly we eventually gave up with mainstream church with our kids. Didn't matter what it was, they were bored shitless. Regardless of the supposed excitement of a sung litany, I know that my three would rather eat their own earwax than sit through one. They just weren't interested in what the grown-ups were doing at the front.

Mrs LB took them to a hands-in-the-air happy clappy shack once just to see if that suited them any better. They hated that as well.

I don't think it's just ours - the church we used to attend now has no children's work because it doesn't have any children.

---

Purely out of interest - what kind of church would your kids enjoy?

Also, how old are they? Not all kids are going to be interested in church full stop, and if they're old enough (or one is old enough to look after younger siblings), I don't think it's wrong to leave the kids at home (this is meant generally, not to you personally!).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by loggats:
I think kids who grow up with an awareness of the mass and have it integrated into their lives would find the whole thing less of an ordeal, and more the culminating moment of their week.

I can only really talk for RC mass (and I'm sure that most protestant services can't provide these things and probably wouldn't want to) but if a child knows that the Eucharistic presence provides a unique opportunity to be near Jesus, that can become a powerful incentive to remain prayerful during the liturgy.

A week that's filled with devotional practices (especially prayed in common with the family) then finds full expression in the mass - even if the child can't receive communion yet and receives a blessing instead. It's about encouraging an intimacy with Christ within the context of liturgy, and having kids appreciate the uniqueness of their encounter with the Lord.

At least that's what I think it's about when children attend Catholic mass.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I think with people in general (not just kids), church is supposed to be counter-cultural. For me, brought up in a totally secular household, Anglo-Catholicism feels incredibly counter-cultural, and being the strange child who preferred museums (not even kid-friendly ones) to theme parks I probably would have enjoyed it as a child. But these things are obviously harder to express as a child.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
[QUOTE] YMMV. Other kinds of children are available. Past experience is not a guide to future performance, etc. etc.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

quote:

---

Originally posted by loggats:
I think kids who grow up with an awareness of the mass and have it integrated into their lives would find the whole thing less of an ordeal, and more the culminating moment of their week.

I can only really talk for RC mass (and I'm sure that most protestant services can't provide these things and probably wouldn't want to) but if a child knows that the Eucharistic presence provides a unique opportunity to be near Jesus, that can become a powerful incentive to remain prayerful during the liturgy.

A week that's filled with devotional practices (especially prayed in common with the family) then finds full expression in the mass - even if the child can't receive communion yet and receives a blessing instead. It's about encouraging an intimacy with Christ within the context of liturgy, and having kids appreciate the uniqueness of their encounter with the Lord.

At least that's what I think it's about when children attend Catholic mass.

---

YMMV. Other kinds of children are available. Past experience is not a guide to future performance, etc. etc.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by loggats:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

quote:

---

Originally posted by loggats:
I think kids who grow up with an awareness of the mass and have it integrated into their lives would find the whole thing less of an ordeal, and more the culminating moment of their week.

I can only really talk for RC mass (and I'm sure that most protestant services can't provide these things and probably wouldn't want to) but if a child knows that the Eucharistic presence provides a unique opportunity to be near Jesus, that can become a powerful incentive to remain prayerful during the liturgy.

A week that's filled with devotional practices (especially prayed in common with the family) then finds full expression in the mass - even if the child can't receive communion yet and receives a blessing instead. It's about encouraging an intimacy with Christ within the context of liturgy, and having kids appreciate the uniqueness of their encounter with the Lord.

At least that's what I think it's about when children attend Catholic mass.

---

YMMV. Other kinds of children are available. Past experience is not a guide to future performance, etc. etc.

---

Definitely, but differences between religious cultures and liturgies are not simply incidental.

---

Trouble is - if I'm thinking what that's bloke/idiot/plonker/priest doing at the front (delete words that don't apply) - then there're probably thinking the same thing.

Not being someone who can skim things and accept superficiality I ask all the wrong questions. My children have done the same and it's, shall we say, not helped our stay in one or two places of religious experience.

I accept what you say about difference but it's the assumption that just because we believe this/do this, I have to do the same, that I really take issue with.
 

---

Posted by loggats (# 17643) on :
 
Well, if you believed that the priest was acting in the person of Christ and (regardless of how utterly idiotic you found him to be otherwise) "unites himself most intimately with the offering" (in the words of Pope Paul VI) then it takes on another level of significance above and beyond your immediate reactions.

Obviously this doesn't apply to protestant services, where no such action in persona Christi takes place as part of a sacramental rite.

Awkward questions have their place but if you don't believe in what's going on, I would think that a mass isn't the most edifying or appropriate place for you.

Now if the service doesn't include an awareness of this sacramental reality or unique role of the priest, it becomes quite different and the opportunity to criticise it changes too. Which is why the way we approach a Sunday service (as kids or grownups) really does depend on what we're actually doing.
 

---

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
It's not uncommon these days for about one-third of our Sunday Mass assembly to consist of under-16s.......

.......many (at the moment) are babies or toddlers, but, on most Sundays (at least during term-time), half-a-dozen or so have an informal 'Sunday Club' with their own teaching/activities, which takes place in the Hall during the homily, intercessions, and Eucharistic Prayer. They rejoin the rest of the assembly at the Peace (which is just before Communion, as per the Roman rite).

This seems to work for us, but I would like some of the older kidz to help out as servers.....the problem is that they simply don't arrive in time - half our people waltz in somewhen between the introit hymn and the Gospel.......

Personally, I love to see the kidz in church, and many of our folk share this view. No angry whispers, dagger-like glancings, or 'tut-tutting' at our place!

Ian J.
 

---

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
It's a problem we're still facing. We have a nice small church, full of great people we really like. And, for it's size has a relatively large number of kids (how many churches could find themselves with 20% of the congregation under 18? - albeit maybe only once or twice a month) but with a congregation usually under 20 that often leaves just our two. And, the other kids that come once or twice a month are older, so they're needs are different from those of our kids. Of course, with a small congregation the task of taking kids out can't be passed around very much so it's often one person who then misses out on the rest of church.

We have a Sunday School of sorts, although there is rarely anything more organised than read a Bible story and colour some pictures. Not surprisingly the teens we have aren't interested in that, our boy isn't either. When the wee man started to refuse to go out, prefering to sit through the sermon than what was offered in Sunday School his sister followed suit so we started sitting at the back with some of our own puzzle/colouring books. A table spontaneously appeared after a couple of weeks of this, with the Sunday School materials, as the church adapted to what was working for us. But, still it's not ideal - for a start the kids are not now getting any teaching from the church except the little bits they may garner when they look up from their activities. And, it means Flausa and I are back to looking after children rather than worshipping and getting something for ourselves from the service.

We would like it if there was more opportunity for our kids to participate in the service. But, there are issues at the moment about assisting in things like passing the collection bags around or distributing bread and juice at Communion. They enthusiastically (well, sometimes) assist in clearing away chairs and taking down the hymn numbers after the service.

We talked yesterday with the minister, and have some ideas that may help us. First, she's going to print off a copy of the sermon so that our boy can read it during the service. Also, let us know in advance what hymns there are going to be so that we can go through them with the kids in advance so they can be more confident joining in the singing - plus we'll let the minister know what songs/hymns they know and like and she'll try and fit those in where appropriate. Rest assured, our boy is learning to play the organ and seems much more at home with traditional hymns than they dross that often comes out as "child appropriate" songs.

Second, we're going to occasionally go to other churches and experience how they conduct worship and what they do with the children - we may, or may not, find ourselves moving. We may just find what options there are so the boy can tell us what he would want.
 

---

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
A wise old priest I used to know had one standard line for parents (and adults in general) at Baptisms:

"Do not send your child to church or Sunday School: there is no more sure-fire way to innoculate a child against the church than to send it to a place where mum and dad never go."

Churches can make young children welcome: play bags, a creche in the same building, carpet the back of a side aisle (if you have one), etc, etc.

Making children welcome does not have to mean dumbing-down or religion-lite: you preach to the whole of the congregation.

"All-Age" and "Family" should mean just that: that the service, including the sermon, is for ALL ages and ALL the family from granny to the youngest. By all means ask granny to be patient but, equally, ask parents of young children to fit in with their elders as well.

[ 22. April 2013, 12:37: Message edited by: L'organist ]
 

---

Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
My experience was probably very untypical. My brother and I were brought to church from pre-toddler age. With books and small quiet toys, I believe - but still firmly sitting in my chair. So by the time I was primary school age (four and a half), morning prayer, hymns, canticles, prayers, 20 minutes sermon etc were normal. I don't remember being bored, though it's likely there were moments of boredom, and the mother nudged us back into paying attention mode! I joined the choir at 8*, where I learnt it was partly my job to show the congo how to behave in church. Needless to say the children were better at this than the adults. (*I heard they served tea and biscuits at half-time.)

I do remember being very unhappy at church Sunday School, and Mum arguing with the rector about why she didn't send us there, but sent us to another one in the afternoon, instead. (The excursions and annual prize-giving were better.) That was when the Sunday School was before church, however. I once tried to be a Sunday School teacher, too. But that was a very unsatisfactory experience, as well.

I've noticed that in the very small church congregations I know of where whole families from baby-age to teenage turn up - and there is little more than a bag of crayons and a colouring page available - the children appear to be joining in with the worship, as they gain their reading and speaking skills. Thanks to the parents, I have to say. At the moment, I'm trying to slow down the usual incoherent mumble of the adults, so that the children - who are very clearly enunanciating their prayers - can properly join in and feel included. But I seem to be the only one who's noticed this.
 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
Nah, we took ours along from baby age upwards, tried to encourage them to take part in the liturgy and the hymns, but they just didn't want to.

To be honest, I find that perfectly to be expected and totally understandable. It's the kids who apparently like being there and taking part that I find strange.

But then I'm strange, awkward, bizarre and not like anyone else, so it's perhaps not surprising that my kids are also apparently from another planet.

[ 22. April 2013, 14:16: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
 

---

Posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras (# 11274) on :
 
I always preferred the old Anglo-Catholic custom of having the sermon after Mass. That way, children do not have to suffer through it. Back in the places where this was the practice in my youth and young adulthood, people did not leave in droves immediately after Mass and before the sermon; one would only do this rarely when there was some legitimate need to haste away -- it was considered too obviously rude to do otherwise.
 

---

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Nah, we took ours along from baby age upwards, tried to encourage them to take part in the liturgy and the hymns, but they just didn't want to.

To be honest, I find that perfectly to be expected and totally understandable. It's the kids who apparently like being there and taking part that I find strange.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hart:

quote:

---

Quoth leo:
Also, where are the children supposed to go during a 15 minute Litany?

---

Not to pick on leo, but I wonder what presuppositions underlie the asking of that question, and the answers we might give.

---

A sung litany in procession with incense is ideal liturgy for children. Seemingly contrived especially to evoke the goggle-eyed in a child of any age.

• Ya got action—There's a whole crowd of folk walking around.
• Ya got visuals, plenty to look at—Vested acolytes carrying processional cross and candles, including adults & children their own age: 7 years to 18 years. Vested choir, including adults & children their own age: 7 years old to 18 years old, plus adults. Not to mention the folk wearing the fancy, eye-catching dresses (tunicle, dalmatic, and chasuble).
• Ya got smoke and fire—What's not to like here? Thurifer with a steaming incense pot, plus a boatbearer of about age 7 or 8.
• Ya got music—Plus responses that soothe the savage child^h^h^h^h^h I mean beast that are easy to learn and easier to sing.
• Pop in a banner or two and then take the whole shebang outside for a walk around the block.

Then, more general than just a sung litany, I agree with the other comments. The ones about low expectations; and, ESPECIALLY, how we seem to want to teach our children how not to be in church, by EXCOMMUNICATING them from the assembly.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by loggats:
I agree that young well behaved kids generally imitate their parents and will mirror the reverence that's expected.

---

quote:

---

And parents can always explain what's going on after the service and/or during the week.

---

quote:

---

Relying on Sunday School or catechism class to give children a rounded appreciation for the faith, including liturgy, isn't always a good idea.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
A sung litany in procession with incense is ideal liturgy for children. Seemingly contrived especially to evoke the goggle-eyed in a child of any age.

• Ya got action—There's a whole crowd of folk walking around.
• Ya got visuals, plenty to look at—Vested acolytes carrying processional cross and candles, including adults & children their own age: 7 years to 18 years. Vested choir, including adults & children their own age: 7 years old to 18 years old, plus adults. Not to mention the folk wearing the fancy, eye-catching dresses (tunicle, dalmatic, and chasuble).
• Ya got smoke and fire—What's not to like here? Thurifer with a steaming incense pot, plus a boatbearer of about age 7 or 8.
• Ya got music—Plus responses that soothe the savage child^h^h^h^h^h I mean beast that are easy to learn and easier to sing.
• Pop in a banner or two and then take the whole shebang outside for a walk around the block.

Then, more general than just a sung litany, I agree with the other comments. The ones about low expectations; and, ESPECIALLY, how we seem to want to teach our children how not to be in church, by EXCOMMUNICATING them from the assembly.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by loggats:

Some children are difficult, and they need special attention, but I don't think all children are like that and the majority of young children I see at mass on a Sunday are respectful and seem aware of what's going on.

---

quote:

---

If it's just a glorified baby-sitting service that's aimed at keeping them quiet while the adults get on with the "more important" business of "proper church", then I think it becomes something like "excommunicating" them from church - and that is a problem.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stejjie:
What ya haven't got is anything much for them to do - as in, to get their hands on, to pick up, to touch and feel and play with and make work and experience.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stejjie:
What ya haven't got is anything much for them to do - as in, to get their hands on, to pick up, to touch and feel and play with and make work and experience.

---

Why should they "do" anything except absorb what is going on?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:

As for children's liturgies as far as I'm concerned it's a complete anathema. There should be no more than one Divine Liturgy on any given day in any given church. Any other divine worship should be devoted to the liturgical hours.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stejjie:
What ya haven't got is anything much for them to do - as in, to get their hands on, to pick up, to touch and feel and play with and make work and experience.

---

Why should they "do" anything except absorb what is going on?

---

Because when we gather together as church, we're supposed to encourage, strengthen and enrich each other in our faith. We're not supposed to watch some other people do stuff and join in with little bits here and there. *Takes cover*

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:

As for children's liturgies as far as I'm concerned it's a complete anathema. There should be no more than one Divine Liturgy on any given day in any given church. Any other divine worship should be devoted to the liturgical hours.

---

To clarify, AO, do you view a children's liturgy as the same degree of anathema as having two Masses at different times on the same day, or is one worse than the other?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ExclamationMark:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I think with people in general (not just kids), church is supposed to be counter-cultural. For me, brought up in a totally secular household, Anglo-Catholicism feels incredibly counter-cultural, and being the strange child who preferred museums (not even kid-friendly ones) to theme parks I probably would have enjoyed it as a child. But these things are obviously harder to express as a child.

---

That's exactly the issue - for me, A_C worship has never seemed counter cultural at all and the hierarchical nature of "priesthood" as it is practised (admittedly not always what is intended) turns me off totally. I just can't be doing with all that fiddling about either and besides which the incense makes me heave. I got angry enough at people who smoked near me in pubs and restaurants when it was allowed, to get myself back into that position. Then, there's the hypocrisy of a fair church of the A-C world which even Ken Leech points out: explicit opposition to gay priests from the very sector that attracts a high % of them (and often from the very individuals who are still closeted).

I don't see that as counter cultural more a expression of the establishment of this country that to be frank, I can't stand.

There's actually little difference in some ways between Eucharistic and sermon based liturgies: it all involves action elsewhere and sitting and listening.

Potential prejudices aside, too much of what is presented as mainstream "church" comes across as safe, smug and all too smart for its own good. Too many "in jokes" in asides, too much pointless information. I don't need to know who's polishing the brass this week. (And yes, I've heard that as a visitor in a church recently not an A-C one but an Con Evo one - so there's trouble everywhere).

For me, counter cultural is kicking hierarchies into touch, asking someone in the congregational to pray the prayer of thanksgiving from the pew and giving stuff out to the prostitutes who work 20 yards away on the street corner. It's asking big questions not just of faith but of faith structures, as well as of our society and its institutions. That's radical: doing someone different probably isn't - being something different certainly is.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
A sung litany in procession with incense is ideal liturgy for children.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
The issue of churches doing rather than just being is important though and I totally get and have myself the problem of being torn between what I believe to be sacramentally important (A-C churches) and what I want the church to be doing (in fairness, usually not A-C churches now the Society of the Holy Cross is mostly concerned with DH topics, much to my frustration). I've found some of it with the Student Christian Movement and also with a wonderful A-C church in Coventry a few weeks back (busy Sunday school and teenagers happy to be in church!), but it is hugely frustrating. Evangelical churches do such great stuff but...I'm just not an evangelical. I'm just not.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indifferently:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
The issue of churches doing rather than just being is important though and I totally get and have myself the problem of being torn between what I believe to be sacramentally important (A-C churches) and what I want the church to be doing (in fairness, usually not A-C churches now the Society of the Holy Cross is mostly concerned with DH topics, much to my frustration). I've found some of it with the Student Christian Movement and also with a wonderful A-C church in Coventry a few weeks back (busy Sunday school and teenagers happy to be in church!), but it is hugely frustrating. Evangelical churches do such great stuff but...I'm just not an evangelical. I'm just not.

---

I live in Coventry. Where is this buzzing Anglo Catholic parish? And is it proper Catholic, or liberal (aka voodoo shamanism)?

---

Affirming A-C IS 'proper' Catholic, as this parish is. It's St Mary Magdalen in Chapelfields. I am actually from Coventry but didn't become a Christian until after I'd left.
 

---

Posted by The Silent Acolyte (# 1158) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stejjie:
What ya haven't got is anything much for them to do - as in, to get their hands on, to pick up, to touch and feel and play with and make work and experience.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:

The range of age of the children can be from about seven to seventy-five.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
You were unaware that Sunday school existed?

---

No, I'm aware of Sunday School, and even aware that in some places it happens during the main service, but everywhere I have been where there has been Sunday School during the service, it has been for small children, not for tweens and teenagers. If you're embarrassed about singing songs with actions, you're too old

quote:

---

And not all churches have acolytes. What then?

---

quote:

---

making sure that people attending church (with or without children) aren't bored stiff is, because that's how churches keep going. If you lose kids you've lost the church.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
You were unaware that Sunday school existed? And not all churches have acolytes. What then? Church is boring for a lot of adults, let alone children. I don't think Sunday school is always necessary (because it depends on the age of the children involved, the service type etc) but making sure that people attending church (with or without children) aren't bored stiff is, because that's how churches keep going. If you lose kids you've lost the church.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Maybe boredom has more to do with the one being bored than the thing one finds boring. What I mean is that maybe such approach divine worship with the wrong expectations. Do such go there expecting to be entertained?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
I'm not trying to blame anyone, Karl. Calm down. This is an important issue and at the heart of it, I believe, are wrong expectations. Of course, when speaking of divine worship I do so purely from a liturgical perspective. Should it be a case of the person fitting into the liturgy rather than the other way round? I would argue go, absorb, if you think you're going to br sick if you hear another "Lord have mercy" be sick, but go, parents and children alike, the same liturgy, not two different ones or one dumbed down one. If kids sre crying or running about, so what? Give them a chance to grow into it.

That's what I reckon anyway.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
But it's the church creating the liturgy, not the other way round - so of course the liturgy should fit the congregation. Liturgy is for US and our benefit. God doesn't need chanting and singing and blessings. That's not me saying we shouldn't have liturgy, I've made my liturgical position clear, but liturgy and the church service should fit the needs of the people using it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
But it's the church creating the liturgy, not the other way round - so of course the liturgy should fit the congregation. Liturgy is for US and our benefit. God doesn't need chanting and singing and blessings. That's not me saying we shouldn't have liturgy, I've made my liturgical position clear, but liturgy and the church service should fit the needs of the people using it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stejjie:
What ya haven't got is anything much for them to do - as in, to get their hands on, to pick up, to touch and feel and play with and make work and experience.

---

A careful reading of my post will show that my description of a sung litany in procession with incense has all that you ask for.

The children's hands are on, have picked, are touching, are making work torches, processional crosses, thuribles, incense boats, and banners.

Words are the least part of what is going on.

During the set-up to the mass, these same hands have built the vested chalice, filled cruets with wine and water, and have placed these items together with the handwashing bowl, towel, extra chalice on the credence. These hands have set the gospel book and missal and placed them on the altar. They have taken eight-foot-long extinguishers and lighted the six office lights and mass lights.

The range of age of the children can be from about seven to seventy-five. We promote them as fast as we can to the more responsible roles. The youngest ones see what the older ones are doing and work to earn those roles. We strive for the thurifers to start at around 13 to 15 years of age and for the subdeacons to start at about 17 to 18.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Why should they "do" anything except absorb what is going on?

---

quote:

---

Is this the same "doing" that has in most Novus Ordo parishes twenty-seven lay people administering the chalice to a congregation of an hundred and fifty?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
But it's the church creating the liturgy, not the other way round - so of course the liturgy should fit the congregation. Liturgy is for US and our benefit. God doesn't need chanting and singing and blessings. That's not me saying we shouldn't have liturgy, I've made my liturgical position clear, but liturgy and the church service should fit the needs of the people using it.

---

I guess this largely depends upon hiw one views liturgy. Of course it is for the benefit of the people but neither should it be tinkered with. As far as the ancient liturgies are concerned I would view them akin to scripture. They are the prayer of the Church approved by the Holy Spirit by constant use.

Both my former traditional RC parish and current Orthodox parish have a vibrant living congregation of all ages. They're doing something right. I can't and don't claim to speak for anyone else.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Incidently - and I know that Evidence isn't the plural of Anecdote, but I grew up in a non-church attending family. This was because my mother had to attend church as a child and hated it so much she swore not to inflict it on her own children.

She remains a non-church going adult who didn't "grow into it" or "absorb it".

I am trying not to repeat the mistakes made by my grandparents.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indifferently:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
The issue of churches doing rather than just being is important though and I totally get and have myself the problem of being torn between what I believe to be sacramentally important (A-C churches) and what I want the church to be doing (in fairness, usually not A-C churches now the Society of the Holy Cross is mostly concerned with DH topics, much to my frustration). I've found some of it with the Student Christian Movement and also with a wonderful A-C church in Coventry a few weeks back (busy Sunday school and teenagers happy to be in church!), but it is hugely frustrating. Evangelical churches do such great stuff but...I'm just not an evangelical. I'm just not.

---

I live in Coventry. Where is this buzzing Anglo Catholic parish? And is it proper Catholic, or liberal (aka voodoo shamanism)?

---

Affirming A-C IS 'proper' Catholic, as this parish is. It's St Mary Magdalen in Chapelfields. I am actually from Coventry but didn't become a Christian until after I'd left.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Incidently - and I know that Evidence isn't the plural of Anecdote, but I grew up in a non-church attending family. This was because my mother had to attend church as a child and hated it so much she swore not to inflict it on her own children.

She remains a non-church going adult who didn't "grow into it" or "absorb it".

I am trying not to repeat the mistakes made by my grandparents.

---

This is also my experience, with both my parents not having 'grown into' or 'absorbed' church (high church Anglican for my mum, RC for my dad).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
KLB, I am in agreement with you here. Of course the problem with making church less weird for un-churched or de-churched people is getting churches to admit that church can be weird/boring in the first place...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Nah, we took ours along from baby age upwards, tried to encourage them to take part in the liturgy and the hymns, but they just didn't want to.

To be honest, I find that perfectly to be expected and totally understandable. It's the kids who apparently like being there and taking part that I find strange.

But then I'm strange, awkward, bizarre and not like anyone else, so it's perhaps not surprising that my kids are also apparently from another planet.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
3. The tiny minority of annoying little pains in the arse who do find it weird/boring, but insist on going anyway, and pointing out that it is weird/boring.

I'm a card-carrying member of group 3.

---

Well, you're a better man than me Gunga Din. If I found it weird (well any more weird) and boring, I wouldn't go. Ordained or not. (And I can say that as I'm about to leave stipendiary ministry.)
 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
Ah yes. My fault for not disciplining them properly and them not knowing how to behave.

This is exactly the shit I'm so sick of.

Look. The do know how to behave. Mostly they did. BUT THEY FUCKING HATED IT BECAUSE THEY WERE BORED SHITLESS

How hard is this to explain?
 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anselmina:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
3. The tiny minority of annoying little pains in the arse who do find it weird/boring, but insist on going anyway, and pointing out that it is weird/boring.

I'm a card-carrying member of group 3.

---

Well, you're a better man than me Gunga Din. If I found it weird (well any more weird) and boring, I wouldn't go. Ordained or not. (And I can say that as I'm about to leave stipendiary ministry.)

---

Would you rather us irritating people pissed off and left the church? Perhaps we should leave the faith as well and be done with it.

Gah.
 

---

Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
Karl, you're taking this too personally. I don't mean to infer any such thing about your parenting skills. I have commented on the kids I'm talking about who are well behaved, and I'm saying it seems to be down to what their parents are doing. Would you rather I didn't give credit to the parents for their hard work? I appreciate that may seem a short step away from saying that noisy or distracted kids must therefore also be down to what their parents are doing. But even as a non-parent, I know that's not always how it works.

A perfect 18 month-old can become a terrorizing two year old and by four, an angel again. I've referred to our noisy kids, too.

I do think there was a time when children seemed to be more observant of parental discipline, perhaps because in those days corporal punishment and being shouted at was more normal. It's hard, otherwise, to explain the general behaviour of kids when I was young and the general behaviour of kids today. But I don't think that that's a bad thing, myself, as I don't believe in corporal punishment. And I certainly don't think older children should be forced to attend church.

I've also referred to society/culture of the child. Here, I suppose we're rather old-fashioned. Children usually go to very small schools and are incorporated into adult life from day one - such as the farming, or the business.

Are you 'irritating'? I have no idea what kind of person you are. As for whether or not you go to church - it's your call. I've lost count of the number of times I've posted on threads that I don't mind why people have come to church, I'm just glad they're there. So it's hardly likely I'm going to start issuing orders about who should be there and who should stay away. Talking about MYSELF - I said I would stay away if I felt as you do. And believe me I shall do that, if I have to. What you do is your business!
 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 


Perhaps I get over excited about all this, but it's because it really matters to me.

I don't want the kids just to attend and even do as the adults do, if they get to 11 or 12 and then leave. I don't see the point of that; if our childhood churchgoing doesn't make us want to attend as adults, then I really don't see the point of it. Believe it or not, I actually see attendance at church (not legalistically, be there every week or burn in Hell, but still) as an integral part of Christian discipleship. And what the little idealistic bit in me wants is for my kids to grow up to be Christian disciples - hopefully better ones than I am. And I'd like the help, rather than the hindrance, of the visible church in doing this. This was the deal I made at their baptisms, no?

Which is why it pains me so much that my generation and younger seem in general to be offered the choice of hands in the air happy clappy WeAreAlwaysHappyWeAreNeverSad with a side helping of ultra-conservative theology, or liturgical stodge (how they appear to me, YMMV). And it's why just forgetting about it is not an option. And when it was just me and Mrs KLB, we could live with the tedium. But our kids are our kids; they can't.

Hearing how everyone else's little angels love sitting through a four hour solemn tenebrae only convinces me that one of the reasons our churches are half empty, and attendance is rather eccentric, is because the vast majority of people, with their perceptions of what is tedious or dull, aren't there.
 

---

Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:

1. So you think A-C churches never do things like give stuff to prostitutes on the street corner? A-C churches never get involved with outside ministries? Of course they do.


2. YMMV obviously. I love incense because of the link to the Temple in Jerusalem and it being a visual sign of the prayers of the people going to God. As a member of the congregation I do plenty, such as singing the Gloria and the Agnus Dei and saying the Creed and Lord's Prayer etc,

3. What the priest is doing isn't for me to do. It's just not. I am not ordained to carry out the sacramental duties a priest is, and I believe that is the way God has ordained it. YMMV, obviously, but I don't believe in the priestly hierarchy just for the sake of it. Participating in the holy mystery of the Eucharist by receiving the bread and wine is my job, the other stuff is not.

4. Re counter-culturalism, the slick salesmen of conservative evangelicalism seem far more of this age than the holiness of a candlelit shrine....

5. As for children....I really don't know. I spent 6 years in a large ConEvo Anglican church in Sussex with a lot of kids and a thriving children's ministry, including 200-strong holiday clubs in summer. I taught Sunday school, helped at holiday clubs, after-school clubs and youth groups. The kids were really engaged, even the 'awkward' ones, and we kept most of them into their teenage years. But I don't agree with so much of what we actually taught them, I don't know what the answer is. [/QB]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
[QUOTE] As far as the ancient liturgies are concerned I would view them akin to scripture. They are the prayer of the Church approved by the Holy Spirit by constant use.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
As for children's liturgies as far as I'm concerned it's a complete anathema. There should be no more than one Divine Liturgy on any given day in any given church. Any other divine worship should be devoted to the liturgical hours.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
But it's the church creating the liturgy, not the other way round - so of course the liturgy should fit the congregation. Liturgy is for US and our benefit. God doesn't need chanting and singing and blessings. That's not me saying we shouldn't have liturgy, I've made my liturgical position clear, but liturgy and the church service should fit the needs of the people using it.

---

I guess this largely depends upon hiw one views liturgy. Of course it is for the benefit of the people but neither should it be tinkered with. As far as the ancient liturgies are concerned I would view them akin to scripture. They are the prayer of the Church approved by the Holy Spirit by constant use.

Both my former traditional RC parish and current Orthodox parish have a vibrant living congregation of all ages. They're doing something right. I can't and don't claim to speak for anyone else.

---

RC and Orthodox churches in the UK at least benefit from cultural ties to other countries. Anglican and Protestant denominations don't have this. Liturgy is as you say, approved by the Holy Spirit but this makes it dynamic and flexible, not set in stone. Liturgical needs vary from congregation to congregation.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
As for children's liturgies as far as I'm concerned it's a complete anathema. There should be no more than one Divine Liturgy on any given day in any given church. Any other divine worship should be devoted to the liturgical hours.

---

Orthodox liturgy does not usually demand that the congregation sit still as if they were in school. Kids, as well as adults, can chat, walk round, go out for as cigarette (well the adults).

For other churches, in the UK, the expectation is silence for much of the time. That is harder for kids, especially for one i know with ADHD - he is 'tolerated' when he shouts out, walks up and down the aisle with a sword, goes up to the altar and waves at everyone. BUT the congregation has a rest from him when he goes out to the Sunday school (which lasts from the readings until the communion)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by loggats:
It does seem more than a little disruptive to have a child walking up to the altar and all around the church during mass. Never seen that happen.

---

quote:

---

posted by loggats
It does seem more than a little disruptive to have a child walking up to the altar and all around the church during mass. Never seen that happen.

---

Keep the mind on higher things, dear boy.

Anyway, we have our instructions in the Gospels: Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God.
 

---

Posted by Olaf (# 11804) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:

quote:

---

Originally posted by loggats:
It does seem more than a little disruptive to have a child walking up to the altar and all around the church during mass. Never seen that happen.

---

I have, with nobody bothered at all--but that is in a different culture, and it would be unrealistic to expect that degree of tolerance from most English speaking churches I know.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:

quote:

---

Originally posted by loggats:
It does seem more than a little disruptive to have a child walking up to the altar and all around the church during mass. Never seen that happen.

---

I have, with nobody bothered at all--but that is in a different culture, and it would be unrealistic to expect that degree of tolerance from most English speaking churches I know.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indifferently:
[QUOTE]I take it by "ADHD" you mean a lack of parental discipline and control. Why is this child being allowed to walk around the Church and be a nuisance during the liturgy?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:

quote:

---

Originally posted by loggats:
It does seem more than a little disruptive to have a child walking up to the altar and all around the church during mass. Never seen that happen.

---

I have, with nobody bothered at all--but that is in a different culture, and it would be unrealistic to expect that degree of tolerance from most English speaking churches I know.

---

I think that illustrates where part of the problem is coming from.
 

---

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
I'm just trying to think how we managed with all those ADHD kids unmedicated and at school in the 1950s and 60s. They were in mainstream school and they learned to read, write, do maths, etc - and without Teaching Assistants, either!

And in light of the news that lead-free petrol means we are a less violent society than 20 (or even 10) years ago I'm even more puzzled.

If it was possible for children, by-and-large, to be well-disciplined and well-behaved then, why not now?

And just before the lobby gets into gear I'd like to point out that most of us were not beaten into submission, and certainly not bribed with material goods as are many of today's little darlings.
 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
Don't know, don't care. We have to deal with the situation we have today, not bang on about how we were all little angels in our day.

Thing is, as I pointed out with the case of my mother, we may have had well behaved children in church but the falling numbers in the pews show that when they grew up they didn't carry on coming to church.

The question is not "how do we make the children behave properly in church?", it's "how do we make church a place children want to come and where their individual faith is developed such that they want to carry on coming when they are independent adult Christian disciples?"

I sometimes think that children in church is a bit like children wanting a pet. People like the idea, but when it shits on the floor, needs mucking out and bites them they start losing interest in having it.
 

---

Posted by Ad Orientem (# 17574) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by ExclamationMark:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:

quote:

---

Originally posted by loggats:
It does seem more than a little disruptive to have a child walking up to the altar and all around the church during mass. Never seen that happen.

---

I have, with nobody bothered at all--but that is in a different culture, and it would be unrealistic to expect that degree of tolerance from most English speaking churches I know.

---

It happens in prickly mountain and no one turns a hair. It's not disruptive because whoever leads either involves the child concerned or just takes no notice. The congregation take their lead from that.

Can you prove that the love feasts (aka eucharist, communion or Lord's Supper etc) of the early church were staid, come to the front to get your fix, kind of affairs? I think not - they were meals with a certain amount of fluidity and informality.

---

And where do you get that from?
 

---

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
...of course, it depends on the child and the form of "disruption".

I sorely miss the little darling who would applaud at the end of hymns she enjoyed particularly.

But - (this might be a new thread?) - THE BEST unscripted interjection of all time:

Matins: We've sung office hymn, canticles and psalm, heard 2 readings.

Priest turns East and proclaim loudly "I believe in God"

Young voice from the laity "I should hope so too"

 

---

Posted by Liturgylover (# 15711) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
I'm just trying to think how we managed with all those ADHD kids unmedicated and at school in the 1950s and 60s. They were in mainstream school and they learned to read, write, do maths, etc - and without Teaching Assistants, either!

And in light of the news that lead-free petrol means we are a less violent society than 20 (or even 10) years ago I'm even more puzzled.

If it was possible for children, by-and-large, to be well-disciplined and well-behaved then, why not now?

And just before the lobby gets into gear I'd like to point out that most of us were not beaten into submission, and certainly not bribed with material goods as are many of today's little darlings.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:

quote:

---

Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
I think not - they were meals with a certain amount of fluidity and informality.

---

And where do you get that from?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
The question is not "how do we make the children behave properly in church?", it's "how do we make church a place children want to come and where their individual faith is developed such that they want to carry on coming when they are independent adult Christian disciples?"

I sometimes think that children in church is a bit like children wanting a pet. People like the idea, but when it shits on the floor, needs mucking out and bites them they start losing interest in having it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Laurelin:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:

quote:

---

Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
I think not - they were meals with a certain amount of fluidity and informality.

---

And where do you get that from?

---

The New Testament. Scriptures like this one: Every day they continued to meet together in the temple courts. They broke bread in their homes and ate together with glad and sincere hearts. Acts 2:46

The first Christians were, of course, Jews. So their agape meals were, essentially, seders. But the new Greek/Gentile Christians were from pagan backgrounds: the way they adapted and practiced the agape meal would be somewhat different. It would be fascinating to go back in time and see how the early church developed those agape meals, over time, into the more formal kind of Eucharist.

[It is clear from the way St Paul writes to the Christians in Corinth that the pagan background contingent were treating their communion/agape meals as a 'free-for-all' and therefore the Apostle had to call them sharply to order. Informality in itself, however, is not the same thing as irreverence.]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
... And in light of the news that lead-free petrol means we are a less violent society than 20 (or even 10) years ago I'm even more puzzled. ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
I do not read from that that the Eucharist was some informal gathering. Neither does it match immemorial practice of the Church which surely must speak volumes. The Eucharist was never a seder, not at the Last Supper and not since.

---

The Lord Jesus Christ was a Jew. He deliberately applied all the rich symbolism of the Passover to Himself at the Last Supper. Yes, I know He was doing something new and wonderful. But He wasn't instituting something which was completely divorced from His Jewishness.

We are probably getting into Purgatory area here. And certainly off-topic. So I will leave it at that.
 

---

Posted by Indifferently (# 17517) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
ADHD is a neurological disorder

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indifferently:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
ADHD is a neurological disorder

---

That is absolute nonsense. There is no such thing as "ADHD" and no objective evidence that it exists at all.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ExclamationMark:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indifferently:
[QUOTE]I take it by "ADHD" you mean a lack of parental discipline and control. Why is this child being allowed to walk around the Church and be a nuisance during the liturgy?

---

Why are you allowed to participate in the liturgy with such judgemental issues going through your mind? Which is the more disturbing from God's POV?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indifferently:
There is no such thing as "ADHD" and no objective evidence that it exists at all.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:

quote:

---

Originally posted by loggats:
It does seem more than a little disruptive to have a child walking up to the altar and all around the church during mass. Never seen that happen.

---

I have, with nobody bothered at all--but that is in a different culture, and it would be unrealistic to expect that degree of tolerance from most English speaking churches I know.

---

I think that illustrates where part of the problem is coming from.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:

quote:

---

Originally posted by loggats:
It does seem more than a little disruptive to have a child walking up to the altar and all around the church during mass. Never seen that happen.

---

I have, with nobody bothered at all--but that is in a different culture, and it would be unrealistic to expect that degree of tolerance from most English speaking churches I know.

---

I think that illustrates where part of the problem is coming from.

---

I agree--but we live in such an age segregated society that I think most adults have lost the ability to recognize and tolerate normal childish noises and behaviors.

---

quote:

---

posted by Enoch

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist: ... And in light of the news that lead-free petrol means we are a less violent society than 20 (or even 10) years ago I'm even more puzzled. ...

---

What's that about? Does this get a prize for non sequitur of the week, or have I missed something?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I think we need to explicitly lay out the choices to congregations - either they tolerate children being children, or they look forward to ever decreasing congregations as the existing congregants age and die with no-one coming up to replace them.

---

In a nutshell.
 

---

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Laurelin:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I think we need to explicitly lay out the choices to congregations - either they tolerate children being children, or they look forward to ever decreasing congregations as the existing congregants age and die with no-one coming up to replace them.

---

In a nutshell.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indifferently:
[QUOTE]Actually I can focus perfectly on holy things in church. It is simply objectively true that ADHD is an invention, and the drugs given to such poor children have the most wicked consequences.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Laurelin:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I think we need to explicitly lay out the choices to congregations - either they tolerate children being children, or they look forward to ever decreasing congregations as the existing congregants age and die with no-one coming up to replace them.

---

In a nutshell.

---

Assuming the congregation are looking forward to more than the church being there for their funeral, I more or less agree. The church needs to see there's a choice, one of the options being to simply close up the building when all but the last few have had their funerals there.

I would say that, for me, "tolerate children being children" is inadequate. As a parent, I want my children to be more than tolerated (though, sometimes that would be an improvement). Children who are tolerated, but otherwise not served by the church are as likely to end up with the church dead when the last of the current congregation die as not tolerating children. Those children will still reach an age when they can make the decision "church gives me nothing, I'm better off playing footie with my mates on a Sunday" and as parents we have no right to deny them their choice.

More than tolerate, please. Why can't church cater for all? Why can't all give and receive in the service? Why can't all be nurtured and supported? How can we reach that point?

---

quote:

---

I didn't question whether you can focus or not ...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I think we need to explicitly lay out the choices to congregations - either they tolerate children being children, or they look forward to ever decreasing congregations as the existing congregants age and die with no-one coming up to replace them.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
[QUOTE]And where do you get that from?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I think we need to explicitly lay out the choices to congregations - either they tolerate children being children, or they look forward to ever decreasing congregations as the existing congregants age and die with no-one coming up to replace them.

---

Sadly, my parent's church is one that has pretty much explicitly decided to go down the path of providing exactly the worship and culture that the current congregation are comfortable with, and with no expectation of it surviving beyond their deaths. My parents, at the ages of 63 and 61, are among the youngest members who still turn up most weeks. Even the vicar has given up on planning for the future, because hardly any of the congregation give a shit if there is one beyond the few years they personally have left.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Laurelin:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I think we need to explicitly lay out the choices to congregations - either they tolerate children being children, or they look forward to ever decreasing congregations as the existing congregants age and die with no-one coming up to replace them.

---

In a nutshell.

---

Assuming the congregation are looking forward to more than the church being there for their funeral, I more or less agree. The church needs to see there's a choice, one of the options being to simply close up the building when all but the last few have had their funerals there.

I would say that, for me, "tolerate children being children" is inadequate. As a parent, I want my children to be more than tolerated (though, sometimes that would be an improvement). Children who are tolerated, but otherwise not served by the church are as likely to end up with the church dead when the last of the current congregation die as not tolerating children. Those children will still reach an age when they can make the decision "church gives me nothing, I'm better off playing footie with my mates on a Sunday" and as parents we have no right to deny them their choice.

More than tolerate, please. Why can't church cater for all? Why can't all give and receive in the service? Why can't all be nurtured and supported? How can we reach that point?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
the phasing out of TEL as a petrol additive has corresponded with a rise by several points in IQ levels among children in the USA

---

American children are smarter than they used to be? Coulda fooled me. No doubt reducing exposure to lead has helped, but there must be some other influence going the other way.
 

---

Posted by Indifferently (# 17517) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indifferently:
There is no such thing as "ADHD" and no objective evidence that it exists at all.

---

Tell that to the NHS not to mention countless medical professionals.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indifferently:

quote:

---

Originally posted by leo:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
As for children's liturgies as far as I'm concerned it's a complete anathema. There should be no more than one Divine Liturgy on any given day in any given church. Any other divine worship should be devoted to the liturgical hours.

---

Orthodox liturgy does not usually demand that the congregation sit still as if they were in school. Kids, as well as adults, can chat, walk round, go out for as cigarette (well the adults).

For other churches, in the UK, the expectation is silence for much of the time. That is harder for kids, especially for one i know with ADHD - he is 'tolerated' when he shouts out, walks up and down the aisle with a sword, goes up to the altar and waves at everyone. BUT the congregation has a rest from him when he goes out to the Sunday school (which lasts from the readings until the communion)

---

I take it by "ADHD" you mean a lack of parental discipline and control. Why is this child being allowed to walk around the Church and be a nuisance during the liturgy?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indifferently:

If anyone has seen objective evidence that there exists "ADHD" I'd love to see it. As it stands, it is just a faith belief, like "dyslexia".

---

quote:

---

Cross-sectional anatomical imaging studies of ADHD consistently point to involvement of the frontal lobes (Castellanos et al., 2002), parietal lobes (Sowell et al., 2003), basal ganglia (Castellanos and Giedd, 1994), corpus callosum (Giedd et al., 1994), and cerebellum (Berquin et al., 1998). Imaging studies of brain physiology also support involvement of right frontal-basal ganglia circuitry with a powerful modulatory influence from the cerebellum (see Giedd et al., 2001, for review).

Because of the wide range of clinical outcomes seen in ADHD, longitudinal studies have been of particular interest. Such studies indicate a developmental delay of cortical thickness trajectories most markedly for the frontal lobes (Shaw et al., 2007a) (see Figure 3). The general pattern of primary sensory areas attaining peak cortical thickness before polymodal, high-order association areas occurred in both those with and without ADHD. However, the median age by which 50% of the cortical points attained peak thickness was 10.5 years for ADHD and 7.5 years for controls. The area with the greatest age difference was the middle prefrontal cortex, reaching peak thickness at 10.9 years in those with ADHD and 5.9 years for controls.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indifferently:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indifferently:
There is no such thing as "ADHD" and no objective evidence that it exists at all.

---

Tell that to the NHS not to mention countless medical professionals.

---

These are the same leftists whose view of 'harm reduction' has resulted in the worst drugs epidemic in western Europe. Most people who trust the NHS tend not to have had the misfortune of actually using it.

We live in an extremely undisciplined society. I have little wonder that children whose "parents" let them play video games and run roughshod will behave like savages, even in church. They are victims of our evil culture.

If anyone has seen objective evidence that there exists "ADHD" I'd love to see it. As it stands, it is just a faith belief, like "dyslexia".

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indifferently:
We live in an extremely undisciplined society. I have little wonder that children whose "parents" let them play video games and run roughshod will behave like savages, even in church. They are victims of our evil culture.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indifferently:
We live in an extremely undisciplined society. I have little wonder that children whose "parents" let them play video games and run roughshod will behave like savages, even in church. They are victims of our evil culture.

---

Can I PLEASE take this thread in a different direction?

If what Indifferently says in any way true (and I don't want to argue that either way), then these are the children and parents with whom the Church must interact and to whom it must offer welcome.

How are we going to do that if all we are concerned with are our personal "focus" on worship, due decorum, faintly-disguised toleration and all the rest of it. God surely calls us to love people as they are, rather than as we'd expect them to be. That includes both unruly kids and the obnoxious parents who can't or won't discipline them.

WWJD?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indifferently:
If Christianity is not affecting change in people,making them turn from idolatry and disobedience and blasphemy, then it is not working.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:

quote:

---

Originally posted by loggats:
It does seem more than a little disruptive to have a child walking up to the altar and all around the church during mass. Never seen that happen.

---

I have, with nobody bothered at all--but that is in a different culture, and it would be unrealistic to expect that degree of tolerance from most English speaking churches I know.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by no prophet:
[QUOTE]I do recall in the 1980s how a nearly 90 year old rebuked those who said that children disrupt the reverence of the service. Her comment changed everything with what I just described.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
The question is not "how do we make the children behave properly in church?", it's "how do we make church a place children want to come and where their individual faith is developed such that they want to carry on coming when they are independent adult Christian disciples?"

I sometimes think that children in church is a bit like children wanting a pet. People like the idea, but when it shits on the floor, needs mucking out and bites them they start losing interest in having it.

---

• Ideal toy for church - wind-up fire engine with siren
• Ideal book: interactive with push pads that produce loud noises (better if the book is about "sound")
• Ideal footwear for a wanderer/climber - shoes with hard soles that Fred Astaire could have used to get the right sound

I am also - and this is not exclusive to church - amazed at the lack of responsibility some parents take over the behaviour of their children:

A I don't object to a child trying to scale a pile of stackable chairs because it offends ME, I take exception because it is DANGEROUS, not only to the child but to anyone sitting within range if the stack is toppled.

B When a child appears in the organ loft mid-service I'm concerned because (a) they've used a staircase that is potentially lethal; (b) I can't see the back or sides of the organ where there are cables, ladders and other hazards; and (c) they've had adult connivance - the outward opening door at the base of the tower is very heavy, fitted with a gas closer to keep it shut, and 4'6" off the ground.

C A 5 year old child in the base of the tower has taken his 18 month old sister with him and is trying to get a bell-rope around her neck; the next week the same child was caught before he could shut her in a filing cabinet.

All of these instances have happened with 2 parents calmly sitting by and doing absolutely nothing to find out what their child was doing. In the instances of the child (and younger sibling in C) having been given access to the tower by a parent the attitude was "well, you shouldn't have dangerous things here" - their putting the children in the way of danger passed them by completely.

All of these - and I could give more - show an abdication of responsibility that is frightening. I would argue that for the church, or an individual churchgoer, to remain silent in instances like this is just plain wrong - and in law it would be seen that we too were being negligent and irresponsible.
 

---

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
@ Hart

Excellent blog post.

The only change I'd make would be to say that its the responsibility of a parent to teach their child how to behave appropriately PERIOD, not just at church.
 

---

Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Don't know, don't care. We have to deal with the situation we have today, not bang on about how we were all little angels in our day.

Thing is, as I pointed out with the case of my mother, we may have had well behaved children in church but the falling numbers in the pews show that when they grew up they didn't carry on coming to church.

The question is not "how do we make the children behave properly in church?", it's "how do we make church a place children want to come and where their individual faith is developed such that they want to carry on coming when they are independent adult Christian disciples?"

I sometimes think that children in church is a bit like children wanting a pet. People like the idea, but when it shits on the floor, needs mucking out and bites them they start losing interest in having it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anselmina:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Don't know, don't care. We have to deal with the situation we have today, not bang on about how we were all little angels in our day.

Thing is, as I pointed out with the case of my mother, we may have had well behaved children in church but the falling numbers in the pews show that when they grew up they didn't carry on coming to church.

The question is not "how do we make the children behave properly in church?", it's "how do we make church a place children want to come and where their individual faith is developed such that they want to carry on coming when they are independent adult Christian disciples?"

I sometimes think that children in church is a bit like children wanting a pet. People like the idea, but when it shits on the floor, needs mucking out and bites them they start losing interest in having it.

---

You know, you're absolutely right. As a cleric, I'm usually part of the problem; of maintaining the comfort zone of a congregation who want what they want for 'their' church experience and nothing else. It's one of the things challenging me about how we 'do' church. And why it's hard to keep up a belief in the task of the church, when it seems to set such low expectations. Heaven knows I've used the same arguments above myself, only to give in to the usual consensus of 'but this is how we do it'.

Karl, I'm truly sorry for any uncharitable inference I've made about your and your children.

---

'salright - I got quite prickly about this after being effectively dechurched back in October so I can end up coming over abrasive.
 

---

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
... Sometimes I wonder who the church actually does cater well for.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

I think we should be aiming for more for the younger members of the congregation.
[..]
The fact that the children have no interest in what's going on around them and are merely being occupied rather than being engaged remains.

Here we observe that it doesn't do particularly well with older children and young adults,

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
... Sometimes I wonder who the church actually does cater well for.

---

It obviously doesn't cater well for Shippies. Most of us spend a lot of time and energy complaining about it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

I think we should be aiming for more for the younger members of the congregation.
[..]
The fact that the children have no interest in what's going on around them and are merely being occupied rather than being engaged remains.

Here we observe that it doesn't do particularly well with older children and young adults,

---

I agree with everything, except the target age group. I think the bigger problem is primary-school age children: if what they are being fed is a constant diet of "be quiet and don't be a nuisance while while church happens" then is it any surprise that they don't want to stick around once they have some autonomy?

---

quote:

---

It depends on whether church is "boring" because the liturgy seems irrelevant, or because you want a praise band but have a bad organist who plays the same selection of dreary hymns maestoso, or what.

---

God please not either seriously though I actually don't see an awful lot of difference between the two; I personally think - and this isn't solely related to children, by the way - that the sorts of changes we need to consider make the distinction between a praise band and an organ and choir mere detail. That's probably for another thread.

quote:

---

I suspect that one can wean children onto adult liturgy by beginning with a child-friendly, well-explained version in simple language, but the same structure.

---

Now grab that thought you held earlier. Where there is a Sunday School I often think that the transition is hard to handle - children expected to jump from filling in a wordsearch and a colouring in sheet to hymns ancient and obscure and lots of strange theological terms all in one go.

Not sure what's so wrong with offering everyone a friendly, well explained version in simple language, TBH, but I daresay I'll find myself open to a charge of dumbing down or iconoclasm or something.
 

---

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
Karl

I think churches are often the authors of their own misfortunes precisely because they spend so much time trying to appeal to niche markets/different constituencies.

One of the reasons they rarely, if ever, get it right is that they do this while still hoping to keep their original congregation/constituency in the pews, ignoring the fact that they may be taking away the very thing that attracted them to start with.

Another is that they don't give innovations sufficient time to bed-in before embarking on the next panicky round of soul-searching and change.

Businesses which behave like this are rare because:

• they have no coherent idea of what they are making
• they have no idea of the market they're making it for
• they don't listen to research they don't agree with
• they start sales campaigns with insufficient or inappropriare resources
• they cancel marketing campaigns mid-term with no alternative in place
• they have a default mode of mutual blame if everything isn't an instant, wild success
• in many cases they're trying to appeal to a saturated market
• no one is prepared to carry the can for failure

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

I think we should be aiming for more for the younger members of the congregation.
[..]
The fact that the children have no interest in what's going on around them and are merely being occupied rather than being engaged remains.

Here we observe that it doesn't do particularly well with older children and young adults,

---

I agree with everything, except the target age group. I think the bigger problem is primary-school age children: if what they are being fed is a constant diet of "be quiet and don't be a nuisance while while church happens" then is it any surprise that they don't want to stick around once they have some autonomy?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
Karl

stuff

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Now grab that thought you held earlier. Where there is a Sunday School I often think that the transition is hard to handle - children expected to jump from filling in a wordsearch and a colouring in sheet to hymns ancient and obscure and lots of strange theological terms all in one go.

---

quote:

---

Not sure what's so wrong with offering everyone a friendly, well explained version in simple language, TBH, but I daresay I'll find myself open to a charge of dumbing down or iconoclasm or something.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:

I think the problem arises when they get a bit older (say 10+) and feel that they are being "babied" by the adults yet may not really be able to cope with some of the rigours of adult worship.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
Give them [10 year olds +] responsibility. Make them acolytes.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belle Ringer:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
Give them [10 year olds +] responsibility. Make them acolytes.

---

In my church, the youth workers openly admit, with a laugh, the acolytes are bored. They make provision for them to carry (unseen) or to put in place ahead of time comic books and other quiet entertainments.

If the service is structured in a way that is boring, it's boring even though you carry the cross at the beginning and end.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belle Ringer:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
Give them [10 year olds +] responsibility. Make them acolytes.

---

In my church, the youth workers openly admit, with a laugh, the acolytes are bored. They make provision for them to carry (unseen) or to put in place ahead of time comic books and other quiet entertainments.

If the service is structured in a way that is boring, it's boring even though you carry the cross at the beginning and end.

---

Being not particularly sporty, I can't think of many things at that age which would have encouraged me to take up football on a Sunday morning. Nevertheless, if anyone had tried to persuade me to dress up in funny robes and be an acolyte, that would have done the trick. I'd have been out on the pitch whatever the weather.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
They make provision for them to carry (unseen)

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Now grab that thought you held earlier. Where there is a Sunday School I often think that the transition is hard to handle - children expected to jump from filling in a wordsearch and a colouring in sheet to hymns ancient and obscure and lots of strange theological terms all in one go.

---

I don't think the typical Sunday School is an appropriate replacement. Sunday School is education, not worship

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
In my church, the youth workers openly admit, with a laugh, the acolytes are bored. They make provision for them to carry (unseen) or to put in place ahead of time comic books and other quiet entertainments.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chorister:
Also, he used to set them challenges such as 'How many times does the preacher use the word 'God' in his sermon?' and 'How many angels can you count in the stained glass windows?' so they had something to focus on.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chorister:
Also, he used to set them challenges such as 'How many times does the preacher use the word 'God' in his sermon?' and 'How many angels can you count in the stained glass windows?' so they had something to focus on.

---

I did once ask - on Easter Sunday - how many times we said or sung the word "Hallelujah". It was up around the 50 mark I think, but no-one got it quite right!

This may sound silly, but at least the young folk are interacting with the service in some way.

---

<tangent>
I have to admit to doing the same sort of thing when certain of our church extemporise prayer. The record, IIRC, is 32 "FatherGods" in about two minutes.

Sorry. Can't help it.
</tangent>
 

---

Posted by Albertus (# 13356) on :
 
And how many 'we just want to's?
 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Albertus:
And how many 'we just want to's?

---

just really want to...
 

---

Posted by ArachnidinElmet (# 17346) on :
 
I remember reading a suggestion for church bingo with a square full of words that may pop up during a sermon. If memory serves if you get a full house, you stand up and shout 'cathedral!'. It may have been taking the piss.
 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
Apocalypse Bingo for sermons on the End Times has been popular for years in churches that go in for that sort of thing. If you fill up your card you shout "Rapture!"
 

---

Posted by Penny S (# 14768) on :
 
My father taught us how to play what I could call "time travel" with the hymnbooks (which of course you need for this to work, no good with projectors). Find a hymn with an author with no date of death, so possibly still alive. Note the date of birth. Find a hymn with the author's date of death close to, and overlapping with, that of the first one. See how far back you can get, in as few as possible jumps.

For myself, I worked out hymn board maths - trying to use the digits of the second hymn number to transform the first hymn number into the third by whatever process necessary, and so on.

Weird lot, we are.
 

---

Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Albertus:
And how many 'we just want to's?

---

just really want to...

---

Surely by now, you know that the prayers don't work unless you use the right number of reallys?

[ 26. April 2013, 21:56: Message edited by: Enoch ]
 

---

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :
 
...and how many "O Lord, we ask that you might..."

(as in "I might go shopping, it all depends..."
 

---

Posted by Zappa (# 8433) on :
 
"Woulds" can work as an alternative. As in "Lord we would really like to, like, really oh Lord just praise you Jesus" but we've been so bloody busy articulating superfluous conjunctions that we haven't got around to it ...
 

---

Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Penny S:
For myself, I worked out hymn board maths - trying to use the digits of the second hymn number to transform the first hymn number into the third by whatever process necessary, and so on.

Weird lot, we are.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chorister:
It has made me realise that it can't do any harm to families to pace themselves and not feel they have to be there every single week, particularly if their children are finding it difficult.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chorister:
Having been to church just about every week of my whole life (often twice or more a week - being in the choir is like being on an eternal treadmill), I'm finally allowing myself a week or two off from time to time. It has made me realise that it can't do any harm to families to pace themselves and not feel they have to be there every single week, particularly if their children are finding it difficult.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Have we jettisoned altogether the idea that hearing services on Sunday is a moral obligation?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Have we jettisoned altogether the idea that hearing services on Sunday is a moral obligation?

---

Since when has it ever been acceptable merely to
hear a service?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Sorry if I seem dense, but how did it change your approach, lily pad? I suspect many of our people manage the same level of attendance - but, of course, they're not all there on the same 22 Sundays!

Ian J.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hart:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Have we jettisoned altogether the idea that hearing services on Sunday is a moral obligation?

---

Since when has it ever been acceptable merely to
hear a service?

---

The fullness of what we're called to? No. Acceptable? Yes.

Obligations are normally set at pretty low bars. All we're obliged to is attendance. We're called to a lot more than that (full participation), but someone's not failing in their obligation if they miss a single response, or fail to concentrate on every word preached, etc.

[ETA: And there are scrupulous people out there who will beat themselves up over that kind of thing. Those people do need to be reminded how low the obligation is. Of course, there are also people who need to called up to a higher standard.]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Have we jettisoned altogether the idea that hearing services on Sunday is a moral obligation?

---

Nothing to jettison. No such obligation was ever mentioned to me when I converted, so as far as I'm concerned no such obligation exists.
 

---

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
I don't see it as an obligation. Rather it is a logical conclusion that IF I "love God with all my heart and soul and mind" and (in a church with a preaching/teaching tradition at least) IF I want to learn and be challenged by God and (in a church with a more sacramental tradition) IF I feel I need to be nourished through the sacraments, THEN I will want to do everything I possibly can to be at worship. Indeed, it will be my priority.
 

---

Posted by Marvin the Martian (# 4360) on :
 
That's three pretty big "IF"s right there...
 

---

Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
Deliberately so!
 

---

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :
 
Maybe it's a denominational thing - I'd say that any semblance of regular weekly attendance amongst the young in most Anglican Churches is now long past. I can't think of any families in my church that attend every week without fail. But most come at least once a month. Plus, with many occasional holiday visitors, there is no definite expected weekly core of children. Those who turn up are made welcome, but nothing compulsory is expected or planned. It's a fact of modern life.
 

---

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :
 
"Love the Lord your God with all your heart and all your mind and all your soul. But if .008% of your week is too much of a hassle, don't worry about it. We don't want to go nuts and let the kiddies get it into their minds that this salvation business is important or something."

The word of the Lord.

[ 29. April 2013, 13:03: Message edited by: Zach82 ]
 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
Yes, Zach, it's terribly important that kids learn that they are obligated to be bored shitless for an hour and a half every week because God says they have to do it and will burn them in Hell if they don't.

That'll really make disciples for the next gneration.

Tell me Zach - are you bored out of your skull by church? Are you really telling me you'd not find some way around this idea of an obligation (which I've only every heard from you in the Anglican Church) if you were?
 

---

Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 
What Karl said. Talking about the Sunday service representing just 0.008% of our time is a red herring for me; our obligation AIUI is to meet regularly with fellow Christians for mutual encouragement, support and challenge in the life's work that is being a disciple of Jesus Christ.

If the Sunday service is indeed boring you (or your kids) shitless then other ways of meeting regularly should be sought, IMO. And people who are happy - or at least not bored shitless! - within more traditional church structures shouldn't frown on those who are looking for an alternative.
 

---

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :
 
Asking us to be bored shitless for an hour and a half once a week is quite literally the least God could demand of us. Any less, and I do think He would be making the clearest statement ever that He's completely irrelevant. "Where your treasure is, there your heart shall be also." If sleeping in and making pancakes takes precedence over worshiping God, then you are telling the kids that worshiping God is less important than pancakes.

It's really a point of absurdity that people today equate "obligation" with "boring." I quite like going to church myself- but even when we find it boring we're still obliged to go. But personally I find people that refuse to ever be bored the most boring people of all.
 

---

Posted by Caissa (# 16710) on :
 
Nobody is obligated to tend a boring service when more interesting services abound.
 

---

Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 
Zach82, isn't the New Testament clear that our whole lives are (or should be) an act of worship to God? We don't go to church to worship; that's a totally Old Testament conception.

Say your family has not spent much time together recently, maybe because a child has been on a school trip all week and mum has been away with work for a couple of days. Spending Sunday morning making pancakes together (instead of 'attending worship') might be the very best thing to do at that time, and would thus be an act of worship, IMO, if done in obedience to God.
 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Asking us to be bored shitless for an hour and a half once a week is quite literally the least God could demand of us. Any less, and I do think He would be making the clearest statement ever that He's completely irrelevant. "Where your treasure is, there your heart shall be also." If sleeping in and making pancakes takes precedence over worshiping God, then you are telling the kids that worshiping God is less important than pancakes.

It's really a point of absurdity that people today equate "obligation" with "boring." I quite like going to church myself- but even when we find it boring we're still obliged to go. But personally I find people that refuse to ever be bored the most boring people of all.

---

quote:

---

That's not far (without the "obligation" crap) from how we viewed it, until it became very clear that insisting the kids go to church every Sunday was the absolute best thing we could do to make sure they didn't attend once they grew up. But really, the way you put it you'd think God wanted us to be bored shitless as some kind of duty to him. What sort of pointless God wants that?

---

quote:

---

I do not equate "obligation" with "boring"; church is quite capable of being as boring as fuck without any obligation to go there, so you can take that strawman and burn it.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Caissa:
Nobody is obligated to tend a boring service when more interesting services abound.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Karl, I am trying to engage, but you are making it very difficult with continual, shrill accusations of evasion and straw-mannery.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Perhaps instead of trying to make church a perpetually titillating experience that can compete with pancakes and soccer, we could disabuse people of the notion that they have to be amused every second of every day. Toss of the idea that important matters will always be entertaining to everyone at all times in the gutter where it belongs.

---

quote:

---

As I've been saying, we need to teach children to prioritize church, and we do this by prioritizing it. It's only an obligation to be bored if one is determined to be bored.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
...dragging them kicking and screaming to be bored shitless...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
It was only when being a parent forced me to look again at Sunday services with the eyes of a child that I saw just how inaccessible they can be.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Perhaps instead of trying to make church a perpetually titillating experience... amused every second of every day...

---

quote:

---

Zach, the point is not that the children sometimes found church less than scintillating. It's that they found it unremittingly, unfailingly, utterly, completely, and unfailingly dull. I do wish people would chuck the idea that we're expecting wall to wall entertainment into the gutter as well.

---

quote:

---

Utter rubbish. We did prioritize church; we did try to enthuse them. They found it boring all by themselves, without any determination to do so. And you're a very strange person if you are inclined to prioritize something that bores you rigid. You don't - you've admitted you like going.

---

quote:

---

Frankly, I can't answer that question if the church is unremittingly boring, and nor, I think, can you. Again, it would seem to a child that you are saying that God wants us to be bored. Why does he want that?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Child: "I don't want to go. It's boring."
Parent: "You have to go. Church is important."
Child: "Why?"
Parent: "We have an obligation to go. God wants us to go."
Child: "Why?"

Frankly, I can't answer that question if the church is unremittingly boring, and nor, I think, can you.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anselmina:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Child: "I don't want to go. It's boring."
Parent: "You have to go. Church is important."
Child: "Why?"
Parent: "We have an obligation to go. God wants us to go."
Child: "Why?"

Frankly, I can't answer that question if the church is unremittingly boring, and nor, I think, can you.

---

Wouldn't you share with your child your own reasons for going to church, and why your children are part of that? What do you already tell them about why you're doing what you're doing? I'm sure you didn't just bring them along without telling them what was happening, or why.

---

quote:

---

After all, from the kid's perspective, he's being forced to go. But you're not. So it's only fair to let him know where you're coming from, in obliging him to be bored shitless every Sunday.

---

quote:

---

Stats suggest that by the time he's 12, he'll have decided everything mum and dad - and most adults - do is rubbish anyway. Which is why most kids - given the option at that age - opt out. But up to that point he's looking to you to put into context the reason for why things happen in his life as they do. So what do you tell him when he says: 'why should I go?'

---

quote:

---

Zach - these kids are 4, 6 and 8 years old. What exactly do you mean by "make them responsible for their own boredom"? I don't even know what you're going on about here as an adult, so I'm pretty sure my children wouldn't know what you meant.

I do not expect the church to "amuse" them in and of itself. However, if it's to engage them, to mean something to them, it's going the wrong bloody way when it bores the pants off them.

---

quote:

---

You say God doesn't want us to be bored, but you give the impression you don't think he cares much if we are.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Going back to "obligation" (if I may) ... what about Hebrews 10:24-25 ?

---

quote:

---

And let us consider how to provoke one another to love and good deeds, not neglecting to meet together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another, and all the more as you see the Day approaching.

---

I alluded to this passage (and others) upthread when I said 'our obligation AIUI is to meet regularly with fellow Christians for mutual encouragement, support and challenge in the life's work that is being a disciple of Jesus Christ'.

I think if we considered our church services through the lens offered by this passage (and not in terms of hearing the Word preached or participating in the Eucharist), we might start to do things somewhat differently. Not least, they'd be more participative; which I expect would be more engaging for children (and adults too).

Indeed, one theme in this thread has been that adults also often find church services dull, we're just better at hiding that fact than children are. Bless the children for not having learnt to put on masks like us adults!
 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
Zach - my kids, for their age, understand the Christian faith very well, thank you. That doesn't mean they are any less bored by the mainstream offerings, which leads me to...

Chorister - fortunately we've found a congregation where we are actually not bored (hurrah!) although it wouldn't be to a lot of peoples' tastes around here I fear. It only has a service once every two weeks, although we're considering filling in the other two weeks by geocaching parts of the service, to bring together to meet in the open air on the other Sundays. We await seeing how that runs

I agree, Zach, that churchgoing is a habit we want the children to acquire. I have absolutely no faith however that forcing them to mainstream church services was enabling them to do any such thing. Can I point you back to my own childhood? As I explained, I was never taken to my church because my mother had been, and was bored stiff, and as a result she (a) stopped going as soon as she could, and (b) swore she'd not do the same to us. I suspect that our churches are largely empty because of a lot of people in the same boat.

Enoch - I don't think God is boring. I do, however, constantly find that his most interesting and exciting facets are not particularly well reflected in our worship services. I think SCK's right on the money here; one of the things I love about our two-weekly Eucharist is that it is followed by a communal meal.

BT - it's a bit of a stretch to go from "let's not stop meeting each other" to "you MUST go to church every Sunday whether you like it or not". YMMV of course.

[ 29. April 2013, 18:09: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
 

---

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :
 
My head is spinning, Karl. You say you don't have the expectation of never being bored, then declare that boredom absolves you and your children from your duty of worshiping God. Again and again.

I don't know how to keep your children from ever being bored at church, and it seems odd that you could possibly think I am in a place to tell you. I don't even know your children. What I can't see is that it has any bearing on a Christian's obligations. That's what obligations are- things you ought to do whether you like it or not. Either like it or suck it up. Just because it's a hard breaks lesson doesn't mean children shouldn't have to learn it.

[ 29. April 2013, 18:41: Message edited by: Zach82 ]
 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
Zach, if that's what you think I've posted, then your comprehension skills are beyond my ability to help you.

Sorry.

I really don't think there's any point you carrying on trying to engage, I really don't.
 

---

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :
 
Did you ever stop to think that your expectation for some kind of magic bullet solution to make your children perpetually engaged by church might be a little ridiculous, and your declaration of my illiteracy at my inability to provide it could be a tad unfair?
 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Did you ever stop to think that your expectation for some kind of magic bullet solution to make your children perpetually engaged by church might be a little ridiculous, and your declaration of my illiteracy at my inability to provide it could be a tad unfair?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I don't think God is boring. I do, however, constantly find that his most interesting and exciting facets are not particularly well reflected in our worship services.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Amen to that. "Awe and Wonder", anyone?

And how do we offer that to our children? Surely that's the nub of the question.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I don't think God is boring. I do, however, constantly find that his most interesting and exciting facets are not particularly well reflected in our worship services.

---

Amen to that. "Awe and Wonder", anyone?

And how do we offer that to our children? Surely that's the nub of the question.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
The problem with finding "non-boring" services is that anything becomes boring after enough repetition, and one is left where one started sooner rather than later.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chorister: For some of us, and that includes certain types of children, repetition is comforting. My favourite service as a child was Evensong. As it is now, although I love Compline as well.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin: Variety is the spice of life!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:
Novelty runs out eventually- especially when we as Christians really only have one story to tell.

---

quote:

---

I broadly agree with you, Zach82, except regarding the above comment and that you seem to be taking much of what Karl is saying to the Nth degree. He says church services shouldn't make people 'bored shitless' then you say but we shouldn't expect to be, what was it, constantly titillated by church services. Which is not remotely what Karl was suggesting.

---

quote:

---

On that 'only one story to tell' point, I strongly disagree. Every Christian should have an ongoing story to tell, of God's continuing interaction with us and our growth into greater Christlike character. Of course, the way most church services are structured, there's not much opportunity to tell our ongoing story and hear that of our sisters and brothers in Christ. Which is a crying shame, IMO.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
Not trying to sound pious and if you are faced with lousy liturgy being chucked at you with no grace then I'm sorry.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by L'organist:
Karl

Why do I have the feeling that you find the liturgy at your church dull and lifeless. I'm not suggesting that liturgy that is genuinely and irredeemably lousy is excusable, but could it possibly be that its your personal preference that is not being met by your church, rather than some metaphysical standard of excellence?

And could it be that your children are picking-up on your feelings? Or perhaps have heard you and their mother discussing what happens in a less than flattering light?

Not trying to sound pious and if you are faced with lousy liturgy being chucked at you with no grace then I'm sorry.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
I think we can surely all agree that different forms of service "do it" for different people. That must have something to do with our personality types and probably with our upbringing.

So please can we leave this discussion behind, as it is unhelpful and ultimately fails to answer the question that this thread is positing. That needs to go to a deeper level, the one that Latecomer has recently posted: how do we inculcate a sense of the numinous in our children which leads to them appreciating not just "Bible stories" but the God behind those stories?

---

quote:

---

But this still seems to me like belittling Karl's objections. What if, for him and his children, the very structure of liturgical church services is not engaging or relevant? ... And this doesn't reflect a character flaw in them (us).

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by latecomer:
Could we make a distinction between someone who has already grasped the "wonderfulness" of God & is therefore prepared to put up with unengaging services for the sake of worship, and those - often children - who we are trying to inspire to find that "wonderfulness".

I can put up with badly-done liturgy, poor preaching etc etc because I know that it's still worship & glory; I don't think that is the way to inspire a child.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:

quote:

---

Originally posted by latecomer:
Could we make a distinction between someone who has already grasped the "wonderfulness" of God & is therefore prepared to put up with unengaging services for the sake of worship, and those - often children - who we are trying to inspire to find that "wonderfulness".

I can put up with badly-done liturgy, poor preaching etc etc because I know that it's still worship & glory; I don't think that is the way to inspire a child.

---

As I already said, all we can do is tell them the Gospel with sincerity over and over, for their whole lives, while teaching them that good things in life will come with hard work and boredom.

---

quote:

---

It's a suggestion that's been ignored again and again, over what seems to be the Bill Nye school of liturgy.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
In other words, blame the children for not being good enough little Christians to cope with the tedium.

That's helpful. Not.

It might be a good idea for you to be reminded of what Latecomer said on the previous page. Right on the money, I think.

You're expecting young children to run before they can walk, IMO.

---

quote:

---

Except you can't do that, because as soon as they're 11 or 12 they'll tell you to fuck off with your hair shirt doom and gloom and piss off to play football or just lie in bed, and I can't blame 'em.

---

quote:

---

posted by Karl
We wonder why churches are empty and I think that one answer, at least, is quite clear - people now are the children and grandchildren of people who had the bejaysus bored out of them in church as children and never darkened the door of a church once they no longer had to. That so many within the church don't see that is that they are self-selecting sample of people whose forbears actually liked it and whose offspring had similar temperaments. That church attendance is now the preserve of a tiny percentage of the population, now that the social expectation of attending is gone, might tell us that that is a pretty small self-selecting group. That's my thesis anyway. Make of it what you will.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
No, it's the "perhaps we don't have to be miserable, fed up and bored all the fucking time at church" school of liturgy.

---

I like the sound of this school of liturgy! Of course, church services aren't going to be exciting, uplifting and engaging every time. No one is suggesting they will be, or should be. What Karl wants is for church services not to be boring 'all the fucking time'. That's not too much to ask, is it?

'Hair shirt doom and gloom' is quite an apt phrase, I think. Where does this idea come from that attending church services is a duty that one shouldn't expect to be (most of the time) engaging and uplifting, yes, even exciting?

I mean, living a whole life of obedience to Christ will, of course, have many moments of struggle, trauma, crisis and teeth-gritting fulfilment of duty. But when Christians gather together to share how God is working among us, and to encourage and challenge one another to keep walking in God's ways, that should be a joyful occasion. Even, at times, a foretaste of eternity with God.

Zach82, your experience of church services sounds a long way from this. I'm sorry for you
 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
I must have missed or misunderstood that earlier post (I've been feeling rather defensive, can't imagine why ) , L'organist, because I have to say I agree.

I think there's a growing disconnect between the cultural world of the man in the pew (especially in the more formally liturgical end of things) and the man in the street. The man in the pew finds it normal enough to sing in public religious lyrics, often in a very distinctive linguistic register, to an instrument only otherwise found at fairgrounds*, to listen politely to readings from a book written thousands of years ago and then to someone in funny clothes telling them what to believe or how to live.

The man in the street listens to recorded music on an iPod and generally flips through small chunks of input from a multitude of sources, changing by the minute, and is used to evaluating them with a significant level of scepticism.

Our problem, as I see it, is one of wine and wineskins. There's nothing wrong with the wine, but presenting it in the old wineskin makes the man in the street assume you're offering him some manky old vinegar.

To drag this back to the original topic of children and church, part of the problem might well be that to a young palette, a good wine can taste just like vinegar.

*Don't get me wrong; personally I love organs and am even an occasional stand-in organist myself
 

---

Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
I think you are right, Karl, but I didn't let it bother me. My two stopped coming to Church as soon as they were allowed to stay home alone.

It's done them no harm whatever. Both have turned out to be agnostic/atheists but I don't mind that either. Not at all. I don't think God does either.


 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
No, it's the "perhaps we don't have to be miserable, fed up and bored all the fucking time at church" school of liturgy.

---

I like the sound of this school of liturgy! Of course, church services aren't going to be exciting, uplifting and engaging every time. No one is suggesting they will be, or should be. What Karl wants is for church services not to be boring 'all the fucking time'. That's not too much to ask, is it?

'Hair shirt doom and gloom' is quite an apt phrase, I think. Where does this idea come from that attending church services is a duty that one shouldn't expect to be (most of the time) engaging and uplifting, yes, even exciting?

I mean, living a whole life of obedience to Christ will, of course, have many moments of struggle, trauma, crisis and teeth-gritting fulfilment of duty. But when Christians gather together to share how God is working among us, and to encourage and challenge one another to keep walking in God's ways, that should be a joyful occasion. Even, at times, a foretaste of eternity with God.

Zach82, your experience of church services sounds a long way from this. I'm sorry for you

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
I like the sound of this school of liturgy! Of course, church services aren't going to be exciting, uplifting and engaging every time. No one is suggesting they will be, or should be. What Karl wants is for church services not to be boring 'all the fucking time'. That's not too much to ask, is it?

'Hair shirt doom and gloom' is quite an apt phrase, I think. Where does this idea come from that attending church services is a duty that one shouldn't expect to be (most of the time) engaging and uplifting, yes, even exciting?

I mean, living a whole life of obedience to Christ will, of course, have many moments of struggle, trauma, crisis and teeth-gritting fulfilment of duty. But when Christians gather together to share how God is working among us, and to encourage and challenge one another to keep walking in God's ways, that should be a joyful occasion. Even, at times, a foretaste of eternity with God.

Zach82, your experience of church services sounds a long way from this. I'm sorry for you

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boogie:
I think you are right, Karl, but I didn't let it bother me. My two stopped coming to Church as soon as they were allowed to stay home alone.

It's done them no harm whatever. Both have turned out to be agnostic/atheists but I don't mind that either. Not at all. I don't think God does either.

---

Perhaps I made a mistake at their baptisms where, fool that I am, I promised to try to push them in a different direction.


 

---

Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Boogie:
I think you are right, Karl, but I didn't let it bother me. My two stopped coming to Church as soon as they were allowed to stay home alone.

It's done them no harm whatever. Both have turned out to be agnostic/atheists but I don't mind that either. Not at all. I don't think God does either.

---

Perhaps I made a mistake at their baptisms where, fool that I am, I promised to try to push them in a different direction.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Living a whole life of obedience to Christ will, of course, have many moments of struggle, trauma, crisis and teeth-gritting fulfilment of duty

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Living a whole life of obedience to Christ will, of course, have many moments of struggle, trauma, crisis and teeth-gritting fulfilment of duty

---

... and sheer perplexity, too.

And there will be times when - even with children present - worship will respect this. It's not all about happy-clappy praise (and I know you're not suggesting that it is). There is a place for high exaltation and also the "travail of one's soul". The URC "Children's Charter" suggests that children should experience "the full diet of Christian worship" and we are doing them a disservice if we subject them to a constant barrage of sunshine, unmixed with shadows.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Our problem, as I see it, is one of wine and wineskins. There's nothing wrong with the wine...

---

That's a matter of opinion.

But I jest. The problem is that what adults think of as church is almost invariably mind- and arse-numbingly boring (for children, if no one else), what we think of as church for children not only takes up serious resources to be done well, but looks and sounds a lot like school, and a mutually acceptable common ground doesn't exist outside the impractical and unscaleable fringes. Worst of all, trying to keep children in the service generally results in embarrassed and hassled parents or uncontrolled noise distracting everyone else.

The K-Glets already have a love/hate relationship with church. It's something they accept as a fact of life, and the biscuits are enough to make them enthusiastic, but K-Glet#1 (6) is starting to moan a lot about it. I think that's partly because Daddy doesn't go these days, but it's not just that. This is a boy who even loves school, and can't wait for the holidays to be over so he can go back, but church leaves him cold.

The one thing they both agree on is that Messy Church is different. Messy Church is fun, and it's a special treat to be able to go during the holidays because they aren't at school. Again, biscuits may have something to do with it, or possibly the different routine, or maybe it's just being able to be in control, do their own thing and have a "service" that's actually appropriate for them, rather than something boring that adults do, so you children can go and colour in a picture of Jesus at the back.
 

---

Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
The URC "Children's Charter" suggests that children should experience "the full diet of Christian worship" and we are doing them a disservice if we subject them to a constant barrage of sunshine, unmixed with shadows.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
We wonder why churches are empty and I think that one answer, at least, is quite clear - people now are the children and grandchildren of people who had the bejaysus bored out of them in church as children and never darkened the door of a church once they no longer had to. That so many within the church don't see that is that they are self-selecting sample of people whose forbears actually liked it and whose offspring had similar temperaments. That church attendance is now the preserve of a tiny percentage of the population, now that the social expectation of attending is gone, might tell us that that is a pretty small self-selecting group.

That's my thesis anyway. Make of it what you will.

---

• the provision can be dire (or not at all)
• if your children don't show up one week their absence is obvious to all
• you may feel obliged to make them go when they'd rather not
• the children may feel obliged to go because they know you care about it

• pointed out they wanted to go to the CofE secondary and they needed church attendance
• made it very clear I would not support them by filling in the forms if they didn't stick to their part of the bargain
• explained that sometimes in life to achieve what you want you need to put up with something you don't like or find congenial - like piano scales
• found a rugby club that met on a Saturday (even if it was a 120 mile round trip) so they didn't miss out
• said that once they were confirmed they could go to the said 8am to "get church out of the way"

quote:

---

Originally posted by Zach82:

quote:

---

Except you can't do that, because as soon as they're 11 or 12 they'll tell you to fuck off with your hair shirt doom and gloom and piss off to play football or just lie in bed, and I can't blame 'em.

---

I know you don't keep bringing your own kids up because you want parenting advice, so I can only give general advice about general kiddies, but have your ever tried just telling them it's for their own good?

I used to sit over my math in third grade sobbing over my multiplication tables for HOURS, but I sure thank teenaged Jesus now that my parents, who hated math as much as I did, forced me to slog through it. Knowing 7 and 8 has actually come in pretty useful in life, as hard as I found it to believe back then.

---

Only, people NEED maths in order to function in society. People don't need church services that make them consider the National Secular Society in order to be a part of God's Kingdom. My church has full sung Eucharist with incense every week, but I don't go because God is keeping attendance, I go because I want to. Paul and the early church meeting in Lydia's house over mint tea and halva* doesn't seem to have a lot in common with dull church services that nobody wants to go to.

*Middle Eastern hospitality equals food! Imagine, a church with drinkable coffee
 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
I agree that the normal church service is boring for many kids, although not all, I guess. My son was bored witless, and couldn't wait to stop going.

Hey, I get bored. Then I don't go. I think making pancakes is also being with God. A pancake just is numinous.

But it makes you wonder about very different kinds of services, which might attract kids, and adults. Involving music, film, dance, and so on. I'm sure someone is doing this right now.

---

Well, not dance, but yes. We do. We get accused of turning church into entertainment, of course, amongst other things (the sheep's skull got one person accusing us of being Satanists )
 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by John Holding:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
We wonder why churches are empty and I think that one answer, at least, is quite clear - people now are the children and grandchildren of people who had the bejaysus bored out of them in church as children and never darkened the door of a church once they no longer had to. That so many within the church don't see that is that they are self-selecting sample of people whose forbears actually liked it and whose offspring had similar temperaments. That church attendance is now the preserve of a tiny percentage of the population, now that the social expectation of attending is gone, might tell us that that is a pretty small self-selecting group.

That's my thesis anyway. Make of it what you will.

---

Not just your thesis -- a survey carried out in Canada 10-12 years ago by a very respected group found -- across all denominations from the Othies to the latest version of Pentecostals -- that "we" -- all of us who go to church -- keep about 10 per cent of the children we take to church/Sunday School. And that of those in church -- any church -- 90 per cent had attended church/SUnday school as children.

I remember the early 50s in a lowish Anglican church. Children went to SS at 10 and then went home. ONly the boys in the choir stayed on for Morning Prayer at 11 -- Holy COmmunion once a once and Easter Day if not a first SUnday. Once you were confirmed, you were on your own in terms of church attendence. I'd be willing to bet that of the 20-24 boys in the choir when I was there, 2-3 now attend church -- the rest were thoroughly innoculated against thinking church mattered because it was so incredibly boring (unless you were one of the few odd ones like me who actually enjoed it).

Eveything you've said makes sense to me -- my wife and I were lucky in that we attended a church which actually was fairly exciting -- excellent music (from across the spectrum, but all sung by everyone -- no choir) excellent preaching and a vibrant community with a fair number of kids. Our son (who would now identify as a Buddhist, I think) stuck it out until about 15. Our daughters, who both played in the band (one on drums, one on horn) are attenders. But I acknowledge that different personalities and different circumstances would have led to very different results.

The approach taken by some of those who seem to disagree with you seems to me to be typical of those who have never raised actual chidren, and out of the 1930s. It reeks of a culture of deference that has no match in current society -- there's nothing in the lives of children and young people today to which the ideas being proposed will latch on. (I'd argue we've gone too far in reacting against deference, but that's for another time.)

All you can do is your best, Karl. And that's what I think you probably are doing, given where and when you live.

John

---

quote:

---

To carry out such a task [of carrying "forward the work of Christ under the lead of the befriending Spirit"], the Church has always had the duty of scrutinizing the signs of the times and of interpreting them in the light of the Gospel. Thus, in language intelligible to each generation, she can respond to the perennial questions which men ask about this present life and the life to come, and about the relationship of the one to the other. We must therefore recognize and understand the world in which we live, its explanations, its longings, and its often dramatic characteristics.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
What seems to be "free-fall" in the UK is merely "sharp decline" in the US. What is viewed with desperation in the UK, in the US is merely cause for grave concern.

I'm hoping this explains Karl's graceless repetition of "bored shitless," "terminally tedious," "bored out of my skull," "BORED SHITLESS," etc., etc. Or, maybe he's just posting like a mother bear.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Change is needed in so mnay churches to bring them alive to families. Far too many are not prepared to even consider new expressions of church - that aren't dangerous IMHO - but stick in the mud until it and death overwhelm them. By that time there's noone left to carry on and the church becomes another relict dotting the landscape (just look at the number of closed churches in Norfolk).

---

Stuff like Fresh Expressions and Messy Church are the way forward, IMO. People are more likely to be drawn to Christ and the church if the style is culturally relevant to them, ISTM. But more and more people have no personal 'heritage' of Christian experience so 'culturally relevant' for them is, on the whole, (not entirely, to be sure), very different to the way many churches do things (liturgy, the language used, style of music, odd clothes...).

I think we in the developed world have to be so much more flexible about the way we 'do' church, now that most people have little experience of what church is like. The folks who we engage with in my church through our debt counselling project have, almost all of them, near enough no knowledge of Christianity, either its message or its practices. A traditional church service would be utterly alien to them, and - I'm pretty sure - thoroughly alienating.
 

---

Posted by Ad Orientem (# 17574) on :
 
Personally I wouldn't step foot into a Church that didn't worship liturgically. I think the question is how do we instill a deep appreciation of the liturgy into people. Both the Byzantine Rite and old Roman Rite liturgies I've ever attended were never short of young families. That's only my personal experience though, of course. For new members catechesis surely has a role?

[ 02. May 2013, 08:59: Message edited by: Ad Orientem ]
 

---

Posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider (# 76) on :
 
SA - useful analysis re pond differences. Can I also say that the idea of weekly attendance being our chief ethical obligation would probably be a pretty rare thing in the UK; certainly not something I've come across though I daresay it exists. Certainly I find it pretty alien; I would never dream, for example, of seeking out a service when I'm on holiday (that's vacation to you ); I feel a loyalty and commitment to my current church, and the people within it with whom I have relationships, but it would feel very strange attending a church where I don't know anyone. The CofE is on average rather lower than the ECUSA from what I understand, and perhaps these are more low church evangelical understandings that have crept up the candle here?

My "graceless repetitions" are down to three things: 1. the accuracy of the phrases in question; 2. the centrality of this point, and 3. lack of effort in finding synonymous phrases

EM's on the money as well to my mind. If my maths based on John Holding's reported report (I like that phrase) is correct, we could indeed be on the last throw of the dice. I can't see my local parish church lasting another generation. We tried to be part of whatever future it might have; for nine years we tried, but ultimately although it was our decision to leave, it was an unavoidable decision. Almost a "constructive dismissal"
 

---

Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Personally I wouldn't step foot into a Church that didn't worship liturgically. I think the question is how do we instill a deep appreciation of the liturgy into people.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
As I said, that's not my experience though. Surely a newcomer to the faith decides first what they believe and then go from there. Divine worship then becomes part of their catechesis, their instruction in the faith. Lex orandi lex credendi.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Personally I wouldn't step foot into a Church that didn't worship liturgically. I think the question is how do we instill a deep appreciation of the liturgy into people.

---

quote:

---

Both the Byzantine Rite and old Roman Rite liturgies I've ever attended were never short of young families. That's only my personal experience though, of course.

---

quote:

---

For new members catechesis surely has a role?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
As I said, that's not my experience though. Surely a newcomer to the faith decides first what they believe and then go from there. Divine worship then becomes part of their catechesis, their instruction in the faith. Lex orandi lex credendi.

---

How interesting! In my experience, it's usually the other way round - unchurched people are drawn to a Christian community through a friend or some other positive engagement with Christians. Their beliefs tend to be pretty woolly, beyond a fairly simple 'There's something in this Christianity thing, and my new-found Christian friends are great!'

So there's no strong conception of what church services ought to be like, merely a desire to get involved in a church. And, again just from my own experience and intuition, if an unchurched person goes along to a church service or two with their friend but doesn't find it welcoming, comprehensible and so on, they'll tend simply to give up on church, not try other churches where they most likely won't know anybody.

I think we forget how daunting many people find going to some place where (a) you don't know anyone, and (b) you aren't familiar with what's going on.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Liturgylover:
I do think part of the source of the problem - and let me emphasise the word part - is that for the Anglican Church in England there are simply too many churches, and much effort is spent in rural areas trying to keep village churches going with the Vicar rushing from place to place ministering to a handful. And in some towns two churches down the road effectively competing with each other. I know that the parish system explains why this is so, but it's not sustainable for the future.

A consolidation programme would help concentrate both manpower and resources and may help communities both to provide better traditional worship and develop innovative new ones. It should be planned rather than reactive, though it would, of course, be politically explosive.

It's worth noting here that the decline in numbers and resource is not universal. In London numbers attending have grown consistently, Electoral roll numbers and giving have increased by 60% since 1990 compared to a national decline of 15%, and Sunday attendance has risen by 25% in the same period. This growth isn't unique to London - Southwark, Coventry and York have grown but not as much.

Not surprisingly those with higher proportions of children have grown the fastest - and incidently half of these have no links to Church schools. The parishes that have grown are not all evangelical ones or ones that have adopted fresh expressions (in fact most haven't) but those with strong children's ministries, and offering weekday as well as sunday provision.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Liturgylover:
I do think part of the source of the problem - and let me emphasise the word part - is that for the Anglican Church in England there are simply too many churches, and much effort is spent in rural areas trying to keep village churches going with the Vicar rushing from place to place ministering to a handful. ... A consolidation programme would help concentrate both manpower and resources and may help communities both to provide better traditional worship and develop innovative new ones.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Stuff like Fresh Expressions and Messy Church are the way forward, IMO.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Liturgylover:
I do think part of the source of the problem - and let me emphasise the word part - is that for the Anglican Church in England there are simply too many churches, and much effort is spent in rural areas trying to keep village churches going with the Vicar rushing from place to place ministering to a handful. ... A consolidation programme would help concentrate both manpower and resources and may help communities both to provide better traditional worship and develop innovative new ones.

---

True of other denominations, too. Virtually all Methodist and URC ministers have more than one church - sometimes many miles apart; the lay preachers do their best but the quality varies enormously.

Nothing really to do with this post: but I think "consolidation" might work better if that meant United Churches in every community rather than a "core" Anglican church in one, a Methodist somewhere else and so on. That would ground Christianity in each community but of course tradition dies hard and some people simply wouldn't go if it wasn't "their" church.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
As I said, that's not my experience though. Surely a newcomer to the faith decides first what they believe and then go from there. Divine worship then becomes part of their catechesis, their instruction in the faith. Lex orandi lex credendi.

---

How interesting! In my experience, it's usually the other way round - unchurched people are drawn to a Christian community through a friend or some other positive engagement with Christians. Their beliefs tend to be pretty woolly, beyond a fairly simple 'There's something in this Christianity thing, and my new-found Christian friends are great!'

So there's no strong conception of what church services ought to be like, merely a desire to get involved in a church. And, again just from my own experience and intuition, if an unchurched person goes along to a church service or two with their friend but doesn't find it welcoming, comprehensible and so on, they'll tend simply to give up on church, not try other churches where they most likely won't know anybody.

I think we forget how daunting many people find going to some place where (a) you don't know anyone, and (b) you aren't familiar with what's going on.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
The vast majority of people come to the faith through friends. They will naturally start going to church with those same friends. Whether that's a church that floats in the rafters on a cloud of incense or a praise band worship fest, the whole thing will be largely incomprehensible. People rely on their friends to explain what is going on, and why.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chorister:
On the previous page, attending the Eucharist as a weekly obligation was discussed, something Karl said he'd not come across before. It's something I've heard of in relation to Roman Catholic church observance (and one instance in High Church Anglicanism). However, in my childhood church, I remember there was a printed notice up by the belltower. It stated that churchgoers should attend church at least twice a year, one of which should be Easter. I've heard several churchgoers refer wryly to that notice to explain why the sky wouldn't fall in if they missed a Sunday or two!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chorister:
On the previous page, attending the Eucharist as a weekly obligation was discussed, something Karl said he'd not come across before. It's something I've heard of in relation to Roman Catholic church observance (and one instance in High Church Anglicanism). However, in my childhood church, I remember there was a printed notice up by the belltower. It stated that churchgoers should attend church at least twice a year, one of which should be Easter. I've heard several churchgoers refer wryly to that notice to explain why the sky wouldn't fall in if they missed a Sunday or two!

---

That notice sounds as if it is echoing Cranmer - in which case it isn't about church attendance ut about receiving Holy Communion.

As another 'high churchman' i regard attendance at the eucharist (not receiving HC) to be an obligation on all Sundays and red letter days.
 

---

Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
I think the minimum still required of a confirmed member of the C of E, as regards reception of Communion, is indeed three times a year, of which Easter to be one.

And, of course, names to be signified to the Curate beforehand!

Ian J.
 

---

Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :
 
Yes leo, you are right, it was talking about taking Communion. (You have to remember I last read this notice a long time ago!)

But the point still holds true - we have to be careful not to require more of children than we require of ourselves as adults, remembering of course that children still attend regular assemblies (at least weekly, if no longer daily) in school in addition to any church attendance at the weekends.
 

---

Posted by PataLeBon (# 5452) on :
 
I was raised as a PK (preacher's kid), so I don't know how much really applies, but...

Going to church in my household was an obligation. It was my father's job (and therefore he had to go, even when people were irritating him). My mother didn't always like church or feel close to God, but she always went anyway. My brother and I were brought up by example, that you went to church, even when people were irritating, the service was boring, or you just didn't feel like it, it's what you did.

My mother occasionally jokes that I learned to read early because of the 1928 Prayer Book and the 1948 Hymnal. She says that the only way I would be quiet when I was 2-3 years old was for her to show me what was going on in church. My brother however thought that throwing his toys across church was much more entertaining. (Needless to say, no more toys came to church for awhile after that event).

The truth is that what children should do while the adults are in church has been going on for centuries. My grandfather and grandmother had old patterns for church toys for young children (small dolls that were made from fabric, little wooden toys, etc.), so I really don't have any problem with children coloring or playing quietly in church, it's been done for a long time.

I'm personally hesitant about Sunday School being done during worship because it seems (IMHO) to set a standard that children need to be educated and discuss their faith, but adults don't need to. Besides the other idea that children don't worship, adults do.

However, I lead Children's Chapel in my current church, but like most US churches our Sunday School is set at a different time, and we have worked at making sure that people understand that there is a difference. We also don't "make" all the young children (3-6) come. It's an option, and when one parent confessed that their 3 year old would rather remain in church, I told them to let him stay in church. Education was part of Sunday School, worship was part of Chapel, and he could worship with the adults.
 

---

Posted by Indifferently (# 17517) on :
 
Ancient Canon law prescribes weekly communion, and Acts 20:7 certainly hints at it. I bow to the universal authority of the Church on this one.
 

---

Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by PataLeBon:
I'm personally hesitant about Sunday School being done during worship because it seems (IMHO) to set a standard that children need to be educated and discuss their faith, but adults don't need to. Besides the other idea that children don't worship, adults do.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indifferently:
Ancient Canon law prescribes weekly communion, and Acts 20:7 certainly hints at it. I bow to the universal authority of the Church on this one.

---

When you mean 'my Church' could you say that please, rather than 'the Church'? Thanks!
 

---

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :
 

quote:

---

Originally posted by PataLeBon:


I'm personally hesitant about Sunday School being done during worship because it seems (IMHO) to set a standard that children need to be educated and discuss their faith, but adults don't need to. Besides the other idea that children don't worship, adults do.

However, I lead Children's Chapel in my current church, but like most US churches our Sunday School is set at a different time, and we have worked at making sure that people understand that there is a difference.

---

quote:

---

Now our little kids get a regular "homeschool" packet of devotional materials, Bible stories and games/activities for their parents to do with them at home.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
As for adults not needing to be educated and discuss their faith, IMO church services would be much more fruitful if there were a more explicit element of teaching (or rather, discipleship) in which people talked with one another about their faith.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
I once read that in the past, the Christian education of children was seen primarily as the job of their parents, not of specialist volunteers in churches.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
I get seriously concerned by the number of adult Christians who don't want to learn about their faith (and apply it to real-life situations). So often they think they've learned all they need by the age of 11 and never grow into a mature faith.

Why is this? Simply laziness to apply one's mind to matters of faith? A feeling that church should be a refuge from the world on Monday to Friday? Spiritual pride which says "I know it all"? A desire not to be disturbed from their comfy assumptions rather than to pursue the more risky path of pilgrimage and new discoveries? Or what?

Is it not rather hypocritical of adults to expect children to learn when they are not prepared to do so themselves?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
When you mean 'my Church' could you say that please, rather than 'the Church'? Thanks!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
As for adults not needing to be educated and discuss their faith, IMO church services would be much more fruitful if there were a more explicit element of teaching (or rather, discipleship) in which people talked with one another about their faith. I agree with your point, PataLeBon, that adults' and children's meetings should cover the same sort of ground, but I think it's adult meetings that are in most need of re-examination!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Indifferently:

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
When you mean 'my Church' could you say that please, rather than 'the Church'? Thanks!

---

No, when I say "the Church" I am referring to the universal Church here. My particular Church (the Church of England) has not ruled on the matter.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
But how do you get folks - children or adult - to attend a group outside the main Sunday worship time? IME only 20% of people are willing to do so. And some hate small-group discussion as they feel so exposed.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
... I once read that in the past, the Christian education of children was seen primarily as the job of their parents, not of specialist volunteers in churches. Toddlers weren't expected to sit quietly in church; they graduated to churchgoing as they approached adulthood. We (in the UK) seem to have de-skilled or de-motivated Christian parents by undermining their educational role in this process. I've never heard a sermon or a church discussion about how parents should discuss their living faith with their children. But I have heard of churchgoing parents who never talk to their children about Jesus. It's strange.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Enoch:
But what about family prayers?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Perhaps church primary schools and primary schools in small towns, villages and some suburban areas still do prayers and have some openly Christian imput. But I don't think this is universal. And although the CofE places a high priority on its church schools, I'm not sure what they count as success in terms of the spiritual life of the children there. Putting it crudely, what's the payback? (And I'm not referring to kids who have to go to church just to win a place at a 'good school'!)

As for family prayers, it would interesting to know to what extent these persist among Christian families.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Perhaps church primary schools and primary schools in small towns, villages and some suburban areas still do prayers and have some openly Christian imput. But I don't think this is universal. And although the CofE places a high priority on its church schools, I'm not sure what they count as success in terms of the spiritual life of the children there. Putting it crudely, what's the payback? (And I'm not referring to kids who have to go to church just to win a place at a 'good school'!)

As for family prayers, it would interesting to know to what extent these persist among Christian families.

---

It is law for UK schools to have prayer, church school or not. From what I can tell, prayers and hymns at assemblies is pretty normal even in big cities. There may be a lot of children excused from the assemblies on religious grounds, but the assemblies still happen.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Perhaps church primary schools and primary schools in small towns, villages and some suburban areas still do prayers and have some openly Christian imput. But I don't think this is universal. And although the CofE places a high priority on its church schools, I'm not sure what they count as success in terms of the spiritual life of the children there. Putting it crudely, what's the payback? (And I'm not referring to kids who have to go to church just to win a place at a 'good school'!)

As for family prayers, it would interesting to know to what extent these persist among Christian families.

---

It is law for UK schools to have prayer, church school or not. From what I can tell, prayers and hymns at assemblies is pretty normal even in big cities. There may be a lot of children excused from the assemblies on religious grounds, but the assemblies still happen.

---

I understand what the law says, but schools don't necessarily follow the law to the letter, especially if they don't feel it would be appropriate to do so.

I live in a multicultural area in a highly multicultural city.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
[QUOTE]It is law for UK schools to have prayer, church school or not. From what I can tell, prayers and hymns at assemblies is pretty normal even in big cities. There may be a lot of children excused from the assemblies on religious grounds, but the assemblies still happen.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
[QUOTE] but schools don't necessarily follow the law to the letter, especially if they don't feel it would be appropriate to do so.

I live in a multicultural area in a highly multicultural city.

---

© Ship of Fools 2016


UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0