|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: What characterises your church's culture?
|
Truman White
Shipmate
# 17290
|
Posted
Now I don't mind how precisely you want to define culture. For sake of argument I'm going for something loose like "how we normally behave around here and what we value."
Four characteristics our church aspires to (to get us started) are:
Being a really, really, encouraging place to be;
Being somewhere where we encourage people to take risks in expressing their faith;
Being people who respect and value other Christian traditions (we have different jobs, but as part of global Christendom we're all on the same team);
Having a secure and deep confidence in the essential goodness of God, from which we derive our personal security and identity as his children.
So what's your culture? How would explain it simply to someone else? And what do you do to develop that culture in the face of whatever factors are working to militate against it?
And I'm dead interested in where on the big green planet you're writing from.
Posts: 476 | Registered: Aug 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
We are working on identifying this more clearly. For now, I'd say:
We strive to welcome those who have been marginalized by other churches, and who have felt disconnected from Christianity as it currently is represented in the media.
American Midwest...what about you, Truman?
[ 13. April 2014, 16:02: Message edited by: Olaf ]
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
From two statements that I've seen on Literature regarding my church: We are journeying together in faith, hope and love; seeking to be a welcoming, caring community for all: rooted in prayer, growing in faith in Jesus Christ, and making a difference to the town in which we serve.
Creamtealand is a protuberance to the west off the southern part of Great Britain. A land flowing with oggies and cider.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
What culture do they SAY or what culture do the actually REFLECT?
Words are often broader than reality. Not uncommon for a church to say and believe they "welcome all," while in fact many members would be distressed if a food-insecure person came by and stuffed their pockets with food at coffee instead of the half dozen grapes and single cookie the coffee hosts intended. Cross-cultural expectations can surprise people on both sides. Do you shout "amen" mid-sermon in this church or not?
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
We aspire to be nicer. In the main. So we're nice to a gay couple. Mainly.
Some of us want to kick 'them' (no, no, NO, not THEM!) up the backside. Them being the generalized others in the congregation who 'just don't get it'. Whatever 'it' is. Pious charismatic zeal, I more than suspect. 'Greater things.'
We're ALWAYS being encouraged to pray more and read our Bibles more. But nobody says why.
For me it's all about ... let's call him Eugene (that's really clever that). Eugene, at 50 odd, is recently unemployed and will remain so for the rest of his life, he is bereaved of his mother from a year ago. He has lice and doesn't shave well and his flies are at half mast and his clothes need washing of their aroma and food and other stains. And he wants "that twat up there", nodding toward the empty front of the church, to do something about it all otherwise he'd rather die of cancer. And no he doesn't want to come for a drink, doesn't have a phone, doesn't want to come to a men's group. He likes to talk to elderly women as they remind of his mother but they scare easy ...
God has the funniest sense of humour: "There you go, be nice to Eugene. REALLY nice.".
But we'd really he rather get it 'by hearing the word' that Jesus loves him ever so without us having to be the sole intermediaries.
Ratae Corieltavorum. Ratas for short.
[ 13. April 2014, 22:14: Message edited by: Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard ]
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
HughWillRidmee
Shipmate
# 15614
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Chorister:
Creamtealand is a protuberance to the west off the southern part of Great Britain. A land flowing with oggies and cider.
Tangent - We always prefaced Oggie with Tiddy - according to this we must have been poorer than you! However, since I was led to believe that the pastry was not eaten, tin miners didn't have hand washing facilities - but discarded as the traditional version of cling-film, either I, the site's expert or both of us are unreliable.
--------------------
The danger to society is not merely that it should believe wrong things.. but that it should become credulous, and lose the habit of testing things and inquiring into them...
W. K. Clifford, "The Ethics of Belief" (1877)
Posts: 894 | From: Middle England | Registered: Apr 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
What culture do they SAY or what culture do the actually REFLECT?
Zing! (That was the sound of Belle Ringer's arrow flying from her bow and hitting the bullseye. IMO of course.)
--------------------
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
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
Why should churches have a culture?
Sorry, Truman, but your list in the OP reads like one of those ghastly 'mission statements' now to be found inside the headquarters of major public bodies, such as the Metropolitan Police or Network Rail.
In many cases it is mandatory for employees ('colleagues' or 'partners') to sign up to the statement, regardless of their personal viewpoint or place within the organisation.
It can also lead to the sort of vacuous euphemism that bedevils all levels of UK life - 'Industrial Action' = less or no action (strike or partial withdrawal of labour); 'Joyriding' = theft, rendering legal owner incapable of ANY riding; 'Shop-lifting' = theft, illegal conversion of goods.
All churches should strive to be welcoming without making a chance visitor feel overwhelmed. To that end any information given out should be clear and easy to follow, and services ought to be unintimidating to people not already 'in the club'.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Why should churches have a culture?
It's impossible to have human interaction without there being a culture, and churches are no exception to that. Even your ideal of "welcoming and unintimidating" is descriptive of a certain culture.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
Absolutely, Marvin The Martian. It can be like water to a fish: "Water? What's water?" The ability to see the usually completely unremarked culture that surrounds us in whichever setting we're in is gold. The real culture is not necessarily at all what the mission statement or whatever claims to want to be.
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
Absolutely, Marvin The Martian. It can be like water to a fish: "Water? What's water?" The ability to see the usually completely unremarked culture that surrounds us in whichever setting we're in is gold.
This is mere speculation on my part but I wonder if this ability is particularly rare in Christians from more traditionalist backgrounds. Because for such people, much of the reason why things are done they way they are is 'because that's how things should be done', without much questioning of the status quo.
I don't mean this as an attack on high church people / denominations; you can surely get 'traditionalist' low church people who shy away from examining their customs and practices. It's just that their 'we've always done things that way' history might only go back 20 or 200 years, rather than not far off 2,000 years. But the effect is the same, ISTM; a failure to examine the methods and practices and to ask the 'why' questions.
--------------------
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
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
I'm not talking about the willingness or resistance to change. If people can point to things that "we've always done that way" then they are identifying parts of their culture. The next step is to go to deeper things that one may not be used to observing, or have had occasion to identify explicitly.
Consider a baseball game in the U.S. and the singing of the national anthem (U.S.). A really obvious part of the culture about that is that everyone stands. A second part of the culture, that probably most people who have gone to baseball games could think of, is that everyone takes off their hats. (Actually, the traditional culture is that all the men take off their hats; I take off my hat too, and I'm not sure what other women wearing hats do.) A third, much less remarked upon, part of the culture is, first of all that not many people sing along with the performer, and second of all that if you're going to sing along, you don't sing very loud.
There are implicit messages about singing and about what our national anthem is to us embedded in all this, that go beyond what is revealed by the mere statement "the national anthem is sung at the start of the ball game."
(I'm not sure why I get so torqued out that our national culture has become such that we don't ourselves sing our own national anthem, but leave it to performers, when I'm not torqued out wanting more vocal congregational participation in church services, but perfectly content with participation by listening there -- at least, in the proportions I'm used to.)
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gwai
Shipmate
# 11076
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
quote:
Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
Absolutely, Marvin The Martian. It can be like water to a fish: "Water? What's water?" The ability to see the usually completely unremarked culture that surrounds us in whichever setting we're in is gold.
This is mere speculation on my part but I wonder if this ability is particularly rare in Christians from more traditionalist backgrounds. Because for such people, much of the reason why things are done they way they are is 'because that's how things should be done', without much questioning of the status quo.
I suspect it's something we mainly notice when people of other traditions do it. Because I regularly see low church people being clueless in this way. I'm pretty sure I (and other people whose churchmanship is more like my own) do it, but that doesn't stick out to me, of course.
--------------------
A master of men was the Goodly Fere,
A mate of the wind and sea.
If they think they ha’ slain our Goodly Fere
They are fools eternally.
Posts: 11914 | From: Chicago | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
Who knows, perhaps it's less rare in people high up the candle, at least as far as the church service goes. Everything has an expected way for how it's supposed to go, and there are people around who have studied that and can tell you about it.
People at a church service that isn't governed by one of the handbooks of procedures beloved by those high on the candle may think that what they're doing is free-form, but it's usually not.
Neither group may have any idea how their service looks to strangers or to those unfamiliar with the tradition.
But I don't think looking at the elements of the church service itself is really the relevant bit of culture when asking about what characterises a church's culture. Rather, it's how people behave in and around the elements of the service that I think is interesting.
For example: where do people sit when they come into a pew? Let's suppose a church with a single, central aisle. Do people sit on the aisle end, so if anyone else is going to come into the pew they have to make the people on the end move or stand up? Or do they sit farther in, near the wall, so that there is an inviting open space in the pew where others can come in easily? And does it make a difference to what people tend to do, and how awkward it is or isn't for later arrivals to find a seat, if you have pews vs. if you have chairs?
Do people generally grumble when they find someone in their usual spot, or do they cheerfully give thanks that someone has found a seat, and go find another seat?
Do people tend to glare at noisy children, and/or their parents, in church? or find some way to be more welcoming?
If you don't know when to sit, stand, or kneel, are people going to glare at you? If you do the wrong thing with the communion, is the server going to have a fit and embarrass you in public for not knowing what to do? Or be too tongue-tied in astonishment that someone might not know what to do, that they can't manage to say a few gentle words to orient you?
If you bring a covered coffee cup into church, what proportion of people are going to express that they're glad you there as their first interaction, and what proportion of people are going to be aghast and wondering if it's allowed to bring coffee cups into church? (True incident.)
All those are still examples in the church service, perhaps because that's where my closest connection is to church. Much more examples could be found in coffee hour, or in the general events held by the church.
Here's another piece of culture -- when someone asks you to say a prayer for them, do you take the information and indicate that you'll pray later? or do you stop and pray with them right then and there? Or do you ask which they'd like? (Minister from Sunday, you were very kind and I'm glad I found you, and I'm glad for your prayers later, but we had a major failure to communicate about what the phrase "I'm looking for someone to say a prayer for me" means...) Is there a prevailing culture one way or the other in the church, or is your church varied in how people would respond to that request?
I could go on and on (well, more than I already have...).
I'll add one more -- my church has gone through various wierd practices about how they read out the names of people for public intercessions in Sunday services. At root, AFAICT, is a fear of the list being too long for people to listen to without getting bored or annoyed. If that fear is correct (and I don't know if it is or not), that means my church has a culture of "we don't like to listen to long lists of names of people to pray for (and will give them short shrift in public prayer in order to avoid being bored and annoyed)". (I'll see if I can find a Sunday bulletin to count: I think in my church 10 is fine, but 20 is getting to be way too many.)
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Autenrieth Road
Shipmate
# 10509
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by me:
If that fear is correct (and I don't know if it is or not),
That phrase from my last paragraph is a bit strange. What I mean is, "if my assessment is correct that the fear of listening to long lists is motivating our wierd prayer practices... etc."
--------------------
Truth
Posts: 9559 | From: starlight | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
I'm not talking about the willingness or resistance to change. If people can point to things that "we've always done that way" then they are identifying parts of their culture. The next step is to go to deeper things that one may not be used to observing, or have had occasion to identify explicitly.
Okay, I get you. And good example with the singing of the National Anthem at baseball games!
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
I suspect it's something we mainly notice when people of other traditions do it.
Yes, I expect you're right. I'm now feeling a bit embarrassed at my blithe assertion and the implication that I, being a progressive, experimental sort when it comes to faith practices, am very good at identifying below-the-surface elements of church culture...
quote:
Originally posted by Autenrieth Road:
People at a church service that isn't governed by one of the handbooks of procedures beloved by those high on the candle may think that what they're doing is free-form, but it's usually not.
Neither group may have any idea how their service looks to strangers or to those unfamiliar with the tradition.
Absolutely! There are codes and expectations of behaviour in every church, indeed in every gathering or community of people.
This is why I think it's so important for things to be explained in church gatherings. If people are expected to sit, stand, kneel, genuflect or whatever at certain points then make sure this is pointed out somehow, so people aren't left feeling embarrassed. If some folks are singing in tongues, then make sure this is explained at some point, so people aren't left wondering what the heck is going on. It ain't rocket science!
--------------------
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
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
This is why I think it's so important for things to be explained in church gatherings. If people are expected to sit, stand, kneel, genuflect or whatever at certain points then make sure this is pointed out somehow, so people aren't left feeling embarrassed. If some folks are singing in tongues, then make sure this is explained at some point, so people aren't left wondering what the heck is going on. It ain't rocket science!
I'm not so sure. I'm very much of the school of thought that one should just leave others to get on with it, and this is more or less how things are done among the people during the Divine Liturgy. So if we're talking culture, that's very much the culture among the people in Orthodox circles.
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
I'm very much of the school of thought that one should just leave others to get on with it...
Why, if I may ask? What do you see as the advantages or merits to leaving people to get on with it. Because ISTM the disadvantages (e.g. newcomers don't feel welcome, people get embarrassed when they sit while everyone else genuflects....) are both very obvious and pretty significant.
--------------------
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
|
|
Ad Orientem
Shipmate
# 17574
|
Posted
Because, I would argue, the Divine Liturgy is not the place to do it. Constantly explaining everything during the liturgy is far too cerebral, if you ask me. Of course, it can leave some people sratching their heads, but if explanation is necessary that can be done during the period of catechesis that converts go through. It's a culture difference between Eastern and Western liturgies. Western liturgies, espescially the Roman, tend to be much more regimented.
[ 15. April 2014, 07:13: Message edited by: Ad Orientem ]
Posts: 2606 | From: Finland | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ad Orientem:
Because, I would argue, the Divine Liturgy is not the place to do it. Constantly explaining everything during the liturgy is far too cerebral, if you ask me.
Okay, I get that, and I can see the problem with frequent interruptions (as you'd evidently see them) to the rituals, the prayers, the readings and all that.
However, in a previous discussion on this topic someone suggested a written explanation, along the bottom of the service sheet / booklet or in a separate booklet that was available in the church building for those who wanted one. I suppose you could even have posters or suchlike on a noticeboard or something like that.
--------------------
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
|
|
Carys
Ship's Celticist
# 78
|
Posted
The danger with explaining everything everytime is that it's then not owned by the congregation, who are more spectators. It reminds me of tv quiz shows which always start with a reminder of the rules which gets tedious if you're a regular viewer. I can put up with it for TV, but it bugs me at church, because I'm not just a viewer, I'm part of this.
On culture, our vicar introduced us to the idea of accidental values - those things which our behaviour shows we value, though we don't intend to...
Carys
--------------------
O Lord, you have searched me and know me
You know when I sit and when I rise
Posts: 6896 | From: Bryste mwy na thebyg | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
