|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Church in Wales ... numbers down ...
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Me neither. Most monastics are lay people, after all.
--------------------
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
|
|
Bob Two-Owls
Shipmate
# 9680
|
Posted
But they don't get treated the same as A.N.Other do they? At least they never have in the churches I have been a part of.
Posts: 1262 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Well, most churches seem to barely acknowledge their existence unless they're distinctly A-C.
--------------------
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
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
Our Vicarage is not currently used by our Priest-in-charge (he is a Self-Supporting Minister, and has his own house). I would really love to see the Vicarage inhabited by two or three Benedictine Nuns With Sensible Shoes - the benefit to our little backstreet parish would be immense!
Ian J.
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bishops Finger:
Our Vicarage is not currently used by our Priest-in-charge (he is a Self-Supporting Minister, and has his own house). I would really love to see the Vicarage inhabited by two or three Benedictine Nuns With Sensible Shoes - the benefit to our little backstreet parish would be immense!
Ian J.
The only Benedictine/Benedictine influenced community that's not purely contemplative is OHP - I think Whitby may be a bit of a trek, unfortunately! I believe the Sisters of Bethany (not tooo far away from you, just along the coast) are Augustinian? Not sure about the communities within the Greater London area.
--------------------
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
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
From conversations I've had with RCs and Orthodox, they both see the revival or monasticism as a key component to evangelism ... but not the only one, of course.
I think there would definitely be scope for Fresh Expressions/religious community collaboration.
It wouldn't be easy to achieve, though, but it'd be interesting to see someone try.
The RCs have some very interesting models of urban mission based around religious communities and these deserve to be better known ...
In some ways, the work of the Message Tribe or Eden Project or whatever they call themselves these days could be seen as an evangelical example ... but it's not a project I know a great deal about.
Back in my restorationist days I was part of a group that was deliberately 'planted' in some difficult to let council flats in a rough area. The idea was to build community and contribute to the area in some way - and also engage in church planting. It fizzled out after a while but it was an interesting experiment - yet very, very claustrophobic.
Interestingly, once the flats were demolished and we all moved out - and/or were rehoused on another council estate ... the whole thing began to develop far more naturally. I lived in a tower block and knew loads of my neighbours and, for a time, there were some very fruitful church-based initiatives in that area and a number of people finding faith.
The point is, the less 'deliberate' and the more organic we were about it, the more successful it became.
--------------------
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
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
From conversations I've had with RCs and Orthodox, they both see the revival or monasticism as a key component to evangelism ... but not the only one, of course. ...
I get the strong impression Archbishop Justin does too.
We need a Holy Mountain, or a few more Holy Islands.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Yes - although judging by the consensus on the thread about the kids being monastics for a year in Lambeth Palace, Welby's initiative hasn't gone down too well with Shippies ...
I can understand their concerns. If we're going to do it, let's do it properly.
--------------------
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
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
Yes - although judging by the consensus on the thread about the kids being monastics for a year in Lambeth Palace, Welby's initiative hasn't gone down too well with Shippies ...
I can understand their concerns. If we're going to do it, let's do it properly.
Oi, enough with the 'kids' talk ![[Razz]](tongue.gif) Those 35 and under can apply, which is hardly teenagers. Yours truly will be applying, unsurprisingly perhaps - if nothing else keeping a tradition of family presence at Lambeth (my aunt is the CHN sister who was there during ++Rowan's tenure).
--------------------
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
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
posted by Jade Constable quote:
my aunt is the CHN sister who was there during ++Rowan's tenure
If its the same CHN sister I'm thinking of then one of the best advertisements for the religious life I've ever met.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
From conversations I've had with RCs and Orthodox, they both see the revival or monasticism as a key component to evangelism ... but not the only one, of course.
I think there would definitely be scope for Fresh Expressions/religious community collaboration.
It wouldn't be easy to achieve, though, but it'd be interesting to see someone try.
...
In some ways, the work of the Message Tribe or Eden Project or whatever they call themselves these days could be seen as an evangelical example ... but it's not a project I know a great deal about.
Anyone know anything about
The Order of Mission? Do they deliver the goods?
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mstevens
Apprentice
# 15437
|
Posted
I've resisted posting on this thread so far, but I think I'll finally give in.
As an Interested Non Christian I have opinions on churches, but I fear they're liable to be very personal, and are impressions and not necessarily reality.
I think as others have said most non-Christians don't see any relevance to churches- there's just no connection to their lives.
More personally, there seems to be a suspicious attachment to architecture, and people who say they want to help the poor seem to find maintaining old buildings a much higher priority.
I was interested recently on twitter to realise how ignorant I am of what goes on in churches - I have vague images of a lot of singing and speeches but the details are very fuzzy.
A lot of church PR (even some people in this very thread) seem to suggest it's a club for being nice to people. Which I have no objection to! It's a good thing! But seems to be missing the alleged point of your existence.
I think I've talked about this in other threads, but Christianity feels like it lacks a "sign-up" experience somehow - I have visions of going to a church and being expected to commit to everything on the first day, when I really want to be told what I'm getting into (the Alpha course is sort of going in the right direction here, although I hate the *actual* Alpha course)...
Posts: 44 | From: London,UK | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Good to hear your views, mstevens - please don't feel the need to apologise for them.
I was brought up to go to Sunday school and so on and so was quite familiar with a lot of the language, concepts and what went on ... although I dropped out when they started encouraging us to join 'confirmation classes' when I was about 11 or 12.
I returned briefly - to another and 'higher' parish to have a second look when I was about 16 but didn't engage with church again until after my evangelical conversion at university at the age of 19.
It works differently in all cases but for me it was a case of being converted first and then going and looking for a church second.
For other people 'belonging' precedes believing.
There's no real formula, each case is different and there are as many stories as there are people.
So, for me there was a starting gun and a sense of conviction and so on that led me to seek out a church as a place of fellowship where these things could be expressed and explored.
Of course, not all aspects of my conversion experience fit a standard template and I'm sure how I interpreted that experience at the time and subsequently derived to a great extent from the circles I later moved in and the particular paradigms within which they operated. So, for instance, had I ended up in an RC setting, say, I may have viewed the experience rather differently than I did as I went in an increasingly evangelical direction - but essentially I think I'd have still seen it as the same thing - a conviction that if Jesus was God as people told me he was then I could no longer sit on the fence but had to do something about it.
All the various styles and traditions of Christian church have their own particular strengths and weaknesses - none of them are perfect - but whilst I can be curmugeonly about aspects of each or all them here on SoF I've never regretted my engagement with the Christian faith - and the God at the heart of it.
--------------------
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
In short - there are a variety of 'sign-up' experiences within Christianity depending on which tradition within the faith you encounter.
The evangelical end of the spectrum strongly emphases a 'sign-up' conversion experience so I'm rather surprised to hear you say that Christianity seems to lack one ... to some Christians the 'sign-up' part is almost the whole point of it - 'unless a man (someone) be born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God.'
'Sign-up' experiences certainly take place and there are plenty of people on these boards - from a range of different backgrounds and traditions - who can attest to that.
--------------------
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
|
|
mstevens
Apprentice
# 15437
|
Posted
Well as I say, one thing I've realised lately is my ignorance on the topic.
I think you were taking "signup" as meaning a bit where someone goes "yes, I totally am a Christian".
I was thinking more, I'm not sure exactly, but a process of telling you what you're getting into?
Posts: 44 | From: London,UK | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Hmmm ... ok, yes, I can see what you are getting at.
I s'pose most churches - other than some very pushy evangelical ones - would expect people to hang around for a while to see if it was for them. Also, it's not as if it's difficult to find out what Christians believe - or are supposed to believe.
As for how churches are run and what happens within them - well ... generally speaking I would say that most mainstream and responsible churches - if that's the right term - and even most of the more 'full-on' charismatic evangelical churches are pretty open and transparent about what they get up to.
It's not as if anyone is going to be surprised after Week 17 of attending a particular church by being confronted with, 'Aha! It's too late now! We didn't tell you that we worship the Great White Flying Bunny from the Planet Zarg!'
Those churches that go in for practices that some would find off-putting and a deal breaker - such as tithing or speaking in tongues - are also pretty upfront about these things in my view. You don't get involved with a church like that only to find out after 6 months that they're expecting you to tithe or that 'speaking in tongues' is seen as normative or desirable.
The mileage does vary, of course, but in most churches I'm aware of I'm pretty sure you could find someone who could tell you what to expect - be it the clergy persons or members of the congregation.
If it's a fairly moderate, MoR type of church then there are going to be no real surprises. If it's a more 'full-on' type of church then the nature of being 'full-on' means that they're largely likely to be upfront about what to expect ... if only because they want you to have the same experiences as them ...
--------------------
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
Most churches don't have a specific process of telling you what you're getting into until you decide that you want to be baptised, at which point the mainstream denominations will allocate you to a series of confirmation classes before the baptism take place. But some (non-mainstream) denominations don't even do that, because as soon as you appear to have found faith, you're urged to get baptised. The doctrinal issues are deemed to be secondary to the decision to become a Christian. You have the rest of your life to study doctrines, etc.
Non-evangelical mainstream churches tend to assume that most people who turn up fairly regularly will be socialised into faith rather than needing special classes. This is probably because the culture has developed whereby most attenders are 'born into' the church and if they stick around they're Christians by default, if you like. Having an intentional process for advising and nurturing people who are completely new to the faith is still something of a novelty for the majority of such churches.
The (evangelical) Alpha course has become so popular because it helps churches to fill this gap, but it's burdened with the job of being all things to all people, so criticism is inevitable. There are alternative courses but they have less brand recognition, so even non-evangelical churches mostly stick with Alpha. This is a PR problem that needs to be rectified.
[cross-posted with Gamaliel]
[ 15. September 2014, 20:56: Message edited by: SvitlanaV2 ]
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
mstevens
Apprentice
# 15437
|
Posted
Actually I heard (a little) about the pilgrim course, and it sounded at least potentially better than the alpha course, although I don't regard this as a very high bar...
Posts: 44 | From: London,UK | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Darllenwr
Shipmate
# 14520
|
Posted
mstevens, you might want to look up the Emmaus Course. I cannot speak from personal experience, but I understand that it covers much the same ground as Alpha but uses a different approach that some folk find less disturbing / offensive / [add your own pejorative adjective here!]
Within the Anglican setting, the serious course work, if you like, generally comes at Confirmation. Because Anglicans are apt to baptise people as small babies, it is understood that they don't understand what they are being signed up to at the time. In due course, the individuals in question are urged to confirm their baptism by undertaking a course of study in what it means to be a Christian, culminating in the ceremony of Confirmation, undertaken by a Bishop, which is essentially a passing-out parade for new Christians.
In spite of the fact that I am an Anglican lay-preacher, my background is non-conformist, which means I tend to look somewhat askance at infant baptism ...
I have learned to cope with it - it goes with the brand, so to speak.
--------------------
If I've told you once, I've told you a million times: I do not exaggerate!
Posts: 1101 | From: The catbox | Registered: Jan 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
'A passing-out parade ...' like it, Darllenwr.
Confirmation in the Anglican Church has been described as a 'ceremony in search of a theology ...'
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Generally speaking, though, and without cutting across the tenor of what SvitlanaV2 has said, I would suggest that irrespective of church tradition, most people who find their way into the Christian faith - whether they were brought up in it or come to it later in life - are effectively socialised into it.
This applies as much to the very evangelical churches as it does to the more MoR ones ...
Whilst my own conversion happened in my bedroom in a rather delapidated student house, it followed a period of intense questioning and grappling with the issues as well as exposure to Christian communities and to Christian teaching.
It wasn't as 'socialised' perhaps as someone attending church from infancy and going through a confirmation process as Darllenwr has described, but it still involved 'socialisation'.
Alpha, for all its strengths and weaknesses, does take that into account ... as indeed do the other available courses such as Emmaus etc.
I'm not quite sure I agree with SvitlanaV2 that the process doesn't generally start until people decide they want to be baptised. It does intensify at that point, but depending on the tradition, most clergy and lay-people (if we want to make those distinctions) would generally point enquirers to something or other that explained the route-map well before that point.
I'd also point out that not all groups would see baptism as the starting point - the Salvation Army for instance.
--------------------
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 Darllenwr:
In spite of the fact that I am an Anglican lay-preacher, my background is non-conformist, which means I tend to look somewhat askance at infant baptism ...
I have learned to cope with it - it goes with the brand, so to speak.
However, the (British) Methodists and the URC are Nonconformists who do practice infant baptism.
I was baptised as an adult, although my lifelong attachment to the Methodists means I'm well used to infant baptism. I wonder if there's been a growth in adult baptisms in the CinW, as there has been in the CofE? The link in the OP doesn't bring this up, although the Welsh figures make it clear that the growth in adult baptisms isn't making up for the decline in infant baptisms.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gamaliel:
I would suggest that irrespective of church tradition, most people who find their way into the Christian faith - whether they were brought up in it or come to it later in life - are effectively socialised into it.
[...]
I'm not quite sure I agree with SvitlanaV2 that the process doesn't generally start until people decide they want to be baptised. It does intensify at that point, but depending on the tradition, most clergy and lay-people (if we want to make those distinctions) would generally point enquirers to something or other that explained the route-map well before that point.
I suppose it's affiliation with a church rather than becoming a Christian as such that inevitably involves socialisation. The process will be very different for people not raised in the church.
However, many new Christians apparently founder at this point. They end up dropping out of church precisely because they're never been sufficiently socialised into that environment. I understand that this is a problem for some people who become Christians as a result of evangelistic rallies, Alpha courses and alternative outreach fellowships, or perhaps simply through friendships; they may find the gospel very attractive on initial contact, and even get baptised, but they never quite gel with the routine and cultural expectations of church life.
I agree with you that different traditions take different steps regarding what's offered to 'enquirers'. My point was that not all faith traditions expect to go into detailed doctrinal explanations at an early stage. Early Pentecostalism, for example, saw the emotional, mystical response to the gospel as more important than intellectual understanding of specific doctrines. Maybe this has something to do with the non-European spiritual influences in early Pentecostalism, and perhaps also to early Pentecostals, both clergy and laity, often having a low level of formal education. Western Pentecostalism is more mainstream in both respects nowadays, and of course it has to appeal to more discerning 'enquirers' who bring different psychological and spiritual requirements to the table.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
IngoB
Sentire cum Ecclesia
# 8700
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mstevens:
Actually I heard (a little) about the pilgrim course, and it sounded at least potentially better than the alpha course, although I don't regard this as a very high bar...
You are really in the "precatechumentate" stage of inquiry, it seems. But what info or perhaps activity are you actually looking for? And did you already take the alpha course yourself, or why are you so against it? I'm a convert to Roman Catholicism (from growing up non-religious and then being Zen Buddhist for a couple of years) and have no idea what happens in an alpha course. So I can't comment on that, but I'm happy to share my own experiences if that helps.
If you want to know what happens in church (during Catholic mass at least), you can for example watch this: Draw Near - A Video Guide to the Catholic Mass. This video Teaching the Mass (with narration) is nicely complementary in style (more simple info, less showing of the communal spirit). This is the "Ordinary" mass (in the sense of now common). The "Extraordinary" mass (in the sense of what was celebrated for many centuries before) feels rather different. The instructional videos I can find tend to be too overly detailed for a visitor. Here's a short booklet on what to watch out for when attending that sort of mass. And here is a rather clean recording of one: Missa Tridentina.
However, you can also simply walk into a church when the next mass is on and observe. That's what I did, I visited about half a dozen different churches in the beginning to see what was going on there. In RC churches at least you generally do not get bothered at all doing that, which I personally found nice. Just remember to not go forward to receive bread and wine, remain sitting. (Or if you go, cross your arms over your breast so that the priest knows to give you just a blessing.) There usually are quite a number of people that remain in the pews (or go for a blessing only). I would recommend trying out more than one church, for frankly they can be rather different in style.
In the beginning i also started reading the Catechism, which is in fact a very good and comprehensive overview of the RC faith. You can look at it online here, though the book is really cheap enough to buy. This is another website with some reasonable info, it seems to me after a quick browse. If you have specific needs for information, I can perhaps recommend something else to read.
[ 15. September 2014, 23:40: Message edited by: IngoB ]
--------------------
They’ll have me whipp’d for speaking true; thou’lt have me whipp’d for lying; and sometimes I am whipp’d for holding my peace. - The Fool in King Lear
Posts: 12010 | From: Gone fishing | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
ChastMastr
Shipmate
# 716
|
Posted
As a convert to Christianity from outside, myself, I found C.S. Lewis' stuff very helpful, particularly Mere Christianity for a lot of the basics, as well as Screwtape Letters, the Narnia books and more.
--------------------
My essays on comics continuity: http://chastmastr.tumblr.com/tagged/continuity
Posts: 14068 | From: Clearwater, Florida | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Here we go: all you need to do is mention something on the Ship, and people spring into action.
--------------------
My beard is a testament to my masculinity and virility, and demonstrates that I am a real man. Trouble is, bits of quiche sometimes get caught in it.
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mstevens
Apprentice
# 15437
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ChastMastr:
As a convert to Christianity from outside, myself, I found C.S. Lewis' stuff very helpful, particularly Mere Christianity for a lot of the basics, as well as Screwtape Letters, the Narnia books and more.
I have in fact, read a lot of this stuff. Lewis is an amazing writer. But it seems like there's a whole layer of church related activity it doesn't prepare one for.
And although I appreciate the enthusiasm, I'm not quite ready to rush into converting if people would just explain things ![[Smile]](smile.gif) I just wanted to put in my bit on what I think discourages non-churchy people.
Posts: 44 | From: London,UK | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
mstevens
Apprentice
# 15437
|
Posted
Hitting the more personal stuff that probably doesn't generalise at all, churches give me a strong "they will never accept you, you will always be isolated and unpopular" vibe.
Posts: 44 | From: London,UK | Registered: Jan 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
mstevens
Ah. It sounds as though your experience is with rather cliquey churches. And probably churches that are already doing very well for themselves and not in any particular need.
However, some churches are desperate for fresh blood, and if you're pleasant, able-bodied and intelligent you'll probably be invited to contribute to church life at an earlier stage. Methodist churches are rather like that; it wouldn't be hard to join in and rise up the ranks, IMO, because willing participants are often so few. But you do need to be proactive about your own spiritual development, because not much is formally offered to new attenders prior to confirmation classes. Be aware too that any discussion groups and meetings for both new and maturing Christians are now often offered at local and regional level, rather than in individual churches. This makes better use of resources and manpower, especially if individual congregations are fairly small.
The problem with the Methodists and churches such as the URC is that they're now generally dominated by the elderly, whereas young educated enquirers (perhaps like yourself?) are usually looking to be with other people who are demographically a bit more like themselves. This often means attending an evangelical church of some kind, which may not be appropriate. Having grown up in the Methodist Church I have many criticisms of the institution, but I'm grateful that it's always been welcoming, and that it's enabled me to feel comfortable worshipping and mixing with people who are a lot older.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
Don't know where you are in London, mstevens, but Hinde St Methodist Church (West London Mission), in Marylebone, might be worth a try. Years since I went there but it certainly was friendly, intelligent, reasonably varied in its worshippers (you might want to look at the different services), and also- if you like that kind of thing- very socially engaged. Unless it has changed a lot it would, I think, pretty much welcome you as you are and wwhere you are and not lean on you to do or sign up to anything you didn't want to.
[ 16. September 2014, 14:54: Message edited by: Albertus ]
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
I was thinking of Hinde St Methodist Church too, when I realised that mstevens was in London!
It's a long time since I've been there, but it's a place where I felt very welcome.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
posted by Jade Constable quote:
my aunt is the CHN sister who was there during ++Rowan's tenure
If its the same CHN sister I'm thinking of then one of the best advertisements for the religious life I've ever met.
Can't send you a private message so forgive the use of initials - my aunt is Sister E M.
--------------------
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
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
Jade C - YESSS!!!
Wonderful woman.
I have very fond memories of her gently taking apart one particular bladder of wind senior cleric as if with a glass scalpel - I don't think he ever quite worked out how it happened!
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Haha, because she's my aunt - actually as I told Carys and some others at Greenbelt, to me she's Auntie Margarine! - I never really see her in terms of 'nun' or even 'Christian'. She's my maternal grandma's oldest sister, and my maternal family is generally nominally Christian and my immediate family not at all, so my faith developed totally separately. Because we see each other at family events we don't really discuss nun stuff!
--------------------
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
|
|
ToujoursDan
Ship's prole
# 10578
|
Posted
* can't speak for Wales but think some assertions on this thread need to be chall***ed.
In North America at least, many denominations that have a very strong sense of identity, beliefs and purpose are experiencing the same aging and decline that their w***y-washy liberal counterparts are.
The Lutheran Church Missouri Synod had 2.8 million members in 1970 and has about 2 million today. Their demographic profile isn't much different than the UCC or Presbyterians (USA).
The Southern Baptist Church, which by all accounts is very evangelistic, is declining by 100,000 members a year.
The Roman Catholic Church in North America is also in decline. The number of observant Catholics is in free fall. 47% of Roman Catholics attended weekly mass in 1974 but only 24% do today. It isn't exactly bursting at the seams in much of Latin America (Argentina, Uruguay, etc.), Québec and much of Europe either.
At the same time, a church that openly proclaims that they have no hard, fast beliefs - the Unitarian-Universalist Association - is growing. It grew by 16% between 2000 and 2010 alone.
So * don't see much correlation between a church having strong beliefs and purpose and growth. It isn't in any of the statistics.
Most demographers believe that this is the true cause: Denominational Decline Related To Birthrates, Societal Changes
People may have their own reasons to believe that strict moral behaviour and well-defined theology are better, but it has little to do with church growth.
1) * think a big problem North American churches have is that many still largely tied to ethnic identity and their core ethnic group's birthrates are in decline. Mainline Protestantism and quite a few evangelical denominations are closely identified with WASP/Northern European culture. Episcopalians, United Methodists, Presbyterians, Lutherans (ECLA or LCMS), etc. are mostly seen as white denominations. Even when they make efforts to welcome people of color and immigrants, the prevailing church culture is still very white and Northern European and that remains a big barrier for many people.
2) Church decline is a subset of a decline in commitment altogether. It's not just churches, but social groups like the Elks, Masons, Odd Fellows, etc. Younger people in particular, are very reluctant to make ongoing commitments to organizations. They are far more comfortable lending support for a period of time (* .e., volunteering to run a race for charity or volunteering to work at a food bank for a period of time) than committing to church Sunday after Sunday indefinitely. This is HUGE problem for employers as Millenials generally don't see themselves as being in it for the long haul with their employers either.
3) Most people are "evangelized" dozens of times a day through marketing and advertising. Church evangelism generally is only effective in relationship, but most denominations follow a corporate model. People have a thick skin for that now.
At same time, what most unchurched people hear about Christians is pretty negative: pastors making intolerant statements about gays, women, Muslims, poor people, etc. Denominations launching high-profile campaigns to limit the rights of the same groups of people. Scandals like the RCC's ongoing, international molestation scandal and financial and sex scandals that are outrageous in their hypocrisy. Saying "We're not like them." isn't a very satisfactory answer.
4) The rise in individualism. People generally don't want to be told what to think and do. They want to figure it out for themselves.
* would certainly agree that the collapse in Christian education has harmed churches. More and more people seem to have a very superficial understanding of Christian doctrine and often believe that they have to choose between faith and science. That's a huge problem. But * think there are some pretty big headwinds against growth for most denominations nowadays. At the same time * think it's a mistake to think these social trends will last forever though.
Posts: 3734 | From: NYC | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gamaliel
Shipmate
# 812
|
Posted
Yes - I think you're on the money, ToujoursDan and it applies to Western societies as a whole.
--------------------
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 ToujoursDan:
* can't speak for Wales but think some assertions on this thread need to be chall***ed.
In North America at least, many denominations that have a very strong sense of identity, beliefs and purpose are experiencing the same aging and decline that their w***y-washy liberal counterparts are.
[...]
So * don't see much correlation between a church having strong beliefs and purpose and growth. It isn't in any of the statistics.
Church decline in the UK includes all kinds of churches, including those that might consider themselves evangelical (or that have 'a strong sense of identity', etc.). However, among Protestant churches, the rate of decline is greater for those that identify as non-evangelical. The proportion of evangelicals in the churchgoing population is increasing.
http://www.eauk.org/church/research-and-statistics/english-church-census.cfm
Regarding the RCC, it's traditionally been better at holding on to its people, although it too has experienced decline. Currently, the RCC is benefiting from a large increase in immigration.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1573452/Britain-has-become-a-Catholic-country.html
quote:
The Southern Baptist Church, which by all accounts is very evangelistic, is declining by 100,000 members a year.
Interestingly, on a number of counts the Baptists are apparently doing better than other mainstream denominations in the UK. (This doesn't mean they don't face the same challenges as the CofE, Methodists, etc.)
http://www.brin.ac.uk/news/2010/christian-research-and-churchgoing/
The EA link above shows that Baptist churches are much more likely to self-define as evangelical than churches in other historical denominations.
Regarding the birthrate, immigrants are important to many urban British churches, and they tend to have larger families. But I don't think there's been any study into the fertility rates of British churchgoers as a whole. Denominations that have already undergone significant ageing will have fewer and fewer children as time goes by, whereas more youthful denominations still have children (and have more confidence about reaching out to youth outside the church) but will have to work hard to retain them.
Another interesting issue is wealth/poverty. Overall, Wales is fairly poor compared to England. In British terms this usually means less church involvement. But in the USA, I understand that the poorest states (i.e. in the Deep South) are the most religious.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Net Spinster
Shipmate
# 16058
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ToujoursDan:
At the same time, a church that openly proclaims that they have no hard, fast beliefs - the Unitarian-Universalist Association - is growing. It grew by 16% between 2000 and 2010 alone.
So * don't see much correlation between a church having strong beliefs and purpose and growth. It isn't in any of the statistics.
...[millenials not into long-term commitments]
This is HUGE problem for employers as Millenials generally don't see themselves as being in it for the long haul with their employers either.
The UUA has dropped a bit since; however, it is a small denomination in the first place (a bit over 160,000 members). It also has the odd problem of a lot more people claiming to be UU (according to surveys, for example one reputable survey estimated there were 586,000 UUs in the US in 2008) than they have on the membership rolls.
On the second point I'll note that employers haven't exactly treated employees as long term either (anyone for a reorganization?) so which came first in that area?
--------------------
spinner of webs
Posts: 1093 | From: San Francisco Bay area | Registered: Dec 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Pontivillian:
The challenge is to get people to hear the gospel in a way that doesn't put them off.
Might I say that maybe that's the problem? The public don't see the church's teaching as Good News; they see it as judgmental, critical of their lifestyles, nasty, superstitious nonsense.
Basically the message of the Good News is that there is a God, he loves the world, the people of this world are sinful to the extent of inability to redeem themselves but "hey guys! Jesus is God and died for you so your sins can be forgiven and you can go to Heaven!"
1. They don't believe in God.
2. They don't care if the non-existent God loves them or not.
3. They are not sinners -"How very dare you suggest it!"
4. Who cares about Jesus - a mythical figure in a made-up book?
5. Who cares about Heaven? We live on in our kids and anyway, if there is a Heaven, we all go there anyway and we're not fussed about God being there as long as my Mum, wife and and the kids are there as well.
If people are not sinners (it's all lifestyle choice now) then they don't need a saviour. If people don't want a Saviour, that's the cross out of the window and they don't need the Good News.
That's the issue we need to address. The problem is that many committed Christians don't have non-Christian friends and therefore don't actually know what atheists and agnostics actually think.
Simply assuming that we need to teach the sinners more clearly and attract them with amateur guitar-playing is going to do it entirely misses the mark.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
Oh, if we're talking about denominational figures, The Salvation Army is growing globally and is bigger now than has ever been at any time in its short history (1865) The growth areas are Africa and Korea.
The declining areas are Western Europe.
We've never been big in Catholic/Mediterranean areas, though we have recently started in places like Greece and some Muslim countries, strangely enough.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
Sorry, I should have looked for the stats first. TSA increased in membership of Senior Soldiers - i.e. uniformed adult members (not including children and 'adherent members' (people who see TSA as their church but who haven't signed the covenant of membership) - by 10% worldwide between 2001 and 2012
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Pontivillian:
The challenge is to get people to hear the gospel in a way that doesn't put them off.
Might I say that maybe that's the problem? The public don't see the church's teaching as Good News; they see it as judgmental, critical of their lifestyles, nasty, superstitious nonsense.
Basically the message of the Good News is that there is a God, he loves the world, the people of this world are sinful to the extent of inability to redeem themselves but "hey guys! Jesus is God and died for you so your sins can be forgiven and you can go to Heaven!"
1. They don't believe in God.
2. They don't care if the non-existent God loves them or not.
3. They are not sinners -"How very dare you suggest it!"
4. Who cares about Jesus - a mythical figure in a made-up book?
5. Who cares about Heaven? We live on in our kids and anyway, if there is a Heaven, we all go there anyway and we're not fussed about God being there as long as my Mum, wife and and the kids are there as well.
If people are not sinners (it's all lifestyle choice now) then they don't need a saviour. If people don't want a Saviour, that's the cross out of the window and they don't need the Good News.
That's the issue we need to address. The problem is that many committed Christians don't have non-Christian friends and therefore don't actually know what atheists and agnostics actually think.
Simply assuming that we need to teach the sinners more clearly and attract them with amateur guitar-playing is going to do it entirely misses the mark.
The church repenting for its role in peddling nasty, judgmental, superstitious nonsense and not the Gospel would help in that respect, I think.
It's not really surprising that people don't believe in God when they've never been shown the actual loving reality of Him, but a bigoted busybody judging people from Heaven.
--------------------
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
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
But they don't believe in the loving non-judgmental One either. To most atheist/agnostic/secular/humanist people any belief in an 'imaginary deity' - even a Friendly One - who lives in the clouds is unnecessary and ridiculous.
To be honest, I think that were they forced to, some people would rather believe in a strong-willed One who actively gets involved and does stuff, than a Lovely One who smiles benignly and has no opinions about us.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
The church repenting for its role in peddling nasty, judgmental, superstitious nonsense and not the Gospel would help in that respect, I think.
It's not really surprising that people don't believe in God when they've never been shown the actual loving reality of Him, but a bigoted busybody judging people from Heaven.
I totally agree with that.
The only time we are safe in what we tell the world is when we stick to the broad sweep of Scripture and don't get into embellishing it or mixing it with over dramatised human tradition.
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Justinian
Shipmate
# 5357
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Mudfrog:
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Pontivillian:
The challenge is to get people to hear the gospel in a way that doesn't put them off.
Might I say that maybe that's the problem? The public don't see the church's teaching as Good News; they see it as judgmental, critical of their lifestyles, nasty, superstitious nonsense.
Basically the message of the Good News is that there is a God, he loves the world, the people of this world are sinful to the extent of inability to redeem themselves but "hey guys! Jesus is God and died for you so your sins can be forgiven and you can go to Heaven!"
And as I've said in the past, the idea that there's an invisible being who is going to torture people eternally - but instead took some of it out on his son is not good news in any way, shape, or form. That the powerful invisible being is also a homophobe (for whatever reason) is simply a further reason beyond that of being an unrepentant supporter of torture that we should not take their moral pronouncements seriously.
It's not necessarily about not being sinners. There are very few people who won't admit to being less than perfect. It's about what is being preached as the penalty, and what is being preached as the way forward and salvation.
Were I to accept salvation from a judge who decided that others deserved unending torture, at the cost of having to praise that judge and that judge's morality, I'd be accepting against my conscience. To accept would probably be a sin. (I'd probably accept because I have no wish to be tortured. But I'd have a hard time looking at myself in a mirror afterwards).
What is frequently being preached is that we should accept salvation from a homophobic (i.e. evil) judge who endorses hell (i.e. torture, i.e. evil). And that we should call such a saviour good when the thing we are being saved from is their will.
quote:
That's the issue we need to address. The problem is that many committed Christians don't have non-Christian friends and therefore don't actually know what atheists and agnostics actually think.
Simply assuming that we need to teach the sinners more clearly and attract them with amateur guitar-playing is going to do it entirely misses the mark.
Indeed. Until the world you promise and the God you support has better morality than this one does even in practice you're going to have a lot of trouble. There are very few atheists who haven't heard the "Good News".
But the first thing you are going to have to do is prevent homophobia being a conservative shibboleth and acceptable by mainstream Christians. It's not about the harsh nature or judgmental rules, as you seem to think. It's what those rules are. Most atheists would no more support the homophobia pushed by almost all the Conservative churches from the top than they would support overt racism.
Far from the moral high ground, right now Christianity needs to reform to reach the moral average especially among the young. And when that's the position you are in what do you have to offer?
--------------------
My real name consists of just four letters, but in billions of combinations.
Eudaimonaic Laughter - my blog.
Posts: 3926 | From: The Sea Coast of Bohemia | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
Accepting the evil of homophobia (and racism, sexism and other once tolerated isms and phobias), might I suggest that actually this is a red herring?
Homophobia has only become an issue in the last 20 years. Maybe even 10 years!
The churches have been failing to win converts for 50+ years, even when society as a whole agreed wholeheartedly with the church's teaching - I mean, it was all illegal until 1967 (?)
No one hated the church for homophobia then because everyone was institutionally homophobic. You can't blame the church for that!
--------------------
"The point of having an open mind, like having an open mouth, is to close it on something solid."
G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Church attendance (certainly amongst the working class in the UK) has been dropping since the 1800s, so I certainly wouldn't put all the blame on homophobia. Generally, it's about a church which institutionally upholds the status quo and therefore has not a great deal in common with the Christ of the Gospels. People see the hypocrisy and it stinks. I think the issue now is that what the church sees as the status quo and what people in general see as the status quo are different things, and you get problems like churches not feeling the need to challenge basic injustice because challenging injustice is seen as 'worldly' or 'mainstream'. On some issues, much of the secular public has a better handle on justice than the church, and that's a problem.
--------------------
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
|
|
Albertus
Shipmate
# 13356
|
Posted
So, to take this back to the OP, where does that leave the Church in Wales, which is and is I think, insofar as anyone actually does perceive it to be anything (and it or at least the current Archbishop has a higher profile than you might expect), pretty consistently on the side of what you (and I) would call justice- angry about poverty and much more inclusive on DH issues than big sister over the border?
Posts: 6498 | From: Y Sowth | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
From what I've seen, I think that's the case Albertus - so the issue would be getting the message out there. Not being Welsh or living in Wales I don't know how this would be best done.
--------------------
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
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
