• What’s really happening to the churches in Scotland

    Ruined Church

    Over the last few weeks there’s been a number of articles that have appeared in the press highlighting decline in the religious life of Scotland and claiming in particular that it indicates a sudden decline in interest in organised religion in Scotland.

    On the face of it, this seems difficult to argue with. Fewer people are going to church, church buildings are being closed and sold off up and down the land and therefore organised religion must be in decline. However, I think that the picture is complex. In particular, within the three largest church denominations there is clear and obvious decline in all of them but the reasons for, and the character of that decline, seem to me to be quite different across those churches.

    Let’s take them one by one.

    Firstly, my own denomination, the Scottish Episcopal Church. There is no doubt that the numbers of Episcopalians are declining though they have been doing so since about the 1920s. What is the nature of the decline here at this time though? Certainly, we’ve had problems within our senior leadership in recent years and that isn’t limited to one high profile case in one diocese. For several different reasons, some of our dioceses have had patterns of stable leadership disrupted in recent times. Now, whilst it is not my belief that bishops are solely responsible for either decline or growth in their dioceses, for a church which names the Episcopate as its defining characteristic in its name, this must matter.

    It is very difficult to understand how many members of the Scottish Episcopal Church there actually are. The number of communicants on a Sunday has been steadily declining. The number of non-communicants who have some kind of adherence to the church has dropped off incredibly fast. However, the number of people in the Scottish census who claim to be Anglican or Episcopalian or who claim to belong to church with which we are in full communion is very significantly higher. As with all the church denominations that I’m discussing in this article, there are churches which buck the trend and are growing and attracting new worshippers. We find it very difficult to celebrate such successes and very difficult to learn from them. Not paying attention to what is working seems to me to be characteristic of decline. Many people I know in the Scottish Episcopal Church are quite upbeat though, notwithstanding the terrible statistics that we report each year. (And we’ll ignore the cries of those who want to count the dog training classes in the church hall as reasons to pay no attention to the decline of people actually turning up to worship God). The upbeat mood is partly because I think that quite a lot of clergy really do believe that the SEC has what many religious people in Scotland need right now. Liturgical worship and ethical values that align with the population are a great starting point. However, the quality of our worship is something we find difficult to talk about and our inability to communicate to local populations that something that will give them life in all its fullness is right on their doorstep is part of our story. I don’t think that continuing decline at current rates is inevitable but we need life-changing worship and a clearer narrative if things are going to change for the better.

    The Scottish Episcopal Church has been the third largest church in Scotland for a long time. The next largest has traditionally been the Roman Catholic Church though that may change depending on how you count. It wouldn’t surprise me if there were more Roman Catholics at mass on a Sunday than there are members of the Church of Scotland at worship. And I’m sure that it is the case that there are more people receiving communion from the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland than from the Church of Scotland. See what I mean about it being difficult to know how to count Christians?

    The Roman Catholic Church has been declining in Scotland for some time as it has in most Western countries. Abuse scandals here and abroad have rocked confidence in the hierarchy of the church. Decline is real. People are not going to mass as they used to do and again, local churches are being closed down and sold off. However the Roman Catholic Church has its own distinctive pattern of decline. As an outsider, one of the things that I see most strongly is that there is a stronger cultural tie within Roman Catholic Communities than there is in other denominations. What that means is that those who grew up Roman Catholic are still quite likely to describe themselves as Roman Catholic long after they’ve stopped going to church. I suspect that members of the Church of Scotland who stop going, stop thinking of themselves as part of the Kirk much more readily. The Roman Catholic Church also benefits from the immigration of Roman Catholics from many different parts of the world. Congregations, particularly in the cities, are eclectic and diverse. The Pope’s emphasis on Mercy is a way of speaking which is beginning to change how people think about that church. It speaks well to Roman Catholics who have lost touch with parish life. Recent attempts to introduce synodality into the church – a more consultative way of being the church, have yet to see any fruit, but who knows…maybe there are glimpses of something fresh and new in those conversations. However, the Roman Catholic Church has within it its own worst enemies. Far-right populist Roman Catholicism seems on the rise. It doesn’t attract people like me but then it isn’t aimed at attracting people like me. The Roman Catholic Church has as its named charism the unity of a truly catholic gathered people. Unfortunately, that very ethos is challenged by division and factionalism that could put protestants to shame.

    Finally, the Church of Scotland. It is the sell off of many Church of Scotland properties that seems to have attracted the attention of journalists in the secular press. The landscape of Scottish religion is changing right now by the disappearance of the Church of Scotland from many local areas. Buildings are being sold off at an amazing pace. Some of them have great history. It is worth taking a look at the list of buildings being sold to get an idea of the scale and pace of change. Many of these buildings have great history. Many of them are significant parts of the built heritage of our land. They are being transferred to private hands.

    The decline of the Church of Scotland seems different to me to the decline of the other churches. Its speed is astonishing. Again, the defining characteristic of the denomination is being challenged by the decline – it is hard to claim to be The National Church when large areas of the country don’t have local congregations. The decline of the C of S seems to me to be more like what happened to the Scottish Episcopal Church in 1689 than what has been happening to the Scottish Episcopal Church over the last 100 years of decline. In 1689, Scotland decided that it didn’t want the Episcopalians. People lost local clergy and buildings and we disappeared from national life. This is what is happening to the Church of Scotland right now and it is a hugely significant thing to happen to this nation.

    Many things are very different to 1689 of course. It is the Church of Scotland’s own policies which are driving the sell-off of buildings rather than national politics. Those policies are brutal and more than one friend in the Church of Scotland has commented that people in the General Assembly voted for them because they thought that a managerial approach needed to be taken to the church and that lots of churches needed to be closed though the very same people never thought it would happen to their own worshipping communities. People up and down the land have stories about the Church of Scotland closing up in precisely the places that one might have expected local parish churches to thrive.

    In the midst of all this, it is important to say that the smaller denominations in Scotland would not all share the narrative of decline of the larger ones. The Free Church seems to have a confidence about it that many would not expect it to have. The tiny Orthodox communities in Scotland see conversions to Orthodoxy more often than many would suspect.

    The message I get from this is that churches which have a strong sense of identity and have a clear way of communicating that identity are likely to do well in 21st century Scotland.

    These reflections are merely those of someone in one part of the country, there may well be people who see different things happening in different places. Ecumenism is often limited to church leaders making bland statements these days rather than people from different churches meeting one another to engage on matters affecting church and state. Interfaith engagement somehow seems more interesting than ecumenical contact which has largely stalled. We like one another more than we used to do but we don’t do much together.

    So there you have it. Decline is real but it is different in different churches. Only by being interested in it and thinking carefully about it do we stand much change of changing things.

    Perhaps I’ll write a bit more again this year about how we might get out of the doldums.

    In the meantime, it may be that others want to comment on their own perspective of what is happening to the churches in the comments below.

56 responses to “Six things I have learned about anti-semitism and the church”

  1. Jacqui Norman Avatar
    Jacqui Norman

    Dear Kevin,
    I am sure that some Jews would be offended, and this is very sad on every level. Just as it would be sad for Christians to object to non Christians celebrating Christmas or Resurrection Day.
    In your piece you said yourself, that some Jewish people invite Christian people to join them for the meals. This demonstrates that the offence to Gentiles celebrating with their Jewish brothers and sisters is not universal in the faith.
    Blessings.

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      No Jacqui. It is considered a blessing in Judaism to include others in the ritual of passover. This does not justify Christians copying it without Jews being present, appropriating the ceremony to make it something entirely Christian and in doing so causing offence. It is not the same in any way as Christians objecting or not to non-Christians celebrating Christmas.

      If you wish to follow the line of saying that Christian Passovers are not offensive to all Jewish people, then can I ask what proportion of Jewish people you think it is legitimate for Christians to be offensive to? How many is OK?

      1. Jacqui Norman Avatar
        Jacqui Norman

        Of course one would not wish to offend anybody.
        I feel we must graciously agree to disagree, I see no difference to the Christmas/Resurrection Day comparison… We disagree on this one point from your piece.
        God bless you.

        1. Kelvin Avatar

          > We disagree on this one point from your piece.

          So what you’re saying is that anti-semitic things that other people do are wrong but things that you do can’t be anti-semitic because you do them with good intent in your heart?

          Isn’t that what the problem is?

          1. Jacqui Norman Avatar
            Jacqui Norman

            WOW what a leap!
            No, of course it is not what I am saying… It is the opposite!
            Your opinion is that Christians should not engage with the Old Testament. Mine is that it is divisive NOT to. As you said Jesus is Jewish, we are his body …
            I have never had a conversation with a Jew who has expressed your opinion about this matter.
            I asked you politely about this aspect of your opinion, and you have made a personal attack at me(whom you do not know) and called me an anti Semite when nothing could be further from the truth. Now, that kind of thing IS where the problem lies.
            Blessings to you.

          2. Kelvin Avatar

            Don’t be ridiculous, Jacqui. My opinion is not that Christians should not engage with the Old Testament.

            If you can’t post things truthfully then I’ll not allow further comment.

      2. Martin Reynolds Avatar
        Martin Reynolds

        I would ask the opposite question.
        How many need to be offended?
        Just one?

        This argument seems to be in the mode of
        “Christians shouldn’t practice yoga.” school of thought.

        1. Kelvin Avatar

          There’s a difference isn’t there? Most people wanting to stop Christians practicing yoga think that they should take that view because it will harm Christian souls rather because it will harm Hindu feelings.

          1. Martin Reynolds Avatar
            Martin Reynolds

            It depends which Hindu you talk to.

          2. Kelvin Avatar

            Can you point me to an argument coming from someone in the Hindu community who believes that Christians and non-Hindus should refrain from practising yoga? I’m genuinely interested.

        2. Martin Reynolds Avatar
          Martin Reynolds

          I will try and point you in the right direction.

  2. Alexander Hamilton Avatar
    Alexander Hamilton

    Wel now that was a jolly good read. Thank you to all contributers, some thought provoking matters raised, with of course no conclusion, and properly so. So much is a matter of personal belief and practise, no matter how bedecked and caparisoned the chuch one attends. I find myself sayng, ‘What would Jesus say?’ when watching the next best thing to pantomime at some services.

    1. Jacqui Norman Avatar
      Jacqui Norman

      Amen

  3. Jacqui Norman Avatar
    Jacqui Norman

    Ps, In my opinion, the fact that “Passover is not important to most Christians ” is due to a lack of good teaching on the subject. It is not possible to fully appreciate the work of Jesus, (who in you picture, notably does not have the “Jewish nose” – very much enforcing your point that people do not appreciate that Jesus was (is!) a Jew, and with which I wholeheartedly agree with you) without first understanding the Old Testament story in its fullness.

    I would also like to emphasise that this is the only one of your points with which I disagree 🙂

  4. Jacqui Norman Avatar
    Jacqui Norman

    From the homepage:

    Disclaimer
    The views published here are my own and do not necessarily represent the views of St Mary’s Catheral nor the Scottish Episcopal Church.

    Nor do they represent what I’ll think forever.

    I change my mind sometimes – especially when persuaded of something by someone in debate.

    Try me and see.

    Maybe that should read “Try me and get called ridiculous ”

    Very sad.

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      Jacqui – this is my blog space. You don’t get to post untruthful things about me on it.

      Whether you like that or not doesn’t really matter to me it is the way it is.

      No further comments from you.

  5. Dion Smythe Avatar
    Dion Smythe

    Christian “seders” are comparable to Jewish [re]appropriation of the Eurcharistic texts and reciting them [with some notable omissions] at Kiddush after the Sabbath morning service….

    1. Meg Rosenfeld Avatar
      Meg Rosenfeld

      As a Christian who once visited a conservative synagogue where they did this, I was surprised and pleased to find this activity that was so much like ours, taking place. It seemed home-like. My daughter, then a teen-ager, had the same reaction. We were both thinking “Now I see where this part of our ritual comes from.” After all, Jesus (a Jew) was probably following very familiar tradition when he, as we say, instituted the Eucharist; he just said some new and startling things.

      1. Dion Smythe Avatar
        Dion Smythe

        Meg, I think you’ll find that what you witnesses at a conservative Jewish synagogue was the standard Kiddush after the Sabbath morning service — blessings over wine and bread and then the sharing of the same. What I was suggesting was that these Christian “Seders” would be comparable to Jewish congregations celebrating Christian Eucharists but with the important words left out [or indeed maybe even not] rather than the comparison between Christian “Seders” and Jews [or other non Christians] celebrating or marking the celebrations of Christmas or Easter, but not going so far as to have a parody of the Christian Eucharist.

        1. Meg Rosenfeld Avatar
          Meg Rosenfeld

          Hmm. since I’ve never seen the sort of thing you’re describing, I can’t really make an intelligent comment. It’s difficult to think of a literal parody of a Christian ritual (except maybe in the case of a group of kids “playing church”) other than the secular Santa-centered goings-on which seem to be increasingly taking over the holy day commonly known as Christmas . . .

  6. Meg Rosenfeld Avatar
    Meg Rosenfeld

    Back to St. John, sometimes I can’t help wondering what Jesus would say if he heard some of John’s more convoluted pronouncements. What’s the Aramaic for “Huh?”

  7. James Byron Avatar
    James Byron

    Regarding offensiveness: surely Christianity’s central claim, that Jesus of Nazareth was God in human form, is deeply offensive to Judaism.

    Further, offense isn’t a knockdown argument. It just means that someone strongly objects to something. Many evangelicals find gay relationships offensive; many Calvinists find Arminianism offensive, and so on. Such feelings say nothing for the merits of the view.

    The key question isn’t whether X is offensive, but whether the objections are reasonable and compelling enough to justify ending it.

    1. Dennis Avatar
      Dennis

      Once again, we have a problem with most of western society having forgotten the difference between disagreeing with and being offended by. Offensiveness is most certainly not just when someone strongly objects to something. Calvinists don’t or shouldn’t find Armenianism offensive, though they disagree with it. It is merely a competing theory that divides evangelicals. But a play or novel that presented John Calvin as pimp who ran a brothel on the side and committed sex crimes with little boys would be offensive because it would be a false characterization meant to belittle and demean. So-called Christian seders are more like the sex-crime pimp John Calvin example than the disgreement with non-predestinationist types example – and would therefore be offensive.

  8. Bernard Randall Avatar
    Bernard Randall

    At the risk of re-opening a can of worms, it seems to me a mistake to suggest that passover is not important to Christians. The death of the firstborn Son, the crossing of the people through the waters etc – the whole Exodus narrative – are deeply part of Christian theology. It’s an inescapable background to much in the New Testament (Sermon on the Mount as reflecting Moses on Sinai, or Jesus (in John’s Gospel) being crucified at the same time as the Passover lambs are sacrificed, anyone?).
    So to take just a few liturgical examples, in “Common Worship” material for Easter season, the introduction to confessional starts “Christ our Passover lamb has been sacrificed for us …”; the Eucharistic prefaces say “he is the true paschal lamb” or “in the joy of this Passover”; and the invitation to Communion is “Alleluia. Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us. Therefore let us keep the feast. Alleluia.”
    Fine, that’s Church of England, not everyone will be saying those particular words, but the theology is front and centre.
    To this extent the passover story belongs just as much to Christianity as to Rabbinic Judaism. But the passover story in the Bible is not the same as the Passover religious observance/festival of modern Judaism.
    Indeed I thoroughly object to Christians celebrating a Seder meal, because it isn’t what Jesus did – both because the Seder as we have it is a later development, and because the Last Supper quite likely wasn’t a Passover meal. A “Christian Seder” doesn’t connect us to anything historically, while we have the Eucharist (and Maundy foot washing) to connect theologically to what Jesus did at the Last Supper.
    I don’t think that being offensive alone is a reason not do something with another more positive purpose, but in the case of a “Christian Seder” the offense is caused to no good purpose and so the case against is fatal. It ought not to be done.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Sermon preached on 15 July 2018 (Pride Weekend)

    Is this the word of the Lord? Is this the gospel? “What should I ask for” said Herodias. “The head of the Baptist” said her mother. And it was so. And where is the good news in any of that? It is one of the worst, most barbaric and miserable stories in all of scripture.…

  • Civil Partnerships – What now for the churches?

    It has just been announced that a man and a woman have won their fight to enable them to register a Civil Partnership. At first sight, it will seem only just and right to most people. If same-sex couples can enter either a marriage or a civil partnership then why shouldn’t an opposite-sex couple? Put…

  • Marriage Equality for Anglicans in Brazil

    I have just issued the following statement: “I am delighted to hear that the Anglican Church in Brazil has just changed its marriage canon to allow same-sex couples to get married. As we have rejoiced in St Mary’s Cathedral Glasgow in recent months with couples who have waited years to be married in church, so…

  • Should the churches use more data or less data?

    The trouble with data is not what you can do with it – it is what else you can do with it. There are so many interesting things that one might do with data these days which were simply not possible a few years ago. The question is, how many of them should we attempt…