Ship of Fools: Blending congregations

Thread: Blending congregations 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=027903

Posted by bib (# 13074) on :

At my church the kids and their parents are looked after by having a service separate from the regular Sunday morning Eucharist service. This has certainly led to and increase in young families coming to worship, but they never appear at the Sunday service except for what is designated a Family service. The idea originally was that there would be a blend of liturgies at that service so that both congregations could appreciate each other and so that the kids could learn what 'big church' was. Trouble is, the service is so watered down and unrecognisable as our Sunday Eucharist service that the regular Sunday congregation members stay away in droves. There are always some who go along to the kids' service and to the Family service, but we never see any of the families come on normal Sunday services. It all feels so disjointed and such a failure even though the minister had high hopes at first. He seems unwilling to hold a better liturgy balance on Sunday so that all needs are met (I get the feeling he doesn't want to admit to failure). Is there any way to resolve this, or do we just have to make the best of things? Even the choir takes a holiday when we have Family services and takes the opportunity to stay home and sleep in (they were in fact told that they weren't wanted at the Family service).

Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :

I fear that I am in the group which leans away from blended services. I have no trouble with the idea that in each parish there are a number of different congregations. Some want their music and formality, others a quiet service, some their guitars, and families with young children have their own specific needs. While it might be nice to get them all together from time to time, surely it is more important that they are there and participating in the ways which work best for them. While this will mean more work for the clergy and those involved in services, these different component can be a good way of recruiting people to be more active.

Posted by SvitlanaV2 (# 16967) on :

bib

It can hardly be called a failure if you're getting new families to attend your church! Many British churches would be so grateful for that!

It sounds as if you need a special group of regular members who value the church's outreach and are willing to devote themselves to developing the Family Services in a sensitive way. If the choir are unable to do something different perhaps someone needs to put together a separate music group. This might even include some of the new people.

Whether you'll be able to blend the two congregations eventually is a difficult question, but if two groups are being nourished rather than one, is that such a bad thing? You might be developing a very interesting, multilayered, postmodern form of church life there. That might be a good thing; not everyone thinks that one size should fit all.

Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :

quote:
Originally posted by bib:
At my church the kids and their parents are looked after by having a service separate from the regular Sunday morning Eucharist service.

I think a possible implication of this is that small children are not welcomed at the regular service. With the best will in the world, small children make noise. If they get shushed and tutted at, their parents probably won't come back.

There's also the question of musical/service style. For a while, our shack alternated weeks - we had traditional hymns with organ one week, and more modern worship songs with guitars the next. The liturgy was the same - just the music changed.

Our observation was that a significant fraction of the congregation took this as permission to come only on alternate Sundays, to whichever service offered their preferred music.

We don't do that any more.

Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on :

The congregation we belong to is not small, but is also not big enough to warrant more than one service on Sunday. Added to that, I think our congregation values having just one service where everyone gets to see everyone. So for us, blended is the only way to go.

What we did with children was in two parts. Ongoing efforts have been made to encourage older members of the congregation to see children as indispensible members of the congregation whose presence is to be welcomed. We look for ways that children can take an active role—just this past week a 9-year-old played piano (with her teacher). The vast majority of the congregation is on board with that, so tolerance for kids is pretty high.

But we don't expect young children to sit through a 20 minute sermon. So children 8 or so and younger leave after the Scripture readings for age-appropriate worship based on the Godly play model, which is linked to the days readings and to the liturgical year. This keeps the kids engaged and allows parents to not have to worry about whether their kids are bothering anyone. The younger kids (5 and under) stay in children's worship; the older ones come back for the last part of the service while the offering is being collected.

For those too old for chidlren's worship but not quite old enough to endure a sermon, we have bags with quiet and appropriate activities that children can have in the pews.

As for music, we're used to a variety of musical styles in a single service.

FWIW.

Posted by Leorning Cniht (# 17564) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:

But we don't expect young children to sit through a 20 minute sermon. So children 8 or so and younger leave after the Scripture readings
[..]The younger kids (5 and under) stay in children's worship; the older ones come back for the last part of the service while the offering is being collected.

FWIW, this wouldn't have worked for my two eldest. When they were under 5, there is precisely no chance that they would have chosen Godly Play over staying with us.

Posted by Nick Tamen (# 15164) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:

quote:
Originally posted by Nick Tamen:

But we don't expect young children to sit through a 20 minute sermon. So children 8 or so and younger leave after the Scripture readings
[..]The younger kids (5 and under) stay in children's worship; the older ones come back for the last part of the service while the offering is being collected.
FWIW, this wouldn't have worked for my two eldest. When they were under 5, there is precisely no chance that they would have chosen Godly Play over staying with us.

Understood, and I know a few other kids like that. And having a child with ADHD and Asperger's, I'm very aware that all children are not alike. (I'm also very aware of being preoccupied with worry that my child is disturbing others. What a true gift it is when those around you simply react with a smile.)

I guess I should clarify and say that children are invited but certainly not forced to go to children's worship.

Posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop (# 10745) on :

Once-a-month compromise may be unsatisfactory, because some people may only attend when it is the service of their choice taking place. In today's church, not everyone attends weekly.

IMHO a service as an alternative to the main Sunday service should not take place more often than monthly. It is preferable to hold a monthly service in addition to the main Sunday service and at a different time.

Personally, I will avoid and worship elsewhere at a service of the word if it is in place of the principal Sunday Eucharist and there is no replacement Eucharist to make up for it. I am old-fashioned enough to believe that Sunday Eucharist comes first and that I will attend church because I want to go and not because I have to go.

Posted by leo (# 1458) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Ecclesiastical Flip-flop:
Personally, I will avoid and worship elsewhere at a service of the word if it is in place of the principal Sunday Eucharist and there is no replacement Eucharist to make up for it. I am old-fashioned enough to believe that Sunday Eucharist comes first and that I will attend church because I want to go and not because I have to go.

same here

Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :

Having been through this when my children were young, and revisiting this as young families have come a long, as a parishioner, warden and vestry member (parish council) for long periods of time I have a couple of suggestions.

First, as clergy, it is an issue to be shared with your congregants. Ask, talk, get feedback, and get your parish officers and vestry members talking about it. People who feel they have a voice, even without a solution feel better about the situation. Second, make sure it is an "issue" as labelled, not as a "problem". My 2¢.

Posted by Oscar the Grouch (# 1916) on :

I think that part of the problem is unrealistic expectations. I know of very few places where two congregations are successfully "blended". So I would just let the two congregations exist alongside each other and not fret too much about bringing them together.

In my last church, we set up a once a month "liturgy-lite" (but not liturgy-free) service, aimed at younger families. Whilst at first, a number of the old stagers stayed away from this service, over time some started attending (and even enjoying!) this service. But if people make the decision to avoid it, so be it. You can't please everyone, so you have to do what seems right and focus on the good things you are achieving, rather than the complaints of the few.

Posted by bib (# 13074) on :

We used to have a children's segment contained within the usual Sunday service and this seemed to work well, but the separate service was tried to cater for very young children and for parents who were unfamiliar with church and needed a simpler format. It was explained to us at a Parish meeting that we all needed to help and encourage each other and that the occasional Family Service would be a mix of both services allowing for children's participation and perhaps half of the traditional liturgy. This happened at first, but the 'family group' didn't like that and threatened to boycott if they couldn't run the service totally. Hence we have what is going on now. I tend to feel that we going to have to keep both services separate unless a compromise can be reached.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0