|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Is the church ageist?
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
A church whose newsletter I still get is asking for families and couples to light the Advent candle.
ouch.
![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
I suspect the apparent exclusion of singles from the invitation is just blindness to existence of singles even though (according to the directory) over 30% of that church's households are single adults (mostly widows, but also some divorced and a few never marrieds including a gay couple). A previous pastor of that church told me I was the only single, that's when I looked through the directory to see.
I'm guessing that may have something to do with why it's now only a church you used to attend.
[ 08. December 2014, 16:28: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
HCH
Shipmate
# 14313
|
Posted
Some of these remarks make me wonder just who the church is serving well. Is it time to attempt a redesign, taking little for granted?
Posts: 1540 | From: Illinois, USA | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Midge
Shipmate
# 2398
|
Posted
The Church?
It is our Church. We are all part of the problem or the solution.
--------------------
Some days you are the fly.
On other days you are the windscreen.
Posts: 1085 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Midge:
The Church?
It is our Church. We are all part of the problem or the solution.
Yes, this. If we don't go out of our way to make other people of whatever age or status feel as if they are one of the family, we shouldn't be surprised if they don't come back.
And that includes making the ministers feel welcome. Too many give their all without being given anything in return but criticism and complaints.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by HCH:
Some of these remarks make me wonder just who the church is serving well. Is it time to attempt a redesign, taking little for granted?
Possibly no one? Partly because people get categorized by superficial externals like old, young, familied, single, etc. I keep pushing for categorization (if there has to be any) by interest. The assumption women have different interests than men so we need separate women's and men's groups - huh?
One friend, an elder in his church, said his church has a motorcycle men's group that do things like go on motorcycle day trips. I asked what about any woman who loves to motorcycle? He said one man brings his wife. I said why not call it a motorcycle group instead of a motorcycle men's group so other interested women could feel welcome? That had never occurred to him, and he said he would suggest it.
People enjoy and value each other when they gather around an interest. When we group people by demographics - youth in a separate building, women and men in separate groups, couples in a separate Bible study from singles, parents of teenagers in their own group - I suspect we serve no one well.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Saul the Apostle
Shipmate
# 13808
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
quote:
Originally posted by HCH:
Some of these remarks make me wonder just who the church is serving well. Is it time to attempt a redesign, taking little for granted?
Possibly no one? Partly because people get categorized by superficial externals like old, young, familied, single, etc. I keep pushing for categorization (if there has to be any) by interest. The assumption women have different interests than men so we need separate women's and men's groups - huh?
One friend, an elder in his church, said his church has a motorcycle men's group that do things like go on motorcycle day trips. I asked what about any woman who loves to motorcycle? He said one man brings his wife. I said why not call it a motorcycle group instead of a motorcycle men's group so other interested women could feel welcome? That had never occurred to him, and he said he would suggest it.
People enjoy and value each other when they gather around an interest. When we group people by demographics - youth in a separate building, women and men in separate groups, couples in a separate Bible study from singles, parents of teenagers in their own group - I suspect we serve no one well.
Fair comments, I suppose in the OP I mentioned a church re-positioning itself. It seems that the church wants to target a particular demographic - at the expense of another.
This smacks of a business decision, the sort of choice a supermarket or retail chain might make. But of course the church is not about ''re-positioning '' itself, not unless it wants to grow and in so doing exclude other major demographics.
That type of marketing mentality is, I would suggest, alien from the discipleship model and the church, where all are valued. Indeed, the place for everyone is a place in the church; it's very DNA should be highly inclusive.
When people start getting fired because they're not in the correct age band, despite being servant hearted and gifted, this should set off alarm bells surely?
Saul
--------------------
"I cannot forecast to you the action of Russia. It is a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma; but perhaps there is a key. That key is Russian national interest."
Posts: 1772 | From: unsure | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mousethief:
I went for a brief while to a church which had no youth program because it would have meant heating a room some other night of the week than Sunday, and their pastor's wife worshipped somewhere else, because she was told by some old biddy that her baby was too loud during the service, and it was accompanied with general disapprobation and soft abuse. Not surprisingly, nobody in the pews was younger than about 60. This was 30 years ago so hopefully the old guard has all died out and the church has been paved over for an Arby's.
The pastor's wife in the church I used to attend was strongly reprimanded by a young biddy for using a too strong voice when telling a ten-year-old boy, for the third time, to quit throwing the basketball in the fellowship hall as he had already hurt a toddler with it. She was made to write an apology and read it before the group of outraged young mothers who had already pushed ut all the older Sunday school teachers. Not surprisingly most of the older people left that church and it was all enthusiastic young families for a few years. Then their children turned into teenagers and the families lost interest. That church has dwindled to about half the size it was when I first encountered it.
I think we need to admit that very few people attend church regularly from infancy to old age. Many of us go when we're small and our parents make us, then we turn away for awhile as we go off to college and question everything, then we return with our own small children, they get older and we get caught up in our careers and back slide in attendance and finally in retirement we have time to really get involved and stay that way.
Despising old members because they don't like change or have a stricter view of what sort of behavior should be allowed in children, is just as bad as making children feel unwelcome in church. At least the cranky old people aren't making it impossible for others to hear the sermon the way a screaming baby does.
I never understood why people think children are happiest in an atmosphere of chaos anyway. Maybe some of them would like to hear the sermon, too.
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
A baby making noise (doesn't necessarily mean crying, could be - heaven forbid! - laughing) doesn't equal an atmosphere of chaos, it means the church is actually alive.
The last time I checked, old people were adults and totally capable of dealing with change even if they don't want to.
I don't see why one case of young mothers being unreasonable means all old people in church are justified in being jerks.
--------------------
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
|
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
"Too loud during service," didn't sound like the gurgling of a laughing baby to me. I never knew a baby who could laugh loud enough to be considered "too loud." I had a colicky baby myself and I always took him out of restaurants when he started crying and never even tried to take him to church. Why should one baby ruin an experience for all the other people there?
What are these changes that old people simply must tolerate? Why is this change more important than they are?
Your last sentence doesn't apply to anything I said.
[ 09. December 2014, 22:42: Message edited by: Twilight ]
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
it means the church is actually alive.
Churches are not dead because they have lots of old people and they aren't "alive" because they have lots of babies. I resent this repeated charge of churches with old people being "dead" even more than Mousethief being happy that the old people in his last church have all died.
Is the church ageist? That's like asking if the KKK is racist. Just read your hate filled posts.
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
anoesis
Shipmate
# 14189
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
I had a colicky baby myself and I always took him out of restaurants when he started crying and never even tried to take him to church. Why should one baby ruin an experience for all the other people there?
I do get what you're saying here - I had a colicky baby also and felt much the same. Said colicky baby grew into a hyperactive child. Who is now six-and-a-bit. I haven't been to church in around about six years now. I can't see myself going back, to be honest. Amongst other things, I discovered that I didn't miss it.
I should point out that no-one actually came and tutted at me about baby. But the place really wasn't set up for taking a baby out until it calmed down. Either you stood in the anteroom with all the unused AV equipment and chairs, or you walked around outside in the rain.
All I'm really trying to say here, I think, is that 'having a baby' isn't a thing you do for a year or so. It's permanently life-altering and makes absolutely everything more complicated. If going to church during that early period is too difficult/embarrassing, it isn't likely to just suddenly resolve itself when the baby stops crying and starts saying 'Wat Dat?' every three seconds instead. You take em or leave em, and people who have em currently, at some phase in their larval stage, represent a really big chunk of the population.
--------------------
The history of humanity give one little hope that strength left to its own devices won't be abused. Indeed, it gives one little ground to think that strength would continue to exist if it were not abused. -- Dafyd --
Posts: 993 | From: New Zealand | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
"Too loud during service," didn't sound like the gurgling of a laughing baby to me. I never knew a baby who could laugh loud enough to be considered "too loud." I had a colicky baby myself and I always took him out of restaurants when he started crying and never even tried to take him to church. Why should one baby ruin an experience for all the other people there?
I don't think we-- any of us-- should see it as "ruining the experience". It's part of life-- just like squealing batteries in hearing aids is a part of life. It's what it's like to live in a family.
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
What are these changes that old people simply must tolerate? Why is this change more important than they are?
The change isn't more important than them. But the family (church family, that is) is. Just like it is-- or should be-- for young people. The only way this church thing will work at all is if we all get past the notion that it's about me, and start remembering that it's about us. So, just like a biological family involves a heck of a lot of give-and-take and compromise and giving up this Good Thing A in order to do Other Good Thing B, and this person gets what they want sometimes and not other times. All of which is a whole lot easier to do when you remember why you're there.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
I wish everybody would tolerate each other better. I didn't like getting reamed out by the old ladies in the back row because my son had an OCD meltdown in service and had to be taken out ("such an insult to the pastor!") and I don't like it much either when the young adults make it clear that our lifelong ministry is a washed-up failure fit only for antiques from the old country. I suppose I'm getting the rough edges sanded off my character or something, but it makes me grrrrrrrrrrr to be getting it from all sides, and I don't think it's right for the church.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
The dryest, most austere cleric I ever knew used to give his congregation a little pep-talk once a year:
Now - about children.
We all begin as babies - not one of us entered this world fully formed and able to participate in holy mass without offending anyone with shouts, yells, cries and the like.
We all became children - we all loved the sound our new shoes made on the chairs, or the tip-tap they produced on a church floor. I suspect many of us enjoyed the reaction we got from our mother when we dropped a book and heard the echo in church.
When we were teens most of us probably embarrassed our parents with what we wore, with our sulkiness, declared 'church is for old people who believe in fairy tales' and such like; fortunately most of us have grown beyond that.
And some of us have yet to reach the stage of expecting to criticise everyone and every thing as deficient because its not 'as it was in my day'.
There are children in this church because they belong here. We hope they will continue to feel accepted and that they belong because otherwise, when my children are about 40, this church will be bulldozed to make way for something better, like a cinema.
No member of this church is ever going to criticise a mother or father for the behaviour of their child: I won't have it. And everyone over the age of 12 is to take their turn on the rota for running the creche: the people who run our creche are the most important in this church because they are welcoming the congregation of tomorrow.
The churchmanship was very high - 3 thuribles for feasts! - the lace was deep, their were lots of old ladies, etc: but that church was more welcoming to children and babies than any I ever knew, bar none.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
The RC Church next door to us has a notice on the door which says that the PP loves children and that "boisterous and turbulent toddlers" are welcome at their services!
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
"Too loud during service," didn't sound like the gurgling of a laughing baby to me. I never knew a baby who could laugh loud enough to be considered "too loud." I had a colicky baby myself and I always took him out of restaurants when he started crying and never even tried to take him to church. Why should one baby ruin an experience for all the other people there?
I don't think we-- any of us-- should see it as "ruining the experience". It's part of life-- just like squealing batteries in hearing aids is a part of life. It's what it's like to live in a family.
Isn't part of the problem the fact that people think of worship as their own individual experience (Which Must Not Be Spoiled) - in other words (to quote St. Paul), they are "failing to discern the body" of the Church community.
(And I say this as someone who gets really annoyed by the faint tinny rhythm of someone's personal stereo playing at the other end of the train carriage!)
[ 10. December 2014, 07:42: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
You have me wrong if you think I don't like children in the church. I love the kids in my church and they seem to like me. I sit, by choice, behind a one year old and his infant brother and I love to watch them play and hear their comments. I also know that some children have problems being quiet in church for many years, although I wouldn't say they were still babies or that wiggling and talking is ever the same thing as a screaming baby.
"Ruining the experience for everyone" doesn't mean a little fussing from the babies or our mentally disabled man who shouts, "Play the trumpet!" from time to time. That's all part of the fun to me.
I guess some of you have never been around a truly loud baby who is screaming continuously from teething pain. Hearing the prepared sermon or the music would be impossible. More importantly it's hard to hear a baby in pain without wanting to do something about it. You can talk about your baby's right to be in church all you want but I think a baby like that needs comfort more than church. He needs to be taken out and walked or driven around the block or put to the breast or pushed in his chair, not made to sit in a pew for an hour. I've seen babies denied any of that because of a stubborn insistence on the mother's part to exert her right to stay.
Even in those cases I would never say a word to the mother, I just don't do that sort of thing, but then I wouldn't tell the old woman who needs a walker that she was holding up the line to communion. I wouldn't tell the older woman who has taught the adult Sunday School class for years that I was going to take it over and if I was the pastor I wouldn't give sermons about how depressing he finds it to look out over the congregation and see so much gray hair. Maybe old people "are grown-ups and should be able to handle it," but some of them still have feelings.
That sermon about welcoming the children was very nice and my present pastor has one just like it. I wonder why that inclusive attitude doesn't extend to the older people? Why is it okay to look forward to them going somewhere else or even dying?
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gwai
Shipmate
# 11076
|
Posted
I went to a service last Sunday that was particularly children-focused, so it was included many families. It also included a significant number of other childless people who wanted to be in church early in the morning for reasons known to themselves. It was a good service, but I did notice two people giving my two year old son dirty looks. He did not once scream from teething pain or anything else, but he rapped his pencil repeatedly on his paper to hear the sound of the pencil clicking on the pew beneath. He colored on my neighbor's bulletin. (She told me not to stop him, so I didn't, and their sweet interaction was good for my soul.) He danced in the communion line, and in the prayer circle, and he infuriated another toddler when we let our son go back to the children's area during the sermon. (The other toddler was not allowed to do so.) My son also invaded (temporarily before I removed him!) the pew of one of the people who had been giving him the dirty looks. I think he wanted to befriend her. That or he was being a goober. And you know what, I sympathize with the three people (counting the toddler) who were bothered by my son, but I don't think he did anything inappropriate. On the other hand, if you think only things like colicky or teething babies can disrupt people, you are apparently wrong. A silent but very active two year old boy clearly can do so also, even at a children's service.
That used to be the kind of thing I would freak out about. But you know, he's not my first and I'm a little more relaxed now. B is just as much part of the body of Christ as a crabby woman, and if the pastor (and his parents) are fine with him dancing in place, then is indeed ageist to object. Staying still is almost impossible for him just as other things are very hard for other people.
I think minor exclusion is almost impossible to avoid though. I think that church is actually very inclusive, but I've seen (fought) prejudice against at least one elderly person too. The difference is not that some churches never have problems with staff who insult M for being old and blind or B for two. The difference is that this church fixed its problems re M, and welcomes B, mostly.
--------------------
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
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
One church I was in, if the pastor saw a parent get up to leave with a quietly fussing infant, he would interrupt whatever he was doing to say "we like babies here." I liked that. Only once did I see a parent continue out the door instead of turn around and sit down again, child still lightly fussing.
Screaming is different, even the parent cannot be focusing on what's going on, so the parent is no worse off leaving with the child.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
You have me wrong if you think I don't like children in the church. I love the kids in my church and they seem to like me. I sit, by choice, behind a one year old and his infant brother and I love to watch them play and hear their comments. I also know that some children have problems being quiet in church for many years, although I wouldn't say they were still babies or that wiggling and talking is ever the same thing as a screaming baby.
"Ruining the experience for everyone" doesn't mean a little fussing from the babies or our mentally disabled man who shouts, "Play the trumpet!" from time to time. That's all part of the fun to me.
I guess some of you have never been around a truly loud baby who is screaming continuously from teething pain. Hearing the prepared sermon or the music would be impossible. More importantly it's hard to hear a baby in pain without wanting to do something about it. You can talk about your baby's right to be in church all you want but I think a baby like that needs comfort more than church. He needs to be taken out and walked or driven around the block or put to the breast or pushed in his chair, not made to sit in a pew for an hour. I've seen babies denied any of that because of a stubborn insistence on the mother's part to exert her right to stay.
Yes. It's hard. And the only person it's harder on that the one sitting next to the screaming baby is (with the possible exception of the baby) the mother. Probably this is not the first time this has happened, so most likely mom knows better than anyone else what baby needs at this moment. So give her space to deal with it. (Which might mean putting baby to breast right there in the pew, especially if there's not some suitable nursing room with a good video feed, not shuttled to some dusty back room).
But unless you're willing to retract your statement, it still speaks volumes. "Ruining the experience" is the phrase you used, and that says it all-- far beyond any attempt to explain it away. You simply can't say something like that and then pretend that you are open and welcoming to everyone. Because you're not.
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
Even in those cases I would never say a word to the mother, I just don't do that sort of thing, but then I wouldn't tell the old woman who needs a walker that she was holding up the line to communion. I wouldn't tell the older woman who has taught the adult Sunday School class for years that I was going to take it over and if I was the pastor I wouldn't give sermons about how depressing he finds it to look out over the congregation and see so much gray hair. Maybe old people "are grown-ups and should be able to handle it," but some of them still have feelings.
That sermon about welcoming the children was very nice and my present pastor has one just like it. I wonder why that inclusive attitude doesn't extend to the older people? Why is it okay to look forward to them going somewhere else or even dying?
Of course. I don't think anyone here would disagree.
Which goes to the point already made-- it's a two-way street. This is a family, and to BE a family means that everyone makes sacrifices. Sometimes it's going to be uncomfortable-- and yes, both children and the elderly can make it uncomfortable and inconvenient at times (sometimes in amusingly similar ways). It's hard. But taking the effort to truly welcome everyone is what it means to be a church.
I am thinking now of a lovely family in our church. Their toddler is well, to put it frankly, having a hard time learning "church behavior." Lots of melt downs and misbehavior, more so than the other kids his age in our church. He's not a quiet kid. I've seen mom struggling to figure out how to deal with this, sometimes in tears with embarrassment when her little guy draws a lot of attention in the middle of church.
But this is the family who thought of the quirky and somewhat socially awkward older gentleman in our congregation, recently bereaved with no children. They reached out and included him in their holiday dinner. No one asked them to do that. They just noticed, and cared.
That's what church is all about IMHO.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chocoholic
Shipmate
# 4655
|
Posted
Just about everyone can find some sound or another annoying. I was sat in a pew along from a man who was sniffing, a lot, throughout the first half of the service. Repeated sniffing is one of those I find really irritating and so distracting, and I was aware I could not focus on the readings. When a sound someone finds annoying comes from a baby or child there is often a reactionary response to defend child/parents and blame the person who finds it annoying or blame the parents for not removing child etc. But the thing is if someone finds the sound irritating and distracting, then they are finding it irritating and distracting. It is just worth acknowledging as existing without jumping to cast blame cast on either side or jumping to defences.
(Luckily sniffing man stopped around the sermon!)
Posts: 773 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
The Midge
Shipmate
# 2398
|
Posted
I can't help but wonder, as I read the anecdotes in this thread, if it would help us if we saw Church as something that continues outside of the Sunday morning service?
--------------------
Some days you are the fly.
On other days you are the windscreen.
Posts: 1085 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chocoholic
Shipmate
# 4655
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gwai:
I just question whether we all have the right to be not annoyed in church.
We don't but trying to pretend you are not annoyed about something when you are (even if it's just a personal acknowledgement) and being blamed for feeling that way is different.
Posts: 773 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
Are we getting to the nub of this? Is it our own critical attitudes, that we take into church with us, that are causing us to turn against our brothers and sisters rather than go out of our way to make them feel welcome?
A critical heart will ensure that we're never fully comfortable anywhere except home in our own controlled environment. Is it something we can overcome? I think so, with perseverance.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
But unless you're willing to retract your statement, it still speaks volumes. "Ruining the experience" is the phrase you used, and that says it all-- far beyond any attempt to explain it away. You simply can't say something like that and then pretend that you are open and welcoming to everyone. Because you're not.
Good Gosh. You're the most sanctimonious, judgemental person I know and yet you brag constantly about being the opposite.
Here's the sentence that you find so horribly unforgivable and for which you demand a retraction: quote:
I had a colicky baby myself and I always took him out of restaurants when he started crying and never even tried to take him to church. Why should one baby ruin an experience for all the other people there?
I was explaining my own personal thoughts when I felt my baby's crying was making it impossible for others to enjoy their meal in the restaurant. I was also, by staying home from church, predicting that we might possibly make church unpleasant for myself and others. I was trying to be considerate of others.
I can just barely believe that some people have a wonderful church experience while listening to a baby scream for an hour. You have professed yourself to be one, but all I've tried to do here is suggest that it may be hard for other less saintly people, like the woman who Mousethief first mentioned.
In cases of extreme crying, I really don't see the point of mother and child staying in the sanctuary. I doubt if either of them are happy in those circumstances, I know I wouldn't have been.
The pastor who insists the mother sit back down is a little out of line in my opinion. He really doesn't know the circumstances as well as the mother. I would have felt embarrassed and humiliated to be used as an object lesson so that other people could demonstrate their cloying tolerance.
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
A single mum with 2 children is befriended by the toddler group meeting in the week: she has been referred to the group by social services. They help her, listen to her and accept her children who like to run around more than the other children.
fast forward. because she likes the people at Toddlers she joins them on Sunday for church. Her children aren't the finished article, nor is she but she finds acceptance, warmth and love. She likes the church, the music the people but she behaves rather differently from most. Her children run around the church: one or two eyebrows are raised, one old lady won't take communion because the children aren't stopped from running around the communion table. They stop naturally after a few minutes.
How would you as Minister/Vicar/Priest deal with said old lady's complaint that the church has become a playground?
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
A single mum with 2 children is befriended by the toddler group meeting in the week: she has been referred to the group by social services. They help her, listen to her and accept her children who like to run around more than the other children.
fast forward. because she likes the people at Toddlers she joins them on Sunday for church. Her children aren't the finished article, nor is she but she finds acceptance, warmth and love. She likes the church, the music the people but she behaves rather differently from most. Her children run around the church: one or two eyebrows are raised, one old lady won't take communion because the children aren't stopped from running around the communion table. They stop naturally after a few minutes.
How would you as Minister/Vicar/Priest deal with said old lady's complaint that the church has become a playground?
I'd start by listening and asking a whole bunch of questions. There's most likely something behind this complaint (there's usually a bunch of stuff behind every complaint). I'd want to know what I was dealing with before I made any definite move.
It might, for example, be some deep-seated (though slightly wrong-headed) desire to see holy places kept holy. We have a lot of people in our current host congregation who seem to think that once you step on the carpet (the chancel space), you are in major holy ground and ought not do things like carrying around a watering pot, passing through the space to reach the church offices (which cannot be conveniently reached in any other way), etc. etc. They would definitely object to a toddler setting foot in the chancel because they basically object to anybody doing so who is not performing something liturgical at the moment.
If I were dealing with one of those folks, I would agree with them on the holiness bit but then point to the role of the little children in Jesus' entry into Jerusalem, complete with their shouting in the temple. Not totally overturn their worldview, just suggest an adjustment to it.
If the person were objecting because "I never let MY children get away from me," and basically she felt wronged because she was held to a higher standard way back in the day, I'd probably do some gentle probing to discover whether she usually brought the kids to church complete with Dad (Grandma, older sibling, whatever). Or maybe, she never brought them into service at all, but sent them to Sunday School at the same time. I would then gently point out that the mother of these particular children has no one to help her, and (if I was feeling daring that day) suggest that the complainant might help out.
And so forth.
It all depends on what the real complaint is.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Twilight - I have certainly experienced parents being told off because their baby is laughing. In the context of my post, I meant 'it means the church is alive' in the sense that the church is full of different ages and experiences, not that I want all elderly churchgoers to die or anything. Sorry for any confusion. Maybe you've never experienced it, but I have experienced churches where literally everyone in the church wants xyz change aside from a small clique of older people who act like toddlers whenever the c-word is uttered. Our experiences are going to colour our view. I don't think expecting older people to deal with change as much as churches expect children to deal with change is unreasonable or hate-filled. I'm not sure why old age is some kind of get out of jail free card.
Cliffdweller and L'Organist, as usual, speak a lot of sense here.
--------------------
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
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
Good Gosh. You're the most sanctimonious, judgemental person I know and yet you brag constantly about being the opposite.
Probably true (although I don't recall ever claiming not to be...?) I can certainly be as snarky (as my post showed) and pig-headed as anyone. Which just goes to show I am as much a part of the problem as anyone.
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
Here's the sentence that you find so horribly unforgivable and for which you demand a retraction: quote:
I had a colicky baby myself and I always took him out of restaurants when he started crying and never even tried to take him to church. Why should one baby ruin an experience for all the other people there?
I was explaining my own personal thoughts when I felt my baby's crying was making it impossible for others to enjoy their meal in the restaurant. I was also, by staying home from church, predicting that we might possibly make church unpleasant for myself and others. I was trying to be considerate of others.
Obviously not "unforgiveable", my call for retraction was just trying to clarify (because you seemed to back off at one point) your statement re: the crying baby "ruining everyone's experience"-- which I took to mean everyone's experience of church, not lunch. I think there's a difference in those two scenarios because there is a difference in the intent and purpose of each.
Obviously it's a very good and admirable thing that you are concerned about those around you and not wanting to cause any distress to your fellow diners and/or worshippers. The problem as I saw it was you seemed to impose that decision on every other parent:
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
In cases of extreme crying, I really don't see the point of mother and child staying in the sanctuary. I doubt if either of them are happy in those circumstances, I know I wouldn't have been.
If they stay in the sanctuary, then presumably the moms ARE happy, or as happy as is possible under the circumstances. Whether or not that's "best for baby" is hard to say, given that as an outsider we can't really know exactly what's going on or why. But I do see that we all have this tendency to impose our experience on others-- particularly on parents. The decisions we make as parents are just so personal, so fraught, we spend so much time and so much of our selves in deciding how to handle these and other similar situations, that it's hard for us to imagine how another parent might choose differently. But the fact that we can empirically observe other parents choosing differently shows that is not the case. So we all (myself obviously included as you have helpfully pointed out) need to recognize that our own experiences are not universal.
Again, it's not my intent to come down on the "young people"/ parents side vs. the "older people" side (generationally I'm one of those oldsters). My intent is to argue for ALL of us to recognize the sort of give-and-take that is necessary to make a Church work, to remember our mission and purpose, and allow that to frame the way we understand the experience of "being annoyed" in Church. And yes, I need this as much as anyone.
The most helpful comment so far I think is this gem that really sums it all up so well:
quote:
Originally posted by Lamb Chopped:
I'd start by listening and asking a whole bunch of questions. There's most likely something behind this complaint (there's usually a bunch of stuff behind every complaint). I'd want to know what I was dealing with before I made any definite move.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
How would you as Minister/Vicar/Priest deal with said old lady's complaint that the church has become a playground?
I would interpret the old lady's complaint as fear of being knocked down, a fear that becomes quite serious as people age.
A friend was knocked down by a running child and the fall broke her hip - at age 50, not an old age "hip breaks then you fall."
I was run into and painfully knocked into the wood pew side by a 6 year old happily running down the aisle while looking behind him, I stood to the side of the aisle to let him pass but he swerved and ran right into me with his full body.
My Mom fell and broke an arm when a crawler on the floor got between her feet and tripped her.
Old people are often a bit uncertain on their feet, that doesn't mix well with child play grounds. It's not prejudice against kids, it's a safety issue.
Makes sense to ask what the concern is, but you may have to dig beyond the first answer to get to the truth. People don't like to admit their fears and frailness, so often speak in more superficial terms like "we weren't allowed to do that as kids."
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
Yes. And this goes to the whole area of pre-planning. Toddlers ARE going to run around. They are going to crawl underfoot. It's no good saying they shouldn't or explaining how much of a risk it is to the elderly, it's like telling a duck not to quack. It's what toddlers do.
And yet, as Belle notes, falls are a very real and important concern. I've seen far too many times when a bad fall can be the prelude to a sharp decline in a formerly active and energetic senior.
Part of being an inclusive, loving, caring community is being aware of both these realities and planning for them. Not by telling the parents of toddlers to require their children to be something that is unnatural for a toddler. And not by telling the seniors to not care about something that is a very real and valid concern about a serious risk. You do it by finding creative and workable solutions. Things like designing our shared spaces (both worship spaces and fellowship spaces) with designated areas for play that are confined in some way. Things like providing some toys or crayons or whatever for kids. Things like providing ramps and easy access for the mobility impaired, and paying attention to ambient noise and other challenges for the hearing impaired. Things like having a comfortable and attractive nursing moms room with a audio or video feed from the service.
Some of these things will cost money, some of them won't. So they all have to be the mix of how we budget and prioritize various things. Again, all part of the conversations that every family everywhere has to have all the time. But it begins by opening our eyes and hearts to notice ALL the people around us and think proactively about how to best care for all their needs.
[ 11. December 2014, 14:18: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
hosting/
quote:
Originally posted by Twilight:
Good Gosh. You're the most sanctimonious, judgemental person I know and yet you brag constantly about being the opposite.
The Ship is not ageist. Its commandments apply to those of all and indeterminate ages. Commandments include the injunction to take it to Hell if you must get personal. Stay with the issue or get thee hence.
/hosting
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
Twilight - I have certainly experienced parents being told off because their baby is laughing. In the context of my post, I meant 'it means the church is alive' in the sense that the church is full of different ages and experiences, not that I want all elderly churchgoers to die or anything.
Okay. I've never heard the word "alive" used to mean "a variety of age groups." A first grade class is usually full of children who are all the same age but I wouldn't call it dead.
quote:
Maybe you've never experienced it, but I have experienced churches where literally everyone in the church wants xyz change aside from a small clique of older people who act like toddlers whenever the c-word is uttered.
No, I haven't experienced a church like that. Our church takes a vote on changes, so a small group would never override a large one. But why are the people who don't want the change, whether it be a new roof or paving the parking lot, "acting like toddlers?" How is one vote more mature than another?
quote:
Our experiences are going to colour our view. I don't think expecting older people to deal with change as much as churches expect children to deal with change is unreasonable or hate-filled. I'm not sure why old age is some kind of get out of jail free card.
I'm hard pressed to think of an example of a change that the children might be asked to make. Do little children really care about whether the church gets a new roof or hymnals are replaced with words on large screen TVs?
Your experiences are clearly very different than mine. I don't think I've seen any old people acting like toddlers in church,(climbing over the pews and screaming for juice?) much less behaving badly and then claiming their age as a "get out of jail free card."
The old people in my church behave quietly, are kind to everyone else and I've never once seen any one of them shushing a child. I can't speak for the "dirty looks," so many older people have been accused of on this thread. I wonder if the effects of time and gravity on elderly faces have caused a few people to look grouchy when they are actually thinking pleasant thoughts.
The single biggest complaint about old people on this thread seems to come down to some of them preferring to keep to tradition rather than institute something new. Why is this always a bad thing? Where is the evidence that the new changes will make the church better or keep more people in the pews over the long run?
I'm grateful for the people in my Lutheran church's history, whether they were old or young, who kept things pretty much the same from one generation to the next. I'm glad they didn't change all the hymns to a big-band swing tempo during the 1940's to "keep the young people" or add crystal ball readings to the schedule during the 19th Century wave of spiritualism.
Change is sometimes good and sometimes bad. I think everyone should be entitled to their opinion without being accused of selfishness or stubbornness just because they don't agree with you. I think it's unfair to say that those who vote against or resist a change you happen to want are acting like toddlers. Maybe, occasionally, the ones who want the latest thing they saw on TV or something they heard the other church had, are the ones who are acting like children.
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
There seem to be some misconceptions here.
First is that it is not acceptable for anyone to complain about age-inappropriate behaviour in church by children. But that is simply not true: children of 4 years old already have some idea of appropriate behaviour and so it should not be beyond the wit of priests and people to find a way to request that age-appropriate behavioural norms be applied in the case of church.
What do I mean by that? Well, any child over 4 should be able to grasp that it is not acceptable to run about in church, and especially not in the middle of a service. No, that is not me being unreasonable: in the UK most 4 year olds are in formal education and they 'get' the need to conform to some behavioural standards at school - why should church be any different?
Second: it is not ageist/ anti-child or unwelcoming to gently point out or discreetly mention that a child of 4 or over running about and chattering loudly during a service is not appropriate. No one is suggesting that parents should be made to feel unwelcome but that doesn't mean that the preferences of an indisciplined child should take precedence over the needs of a congregation of adults.
If the adults with such a child find that off-putting then so be it: I suggest they'd be pretty appalled if someone brought a child to their house who proceded to wreck the joint, running about and screaming the while - why should God's house be any different.
As for those bits of a service a child might find dull or boring: by age 5 they should be able to concentrate on one thing for about 10 minutes - and that is the length of a sermon or a long lesson or a prayer of consecration.
No, the older generation should not complain about nothing, but irresponsible parents should not see church as some free adventure playground where a child can run around unfettered to their heart's content: if they want that there are playgrounds and park facilities specifically for this purpose, but they tend to be outdoors and unconsecrated.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by cliffdweller:
Yes. And this goes to the whole area of pre-planning. Toddlers ARE going to run around. They are going to crawl underfoot. It's no good saying they shouldn't or explaining how much of a risk it is to the elderly, it's like telling a duck not to quack. It's what toddlers do.
And yet, as Belle notes, falls are a very real and important concern. I've seen far too many times when a bad fall can be the prelude to a sharp decline in a formerly active and energetic senior.
Part of being an inclusive, loving, caring community is being aware of both these realities and planning for them. Not by telling the parents of toddlers to require their children to be something that is unnatural for a toddler. And not by telling the seniors to not care about something that is a very real and valid concern about a serious risk. You do it by finding creative and workable solutions. Things like designing our shared spaces (both worship spaces and fellowship spaces) with designated areas for play that are confined in some way. Things like providing some toys or crayons or whatever for kids. Things like providing ramps and easy access for the mobility impaired, and paying attention to ambient noise and other challenges for the hearing impaired. Things like having a comfortable and attractive nursing moms room with a audio or video feed from the service.
Some of these things will cost money, some of them won't. So they all have to be the mix of how we budget and prioritize various things. Again, all part of the conversations that every family everywhere has to have all the time. But it begins by opening our eyes and hearts to notice ALL the people around us and think proactively about how to best care for all their needs.
This is one of the best damn posts I have ever read about being serious about being inclusive.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Kelly Alves
Bunny with an axe
# 2522
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Raptor Eye:
Are we getting to the nub of this? Is it our own critical attitudes, that we take into church with us, that are causing us to turn against our brothers and sisters rather than go out of our way to make them feel welcome?
A critical heart will ensure that we're never fully comfortable anywhere except home in our own controlled environment. Is it something we can overcome? I think so, with perseverance.
I just read further back, and I have to say, that cuts both ways.
The discussion provoked a memory-- a few years back, I learned a friend if mine shot herself. I spend a day cooped up in my room, shellshocked, but the next day I decided I needed to get my ass out of the house, so I went to have breakfast.
I was seated next to an elderly couple ( in front of me) and a mother with a toddler boy. The toddler boy was doing toddler boy things-- shredding his napkin, banging his spoon, tossing his food, etc. ( Gwai-"being a goober." ) ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif) I sensed I was on edge and it was working on my nerves, but it was easy enough to ignore as there was a table space between us and they were behind me.
About five minutes into the meal, the kid let out a piercing scream. I jumped out my skin and looked around-- pure reflex. Also job instinct, I guess-- if I heared one of my own toddlers scream like that, I would have assumed he'd bit his tongue in half. Kid was just horsing around, mom gently corrected him, that was that. I took a few deep breaths and picked up my fork.
The husband of the couple in front of me saw me jump, threw his napkin down, and started in a loud speech about people who didn't appreciate the joyful sounds if chldren, about how he thought it was a blessing and one should rejoice in hearing it. He was glaring ar me the whole time, and his voice shook with rage.His wife shushed him. i just sat there crying and wishing I had never left the house. I'm sure that just confirmed to him that I was a person who resisted joy.
So, there is the judgement that " i would never let my kid do that, by gum, in my day..." But there is also the judgement that. " anyone who jumps at a loud noise hates kids." Neither is fair. You just don't know what might be going on.
--------------------
I cannot expect people to believe “
Jesus loves me, this I know” of they don’t believe “Kelly loves me, this I know.”
Kelly Alves, somewhere around 2003.
Posts: 35076 | From: Pura Californiana | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
That father's damn lucky he didn't have a Vietnam vet sitting with his back to him. Idiot.
ETA: I see it was a different table which produced the idiot. Still, a Vietnam vet in PTSD flashback mode is not a pretty sight. You think older people particularly would have some awareness of the effect sudden screams from behind have on people.
[ 11. December 2014, 21:43: Message edited by: Lamb Chopped ]
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Twilight - I'm not talking about any change that's down to a new fad or anything. In my church's case, some pews (like, 5 in a big church) were going to be removed and the pews shifted around in order to make the layout more wheelchair-friendly. Said old people were unhappy because 'their' pews were going to be moved. If that's not childish and toddler-like I don't know what is. Btw these weren't pews with memorials or anything like that in, just standard pews the people habitually sat in every week. There are lots of changes that happen in church that have nothing to do with trends.
I'm genuinely glad that you've only experienced nice old people in your church(es), but that's not the case for everyone. Rather than acting as if our experiences cannot possibly be true, why not believe us...? Btw I would be perfectly fine with a parent wanting to take out a genuinely screaming child, and wouldn't hesitate to ask a parent to get their child to stop running around (for example). I'm also baffled by why you took my comment about a church with different ages being alive so literally - a church is supposed to be a family, a community. Obviously it's only going to live and survive with a mix of different ages. A school class is part of the wider school body and is a bit different. Do you genuinely not understand why one needs a mix of ages and the other doesn't? ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
By far the nastiest people I have encountered in a church situation have been old people. One time a newcomer sat in 'their spot' and said person hissed about it to their neighbour. The newcomer got up, left and never came back. Another time (different church!) quite possibly the nastiest person I've ever encountered in a church setting thought she could just do and say whatever she liked and nobody dared tell an old lady to stop. Screaming at someone for folding a used raffle ticket 'incorrectly'. Like I'm assuming there may have been some mental health issues there but she was just horrible to everyone, and in a church with a small congregation that was not exactly helpful to growth.
--------------------
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
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
A friend of mine was on the vestry of a church in Haymarket, VA, and had me look over the 'Welcome' leaflet before they went to reprint. It was quite an old document, probably written fifty years ago. I pointed out that if they insisted on referring to 'the War of Northern Aggression' it was a lead pipe cinch that modern suburban families would not feel very welcome. He replied that the oldest member of the congregation was also the wealthiest, and she was still fighting the Civil War. Nothing could be done to change the wording until she died.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Pomona:
Twilight ... I'm genuinely glad that you've only experienced nice old people in your church(es), but that's not the case for everyone. Rather than acting as if our experiences cannot possibly be true, why not believe us...?
By far the nastiest people I have encountered in a church ...situation have been old people. One time a newcomer sat in 'their spot' and said person hissed about it to their neighbour. The newcomer got up, left and never came back. Another time (different church!) quite possibly the nastiest person I've ever encountered in a church setting thought she could just do and say whatever she liked and nobody dared tell an old lady to stop. Screaming at someone for folding a used raffle ticket 'incorrectly'. Like I'm assuming there may have been some mental health issues there but she was just horrible to everyone, and in a church with a small congregation that was not exactly helpful to growth.
I'm sure it varies a lot from place to place. In my experience, it's been a bit more of a mixed message-- in almost every church I've attended the verbal communication (e.g. mission statements) has very much favored young families to the exclusion of singles and older folks-- to the point you'd think "young family" was code for "Christ incarnate". But the actual priorities of said churches-- what actually gets done when push comes to shove (and it does)-- almost always favored older adults, often to the point of even explicitly saying "because that's where all the givers/ money comes from" ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
As to who wins the "worship wars" about what sort of music is sung, the short answer is: no one.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
Far as I can tell, you are all correct.
Churches can simultaneously seek to please "young couples with children" and also elders demanding traditional un-wheelchair friendly seating or Easter flowers done exactly the way Mildred's grandmother did the flowers. It's a connection to loved dead ancestors for the oldest long time members and a dusty museum that needs to focus more on the present congregation.
Some churches depend on singles to do lots of the volunteer work while the informal social life centers on couples/families. A church naturally reflects the lifestyle and values of the majority but is littered with people who don't fit those values.
Churches can be warm and friendly to it's long term members and cold to newcomers who aren't the target demographic. It needs to be reaching out to new members but success in that can make long term members feel invaded and shunted aside.
It needs to mix all ages while giving children room to be children and simultaneously protecting toddling elders from the dangers of crawling or toddling (or running) children. It needs to engage instead of boring the teens without reducing adult level of interest.
Etc.
We all seem to have expectations of what "church" is supposed to be like, but those expectations conflict. Is church supposed to be a refuge into a familiar environment or a stimulation to change and get out of your rut? Yes to both?
Were things easier back in a less mobile society, when people in church mostly grew up together, and the handicapped (toddling elders, wheelchair riders, the deaf, autistic, young children needing wiggle room, etc) stayed home?
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
How would you as Minister/Vicar/Priest deal with said old lady's complaint that the church has become a playground?
I would interpret the old lady's complaint as fear of being knocked down, a fear that becomes quite serious as people age.
Thanks everyone.
The fact is that this is a real life event. All the facts as written are 100% true and correct. Now for the extra facts.
Belle, the lady in question may be afraid of being tripped but seeing as she sits down for 100% of the service, it's not that in this instance. Said lady is also causing ructions at the weekly lunch (mainly attended by people 60+) and has had an issue with gossip and winding others up for many years. She is also married but childless with no nieces/nephews. Her views have not come to me directly but through others.
The family. Very poor and on benefit. Dad has mental health problems and doesn't leave the house. They often don't have enough food - not through mismanagement or anything but because of benefit cuts and restrictions. They have no money and rely on food banks to make ends meet. Their house is not the cleanest but the children are happy and full of joy and have come to enjoy church and the many people who talk to them and support them as a family. Mum has helped others in the community even though poor herself.
The question is should I make a suggestion to the elderly lady (who has been in the church for many years)? The suggestion is being this: there are 94 churches at least in this area, some closer to her home than this. Over 80% of them are child free zones. Would she care to attend one where she might feel better at home? [By the way, pretty much everyone admits that she should have been tackled on her gossip etc years ago but no one dared it seems].
Or, should I invite the family to parent craft classes, ask the children not to wave the flags provided? Not to smile and be part of the welcome team? In other words to lose perhaps the only part of their week where they feel they are giving something to others?
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
There's been a lot of change in this church in the last few years: much of it has been driven by our older members.
It is not change for change's sake nor has it resulted in an age skewed congregation. We are becoming a very mixed age church. Much of what the church has done for years is fine and will remain: other things need to be flexible.
Interesting that one of the things that came out of our recent review of youth and children's work was the comment from our young people's group. They really value the fact that we are a mixed age/class/demographic group and that there is plenty of flexibility for them to try new stuff.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Magenpie
Apprentice
# 12746
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Saul the Apostle:
In a nearby church, there is a veritable ''Night of the long knives'' going on. Older and experienced people are being air brushed out of the picture. Or to be more precise removed..
Oh how this brought back so many memories as this happened in my former church about 7 years ago and the scars still remain - many of the people who were aged between 40 and 80 either joined other congregations or left the church in disgust.
The Pastor wanted a "young" church, even though we had different services for each congregation/age group. Now the church is in financial difficulty (a cumulative effect over the years) and looks scruffy and in need of a new pastor.
Whilst not wanting this church to fail, I can understand why those who were very hurt by the decisions made 7 years ago and may be in the plant churches not being prepared to stump up a hefty wedge to keep the status quo.
The C of E can sometimes be its own worst enemy.
--------------------
"The answer. What is the answer? In that case, what is the question?"
- Gertrude Stein
Posts: 13 | From: Shakespeare's County | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adeodatus
Shipmate
# 4992
|
Posted
A thought occurred to me this morning while flicking through a volume of C.G.Jung's essays, as one does of a cold Friday morning.
While I have no objection to <insert usual stuff about youth and the Church here>, surely if Jung has any mileage left in him at all, then one of his key insights is that spirituality tends to be something people pursue in the second half of life?
What do we think of that? And of the corollary that if it's true, then turfing out the second-half-of-lifers in order to create a "young Church" is probably the last thing we should be doing?
Personally, I think there's something in that. A lot of my work involves pastoral relationships with older people who have only begun to think really deeply about faith as they became older.
(But can we avoid reference to the old joke - "Mum, why does Granny read the Bible so much?" "She's cramming for her finals, dear.")
--------------------
"What is broken, repair with gold."
Posts: 9779 | From: Manchester | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Twilight
Puddleglum's sister
# 2832
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Thanks everyone.
The fact is that this is a real life event. All the facts as written are 100% true and correct. Now for the extra facts.
Belle, the lady in question may be afraid of being tripped but seeing as she sits down for 100% of the service, it's not that in this instance. Said lady is also causing ructions at the weekly lunch (mainly attended by people 60+) and has had an issue with gossip and winding others up for many years. She is also married but childless with no nieces/nephews. Her views have not come to me directly but through others.
Translation: Belle is a nasty old biddy who gossips; everyone says so.
quote:
The family. Very poor and on benefit. Dad has mental health problems and doesn't leave the house. They often don't have enough food - not through mismanagement or anything but because of benefit cuts and restrictions. They have no money and rely on food banks to make ends meet. Their house is not the cleanest but the children are happy and full of joy and have come to enjoy church and the many people who talk to them and support them as a family. Mum has helped others in the community even though poor herself.
Translation: The family is poor. They like the church and all the church people who help them.
quote:
The question is should I make a suggestion to the elderly lady (who has been in the church for many years)? The suggestion is being this: there are 94 churches at least in this area, some closer to her home than this. Over 80% of them are child free zones. Would she care to attend one where she might feel better at home? [By the way, pretty much everyone admits that she should have been tackled on her gossip etc years ago but no one dared it seems].
Translation: Should I kick the old lady out? Everyone says I should have done it long ago.
quote:
Or, should I invite the family to parent craft classes, ask the children not to wave the flags provided? Not to smile and be part of the welcome team? In other words to lose perhaps the only part of their week where they feel they are giving something to others?
Translation: Or should I tell children not to smile?
---------------
Its obvious your mind was made up before you asked the question. The children are popular, pretty little things and the woman is unpopular, old and ugly. Nobody likes her, particularly the gossipy people who complained to you about her. I guess it's true the church is like a big family and when grandma becomes a downer at the parties its time to put her in a home.
Posts: 6817 | Registered: May 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Tulfes
Shipmate
# 18000
|
Posted
Would Jesus have told the woman to go elsewhere? No!!! EM, you need to consider carefully what sort of example you are demonstrating to your flock. By the way, continually referring to the woman as "elderly" is ageist and demeaning.
Posts: 175 | Registered: Feb 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Is 'elderly' really demeaning? Lots of older people I know use it to describe themselves, it's certainly a normal word to use about older people in the UK. I was under the impression that elderly was just a plain description. Happy to be informed otherwise.
Also I too am alarmed by the suggestion to ask the older lady to go elsewhere. There are other options beside that and asking the children to not be happy!
--------------------
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
|
|
bib
Shipmate
# 13074
|
Posted
No matter how tolerant we all profess to be, I'm sure we have all reacted with irritation when people around us in church do something to upset the equilibrium. I found myself feeling such irritation last Sunday at which there were several young families present for a baptism. There was one little boy aged about 3 who spent the entire time having melt downs and screaming the place down. He physically lashed out at people around him and generally caused a disturbance. Unfortunately, mother did nothing about the kid apart from the occasional loud yell as she was busy talking loudly all the time on her mobile phone. She made no attempt to take the child out or to calm him.
I was sorry for the kid, but I found myself becoming increasingly irritated with the mother whose behaviour was so inappropriate. No wonder her little boy appeared feral - he knew no other way. I think it was normal to feel irritated, but I also felt so sad for the child and frustrated at not knowing what to do. I don't think I could cope with that every Sunday.
--------------------
"My Lord, my Life, my Way, my End, accept the praise I bring"
Posts: 1307 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
