|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Church websites: what is a parish's evangelical responsibility?
|
(S)pike couchant
Shipmate
# 17199
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
quote:
Originally posted by (S)pike couchant:
'Is [this] a Roman Catholic Church?'. I like the answer to this, as it goes beyond simply saying 'no', and explains that doctrines and liturgical praxis of the Churches of England and of Rome are virtually identical, save for their teachings on Papal authority.
![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif) YMMV, as they say.
What? I imagine any Anglican priest even slightly higher than MotR would give a similar answer if asked. Com
--------------------
'Still the towers of Trebizond, the fabled city, shimmer on the far horizon, gated and walled' but Bize her yer Trabzon.
Posts: 308 | From: West of Eden, East of England | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
No. I'm slightly higher than MOTR and the honest response would be 'many Anglicans believe virtually the same doctrine as Rome on many matters, but many, or even most, would start from very different presuppositions.'
That's not to say that the essentials, i.e. the Creeds, are in dispute, but when it comes to characteristically 'Catholic' teaching on the sacraments, the saints, the state of the departed and so on, there is a clear dividing line, which cuts through the middle of Anglicanism.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
(S)pike couchant
Shipmate
# 17199
|
Posted
Actually, re-reading it, what it actually says is 'The Church of England separated from the Church of Rome under Henry VIII due to matters of Church order, not of doctrine, and members of the Roman Catholic Church will probably recognise the teaching and worship [at our parish] as identical, in most respects, to that of their own church. However, [we are] particularly devoted to the spirituality of the Anglican tradition. The bishops and clergy of the Church of England belong to the Apostolic succession which has been continuous from St Augustine of Canterbury. '
Is that a more suitably balanced Anglican statement?
--------------------
'Still the towers of Trebizond, the fabled city, shimmer on the far horizon, gated and walled' but Bize her yer Trabzon.
Posts: 308 | From: West of Eden, East of England | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
Of course. That is very different from what you originally said.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Metapelagius
Shipmate
# 9453
|
Posted
If the site in question is the one I think it is, it also says, no doubt to make matters quite clear, that [this church] 'does not come under the authority of the Pope of Rome'. A quaint phrase - used of the Patriarch of the West neutrally by the Orthodox, I believe, but far from neutrally by the Revd Dr Ian Paisley and others of his ecclesiastical viewpoint. ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
--------------------
Rec a archaw e nim naccer.
y rof a duv. dagnouet.
Am bo forth. y porth riet.
Crist ny buv e trist yth orsset.
Posts: 1032 | From: Hereabouts | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
(S)pike couchant
Shipmate
# 17199
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Metapelagius:
If the site in question is the one I think it is, it also says, no doubt to make matters quite clear, that [this church] 'does not come under the authority of the Pope of Rome'.
That does sound like us (to the point of being a verbatim quote). 'Dr' Paisley was supposed to be giving a speech in our little market town, but unfortunately had to cancel due to health reasons. Shame, we could have invited him to give a sermon, preferably on alternative dental provisions during the Last Judgement.
--------------------
'Still the towers of Trebizond, the fabled city, shimmer on the far horizon, gated and walled' but Bize her yer Trabzon.
Posts: 308 | From: West of Eden, East of England | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
LutheranChik
Shipmate
# 9826
|
Posted
Since a large percentage of our congregation is either computer-illiterate or has little access to computers outside of work or school time, I guess our online presence is by definition evangelistic -- less preaching to the choir than giving outside people an understanding of who we are.
That said, our website itself is bare-bones -- not a lot of bells and whistles. (Although since we have a new pastoral intern DP, the webmeister, created a fun intro welcoming her to our congregation.) We try to have all the who/what/when/where information in an accessible place. We also have a regular "Message From the Pastor," usually cribbed from our church newsletter, and we have links to things like the ELCA website, its page describing the current season of the Church year, etc. And we have an online calendar of events/helpers' schedule.
But by far the most successful part of our online activity has been our Facebook page. It gets far more hits and feedback than our official website ever has. And it's also by far the easiest way to provide people with instant updates -- last-minute events, typos in the church bulletin, etc.
And after a personally challenging/interesting stint as church blogger -- I quit this project after realizing that almost no one from our congregation ever visited the blog, including the pastor; I'd basically been writing to myself for a year -- I found that Facebook is also a fast, easy way to do ongoing adult Christian education. I'm always sharing links, and we seem to have a steady number of readers. And -- our people, anyway, really appreciate daily prayers and/or Scripture postings...I usually crib these from the Daily Office and lectionary, or the ELCA Facebook page. These are the posts that seem to generate the most positive reader response, by the way.
So I'd echo the sentiment that, even if you personally hate Facebook, other people do not; in fact, for them it can be their primary reason for being online.
--------------------
Simul iustus et peccator
http://www.lutheranchiklworddiary.blogspot.com
Posts: 6462 | From: rural Michigan, USA | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
The website needs to be a good representation of what your church is really like, otherwise people might turn up and be disappointed or not turn up because they think it isn't the right place for them. I'm concerned because we have a picture on our front page of the whole congregation enthusiastically waving at the camera (as they were asked to do especially). It looks for all the world like we are a happy clappy church given to frequent renditions of action choruses, which we are not.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
If you (when you) set up a Facebook page for the church, please set it to be accessible by non-Facebook members!
I've been directed to Facebook pages where I could wander through the pictures on the wall, read the last hundred comments, do just about anything except post my own comments. (Which is fine, although if a church goes to Facebook only some people won't be able to sign up for things on line, which would discourage them from fully participating.)
I've been directed to Facebook pages where I could see the initial page but everything else was blocked, even the "click here to learn about our Easter season events" was clickable only by Facebook members.
I've been directed to Facebook pages that I couldn't access at all unless I first become a Facebook member.
The 2nd and especially the 3rd categories scream "We don't want YOU." Facebook members tend to think "what's your problem? just join Facebook, it's free"; but not everyone wants to join Facebook. Their reasons are their own business.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Scrumpmeister
Ship’s Taverner
# 5638
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
The 2nd and especially the 3rd categories scream "We don't want YOU." Facebook members tend to think "what's your problem? just join Facebook, it's free"; but not everyone wants to join Facebook. Their reasons are their own business.
Well, precisely.
I chose to leave Facebook last year for my own reasons, and if any organisation decides to restrict its information to FB users (and I, too, have encountered them), then I'm not interested.
I think it boils down, not to an intention to restrict access but rather of having what seems like a good idea without the time to ensure that the practical processes surrounding maintaining it are feasible.
To respond further to this and some of the points raised in the OP...
My parish had a Facebook group which I closed when I left FB. It had actually turned into something very unhelpful. I waited to see what the new Google+ pages looked like but this didn't work too well for us either. In the end, I simply made a "parish" circle on my G+ and that works for all correspondence. I have added all of the parish e-mail addresses that I have and others have since requested access. It requires minimal maintenance, which is good because I also run the parish website and diocesan website and that takes time in order to do any of it effectively. We use it for updates about services, parishioners' news, special events, trips, funerals, and so forth, and it seems to work well. I send out about one update each month, with occasiona additional ones when necessary. That seems to work well enough.
The parish website has an up-to-date schedule of forthcoming services and gives full details of occasional services and other events as and when they come round. It has catechetical resources, musical resources, and liturgical resources, both for those within and without the parish and Orthodox Church. All of these things are either home-produced, usually by me, or if they come from elsewhere, they are checked by one of us first. This ensures that what we have is of a standard that we find acceptable and that will be beneficial but it all takes time to keep it up-to-date. That keeps me busy enough, as the number of unfinished projects on the website bear witness.
I recognise that this does not cater for the needs of those who are not connected to the internet but they are a small minority among our parishioners. That isn't to say that it isn't worthwhile for that minority, and for those further afield to whom we might be able to reach out, but we have limited resources in terms of time, effort, and money, and we have to be responsible about how we use them. We are not averse to the idea of printed news bulletins but that is something for which somebody who perceives a need for it and who has the time to maintain it to come forward and actually do the work in producing, maintaining, and working out how to fund it.
--------------------
If Christ is not fully human, humankind is not fully saved. - St John of Saint-Denis
Posts: 14741 | From: Greater Manchester, UK | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
I won't name and shame, but my brother visited a church a few times which had a shot taken at a large Christian gathering on its home-page. The church had attended a large charismatic knees-up/convention.
When he got there he was expecting to see 400 or 500 people. There were about 40 adults plus children.
--------------------
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
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
