|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Eccles: Bridges and new congregations
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
For what it's worth, turning up at an RC church for mass got me not a word spoken except the blessing from the Priest at communion time. Maybe this isn't typical but there seemed to be an implicit assumption that if you've found your way there then there was no particular effort needed from the congregation or indeed the priest to make you welcome.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
And also an assumption that religion is a private and personal thing, rather than an explicitly corporate and communal activity?
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
For what it's worth, turning up at an RC church for mass got me not a word spoken except the blessing from the Priest at communion time. Maybe this isn't typical but there seemed to be an implicit assumption that if you've found your way there then there was no particular effort needed from the congregation or indeed the priest to make you welcome.
Well, your average Novus Ordo RC parish really isn't much different to your average Anglican parish.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Liturgylover
Shipmate
# 15711
|
Posted
I think that for RC parishes it varies from place to place - our local RC church has a welcomer at the relatively quieter masses on sat and sun evening. But RC churches have much larger congregations - the average Sunday mass attendance for parishes in Diocese of Westminster is 1100 - and people are used to just helping themselves to the materials which are left at the back. To be honest I wish more CofE churches did this. As an Anglican, what I like about RC parishes is the implicit assumption that it is just natural for one to be there, though I realise that experience may be different for someone new to the faith.
I think the CofE tendency to "pounce on people as they walk in" as it was described to me by a friend) particularly in smaller country parishes can be more off-putting than letting people find their feet and peace. I don't know enough about the welcoming experience in Methodist/ Baptist/ Reformeed churches to comment but I imagine they would be similar to the CofE?
Posts: 452 | From: North London | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Liturgylover:
I think the CofE tendency to "pounce on people as they walk in" as it was described to me by a friend) particularly in smaller country parishes can be more off-putting than letting people find their feet and peace. I don't know enough about the welcoming experience in Methodist/ Baptist/ Reformeed churches to comment but I imagine they would be similar to the CofE?
The 'letting people find their feet' approach is fine for assertive or extrovert people who'll feel comfortable with getting stuck in and sparking up conversations themselves. But plenty of people aren't like that, are they? Plenty of people will sit and wait for someone to approach them, and if no one does (especially on their second or third service attendance) then they might well not come back, having decided that they're not really welcome there.
Surely what's needed is a sensitive and gentle approach to someone who's on their own; something like, 'Hello, I've not seen you here before. I'm Kevin, pleased to meet you.' Then if the person is new, an offer to get them a drink, sit with them, explain potentially confusing aspects of the service etc. etc. (delete as appropriate to your particular service style). But we must also be alert for signs that a person would really prefer to be left alone, because I realise that is what some people will want.
And then look out for them the following couple of weeks and make a point of greeting them, maybe also introducing them to one or two other people, maybe inviting them to a home group meeting, the coffee morning or whatever.
This is off the point, sorry, but it's an issue I feel strongly about!
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Liturgylover
Shipmate
# 15711
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Liturgylover:
I think the CofE tendency to "pounce on people as they walk in" as it was described to me by a friend) particularly in smaller country parishes can be more off-putting than letting people find their feet and peace. I don't know enough about the welcoming experience in Methodist/ Baptist/ Reformeed churches to comment but I imagine they would be similar to the CofE?
The 'letting people find their feet' approach is fine for assertive or extrovert people who'll feel comfortable with getting stuck in and sparking up conversations themselves. But plenty of people aren't like that, are they? Plenty of people will sit and wait for someone to approach them, and if no one does (especially on their second or third service attendance) then they might well not come back, having decided that they're not really welcome there.
Surely what's needed is a sensitive and gentle approach to someone who's on their own; something like, 'Hello, I've not seen you here before. I'm Kevin, pleased to meet you.' Then if the person is new, an offer to get them a drink, sit with them, explain potentially confusing aspects of the service etc. etc. (delete as appropriate to your particular service style). But we must also be alert for signs that a person would really prefer to be left alone, because I realise that is what some people will want.
And then look out for them the following couple of weeks and make a point of greeting them, maybe also introducing them to one or two other people, maybe inviting them to a home group meeting, the coffee morning or whatever.
This is off the point, sorry, but it's an issue I feel strongly about!
No, I completely disagree with you. We are all different of course but if I walked into your church and someone did what you suggested above I would walk straight out. I am not assertive or an extrovert, quite the opposite in fact, and I feel more challenged when being approached when I enter a building. I think for most people the most appropriate time for welcome and exploration and follow up would be at the end of a service where it's possible to have a more reflective discussion about the faith and what the particular church offers. I think welcomers at CofE churches (and there are some that do this well) need to try and be more discerning about the needs of the indivdual. What I find unpleasant is the automatic "default" into welcome which then becomes anything but.
Posts: 452 | From: North London | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I think there's a balance to be struck ...
Being aware and sensitive to the needs of visitors is the right way to go ... but it's easier said than done.
There is also something, I would suggest, in Baptist Trainfan's question about whether RC settings cultivate a view of the faith that it is a personal and private matter ...
When I was involved in a Baptist church I remember a lad gravitating towards the Baptists from one of the RC churches in the area precisely because he wanted a greater sense of community and involvement ...
That doesn't mean that there isn't a sense of community in RC churches - but it does vary and some people - as RCs will often admit themselves - do use the Mass as some kind of 'filling station' ...
All that said, I agree with the posters who say that RCs (and the Orthodox I'd add) do seem perfectly comfortable and at ease in church in an unselfconscious kind of way and simply segue in and out of it as they see fit ...
So, because they are used to dipping in and out as it were, they aren't particularly going to be attuned to the likelihood of people coming in for other reasons - ie, to connect with faith for the first time or reconnect with a faith they'd lost ...
All that said, I do find some Anglican approaches to welcoming visitors rather intrusive. You practically get rugby tackled in some places ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Liturgylover:
We are all different of course but if I walked into your church and someone did what you suggested above I would walk straight out.
Wow, okay. I'm very surprised but, as you say, we are all different!
quote:
Originally posted by Liturgylover:
I think for most people the most appropriate time for welcome and exploration and follow up would be at the end of a service where it's possible to have a more reflective discussion about the faith and what the particular church offers.
Yes, good point. I was thinking of my particular church context; at our Sunday gatherings there is much conversation and general hubbub before the meeting begins, and we also have a 10-15 break for drinks, biscuits, fruit, prayer, conversation, reflection.
Which all means that it's thoroughly natural and appropriate (ISTM) for a 'Hi, not seen you here before, you're very welcome' conversation to happen before the start. I suppose that might well not be the case with some / many other churches.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Paradox and conundrums (conundra?) run through everything. RC theology and ecclesiology is far more 'corporate' than anything we might encounter in 'congregational' settings ... yet in practice the RC approach can be personal and somewhat individualised ... or at least, give that appearance from the outside ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
I've been both 'pounced upon' and ignored, the former in a pushy way, the latter where not one member of the congregation, nor the minister, made eye contact. Neither are the 'right' approach.
To walk into a church for a service and be expected to find the service sheets and hymn books (if any) and somewhere to sit with no help from anyone is neglectful of hospitality imv. Hospitality must be one of the obvious bridges.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Liturgylover:
We are all different of course but if I walked into your church and someone did what you suggested above I would walk straight out.
Wow, okay. I'm very surprised but, as you say, we are all different!
quote:
Originally posted by Liturgylover:
I think for most people the most appropriate time for welcome and exploration and follow up would be at the end of a service where it's possible to have a more reflective discussion about the faith and what the particular church offers.
Yes, good point. I was thinking of my particular church context; at our Sunday gatherings there is much conversation and general hubbub before the meeting begins, and we also have a 10-15 break for drinks, biscuits, fruit, prayer, conversation, reflection.
Which all means that it's thoroughly natural and appropriate (ISTM) for a 'Hi, not seen you here before, you're very welcome' conversation to happen before the start. I suppose that might well not be the case with some / many other churches.
In churches where quiet reflection or Eucharistic adoration happens before the service, it's not very appropriate for a chat beforehand, no. Also as an introvert, I find that the opposite to what you say is true - introverts generally want to be left to settle into a service by themselves and not be bothered by someone coming to chat to them. We hate small talk. I once went to a new-to-me charismatic church and the leader made me introduce myself to the whole church! Predictably, I never darkened their door again - I felt very exposed and uncomfortable. Please also be aware that there are those of us with social anxiety and related conditions, and stepping into a church full of people is terrifying enough for us sometimes.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
quote:
Originally posted by Arethosemyfeet:
For what it's worth, turning up at an RC church for mass got me not a word spoken except the blessing from the Priest at communion time. Maybe this isn't typical but there seemed to be an implicit assumption that if you've found your way there then there was no particular effort needed from the congregation or indeed the priest to make you welcome.
Well, your average Novus Ordo RC parish really isn't much different to your average Anglican parish.
That is not my experience at all. Many post-VaticanII RC parishes (in fairness I've never been to any other kind of RC church) don't even have refreshments after mass, which is practically part of Anglican liturgy! There is no time for chatting and socialising after the service, which is very important for newcomers to feel at home. I do find that this contributes to the 'filling station' attitude towards church in RC churches. It doesn't feel like a real community.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Re converts - we have a lot here, but then we have the Jesus Army here. Areas with large evangelical churches will get converts - but whether or not they stay converts is another matter.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
...introverts generally want to be left to settle into a service by themselves and not be bothered by someone coming to chat to them. We hate small talk.
I'm an introvert too, and find small talk very difficult. That's why I tried to stress sensitivity in the approach to someone who might be a newcomer, and focusing on concrete matters like getting a drink, finding a seat, explaining what's going on.
Probably this would seem more natural at my church's Sunday meetings than at those of most other churches - most people are mingling, chatting, getting a coffee and so on, rather than there being an atmosphere of quiet reflection and anticipation. But in any case, it's certainly important to be alert to signals that someone would rather be left alone.
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I once went to a new-to-me charismatic church and the leader made me introduce myself to the whole church! Predictably, I never darkened their door again - I felt very exposed and uncomfortable
Good grief, that's horrendously inappropriate... This was on your first visit? ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
The thing is, Raptor Eye, some churches don't use hymn books and service sheets.
If you went into an Orthodox service you'd find the whole thing just trundles along without any explanations at all ...
Part of me likes that idea. They're so secure in their own skins that they just get on with it ... although I can see how it could totally bewilder anyone not used to it and not sure what to expect.
But, as you say, hospitality, however it is expressed, is very important indeed.
These things can be done.
I recently visited an Anglican church for the first time - as part of something voluntary I'm involved with - and turned up 10 minutes late as I couldn't find the building at first.
The service was well on and when I sneaked in and took a pew near the back someone very helpfully passed me a hymn and service book and showed me the page they were on. This was done so thoughtfully and graciously that there was no way anyone could have taken offence.
As it happened, I would have been able to find the right place as I'm familiar with the format - but had I not been this would have been a very welcome gesture on that person's part.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
...introverts generally want to be left to settle into a service by themselves and not be bothered by someone coming to chat to them. We hate small talk.
I'm an introvert too, and find small talk very difficult. That's why I tried to stress sensitivity in the approach to someone who might be a newcomer, and focusing on concrete matters like getting a drink, finding a seat, explaining what's going on.
Probably this would seem more natural at my church's Sunday meetings than at those of most other churches - most people are mingling, chatting, getting a coffee and so on, rather than there being an atmosphere of quiet reflection and anticipation. But in any case, it's certainly important to be alert to signals that someone would rather be left alone.
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I once went to a new-to-me charismatic church and the leader made me introduce myself to the whole church! Predictably, I never darkened their door again - I felt very exposed and uncomfortable
Good grief, that's horrendously inappropriate... This was on your first visit?
I have been to several churches in the south-eastern US where visitors were asked to stand, introduce themselves by name, and tell the congregation a bit about why and how they had come to that church for the first time that day. I have encountered this in Methodist, Baptist and Episcopalian settings. Indeed, one of the reasons I seek out the early morning services when travelling is to be spared this.
I will say that coffee hour at such places tends to be friendly (as opposed to churches declaring their inclusivity where visitors are ignored at the coffee hour) although perhaps this has more to do with local traditions of hospitality.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
...introverts generally want to be left to settle into a service by themselves and not be bothered by someone coming to chat to them. We hate small talk.
I'm an introvert too, and find small talk very difficult. That's why I tried to stress sensitivity in the approach to someone who might be a newcomer, and focusing on concrete matters like getting a drink, finding a seat, explaining what's going on.
Probably this would seem more natural at my church's Sunday meetings than at those of most other churches - most people are mingling, chatting, getting a coffee and so on, rather than there being an atmosphere of quiet reflection and anticipation. But in any case, it's certainly important to be alert to signals that someone would rather be left alone.
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I once went to a new-to-me charismatic church and the leader made me introduce myself to the whole church! Predictably, I never darkened their door again - I felt very exposed and uncomfortable
Good grief, that's horrendously inappropriate... This was on your first visit?
I have been to several churches in the south-eastern US where visitors were asked to stand, introduce themselves by name, and tell the congregation a bit about why and how they had come to that church for the first time that day. I have encountered this in Methodist, Baptist and Episcopalian settings. Indeed, one of the reasons I seek out the early morning services when travelling is to be spared this.
I will say that coffee hour at such places tends to be friendly (as opposed to churches declaring their inclusivity where visitors are ignored at the coffee hour) although perhaps this has more to do with local traditions of hospitality.
Kill them. With fire if available.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
O. I forgot to mention that there was applause after each new visitor presentation.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
...introverts generally want to be left to settle into a service by themselves and not be bothered by someone coming to chat to them. We hate small talk.
I'm an introvert too, and find small talk very difficult. That's why I tried to stress sensitivity in the approach to someone who might be a newcomer, and focusing on concrete matters like getting a drink, finding a seat, explaining what's going on.
Probably this would seem more natural at my church's Sunday meetings than at those of most other churches - most people are mingling, chatting, getting a coffee and so on, rather than there being an atmosphere of quiet reflection and anticipation. But in any case, it's certainly important to be alert to signals that someone would rather be left alone.
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
I once went to a new-to-me charismatic church and the leader made me introduce myself to the whole church! Predictably, I never darkened their door again - I felt very exposed and uncomfortable
Good grief, that's horrendously inappropriate... This was on your first visit?
I was imagining you asking someone if they were new in a stage whisper in front of everyone sitting quietly! If everyone is chatting and mingling and it's done discreetly then that's not so bad I suppose. I have experienced the pre-service mingle/coffee time in some evangelical Anglican services and it can work, although personally I prefer a bit of quiet reflection/meditation rather than people milling around.
And yes, my very first (and last) visit, they'd never seen me before. I sat to the side, the service started when suddenly the leader (not the pastor though) handed me the microphone ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif)
Also - re the US introductions of newcomers, I am horrified that this takes place in Episcopalian churches! There should be no place in the mass for that.
[ 13. February 2014, 16:00: Message edited by: Jade Constable ]
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
I have a confession to make. At my last church, one of my jobs was to invite any visitors to stand up and introduce themselves. And yes, they would be clapped afterwards. In our defense, this wasn't something that visitors were obliged to do, it was more a question of 'Would any visitors like to ...'. If noone stood up that was perfectly okay, and the service would simply continue. This seemed to be a long-standing custom at that church.
Speaking very generally, I don't think Methodist churches are good places to turn up and be ignored. (These days I go to the CofE for that!) Certainly, if you turn up for a few weeks, the members WILL find out who you are. I think there's a certain communality in Methodism that's a carry-over from the past; you don't go to a Methodist church to be alone with God and to bathe in quiet contemplation. Mutual engagement of some kind is expected of everyone. That's probably even truer in some of the charismatic congregations, although the advantage there is that many of them are much larger, so it's easier to turn up and hide. Smaller charismatic congregations are more challenging to me as a visitor
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Arethosemyfeet
Shipmate
# 17047
|
Posted
I don't think I've ever been ignored at an Anglican service. At the very least people will smile or say good morning/evening. And as someone who is pretty shy (plus asperger's) anyway I'm pretty happy with that. Not having a word spoken or eye contact made at all seems a bit... unfriendly to me.
Posts: 2933 | From: Hebrides | Registered: Apr 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
I should note that in the Baptist and Methodist churches to which I referred above, while I found it awkward, it was not hellish: everyone was relaxed and friendly and I was not made to feel out of place. In two of them, there were substantial meals afterward and I was treated with much (ableit deepfried) hospitality. At the Episcopalian one (the name can be obtained after a significant draft of a morale-strengthening libation), it was quite creepy with about 80 people grinning at me in expectation, as if I had fallen into an odd kind of horror film.
I was once in a Jamaican Anglican church where we had the same routine and there were three of us tourists among the congrgation. After the invitation, we looked at each other nervously, wondering how we could be magically made to feel invisible. The rector saw this and said: "Let us welcome the Canadians," causing much much mirth among the worshippers.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
I'm very glad Mr. C. was pounced upon by an over-enthusiastic welcomer asking if he was saved, or some such, when he decided to try out a church. Because it frightened him off so much that he came to my church instead and met, and married, me. The welcomer did us a huge favour - if it wasn't for him overdoing things, Mr. C. might have stayed there and we might never have met!
God moves in (very) mysterious ways....
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Tsk ... tsk ... Chorister ... you might not have met, but your husband might have stayed there and 'been saved' ... ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
'What profits it a man if he gain (a wife) and yet ...'
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
Lord have mercy,
Christ have mercy,
Lord have mercy-hee-hee-hee!
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
A few years ago I spent a few months travelling around churches of all sorts of traditions, sizes, denominations and service types.
Most of them barely acknowledged my presence. The worst offender was a "new" church over 100 strong populated by mainly the under 35's. No one but no one spoke to me nor acknowledged me: in a catch up time part way through the service (I suppose their equivalent of the peace), everyone pastor included walked past me, sitting on the end of a row.
A few spoke: one or two got it right.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
A few years ago I spent a few months travelling around churches of all sorts of traditions, sizes, denominations and service types.
Most of them barely acknowledged my presence. The worst offender was a "new" church over 100 strong populated by mainly the under 35's. No one but no one spoke to me nor acknowledged me: in a catch up time part way through the service (I suppose their equivalent of the peace), everyone pastor included walked past me, sitting on the end of a row.
A few spoke: one or two got it right.
Out of interest, what would have been the right 'bridge' to enable you to take the next steps into their congregations? How did those who 'got it right' manage it? Did you go back?
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
A few years ago I spent a few months travelling around churches of all sorts of traditions, sizes, denominations and service types.
Most of them barely acknowledged my presence. The worst offender was a "new" church over 100 strong populated by mainly the under 35's. No one but no one spoke to me nor acknowledged me: in a catch up time part way through the service (I suppose their equivalent of the peace), everyone pastor included walked past me, sitting on the end of a row.
A few spoke: one or two got it right.
Out of interest, what would have been the right 'bridge' to enable you to take the next steps into their congregations? How did those who 'got it right' manage it? Did you go back?
The bridge would've been a smile and an offer of help with service books etc. Better still would've been a kindly person who offered to sit with me to explain stuff - as it happens I'd probable decline (which I did in the case of the one or two who got it "right" for me). It was a case of expect nothing but explain everything if needed.
It certainly wouldn't have been the church where a haughty man asked me to move from a his seat in a virtually empty rural church and, for the first time ever, I walked out of the church door right away. Neither would it have been the Baptist church where they didn't offer us the communion ....
As for the church who ignored me totally, I'd never go back. Not only was their welcome off the scale, their theology was warped too. I can't go back in any event - they are no longer in existence.
At this point I'd want to reveal that I was visiting these churches as part of a sabbatical project on how we welcome people --- I deliberately went to place where I wouldn't be known!
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Neither would it have been the Baptist church where they didn't offer us the communion ....
Presumably that wasn't a case of "no Communion being on offer" but "Communion offered to members but not outsiders" - i.e. the Strict Baptist position. I came across the bizarre situation many years ago as part of a Mission Team who were given a "spot" to speak in the service but still excluded from Communion ...
Bearing in mind that non-RCs can't receive Communion at Mass, how would you have felt if someone had gently explained that "we are delighted to have you worshipping here with us, but we're afraid our theology does not permit us to offer Communion to people who are not members of this church"?
Mind you, that's not "where I'm at" personally!
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
That sounds like an interesting sabbatical exercise, ExclamationMark with valuable object lessons in how 'not' to welcome people ...
I agree with your recommendation on offering to help but backing off and allowing the visitor space if they don't need or want any.
Difficult balance to strike, but it's the right one, I think.
On the reception/non-reception of communion thing - that all depends on context, of course and some explanation should be provided whatever the policy ...
I've seen Orthodox parish websites where they spell out that whilst they'd welcome people from other Christian traditions their eucharistic policy doesn't allow them to share communion ...
Whether they would say that or explain that if a visitor wandered in without seeing the website in advance, or who wasn't aware of their position on this one ... I don't know ...
I've been ushered forward at Mass in RC churches only to smile politely and decline ... not because I'd feel awkward going up and indicating to the priest that I couldn't receive ... but because I thought it was easier and simpler to stay put.
At Orthodox churches - where I tend to know some of the people anyway - I will go forward for the 'blessing' or the kissing of the cross but won't receive from the chalice where they mix the bread and wine together. In fact, I do everything they do - in those exercises where I know the 'moves', apart from receiving communion - but that's not an attention grabber as some of them won't be receiving communion every Sunday either ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
The bridge [...] wouldn't have been the church where a haughty man asked me to move from a his seat in a virtually empty rural church and, for the first time ever, I walked out of the church door right away. Neither would it have been the Baptist church where they didn't offer us the communion ....
It occurs to me that being refused Communion is probably a bigger turn-off to practising Christians than it would be to non-religious visitors, who often don't want to take Communion anyway.
Any church that doesn't make Communion available to every visitor (for how can we know which visitors really are believers and which not?) doesn't belong to the bridge-building school of churchmanship. Well, fair enough - it's a considered position, and not every church aims to grow by following the 'belonging before believing' principle. Some churches find that making entry costs higher for newcomers works better for them. This isn't the same thing as being rude for rudeness' sake, but I suppose they can both have a similar effect on the casual, unprepared visitor.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
It depends - it could work on the reverse psychology principle ... I want to belong, I want to have communion with these people, therefore I must convert ...
Although I'm sure that wouldn't come into play in many instances.
All that said, I've never felt particularly 'rejected' or hacked off when visiting RC or Orthodox services - because I know their 'take' on these things and 'when in Rome' and all that - literally in the case of the RCs ...
I thought I'd feel completely rejected and unwelcome the first time I attended an Orthodox service, for instance ...
But when it came to it I didn't feel put-out in the least that I wasn't able to share communion. I could see that to do so would mean to share their theology and 'take' on these things ...
Both the RCs and the Orthodox have a catechumenate system which takes people through the process and shows them the ropes ... there is a sense of 'belonging' preceding believing to a certain extent in those settings.
All churches have a process. Even those that go in for 'instant conversions' and so on.
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Gamaliel
I wasn't thinking of 'instant conversions', but of churches that see 'church' very much as a place with clear boundaries between the inside and the outside. Conversion may take a while but it could be nurtured by careful teaching in sessions outside Sunday worship, and you don't truly 'belong' until that moment has come and been verified.
The case of the Metropolitan Tabernacle in London is quite relevant. There's a MW report on it here. It's a non-charismatic evangelical church with a long history which after a period of decline earlier in the 20th c. now has a community of 5000 people, even though it quizzes strangers on the door instead of welcoming everyone in with open arms. It isn't open to the wider community except through its bookshop, and all its activities apart from Sunday lunch are religious activities. In the words of an essay I have here it shuns being 'a public space of co-mingling of strangers' and of 'relationality and encounter with different others'.
This model clearly wouldn't work for other churches whose identity is one of openness to the wider community and of an internal tolerance of various theological perspectives.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Sure, I didn't respond to all of your points and yes, I agree with what you're saying about churches which erect 'barriers' to some extent or other ...
Incidentally, I am familiar with the Metropolitan Tabernacle - both with its history and location. I once visited its bookshop - this must have been in 1986 ... and your description is uncannily accurate.
I tried to engage the bloke behind the counter in conversation and although he smiled sweetly, it was clear he wasn't going to be drawn ...
I was rather glad he wasn't as I was in a very full-on charismatic church at the time and I might have had the third-degree about that.
Incidentally, a liberal clergyman I know suggests that the Alpha course contains a 'barrier' - for all its apparent laid-backness - and that's the 'tongues' issue ...
He believes that it is place where it is in the Alpha sequence as some kind of filtering device - rather in the way that there are several 'get-out' points in the course of certain sales practices and techniques ...
So if you're still around after the 'tongues' teaching and the 'Holy Spirit' weekend, then the organisers know that you're susceptible enough to go with matters charismatic ...
I think that's an intriguing observation ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
That would make sense in many charismatic settings - after all, some people might hate the idea of speaking in tongues so it's probably better to deal with that issue before they join such a church unawares.
However, not every church that uses Alpha is the kind that emphasises speaking in tongues. I understand that some churches even skip over that bit, although the writers aren't too happy about that. But the Alpha brand is now so successful that theological objections have been pushed aside in many cases. Maybe we should be grateful to Alpha for building ecumenical bridges!
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Well yes, my point wasn't to have a dig at Alpha necessarily - simply to illustrate the point that even 'laid-back' and chatty styles of evangelism/catechesis can contain a 'barrier' element ...
I'm well aware that many places gloss over the tongues bit in the Alpha course - and I'd suggest that this is one of the other reasons for it's success and popularity irrespective of what the authors think ... it does provide a format which is adaptable and flexible to some extent.
I'm sure loads of Alpha users don't go by the book and the manual/videos ...
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I'm not sure that joining 'such a church unawares' figures that much in these cases ...
My experience with charismatic churches is that people who are drawn to them are those who want the charismatic element in the first place - so they're well up for the tongues thing if they aren't into it already ...
Most full-on charismatic churches tend to draw people in from other settings who want a more full-on charismatic experience than might be available where they are ... it's mostly 'tranfer-growth' ...
That said, there are, generally speaking and in my experience, converts from unchurched backgrounds too. If these do stay the course - and many do drop out at an early stage - then they accept the charismatic dimension because that's what's there and that's what's on offer.
I don't think it's a case of people joining a charismatic church and then suddenly waking up one morning and thinking, 'Oooh 'eck, they didn't tell me about the tongues ...'
--------------------
Let us with a gladsome mind
Praise the Lord for He is kind.
http://philthebard.blogspot.com
Posts: 15997 | From: Cheshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
If your clergyman was simply saying that not everyone is converted as a result of contact with Alpha, that's obviously the case. Noone can claim otherwise, especially now that studies have emerged describing the kinds of people who are the most and least likely to find Alpha spiritually helpful. 'Chatty' and 'laid-back' dinners with strangers don't always fit the bill.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Neither would it have been the Baptist church where they didn't offer us the communion ....
1. Presumably that wasn't a case of "no Communion being on offer" but "Communion offered to members but not outsiders" - i.e. the Strict Baptist position. I came across the bizarre situation many years ago as part of a Mission Team who were given a "spot" to speak in the service but still excluded from Communion ...
2. Bearing in mind that non-RCs can't receive Communion at Mass, how would you have felt if someone had gently explained that "we are delighted to have you worshipping here with us, but we're afraid our theology does not permit us to offer Communion to people who are not members of this church"?
Mind you, that's not "where I'm at" personally!
1. I wish it was a Strict Baptist Church - it wasn't it was an open membership BUGB place.
2. I'd argue with them (if not there and then, then afterwards). You are not worshipping with me unless and until you allow me to participate: your idea of the total expression of worship excludes me. It may be worship for you but it isn't for me: you are preventing me from coming close to God - are you happy to haver that on your conscience?
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Out of interest, has the BUGB ever discussed the topic of Communion? Has it ever expressed any preference for the open Communion table?
IME Methodist ministers almost always emphasise the inclusivity of Communion during the Communion service. I don't know what the historical root of this openness is, nor at what point ministers were taught to emphasise it during services.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vade Mecum
Shipmate
# 17688
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Neither would it have been the Baptist church where they didn't offer us the communion ....
1. Presumably that wasn't a case of "no Communion being on offer" but "Communion offered to members but not outsiders" - i.e. the Strict Baptist position. I came across the bizarre situation many years ago as part of a Mission Team who were given a "spot" to speak in the service but still excluded from Communion ...
2. Bearing in mind that non-RCs can't receive Communion at Mass, how would you have felt if someone had gently explained that "we are delighted to have you worshipping here with us, but we're afraid our theology does not permit us to offer Communion to people who are not members of this church"?
Mind you, that's not "where I'm at" personally!
1. I wish it was a Strict Baptist Church - it wasn't it was an open membership BUGB place.
2. I'd argue with them (if not there and then, then afterwards). You are not worshipping with me unless and until you allow me to participate: your idea of the total expression of worship excludes me. It may be worship for you but it isn't for me: you are preventing me from coming close to God - are you happy to haver that on your conscience?
How is it good bridge-building to allow newcomers wilfully or unknowingly potentially to damn themselves by receiving the Sacrament unworthily? And how is it good bridge building, or indeed good logic, to offer someone Communion with whom one is not, canonically or objectively, in Communion?
--------------------
I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
Posts: 307 | From: North London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
IME Methodist ministers almost always emphasise the inclusivity of Communion during the Communion service. I don't know what the historical root of this openness is, nor at what point ministers were taught to emphasise it during services.
Probably Wesley's belief that Communion was a 'converting ordinance'.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Thanks.
I wonder what Wesley meant by that. And do Methodist clergy have the same understanding today? As someone said on the recent 'Eucharist' thread in Purgatory, Methodists have a range of different beliefs about Communion. Maybe the only thing that holds all those beliefs together is the idea that it should be available to anyone who wants it.
Sometimes the offer of Communion is made to 'anyone who loves Jesus', which is as elastic as can be, since there are people of all religions and none claim to love Jesus. It's unsurprising that RCs and a few Baptists, among others, find this at least a little unsatisfactory.
[ 15. February 2014, 17:21: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rev per Minute
Shipmate
# 69
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Vade Mecum:
How is it good bridge-building to allow newcomers wilfully or unknowingly potentially to damn themselves by receiving the Sacrament unworthily? And how is it good bridge building, or indeed good logic, to offer someone Communion with whom one is not, canonically or objectively, in Communion?
But of course not all of us believe that people who receive communion 'unworthily' are 'damned', but that all can receive grace from sharing communion at the Lord's table. If the Eucharist is a 'mystery', then it is for God to decide who is or is not worthy.
In an established Church, it is at least arguable that everyone is in communion with that church unless they have decided otherwise. At the very least, anyone baptised would be welcome to receive communion (we can leave the question of children to another time, recognising the logic of the Orthodox approach to communicating infants and children).
--------------------
"Allons-y!" "Geronimo!" "Oh, for God's sake!" The Day of the Doctor
At the end of the day, we face our Maker alongside Jesus. RIP ken
Posts: 2696 | From: my desk (if I can find the keyboard under this mess) | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
Thanks.
I wonder what Wesley meant by that. And do Methodist clergy have the same understanding today? As someone said on the recent 'Eucharist' thread in Purgatory, Methodists have a range of different beliefs about Communion. Maybe the only thing that holds all those beliefs together is the idea that it should be available to anyone who wants it.
Sometimes the offer of Communion is made to 'anyone who loves Jesus', which is as elastic as can be, since there are people of all religions and none claim to love Jesus. It's unsurprising that RCs and a few Baptists, among others, find this at least a little unsatisfactory.
I am happy with 'elastic'.
Some time ago, I MW'ed a eucharist celebrated by a Methodist minister on the 4th plinth at Trafalgar Sq. The sacrament was offered to all who went past on the way to their city jobs.
To be fair,. Wesley was speaking/writing at a time when almost everyone in England had been christened and knew somethijg about Christianity.
Then again, Sarah Miles' experience in the States suggests that the mass is still a converting ordinance.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vade Mecum
Shipmate
# 17688
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Rev per Minute:
quote:
Originally posted by Vade Mecum:
How is it good bridge-building to allow newcomers wilfully or unknowingly potentially to damn themselves by receiving the Sacrament unworthily? And how is it good bridge building, or indeed good logic, to offer someone Communion with whom one is not, canonically or objectively, in Communion?
But of course not all of us believe that people who receive communion 'unworthily' are 'damned', but that all can receive grace from sharing communion at the Lord's table. If the Eucharist is a 'mystery', then it is for God to decide who is or is not worthy.
In an established Church, it is at least arguable that everyone is in communion with that church unless they have decided otherwise. At the very least, anyone baptised would be welcome to receive communion (we can leave the question of children to another time, recognising the logic of the Orthodox approach to communicating infants and children).
Right, fine. But the communions under question in this instance were the RCC and the Orthodox. Who do not believe or teach that.
--------------------
I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
Posts: 307 | From: North London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Rev per Minute
Shipmate
# 69
|
Posted
TBH, I thought that the discussion had stretched beyond that, with discussion of Baptists and others. We were talking generally about the welcome as well as communion practices.
--------------------
"Allons-y!" "Geronimo!" "Oh, for God's sake!" The Day of the Doctor
At the end of the day, we face our Maker alongside Jesus. RIP ken
Posts: 2696 | From: my desk (if I can find the keyboard under this mess) | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Below the Lansker
Shipmate
# 17297
|
Posted
My experience in BUGB/BUW churches is that the open/closed communion question has evolved from limited to open, although not uniformly, since each congregation is able to set its own policy. I remember as a teenager only being allowed to take communion after having been baptised by immersion and having accepted the 'privileges and responsibilities' of church membership (as it was expressed at the time). In the rural churches of the time, communion was offered only to those who had been baptised by full immersion (preferably, but not necessarily in a Baptist church). It was later extended to 'any person professing faith in Jesus Christ and a member in good standing of any Christian church' - nowadays it is much more along the lines of anyone who professes faith in Christ, or accepts Him as Saviour and Lord, or follows or loves the Lord Jesus (depending on who is ministering at the time). Whilst not hankering for a return to the days of 'if you haven't been dunked, don't even ask', I do think that the open table has made people take the ordinance a lot less seriously than in the past.
Posts: 144 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Vade Mecum:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Neither would it have been the Baptist church where they didn't offer us the communion ....
1. Presumably that wasn't a case of "no Communion being on offer" but "Communion offered to members but not outsiders" - i.e. the Strict Baptist position. I came across the bizarre situation many years ago as part of a Mission Team who were given a "spot" to speak in the service but still excluded from Communion ...
2. Bearing in mind that non-RCs can't receive Communion at Mass, how would you have felt if someone had gently explained that "we are delighted to have you worshipping here with us, but we're afraid our theology does not permit us to offer Communion to people who are not members of this church"?
Mind you, that's not "where I'm at" personally!
1. I wish it was a Strict Baptist Church - it wasn't it was an open membership BUGB place.
2. I'd argue with them (if not there and then, then afterwards). You are not worshipping with me unless and until you allow me to participate: your idea of the total expression of worship excludes me. It may be worship for you but it isn't for me: you are preventing me from coming close to God - are you happy to haver that on your conscience?
How is it good bridge-building to allow newcomers wilfully or unknowingly potentially to damn themselves by receiving the Sacrament unworthily? And how is it good bridge building, or indeed good logic, to offer someone Communion with whom one is not, canonically or objectively, in Communion?
How is it any way anything other than barking to believe that God casts people into Hell for unknowingly doing anything? What sort of monstrous God do some people believe in, for FSM's sake?
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
