|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Church decline and the Bishop of Blackburn
|
Magersfontein Lugg
Shipmate
# 18240
|
Posted
I have to say the newspaper report of what the Bishop (and Archdeacon) of Blackburn have said about church decline upset me. The Archdeacon's inspiring words are that unless there is change by 2050 there will be no C of E in his diocese.
I don't mean I disagree, I just find it both challenging and upsetting (and I have to say not very encouraging to elderly members of congregations).
Here is a newspaper report about the Bishop's comments.
One of the questions I ask is what do Church of England hierarchy want? More in the pews or other types of seats so parish share is paid and the unpruned down C of E continues? Or fewer churches...
Sometimes I get the impression the idea behind 'church growth' is everyone should become Christian, but then others say differently.
I guess I would be more encouraged if Bishops talked more of vision, prayer and God, rather than of plans to revive.
I realise this is a bit of a muddled starter, but I'd be pleased (and helped) to read others thoughts about this.
[ 29. October 2014, 22:01: Message edited by: Magersfontein Lugg ]
Posts: 104 | From: Bottle Street | Registered: Oct 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Magersfontein Lugg:
... by 2050 there will be no C of E in his diocese....
I don't get real excited by the predicted death of the church - CofE or in general.
Decline of numbers and influence is not surprising in an increasingly non-homogeneous society. But God is not dead and the church will not die.
I do believe church as we have known it may need to die - morph into something less medieval, less focused on spending horrendous amounts of money renewing the lead on stained glass windows and restoring stonework carvings, become vibrant in ways that address today's cultures and concerns.
I'm not saying adopt societal values. Jesus used then contemporary stories about contemporary people with contemporary values - we put men in floor length dresses and funny hats and wonder why outsiders think that's strange, we ask for a pledge for the year from people who aren't sure they'll have a job next month, we preach "Jesus heals" to people on ten medications for pain and disability who walk out of church with all those same problems, we speak of sacrifice while ignoring the homeless a block away and the throw-away kids desperate for one on one attention.
I don't have answers, but when the next generation can't see the relevance of church to real life, I understand. If it weren't a habit I wouldn't be there either.
[codefix]
[ 30. October 2014, 05:00: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
Depends what you mean by decline.
If its based on numbers attending (bums on seats, pews, chairs etc) and outlets available (churches), then yes there is a decline. But on a more qualitative measure, it's possibly true that there's growth in terms of the church's depth as opposed to its width. By and large, those who attend do so because they want to not because they feel they have to: that must mean something for the UK where church attendance (as opposed to commitment) had huge social implications and economic necessity.
I see church attendance as a wider reflection of engagement with God and less of the social obligation of the past. It's good too that in some churches, if we don't know the answer then we say we don't -- without presuming or pretending otherwise.
But that is not to be complacent: tbh I'd rather hear more God talk and prayer and a bit less vision casting and talk of revival (its always talked up as Cwmbran demonstrated recently). A lot of churches do the latter without the former.
There are too many churches are doing too little and some are living on the cash provided by the sterling efforts of others without doing much themselves. There needs IMHO to be more joined up thinking on a local level with a great deal more flexibility of approach in the uses of the buildings. (English Heritage can be a real pain if you want to change or even repair, a listed building).
That's not to say that every church becomes ecumenical with a rotating cycle of services - that doesn't work IME as people only attend for the stuff they like. No, decide after full and frank discussion and prayer what form of Christian expression your church should have and stick to it but be open to engage with the world around.
Alternative uses for churches can be found to make them a hub of the community - shops, libraries, drop in, advice centre, film clubs: you're only really limited by your imagination. Oh and church rules - get them sorted soon or they will continue to hinder growth.
[ 30. October 2014, 06:37: Message edited by: ExclamationMark ]
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
The evangelical tendency in the CofE uses the alarming statement - no church by 2050 or whatever - as a stalking horse to promote argument or to justify their preoccupation with 'change'.
And change is what they'll impose regardless of whether a church or parish is moribund, struggling or thriving: I've seen a MOR/Anglo-Cath parish be given a new evangelical incumbent installed and it was decline in action, with a reduction in the electoral roll of 75% in less than 3 years.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
I've seen a MOR/Anglo-Cath parish be given a new evangelical incumbent installed and it was decline in action, with a reduction in the electoral roll of 75% in less than 3 years.
This perhaps needs to be unpacked a little, doesn't it?
It could be, for example, that the church in question had become an Anglo-Cath "centre" with Christians travelling significant distances to get there ... in which case the decline is clearly due to the churchmanship but may reflect little on the church's relationship with the surrounding community.
On the other hand, if the church was engaging well with its hinterland, and became more inward-looking as a result of the new incumbent, then that is a serious cause for concern.
Or it could simply be a matter of people: Incumbent 1 was harder-working/more approachable/a better preacher (or whatever) than Incumbent 2.
All I'm saying is that we must be cautious in making to simplistic a link between "apparent cause" and "apparent effect" - something quite different may, in fact, be going on.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
Baptish Trainfan Nice try, but no.
The old congregation only had 2 people from outside the parish boundary and they lived less than half a mile from the church.
The old incumbent wasn't noticeably hard-working - in part perhaps because they combined the parish with another diocesan post. The new person has only the one post, that of incumbent.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
Fair enough ... I read an account some time back of a church in a working-class district of (I think) Swansea, where a new Evangelical Vicar came in. Soon the church was thriving, to the extent that it was getting noticed by the Christian media. But in fact its links with the community were getting weaker and it was moving up the social scale.
When said Vicar moved on, everything collapsed.
Of course, it doesn't have to be like that ... but different examples can be instructive!
PS An intriguing article from the "Guardian" a few months back ...
[ 30. October 2014, 07:34: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
Which is why we strive to be the VILLAGE church: in fact our reputation is spreading to the extent that we are now getting requests for weddings and baptisms from people who live well outside the parish.
No secret, just plain middle(ish)-of-the-road services celebrated with the minimum of fuss or false bonhomie, good music, friendly congregation all delighted to see new faces and make them feel welcome. While permanent population has shrunk church attendance and electoral roll have increased.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
And change is what they'll impose regardless of whether a church or parish is moribund, struggling or thriving: I've seen a MOR/Anglo-Cath parish be given a new evangelical incumbent installed and it was decline in action, with a reduction in the electoral roll of 75% in less than 3 years.
And my parish was a MOR one with 15 regular worshippers before being planted by an evangelical team appointed by the Bishop of London, and 10 years later we now have 250 regular members.
We can all use anecdotes to "prove" our own churchmanship biases, but in the bigger picture I'm not this is particularly helpful.
Objectively, the types of churches that are growing the most in the UK, largely due to immigration, are evangelical/charismatic and Roman Catholic.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
Not true for the CofE seekingsister: the attendance in the CofE which is growing most is at Cathedrals, during the week - in other words, BCP Choral Evensong.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
seekingsister
Shipmate
# 17707
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Not true for the CofE seekingsister: the attendance in the CofE which is growing most is at Cathedrals, during the week - in other words, BCP Choral Evensong.
That's why I said churches, not CofE. I thought it was clear given I said RCC is growing that I meant churches in general.
Within CofE I'm aware cathedral services are growing, which again has no bearing on a parish church replacing an Anglo-Catholic vicar with an evangelical or vice-versa.
I think our anecdotes have cancelled each other out, unless someone has some numbers. What I know is that at least in the Diocese of London, my rector is being asked to oversee a larger evangelical church planting program and requests are starting to come from the Southwark Diocese as well. It remains to be seen if those churches will all dry up with new leadership as was your experience, of course.
Posts: 1371 | From: London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
I don't think there is much point in trying to say which tradition encourages or hinders growth. Church of England's own report quite clearly states that "Style of worship and where a church places itself in terms of its theological tradition appear to have no significant link with growth, so long as there is consistency and clarity and the chosen style and tradition are wholeheartedly adopted".
The report stresses that the important factors for growth are good leadership, a clear mission and purpose, a willingness to self-reflect and (yes!) to change and adapt according to context, together with the involvement of the laity, being serious about focussing on growth and the nurturing of new disciples.
However, said report notes that "Association [of apparent growth factors] by itself does not prove or disprove anything, and can only at best show that two things are mathematically related, whether or not they are causally related. Therefore a study can only establish that there is association, not proof of why there is association. Given the discovery of an association the next step may be to do further research to test whether, why and how these factors inter-relate".
[ 30. October 2014, 09:28: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Magersfontein Lugg:
I guess I would be more encouraged if Bishops talked more of vision, prayer and God, rather than of plans to revive.
I think this is an often overlooked point. Talk about revival, and you've already planted an idea in people's heads that there's a decline going on. Even if it's true, it's not a good signal to send.
One of these days I'll get round to starting a discussion about how the Church cares for its older members, because I think that's a big part of the problem. I come across many older people who feel they've been forgotten or neglected by churches that they used to go to before they became to frail or unwell to do so. My opinion is that there's really no point recruiting people in their 20s if you're going to lose interest in them when they're in their 80s.
(Welcome aboard, by the way, Magersfontein Lugg - loving the Margery Allingham reference!)
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Adeodatus:
I think this is an often overlooked point. Talk about revival, and you've already planted an idea in people's heads that there's a decline going on.
Yes, in a church I once served I said, "We need to talk about the future of this church". I meant it as "We need to talk about our future plans and direction" - a value-neutral comment. But some people immediately interpreted me as meaning, "There's no future worth thinking about".
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
A local church I have lots of friends in recently did a series of meetings with all interested congregation members on what the church and its programs would look like if there were no barriers of money & talent & other resources.
What really came through was - people want to participate in ways that are meaningful to them, not just walk in sit down and go home or fill some misfit of a volunteer labor slot.
Little mention was made of most of the long-standing programs. Whether out of taking for granted or disinterest I don't know.
They want more outreach to the community like building ramps for houses of poor folks with a new disability, reaching out to new widows/widowers with practical help like yard care, take part in the local soup kitchen.
They want youth included in the adult music program (youth have no music program they can be part of), congregational creativity welcomed like poetry and songs and graphic arts used in worship or on the web page.
And they want more Bible studies.
Biggest complaint: "museum mentality." That probably unpacks in lots of different ways. There are folks who object to any changes - different arrangement of flowers from how their grandma did it, the existence of a daytime womens Bible study that attracts 40 people mostly unchurched (the objection is using church respouces - building wear and air conditioning costs - on a mostly non-members Bible study).
Traditions can ground us but they need to breathe, not be frozen. Some churches have no room to breathe in their traditions.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
I do believe church as we have known it may need to die - morph into something less medieval, less focused on spending horrendous amounts of money renewing the lead on stained glass windows and restoring stonework carvings, become vibrant in ways that address today's cultures and concerns.
Perhaps it is that today's culture is no longer concerned with patronage of the arts. More's the pity, but I think that maintaining our artistic heritage of glass and stone not only reflects that continuing patronage, but also provides jobs for those craftspersons so employed.
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
While I do agree, I think we mustn't forget that the essence of the Church is not found in the arts etc. but in the meeting together of God's people, the preaching of the Word, praying together and celebrating the Sacraments.
[And this is from someone who is actually preaching on Sunday on the need to be creative and use arts in worship!]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
The Bishop wants to try the stuff that Evangelical churches in the US were doing 20 years ago. Throw in some WWJD bracelets to get the full effect. Problem is the reasons for church decline don't have simple fixes. The church has spent decades if not a century creating the conditions for decline. No simple solution exists for saving it.
I'll be surprised if the mainline churches in the United States still exist at the end of this century. I read an article suggesting the last Episcopalian might already have been born. My suspicion is that more moderate Evangelicals will gradually take the place once occupied by the mainline churches.
--------------------
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
|
|
ButchCassidy
Shipmate
# 11147
|
Posted
Belle Ringer, just to say the idea of 40 unchurched willingly attending a daytime Bible study just sounds so amazing! Getting 1 person here would be a struggle.
And indeed the level of interest in general conveyed by the congregation, even if it is making complaints. They have sufficient interest to turn up and complain! How different to the "dying and apathetic about it" attitude I am used to (congregational meetings to turn around a dying church where noone turns up etc). I am sure that indeed, there are many things to improve as you say, but the overall feeling from your post (from here in the UK) is heart-warming ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Posts: 104 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
Retired people like church events in the afternoon. Gives them something to do and they don't have to drive at night. People always turn up to complain.
--------------------
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
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
They want more outreach to the community like building ramps for houses of poor folks with a new disability, reaching out to new widows/widowers with practical help like yard care, take part in the local soup kitchen.
They want youth included in the adult music program (youth have no music program they can be part of), congregational creativity welcomed like poetry and songs and graphic arts used in worship or on the web page.
And they want more Bible studies.
Well, that's what they say they want; but how do they mean it? Are these people going to be willing to show up on a Saturday afternoon to help build the ramp, or do they just have a vague sense that "the church" ought to do it? Does their vision of yard care for the elderly include their spending some time behind the mower, or are they really thinking that the rector ought to go over and work in someone's yard?
In my experience, parish people can be full of wonderful ideas when it comes to brainstorming about outreach, but when it comes time to put those ideas into practice most of them are busy, or on vacation, or or or.
The church is primarily a worshiping community. I wish more churches had a better handle on that; many churches seem to regard themselves as charitable societies with God as a sort of mascot hovering over them. Not surprisingly, that sort of church is usually moribund.
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Beeswax Altar
Shipmate
# 11644
|
Posted
No, the youth are supposed to do the yard work. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
Such surveys give you a lot of information about what others think they think the church should be doing for them and on their behalf.
--------------------
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
|
|
Zacchaeus
Shipmate
# 14454
|
Posted
I've been involved in churches for long enough to have heard a whole heap of good ideas, for other people to do.
Posts: 1905 | From: the back of beyond | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zacchaeus
Shipmate
# 14454
|
Posted
A survey, in the UK, some years ago by the religious sociologist Grace Davie. Showed that it doesn’t make any difference what music tradition you had, as long as it was done well.
Which is a problem for many churches, with lack of musical ability and money to pay for it..
Posts: 1905 | From: the back of beyond | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
We had this stated in Canada too. Not sure about it as a complete prophecy. Except: we started after we moved house in a small church in our neighbourhood. It was closed by the bishop due to numbers, though there may have been other considerations. Just more than a year ago, the church we started attending after church #1 closed, was closed itself, by another bishop, same diocese. Though this time, some 30 years later, the bishop did a more progressive thing, amalgamating it into another church, which really meant that it was wanted that we'd all show up at another particular church which changed its name just to welcome us.
I would suggest that poor church and diocesan planning, doing things that look good on paper, and not bothering to minister to the people who are present, are reasons enough. The church (as an organization) is often careless with the people, and seems to proceed along the lines of as long we open the doors on Sunday, people will come. I think this is basically wrong, because it often puts the organization before the people.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Magersfontein Lugg:
I have to say the newspaper report of what the Bishop (and Archdeacon) of Blackburn have said about church decline upset me. The Archdeacon's inspiring words are that unless there is change by 2050 there will be no C of E in his diocese.
I don't mean I disagree, I just find it both challenging and upsetting (and I have to say not very encouraging to elderly members of congregations).
The elderly members are probably already discouraged if they can see the system failing around them. But at least they won't be around in 2040s if and when things are grinding to a halt (in Blackburn, anyway).
I'm not an Anglican, but I often worship with the CofE these days. The thought playing at the back of my mind is that when I reach old age, the mainstream churches in the areas where I might live won't have the staff or the younger people to provide me with adequate pastoral support. At least today's elderly Christians have that, so they shouldn't grumble too much.
If, however, the elderly are complaining that they don't have this support then it certainly won't be available when I'm an old lady - if things continue as they are! Whether we like it or not, young people need to be courted if the churches are going to be able to carry on with their work. Churches don't run on thin air and nostalgia.
quote:
One of the questions I ask is what do Church of England hierarchy want? More in the pews or other types of seats so parish share is paid and the unpruned down C of E continues? Or fewer churches...
I'm afraid I don't understand this bit: 'other types of seats so parish share is paid'. What 'other types of seats' are you talking about?
(NB: I do realise that parts of London plus some well-heeled (semi-)rural and suburban areas don't face these troublesome issues. Maybe the CofE will retreat to these places and hence continue to exist beyond 2050. Who knows? These are structural matters, and we can't predict what the decisions will be.)
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
I would suggest that poor church and diocesan planning, doing things that look good on paper, and not bothering to minister to the people who are present, are reasons enough. The church (as an organization) is often careless with the people, and seems to proceed along the lines of as long we open the doors on Sunday, people will come. I think this is basically wrong, because it often puts the organization before the people.
Not only before the people, but before God perhaps, which may have something to do with decline.....
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
I would suggest that poor church and diocesan planning, doing things that look good on paper, and not bothering to minister to the people who are present, are reasons enough. The church (as an organization) is often careless with the people, and seems to proceed along the lines of as long we open the doors on Sunday, people will come. I think this is basically wrong, because it often puts the organization before the people.
Not only before the people, but before God perhaps, which may have something to do with decline.....
That's more or less what I was trying to get at in my post.
--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."
--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM
Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ButchCassidy:
Belle Ringer, just to say the idea of 40 unchurched willingly attending a daytime Bible study just sounds so amazing! Getting 1 person here would be a struggle.
It grew out of something else.
The church has long had a Mother's Day Out program for little kids Tuesday and Thursday. One of the directors noticed that many of the mothers were not church members, and chatting with them realized they knew little of Christianity even though aware their kids were in a church program that used Bible stories as well as Big Bird.
The director was not a member of this church, not even of this denomination; she kept saying "you need to start a Bible study for the mothers." Church was disinterested, told her "it's your idea, you do it." So she finally did.
It started with a dozen, grew to 40+, for two years they used nothing but Beth Moore because Beth's programs are specifically aimed at women.
Some women from other churches came too, I don't know of any other local church that has a weekday daytime Bible study for women.
One woman, some well done DVD-based studies (plus workbook and discussion and prayer needs time) targeted to that audience, an easy way to chat up the program with potentially interested people by chatting with the mothers of the kiddies in the MDO.
For a church with ASA 150, to have 40 mostly outsiders in a Bible study group is amazing.
One thing I think it shows, lots of outsiders are interested if we approach them where they are at and meet their own needs, not expect them to join our church and fill our rotas.
(Some in the church have opposed it from the start and still do; they think the group is not church members so it should pay rent for using the space.)
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Robert Armin
All licens'd fool
# 182
|
Posted
Lugg (if I may; it's what Campion called you) said: quote:
The Archdeacon's inspiring words are that unless there is change by 2050 there will be no C of E in his diocese.
This reminds me of an incident a few years ago on the Isle of Man. The present Bishop of S&M wanted to push some restructuring through his Diocesan Synod. The line used there was exactly the same; unless these changes went through there would be no CoE on the island in 50 years times. When challenged as to whether all Anglicans would disappear, the line was qualified: the CoE in its present form would not exist unless these reforms were made. To me this was a circular argument; by changing things the Bishop was already making sure the current form of Anglicanism would not exist in the future.
In other words, I think this is a scare mongering slogan, used to push some rebranding through. (Out of interest, is Bradford getting rid of Deaneries and replacing them with Mission Partnerships? That was S&M's bold new idea to save Anglicanism.)
--------------------
Keeping fit was an obsession with Fr Moity .... He did chin ups in the vestry, calisthenics in the pulpit, and had developed a series of Tai-Chi exercises to correspond with ritual movements of the Mass. The Antipope Robert Rankin
Posts: 8927 | From: In the pack | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Robert Armin:
Out of interest, is Bradford getting rid of Deaneries and replacing them with Mission Partnerships? That was S&M's bold new idea to save Anglicanism)
Well, in this document the Bishop talks about "working collaboratively with neighbouring churches" and "redrawing the Deanery map".
[Edited to tinyurl the URL because it was breaking scroll lock and bothering me. - Gwai]
[ 31. October 2014, 12:48: Message edited by: Gwai ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
They want more outreach to the community like building ramps for houses of poor folks with a new disability, reaching out to new widows/widowers with practical help like yard care, take part in the local soup kitchen....
Well, that's what they say they want; but how do they mean it? Are these people going to be willing to show up on a Saturday afternoon to help build the ramp, or do they just have a vague sense that "the church" ought to do it?
Probably some of the suggestions were people saying how they want to be served instead of how they want to serve, I suspect "help widows and widowers with yard work" might be an example.
But it's also been a church where a number of people (including some of my friends) wanted to start and lead a program of some kind (an "art as worship" afternoon, a Taize service, a Bible study) and were told no because any new activity might draw some away from already existing activities, upsetting those leaders. Also, existing activities need more volunteers, so anyone willing to volunteer must work on the existing activities.
I like the Willow Creek approach I read about, each member is asked what they like to do, and a way is found within the church for them to do it. Also, if not enough people are interested in doing some program decently without overworking the volunteers, that program is cut. No one wants to teach 4th grade Sunday school? That's OK, must mean God doesn't care to have 4th grade Sunday school in this church or God would have sent someone who looks forward to doing it.
Build a church around what people want to contribute, not around what services people want to receive from others. People based, not pre-existing program based. A few things must happen that no one wants to do, like cleaning toilets, so most churches hire out that job.
Pressuring or guilting people into duties mismatched to their interests and abilities is not a good way to convince them to keep coming to church.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by no prophet's flag is set so...:
I would suggest that poor church and diocesan planning, doing things that look good on paper, and not bothering to minister to the people who are present, are reasons enough. The church (as an organization) is often careless with the people, and seems to proceed along the lines of as long we open the doors on Sunday, people will come. I think this is basically wrong, because it often puts the organization before the people.
I completely agree. Really look after the people you already have, and others will find it attractive.
Tertullian tells us what impressed people outside the early Church: "See how [the Christians] love one another." Not, "See how they've got their doctrines all worked out," or "See what endless hours they spend in their Alpha courses", but "See how they love one another".
A Church that forgets that doesn't deserve to survive - in any form.
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
[personal tangent]
We think we have found a parish church to attend, now 15 months later. This Sunday when we attend will represent the first two in a row at the same parish.
I know a number of people who have simply stopped church, and we did that for almost 7 of the 15 months.
[/personal tangent]
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
dv
Shipmate
# 15714
|
Posted
Particular issues in Blackburn, of course: given current demographics the town is likely to be almost entirely Muslim in a few years.
Posts: 70 | From: Lancs UK | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by dv:
Particular issues in Blackburn, of course: given current demographics the town is likely to be almost entirely Muslim in a few years.
When I did (part of my) teacher training there 7 years ago it was around 25% Muslim. I think we've a few years to go yet before it's even majority Muslim.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by dv:
Particular issues in Blackburn, of course: given current demographics the town is likely to be almost entirely Muslim in a few years.
When I did (part of my) teacher training there 7 years ago it was around 25% Muslim. I think we've a few years to go yet before it's even majority Muslim.
Psssh - don't let mere facts get in the way of a good old whine about bloody foreigners!
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Psssh - don't let mere facts get in the way of a good old whine about bloody foreigners!
Most of Blackburn's Muslims were born in Britain.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Magersfontein Lugg
Shipmate
# 18240
|
Posted
I'e enjoyed reading the posts so far on the thread, and they are helping me in thinking over my disquiet about the current C of E and some of its bishops' pronouncements (like Bp of Blackburn)!
Two things come into my mind. Firstly there does seem a priority given to numbers and youth, as above truth and integrity. That may sound a bit harsh, but I'm not happy about church is declining so get on with Alpha groups, adopt the culture of the day and change to appeal to youth approach. This (Alpha etc) approach seems to be quite different in teaching from much traditional anglicanism. Are we to reject a central generous position because numbers are going down?
Secondly, what does the Bishop actually want? All in his diocese to be members of the C of E, hardly. All to be Christian, or some, ... about how many 'should' there be?
Now these are foolish questions! BUT by talking of decline the assumption seems to be there is a level which one should have, otherwise decline can be OK.
(I know, and I'm sorry for it, that my thoughts on this are not as coherent as I'd like but I hope some of this makes sense!)
Lugg
Posts: 104 | From: Bottle Street | Registered: Oct 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zacchaeus
Shipmate
# 14454
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by dv:
Particular issues in Blackburn, of course: given current demographics the town is likely to be almost entirely Muslim in a few years.
Though the diocese of Blackburn and its bishop, cover a much wider area, than just Blackburn itself
Posts: 1905 | From: the back of beyond | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Magersfontein Lugg:
Firstly there does seem a priority given to numbers and youth, as above truth and integrity. That may sound a bit harsh, but I'm not happy about church is declining so get on with Alpha groups, adopt the culture of the day and change to appeal to youth approach.
I should think it's quite reasonable for bishops to raise concerns if it's a serious statistical possibility that there won't be enough involved individuals to keep church structures functioning.
Whether the answer to that problem is Alpha courses is another matter, but people need to know there's a big problem before they can think of solutions.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
fullgospel
Shipmate
# 18233
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
Fair enough ... I read an account some time back of a church in a working-class district of (I think) Swansea, where a new Evangelical Vicar came in. Soon the church was thriving, to the extent that it was getting noticed by the Christian media. But in fact its links with the community were getting weaker and it was moving up the social scale.
When said Vicar moved on, everything collapsed.
Of course, it doesn't have to be like that ... but different examples can be instructive!
PS An intriguing article from the "Guardian" a few months back ...
So 'Evangelical' minister not a bit evangelistic.
Neglecting his actual PARISHONERS
and far from incarnational.
A sad waste....
--------------------
on the one hand - self doubt
on the other, the universe that looks through your eyes - your eyes
Posts: 364 | From: Rubovia | Registered: Sep 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evangeline
Shipmate
# 7002
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Magersfontein Lugg:
I'e enjoyed reading the posts so far on the thread, and they are helping me in thinking over my disquiet about the current C of E and some of its bishops' pronouncements (like Bp of Blackburn)!
Two things come into my mind. Firstly there does seem a priority given to numbers and youth, as above truth and integrity. That may sound a bit harsh, but I'm not happy about church is declining so get on with Alpha groups, adopt the culture of the day and change to appeal to youth approach. This (Alpha etc) approach seems to be quite different in teaching from much traditional anglicanism. Are we to reject a central generous position because numbers are going down?
Secondly, what does the Bishop actually want? All in his diocese to be members of the C of E, hardly. All to be Christian, or some, ... about how many 'should' there be?
Now these are foolish questions! BUT by talking of decline the assumption seems to be there is a level which one should have, otherwise decline can be OK.
(I know, and I'm sorry for it, that my thoughts on this are not as coherent as I'd like but I hope some of this makes sense!)
Lugg
I totally disagree that to be concerned about decreasing numbers of people attending church and identifying as Christians means that "there is a level which one should have"
Jesus calls us to go and make disciples of all nations not sit about watching the numbers of Christians dwindle-if decline is not stopped there will be nobody left to tell others about Jesus.
Posts: 2871 | From: "A capsule of modernity afloat in a wild sea" | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Psssh - don't let mere facts get in the way of a good old whine about bloody foreigners!
Most of Blackburn's Muslims were born in Britain.
Do you think that makes them less forrign to the sort of mind that goes on about this sort of thing?
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Magersfontein Lugg
Shipmate
# 18240
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
quote:
Originally posted by Magersfontein Lugg:
Firstly there does seem a priority given to numbers and youth, as above truth and integrity. That may sound a bit harsh, but I'm not happy about church is declining so get on with Alpha groups, adopt the culture of the day and change to appeal to youth approach.
I should think it's quite reasonable for bishops to raise concerns if it's a serious statistical possibility that there won't be enough involved individuals to keep church structures functioning.
Whether the answer to that problem is Alpha courses is another matter, but people need to know there's a big problem before they can think of solutions.
I agree its Ok for bishops to raise concerns BUT I don't agree if that is simply in order to keep church structures functioning. The concern the bishop should then raise is have we a realistic structure, or are we putting too much effort time etc. into tryng to keep a large creaky ship afloat.
I suspect, sadly, you are right that bishops are raising concern because they want the structures as they are to remain functioning.
Posts: 104 | From: Bottle Street | Registered: Oct 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Magersfontein Lugg
Shipmate
# 18240
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Evangeline:
quote:
Originally posted by Magersfontein Lugg:
Secondly, what does the Bishop actually want? All in his diocese to be members of the C of E, hardly. All to be Christian, or some, ... about how many 'should' there be?
Now these are foolish questions! BUT by talking of decline the assumption seems to be there is a level which one should have, otherwise decline can be OK.
(I know, and I'm sorry for it, that my thoughts on this are not as coherent as I'd like but I hope some of this makes sense!)
Lugg
I totally disagree that to be concerned about decreasing numbers of people attending church and identifying as Christians means that "there is a level which one should have"
Jesus calls us to go and make disciples of all nations not sit about watching the numbers of Christians dwindle-if decline is not stopped there will be nobody left to tell others about Jesus.
I do worry about the stress that puts on people to frantically stop decline.
Evangeline, do you think that call of Jesus as you describe it means everyone should be a christian and this should come about through other christians? (Go...make all nations...)
Personally I have more hope.
However, I do feel if Bishops spent more time on spiritual matters such as prayer, encouraging prayer and spirituality, good well prepared sermons, encouragement of the everyday good that is being done, rather than searching for the new and more initiatives, then the church may decline but I believe commitment and service to God's people would grow.
Posts: 104 | From: Bottle Street | Registered: Oct 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Evangeline
Shipmate
# 7002
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Magersfontein Lugg:
Evangeline, do you think that call of Jesus as you describe it means everyone should be a christian and this should come about through other christians? (Go...make all nations...)
Personally I have more hope.
However, I do feel if Bishops spent more time on spiritual matters such as prayer, encouraging prayer and spirituality, good well prepared sermons, encouragement of the everyday good that is being done, rather than searching for the new and more initiatives, then the church may decline but I believe commitment and service to God's people would grow.
There's a difference between being unconcerned about decline and being frantic about stopping it.
Nurturing the faithful and engaging in well considered evangelistic events are not mutually exclusive activities. It's quite possible to do both. I am not suggesting that getting more bums on pews is the only thing churches should focus on, just that they shouldn't ignore the fact that numbers are dwindling.
I believe that Christianity is the truth, so I guess I do believe everyone should be a Christian. I don't believe it is the Christian's duty to convert everybody they come across but Christianity is "good news", it has always been spread by Christians and the life of the Christian must be lived in community with other CHristians so I don't understand the implication in your question that it isn't the job of Christians to share their faith.
I worry that you seem to think I expect Christians to preach on street corners or badger everyone to come to Alpha or Two Ways to Live, I'm more of the "at all times preach the Gospel and, if you have to, use words" school of thought. I think God would be disappointed if we turned our backs on non-Christians and became purely inward focused, eventually that sort of church will collapse.
[code]
[ 01. November 2014, 12:46: Message edited by: Eutychus ]
Posts: 2871 | From: "A capsule of modernity afloat in a wild sea" | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
I interpret 'make disciples of all nations' to mean that christians should be present in all cultures and all parts of the world, as 'salt of the earth' or 'leaven within'. There is cause to worry if the church is representative of only a particular demographic. But we are always going to be a tiny minority of the world as a whole, and unless our particular grasp of the truth is superior to- and includes the insights of - any other possible faith or philosophy that's how it should be.
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Magersfontein Lugg:
I agree its Ok for bishops to raise concerns BUT I don't agree if that is simply in order to keep church structures functioning. The concern the bishop should then raise is have we a realistic structure, or are we putting too much effort time etc. into tryng to keep a large creaky ship afloat.
I suspect, sadly, you are right that bishops are raising concern because they want the structures as they are to remain functioning.
Actually, I think I've misunderstood you. I thought you wanted CofE structures to remain the same, because earlier you said this:
quote:
Two things come into my mind. Firstly there does seem a priority given to numbers and youth, as above truth and integrity. That may sound a bit harsh, but I'm not happy about church is declining so get on with Alpha groups, adopt the culture of the day and change to appeal to youth approach. This (Alpha etc) approach seems to be quite different in teaching from much traditional Anglicanism.
Will 'traditional Anglicanism' be able to maintain its traditional character if its structures are unsustainable? How about if the parish system goes? If the CofE has to be disestablished because too few people identify with it will it still be able to present a 'traditional' face to the world?
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
