|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: When a church has "had problems"
|
PRESBY DUDE
Apprentice
# 16035
|
Posted
Forgive me if I'm on the wrong page or if this topic has been over-discussed elsewhere. I'm not a seasoned contributor yet. The issue deals with the church in which our best friends are very active, not my own. However, my pal is serving as chairperson of the church's official board, so he's been having quite a continuing headache.
In a situation that's hardly new, the recently dismissed married clergyman was having an affair with the church secretary. I've known this soap opera episode to occur in far too many churches, and it's admittedly old stuff---even biblical! However, it can really hurt a congregation.
The church's attendance, formerly about 135 on an average Sunday, has dropped to about 60 faithful souls. Likewise, offerings have about dropped by half. The church has had some reserves, but in two or three months, there won't be enough money to pay the bills. I'm not sure that the lack of attendance and contributions is anger on the part of parishioners so much as profound disappointment in a pastor that they really liked and respected. He was very charismatic (in personality, not in theology or worship styles), and the youth especially looked up to him.
Much as one admits that the pastor is a sinner like the rest of us, the problem of a badly hurt church remains. A church official from "headquarters" was called to visit with the congregation at a special "healing meeting", but only about 35 or so showed up at the session---not enough to be greatly helpful.
I suppose that time heals most (if not all) wounds, but my pals are worried that eventually there's not going to be enough left of a once healthy parish for much healing to take place.
Any helpful observations or experiences? If my post is in the wrong spot, please transfer it elsewhere. Thanks!
[ 23. December 2012, 00:08: Message edited by: PeteC ]
Posts: 22 | From: Kansas, USA | Registered: Nov 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
Just some encouragement, you have a church of 60, I know churches that are smaller and vibrant.
You had a meeting and *half* of those remaining came, that's a huge percentage to show up for a meeting, and yes it's enough to do some real good.
Be aware of the church you are, not the church you were; built forward from today, not longing for yesterday.
A church here split a year or two ago over something similar; both halves are now vibrant, smaller but healthy, churches.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Just some encouragement, you have a church of 60, I know churches that are smaller and vibrant.
You had a meeting and *half* of those remaining came, that's a huge percentage to show up for a meeting, and yes it's enough to do some real good.
Be aware of the church you are, not the church you were; built forward from today, not longing for yesterday.
A church here split a year or two ago over something similar; both halves are now vibrant, smaller but healthy, churches.
Echoing all of this. 60 seems like a healthy congregation size to me. Obviously the issue of church income is more difficult but I certainly don't think the scandal would be enough to kill the church off.
![[Votive]](graemlins/votive.gif) for you and your church family
--------------------
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
|
|
North East Quine
Curious beastie
# 13049
|
Posted
No helpful suggestions, but I really sympathise. I was a member of a large, vibrant church with a very popular minister. He was arrested (and subsequently jailed) for taking inappropriate photographs of young girls in the congregation.
The church spiralled down in the same manner you describe; people left, giving dropped, more people left, giving dropped still further. Financial crisis loomed. We (my husband and I) initially tried to put more effort into being active within the church, but after a couple of years we burned out and left too.
What would have helped? Possibly more recognition of just how badly some people had been hurt, and just how complicated the situation was. Your friend's church is in a less complicated situation, so I don't think anything I suggest would be relevant in this situation.
However, one bad mistake our church made was to throw the baby out with the bathwater, and change styles of worship the whole congregation had been comfortable with, just because they were associated with the former minister. We lost bits of identity as a reaction to what had happened, and once we'd lost those bits of identity, there was less to keep people from leaving for another church.
Posts: 6414 | From: North East Scotland | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
the giant cheeseburger
Shipmate
# 10942
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Just some encouragement, you have a church of 60, I know churches that are smaller and vibrant.
Echoing all of this. 60 seems like a healthy congregation size to me. Obviously the issue of church income is more difficult but I certainly don't think the scandal would be enough to kill the church off.
for you and your church family
I disagree, a raw number like "60" doesn't tell the full story that this is a church which has just lost the majority of the congregation and is likely to lose even more people before the crisis is over. That they are still burdened with the financial liabilities of a much larger congregation is also a major concern.
In my opinion what is probably most important is for the denominational diocese/conference/synod/presbytery (or whatever other regional body is involved) to wind up the congregation and immediately reopen it as a parish mission run by that regional body, and with a minister skilled in providing leadership in tough situations. This will provide a clean slate that will allow the structure and ministries to be built up from scratch to a level more appropriate for the reduced congregation's capacity, with the advantage of the regional body taking the heat for the tough decisions and providing the financial support to do it smoothly.
From what I read in the OP, I don't think it's dead. I do think it has a major cancer that could kill it within a few months if it's not given some urgent surgery. My opinion is that this can't be done by the congregation attempting to bumble along on their own, they need some strong leadership from their denomination.
Oh, and the denominational body needs to be referring the minister, their spouse, the secretary and (if applicable) their spouse to professional counsellors. The primary reason for this is that they are people who have all been hurt by terrible decisions, but the secondary reason is that it's possible that the denomination may have a legal duty of care and/or some culpability if it could be shown their structures contributed to what happened.
--------------------
If I give a homeopathy advocate a really huge punch in the face, can the injury be cured by giving them another really small punch in the face?
Posts: 4834 | From: Adelaide, South Australia. | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Heavenly Anarchist
Shipmate
# 13313
|
Posted
I have been a member of 2 churches in the last 12 years which have undergone dramatic and damaging church splits. Adultery was not a feature of either but instead they involved the congregation far more personally.
The first was a popular Baptist church where the new minister wasn't the first choice of all the congregation. When he made some changes, some of which were already planned before him, a large chunk of the congregation left but still came back to meetings to call votes of no confidence in him, even two years later. It was horrible, strangers turning up to shout during meetings, and it was very spiteful to him. The situation was resolved when the lovely minister humbly volunteered to go but that the church needed to draw up a constitution and work out what they actually wanted from a minister.
The second church split was far more public. The new vicar clashed with some regular attenders who were used to being in control. Cue years of dispute in church, people refusing communion from certain people, accusations, tribalism, the works. Many people left, the vicar had a nervous breakdown for a year, lots of stress everywhere. We also left during this time as we felt we couldn't stay in a church which was behaving like this - I can honestly say that I met some of the most unpleasant people I have ever known there. It ended when the vicar was taken to an ecclesiastical court so that the antagonists could remove him. The poor vicar was publicly humiliated, his face all over the news.
The result of all this to the churches? They are both growing now, it took a few years but churches do heal. In particular the Anglican one, which I know more about as I'm still in the parish, is doing great work in our village. If these churches can come back alive after a situation which involved everyone then I can't see any reason why the same won't be true where the trauma was isolated to a couple of individuals, despite the hurt of the congregation. In these cases a change of leadership was a major boon in repairing the church but likewise the congregation also had to be on board with any changes.
--------------------
'I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by.' Douglas Adams
Dog Activity Monitor
My shop
Posts: 2831 | From: Trumpington | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
