The beginning of St Hilda's Church

50 years ago building work began.

A stone from Tynemouth Priory was placed in the foundations of the Church and solemnly blessed by the Bishop of Newcastle, Hugh Ashdown.

New Bishop of Newcastle Announced

The Venerable Christine Elizabeth Hardman has been announced as the new Bishop of Newcastle.

Diocesan announcement ~ Wiki page ~ tributes from Southwark Diocese on her retirement as Archdeacon in November 2012 (pdf) ~ Thinking Anglicans ~

The press release says:

No 10 Downing Street has announced this morning that Her Majesty The Queen has approved the nomination of the Venerable Christine Hardman BSc(Econ), M.Th, formerly Archdeacon of Lewisham and Greenwich and now Honorary Assistant Priest in the Cathedral and Collegiate Church of St Saviour and St Mary Overie Southwark, for election as Bishop of Newcastle in succession to the Right Reverend Martin Wharton, BA, on his resignation on 30th November 2014. 

She says,

I don’t really have the words to express my excitement at coming to this vibrant, warm and proud part of the world.” 

From my own faith journey I know the key significance of warm, lively, welcoming church communities with worship that transforms us and sends us out into the world - bringing the depth of Christian hope to places where hope is thin on the ground. 

God cares about the world - not just about the Church. The rule of Christ is over the whole of our lives. That’s why it’s so important for Christians to engage and work with key partners for all that leads to the flourishing of communities. As Bishop of Newcastle I will take every opportunity to engage in the public square and especially to speak on behalf of those whose voices are not heard, 

It will be such a privilege to be your Bishop and to lead you on the next stage of the journey. In all of this I will be relying on God’s grace and your prayers.

The Right Reverend Frank White, Assistant Bishop of Newcastle, said, 

This is such a good moment to welcome Christine Hardman to be our new Bishop and I look forward with eager anticipation to serving alongside her. 

Her wide interests and experience and her desire to encounter and learn from the spirituality of this region offer us all real opportunities for growth. 

Christine's gift for the intelligent engagement of the good news of Jesus Christ with the challenges of our times dovetails wonderfully with the vision of this diocese.

Her CV 

The Venerable Christine Elizabeth Hardman, aged 64, holds a B.Sc (Econ) from the University of London and trained for ordination on the St Albans Ministerial Training Scheme. 

She later studied for a Master’s degree in Applied Theology from Westminster College, Oxford. 

She became a Deaconess in 1984 and was ordained Deacon in 1987, serving as Curate at St John the Baptist, Markyate Street in the Diocese of St Albans. 

She took up the role of Tutor and Course Director on the St Albans Ministerial Training Scheme from 1988-1996. During this period the Scheme merged with the Oxford Ministry Course and she became its Director of Mission Studies. 

Christine was ordained Priest in 1994 and became Vicar of Holy Trinity and Christ the King, Stevenage in 1996 and also Rural Dean of Stevenage in 1999. She served as Archdeacon of Lewisham and Greenwich from 2001 to 2012. 

In 2012 Christine became Assistant Priest at Southwark Cathedral and received the Bishop’s Permission to Officiate in the Diocese of St Albans where she has been acting Warden of Readers. She has a special interest in mission studies and the social implications of the Gospel. 

Christine has been a member of the General Synod since 1998, with one brief break, when she moved from St Albans to Southwark Diocese, and has served on many different committees including the Synod's Eucharistic Prayers Revision Committee, the Dioceses and Pastoral Measures Review Group and the Ethical Investment Advisory Group. Her major area of work on General Synod was the legislation to allow women to be bishops. 

She was Prolocutor of the Province of Canterbury in the last Synod 2010-2015 (which came to an end with the July session) and served on the Archbishop’s Council. 

She is married to Roger and they have two daughters and four grandchildren.
Immediately after graduation Christine worked as an articled clerk and with an estate agency. Her interests include making connections between the worlds of economics and Christian faith, being in the mountains, cycling (especially bike tours in other countries and cultures), theatre and cinema. For many years she enjoyed running, completing the London Marathon three times and the Newcastle-based Great North Run.
Dates have yet to be announced for her Consecration as a bishop and the inauguration of her ministry in the Diocese of Newcastle.

She has her own Wiki page

Creeds and reconciliation

Justin Welby tweeted:

It's Written on Your Face

Jeannette Sirois for

 the City of Vancouver, 2014

Genuine reconciliation is not only about agreement, but about how we love one another in deep disagreement. @JustinWelby

Which is undoubtedly true and which also raises certain challenges - even accusations - for Christians.

History relates that Christians have been appalling bad at showing compassion to other Christians - never mind to those outside their own walls.

In fact - for all the committed Christians and Christian groups committed to reconciliation - I think there are structural aspects of Christianity which make it very difficult to find ways to "love one another in deep [or any other] disagreement."

Specifically the credal character of Christianity - self-definition and self-authentification by statements of belief - is in practice a mechanism for building walls and making enemies.

Creeds, even fragments of creeds, become the tests by which Christians tell themselves who's in their camp (and thus righteous, blessed, and Godly) and who is not (and so is polluted, accursed, ungodly). Creeds simultaneously bind together and alienate. A credal culture mediates this public structure into individual Christian attitudes and behaviour.

Locally too, the presupposition that members of a particular church community agree with one another is very powerful. It can be very hard for people to express spiritual and theological doubt, never mind dissent. Those who speak off-key find they cannot be heard. They are out of tune and they must leave the choir. The desire for harmony can make people wilfully deaf to other tunes. Faithful searchers and questioners may (wittingly and unwittingly) be edged out the door.

It's Written on Your Face

Jeannette Sirois for

 the City of Vancouver, 2014

Political parties, by contrast, begin with the presupposition of internal disagreement. Therefore their structures are designed to accommodate difference and disagreement. There are mechanisms by which differing internal groups seek to persuade the majority of their views. In practice multiple minorities are able to co-exist, collaborate and contend in ways which may contribute to the vitality of the party as a whole. Sometimes they break too, but on the whole public disagreement is evidence of strength.

But churches set on a foundation of presumed agreement, have all too often become rigid, breakable, friable. An inability to listen and unwillingness to accept difference all too easily result in individuals leaving unnoticed and conflicts escalating rapidly into division. Christian truth is conceived as credal statements which demand assent. Expressions of faith in ambiguity and ambivalence, fluid spirituality, historical flow - not to mention a divine refusal to be locked into small verbal boxes - are all threats to the established order.

And yet as Christians we preach reconciliation. We have largely been unable to reconcile older churches to one another and new Christian denominations proliferate like weeds. But we all think we can tell other people to love one another.

SHOUTING IN CHURCH

I can't recall having been shouted at in church. I guess it's happened on occasions, but not for a long time. I've certainly done things on occasions which have left people angry with me.

I did one (relatively brief) job where I was expecting a blazing row every time I entered the building. Although the row never came the expectation of it made worshipping difficult.

But it seems that being shouted at is not uncommon in the life of the clergy.  In a survey of 200 clergy

When asked about church members being rude, aggressive or passive aggressive to them, 76% reported that this was a regular occurrence, with church members shouting at them on average, once a week. Some church leaders however, said that they were shouted at or spoken to aggressively as many as 30 times a month, with one respondent sorrowfully reporting that it happened ‘on a daily basis.’

Shouting in this context is an act of violence just below the physical. It can be felt as a blow, an assault. It's often born of frustration but it can equally be part of a pattern of bullying behaviour.

It's also, for the most part, an expression of violence for those who want to remain within the community. Perhaps they are frustrated in not getting their own way, or they shout to sustain their control over events, or they hate they way things are changing out of their control. But they don't want to leave.

Yet at the same time such people (even when they're not shouting) destroy the quality of the community they're part of. Trust and security are lost. And it's incredibly hard to turn such a situation around into a safe, nourishing and pleasant community.

No, but might benefit
from a haircut

On a couple of occasions in my career people have left the church following a row and the remainder of the church have been able to relax and breathe again and to build a better (if smaller) community. I recall a group of three in Sheffield who left after a dispute and went to the Cathedral. I told the story to one of the Canons who replied "Oh people are always falling out with their vicars and coming to the Cathedral. They don't stop being awkward buggers here - but they do all get together."

But if the experience of being shouted at regularly is as frequent as the survey suggests (and the post gives no details of sampling or methodology) then perhaps a more collective response is needed. 76% reporting regularly being shouted at cannot simply be down to the individuals concerned.

Nor does the brief report say whether men or women are equally the object of shouting or, as I would suspect, women are noticeably more likely to be shouted at.

It also suggests that prospects for church growth may be significantly hampered by poor, even self-destructive, relationships within too many local church communities.

(The brief report of the survey didn't say whether respondents had themselves shouted at other church members, or even whether they had been asked. But it would be unwise to assume that all fault is on the side of the laity.)

Knowing how others see us

A recent survey looking at the perceived trustworthiness of the police included clergy in the list of comparison groups. (Thanks to British Religion in Numbers.)

It turns out that, in general, clergy are deemed noticeably less trustworthy than nurses and doctors, or the police, but more so than lawyers and accountants.

And, thankfully, they are trusted more than tabloid journalists - the question there is why they are trusted by as many as 13% of people.

This survey should not be comfortable reading for clergy. First, I guess it contradicts the self-image of most clergy. Second it suggests clergy have real image problems with two important groups: younger adults and members of ethnic minorities.

Over two-thirds of younger adults find clergy untrustworthy or don't know. This suggests to me that there is a mountain to climb if the church wants to re-balance its age profile by attracting young people. (Or, alternatively, I suppose churches could work harder to strengthen their links with older people who are positively inclined to trust clergy.)

Summary:

% very/quite trustworthy	UK	London
Nurses	86	83
Doctors	85	84
Teachers	80	79
Armed forces	75	70
Judges	68	65
Police	65	60
Clergy	59	53
Accountants	56	55
Lawyers	52	47
Broadsheet journalists	25	36
Politicians	16	20
Tabloid journalists	13	16

Gender: In the more detailed survey results men and women trust clergy more or less equally but more men find them untrustworthy (30 % as opposed to 25% - the difference is that more women don't know).

Age: Older people trust clergy much more than younger people. In the 18-24 age group just 29% thought them trustworthy (as opposed to 72% of 75's and over). 37% of 18-24 year olds found them untrustworthy while 36% didn't know or weren't sure.

Regions: Geographic analysis shows intriguing differences. The North East and Wales have the highest proportion of people judging clergy to be trustworthy (64%), whilst the lowest figure (54%) is found between these two areas, in the North West, and in Northern Ireland.  (added later: Wales has the largest proportion of the population who reported 'no religion' in the 2011 census.)

Ethnicity: Amongst white people 62% thought clergy trustworthy and 26% untrustworthy. Among ethnic minority respondents 39% thought clergy trustworthy and 40% untrustworthy.

Reforrm and Renewal - the South African way

From the website of the Archbishop of South Africa, Thabo Makgoba:

In just over six weeks' time, representatives from all 28 dioceses, including experts in strategic planning, will hold two meetings, back-to-back, in which the Province will seize a Kairos moment to review our Vision and Mission as a church, to strategise around ways to implement our priorities, and then to make practical decisions on how to implement them in a manner that is productive, holistic and transformative.

Five years ago, the Province adopted a Vision and Mission Statement. In it we declared that the Anglican community in Southern Africa seeks to be:

• Anchored – in the love of Christ
• Committed – to God’s mission
• Transformed – by the Holy Spirit

Archbishop visits victims of Duduza tornado
4 October 2011 (Hope Africa gallery)

We added that across the diverse countries and cultures of our region, we seek:

• To honour God in worship that feeds and empowers us for faithful witness and service
• To embody and proclaim the message of God’s redemptive hope and healing for people and creation
• To grow communities of faith that form, inform, and transform those who follow Christ.

Within the context provided by that statement, we declared our Provincial priorities in the succeeding decade to be: 

• Renewal for transformative worship
• Theological education and formation
• Leadership development
• Health (HIV and AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis)
• The environment
• Women and gender
• Protection and nurture of children and young people
• public advocacy

==========

To me the tone and substance might have significant and constructive lessons for the CofE, if we could hear.

1. To begin with God-orientated vision. Not fear of collapse.
2. A history of Kairos (remember the Kairos document of 1985?): embracing the possibility of transformation (wiki). As opposed to cautious and arthritic legislative reform and tinkering.
3. To look equally inwards and out: to see that the church is only whole when it is engaged in a transformative - and reflexive - manner with the injustices of the society in which we live.
4. And, as a united church, to be prepared to address public issues which are neither easy nor one-sided but where there is the possibility that the church could make a substantive and positive difference to people's live.

And, frankly, a sense of excitement. 

I don't doubt that in the cities and the deep countryside there will also be significant anxiety about what all this will mean for them. The view through the Archbishop's eyes is most unlikely to be the same view as a worshipper in a village outside Olifantshoek, say, or in the centre of Bloemfontein.

But we are buried under too much sediment: not only our history but also the weight of being the State church.

Elections for General Synod

General Synod is the governing body of the Church of England. It is a largely elected body with three 'houses' (chambers): Bishops, Clergy and Laity.

Clergy are elected by vote of almost all ordained clergy. The exception is ordained clergy with no permission to officiate. For electoral purposes at  least - they're nobody. They have no standing as clergy and cannot vote as laity.

The laity have an electoral college - Deanery Synod members - who alone vote for representatives of the laity on General Synod. In my view this is wholly unacceptable and embodies the marginalisation of the laity. (I've wittered on about this elsewhere.)

(Curiously, at least on a quick look, I couldn't find a general page about Deanery Synods of the CofE official site - only a leaflet (pdf) and the rules.)

Undoubtedly this new Synod is going to be busy. It has to begin the process of dismantling and rebuilding the CofE.

I personally hope it goes for wholesale reform but that's not the Anglican way: look for slow, piecemeal and insufficient change.

Here's some more talking heads:

Religiously motivated violence

Archbishop Justin Welby at Lambeth Palace

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, has given a considered lecture on aspects of religiously motivated violence, entitled

‘The Abolition of the Global – Learning to Live in the World in One City’

Amongst other things he calls the idea of "a war of civilizations" a dangerous myth, which I would heartily endorse.

The phrase is largely intended to reinforce 'us' as the good guys against an amorphous 'them', the enemy. It suggests a gulf which isn't there, and boundaries which don't exist.

His argument is based in part on an understanding of the way the world has changed:

let us start with reflecting on the nature of electronic media. Electronic media makes everything local. The global has been abolished, ...

What was once something happening to some stranger on the other side of the world is now happening to a friend of a friend on Facebook. 

When we face each other, deeply and sincerely, we begin to catch a glimpse of our creation, our Creator, and thus our shared humanity. 

However, at present the result of digitisation is

diversity but without facing each other. 

He goes on to put a lot of emphasis on "facing one another." which "enables us to perceive selfhood in others. To see that the person we're looking at is a human being of infinite dignity." He cites a Church of England project called Near Neighbours intended

to bring people together who are near neighbours in communities that are religiously and ethnically diverse, so that they can get to know each other better, build relationships of trust and collaborate together on initiatives that improve the local community they live in.

In sum, a consequence of digitization and digital communication is both centralization and centripetalism: it brings together and creates new divisions, it crosses old boundaries and reinforces old ones. In particular religion (implicitly replacing nationalism) becomes the plane on which the 'outsider' is identified and which 'justifies' violence - itself facilitated and intensified by the same changes in technology.

Therefore, the Archbishop's proposal is, effectively, that those seeking peace and mutual respect in our differences must themselves also dissolve the old language and seek new ways and words. We need a "narrative ...underpinned by a commitment to human flourishing." which is not bounded by the old lines of religious division.

In turn this entails a need for a new literacy on matters of faith amongst governmental players.
----

When I began this post I had not intended to simply summarise the Archbishop's lecture - better to read it in full - but I found on more careful reading that I agreed with him  more than I expected.

However I think his references to economic and political forces too slight (accepting it wasn't his theme), They remain powerful and self-serving, marginalising far too many people. I also think that whatever eventually emerges won't be quite what anyone had planned or campaigned for.

ISIS's apocalyptic theology is such that it cannot listen to outsiders. Christians should be able to understand this because Christianity holds the same capacity for such thinking. In the short-term violence seems likely to grow rather than diminish.

And it is precisely because the task seems so great, the violence so horrific, the ideology so absolute that we need to re-affirm the value of love in public policy: respect, affirmation of, consideration for strangers and enemies solely because we are all children of God. Somehow face-to-face valuing of the person in front of us needs to be translated to digital communication and global ordering.

A scene from religiously motivated violence in Egypt

An imaginative Church?

The CofE does a weekly podcast. I'd never bothered with it before, but thought I'd have a listen to one (dated 16 July).

Bishop Thornton: blue skies man

What caught my ear first was Tim Thornton, Bishop of Truro, desperately not saying "imagination's in short supply." (at about 5min 40secs)

Instead he got to: "... imagination is in, er, very great demand, is not around very much."

He was selling a notion that vicars (and congregations) could and should re-imagine roles and  relationships. He  cited leadership in churches in mixed lay/clerical teams.

You could say that sounds basically like a PCC working well, but that might be too simplistic.

However if we take seriously - and I think we should - the notion that imagination is in short supply then it might be helpful to look at some possible reasons.

I suggest, for starters:

• The episcopal system effectively leaves all initiative with the bishop. Tim Thorton can get people to work in different ways because he is bishop. When a new bishop arrives with different ideas they too will be followed by the clergy.  
• Thornton says people need permission to be imaginative. Presumably because the episcopacy has previously constrained them.
• In effect Thornton says: by the authority vested in me I desire and permit you to be imaginative but (implicit but taught and heard well down the generations) only within the boundaries that I set. Those boundaries also include Thornton's tenure in office. New bishop, new ideas, new fashions and practices come into favour. However no bishop (nor, therefore incumbent) can bind the hands of their successor. 

It's not that people lack imagination. It's that the structures and relationships of the CofE have taught both clergy and laity that, first, each member should stay in their allotted place, second, that imagination comes close to insubordination and, third, that any exercise of the imagination is acceptable only within certain prescribed boundaries (which may or may not be set out clearly and in advance).

I found this image when I searched for 'PCC'

There are also, I think, also deeper and religious reasons for unimaginative practice.

• Faith is not only held (object-like) but lived, embodied. Insofar as faith is part of one's identity (individual or shared) behavioural change also entails becoming a different person, a different church. Of course, change is normal - it is the nature of life. But persuading someone else to deliberately change their identity, their sense of who they are and their relationships with others, is a very tall and often scary order.
• And there is always an anxiety in faith faced with novelty: how do we know we're getting it right? To do what has been done before is safe. It may not be adequate but it is secure. Part of  embodied faith is the reassurance which comes from hallowed repetition.

It maybe that a disproportionate number of unimaginative people make their home in the  CofE. or that the CofE has consistently devalued imagination. Or, probably, both. Either way it'll take more than episcopal encouragement to make a thousand flowers bloom.

Destination Imagination

The last sustained and effective re-imagining of the CofE was by the Oxford Movement. It was, of course, initially opposed by bishops. It evoked opposition, some of it violent, sent some clergy to gaol, and took perhaps 100+ years to become the new normal. In part we need new imagination because we are only now shedding such victoriana.

St Hilda on twitter

This is all very new to me, but I've just created a twitter account for St Hilda's:

St Hilda Marden  

 

We'd be delighted if you were  to follow us - and would, of course, return the compliment. 

 

I note the twitter link for blogger is 'broken'. I can't imagine why Google would leave it so.

Centenary of the Order of the Paraclete, Whitby

The Order of the Holy Paraclete at Whitby is 100 years old.

Margaret Cope, founder of the
Order of the Paraclete, Whitby, 1915

(St. Hilda, to whom our church in North Shields is dedicated, was the founding abbess of the monastery at Whitby in 657.)

On the Archbishop of York's site there is a brief history of the order. 

In it Sister Janet Elizabeth of the Order of the Holy Paraclete says,

“Our Foundress, Mother Margaret, was a remarkable woman – she was only 29 when she founded the Order. 

When the then Archbishop, Cosmo Gordon Lang, asked her whether she was not too young to be founding a new religious Order, her feisty reply was, ‘They say you are rather young to be an Archbishop, my Lord!’ 

Her vision was to found an Order based on the wisdom of the past from St Benedict, St Francis and the Celtic Saints, but incorporating beliefs about democracy and the rightful emancipation of women.

The birthday celebration:

Centenary Flower Festival

Friday 17 to Sunday 19 July at Sneaton Castle, Whitby. 

 Preview evening on Friday 17 July at 7:30 pm. Tickets £5 

(to include canapes and first glass of wine.)  

There will be a welcoming address by the Prioress, and music performed by sisters in the chapel. 

The festival is then open on Saturday 18 July from 10am to 5pm, and on Sunday 19 July from 12pm to 4.30pm, 

ending with a Festival Songs of Praise at 4.30pm. 

 Entry to the Centenary Flower Festival is £3 (£2 concessions), to include a souvenir programme.

Morning coffee, light lunches, and afternoon cream teas are available throughout the day. Cards, jams, candles and other crafts made by sisters will be on sale.

Other centenary events are here

Eight impossible things the C of E will never do

Disclaimer: I don't mean any of these literally - and, contrariwise - I know several of them are well underway in some churches. Some have been happening for years - just not necessarily round here. Others are almost inconceivable.

To be clear: this is just a personal tirade. Each of these suggestions is merely meant to point to some aspect of the challenge I think we face. I don't propose to put them into practice (not all of them, anyway). 

1. Walk out of church Sunday

This is especially for those with listed buildings but everyone can play.  Simply leave. (Having, of course, done a good dust and spring clean and checked all electrical appliances are unplugged).

The PCC can resign en mass (leaving a couple of people as residual trustees of any money) and ask the Archdeacon to take over responsibility for the church (copy to the Bishop).

Send a polite letter to the Second Church Estates Commissioner suggesting that the State should take responsibility for the building and telling her which flowerpot the keys are hidden under.

Don't forget, tell the neighbours you'll be away for a while.  And remember to tell the congregation a minimum of one week before it happens. Otherwise people won't know whether they're still supposed to be on the stewarding rota.

2. No congregation should ever own a church

Then hire a meeting place. Find somewhere with decent parking, comfortable seats and above all a cosy feel. Check that coffee and cake are available and that the toilets are clean and comfortable.

If your numbers dwindle move somewhere smaller. When they grow, move somewhere bigger.

In this way you can always be the right size group. You can move to where people are. Leaders can give almost all their attention to the people, the worship and deepening faith - and not to the building. God can be worshipped with minimal distraction. Members can decide what's important and not be overwhelmed by the demands of drains and guttering.

3. Listen to people

I think God listens to each of us. I think the church should too.

At the moment the Church of England pays almost no regard to almost all the laity. The words people use in worship are all scripted. Individuals' experience, priorities, delights and anxieties have no place in such prescribed services.

This relationship is symbolised and realised in the sermon: one person speaks and the rest remain passive. There is no mutuality.

It's not just that the audience have no voice - I would guess it's very rare for a sermoniser even to check what people have heard. The odd hints I occasionally get suggest there can be a considerable and sometimes entertaining gap between what I think I said and what someone else thinks they heard.

And f the church doesn't listen to its members how on earth can it expect to listen to people outside it?

4. Give lay people a full part in the government of the Church

At a larger scale the structure of church government deliberately marginalises the laity. Lay members vote for Deanery Synod Representatives. Deanery Synod Representatives vote for Diocesan and General Synod Representatives. Consequently no-one is accountable to members.

I think it's high time that all members had a vote and a voice. I think representatives should then account to their electorate. It should be easier as there are fewer and fewer of us.

5. and no more processions

Processions embody hierarchy, status and power. They literally set each person in their rank and degree, They mark who's in and who's not. Those who do not process do not count.

I can see some justifications for processions - but not a Christian one (Aquinas notwithstanding).

More significantly, processions are archaic: relics of a social ordering increasingly destroyed by digitisation.

6. Throw out the clutter

Church vestries are renowned for the clutter they accumulate. No-one's quite sure who put the stone gargoyle in the corner, or whether the books belong to the vicar, or whether you need a faculty to throw away unused and mildewed cassocks, or who promised to repair the torn linen. So it all just silts up.

Throw it away (having, of course, first found out about the faculty bit). Throw out the remaining pews, redundant hymn books, nineteenth century robes and ideas. Make space in the vestry and in prayer, give God a bit of room and, when Jesus comes round for a coffee, make sure the place is bright, warm and comfortable.

And, while we're about it, don't be half hearted with legislative reform. Piecemeal tinkering will only end up with pieces all over the floor. Decide the key principles that church governance must and should enact. Throw away everything else.

7. Account for the right things

I know we need to count numbers and money. They are important in themselves (though always, of course, with lots of caveats).

But I think we also need to count what a church gives away. Faith is not something we have but something to be given away. God does not bless us so that we can hoard it, but so that we can be a blessing to others. Jesus did not tell his disciples to guard his teachings carefully - he sent them out to share with all and sundry.

I think counting what a church gives - money, time, energy, facilities - may also be a measure of its compassion and faithfulness.

8. and no more talking heads videos

This is not the way to reform or renew anything:

 Let's have a bit of life, imagination, passion, dynamism, colour, indignation, vision, vitality. This is just dull.

Are we all doomed?

In the words of private Frazer:



Several people have looked at the decline in attendance in the Church of England and projected forward to the date of extinction:

Church Growth Modelling gives around 2040 for the death of The Church in Wales, The Scottish Episcopal Church and The Episcopal Church in the US. The Church of England, starting at a higher numerical base, dies beyond the edge of the graph, sometime around 2100 perhaps.

The Spectator is more pessimistic (which may not surprise anyone). Damian Thompson projects that 2067 will be the date on the Church's tombstone.  He says:

That is the year in which the Christians who have inherited the faith of their British ancestors will become statistically invisible. Parish churches everywhere will have been adapted for secular use, demolished or abandoned. 

... Christianity is dying out among the Anglo-Saxon and Celtic inhabitants of Great Britain. The Gospel that Augustine and his 30 monks brought to England when they landed at Ebbsfleet in ad 597 is now being decisively rejected.

Of course, projections are not predictions. No-one knows what will happen between now and then. Will the effect of Reform and Renewal lift the leading edge of the graph and send it upwards? Will the impact of discussion about deep change lead to depression and hasten decline? Or will none of it make any difference?

Maybe the decline won't be steady at all. Implicit in the larger scale statistics is a picture of support ebbing away like a receding tide (it's gone a long way out from Dover Beach by now). 

But actually, for the most part, we belong to and worship in small semi-discrete units: parish churches. Here I suspect the pattern of decline is more or less steady until there comes a tipping point - where members' time, money and energy is no longer sufficient to sustain the building, services and clergy. One congregation I knew gave up when there were four people left, another had eight.

In other words, the long downhill slope ends suddenly as we fall over the cliff, like this (entirely imaginary) graph.

On this scenario projections from earlier data could even look somewhat optimistic.

Death (and resurrection?)

We do not have to accept less of the same, and may not be able to.

Perhaps 1: in the face of apparently inevitable obliteration, those who remain refuse to accept it. Maybe this will force a radical revision of the Church - it's shape, structure, role and mission. This in turn may tear the church apart if its current divisions are stronger that what holds it together.

Or 2: (I think more probably) minorities may be torn away, leaving a smaller continuing core.

However it happens, and whoever claims legitimate succession, in effect a new church (or churches) will be born from the ashes of the old.

Or 3: even more pessimistically, perhaps at some point in this century the Church of England will simply implode. Perhaps its internal divisions will prevent adequate revision. It might collapse like a burst balloon, as one too many parish church closures triggers an unstoppable cascade of others. At which point those who remain may say to themselves 'that's it. God has abandoned us.'

Or 4: they may say: 'time for a new start'.

Heading downhill

Statistics can be very depressing.

The blog Church Growth Modelling is written by John Hayward, a mathematician committed to the revival of the Church. It has lots of downward curves.

I find this one particularly interesting: 

In essence, roughly since the end of the First World War (or the Second, in Wales) Anglican Church affiliation in the West has headed south.

Second, the percentage of the population was not that great in the twentieth century, even at peak membership -  just over 10% for the CofE in the 1910s. And membership of the CofE was never the same as regular attendance. As Haywood says: "Churches in the West have never been as popular as they have perceived themselves to be."

And, third, through this century the population has grown significantly. This itself has helped buoy up absolute numbers while disguising the rate of decline.

Statistics are always retrospective. The question is whether, given the background rate of decline in affiliation Christianity, any one Church - or even all of them acting together - can do anything effective to counter a cultural shift.

Strawberry Fête

 

St Hilda's Summer
Strawberry Fête

Saturday 25 July

1.30pm to 3.30pm

Entry £2 - everyone invited 

(Tickets available beforehand and on the door)

Stalls - cakes, jams and jewellery

Raffles and tombola

and, of course,

delicious Strawberry Teas

Doing things differently

Calvert Navvy Mission Sunday School on an outing
in Buckinghamshire. c. 1897 Page 

Christians have never been solely locked into their churches, Some have always been inspired to go out to where people are.

Sometimes this means going to where people physically are. The Navvy Mission, for example, sent missionaries out to the gangs of men building canals across Britain. Admittedly they only really got  going at the end of the canal building boom but they quickly adapted to serving those building the railways.

The mobile chapel of the
South African Railway Mission

And in South Africa, in the early 20th century, distances were great and missionaries few. So the South Africa Railway Mission fitted out a railway wagon as a chapel and took it to whichever towns and villages the railway reached.

A modern mobile Chapel

Transport for Christ is a modern expression of the impulse behind the Navvy and  Railway Missions. On the basis that Christian Truckers can't get to church regularly, they take church to them with mobile chapels and chaplains. Guardian Article.

This missionary instinct to go to where people also applies to those seeking to engage people where they are emotionally, culturally, intellectually. It was what got Shleiermacher into such trouble with On Religion: Speeches to its Cultured Despisers (1799).

The Haven-London launched 

in celebration of the creative industries

The Diocese of London has set up Capital Vision 2020: a strategy for the Diocese in the coming decade. One part of which is to engage with the creative industries in the city. It has launched the Haven-London intended to "offer a physical space within London for contemplation, connection and inspiration, where those of faith and those working within the creative industries can engage together."

Christian adherence may be falling  in the UK, not least in the Church of England, but it retains both vitality and an irrepressible optimism. The Church of England may not be in good health but reports of its death have been greatly exaggerated.

Prayers released ahead of Friday's minute silence for victims of Tunisia shootings

Prayers released ahead of Friday's minute silence for victims of Tunisia shootings

From the Church of England Website. The Church had previously posted prayers for peace following the attack.

Father,
you know our hearts and share our sorrows.
We are hurt by our parting from those whom we loved:
when we are angry at the loss we have sustained,
when we long for words of comfort,
yet find them hard to hear,
turn our grief to truer living,
our affliction to firmer hope
in Jesus Christ our Lord.
Amen.

***

In the face of violence and fear,
of anxiety and terror
shine as a light, O Lord,
as sign and substance of
peace, hope, trust, assurance and love.
Amen.

Lord, have mercy
on those who mourn
who feel numb and crushed
and are filled with the pain of grief,
whose strength has given up
You know all our sighing and longings:
be near to us and teach us to fix our hope on you
through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Amen.

***

Lord, do not abandon us in our desolation.
Keep us safe in the midst of trouble,
and complete your purpose for us
through your steadfast love and faithfulness,
in Jesus Christ our Saviour.
Amen.

***

Our eyes, Lord, are wasted with grief;
you know we are weary with groaning.
As we remember our death
in the dark emptiness of the night,
have mercy on us and heal us;
forgive us and take away our fear
through the dying and rising of Jesus your Son.
Amen

Reform and Renewal

Reform and Renewal
These are the latest buzz words of the Church of England. They summarise what  might be an heroic attempt to rebuild and re-orientate the Church: to create a stronger and more missionary church.

The words might signify the beginning of a new Augustinian proclamation of the gospel in a pagan land - the church responding at last to secularization.

Or they might mean merely 'reduce and retrench'.

In broad terms I am very much in favour of the shake up which I think is entailed by 'Reform and Renewal'. I think the Church of England has come to the tail end of the reforms which shook it up in the nineteenth century. That did a lot of good and re-orientated the Church towards the new urban and industrial Britain. But the church created then is wholly unequipped for today's world, let alone tomorrow's. It's a Spy cartoon compared to Wired.

On the other hand, it's very hard to see that this current, top down, reform programme will be sufficient to re-orientate the Church towards the new, digitised, fluid, transnational, anxious and capitalist world.

And it is also very hard to see that any of the streams will be sufficient to the underlying challenge: that fewer and fewer people in the UK are bothered about religion.

(When I googled 'church of england reform and renewal' looking for illustrative images I was given a page dominated by middle-aged white men's heads, most in funny clothes. This does reflect the church, and the leadership of many other English institutions, but it is scarcely inspiring. I went for seeds and seedlings instead.)

Reform and Renewal strands:

Developing Discipleship
Blog / Video / Full Report / Comment Forum

Simplification Report
Blog / Video / Full Report / Comment Forum / Simplification Consultation document

Resourcing Ministerial EducationBlog / Video / Full Report / Comment Forum

Resourcing the Future
Blog / Video / Full Report / Comment Forum

Church Commissioners' and the Task Groups
Blog / Video / Full Report / Comment Forum

Leadership DevelopmentDean of Liverpool blog / Archbishop of Canterbury blog / Note from Bishop of Ely / Full Report