Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vade Mecum:
I don't contend for one moment that FE steals people (clerical or lay) away from Parish ministry (though it may very well do): rather that it saps energy, imagination and intellectual manpower, draining it away from revitalisation of the liturgy, of parochial ministry, of the clerical calling, and drains it into a great sink-hole which, to mix metaphors, is indeed a blind alley leading nowhere.

---

I don't agree with the general tenor of this post, nor with Davidson and Milbank's critique which seems to present a ridiculously rosy-hued picture of what the Parish Church can do, without recognising the cultural complexity of the present day.

Nevertheless, it is certainly the case in some denominations that money and people are being placed into FE rather than resourcing "old expressions". There is nothing wrong with new initiatives but we mustn't neglect traditional Church either ... especially as (in my opinion) it is often they who end up resourcing FE which rarely seem to be able to support themselves. There's a balance to be had here, but I'm not quite sure where it is.

BTW, am I right in thinking that the most "proper" FEs are considered to be those which stand alone, rather than those which are new ministries of already-established (small "e"!) congregations?

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Vade Mecum:
I don't contend for one moment that FE steals people (clerical or lay) away from Parish ministry (though it may very well do): rather that it saps energy, imagination and intellectual manpower, draining it away from revitalisation of the liturgy, of parochial ministry, of the clerical calling, and drains it into a great sink-hole which, to mix metaphors, is indeed a blind alley leading nowhere.

---

I don't agree with the general tenor of this post, nor with Davidson and Milbank's critique which seems to present a ridiculously rosy-hued picture of what the Parish Church can do, without recognising the cultural complexity of the present day.

Nevertheless, it is certainly the case in some denominations that money and people are being placed into FE rather than resourcing "old expressions". There is nothing wrong with new initiatives but we mustn't neglect traditional Church either ... especially as (in my opinion) it is often they who end up resourcing FE which rarely seem to be able to support themselves. There's a balance to be had here, but I'm not quite sure where it is.

BTW, am I right in thinking that the most "proper" FEs are considered to be those which stand alone, rather than those which are new ministries of already-established (small "e"!) congregations?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
An established parish starting a new initiative designed to appeal to a new congregation would be a FE. A new service for the existing congregation probably not, as I understand it.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
TBH I neither know nor much care. I'd like to know where you're going with this. You seem to want me to say "yes, it's basically that" and I want to know why you want me to say that, frankly.

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
"...The aim of a fresh expression is not to provide a stepping stone into existing church, but to form a new church in its own right".

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:


Clearly one can be "church" without organ music, stained glass, hymnbooks or buildings ... but is there a bare minimum without which we do not (yet) have Church?

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Emma Louise:
I like it. I know it would get up the wick of tonnes of people here but its better than us not being in church, and far more valid for us at the moemnt.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by S. Bacchus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:


Clearly one can be "church" without organ music, stained glass, hymnbooks or buildings ... but is there a bare minimum without which we do not (yet) have Church?

---

For me (and for most others coming from an Anglican or RC background, I should think), what is important is that there be a community of people which meets regularly for the Eucharist and the Office.

---

Ah. That'd be us then

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by S. Bacchus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:


Clearly one can be "church" without organ music, stained glass, hymnbooks or buildings ... but is there a bare minimum without which we do not (yet) have Church?

---

For me (and for most others coming from an Anglican or RC background, I should think), what is important is that there be a community of people which meets regularly for the Eucharist and the Office.

---

Ah. That'd be us then

--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by *Leon*:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
An established parish starting a new initiative designed to appeal to a new congregation would be a FE. A new service for the existing congregation probably not, as I understand it.

---

How long can a fresh expression run for before it ceases to be fresh and becomes established?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by S. Bacchus:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:


Clearly one can be "church" without organ music, stained glass, hymnbooks or buildings ... but is there a bare minimum without which we do not (yet) have Church?

---

For me (and for most others coming from an Anglican or RC background, I should think), what is important is that there be a community of people which meets regularly for the Eucharist and the Office.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by *Leon*:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
An established parish starting a new initiative designed to appeal to a new congregation would be a FE. A new service for the existing congregation probably not, as I understand it.

---

How long can a fresh expression run for before it ceases to be fresh and becomes established?

---

Posted                   

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
We seem to be confused as to what an FE is.

From the horse's mouth: http://www.freshexpressions.org.uk/guide/about/whatis

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Plique-à-jour:
A few months ago I knocked on the side door of a church running a Fresh Expressions scheme. There were people in the office inside. I made eye contact with them, and waited for them to answer it. They looked away. I knocked again. Nothing, and this time they withheld eye contact.

Another person walked into the room to talk to the people already there. She looked directly at me. I waved. She looked away and began a conversation. I knocked. Nothing. I walked off around the corner and pissed in their drain.

So yeah, they're of no use to me.

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Plique-à-jour:
A few months ago I knocked on the side door of a church running a Fresh Expressions scheme. There were people in the office inside. I made eye contact with them, and waited for them to answer it. They looked away. I knocked again. Nothing, and this time they withheld eye contact.

Another person walked into the room to talk to the people already there. She looked directly at me. I waved. She looked away and began a conversation. I knocked. Nothing. I walked off around the corner and pissed in their drain.

So yeah, they're of no use to me.

---

I don't think that one experience really reflects the whole range of FE schemes!

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Plique-à-jour:
A few months ago I knocked on the side door of a church running a Fresh Expressions scheme. There were people in the office inside. I made eye contact with them, and waited for them to answer it. They looked away. I knocked again. Nothing, and this time they withheld eye contact.

Another person walked into the room to talk to the people already there. She looked directly at me. I waved. She looked away and began a conversation. I knocked. Nothing. I walked off around the corner and pissed in their drain.

So yeah, they're of no use to me.

---

I don't think that one experience really reflects the whole range of FE schemes!

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Sergius-Melli:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Plique-à-jour:
A few months ago I knocked on the side door of a church running a Fresh Expressions scheme. There were people in the office inside. I made eye contact with them, and waited for them to answer it. They looked away. I knocked again. Nothing, and this time they withheld eye contact.

Another person walked into the room to talk to the people already there. She looked directly at me. I waved. She looked away and began a conversation. I knocked. Nothing. I walked off around the corner and pissed in their drain.

So yeah, they're of no use to me.

---

I don't think that one experience really reflects the whole range of FE schemes!

---

Except it does, especially to the un-churched and the de-churched who need a friendly, engaging group of people to get them back into some sort of communal relationship with God...

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Plique-à-jour:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Plique-à-jour:
A few months ago I knocked on the side door of a church running a Fresh Expressions scheme. There were people in the office inside. I made eye contact with them, and waited for them to answer it. They looked away. I knocked again. Nothing, and this time they withheld eye contact.

Another person walked into the room to talk to the people already there. She looked directly at me. I waved. She looked away and began a conversation. I knocked. Nothing. I walked off around the corner and pissed in their drain.

So yeah, they're of no use to me.

---

I don't think that one experience really reflects the whole range of FE schemes!

---

I was kind of joking, but also serious. If you're doing something based on meeting people where they are, but you won't even put yourself to the trouble of opening a door, you lost me. I could have been unchurched, and that might have been the only time I stood within church grounds.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Plique-à-jour:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I don't think that one experience really reflects the whole range of FE schemes!

---

I was kind of joking, but also serious. If you're doing something based on meeting people where they are, but you won't even put yourself to the trouble of opening a door, you lost me. I could have been unchurched, and that might have been the only time I stood within church grounds.

---

And I would have to agree. But where do you want to go with it? Close down FE because one church side door had people on the other side of it being anti-social? Ye goddes and lyttle fyshes, we'd have closed down the mainstream church years ago on that basis.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Well, that particular one probably isn't. FE probably is of no use to you anyway, because you're neither unchurched nor dechurched. They're not for you. But even if they were, your logic still appears to be that if one X is Y, then all X are Y. Which is of course bollocks.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Plique-à-jour:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Well, that particular one probably isn't. FE probably is of no use to you anyway, because you're neither unchurched nor dechurched. They're not for you. But even if they were, your logic still appears to be that if one X is Y, then all X are Y. Which is of course bollocks.

---

You think they knew that? Of course not.

Oh I know, Karl. I know that FE people always revert to the haughtiness they accuse the mainstream church of whenever anyone even hints they should get adult.

I mean, think about it. That could have been their one chance. They don't know it wasn't.

---

Posted                         

quote:

---

Originally posted by Plique-à-jour:
I know that FE people always revert to the haughtiness they accuse the mainstream church of whenever anyone even hints they should get adult.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I know they didn't know. All I am saying is that one experience of a FE setup that dropped the ball tells you nothing about whether it's generally a good thing and nothing about other FE setups. We all agree this particular incident as you describe it was a Bad Thing.

Hence what's your point? One particular FE setup mucked up on one particular occasion. Big deal. Why do you need to tar them all with the same brush?

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Plique-à-jour:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
I know they didn't know. All I am saying is that one experience of a FE setup that dropped the ball tells you nothing about whether it's generally a good thing and nothing about other FE setups. We all agree this particular incident as you describe it was a Bad Thing.

Hence what's your point? One particular FE setup mucked up on one particular occasion. Big deal. Why do you need to tar them all with the same brush?

---

Perhaps because they're a 'way of being church' which presents itself as being at its best when welcoming the stranger. That's their USP, it's the thing they're supposed to be better at than the mainstream church. I can walk into any parish church in the country and not get blanked by the people hoovering and arranging the flowers. If the FE brief is loose enough to admit that 'way of being church', why should I give it another chance? Would you expect an unchurched person who that had happened to to give it another chance?

---

Posted                       

quote:

---

Originally posted by Plique-à-jour:
[QUOTE]I don't want to go anywhere with it, I'm just saying they're no use to me. I've never been blanked in the mainstream church.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
What Karl and Gumby said, but also where have you got this idea about haughtiness from? Is it from comments on this thread or from previous things you've heard, read or whatever? I'm sorry if I've contributed to the haughtiness at all; I know I have an unhelpful tendency to turn my nose up at written liturgy and what I see as antiquated formality.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
How many times do you have to be told that what happened to you shouldn't, is most certainly not what FE is about, and is in no way representative of what FE wants to be? The FE brief is not "loose enough" to include what you report happening.

So again I ask, given that absolutely no-one is defending this particular incident at this particular FE, why do you persist in making out that it's somehow part of the FE brief?

Your persistent harping on about this one incident is starting to look like a determined effort on your part to hate FE for reasons of your own.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Plique-à-jour:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
How many times do you have to be told that what happened to you shouldn't, is most certainly not what FE is about, and is in no way representative of what FE wants to be? The FE brief is not "loose enough" to include what you report happening.

So again I ask, given that absolutely no-one is defending this particular incident at this particular FE, why do you persist in making out that it's somehow part of the FE brief?

Your persistent harping on about this one incident is starting to look like a determined effort on your part to hate FE for reasons of your own.

---

I'm not harping on, I'm refusing to apologise for not blaming myself, just as you have and do. Only, on this occasion, you happen to be a member of the club being criticised. Why can't you deal with this?

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
If we can actually extract a useful point out of PaJ's train-wrecking of the thread, the point isn't about being blanked.

I'm also fortunate that I've never been blanked in a mainstream church. But on the other hand, I've never felt actually part of, accepted by, and valued by a church community in the way I have been lucky enough to in our FE setup. It's not been about active exclusion for me, so much as always feeling not really quite part of the church community, owing to not quite being subculturally like the rest of the congregation. Not an issue of fault; it just is.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by S. Bacchus:
There seems, Karl, to be a slight inconsistency in that you want your experience to demonstrate that the parochial church system has failed (or at least can fail), but are unwilling to allow that the experience of anyone else might demonstrate that Fresh Expressions might be liable to similar failure.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Plique-à-jour:
I have friends who run a Fresh Expression, and I was interested in visiting it at one time. 'Those who criticise us must be bad people' is how cults think, Karl.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Plique-à-jour:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
How many times do you have to be told that what happened to you shouldn't, is most certainly not what FE is about, and is in no way representative of what FE wants to be? The FE brief is not "loose enough" to include what you report happening.

So again I ask, given that absolutely no-one is defending this particular incident at this particular FE, why do you persist in making out that it's somehow part of the FE brief?

Your persistent harping on about this one incident is starting to look like a determined effort on your part to hate FE for reasons of your own.

---

I'm not harping on, I'm refusing to apologise for not blaming myself, just as you have and do. Only, on this occasion, you happen to be a member of the club being criticised. Why can't you deal with this?

---

And who exactly do you think I'm blaming, and for what?

Your point is extremely obscure. I've agreed with your criticism of this particular incident. I do not expect you to blame yourself for being blanked. I do not understand why you insist on generalising it.

To put it another way, what the fuck are you going on about?

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Plique-à-jour:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
If we can actually extract a useful point out of PaJ's train-wrecking of the thread, the point isn't about being blanked.

I'm also fortunate that I've never been blanked in a mainstream church. But on the other hand, I've never felt actually part of, accepted by, and valued by a church community in the way I have been lucky enough to in our FE setup. It's not been about active exclusion for me, so much as always feeling not really quite part of the church community, owing to not quite being subculturally like the rest of the congregation. Not an issue of fault; it just is.

---

You're comfy, so I'm train-wrecking? No.

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Why do you and PaJ insist on ascribing attitudes, thoughts and opinions to me that I do not actually have?

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Plique-à-jour:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Plique-à-jour:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
How many times do you have to be told that what happened to you shouldn't, is most certainly not what FE is about, and is in no way representative of what FE wants to be? The FE brief is not "loose enough" to include what you report happening.

So again I ask, given that absolutely no-one is defending this particular incident at this particular FE, why do you persist in making out that it's somehow part of the FE brief?

Your persistent harping on about this one incident is starting to look like a determined effort on your part to hate FE for reasons of your own.

---

I'm not harping on, I'm refusing to apologise for not blaming myself, just as you have and do. Only, on this occasion, you happen to be a member of the club being criticised. Why can't you deal with this?

---

And who exactly do you think I'm blaming, and for what?

Your point is extremely obscure. I've agreed with your criticism of this particular incident. I do not expect you to blame yourself for being blanked. I do not understand why you insist on generalising it.

To put it another way, what the fuck are you going on about?

---

In a phrase: by their fruits ye shall know them.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Plique-à-jour:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
Why do you and PaJ insist on ascribing attitudes, thoughts and opinions to me that I do not actually have?

---

Weren't you doing that to me, just now?

---

Posted                      

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
So you are saying that because you had one bad experience all FEs and the people in them are bad.

Which is unbelievably idiotic.

---

Posted                          

quote:

---

Originally posted by Plique-à-jour:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
So you are saying that because you had one bad experience all FEs and the people in them are bad.

Which is unbelievably idiotic.

---

No, I am not, I'm saying that if FEs don't give their occupants the discipline not to behave like that, they're no use to me. The people who smile at me when I enter a church never having met me are not my buddy, nor determined one way or another about me, they're just adults, doing their duties. I don't care how good a club feels, if it looks through strangers, it isn't being church, and my time is not for them to waste trying again and again to learn how to act.

---