Church: What is it good for? The building

Continuing on a theme (this is number five in the series) that came out of the response of those around me regarding Church and where the response has sounded a lot like the Whitfield and Strong song ‘War’ for the answer has been: “Absolutely nothing!”, we continue with their assessment that Church is a 'damaged place'. This is an interesting response and I really had to press to understand what the people in front of me meant. But their response sound become obviously one of two parts.

The first half focussed on the building and how 'churches always have their begging bowls out' whilst the second looked at the people - those were coming, those who had been part once, and those who had been damaged by it ('it' meaning generally the local expression of the whole).

The Building
So often people have asked me why the 'church' thinks it has a right to ask them for money so they can maintain their fine historic (ours is late Elizabethan). You know the building I mean, it's the one they never go into - and wouldn't even if they dead because they'd go to the Crem'.

Courageously the person with the begging bowl continues unabated (or any more dismayed than they were before the person in front of them appeared) and tells them how they should contribute to maintain a special part of the village / town / city*. (delete or amend as necessary) and it's history. How Norman the Great or Harold the Conquered, Ethelred the wind passer (I know, I didn't do history!!) or some other long dead worthy prayed, slept or passed water there.

I had to applaud a chap who, upon being asked to help in the upkeep of the church building, asked whether the 'church' might be able to make a donation ('Alms for the poor' he called it) to his cricket club and their crumbling pavilion. "After all, he said, "We've had England and County players begin their journey from this village because of this club. How many saints have you given birth to?").

It’s a fair point made well!

The problem with so many of our church buildings is that they are are generally old, have building preservation orders on them, and being ‘listed’ means expensive repairs and handcuffs when it comes to updating and modifying.  Many of our buildings are pretty and architecturally valuable, contain great art in the windows, effigies, statuary, monuments, artwork and the like: But they are generally not fit for purpose.

What do we do with them, these architectural treasures? If we close them then this is perceived as concrete (and stone) evidence of the decline and demise of Church. The locals raise up and moan about the closure; which, considering the numbers who come, is a bit like a teatotaller complaining that the local pub is closing (one that does sell food of course). People tell me that the ancient church building in the centre of our town is, “Their church!” Yet they don't come into it, not even at Christmas and Easter. Some / many / a few, have never ever been across the threshold, and yet were it to close they’d be up in arms about it.

Close the building and have the church (don’t lose sight of the fact that its the people, not the building, that's called ‘church’) meet elsewhere and you’ll find some of the stale wart (sic) members refusing to come because (like the Sadducees of the Bible, it’s the building and not the person worshipped in it that is the focus of their passions. Move it into a home and the people would again complain. Everyone knows what they don’t like and yet rarely seem to know what belief demands.

Once church building I worked in was cold, unfriendly and pretty useless. The church council attempted to get permission to install heating, toilets, a kitchen and generally make the building supportive of the congregation’s needs.Sadly, the local Victorian society jumped up and complained that it would alter the ‘feel’ of the place, after all it was a Victorian building (one of the many build during the expansion and movement of the population out of the centre of London and in from the countryside as things industrial came together to create the suburbs).

The end result was that the church building remained as it was, people went to other newer and warmer, more comfortable, buildings and the Victorian society (many of whom had never visited the building ad probably never will) went  off happy that they had triumphed over modern evils.

The conundrum here is that the charm of so many buildings is the Saxon this and the Norman that, the Georgian wotsit and the Victorian thingy; all of which conspire to reflect the changes and the fingerprints of the past ages. But why should other generations not continue to make their mark and give ownership to other ages (the new Elizabethans for instance)?

Of course there are terrible abuses (and even damage) that can be made. Where.I am it seems that much of the valuable and historic was destroyed in the name of modernity. Th results are a wind tunnel, concrete structures and a generally unspectacular and unappealing sea of grey with a few treasures rising up from it.

But the buildings must change or they will fall into disuse and decay as the original inhabitants pop their clog or move away to other, more suitable places.

We (the Church) do make enough of our buildings an this results in the begging bowl mentality. We should be making God’s love known to people. We should be reaching out and doing the stuff! We must not forget our duty to be the ‘curators of a town’s memories’ but must also be free to keep the building made of bricks effective as a place for a church made of people.

At the end of the day (and I know some clergy and church treasurers and others will hate me for saying this) we don't want your money, we want your lives to be given to God. And the stones? All buildings will fall eventually, let’s build in heavenly places where they sand for ever.

Where your treasure is, there also will be found your heart. If your heart isn't in the church building or the worship of God - please stop handcuffing the Church because of your soppy sentimentality (and by the way, there was nothing at all romantic in the sinking of the Titanic. It was cold, wet and few stood at the front with their arms outstretched as Celine Dion sang!).

And Church, please stop trying to manipulate and embarrass people into giving for our precious buildings, unless we are willing to contribute to the buildings of those outside our doors. there are times and needs which make it right, but learn to cut your cloth and find clever solutions to the needs rather than wheelbarrows of cash poorly spent.

Ooh, that might start a few fires :-)

Happy Thursday - we will do ‘broken people’ next ...

Pax

Pioneer Ministry - Gloves Off?

Following on from my post yesterday on the issue of Pioneer Ministry, I received this response:

"Too many clergy assume that they can do the work of a pioneer minister because they have done church but this isnt the case. Pioneering is church at the cutting edge rather than the dull edge of declining church."

Wow! 'Church at the 'cutting edge', now that's a challenge to all those poor souls who merely manage things at the dull edge I guess. I 've been thinking and praying a lot about this topic because the church I go to have a Pioneer Minister and wonder what she does and why we have one and she tells me and shows me areas of engagement and considers things like accessibility and opportunity and the like where others talk of 'services' and 'ministry'.

During a moment of reflection and prayer I realised that of course the world we occupy is a tardis-like creation that is, minute by minute, hour by hour, taking us through time. The result of this is that some of the congregation of my local big church tells me of days when everyone knew the Lord's Prayer and how they were packed every Sunday evening for Evensnog! The problem is that ministry in this established church (been there in some form for around 1,500 years) is to the older, established, folk and the newer, don't actually know about church or come in, folk. This means that even in the established and ordered churches there is an element of pioneering!

The scenery doesn't change but the people within it does and rather than 'settle a region' the minister needs to 'settle a people' and this, whether my correspondent likes it or not, is pioneering. So let us have a go at modifying the Pioneer Minister definition:

A 'Parish Minister' (PM) is 'a person who is among those who first engages or settles a people, thus opening them up to the inspiration and acceptance of God through Jesus, His Son. Therefore, Parish Ministry is 'doing and being Church where no Church is to be found'.

Now some PMs are engaged and effective in evangelistic zeal and practice. Some are content to live in a parish that neither grows or declines and maintain the status quo (and oddly they are applauded because they pay their Parish Share and never post negative numbers). Other still are ?????? [insert label from: lazy, incompetent, overworked, under-equipped, unlucky, disengaged, battle-weary or (add your own label here) and they sit within their dwindling numbers and await retirement with the same hope that others have for the parousia!

Pioneer ministry cannot exist without established church and established church cannot exist without pioneer minister who bring expertise, evangelistic zeal and a desire to build the kingdom. BUT - some of those who would be Pioneers wish to do so on their own terms and in isolation from the established or settled church. Some of those who wish to be Pioneer ministers have the zeal but lack the understanding and the tools and abilities, the experience of ministry and the theological sense that is required.

Both groups have their weaknesses, but in partnership we are strong. Can the eye say to the hand I have no need of you? if it does we will never dry our tears will we?

Pax

Pioneer Ministry - 1

Mention this and you usually get the question, "What is it?" or perhaps, "Who does it?"

The most common definitions appears to be that a 'Pioneer Minister' is 'a person who is among those who first enter or settle a region, thus opening it for occupation and development by others' and so pioneer ministry is 'doing and being Church where no Church is to be found'.

The reality is that once this country knew the Bible stories, understood the times and seasons and was the physical embodiment of the Christian message. Then, following a couple of World Wars, this situation started to change and secularism and its servant consumerism began to rise up. The situation now is that amongst the indigenous british citizen (and they are white multi-generational british not immigrants as many seem to assume) the situation is the many have no idea what Christmas of Easter is truly about and the stories some assume as being commonplace are untold and thus unknown!

The problem is that some, not all, of those in the organised church assumes that anything new must look like it and must bring people into it (and quickly!) whilst others in the pioneer church assume that whatever it is it must not look like organised church and thus they are free from the constraints and demands of the former. This causes some to sneer when dog-collars in 'organised church' say that all are pioneers, because, "If they were, where are the new members, where are the new congregations!" Some claim that the organised church dog-collars are merely archaic protectionists who are frightened by the new breed of bright young (and not so young) things that are coming to do Church in a new and 'real' way!

In return, there are many established dog-collars who see the unstructured, 'let's do coffee', abstract efforts of some of the pioneers as unproductive, elitist and separatist. "They want Church on their terms and set themselves us as something different and better that us," whined one cleric recently. The reason for this being that they'd tried to embrace (not physically) someone doing 'pioneering' and been totally blown off by them!

The aim of pioneer ministry is to create congregations (gatherings) of people who know Christ, accept that He died for them and live within all the traditional tenets of the Christian faith but perhaps in ways that are not traditional or within traditional buildings. The hope is that at some stage the two will coalesce - but in partnership not ownership! The work of pioneering is carried out in people that are wild and separate from God (just like the open prairies of the Wester US). The desire is to see them 'become Church' not 'Come to Church' and you know when a pioneer settlement has become Church because it will possess within it it the two Anglican sacraments (oooh, using the term sacrament often throws some into a flat spin - too possessive, too controlling, 'not what we are about man!') of baptism and communion.

Pioneer ministry is about doing what Church has always done, meeting the people where they are and helping them to recognise the hand of God on their lives and come to Him through His Son, Jesus Christ. It is not the panacea for that formidable parish share, neither is it a declaration of independence from the rest of the (tired, old and irrelevant) Church - it is yet another facet of the ministry of the Church and, as per Eph 4:11, gives us:

Apostles (ἀπόστολος)
Prophets (προφήτης)
Evangelists (εὐαγγελιστής)
Pastors (ποιμήν), and
Teachers (διδάσκαλος)

Not in isolation but in partnership. In an army you need bayonets (infantry), bridges (engineers), communications (signallers), medics, people who can 'soften' up the enemy and their positions before the bayonets go in (artillery), understanding of the enemy, their strength and tactics (Intelligence) and some AFvs too (why walk to war when you can ride?). Some of these are regular, some of these are volunteer reserves - but we need to have a 'one army' approach if we are to fight well and work together.

Seems this is a lesson some within Church circles could do with learning!

Pax