|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: In which he invites discourse on the demerits of MoTR churches
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
It has been charged that the Ship is full of disenchanted former evangelicals who diss their previous affiliation.
Now, here's a chance to redress the balance, if imbalance there is ...
Here is your opportunity to state why MoTR and liberal churches stink.
It"s your chance to complain about oh so worthy but oh so PC worship lyrics, or MoTR complacency or lack of fervour or liberal apostasy or ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Ah, you jumped in quickly there!
The main reason they 'stink' is that almost no one wants to attend them. Who cares about theology, music, coffee mornings, etc. if no one's there?
I wouldn't use the word 'stink' though. Maybe the stink of decline? Or the stink of shabby chapels? But IME the friendly atmosphere in such churches is usually quite fragrant, figuratively speaking.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Aijalon
Shipmate
# 18777
|
Posted
Certainly. I'm a disenchanged evangelical, though not a "former" one. I gave up on the Pentecostal church of my upbringing and went with a more doctrinally sound church. All I got was a slightly more boring church. At least my kids are safe from accusation they are crippled Christians if they don't "fall out" under the spirit.
I visited a trendy church when I was cast adrift in my little ship on a church hunt. The star field moving behind the band on the three synchronized big screens was so awe inspiring to my visual senses I didn't even need to worship - I was having so much fun being dizzy.
--------------------
God gave you free will so you could give it back.
Posts: 200 | From: Kansas City | Registered: May 2017
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I was using 'stink' figuratively, of course, SvitlanaV2.
What I mean of course, is 'what's wrong with them?'
Ok, so nobody goes to them, at least where you are ...
What else?
What is wrong with them that stops people going?
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
One of the advantages is that people are free to come and go, without anyone creating much of a fuss. But that is also a disadvantage - people stop going and nobody much notices. Sometimes people want to be noticed and get upset by that, although they'd hate the intense interest shown by leaders of more dominant churches. You can't have it both ways. (Or can you?)
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
Could I suggest that a definition of what exactly is meant by "a MoTR church" might be useful? Maybe I'm wrong, but I get the feeling from other threads that it might have a more specific meaning on in the other side of The Pond than on this side.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
We might also ask Aijalon what he means by a 'doctrinally sound' church.
Given his signature, I could guess ...
But that would derail the thread away from the OP.
I'm not sure there are major Pond Differences when it comes to MoTR churches - although there are probably more of a variety in the US and Canada. I suspect that MoTR churches in New Zealand and Australia are closer to what we'd have in the UK, but I might be wrong.
Perhaps it would help if you could define the features from a US / North American perspective, Nick Tamen and then we can see if we are comparing like with like?
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jay-Emm
Shipmate
# 11411
|
Posted
Lost my post. Can't rewrite the assumed demerits of the extremes (and a bit about having prejudice and inaccuracies)
MoTR churches can have milder forms of the weaknesses of all of them. It might not quite be a concert with performers but it can still be a bit social clubby.
Sometimes without the strengths, a half-present ritual or a slightly naff praise band (that doesn't even give the high of it), social work that's a bit feeble. Leaving the down sides without the ups, and there will be occasions where that will happen.
Other times it can be of course be totally different. They are still in places that none of the other groups can get to (but that would be a different thread).
Posts: 1643 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Every time I've been to Oasis, Waterloo, it's been full to the rafters.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
Someone is going to have to define "middle of the road"!
I can see that in some churches it might mean not much of anything - a sort of Laodicean milk-and-water experience. But in others it may mean committed but missing the dafter fringes. You can get the latter anywhere in any tradition. But those are two different things.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I'm not sure there are major Pond Differences when it comes to MoTR churches - although there are probably more of a variety in the US and Canada. I suspect that MoTR churches in New Zealand and Australia are closer to what we'd have in the UK, but I might be wrong.
Perhaps it would help if you could define the features from a US / North American perspective, Nick Tamen and then we can see if we are comparing like with like?
That's the thing. I'm not sure there are "features" to define from an American perspective. "Middle of the road" means avoiding extremes to as to be acceptable to the widest possible audience. In a church context, it would probably simply mean not particularly conservative, not particularly liberal—unless one is talking about Episcopal churches, where it might mean not Low Church, not Anglo-Catholic—such that it's appealing to the largest possible cross-section of believers. And that seems contrary to the premise of the thread.
To be honest, I don't hear churches described as MoTR much at all over here. But I see it on the ship from British posters with enough regularity to make me assume—as I said, possibly incorrectly—that it has some more definite meaning there.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jay-Emm
Shipmate
# 11411
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:
Someone is going to have to define "middle of the road"!
I can see that in some churches it might mean not much of anything - a sort of Laodicean milk-and-water experience. But in others it may mean committed but missing the dafter fringes. You can get the latter anywhere in any tradition. But those are two different things.
I'd say if you pick a largish [British] village/small town church (of any denomination) it's probably somewhere middle of the [Left hand drive] road. (whereas the town ones can differentiate more). [I'd imagine there's be a similar rule for other countries but it will be different]
And similarly if given a church in a random group of 100 churches for anything you can expect to find 10* that are more extreme each way. Then it counts as MoTR.
*Going for 10 as you'd expect 50% to be in the middle 80% of three uncorrelated questions.
[ 24. May 2017, 20:47: Message edited by: Jay-Emm ]
Posts: 1643 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
I think we're talking about the rump of Protestant churches which can't be described in other ways - so take out the Evangelicals, the liberals, the ultra-conservatives.
It's the broad space which includes most modern Methodists, URC, a lot of Anglican parish churches, lots of welsh chapels of various types and so on.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
What are thé two "sides" of the road that these churches lie between?
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Aijalon
Shipmate
# 18777
|
Posted
@Gamaliel. ha ha. I asked for that. So "doctrinally sound" should be taken to mean that any church activity, policy or theology should be carefully proven... which may mean leaving out a lot of the mystery and wonder of being a believer in a God of love who hides a matter for kings to search out. There is not much searching anymore in a "doctrinally sound" church, it is just a church made of the sum of its deeds (and its voters).
did you guess correctly! It's SBC! In regards to that my church is dying out little place. We think it's safe from holy spirit there!
Middle of the road in my mind simply means not offending people and appealing to all the millenials and building nice playgrounds and coffee shops. It means preaching out of, blogs, NT Write or Timothy Kellar books more than actual scripture. And it certainly means using easy on the ears translations.
Most of all MoTR means being politically neutral on my side of the pond. Patriotism is the great equalizer.
--------------------
God gave you free will so you could give it back.
Posts: 200 | From: Kansas City | Registered: May 2017
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Yes, some definitions would be good - for example I wouldn't call Oasis Waterloo MoTR, it's evangelical.
Some denominations, of course, straddle multiple categories - obviously many Anglican churches are MoTR, but also many aren't.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mr cheesy:
I think we're talking about the rump of Protestant churches which can't be described in other ways - so take out the Evangelicals, the liberals, the ultra-conservatives.
It's the broad space which includes most modern Methodists, URC, a lot of Anglican parish churches, lots of welsh chapels of various types and so on.
Hmmm, to me MoTR means between Catholic and evangelical - it would certainly include many liberals, though of course liberals can also be Catholic or evangelical.
I think a good old fashioned alignment chart is helpful here:
Conservative Catholic Conservative MoTR Conservative Evangelical
Moderate Catholic True Neutral (Moderate MoTR) Moderate Evangelical
Liberal Catholic Liberal MoTR Liberal Evangelical
Obviously, it only includes Western Rite traditions and those derived from then - one including Eastern Rites would be pretty complicated!
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jay-Emm
Shipmate
# 11411
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
What are thé two "sides" of the road that these churches lie between?
I'm pretty sure it's not between a single set of 2 sides.
Whether that's in the centre of an octogon (say between Liberal/Ritualistic/Fundamentalist). Or midway between a number of bipolar issues. I don't know.
Posts: 1643 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
In our deanery (which divides into two parts - one 4-church team parish in the south, and seven separate parishes in the north), the churches have the following characteristics:
In the northern part:
1 x Anglo-Catholic - Mass/Benediction/Cell of OLW;
1 x charismatic-Evangelical (with a separate church plant on a newish housing development) - lots of missionary work, at home and overseas;
5 x 'Central' churchmanship - mostly Parish Communion/monthly Family Service, full vestments or alb/stole, few evening services, varying degrees of social interaction.
In the southern team parish:
1 x 'Central' - Parish communion/Family Service
1 x charismatic-Evangelical
1 x small mission church - Holy Communion/Family Service/Morning Worship
1 x small and very pretty mediaeval village church - wide mixture of services & lots of weddings!
The different churches have varying degrees of social interaction (the village church is noted for its work with young families).
Most of our parishes would, I think, be classed as 'MoTR', with the Carflicks and Evos at either side of the said road.
Many of the churches in other parts of the town are similar to the 'Central' ones - Our Place is the only A-C shack.
Does that help with definitions?
IJ
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jay-Emm
Shipmate
# 11411
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
I think a good old fashioned alignment chart is helpful here:
I've was introduced years ago a alignment chart with Lib/Evo/Trads as the vertices/corners of a triangle.
But at my last church, when heard it being described it had the edges labelled, which I like a lot more (there isn't a platonic extreme XXX church, and while you can't be all three extremes you can be two, which seems more accurate and interesting).
In both of these the centre of the triangle would be MoTR (either as a region round a bisector, e.g. extending to the Liberals in Pomona's def), or a circle (in Cheesy's).
Posts: 1643 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Honest Ron Bacardi
Shipmate
# 38
|
Posted
The triangle thing only works in Anglicanism, but it does have the advantage of being based on a historical analysis of the roots of modern Anglicanism (i.e. "The Panther & the Hind" by Aidan Nichols). I take the point about the Platonic nature of the vertices, though I have visited a few of those! But it does highlight the serious problem involved in making one-dimensional characterisations.
Apologies to non-Anglicans.
--------------------
Anglo-Cthulhic
Posts: 4857 | From: the corridors of Pah! | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Aijalon
Shipmate
# 18777
|
Posted
I think MOTR was originally intended to apply generically in a sense of being just average.
Any church in any deno or creed could behave as "average".
The hallmarks of MOTR (or not) might manifest as the following
Limited political discourse by leaders
High overhead (buildings and payroll costs)
contemporary style music or mixed contemp.
Business models and capital and giving campaigns
preaching "series"
volunteerism initiatives
retreats
divorce rates equal to secular
income and status of members mainly homogenous
--------------------
God gave you free will so you could give it back.
Posts: 200 | From: Kansas City | Registered: May 2017
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sober Preacher's Kid
Presbymethegationalist
# 12699
|
Posted
Eh? How many times to I have to repeat that Canada is NOT the US when it comes to denominational structure and history. Not by a long shot.
--------------------
NDP Federal Convention Ottawa 2018: A random assortment of Prots and Trots.
Posts: 7646 | From: Peterborough, Upper Canada | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
It seems like I've opened a can of worms with the definitions ...
I actually had something simpler in mind, but I can see it's not that simple ...
Kansas City is on another planet.
Canada probably less so.
My own definition of MoTR in UK terms would be similar to mr cheesy's.
In Free Church or 'Non-conformist' terms it'd be most Methodist and United Reformed Churches and those Protestants who weren't evangelical nor uber-liberal in the more radical sense.
In Anglican terms it'd be 'Broad Church' or the modern equivalent of the old Latitudinarian thing.
So a modicum of ceremony and a sense of decorum without anything to frighten the horses, whether stratospherically 'high' on the one hand or overly 'enthusiastic' on the other.
MoTR preaching would tend to deal in broad moral platitudes without a great deal of theological content. All about being living, caring and nice to everyone.
MoTR worship would be worthy but unexciting, lacking the kind of oomph and fervour associated with charismatic evangelicalism on the one hand or the sense of mystery and the numinous associated with more 'higher up the candle' worship.
Essentially, it's a talk with hymns.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
I think MOTR was originally intended to apply generically in a sense of being just average.
'Average' depends on the context, though. For example, in the British contexts I know, your list wouldn't be more relevant to MOTR churches than to other kinds, except that they probably spend a higher percentage of their income on the maintenance of buildings.
But above all, IMO, MOTR churches in the UK are defined by moderation. This is to say they may see themselves as evangelical, catholic, traditional, liberal or anything else, but only moderately so. A diversity of theological influences is tolerated among the laity so long as they're moderate and restrained about it. A fairly low key, moderate message will be delivered from the pulpit. There may be a few small groups, but not focused on discipleship, because individuals are free to develop their own (moderate) path of discipleship.
My background is with MOTR as a somewhat centre left and liberal leaning label. It goes along with mostly traditional hymns, a few 'worthy' late 20th c. numbers, and the occasional worship song. There's a strong sense of 'serving the community' through various social projects, and the church building is used by local groups. Specific evangelistic ventures take place occasionally, but aren't an embedded part of church culture, since there's an ambivalence about evangelism. However, I see the Fresh Expressions movement as a form of well-heeled MOTR evangelism. It keeps enthusiasts busy, but leaves mainstream congregations to follow their normal, moderate path.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
simontoad
Ship's Amphibian
# 18096
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Honest Ron Bacardi:
Someone is going to have to define "middle of the road"!
Oh! finally! The use of acronyms on this site is DMFHI*
*NSFW
--------------------
Human
Posts: 1571 | From: Romsey, Vic, AU | Registered: May 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
I think MOTR was originally intended to apply generically in a sense of being just average.
Any church in any deno or creed could behave as "average".
The hallmarks of MOTR (or not) might manifest as the following
Limited political discourse by leaders
High overhead (buildings and payroll costs)
contemporary style music or mixed contemp.
Business models and capital and giving campaigns
preaching "series"
volunteerism initiatives
retreats
divorce rates equal to secular
income and status of members mainly homogenous
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
Other than the point on political discourse, I have a hard time seeing any of those things as markers of a muddled-of-the-road church. I've encountered all of those things in lots and lots of churches on all sides of the road. The road would have to be exceedingly narrow for all of those things to be in the middle.
So far, the only clear picture I've gotten is that just about everyone means something different when describing a church as middle-of-the-road.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
mousethief
Ship's Thieving Rodent
# 953
|
Posted
In other words it's a throwaway term, a weasel word, meant to mean "a church I don't like because it's not as exciting/biblical/liturgical/spiritual* as mine."
Prove me wrong.
_______
*/self-consciously offensive
[ 25. May 2017, 03:14: Message edited by: mousethief ]
--------------------
This is the last sig I'll ever write for you...
Posts: 63536 | From: Washington | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
No, I don't think it's like that at all, Mousethief.
From a UK perspective, I think SvitlanaV2 has defined it well and she isn't citing it as something she necessarily agrees with or disagrees with, simply as the particular church background she has come from.
'Sweet moderation, the heart of this nation,' as Billy Bragg once sang.
What we've had here, of course, is a reaction to the civil and religious wars of the 17th century. Germany the same.
A lot of the keenies and the crazies killed one another or else buggered off to set up crazy communities on the other side of the Atlantic. (Gross simplification)
So what with that and the influence of the Anglican Via Media there developed a range of mild and moderate options.
In creating this thread, I'm addressing an apparent imbalance SvitlanaV2 has identified. Post Evangelicals like me are forever thrashing evangelical numptiness here aboard Ship whilst apparently giving the MoTR a free pass.
So here's an opportunity to pour shot in that direction too.
Equal opportunities.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Of course, apologies for the double-post, context and location come into it, too.
I'd tend to regard the Uniting Church in Canada (is that the right name?) and its equivalent in Australia as MoTR and groups like the United Methodists (is it?) and various moderate US Presbyterian groups as MoTR as well as some forms of US Baptist - National Baptist and American Baptist perhaps.
I might be wrong.
Of course these things are complicated. I read an article yesterday which talked about 'middle of the road evangelical and charismatic churches' in the US, by which it presumably meant mainstream churches within those traditions and not outliers who plunge their hands into baskets of rattle-snakes or head off into the hills armed with AK47s ...
In other parts of the world such moderate evangelical churches would themselves be seen as outliers.
It depends on perspective, on whether you stand.
In this instance, though, I'm running with SvitlanaV2's definition.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jay-Emm
Shipmate
# 11411
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
In other words it's a throwaway term, a weasel word, meant to mean "a church I don't like because it's not as exciting/biblical/liturgical/spiritual* as mine."
Prove me wrong.
Partially true. I'd say more other way round, as much. To call something MoTR you kind of have to recognize both sides, at least a bit.
Wheras if fixed at the extremes your going to see MoTR churches as compromised. Some just worryingly lapse with traditions, some beyond the pale.
Posts: 1643 | Registered: May 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
Yes, some definitions would be good - for example I wouldn't call Oasis Waterloo MoTR, it's evangelical.
Some denominations, of course, straddle multiple categories - obviously many Anglican churches are MoTR, but also many aren't.
I wouldn't call Oasis Evangelical - not in the usual definition of the term anyway.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
mark_in_manchester
not waving, but...
# 15978
|
Posted
These alignment charts are fun, and remind me of a past life in academic engineering:
"Optimising UK churchmanship within an n-dimensional paradigm, using both Genetic Algorithm techniques and the Hidden Markov Model".
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
quote:
Here is your opportunity to state why MoTR and liberal churches stink.
I'm a Methodist; the white guy in a room of Caribbean pensioners. Our church stinks because it's very heavy on committees which no-one wants to serve on. And when the sermon is 'Jesus wants us to be kind', which happens now and again.
But we follow the lectionary, and when preachers are challenging on the text (which happens fairly often) the congregation responds - we sing the hymns louder, and (think about those pensioners) we get the odd 'Amen' and sometimes a spontaneous reprise of the last verse of the hymn.
For me good MOTR Methodism is evangelical (high regard for the bible) and a bit liberal (we can talk about what it means, and that might change; but it surely means something, and what it means is really important). It is charismatic (what it means is subject to the inspiration of the Holy Spirit in our hearts and minds) but also historical and sometimes even a bit academic (Wesley wrote in 17** that........).
I'm an oddity in our church, but a good service like the above would stir our congregation, who mostly don't have an O level between them.
We'll be gone in 10-20 years, and I'll have to go somewhere else. We have RC connections - I don't belong there, but it's local, and (much like our committee problems) if you're not too attached you can let the hierarchical stuff pass you by.
--------------------
"We are punished by our sins, not for them" - Elbert Hubbard
(so good, I wanted to see it after my posts and not only after those of shipmate JBohn from whom I stole it)
Posts: 1596 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Jay-Emm--
quote:
Originally posted by Jay-Emm:
Whereas if fixed at the extremes your going to see MoTR churches as compromised. Some just worryingly lapse with traditions, some beyond the pale.
Yes, that was pretty much the perspective at my childhood fundamentalist church. Though they thought "the traditions of man" something to be avoided.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
Yes, some definitions would be good - for example I wouldn't call Oasis Waterloo MoTR, it's evangelical.
Some denominations, of course, straddle multiple categories - obviously many Anglican churches are MoTR, but also many aren't.
I wouldn't call Oasis Evangelical - not in the usual definition of the term anyway.
It's neither. It's liberal. And packed.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Of course, apologies for the double-post, context and location come into it, too.
I'd tend to regard the Uniting Church in Canada (is that the right name?) and its equivalent in Australia as MoTR and groups like the United Methodists (is it?) and various moderate US Presbyterian groups as MoTR as well as some forms of US Baptist - National Baptist and American Baptist perhaps.
I might be wrong.
Of course these things are complicated. I read an article yesterday which talked about 'middle of the road evangelical and charismatic churches' in the US, by which it presumably meant mainstream churches within those traditions and not outliers who plunge their hands into baskets of rattle-snakes or head off into the hills armed with AK47s ...
In other parts of the world such moderate evangelical churches would themselves be seen as outliers.
It depends on perspective, on whether you stand.
It does indeed depend on perspective, Gamaliel. I'd have to say this thread is confirming what I suspected—that you are taking understandings, distinctions and dynamics that make sense in the UK context and universalising them. In other words, you're taking what fits for British churches and assuming it fits everywhere. But as one living in one of the other places where you're assuming your understanding of middle-of-the-road fits, I'd say I think that assumption is wrong.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
I'd agree with Nick Tamen. I don't know the extent of Gamaliel's experience outside England, let alone the rest of the UK, but again he's not at all right about here.
As a general point, I'd suggest that the role of churches in Oz society is very different to that in England and the US - and any other society you'd care to name. It still differs between the various Oz States although they are more uniform now than 50 years ago.
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Aijalon
Shipmate
# 18777
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
quote:
Originally posted by Aijalon:
I think MOTR was originally intended to apply generically in a sense of being just average.
Any church in any deno or creed could behave as "average".
The hallmarks of MOTR (or not) might manifest as the following
Limited political discourse by leaders
High overhead (buildings and payroll costs)
contemporary style music or mixed contemp.
Business models and capital and giving campaigns
preaching "series"
volunteerism initiatives
retreats
divorce rates equal to secular
income and status of members mainly homogenous
Other than the point on political discourse, I have a hard time seeing any of those things as markers of a muddled-of-the-road church. I've encountered all of those things in lots and lots of churches on all sides of the road. The road would have to be exceedingly narrow for all of those things to be in the middle.
So far, the only clear picture I've gotten is that just about everyone means something different when describing a church as middle-of-the-road.
indeed, I painted the vast majority as MoTR. And yes, the way is narrow. I don't believe that churches are really pointing people to THE WAY. We have become lost in a sea of intellectualism, socio-liberalism, and materialism. I mean, it's really bad.
Someone earlier said that it's like a Laodicean "milk and water" kind of thing. I could not say it better than that.
--------------------
God gave you free will so you could give it back.
Posts: 200 | From: Kansas City | Registered: May 2017
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
To be fair Gee D and Nick Tamen, I have made it clear that any assumptions I'm making about Canada, the US and Australia are purely speculative.
I couched my comments in terms that suggested that I was open to correction if I was wide of the mark.
So no, I am not universalising my UK experience - and puh-leese - it's the UK not 'England' ... England is the bit that's bordered by Wales and Scotland ...
![[Biased]](wink.gif)
I also laid out what it was I was referring to: ie. the UK situation that both mr cheesy and SvitlanaV2 has described.
Any resemblance to matters in Canada, Australia, various parts of the USA, is by necessity going to be partial only and very different conditions exist in each place - and indeed, as Gee D helpfully reminds us, between different regions within each of those countries.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
What is is about 'I might be wrong' that you don't understand?
Dashed Colonials ...
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Aijalon
Shipmate
# 18777
|
Posted
Kansas City may not really be another world as you earlier said. My own definition of MOTR is certainly off of what yours is a little bit, but really now that we have fleshed it out I think I can fairly say the same MOTR you describe is present here. Once personal viewpoints are accounted for, it seems MOTR is prevailing all over, hence, "average" is still a fitting description.
Maybe it simply boils down to not being "offensive".
The Pure Gospel though is offensive to those that don't want to hear it yeah? And prophecy is offensive to the church that is backsliding, yeah?
--------------------
God gave you free will so you could give it back.
Posts: 200 | From: Kansas City | Registered: May 2017
| IP: Logged
|
|
North East Quine
Curious beastie
# 13049
|
Posted
Gamaliel has mentioned US Presbyterians, but no-one's mentioned British Presbyterians yet.
I go to a MOTR Scottish Presbyterian church. It's the only church in the village and we have a few non-Presbyterians; Anglicans who don't want to travel to the next town, or Methodists and Baptists who don't want to travel to the next city. I think the fact that non-Presbyterians are comfortable here is part of what defines us as MOTR.
Our demerits? To be honest, I think the good things about our church far outweigh the demerits. But the size of our congregation has remained static despite new housing developments within the parish, and I'm still in the younger half of the congregation at the age of 53, so we are obviously not attractive to a large section of the population. The evangelical church in the next town is growing, so it's offering something which our MOTR church isn't.
[ 25. May 2017, 14:53: Message edited by: North East Quine ]
Posts: 6414 | From: North East Scotland | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I was teasing you Aijalon. I certainly recognise some elements of your MoTR definitions, of course.
The difference is probably an issue of scale as much as anything else. I tend to tell Americans that although there are indeed big cultural differences, we tend to have almost everything you have in religious terms - only on a much smaller scale.
I'm glad someone has mentioned Presbyterians in the UK. Of course, generally speaking Presbyterians are pretty invisible south of the border as the English Presbyterians were largely subsumed into the United Reformed Church in the early 1970s.
In Wales, the Calvinistic Methodists were Presbyterian ... now that confuses a lot of people ...
Anyhow ...
People are posting value judgements now about MoTR churches - which is what I was hoping to encourage ... not out of cussedness or spite but to redress those times where we've all had a go at evangelicalism or more full-on forms of Christianity.
These areas are tricky to define, of course, but I think 'milk-and-water' would be a good descriptor for what I'm angling at - and I'm sure there are 'universal' elements of that that transcend national, regional and cultural differences.
It's a tricky one too as a kind of principled moderation is one thing - and I don't think that's at all unattractive ... but sloppy milk-and-wateriness is something else again ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mark_in_manchester:
[Our Methodist church] will be gone in 10-20 years, and I'll have to go somewhere else.
And knowing that is sad, isn't it?
What many people, especially non-Methodists, don't realise is that the (MOTR) British Methodist church decline is widespread. They think it's occurring in pockets, just in inner city areas or wherever. But this isn't the case.
In a later post I might highlight some possible reasons for the decline, but at this point I just want to highlight the extent of the 'stink', so we're not in any doubt:
A sociologist at Lancaster Uni says that British Methodists are crumbling into the sea, with membership falling by a third over the past 10 years, to about 200,000 people. Attendance has fallen by a similar amount.
In 2013 there were over twice as many funerals as baptisms, or 2.5 to one, and children's attendances had fallen by 58%. There were 13% as many weddings as funerals.
And numbers on community rolls, which include the church 'fringe', have also fallen fallen dramatically, by 48 %.
Church Statistics (see p. 2) had Methodist decline at 19% between 2005-2010, sharing the highest spot with the Presbyterians; from 2010-2015 Methodists were projected to take the top spot at 24%. This makes it the fastest declining denomination in England, having overtaken the URC.
One of the commentators in a link above suggests that part of the solution would involve the Methodists closing more churches. But the denomination already closes more churches than any other: 310 between 2005-2010, which is more than one a week. This table covering 2008-2013 gives the Methodists a shocking rate of church closure compared to other denominations.
Decline is not a new thing. Between 1970-2000 Methodism lost a third of its churches (while the CofE lost less than a tenth) - and also lost 46% of its membership during the same period. (Refs are available.) Its membership was declining more rapidly than its churches, but closing the churches clearly did nothing to halt the loss. It's possible that oversupply might have been an issue in many cases, but church closure is detrimental to churchgoing overall, and is particularly serious in rural areas. But there there were other significant losses in the 60s-70s, for example a 33% drop in local preachers and a 55% loss of ministers on trial. (Refs are available.)
The denomination has also been aging for a long time, with 1969 the first year in which deaths exceeded new members. As the death rate given above would indicate, most are now retirees; in 2011 69% of adults in the Connexion were over the age of 65. There were more Methodists over 80 than between 20-40, and this was true in all but two circuits! (At least it proves that Methodists have long lives!)
Things are being done in many places to address these issues, but with the decline as longstanding as it is (some date it to the mid-1800s) and society moving culturally and numerically further and further away from Christianity (whether organised or nominal) 'turning things around' will take more energy and time than the denomination possesses as a whole. A few clergy are openly talking about the end. Many want to merge with the CofE, but mergers haven't halted Methodist decline in the past.
However, the Holy Spirit may still have long-term use for individual congregations. Unlikely to be those that look typically MOTR, I would think....
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stetson
Shipmate
# 9597
|
Posted
Gamaliel wrote:
quote:
I'd tend to regard the Uniting Church in Canada (is that the right name?)
Assuming we're talking about the same group, no. It's still called the United Church Of Canada. Probably has a certain affinity(if not affiliation) with the groups calling themselves "uniting", but I'll leave any further explication on that to Sober Preacher's Kid, should he be so inclined.
[ 25. May 2017, 15:34: Message edited by: Stetson ]
--------------------
I have the power...Lucifer is lord!
Posts: 6574 | From: back and forth between bible belts | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Nick Tamen
Ship's Wayfaring Fool
# 15164
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
What is is about 'I might be wrong' that you don't understand?
Dashed Colonials ...
Nothing. Just trying to point out politely that you may be right about being wrong.
Seriously, though, it all leaves me thinking this will likely be one of those threads where no one is talking about the same thing because everyone has different understandings of what middle-of-the-road means.
--------------------
The first thing God says to Moses is, "Take off your shoes." We are on holy ground. Hard to believe, but the truest thing I know. — Anne Lamott
Posts: 2833 | From: On heaven-crammed earth | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I had half an eye on Sober Preacher's Kid when I typed that, expecting to draw down his wrath ...
![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
On SvitlanaV2's observations on the rate of Methodist decline, the question is whether they've brought that on themselves or whether it's a societal / cultural shift we can none of us do a great deal about ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
What is is about 'I might be wrong' that you don't understand?
Dashed Colonials ...
Nothing. Just trying to point out politely that you may be right about being wrong.
Seriously, though, it all leaves me thinking this will likely be one of those threads where no one is talking about the same thing because everyone has different understandings of what middle-of-the-road means.
Heh heh, yes, quite.
I think, though, that Aijalon is right that there is some sense in which we are on the same page.
Other than some of the issues around scale, plant (owning buildings and so on) and practice, I can certainly 'clock' what he means by MoTR once I've taken Pond Differences into account.
Obviously, I am thinking in a UK context and using UK examples - inevitably, as that's where I live and I don't pretend to know a great deal about the church scene where you are.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
