|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: You are a minor, know your place
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
There's something rather disturbing which I've come across in some Anglican churches: ones which would never dream of dividing along gender lines, yet instead make a division between staff and congregation, to the extent that the attitude is one of an autocratic headmaster in charge of a group of schoolchildren. The children are seen as a nuisance if they ask questions about anything, are expected to keep quiet and just accept everything that is done by the autocrat(s) in charge. It is convenient for the congregation to be kept in ignorance about theology, wider church politics and local affairs, because then the autocrat(s) cannot be challenged. There is a chief autocrat, then line managers, then those managed. What the hell is talk about line managers even doing in an individual church situation? Who is putting about these ideas in the first place? And why is the church supposed to be run like a school, an office or a business corporation?
Perhaps your church organisation is different - more co-operative maybe, more congregation-led, or perhaps others recognise the hierarchical structure (or at least the attitude) mentioned above?
What I'd like to know is, what shipmates think is the ideal way to organise a church so that members of the congregation feel able to play a full part without being herded like sheep, or schoolkids?
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
Maybe I'm just tone deaf when it comes to spotting "attitude" but I've never encountered this. I have a tendency to corner clergy after the service and argue something from the sermon, and I've never had one take (noticeable) exception to it. Most just seem pleased someone was paying attention.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
When I was a pastor, I was once asked how I saw myself, as a servant or as a shepherd. Trick question. In someways a pastor ends up being both.
Just this past week my pastor was discussing what it was like to be the pastor of my church. He said he knew it was going to be different when people began to question where he was coming from, but my congregation is made up of largely university types who aren't afraid to question authority.
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Midge
Shipmate
# 2398
|
Posted
quote:
And now the kids will go out to their groups
Sigh. ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
--------------------
Some days you are the fly.
On other days you are the windscreen.
Posts: 1085 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pre-cambrian
Shipmate
# 2055
|
Posted
If you're treated as minors, think yourselves lucky.
As part of the choir here, we will be losing our Saturday tomorrow singing two services at Southwark Cathedral as part of a "Lancelot Andrewes Festival". (The festival doesn't seem very important if the lack of reference on their website is anything to go by.)
As usual someone decided the choir would do this without bothering to ask us in advance. It is just presumed that we (and the parents of the children) will give up the only free day we have in the week, the only time available to do a whole range of domestic and other tasks (given we will be singing two services on Sundays as a matter of course.)
So not so much minors as performing animals to be hired out (free) at will.
[ 27. September 2013, 12:44: Message edited by: Pre-cambrian ]
--------------------
"We cannot leave the appointment of Bishops to the Holy Ghost, because no one is confident that the Holy Ghost would understand what makes a good Church of England bishop."
Posts: 2314 | From: Croydon | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
Oh dear. What do I observe as I listen to conversations of church-goers, clergy and lay? On both 'sides':
Insecurity, whinging, status-grabbing to the point of treading on others, good talk which fails to be translated into action, and plenty of ideas about what others should be doing.
Love of God, self-sacrifice, patience, kindness, laughter and love.
In other words, human beings......
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
What the hell is talk about line managers even doing in an individual church situation? Who is putting about these ideas in the first place? And why is the church supposed to be run like a school, an office or a business corporation?
I know that safeguarding policies increasingly expect or require that volunteers who work with children or vulnerable adults will have role descriptions, and clear lines of accountability. Readers are expected to have annual reviews, and working agreements, and these are expected to who who they are accountable to. Ditto assistant clergy etc. (Incumbents also should have regular reviews/appraisals, although it is less clear who they are answerable to*) It is also generally regarded as good practice that any significant volunteer role should have some clear statement about what is involved, what lines of accountability there are (e.g. to PCC or incumbent, or to leader of pastoral visiting team), and a process of review and evaluation of the role and how a person is getting on with it. Outside the church someone who exercise that role in relation to another is called a line manager, so although (like you) I don't much like the term, I'm not surprised to find it creeping in.
(*Some incumbents seem actively to play bishop off against PCC and vice versa, others seem to find it very stressful trying to square the circle between what the hierarchy expect and what the parish wants/needs)
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
When I was a pastor, I was once asked how I saw myself, as a servant or as a shepherd. Trick question. In someways a pastor ends up being both.
A few years ago, my boss thought it would be entertaining to send me to a day seminar on leadership. At one point the person leading the seminar got onto the subject of "servant leadership" - at which point she turned to me and said, "But you'll know about that because Christianity invented it."
I knew what she meant, of course, and I kept to myself my instinctive response - "Maybe, but in the CofE you'd never think so." But it struck me that if we ever came close to taking to heart what Jesus said about the servant-leader, we'd have happier laity and clergy.
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Plique-à-jour
Shipmate
# 17717
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
What I'd like to know is, what shipmates think is the ideal way to organise a church so that members of the congregation feel able to play a full part without being herded like sheep, or schoolkids?
What does this question even mean? Churches can't plan for every emotional problem represented among their congregations.
--------------------
-
-
Posts: 333 | From: United Kingdom | Registered: Jun 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Laurelin
Shipmate
# 17211
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
It is convenient for the congregation to be kept in ignorance about theology, wider church politics and local affairs, because then the autocrat(s) cannot be challenged.
Really? People in churches don't read the news, watch TV or keep themselves politically informed? ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
I've been in evangelical Anglican churches for 30 years, pretty much, and while I have at times witnessed sad/bad behaviour from both clergy and congregations, I've never encountered the situation you describe in your post. Honestly, I haven't. It's just never been that bad. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif) ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
I have seen some of that authoritarianism in more fundie circles, though.
I have seen some good vicars take abuse and flak from well-meaning people in their flock. I've seen at least two vicars of mine (neither of them wimps or shrinking violets) shouted at in a PCC by someone with serious anger management issues. That person was not someone vulnerable, they had quite an important position within the diocese.
I've also known some clergy who are control freaks and who DO treat their congregation rather like kids. And I've also known some lay people who are right royal pains in the neck.
Most of the people I know in the pews are more than capable of telling the clergy their unfiltered, uncensored opinions!
Servant leadership, yes. Absolutely.
And the people of God must recognise that their vicar/pastor has an anointing of God to carry out their ministry. That doesn't mean the vicar/pastor is infallible and can never be questioned.
--------------------
"I fear that to me Siamese cats belong to the fauna of Mordor." J.R.R. Tolkien
Posts: 545 | From: The Shire | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pre-cambrian:
So not so much minors as performing animals to be hired out (free) at will.
Or pawns on a chessboard. I guess, in a strange way, it's a backhanded compliment to be treated thus.
So tell me more about servant leadership - it sounds intriguing.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by BroJames:
I don't much like the term, I'm not surprised to find it creeping in.
(*Some incumbents seem actively to play bishop off against PCC and vice versa, others seem to find it very stressful trying to square the circle between what the hierarchy expect and what the parish wants/needs)
I'm sure that some of it comes from these sorts of pressures. OTOH there has been a trend for the last few decades from churches to try and borrow from the business world, and whilst this originally started in evangelical circles, I'm not surprised that it went from there to Evangelical Anglican and then more general Anglican circles.
Willow Creek invited Jack Welch to speak at their Global Leadership conference a couple of years ago, and no doubt these ideas then leech into other streams of Christianity. Some HBC influenced churches also seem rather in thrall to this sort of thinking.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
I'm not disagreeing, but I do think the whole safeguarding agenda, and come to think of it issues around Common Tenure to do with capability procedures and also clergy discipline have all hastened the flow of this language into the church.
In the end, although I am not keen on the language of person specifications, job descriptions, and line managers (for reasons I haven't really explored), I do think it is important to think about the right kind of person for a task or role and what gifts and abilities they need; I do sympathize with people who want/need to be clear about what they are being asked to do who they are to work with and what are the limits of their authority; and who will support them or draw a line for them in their task.
Otherwise you end up with a situation where Mr. So-and-so is asked to play the piano for a service, and then discovers that he is also expected to choose the hymns. A couple of weeks later he finds that the organist has moved away and that no replacement is in sight. Finally he runs head on into an argument with the choir leader about what music should be played before the service begins which is in reality a proxy for her concern that she no longer has a role in choosing hymns which the previous organist did, but the minister didn't know about. The sotto voce argument they have in the vestry is then reported to be about something completely different (which as it happens neither of them knew about) and which doesn't exist in quite the form that rumour has stated, and the whole church will take a year to recover from it. (Except Mrs Beamish who has never liked the use of any hymn written since 1950 (and not many after 1900) and chooses this moment to worship in a neighbouring church. So the first thing the minister knows is when her ecumenical colleague in the neighbouring church sympathizes with her about the very difficult time she must be having.)
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
So tell me more about servant leadership - it sounds intriguing.
Servant leadership is just what any good parent does - serve the child's needs to help the child grow healthy physically, emotionally, spiritually. NOT, think the child's job is to serve the parents needs.
Can be tricky, a leader may genuinely believe the best way to serve the needs of others is to impose the leader's will - which actually we do to kids, denying them candy just before supper, taking them to the doc for shots, making them go to school.
Also tricky when what is perceived as good for the group conflicts with what is good for a specific individual. Many churches (and charities and businesses) cover up misbehavior by "important people" on the grounds it's better to sacrifice one or a few mere members than lose the important contribution of the misbehaving one (major donor, organist, popular preacher, whatever).
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Can be tricky, a leader may genuinely believe the best way to serve the needs of others is to impose the leader's will - which actually we do to kids, denying them candy just before supper, taking them to the doc for shots, making them go to school.
This is exactly what I'm getting at - yes parents have to do this, but when the child grows up they are given space to think for themselves. Perhaps some churches are just reluctant to let their congregations grow up?
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arabella Purity Winterbottom
Trumpeting hope
# 3434
|
Posted
I think the situation is a bit like that which medical professionals face these days. In the old days, they were almost like gods, and no one dared question them. Now, with the internet providing so much information, and television presenting so many fallible doctors, that authority has broken down. And some medical professionals can't cope - I've never forgotten standing behind the reference desk when I worked in a medical library and listening to two (quite young) endocrinologists bewailing the fact that their patients felt they could ask questions. I wanted to shake them, and it certainly made me very wary when I had to go to one of them.
Likewise, in the old days, clergy didn't have to contend with parishioners who did theology degrees or joined Sea of Faith. I have had the experience of being slapped down by more than one clergyperson when I dared to offer a theological opinion. My mum, who bridges the gap, once had an argument with her vicar over whether he could share some of the insights he had gained from a clergy study weekend with some well-known theologian - he told her that she wouldn't be able to understand and wouldn't be interested, she told him to give it a go. He never did.
I was talking with an Anglican friend who is people's warden in her church yesterday. She made the comment that what she observes at Synod is an organisation that is still operating as though it doesn't have to convince anyone of its relevance to modern life, thus alienating more and more people, both young and old. I think she's got the same questions as you, Chorister!
--------------------
Hell is full of the talented and Heaven is full of the energetic. St Jane Frances de Chantal
Posts: 3702 | From: Aotearoa, New Zealand | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
Perhaps some churches are just reluctant to let their congregations grow up?
Well, one clergy person told me I cannot know God because I didn't go to seminary so I am obligated to believe and do what she tells me about God, without any questioning. TEC. And a different TEC clergy person shut down the local chapter of Order of St Luke the Physician because at the monthly meetings people were (quietly) praying for each other for relief of illnesses and the clergy guy said only clergy are allowed to pray for the sick, because the Bible says to ask your elders to pray for you, and only clergy are elders.
So yes, some clergy view lay people as permanently incompetent. And to be fair, so do some lay people, like those who complain because a lay person instead of a clergy person visited her in the hospital.
A different issue is churches resisting people "growing up" because - it's like when a boss discourages his secretary from going back to college, the real reason being he doesn't want to lose a good secretary and have to train a new one. One month (in a third world country) three different missionaries of different denominations told me their home church opposed their leaving to go to the mission field saying it couldn't possibly be God's will to remove from their church such a valuable volunteer worker.
Yup, just when the kid gets capable enough to give some real help with the house and yard, he leaves!
The ultimate goal of rearing kids is to send them out in the world (and hope they come back for an occasional visit.) A lot of churches are focused on building a local congregation partly by encouraging stagnation, your job is to fit into an existing activity slot and stay there the rest of your life serving the needs of that program slots (instead of noticing and serving the needs of people).
Like telling your kid he has to stay in third grade forever because the third grade program will fold if he doesn't re-enroll. In his nursing home he'll still be enrolling in the third grade because that's been defined by "authority" as his job in life, unless at some point he gets smart and turns to God and his own built-in talents/interests instead of church/clergy as his source of guidance.
Hard to "hear" God when you have been brainwashed about what God wants of/for you. God's ways are good.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arabella Purity Winterbottom:
I think the situation is a bit like that which medical professionals face these days. In the old days, they were almost like gods, and no one dared question them. Now, with the internet providing so much information, and television presenting so many fallible doctors, that authority has broken down. And some medical professionals can't cope - I've never forgotten standing behind the reference desk when I worked in a medical library and listening to two (quite young) endocrinologists bewailing the fact that their patients felt they could ask questions. I wanted to shake them, and it certainly made me very wary when I had to go to one of them.
Likewise, in the old days, clergy didn't have to contend with parishioners who did theology degrees or joined Sea of Faith.
I'm trying to work out whether it is driven by insecurity, or just that people are still operating under old, or past, ways of working. Perhaps a little of both?
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
I'm trying to work out exactly what all of you going on about other than generic rants against generic clergy with an abstract solution (servant-leadership). As a priest, I hate that sort of thing. My vestry knows that if they expect me to take a complaint about anything seriously it had better specific. I also hate the, "Some people are upset." Oh, the ever famous some people who are members of every congregation (probably mosques and synagogues as well) in every denomination in every nation of the world. You never see their faces but boy do they like to whine about some of the pettiest shit.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arabella Purity Winterbottom
Trumpeting hope
# 3434
|
Posted
My mum's complaint was very specific - she wanted to learn more about a particular theologian's thinking - and her vicar blew her off, belittling her in the process.
How does it hurt him to share some of his learning with the congregation? My mum would have loved to go to hear the theologian herself, but he didn't give any public lectures, only seminars with clergy.
When I was a small child, that same parish had a wonderful vicar, a single man who helped adults and children grow in faith and knowledge - I still remember some of his sermons. Sadly, he was also lonely and alcoholic, due to having almost no support from his colleagues and bishop, and he was removed when I was 14 (my mum told me this later). Since then the parish has had mediocre priests with few pastoral or theological skills. For the men and women who were in their 20s and 30s at the earlier period, there is still a huge gap - their faith and understanding had been opened and extended, then ... nothing.
They're now in their 70s and 80s, and over the last 25 years have formed their own study groups completely outside the church. They still go to the eucharist, but they have given up on being fed spiritually in church (or for that matter, being given any pastoral care). They regard the vicar as nothing more than another, fallible, human, and believe that he has little to offer. There is no sense that he might have anything extra to offer them - because they have been doing theology for themselves for so long that its probably true.
Admittedly, this is only a brief case study of one parish, but I find it interesting that in this case it is the elderly who are drifting away. Mum said to me recently that she's not even sure why she attends the eucharist any more except that she sees all her friends there. This is a lady who was the first female layreader in her diocese, vicar's warden for many years, in charge of pastoral visiting, etc., until she lost her mobility two years ago.
--------------------
Hell is full of the talented and Heaven is full of the energetic. St Jane Frances de Chantal
Posts: 3702 | From: Aotearoa, New Zealand | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
The only thing specific is that once the vicar didn't tell her what the famous theologian had to say. I can think of a few reasons why he wouldn't. One, he wasn't paying attention. Two, he paid attention but thought it was boring and didn't want to repeat it. I attend these things all the time. Most of the time, the material is boring and not the least bit earth shattering. Some people, clergy and lay, get a lot out of these sorts of things. Others don't. Three, maybe he didn't understand what the theologian was saying. Four, maybe he did but didn't feel he could explain or that it wasn't worth the attempt at explaining (how long did the theologian talk). Five, he really thought your mother wouldn't understand. Understanding real theologians and not just the pop variety found on the religion shelf at the local bookstore chain requires not only a background in theology but in philosophy as well. Trying to explain all the background information would be an undertaking in itself even if the vicar had it himself.
One night in seminary, I remember reading a section of a book by Bulgakov to my carolmate. We were in our senior year of seminary. His response was a blank stare followed by, "Yeah, I got nothing." Now, let's say Bulgakov was alive and addressed a clergy gathering and my friend was in attendance. Bulgakov repeats verbatim the passage I read to my friend that night at seminary. Theology isn't my friend's thing. He may not be paying attention to Bulgakov at all. If he does, he's not going to understand what he's saying. My buddy goes to church the next morning. A parishioner of his has heard of Bulgakov and asks him what Bulgakov said. What will he say?
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leaf
Shipmate
# 14169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
The only thing specific is that once the vicar didn't tell her what the famous theologian had to say. I can think of a few reasons why he wouldn't. One, he wasn't paying attention. Two, he paid attention but thought it was boring and didn't want to repeat it. I attend these things all the time. Most of the time, the material is boring and not the least bit earth shattering. Some people, clergy and lay, get a lot out of these sorts of things. Others don't. Three, maybe he didn't understand what the theologian was saying. Four, maybe he did but didn't feel he could explain or that it wasn't worth the attempt at explaining (how long did the theologian talk). Five, he really thought your mother wouldn't understand.
Six: he can't remember, but was too embarrassed to say so.
Posts: 2786 | From: the electrical field | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
The way I see it, the congregation pays its vicar to be its spiritual/religious councillor. When a member of the congregation asks him/her a religious question, he/she can't wave it away by not paying attention, or by finding it too boring. Of course, "I'm sorry, I don't have time to answer right now but I'll get back to you next week" or "To be honest I'm not very familiar with this theologician, but I'll try to find some sources that will tell you more about him" are acceptable. Anything else, and he simply isn't doing his job.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
I also hate the, "Some people are upset." Oh, the ever famous some people who are members of every congregation (probably mosques and synagogues as well) in every denomination in every nation of the world. You never see their faces but boy do they like to whine about some of the pettiest shit.
If you hear that, always respond politely but firmly with the question "Who are we talking about here?" If no answer is forthcoming, then politely but firmly inform the person who gives you that information that you wish to hear no more of the matter.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
Doesn't "Father" always know best in some circles?
It's actually a form of abuse if/when the written or unwritten rules require you to know your place. Yes, there are (IME) "clergy" who think they know best and yes, there are (IME) "lay" people who are serially abusive towards clergy. Some of the worst offenders on both sides are the lay players behind the scenes who support a clerical caste because it gives them (the players) the power.
Oh for a servant church without the power plays - thing is to those of us who have come into "ministry" from the outside world, its a joke. We don' think you're tough throwing your weight around in your little parish/deanery/diocese whatever - we've seen it all before for way longer hours each day to a far greater depth. Don't stop it hurting though.
The longer we have the clerical/lay divide, the tougher it gets to eradicate both problems. Especially as has been pointed out, denominational structures seem to have a vested interest in perpetuating the (incorrect) dualism that is clerical/lay. Even in denominations who are promoting lay involvement, you get the feeling that it's a case of "this far but no further" as people get to lose power if it goes too far. We're being exploited there too.
When we see lay celebrations of the eucharist in cathedrals (without reserved sacrament) then I'll know that the problem has been addressed. That's a real, authentic, worshipping community. Until then it's just window dressing or play acting and that's abuse in its own right.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arabella Purity Winterbottom:
How does it hurt him to share some of his learning with the congregation?
It does seem such a waste when priests have undergone several years of theological training to doctorate level and beyond, if they only ever preach simple sermons without reference to any of it, because they think the congregation are too simple to understand. Yes, some of them probably are, but if the congregation also has a large number of educated persons that's a poor excuse.
It must be very difficult to get the balance right, but to always err on the side of 'nobody would understand' is really taking it too far. The Oxbridge (for example) educated, who take posts in far flung rural areas, should never assume the congregational IQ is universally low.
Or perhaps some priests see their theological education as a necessary evil to be forgotten about as soon as they leave their college? That might explain it.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
My own experience is that within a generally acceptable length of sermon in the rural CofE - not exceeding 20 minutes, say - it isn't really possible to explore theological issues in much depth. Obviously one hopes that there is some benefit to the depth and quality of the sermon from that level of training.
The alternative that I can see would be to provide some additional opportunity or forum for this kind of discussion within the life of the Church, but it does require a great deal of preparation, and a space in the Church's diary, and it probably needs to be more than a one-off event. For an incumbent looking after four or five rural churches, say, it is probably next to impossible to make it happen.
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
The longer we have the clerical/lay divide, the tougher it gets to eradicate both problems. Especially as has been pointed out, denominational structures seem to have a vested interest in perpetuating the (incorrect) dualism that is clerical/lay.
IME there are a fair number of churches where the clergy are over-stretched and rely on a small group of helpful laity who help them run stuff. In consequence you get a little cabal of laity who have a large amount of influence, and while this is to some extent earned by virtue of being helpful, at the same time they lack the accountability of the clergy (and indeed of 'official' lay ministrants such as readers).
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
originally posted by Exclamation Mark:
When we see lay celebrations of the eucharist in cathedrals (without reserved sacrament) then I'll know that the problem has been addressed. That's a real, authentic, worshipping community. Until then it's just window dressing or play acting and that's abuse in its own right.
Yeah, it's all about your pet issue. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
I was raised in Baptist and Charismatic churches where nobody cared who presided at the Lord's Supper the four times a year they devoted a Sunday night to it. Did those churches have less conflict than the Episcopal parish? No, if anything, they had even more. Seemed like every time a new pastor came to the church a power play ensued. The pastor had three options. One, become the pawn of the lay people with the money and influence. Two, use his position to establish himself as the spiritual authority whose actions and teachings must be respected (sermons on not touching God's anointed were common). Spiritual abuse often followed even without any concept of Holy Orders at all. Three, resign or be voted out. All his enemies needed was a simple majority vote in either the congregation or board of elders depending on polity of the church. How hard was that? Spread some rumors and gossip. Make mountains out of molehills. Stop coming for a few Sundays. Next thing you know, members who had no problem with the pastor will vote for him to leave to keep the peace and appease their friends.
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by BroJames:
My own experience is that within a generally acceptable length of sermon in the rural CofE - not exceeding 20 minutes, say - it isn't really possible to explore theological issues in much depth. Obviously one hopes that there is some benefit to the depth and quality of the sermon from that level of training.
The alternative that I can see would be to provide some additional opportunity or forum for this kind of discussion within the life of the Church, but it does require a great deal of preparation, and a space in the Church's diary, and it probably needs to be more than a one-off event. For an incumbent looking after four or five rural churches, say, it is probably next to impossible to make it happen.
And only two or three people come with any regularity and only if they have nothing else to do. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
quote:
Beeswax Altar: The pastor had three options. One, become the pawn of the lay people with the money and influence. Two, use his position to establish himself as the spiritual authority whose actions and teachings must be respected (sermons on not touching God's anointed were common). Spiritual abuse often followed even without any concept of Holy Orders at all. Three, resign or be voted out.
Wow, it certainly is sad when the relationship between a pastor and his congregation is defined by power relations like this.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
Indeed
I prefer episcopal polity for that very reason.
--------------------
Losing sleep is something you want to avoid, if possible.
-Og: King of Bashan
Posts: 8411 | From: By a large lake | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
justlooking
Shipmate
# 12079
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
I also hate the, "Some people are upset." Oh, the ever famous some people who are members of every congregation (probably mosques and synagogues as well) in every denomination in every nation of the world. You never see their faces but boy do they like to whine about some of the pettiest shit.
If you hear that, always respond politely but firmly with the question "Who are we talking about here?" If no answer is forthcoming, then politely but firmly inform the person who gives you that information that you wish to hear no more of the matter.
Excellent advice.
I know what the OP is talking about. I've experienced it in previous churches. However, I'd say that dynamics within some (many?) congregations in the CofE empowers that kind of cleric. ISTM it isn't, usually, a case of an overbearing cleric imposing their will but a dynamic within a congregation that allows a certain type of cleric to manipulate them.
Posts: 2319 | From: thither and yon | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Moo
Ship's tough old bird
# 107
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Five, he really thought your mother wouldn't understand. Understanding real theologians and not just the pop variety found on the religion shelf at the local bookstore chain requires not only a background in theology but in philosophy as well.
How did he know she wouldn't understand? She may have had a very sophisticated understanding of theology and philosophy; some lay people do.
If someone asks a question, they deserve an answer. If they don't understand the answer, that is their problem. Assuming they aren't capable of understanding shows a serious lack of respect.
Moo
--------------------
Kerygmania host
---------------------
See you later, alligator.
Posts: 20365 | From: Alleghany Mountains of Virginia | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
WearyPilgrim
Shipmate
# 14593
|
Posted
quote:
I was raised in Baptist and Charismatic churches where nobody cared who presided at the Lord's Supper the four times a year they devoted a Sunday night to it. Did those churches have less conflict than the Episcopal parish? No, if anything, they had even more. Seemed like every time a new pastor came to the church a power play ensued. The pastor had three options. One, become the pawn of the lay people with the money and influence. Two, use his position to establish himself as the spiritual authority whose actions and teachings must be respected (sermons on not touching God's anointed were common). Spiritual abuse often followed even without any concept of Holy Orders at all. Three, resign or be voted out. All his enemies needed was a simple majority vote in either the congregation or board of elders depending on polity of the church. How hard was that? Spread some rumors and gossip. Make mountains out of molehills. Stop coming for a few Sundays. Next thing you know, members who had no problem with the pastor will vote for him to leave to keep the peace and appease their friends. [/QB]
Clergy abuse and laity abuse are present in churches everywhere, regardless of their polity. I've known of it in parishes with episcopal, presbyterial, and congregational government. I dare say that in most of these instances, Jesus left the building a long time ago.
The advantage to episcopal and presbyterian polity is that when such a problem exists in a parish, there is someone on the outside looking in who can address it (Ideally. It doesn't always happen when it needs to. Witness the Crystal Cathedral). Churches of congregational polity, OTOH, often kowtow to the local powers-that-be and don't dare to challenge them. One or two people with big mouths and strong opinions, claiming authority that isn't rightfully theirs, can tyrannize a church. So can a pastor (and a pastor's spouse. I've seen that happen, too).
Posts: 383 | From: Sedgwick, Maine USA | Registered: Feb 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
There is a chief autocrat, then line managers, then those managed. What the hell is talk about line managers even doing in an individual church situation? Who is putting about these ideas in the first place? And why is the church supposed to be run like a school, an office or a business corporation?
Perhaps your church organisation is different - more co-operative maybe, more congregation-led, or perhaps others recognise the hierarchical structure (or at least the attitude) mentioned above?
You might have missed out some info here, Chorister? Who precisely has been talking about 'line managers'? Or who is saying the church is supposed to be run like a school or an office or a business operation? So far you appear to be the only one who has introduced that terminology in this thread, but presumably you feel someone somewhere is doing these things? Who and where? Is it some kind of official CofE policy thing?
There are certainly times I've seen elements of line managing going on in the church because of the practicalities of who's responsible for what, who's being paid to achieve what, how groups needs to be organized in order to be and do what they want to be and do etc. But in itself there's nothing wrong with that. It's called getting things done.
And all social/legal structures have elements of being like a school or a business. A church that doesn't take its business aspects seriously won't last long. And no parish I know is constituted of individuals who are all completely level spiritually, educationally, theologically, and in terms of ability and desire to serve. If a school is a place where pupils are grouped according to need and ability and responded to accordingly, for the furtherance of the pupils' education and benefit, then in some sense maybe a church has to have some elements of schooling to it.
However, if what is being complained about is the old chestnut of a tyrannical vicar/laity/PCC lording it over everyone else, then it looks like human nature is doing its usual thing. Good corporations and schools don't infantilize or tyrannize their members. Good churches shouldn't either.
Anglican churches have vestries or PCCs where lay people, voted into office by parishioners (not even necessarily churchgoers), have the opportunity to contribute essentially and largely to how their church is run. Some do it extremely well. Some don't. Some clergy, undoubtedly, are permitted to build private kingdoms by their PCCs. My experience has been of the other type, where the clergy are very welcome to chair the meetings how they like, make suggestions, share 'visions' and all that; but the final decisions about what actually happens to the church community end up being dependent on the consensus of the voting body, ie the PCC/vestry.
--------------------
Irish dogs needing homes! http://www.dogactionwelfaregroup.ie/ Greyhounds and Lurchers are shipped over to England for rehoming too!
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
I have, however, noticed in large charismatic-evangelical Anglican churches (e.g. HTB "plants") that they are bringing in management styles from the business world. I can see how it happens - it's where the church members are coming from. At best it can greatly enhance the way the church operates. At worst it can be jargon-heavy and even inhumane (results-centred rather than people- or God-centred). I also suspect that it may disenfranchise folk who do not work in that way. There is a balance to be struck between "efficiency" and "messiness", between "programmes" and "the unpredictable wind of the Spirit".
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
Oh BTW, my church has found the perfect solution for this kind of problems between clergy and the congregation
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
There are certainly times I've seen elements of line managing going on in the church because of the practicalities of who's responsible for what, who's being paid to achieve what, how groups needs to be organized in order to be and do what they want to be and do etc. But in itself there's nothing wrong with that. It's called getting things done.
FWIW, there was a situation at my parents' church where a member of the choir came into conflict with the vicar, and the vicar resolved it by routing his response via the choirmaster. The vicar was a former army chaplain and said he was following the principle of the 'chain of command', and he said this was a necessary part of resolving conflict. Some others who were tangentially involved in the situation seem to think it was effective.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
If I understand correctly, the problem is some people feel as if self-proclaimed "spiritual superiors" are trying to prevent them from growing.
When I get too focused on any church organization I feel like "someone is sitting on my head squishing me" to reduce who I am now, as well as prevent me from growing into being the fuller and more complete and healthy (therefore more contributing) person God had in mind when making me.
My solutions:
1. Stop regarding the church institution as any kind of spiritual authority or primary source of spiritual knowledge. In attitude, turn away from the institution, look to God instead, and start seeing God in many places/ways/people not just in the church.
The church institution is not your boss in any way, don't pretend it is!
2. Decide what you want/need to get out of church involvement, then take those wants/needs, and independently of the concept of formal churches think of how to fulfill them. (Note - your wants/needs include opportunities to grow and serve that the church may be blocking. Fulfilling who God intends you to be is not selfish, it means you are making your uniquely valuable contributions to others.)
Church might be part of the answer. Or more than one church. I have read 10% of regular churchgoers are involved in more than one church because there are things important to them not offered by their regular church. Like, I led VBS music at not-my-church. We both benefited, they were desperate for someone to lead the music program, I had never worked with kids and discovered a new intriguing "world" to enjoy.
Activities in the community or in private groups outside any churches may be important for your spiritual health and contrbutions, too.
Do not believe anything the churches tell you about who you are or should be (other than a dearly loved child of God). Church institutions view people in terms of fitting them into "essential for our self image as a church" programs or "our theology says" pigeonholes without regard for whether it's a healthy fit for the individual.
Try taking a break from church-going sometimes. I have found experimentally I am happier healthier more God-enjoying if I take at least one week off each month plus most of the summer off. We each need to find out own best balance.
The point is, focus on delighting God by becoming all you can be, do NOT focus on being approved of by the church institution. That's worshiping God's creation (moon, stars, churches) instead of worshiping God.
Irregular attendance means you will never be fully approved of, elected to church office, thought of as "spiritual," awarded "service to the church" plaque, thought of as a "valuable" or "loyal member". <Shrug/> Since when is approval of men the goal? </shrug>
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
In reply to Anselmina, the second half of your post makes more sense to the situation I describe. But I did introduce the phrase 'line manager' because this term is used in my church and I was curious to know if it has been used elsewhere. In a previous church, business models were being overtly introduced as a way of organising the church - again I am curious to know if this is becoming more common. I live in a far flung corner of the British Isles, so it may be more of a Diocesan thing than Nationwide. (The Diocese has already been reorganised into Mission Communities and the number of priests allocated sparingly to them. There was plenty of jargon involved in that initiative, too!) And, of course, it may be empty terminology, with business jargon being used to mean something not so harsh-sounding. But it does bring you up short, especially when the autocratic style of leadership is already in evidence.
So, not whingeing or ranting, but trying to puzzle something out. The replies so far have been most helpful in this regard. I guess people won't understand what I'm talking about unless they have already come across similar attitudes and vocabulary in their own, or another, situation.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Avila
Shipmate
# 15541
|
Posted
I am line manager for a lay worker, I have been a lay worker before ordination and on paper had a line manager, but he only did paperwork re leave dates etc.
As a line manager it is my role to support R, challenge her when overworking, go in to bat for her when people have unreasonable expectations (often just unthinkingly) and yes I can do paperwork too when needed.
once a quarter there is a larger management/support group with representatives from the churches she works with where we can bounce around thoughts about how the role is evolving and opportunities to focus on and where to set something aside to avoid trying to do too much.
In comparison I had been appointed to a vague role with no guidance, sounding board, reflection on direction etc so there was no shared vision of the role.
The language of line management may sound business and formal but it is much, much more than that.
Power dynamics in churches predate management speak, can certainly exist within it and will outlast it. Some of the business style structures are about mitigating these issues, and have clarity of expectations and roles etc. They may or may not achieve that - but that is another matter.
--------------------
http://aweebleswonderings.blogspot.com/
Posts: 1305 | From: west midlands | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garasu
Shipmate
# 17152
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Avila:
As a line manager it is my role to support R, challenge her when overworking, go in to bat for her when people have unreasonable expectations (often just unthinkingly) and yes I can do paperwork too when needed.
May be you could talk to my (non-church) line manager...?
--------------------
"Could I believe in the doctrine without believing in the deity?". - Modesitt, L. E., Jr., 1943- Imager.
Posts: 889 | From: Surrey Heath (England) | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
VDMA
Apprentice
# 17846
|
Posted
Coming from Roman Catholicism, I often had the impression which the O.P. describes. As an Anglican for a few months, it was exactly the opposite situation! Perhaps the Canadian Episcopalians I knew were simply liberals, and thus too nice for "that sort of thing" - or perhaps all Canadians are too nice for "that sort of thing".
We need hierarchy, regardless. The Apostles certainly had no problems withdrawing to pray and lead while the deacons served tables. Cessationist or Continuationist, someone always has to lead. It's possible to do it in a Christian way, however, without acting in an overbearing manner. Systems are not inherently bad or good; it's how we act within the framework.
--------------------
Des Christen Herz auf Rosen geht, wenn's mitten unterm Kreuze steht.
Feel free to visit the Anglican Forums: http://forums.anglican.net/
Posts: 29 | From: Canada | Registered: Sep 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by VDMA:
Systems are not inherently bad or good; it's how we act within the framework.
I'm coming to the conclusion that it's not necessarily the language used, but the attitude engendered which ultimately counts.
Thanks to Avila for showing that, sometimes, rather alarming management-speak can sometimes be used for positive reasons.
However, there is a little niggle of doubt - as I have observed (in my situation) that the more management-speak is used, the less is spoken of God, of Love, and other more usual church-related words which we have come to expect and be reassured by. Perhaps, in the end, it all comes down to concerns about money, and how effectively the church is marketed. At which point, I feel we have lost something important.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Avila
Shipmate
# 15541
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Garasu:
quote:
Originally posted by Avila:
As a line manager it is my role to support R, challenge her when overworking, go in to bat for her when people have unreasonable expectations (often just unthinkingly) and yes I can do paperwork too when needed.
May be you could talk to my (non-church) line manager...?
My own experience shapes my approach - I try to be what I needed. We are a good team and get on as people too. If we had radically different opinions then it might be different, and if any issues contractually I would be first in line to raise it. So things aren't always as straightforward.
--------------------
http://aweebleswonderings.blogspot.com/
Posts: 1305 | From: west midlands | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Moo:
quote:
Originally posted by Beeswax Altar:
Five, he really thought your mother wouldn't understand. Understanding real theologians and not just the pop variety found on the religion shelf at the local bookstore chain requires not only a background in theology but in philosophy as well.
How did he know she wouldn't understand? She may have had a very sophisticated understanding of theology and philosophy; some lay people do.
If someone asks a question, they deserve an answer. If they don't understand the answer, that is their problem. Assuming they aren't capable of understanding shows a serious lack of respect.
Why is it the clergyperson's job to supply that answer? Assuming s/he even knows the answer (see various explanations that preceded).
Even if the theologian doesn't give seminars for laity, s/he probably writes books that can be purchased or borrowed-- and if not, there are 1000s of theologians who do. It seems to me that it was the mom in question who was making the clergyperson the gatekeeper, not the pastor. If you want to learn more about some area of theology, there are plenty of ways these days to explore it without getting a permission slip from your clergyperson. (The Ship being just one of many.)
[ 28. September 2013, 20:09: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garasu
Shipmate
# 17152
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Why is it the clergyperson's job to supply that answer?
Maybe s/he should accept that "I don't know" is an acceptable answer...
--------------------
"Could I believe in the doctrine without believing in the deity?". - Modesitt, L. E., Jr., 1943- Imager.
Posts: 889 | From: Surrey Heath (England) | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
I don't think it's necessary for the clergy person to have to answer very single question. But, seeing as they have sometimes spent 6+ years studying theology, it would be rather strange if they kept most of it deliberately hidden and didn't even illustrate sermons with the information. What are they supposed to talk about instead - their train sets?
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
I don't think it's necessary for the clergy person to have to answer very single question. But, seeing as they have sometimes spent 6+ years studying theology, it would be rather strange if they kept most of it deliberately hidden and didn't even illustrate sermons with the information. What are they supposed to talk about instead - their train sets?
Of course. But we're talking about a specific situation where a specific woman cornered her clergyperson and demanded s/he fill her in on a specific theologian's work. As we've seen on this thread, there are all sorts of reasons why the clergyperson may have been unwilling or unable to meet her request, and I'll add another: far too often these requests come on Sunday mornings as I'm busy running from one thing to another, with a 100 items-- prayer requests, hospitalizations, scheduling conflicts, etc. that I've similarly been told on the run-- I'm trying to keep prominent in my mind long enough to be able to stop and write them all down.
Again, the woman in question is the one making the clergyperson the gatekeeper, not the pastor him/herself.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
