Thread: Looking for advice Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.


To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=027028
Posted by Serafina68 (# 16142) on :
 
I have been a member of my local church (fairly high CofE) for over 20 years - I've run the toddler group, been a member of the bellringers, have children who are servers and choristers and have served on various committees etc.
My (now ex of nearly 7 years) husband attends the same church with his new partner as do the rest of his family and our children. Until October last year, I had continued to worship at the church, but I have been feeling increasingly uncomfortable being around the ex family members and I have not attended a service for nearly 6 months. In that time I have not been contacted by a single member of the congregation or clergy to ask if everything is ok - that is until the weekend when I received a note through my door asking if I wanted to be taken off the coffee rota as I had missed my previous 2 slots......!
Perhaps I just need to get over it, but part of me really feels as though the church I have been a part of for so long is not acting as Christian community and actually I need to say something to someone about how I feel. Am I the only one that thinks that not being around to pour coffee should not really be the trigger for someone from the church to get in touch? Do I just suck it up and move on? I don't want to tell my (teenage) children not to go, but I'm not sure that the ethos of this community is what I want them to be part of.
 
Posted by Gildas (# 525) on :
 
Tell the Vicar how you feel. My guess is that he, or she, will be simply aghast at the situation. If they are not then you can push off to a new venue PDQ with a clear conscience. Churches are often crap at dealing with marital break-ups. But if you say "I'm a bit upset about this". Then Father (or Mother) might be able to do something about it. If you stay silent, then the poor chap (or poor woman) won't know what's going on. Clergy, by and large, are not psychic. But will try and do the right thing if you let them know what is going on.
 
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :
 
I can see why you feel that. You may be right. But do you think it is because nobody has noticed? Or is it because there are people who have noticed and might be concerned, but are too embarrassed and don't quite know what to say?

Most of us don't quite know what to do with a difficult personal situation. We are terrified of its blowing up in our faces. So we tend to hold back from engaging with it. Having two people attend regularly who used to be married to each other but aren't now is exactly the sort of situation where other people don't quite know what to do. That's even without the extra frisson that one of them is there regularly with their new wife. I probably shouldn't even ask this, but were all three of you usually there at the same time, or do you try to arrange matters so that you go to different services?

It is even possible that the note might have been an indirect way of trying to make contact, or of testing the waters to see whether you still wanted to have contact made with you, a tentative attempt to give you the opportunity to talk if you wanted to.
 
Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :
 
I don't know. We haven't received any calls either after not attending since October. I think sometimes some people go to church for less than Christian reasons, and perhaps we can hope it eventually forms them.
 
Posted by hilaryg (# 11690) on :
 
In your situation I would definitely speak up to either the Vicar or a Churchwarden - both on your personal difficult situation but also on the disappointing reaction to your absence from your fellow church members.

You have my sympathies regarding the situation with your ex, I'm afraid I can't add much to that, but I have been in a situation where I took "time out" from attending services, and the only time anyone mentioned they missed me, they immediately followed up with "we've had trouble finding someone to serve/read/make the coffee...." etc.

I think unfortunately many congregations are just very bad at this kind of thing. If you are very old, ill or otherwise vulnerable and/or on the prayer list, your absence will usually be noted and followed up. If you are generally healthy and regarded as "capable", your absence will be noted but for some reason no-one actually follows through to see if you are ok.

It seems to be worst in larger congregations - easier to fall through the gaps and everyone thinks someone else will have made the phone call. Better in smaller congregations and in churches with home groups and other support networks.

I'd guess that if you have been separated from your ex for nearly 7 years, everyone probably assumes you are fine with the situation and no-one has any idea of how you are feeling. Do let someone know, don't let the situation go on any longer.
[Votive]
 
Posted by The Silent Acolyte (# 1158) on :
 
Do you have actual friends at the parish with whom you meet outside of parish functions? I mean the occasional dinner or in-home bible study, or small group volunteer jobs at non-parish organizations?

I find that when my friends are missing me, they reach out. But, with the normal ebb and flow of parish attendance, other parishioners are much less likely to be so well-connected to each other that they reach out after an absence.
 
Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :
 
A common story. I have a shelf-ful of books about leaving church, bought a few years ago when I was going thru a hard time church-wise, they all say 99.9999% of people who leave a church (whether by slipping out of the habit, or being newly unable to come, or intentionally leaving but not telling anyone) are never contacted by anyone from the church - not any official representative of the church, not anyone they though of as friends at the church, not anyone from their small group - nada.

Which of course raises the question - when have any of us noticed someone was missing and followed up with them?

Anyway, a friend recently had a blow-up with his pastor (pastor scolded him in front of a group for newly getting divorced,although that denomination tolerates divorce), he left church in anger at the pastor's scolding him about a personal matter in public instead of in private. He called me a few months later and said he'd been active in that church for 27 years, run VBS, substitute preached (Methodist lay speaker), led Sunday school, faithfully attended the weekly men's prayer group - he thought these were close friends, shared lives, but not one person had called, emailed, anything.

Except one man bumped into him at the grocery, scolded him for telling the pastor he was out of line instead of meekly agreeing with the public scolding, and turned his heel.

So my friend is going to no church. If 27 years several days a week is not enough to build a community that includes him when he's down, there's no point in trying church anymore.

Meanwhile I've been out for 3 months (and counting) due to a car wreck from which I'm slowly recovering but can't yet walk far enough to get from a parking place to the church, but my shelf-ful of books taught me not to be surprised no one has called - not from the music group of 6 I'm part of (hard to miss the absence of one of 6 members!), not from the committee of 5 I'm missing meetings of, not from the people I normally sit with.

Just saying, your experience is normal. Don't take it personally. Don't read anything into it.

According to the books, "out of sight out of mind" is the norm in churches of all denominations no matter how obvious your absence.
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I can see why you feel that. You may be right. But do you think it is because nobody has noticed? Or is it because there are people who have noticed and might be concerned, but are too embarrassed and don't quite know what to say?

Most of us don't quite know what to do with a difficult personal situation. We are terrified of its blowing up in our faces. So we tend to hold back from engaging with it. Having two people attend regularly who used to be married to each other but aren't now is exactly the sort of situation where other people don't quite know what to do. That's even without the extra frisson that one of them is there regularly with their new wife. I probably shouldn't even ask this, but were all three of you usually there at the same time, or do you try to arrange matters so that you go to different services?

It is even possible that the note might have been an indirect way of trying to make contact, or of testing the waters to see whether you still wanted to have contact made with you, a tentative attempt to give you the opportunity to talk if you wanted to.
I suspect Enoch is spot on. This is a pattern I've seen far too often-- including, far too often, in me. People (and by people, I mean me) are afraid to have the hard conversations, afraid to ask the hard questions because they're afraid of the answer. Most likely they recognize what is going on-- most divorced couples aren't able to maintain attending the same church for all that long-- and are afraid of intruding in what feels like a private matter.

I don't think that necessarily excuses it. I know when I engage in that passive kind of response, I feel pretty cowardly about it. But it may help explain it a bit, and may suggest that people do care more about you than they let on.

Praying you find the community you're seeking.
[Votive]

(now I need to go make some contacts I've been avoiding for precisely this cowardly reason...)
 
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :
 
On the whole, churches don't cope well with conflict. When an individual deliberately leaves a church there's always conflict in the air: either the conflict that drove them away, or the potential conflict that might erupt if a church member gets in touch with someone who's given up because they don't feel happy at the church. And church leaders, lay and ordained, are rarely trained to deal with these situations.

I think the other thing is, in the (post)modern age we all seem split by two irreconcilable desires: the desire to deeply belong and to be truly loved and accepted; and the desire to be free, to have space, to choose our own destiny and our own way of believing. I don't know how church life can be entirely successful in this context. What actually binds us together? It's not shared belief, because we all believe different things, including different things about Jesus. What is our supposed mutual and deep Christian love based upon, and can our churches really help us to nurture it in such an individualistic age?
 
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :
 
I'm so sorry to hear that it has happened. Sadly I have heard a few such stories over the years.

I'd like to think that it wouldn't happen here (we're not Anglican and of a very different approach to you) but it does even though we have a large care group.

Sometimes people can think that you simply taking time out and then let you be. Yes I know they should ask but I have done so in the past only to be shot at .... seems that sometimes we can't win. On the whole if I knew someone hadn't been I'd try to get in contact even if I risk crossing a border into conflict over it.

I'd suggest you try and talk to the person who leads your congregation. If as said above they are concerned then that's a way forward, if they are not - well that speaks volumes about why the church responds as it does. [In these days of few young people in the church, the cynic in me thinks that the church are more likely to follow up your ex and children than you ....]
 
Posted by Eliab (# 9153) on :
 
Serafina68,

There's nothing wrong with this as a topic for discussion in Purgatory, but if you are looking for personal support or encouragement, rather than a more general discussion on what a Church community should look like, you might prefer the environment in All Saints to here.

Posters here are requested (in the guidelines) to respect statements of a personal nature, but are allowed, within the rules to take your OP as a subject for serious and critical discussion. If you are happy with that, the thread can likely remain here, but if not, All Saints is probably where you want to be.

Eliab
Purgatory Host

[ 25. March 2014, 06:26: Message edited by: Eliab ]
 
Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Gildas:
Tell the Vicar how you feel. My guess is that he, or she, will be simply aghast at the situation.
Why was the vicar not visiting?

My Dad had a huge congregation - he never failed to visit, especially people he'd not seen in Church for a while.

I have one of his visiting cards as a keepsake. It's important to me as it's the way he spent every working afternoon. Mornings in the office, typing. Afternoons visiting. Evenings meetings and Bible study groups.

It's the job, no?

I have been 'simply taking time out' recently (not so simple, to be fair, but that's another story). Our minister has visited three times.

[ 25. March 2014, 06:38: Message edited by: Boogie ]
 
Posted by Jane R (# 331) on :
 
If Serafina is an Anglican her vicar may have four or five parishes to look after, and as a couple of people have pointed out already able-bodied people of working age tend to be left to look after themselves unless they ask for help.

I can sympathise. I've been a Sunday School teacher at my church for about 8 years. Last year I was going through a difficult patch and asked the leader if they could manage without me the following term. She did not reply directly to this, but the next time I was on Sunday School duty (at some personal inconvenience, because I hadn't really got time to do the preparation) I discovered when I arrived that she'd arranged for two other people to lead that week. Without bothering to tell me that I wasn't needed.

Since then I've been in the choir every week. None of the Sunday School team has said anything at all to me.
 
Posted by Lucia (# 15201) on :
 
Misunderstandings and failure in communication seem to be a fairly universal human problem!

Perhaps part of the difficulty in churches is a combination of a lack of a clear sense of who is responsible to follow someone up, a fear of being intrusive of someone's privacy and a tendency to make assumptions about each others situation and motivation.

One person's "nobody cared enough to contact me" can be another person's "I wonder where X is, I haven't seen them for weeks but I don't want them to feel that I'm chasing them up or hassling them if they've chosen to quietly and unobtrusively slip away for reasons I don't know but I expect they have talked to someone else about...."

A desire to respect people's privacy and a discomfort or sense of inadequacy to help those dealing with difficulties can mean people are reticent to contact someone. Especially if you are stereotypically reserved Brits!

And maybe the problem in some places is that there is only a surface level of community which doesn't go deep enough for there to be real caring or awareness of what is happening with each other. Just gathering in one place every week or even serving in a regular role doesn't necessarily build deep relationships and significant community life.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Lucia:
One person's "nobody cared enough to contact me" can be another person's "I wonder where X is, I haven't seen them for weeks but I don't want them to feel that I'm chasing them up or hassling them if they've chosen to quietly and unobtrusively slip away for reasons I don't know but I expect they have talked to someone else about...."
Our Elders Meetings usually have an agenda item for pastoral issues. In particular relating to people who haven't been seen in church for a while. Nothing specific about why they're not present. But, a simple "has anyone been in touch? know what's going on?". If none of the Elders know then it's probably appropriate for the Minister or one of the Elders to get in touch (who would be best would depend on who was absent - we're a small enough congregation that we'll tend to know who would prefer to see an Elder rather than the Minister, or indeed it might be best to ask one of the others in the congregation we know to be close what they know and could they call in).

There is a dynamic that means people are missed in the first few weeks they are away, and you put it down to a bad cold, or a holiday. After a while their absence becomes normal and they slip the cracks. After several months it's then into the awkward "why didn't you come sooner?" period.
 
Posted by Doc Tor (# 9748) on :
 
Something that surprised me recently is that our church (lowest of the low Anglican) takes a register of who's present. Obviously not like it's school (though the churchwarden whose job it is did laugh at the suggestion), but a list of the regulars and ticky boxes.

What the pastoral team then do with the information is not known to me, but presumably they use it to follow up any unexplained absences. Again, easier to do in a church with 120 adults (and 70-odd kids...) than a huge shack somewhere - the churchwarden (new to the job) did admit to struggling the first few weeks with who all these people were.
 
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :
 
My church has a large congregation, and is one of several in the team. It is therefore quite possible for someone to slip through the cracks and not be noticed. This is especially true in the sort of church which respects people's right to privacy and not to ask too many intrusive questions. However, in my church - and in others nearby - there is always a notice to the effect that, if you are in need of pastoral care, these are the people to contact. You are assured of care if you say you need it. Ideally, an absence would be noticed by others, but if not, that is a good catch-all default position. It is also always possible to ask for an appointment with a member of the clergy or a reader, to discuss pastoral situations. The congregation in your case might have erroneously thought you wouldn't want to worhip in the same church as your 'ex' and have taken yourself off elsewhere. They may well continue to think that unless you indicate otherwise, to a someone in a trusted position.
 
Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 
Small groups are (one of) the answer(s)! Of course in a large church, and in some smaller ones too, there will be people whose absence is not noticed by many people. That's why IMO small groups are so important, not just as an optional extra for the keenies, but as something that everyone who wants to get involved in the church is strongly encouraged to join.

If you're in a group of, say, 12 people who meet together and communicate regularly then your absence will be noticed and (hopefully) followed up (hopefully with sensitivity and compassion, although I'm so naive as to think this is always the case).
 
Posted by Gwai (# 11076) on :
 
And for every couple people who say why didn't you contact me there's also someone like my friend K who has gotten over abuse from inside and outside the church, and no is avoiding attending a church. Not because she doesn't want to, but rather that she is afraid of being asked to commit. She needs something like a British cathedral, I think, where perhaps no one would expect that attendance means she's ready to do more than stand on the outside, scared. But she lives in the U.S., and lives 1/3 of the year in a rather conservative rural area where she won't find anything of the kind.

What should a church do? It should automatically know who is like K and who is like serafina. But god if I know how we can do that!
 
Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
If you're in a group of, say, 12 people who meet together and communicate regularly then your absence will be noticed and (hopefully) followed up (hopefully with sensitivity and compassion, although I'm so naive as to think this is always the case).
Erm, 'not so naive as to think...' [Hot and Hormonal]
 
Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Boogie:
quote:
Originally posted by Gildas:
Tell the Vicar how you feel. My guess is that he, or she, will be simply aghast at the situation.
Why was the vicar not visiting?
Never heard of a vicar visiting, except in story books. Really.

Methodist guy told me he is supposed to spend 20 hours a week studying, praying, and working on the sermon (a Methodist lay preacher said he was told a sermon takes one hour of prep time for every minute of sermon, so a 15 minute sermon takes 15 hours to create), week mornings are office hours, afternoons are study and prayer and sermon prep, and there are also committee meetings some afternoons and evenings, as well as doing the whole Sunday morning thing. No time left for visiting. Might squeeze in one hospital visit but the hospital is almost two hours away, so one quick visit is a whole afternoon gone.

I hear about the concept of clergy visiting, never seen it, never met anyone who has had clergy come visit except as just another friend at a birthday party.

Have church programs replaced clergy visits?
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
Here in lala land, it's a generational thing. Older generations expect clergy to visit-- at least during times of stress (illness or bereavement) as well as when they've "gone missing" as per OP. Often a yearly home visit as well.

Younger generations neither expect nor particularly welcome a clergy home visit-- it's considered intrusive and a bit intimidating. If you're able to make it work with work/kids schedule wise (a challenge) most would welcome a "meet up for coffee at Starbucks" kind of thing-- but home visit? Never.
 
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Never heard of a vicar visiting, except in story books. Really.

Methodist guy told me he is supposed to spend 20 hours a week studying, praying, and working on the sermon (a Methodist lay preacher said he was told a sermon takes one hour of prep time for every minute of sermon, so a 15 minute sermon takes 15 hours to create), week mornings are office hours, afternoons are study and prayer and sermon prep, and there are also committee meetings some afternoons and evenings, as well as doing the whole Sunday morning thing. No time left for visiting.
In the British Anglican and Methodist contexts (and in many other British churches too, no doubt), the clergy are expected to visit sick and housebound church members. Indeed, my last (Methodist) minister said that the pastoral side of things was more important to him than anything else. Ministers were once known for doing lots of social visiting too, which probably helped to foster closer bonds between church and community. The clergy (especially in the CofE) do spend a lot of time with families who need their services for baptisms, weddings and funerals.

Like you, I've heard that writing sermons can take a huge amount of time - 40 hours is one figure I was told! I don't know exactly what this means, but it's pretty ridiculous when you consider that there's little to no enunciation of what listening to all these carefully prepared sermons is meant to achieve for the average congregation.
 
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
My last (Methodist) minister said that the pastoral side of things was more important to him than anything else.
I think that was true of my own predecessor. Problem is, it can be somewhat "inward looking" - the needs of the flock take priority over mission, teaching and strategic planning. I think that some ministers are good at the pastoral stuff and less good at teaching, and vice-versa - which makes a good case for team ministry playing to their strengths.

quote:
Like you, I've heard that writing sermons can take a huge amount of time - 40 hours is one figure I was told! I don't know exactly what this means, but it's pretty ridiculous.
This figure is often quoted and I have no idea where it comes from. I do take a decent amount of time (and mine is a "preaching" rather than a "liturgical" tradition - but nothing like that. And my wife, a teacher, rightly says that they have to teach in the classroom for 30 or so hours per week and could never devote that proportion of time to preparation. On the other hand, some sermons sound as if they were scribbled on the back of an envelope five minutes before the service: that does the congregation a disservice and means that it will never learn to think through the faith.

[ 25. March 2014, 14:51: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
 
Posted by Cenobite (# 14853) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Never heard of a vicar visiting, except in story books. Really.

Methodist guy told me he is supposed to spend 20 hours a week studying, praying, and working on the sermon (a Methodist lay preacher said he was told a sermon takes one hour of prep time for every minute of sermon, so a 15 minute sermon takes 15 hours to create), week mornings are office hours, afternoons are study and prayer and sermon prep, and there are also committee meetings some afternoons and evenings, as well as doing the whole Sunday morning thing. No time left for visiting.
In the British Anglican and Methodist contexts (and in many other British churches too, no doubt), the clergy are expected to visit sick and housebound church members. Indeed, my last (Methodist) minister said that the pastoral side of things was more important to him than anything else. Ministers were once known for doing lots of social visiting too, which probably helped to foster closer bonds between church and community. The clergy (especially in the CofE) do spend a lot of time with families who need their services for baptisms, weddings and funerals.

I can only speak for myself, as CofE clergy, but my training incumbent impressed on me as soon as I arrived the primacy of visiting parishioners. So I do. Not only those who are sick/housebound, but all members of the congregation.

The visits vary in frequency according to the needs of the individual household, but if I haven't visited someone in the last three months or so, then they are a priority visit in the next month - even if it's only a "catch-up time" over a cup of coffee.

Some of these visits are pre-arranged, some are a case of calling round at a time that is likely to be convenient (so making sure that it's not going to clash with the school-run, for example).

It may be something to do with this community - I don't know - but here it is appreciated and valued, and is almost certainly a significant factor in the congregation's numerical growth in the last three years. But even if it wasn't having an effect on church growth, I would still be doing it, because it is a fundamental part of the pastoral ministry of the church to which I am called as a deacon and priest.
 
Posted by HCH (# 14313) on :
 
I have two comments.

One: Find another church. This one does not value you. You feel uncomfortable attending it and encountering the ex, and that is not likely to change soon. Bite the bullet and make a change of your own.

Two: I doubt that most Methodist clergy spent an hour of preparation for each minute of sermon.
 
Posted by Alan Cresswell (# 31) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
quote:
Like you, I've heard that writing sermons can take a huge amount of time - 40 hours is one figure I was told! I don't know exactly what this means, but it's pretty ridiculous.
This figure is often quoted and I have no idea where it comes from. I do take a decent amount of time (and mine is a "preaching" rather than a "liturgical" tradition - but nothing like that.
It sounds a lot to me. I know I spend a lot of time writing my sermons, but I'm only an occasional preacher and I assume that preparing a service will be more efficient if I was doing it every week. I suppose it all depends on how you add up the time. I have already read the texts for the next time I'll preach (which isn't until May) and have started to think about them. Does time spent thinking about texts while in the shower, walking to work etc count towards writing time? Or is it only the time actually sat in front of the computer or pad of paper? Either way, I don't spend 40h on preparing a service - which would include selection of hymns, and preparing the childrens address and prayers. With work, spending time with my family, cooking dinner (OK, that can be thinking time too), sleeping etc I'm not sure if I could manage 40h free time between no and the end of April to write a sermon (unless I stop spending time on the Ship). And, I'm not sure spending more time necessarily makes the sermon better - you need to spend enough time on it, but you can also spend too much time.
 
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Cenobite:


I can only speak for myself, as CofE clergy, but my training incumbent impressed on me as soon as I arrived the primacy of visiting parishioners. So I do. Not only those who are sick/housebound, but all members of the congregation.

The visits vary in frequency according to the needs of the individual household, but if I haven't visited someone in the last three months or so, then they are a priority visit in the next month - even if it's only a "catch-up time" over a cup of coffee.
That's impressive. Perhaps it's easier to do in a relatively close-knit community.

Our minister used to invite people to his house, or take them out for meals in groups. Some people feel more comfortable with this than with being visited at home.
 
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :
 
I should imagine that clergy need to find the same balance as RE teachers (and other teachers for that matter). As teachers spend 25 hours a week actually teaching, they cannot possibly spend several hours preparing for each hour that they teach. I should imagine that the most effective priests are those who are also most effective at time management - it must be a nightmare trying to fit in everything that a church expects you to do, and all the other necessary things that the church doesn't expect you to do!

Now that priests have several churches to look after, visiting rarely happens. In addition, in the Anglican church, there is the sense that the whole parish is your church - you are not able to just look after the 50 or so who come to your church services, but the 10,000 plus who live in the town. It's certainly not possible to visit all of them. Some priests see it more as their duty to spend time with the 10,000 who don't come to church than the 50 who do (as he/she can see them on Sundays).
 
Posted by South Coast Kevin (# 16130) on :
 
But why on earth is anyone thinking it is up to the minister / priest to do all the visiting and pastoral care? That's such an awful, consumerist, paternalistic mindset, ISTM.

I'd say the responsibility of leaders with regard to pastoral care (with regarding to anything, really) is to make sure it happens, not to do it all themselves. 'To equip the saints for the work of ministry', as Ephesians 4:12 has it.
 
Posted by Cenobite (# 14853) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
quote:
Originally posted by Cenobite:


I can only speak for myself, as CofE clergy, but my training incumbent impressed on me as soon as I arrived the primacy of visiting parishioners. So I do. Not only those who are sick/housebound, but all members of the congregation.

The visits vary in frequency according to the needs of the individual household, but if I haven't visited someone in the last three months or so, then they are a priority visit in the next month - even if it's only a "catch-up time" over a cup of coffee.
That's impressive. Perhaps it's easier to do in a relatively close-knit community.

Our minister used to invite people to his house, or take them out for meals in groups. Some people feel more comfortable with this than with being visited at home.
Well, it's certainly easier to do it as the curate, rather than the incumbent! I suspect when I move on to incumbency it may have to be adjusted to at least once every 6 months or so.

Just with regard to the comment about making sure pastoral care happens, rather than the priest doing it all, that is of course the ideal. But not every congregation has people with the confidence, competence, time or gifts to do this. So, while they are in the process of being "equipped for the work of ministry", the ministry of pastoral care still needs to happen.
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
I should imagine that clergy need to find the same balance as RE teachers (and other teachers for that matter). As teachers spend 25 hours a week actually teaching, they cannot possibly spend several hours preparing for each hour that they teach.
Except that RE teachers tend to teach 3 year 9 groups, 3 yr. 8 etc. so they can recycle the same lesson 3 times - that cut down the workload.
 
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
But why on earth is anyone thinking it is up to the minister / priest to do all the visiting and pastoral care? That's such an awful, consumerist, paternalistic mindset, ISTM.

I'd say the responsibility of leaders with regard to pastoral care (with regarding to anything, really) is to make sure it happens, not to do it all themselves. 'To equip the saints for the work of ministry', as Ephesians 4:12 has it.
The British Methodist Church has a system of pastoral visitors whose job it is to keep in touch with the church members allocated to them. The system is strained, mostly for the lack of able-bodied volunteers.

Other denominations seem to leave it to individual congregations to develop their own system of pastoral support networks. It must be challenging for many churches to strike the right balance, especially in CofE where it's hard to establish who really belongs. If people seem to drop in and out all the time how does the pastoral team know who is who, and whether or not someone 'needs' anything? How often does someone need to attend to be in the pastoral loop? Once a month? Christmas and Easter? Are lay church workers treated very differently from everyone else?

We hear that many people worship in cathedrals because they want anonymity. I'm a familiar face at Evensong, but the other attenders don't know me as a person. This all seems to be perfectly acceptable, so it's hard to see how or why such churches would change their culture.
 
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
But why on earth is anyone thinking it is up to the minister / priest to do all the visiting and pastoral care? That's such an awful, consumerist, paternalistic mindset, ISTM.
Because there are some people, even in "congregationalist" churches, who still think that it is only a visit from the Minister that "counts". If they are visited by an Elder or Visitor they feel "fobbed off".

Clericalism still rules! [Frown] Trust me on this: I know.

[ 25. March 2014, 18:01: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
 
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
The horror stories are normal, especially in relationship breakdowns. We are lousy at basic friendship.
 
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
In addition, in the Anglican church, there is the sense that the whole parish is your church -
That doesn't seem to imply a very high opinion of the rest of us who also minister in the same town. I've written about that kind of arrogance before on the ship: it's fine until you fail to deliver then you fail big time on lots of levels not just one
 
Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
In addition, in the Anglican church, there is the sense that the whole parish is your church -
That doesn't seem to imply a very high opinion of the rest of us who also minister in the same town. I've written about that kind of arrogance before on the ship: it's fine until you fail to deliver then you fail big time on lots of levels not just one
Certainly this Anglican feels that it applies in the same way to other local churches - even denominations without a parish system have a local area that serves as their equivalent of the parish. Were I a priest, the parish would be my church but also the church of other local denominations. However I can certainly see how it could lead to arrogance and negative relations between denominations.
 
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
[QUOTE] Were I a priest, the parish would be my church but also the church of other local denominations. However I can certainly see how it could lead to arrogance and negative relations between denominations.
It doesn't help that's to be sure. And, if the "lead" denomination (CofE) cocks up because of some moral failure or what not, we all get pulled down with them: guilt by association. It happened in my last town on several occasions.

It wasn't helpful either at the licencing of the new vicar I this town to be told by the evangelical bishop that the Vicar had the cure of souls of the parish. I wouldn't mind too much but I had been invited to welcome the vicar on behalf of all the other churches. It was a bit like a slap with a wet kipper tbh but he's got some big ground to make up: that church is pretty much below the radar with a congregation of about 30 and little or no community involvement - our place quite close by is rather larger and much more involved.
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
But why on earth is anyone thinking it is up to the minister / priest to do all the visiting and pastoral care? That's such an awful, consumerist, paternalistic mindset, ISTM.
Because there are some people, even in "congregationalist" churches, who still think that it is only a visit from the Minister that "counts". If they are visited by an Elder or Visitor they feel "fobbed off".

Clericalism still rules! [Frown] Trust me on this: I know.
(sigh) Not just clericalism. As an Associate Pastor of 20+ years, I have been told by parishioners "I really love when you visit. But I really wanted a pastoral visit." By which I assume they mean it doesn't count unless the visitor is either:
1. The senior/lead pastor and/or
2. Male.
 
Posted by Serafina68 (# 16142) on :
 
Thank you to everyone for your comments. It has certainly put a few things into perspective for me - mainly the fact that what I have experienced doesn't seem to be that unusual, which, in a weird way, makes me feel a bit better about myself! I wouldn't expect members of the congregation to be in contact, but after this length of time I would have thought that one of the clergy team might have called - especially as they know a lot more about what has happened in my (former) family in the past 18 months and what effect that had on me than I have posted on here. I had always avoided attending service when my children were attending during a weekend with their father so that it would not be construed as trying to take time away from him, however that has not worked both ways. I've got beyond having an issue with that although it was hard at first. However, that has been rather a one way street.
I think I do need to look around for another church, but my children are so heavily involved in the life of our current church that I don't want to take them away from it so that we can worship together as a family during our Sundays together.
I'm not sure that I have been looking for people to care about my absence, but I can see how my comments could be taken that way and maybe it is true, but I think I am more disappointed in the response of a Christian community when a member of that community has apparently fallen off the face of the planet. I understand that the British way is to keep yourself to yourself, but when someone is feeling down and vulnerable even one phonecall can make the difference and I think the fact that not even that has been forthcoming has given me food for thought - not only about my own situation, but also the fact that perhaps I need to be more mindful if I ever find myself on the opposite side of the situation.
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Serafina68:
I had always avoided attending service when my children were attending during a weekend with their father so that it would not be construed as trying to take time away from him, however that has not worked both ways. I've got beyond having an issue with that although it was hard at first. However, that has been rather a one way street.
I think I do need to look around for another church, but my children are so heavily involved in the life of our current church that I don't want to take them away from it so that we can worship together as a family during our Sundays together.
Just an unsolicited and tangental thought if it's helpful (and please discard if not): when I was in a similar situation, I found it worked well to renegotiate the usual every other weekend custody arrangement for something quite different. I would agree that if your children are involved in a church it is in their best interests to maintain that, and being able to do that every week is preferable to alternating. At the same time, it seems quite probable that your own spiritual and emotional support may best be found elsewhere. It would be wonderful if you could negotiate something where your children are able to attend their church every week with their father w/o that cutting into your time-- perhaps by adding some other regular family tradition/time that's important to you. This was very helpful to my divided family under similar situations.

But I know custody arrangements are very very very fraught so that just might not work-- understood.


quote:
Originally posted by Serafina68:

I'm not sure that I have been looking for people to care about my absence, but I can see how my comments could be taken that way and maybe it is true, but I think I am more disappointed in the response of a Christian community when a member of that community has apparently fallen off the face of the planet. I understand that the British way is to keep yourself to yourself, but when someone is feeling down and vulnerable even one phonecall can make the difference and I think the fact that not even that has been forthcoming has given me food for thought - not only about my own situation, but also the fact that perhaps I need to be more mindful if I ever find myself on the opposite side of the situation.
I love that take-away. It is a wonderful way to respond to what has clearly been a sad and hurtful situation-- that awareness that you might be able to help someone else in a similar place. Quite lovely.
 
Posted by Jade Constable (# 17175) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
[QUOTE] Were I a priest, the parish would be my church but also the church of other local denominations. However I can certainly see how it could lead to arrogance and negative relations between denominations.
It doesn't help that's to be sure. And, if the "lead" denomination (CofE) cocks up because of some moral failure or what not, we all get pulled down with them: guilt by association. It happened in my last town on several occasions.

It wasn't helpful either at the licencing of the new vicar I this town to be told by the evangelical bishop that the Vicar had the cure of souls of the parish. I wouldn't mind too much but I had been invited to welcome the vicar on behalf of all the other churches. It was a bit like a slap with a wet kipper tbh but he's got some big ground to make up: that church is pretty much below the radar with a congregation of about 30 and little or no community involvement - our place quite close by is rather larger and much more involved.
'Cure of souls' is part of the official job title for an Anglican priest though - the priest can't help that, and it doesn't mean your church or any other doesn't have the cure of souls of the parish. It also depends on the CoE actually being the lead denomination in the local areas - there are plenty of places with historic ties to other denomination where that's not the case. It is not the fault of good priests that the bad priests exploit the parish system, and it's not the fault of Anglican priests in general that the parish system exists - they can't change the system on a whim.
 
Posted by Chorister (# 473) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
I should imagine that clergy need to find the same balance as RE teachers (and other teachers for that matter). As teachers spend 25 hours a week actually teaching, they cannot possibly spend several hours preparing for each hour that they teach.
Except that RE teachers tend to teach 3 year 9 groups, 3 yr. 8 etc. so they can recycle the same lesson 3 times - that cut down the workload.
As do priest who have to preach at several churches/services each week. And don't get me started on how many times a priest can recycle his (one?) wedding sermon! Choristers who sing at a lot of weddings can almost recite them word for word. [Biased]
 
Posted by BroJames (# 9636) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
<snip>As do priest who have to preach at several churches/services each week. And don't get me started on how many times a priest can recycle his (one?) wedding sermon! Choristers who sing at a lot of weddings can almost recite them word for word. [Biased]
[TANGENT]I hope my wedding sermons are not word for word the same. I think they gradually evolve. On the other hand with, very frequently, the same biblical text, and speaking into fundamentally similar situations there is only a limited amount of variation that can be achieved. Sometimes that can be something specific about the couple. But when you look for the best possible way of putting across what one particular text has to say about love in a marriage, why would you change it unless you have failed, or to achieve elegant variation. And there is a danger that elegant variation strays into being only a second (or third) best way of saying the same thing.[/TANGENT]
 
Posted by Mark Wuntoo (# 5673) on :
 
[Another tangent, if I may]
It's even worse, in my experience, if you give-up your faith. Nobody wants to talk about that!
Not 'back-slidden' PLEASE, just taken a major step forward.
Some few have stated that they will pray for me, apparently not realising how offensive that sounds to a non-believer.
 
Posted by ken (# 2460) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Wuntoo:

Some few have stated that they will pray for me, apparently not realising how offensive that sounds to a non-believer.
As of course does the idea that losing your faith is a "major step forward" sound to a believer. It makes it feel as if you are claiming to be the grown-up around here and if they just thought a bit more clearly they would come to agree with you.
 
Posted by Mark Wuntoo (# 5673) on :
 
Sorry if it feels like that - not intended.
I didn't actually lose my faith; as I said, I gave it up.
The point of my post was to support the contention that church people find it difficult to face-up to difficult (personal) situations.
 
Posted by leo (# 1458) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
quote:
Originally posted by leo:
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
I should imagine that clergy need to find the same balance as RE teachers (and other teachers for that matter). As teachers spend 25 hours a week actually teaching, they cannot possibly spend several hours preparing for each hour that they teach.
Except that RE teachers tend to teach 3 year 9 groups, 3 yr. 8 etc. so they can recycle the same lesson 3 times - that cut down the workload.
As do priest who have to preach at several churches/services each week.
Having done both 'jobs', I always spend much more time preparing a sermon than I did on lesson planning.

They are two very different methods of communication - for a start, a 'lesson' doesn't involve talking all the time - just a brief input (much of which might be from a textbook) followed by the students doing some work.
 
Posted by Evangeline (# 7002) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
I can see why you feel that. You may be right. But do you think it is because nobody has noticed? Or is it because there are people who have noticed and might be concerned, but are too embarrassed and don't quite know what to say?

...

It is even possible that the note might have been an indirect way of trying to make contact, or of testing the waters to see whether you still wanted to have contact made with you, a tentative attempt to give you the opportunity to talk if you wanted to.
No, how difficult is it to phone/email/put a note under the door that says, haven't seen you lately, how are you? Is everything ok? That is simply rude and a crap way to treat someone, particularly given that is the ONLY contact she's had. Serafina my 2c is if it's making you uncomfortable, start church shopping-maybe don't cut off all contact with the existing church until you find somewhere else you'd like to stay. I know that sounds calculating etc etc but sometimes you just need to be a bit kind to yourself, churches need to value those who serve but more importantly you need to be valued for who you are as a person not just a coffee pourer. [Votive] For you.
 
Posted by Porridge (# 15405) on :
 
I'm in the US, and I've had exactly the OP's experience in 3 different churches in 3 different denoms. Very active in church doings, then something interrupts one's steady attendance, and boom.

Nobody calls, nobody asks, nobody visits, nobody expresses the slightest concern. The "beloved community" may be all of that, but it's never, IME, a particularly "loving" one.

It's what finally pushed me right out of the Christian fold.
 
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Porridge. It's ENTIRELY down to us. With no expectations on others. Not even God. Especially God. As Mother Theresa found out. As we all find out.

Evangelicals are triply deluded in looking for others to read the Bible and pray more for fire to fall from heaven in tongues and words of wisdom and healings.

It's about lifting ones little finger, tentatively, in the direction of the quietly desperate in our quiet desperation. Giving ones ear. Having asked 'How are you REALLY?'. Looking them back in the eye so that they see their hope reflected.

I experienced this last night, multiple times, with very broken people and I'm regarded as a saint for it.

I did nothing apart from turn up.

[ 29. March 2014, 10:00: Message edited by: Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard ]
 
Posted by bib (# 13074) on :
 
We have a very caring pastoral care team made up of members of the congregation. Everyone in the congregation is on someone's care list. I look after 6-8 people and take note if they are away from church and if they are in need of help from the ministry team. It is impossible for the minister to know what is going on with all the members of his very large congregation without the assistance of the pastoral care team and I have noticed a difference since the team was established. I realise that this doesn't solve the problems posted in the OP. I think in her situation I might be tempted to change churches.
 
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
We're ALL priests and therefore ALL pastors, shepherds and, yes, should ALL be in a pastoral care team. Called 'the church', 'the congregation'. This is appalling. How will all men know us? The church is a pathetic joke known for opposing guy marriage and loving Jesus ever so, ever so much.

AAARRRRRGGGGHHH!

Well done bib by the way. It's a start.
 
Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
We have a very caring pastoral care team made up of members of the congregation. Everyone in the congregation is on someone's care list. I look after 6-8 people and take note if they are away from church and if they are in need of help from the ministry team. It is impossible for the minister to know what is going on with all the members of his very large congregation without the assistance of the pastoral care team and I have noticed a difference since the team was established. I realise that this doesn't solve the problems posted in the OP. I think in her situation I might be tempted to change churches.
This is an excellent (and biblical, btw) model. It really is the only way to avoid the pain we've seen here on this thread. Having been on the other side of this, I really do believe that 99% of the time the neglect is coming from discomfort, social awkwardness and anticipated conflict avoidance. rather than an actual "lack of love". As someone else already noted, there's also "bystander syndrome"-- a real, even urgent concern that unfortunately is coupled with the assumption that "someone" must be doing something about it. Yet as we've seen our "giving them space" and "not intruding" is more often perceived exactly as we have seen. Bib's model is one (the only one in my experience) that really gets past that and ensures that it's not just the "squeaky wheels" that are noticed, but those who are quietly hurting as well.

May God bless you in your service, Bib.
 
Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
It's about lifting ones little finger, tentatively, in the direction of the quietly desperate in our quiet desperation. Giving ones ear.

I did nothing apart from turn up.
You did a lot more than turn up. The ear thing.

I've recently suffered what the docs now say is a permanent injury. The one person I heard from (he's a little sweet on me) asked how I am, let me get out one sentence, then spent an hour telling me about his own health problems. I finally kicked him out. Someone newly hurting doesn't need to hear about more pain.

It's common really, like someone gets pregnant for the first time, lots of people tell her how long and hard their own labor was, instead of encouraging her.

I've long wished - and (unsuccessfully) asked for - training for lay people in how to do visiting. Just an afternoon workshop could teach a lot. We all have to deal with hurting friends and neighbors. Lots of people say hurtful things to the hurting, meaning well, not understanding that someone newly hurting needs an ear, not a mouth.
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
This phenomenon is well-known in the therapy world, where newly trained people are often more determined to show how clever they are, than actually listen. So it takes time and experience for this to wear off.

The famous analyst Donald Winnicott tells some interesting stories, about how he used to think up complicated and clever interpretations, until he realized this was for his own benefit. Then his real training began, and he began to listen.

So, narcissism is a real barrier for many people, and stops us seeing and hearing another.
 
Posted by Hilda of Whitby (# 7341) on :
 
I stopped attending a church several years ago. I was in the choir and went to that church for maybe 2 years. During one summer break, when the choir was on hiatus, I simply stopped going to services there. I would not have welcomed the rector or other people coming by to find out why.

I doubt they would have been prepared for the answer--"Because services are a disorganized mess, the choir is awful, and there is a great amount of tension between a cabal of long-time parishioners and the rector that is very obvious even to a newcomer like me. I didn't start attending church after a decades-long hiatus to put up with this shit, so I voted with my feet."

The only time I would want someone to come by is if I or my husband were seriously ill --- and I would contact the church myself to let them know that, rather than expecting that someone would notice that I wasn't there and take action. In my experience, that simply won't happen.

When I was growing up, the rector of our Episcopal church came by once a month to give communion to my mother, who had multiple sclerosis and was house-bound. I'm pretty sure my dad (who was not Episcopalian or even Christian and thus didn't attend services) let the rector know about mom's illness when we first started attending that church after moving to the area. This particular rector also visited my dad in the hospital, too, when he was ill--certainly not to convert my father, but because a family member of one of his parishioners was ill and that is what a pastor is supposed to do. That rector was a wonderful person. While that level of pastoral care was terrific, I think it is rather unique.
 
Posted by Serafina68 (# 16142) on :
 
Once again, a huge thank you to everyone who has commented.

As of today, I have definitely decided to start church shopping!

I went back to the church this morning. 2 members of the clergy team said good morning - no comment about how long it had been since I had been there. One other person (the one who has helped most when there have been problems with my ex husband and the children) spoke to me about the children. Other than that, no-one said anything until the end of the service when the person who had written me the note about the coffee rota asked if I had got her note!
I told her that I had and that I thought it would be best if she did take me off the rota and said that her note had been a bot of a wake up call for me. Her response was that she would do that and she thanked me for all the help I had given her in the past. I told her that I found it rather difficult that the first contact I had had since my long (ish) period of non attendance was as a result of my not being there to pour the tea and I'm ashamed to admit that I was rather tearful [Frown] . Her response was to tell me that she realised that I found it difficult to attend the church in the circumstances (I have managed for nearly 7 years!!) and it really wasn't her concern. She just needed to get people on the rota to do the job and that the clergy had a fine line to tread when it came to contating people who stopped going.
I didn't know that the fine line was thinner than a phone call.......
 
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
Some people are just clueless idiots.

But yeah, there does come a time when you read the signs and go elsewhere. Which is why we're two-timing our official church on Saturday evenings.
 
Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Hilda of Whitby:
I stopped attending a church several years ago. I was in the choir and went to that church for maybe 2 years. During one summer break, when the choir was on hiatus, I simply stopped going to services there. I would not have welcomed the rector or other people coming by to find out why.

I doubt they would have been prepared for the answer--"Because services are a disorganized mess, the choir is awful, and there is a great amount of tension between a cabal of long-time parishioners and the rector that is very obvious even to a newcomer like me. I didn't start attending church after a decades-long hiatus to put up with this shit, so I voted with my feet."...

rector also visited my dad in the hospital, too, when he was ill--certainly not to convert my father, but because a family member of one of his parishioners was ill and that is what a pastor is supposed to do. That rector was a wonderful person. While that level of pastoral care was terrific, I think it is rather unique.
The frustrating thing is that the things mentioned in your complaints tend to correlate with pastors/churches who don't visit or call--either because they're too busy dealing with the trainwreck or too demoralized or simply crap at their work.

The ones who DO visit and call (in a caring way, I mean) tend not to have this kind of earful to listen to. They get other stuff, of course--we visit and call, and we usually get complaints about member X and his/her behavior, and then have to try to effect a reconciliation. But not usually systemic stuff.

I'm not sure if there's a cause and effect thing, or if there is, in which direction it goes. But we've always believed human contact was one of the main purposes of a pastor. Otherwise, why not do it all by video?
 
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :
 
In contact/visiting a minister always runs the risk of being dumped on. I suppose it's worse in denominations/churches where the "priest" is seen as being only step down from God. It's great when you're calling the shots but not nice you're the only target.

For those of us from a background of "priesthood of all believers" (ie teams and congregational responsibility)such issues should be less. There might not be blame on you but there can be finger pointing at others.

None of this outweighs the joy and the importance of pastoral care.
 
Posted by Baptist Trainfan (# 15128) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
For those of us from a background of "priesthood of all believers" (ie teams and congregational responsibility)such issues should be less. There might not be blame on you but there can be finger pointing at others.
Theoretically. But in many such churches a ministerial visit is still regarded as the only one that "counts".
 
Posted by Autenrieth Road (# 10509) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Serafina68:
Her response was to tell me that she realised that I found it difficult to attend the church in the circumstances (I have managed for nearly 7 years!!) and it really wasn't her concern.
Holy fucking shit! is my response to the part in bold. Just... holy fucking shit.

I'm trying to think of something more constructive to say, or even something more coherent to say, but... just... holy fucking shit.
 
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
... For those of us from a background of "priesthood of all believers" (ie teams and congregational responsibility) such issues should be less. There might not be blame on you but there can be finger pointing at others. ...
That may be a distinction which is deeply significant to those responsible for ministry in different denominations, and I think the average lay person is oblivious to it, and probably rightly so.
 
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
... For those of us from a background of "priesthood of all believers" (ie teams and congregational responsibility) such issues should be less. There might not be blame on you but there can be finger pointing at others. ...
That may be a distinction which is deeply significant to those responsible for ministry in different denominations, and I think the average lay person is oblivious to it, and probably rightly so.
Why should the lay members of the relevant churches be 'rightly' oblivious to the priesthood of all believers? Doesn't that non-awareness negate the whole idea??

[ 31. March 2014, 20:32: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
 
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Serafina68. ARRRRRRRGGGGH!!!! Autenrieth Road. Yeah. Somehow we've got to EMBRACE this, our utter mediocrity writ large.

[ 31. March 2014, 21:57: Message edited by: Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard ]
 
Posted by Enoch (# 14322) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Why should the lay members of the relevant churches be 'rightly' oblivious to the priesthood of all believers? Doesn't that non-awareness negate the whole idea??
Sorry. Perhaps I didn't get my response across clearly enough. I thought (and think) ExclamationMark was suggesting that churches like his didn't have the the problem of needy parishioners/congregants expecting a visit from the 'real' minister because everyone has a 'lower' understanding of ministerial priesthood and a stronger conviction that priesthood lies within the congregation as a whole. I was querying whether, apart from a few really theologically educated people, the ordinary people in the pews think that differently on this whether they are CofE, RC, URC, Baptist or whatever. It might be better if we were all better theologically educated, but whether a person prefers to calls themself priest or minister, he or she is deluding themselves if they run their church life on the assumption that everybody is.
 
Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :
 
Serafina68, chums.

We are rubbish.

Church is rubbish.

But there is no alternative.

Obviously I'm speaking for myself. Not about the rubbish, that's true. Nobody willl ever disabuse me of that after 9 years in the Anglican communion, in four congregations and 19 in a cult before that and a brief jump in to the fire, from that frying pan even when it was being brought in from the cold, of charismania. About the no alternative. We gotta go to the church across the road and make it work. Not weary in well doing. HA! Serafina68, your story is utterly bloody heartbreaking. And it will NOT get better. It can't. Not without you. You will. And then it will. You will get wiser and stronger and more philosophical. It just hurts. It's just terribly lonely. Having the most minimal expectation of friendship, love, support unmet. And realising that it's ALL down to you.

A bit like Jesus' experience really.

The ONLY way to get support is to give it. The ONLY way to be listened to is to listen. All very Zen I know. Just like God. Who does NOTHING, who can do NOTHING but Zen at and for and with and in and on and every other preposition to us but above all FROM us.

ANY expectation is on a hiding to nothing. Of anyone. Including ourselves. If we wait until we feel better, ready, prepared, up for it, inspired, we never will.

There are no short cuts, there is no magic wand, there can't even be a conversation with leadership or anyone else.

And crying IS coping. Breaking down in public, in church is therapeutic, is worship, is real. If people don't like it they can piss off. If you're REALLY lucky someone will come and weep with you. Apart from the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

But don't hold your breath.

Nobody ever did for me. We're all so British. So I started doing it with every broken person I see. It's that or NOTHING.

Cockeyedly optimistic - Martin
 
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
[QUOTE]Sorry. Perhaps I didn't get my response across clearly enough. I thought (and think) ExclamationMark was suggesting that churches like his didn't have the the problem of needy parishioners/congregants expecting a visit from the 'real' minister because everyone has a 'lower' understanding of ministerial priesthood and a stronger conviction that priesthood lies within the congregation as a whole. I was querying whether, apart from a few really theologically educated people, the ordinary people in the pews think that differently on this whether they are CofE, RC, URC, Baptist or whatever. It might be better if we were all better theologically educated, but whether a person prefers to calls themself priest or minister, he or she is deluding themselves if they run their church life on the assumption that everybody is.
Sorry I'm not being very clear. I think I'm trying to say that if an individual sets him/her self up as a Priest/Minister or leader then there are certain expectations alongside that. If that personal set up includes accepting the bouquets for all the good stuff that goes on, it also will invariably mean that the figurehead gets the blame when things go wrong (either actually wrong or perceived to be so). Some church structures seem to suggest (and congregations assent) the idea that Father/Priest/Elder knows best. IMHO this sets that person up for a fall in the event of things going belly up.

A church that teaches and organises around the idea of every member ministry, recognising those gifts publicly, tends not to get the same level of criticism of leaders - you also tend not to find people are missed (although it does happen as in the OP). Perhaps its the theology or practicalities of membership of such churches but IMHO over almost 40 years in a range of settings and denominations it seems to be true.

The church here is Baptist and part of BUGB. It's pretty large in terms of the numbers who cross its thresholds over the week and it has one f/t staff member. He can't cover all the pastoral needs: responsibility is shared and the church understand and accept this. We've arrived at this point after prayer and consultation in a whole congregational setting. Other people use abilities and gifts in different ways and all are affirmed and confirmed by the church. It's a start (but only just) at an expression of the priesthood and fellowship of the saints.

Our minister wouldn't see himself as minister nor pastor nor priest but as someone using and expressing particular gift within the community to which God has called him.
 
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:

Our minister wouldn't see himself as minister nor pastor nor priest but as someone using and expressing particular gift within the community to which God has called him.
I can see what you're trying to say, but has he made it clear to his church community that he rejects these terms? If not, then he can't object if they still see him in the same old way. Has he come up with a new term that suits his role better?
 
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:

Our minister wouldn't see himself as minister nor pastor nor priest but as someone using and expressing particular gift within the community to which God has called him.
I can see what you're trying to say, but has he made it clear to his church community that he rejects these terms? If not, then he can't object if they still see him in the same old way. Has he come up with a new term that suits his role better?
It is not so much rejecting the term as being part of a group that shares pastoral an other responsibilities.
 
Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :
 
I understand what you're getting at, but rejecting terms such a 'minister' and 'pastor' doesn't seem to make much sense if you are actually the figurehead who does a large part of the 'ministering' and the 'pastoring'!

If this man doesn't do more ministering and pastoring than anyone else, then he probably doesn't need those labels. Maybe 'preacher' would be enough. Church spokesman? Baptiser?

Regarding the OP, changing churches might be a good idea, but if it's another church of the same hands-off type then there might not be much difference. The problem in some places might be that church members just won't mind their own business!
 


© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0