What is in Kelvin's Head?

75 questions for people who want to help churches to grow

22/09/2017
Helping churches to grow is hard work but there are some things that need to be addressed to help congregations to grow which seem to be fairly consistent across churches which are otherwise very different in style. Some time ago I published two lots of 25 questions for people who want to help churches to grow.

I thought it was time for 25 more. The new ones are the first 25 below and then come the ones that I’ve published before.
1. If someone were to hear about the congregation from a non-congregational member, what is the most likely thing they would be told?
2. What is the smallest number of words you could use to accurately explain the ethos of the congregation?
3. What are those words?
4. What strategies do you have to get good quality photographs of life of the congregation to use online?
5. Which of the arts does the congregation use in its worship and regular life?
6. How do the church education programmes relate to contemporary culture?
7. Do things start on time?
8. What steps have you implemented to ensure you don’t have the same meetings over and over again?
9. Do you have a set length of time for meetings and does someone stop them after they have gone on enough?
10. How do you stop people making decisions in the car park before or after the meetings?
11. Who chooses the hymns?
12. Why do they choose the hymns they do?
13. When was the last time the congregation learned a new hymn it sang more than once?
14. How many different styles of singing the psalms do you use and is that enough?
15. How many opportunities are there for weekly non-eucharistic worship?
16. Which would attract more people, a course in meditation or a course on prayer?
17. Is anyone working for the local congregation underpaid?
18. Does your bishop/presbytery/judicatory body or person help enable growth or are they a distraction from it?
19. Is there are three year budget?
20. Is the congregation moving into or out of debt?
21. What percentage of people in the congregation would have a basic understanding about the congregation’s finances?
22. Does anyone ever break copyright law whilst acting for the congregation?
23. How do you share good news about the denomination that you belong to?
24. When did you last issue a call to prayer for the congregation and what was it for?
25. If someone wants to make a confession is it clear who they should approach and how they should get in touch?
26. If you didn’t have to go to your church on Sunday would you still go?
27. Are the clergy happy?
28. Are the musicians happy?
29. Does the congregation have a stronger ethos than that of its denomination?
30. What one thing could you change this week to make the worship better?
31. Why didn’t you make that change last week?
32. What steps are you taking to make the phrase “All are Welcome” come true?
33. Do you do church business on a Sunday after church or is there a better time for that?
34. In the next month are you more likely to spend time on ecumenical activities or church growth activities?
35. Do people who leave become ex-members who have disappeared or do they still contribute to the life and ministry of the place?
36. What is the noticeboard like?
37. What is the first thing you see when you come through the door?
38. Did you implement the recommendations of the last “mystery worshipper” you asked to give you a candid assessment?
39. Which church events in the next six months will be newsworthy locally?
40. Which church events in the next six months will be reported in the local media?
41. Do you have enough staff and who decides this?
42. What would your clergy really like to do that they can’t because of the laity?
43. What would your laity really like to do that they can’t because of the clergy?
44. Which would attract young families more – a bible-based week long summer activity for children or letting it be known that gay people are welcome in your church?
45. Can you email those members of your congregation who want to receive regular updates?
46. Do you email those members of your congregation who want to receive regular updates?
47. Has someone done the work required to make sure emails sent to large numbers of people don’t end up in spam boxes?
48. Who in the congregation has gifts that could be better used doing a different job in the congregation than what they are currently doing?
49. Who is your volunteer co-ordinator and is it obvious how to contact them?
50. Can you volunteer without being a member of the church?
51. Do you have a decent church website?
52. Is it up to date?
53. Is it responsive – ie does it work on mobile phones?
54. Does your own online profile feature your ideas and hopes and dreams other than a desire for people to turn up to church?
55. Do you know what you are doing with twitter and facebook?
56. Who could you learn more about social media from?
57. Do you have a compelling reason why people should come to your church other than where it is or what denomination it belongs to?
58. Can everyone in the church tell you in one sentence what that compelling reason is?
59. What is your beginners’ course like?
60. What comes after the beginners’ course?
61. Do people like the preaching?
62. Do people enjoy the music?
63. Have you dealt with conflicts from the past?
64. Are the people friendly?
65. Do you have any new groups starting soon?
66. Do you talk about making the world a better place?
67. How will people experience joy if they come to your congregation?
68. If someone from your past turned up unexpectedly at worship how would it make you feel?
69. How do you identify newcomers and what do you offer them?
70. What problems will arise if you do grow and how will you deal with them?
71. Do claims that you welcome everyone stop you working at welcoming those who traditionally find it hard to find a home in church?
72. Do you use language that is inclusive of everyone?
73. How do you know?
74. Is there any identifiable group of people that you can’t explicitly say are welcome because of how an individual or group in the congregation will react?
75. Do you want to grow or not?
growth, mission, questions

41 responses to “The Columba Declaration”

Edward Andrews

11/02/2016

As Anglicans get down to the important issue of the niceties of Theology, lets get into the broad brush situation.
The relationships between the Churches of the Celtic tradition and the Southern tradition have been fraught since the 7th Century (Whitby). Part of the whole question surrounding the war of Independence (and before with King David was teh independence of the Scottish Church.
The irony is that the present attempt is to bring the Churches of the united Kingdom together may well blow back on them. While the Kirk today doesn’t mean much in Scotland the most secular part of the UK I’m not convinsed that playing footise over Bishops is going to impress the older members – the ones who voted No.
The fact is that the Scottish Episcopal Church has the Anglican franchise in Scotland. It is an authentic Scottish Church (especially if you ignore the instances when it has gone to England for Episcopal ordination.) and to negotiate over its head about something so sensitive it at the best discourteous.
Those of the reformed tradition don’t get wound up by the antics of a few Episcopalians. We seek whatever degree of true unity is available to us, but do not see the need for uniformity. I spent some very pleasant years as a guest of the Scottish Episcopal Church when the climate of the Kirk became unattractive to me, and am grateful for the table fellowship which I received.
The site of two big boys presuming to set things up is not pleasing. For the information of those who want to get up tight about the real presence, that is what the reformed tradition believes, we are Calvinists not followers of Zwingli. I am not going to seek to discuss which Greer philosopher we get our understanding of existence from.

Reply
Father David

12/02/2016

Father Ron: let us not forget that the great Arthur Michael Ramsey was born an ecumenical baby. His maternal Grandfather was Vicar of Horbling in Lincolnshire and his paternal Grandfather was a Congregationalist Minister. His Anglican Grandfather baptised him and when in adult years he visited Horbling parish church he was deeply moved when standing by the font – the place where this great man of God began his Christian pilgrim journey. However, as a child he worshipped with his family at the Congregationalist church in Cambridge. To the great benefit of the Church of England and the Anglican Communion – the kind of High Jinks that took place next door at Little St. Mary’s proved to be an attractive magnet and so the pull of Anglo-Catholicism brought to us a spiritual giant and a contender (in company with William Temple) for the title of the greatest Archbishop of Canterbury of the 20th century and a man who yearned and longed for Christian Unity.
Edward Andrews: Even as we all long and hope for the unity of all Christians your words are wise when you point to unity not uniformity.

Reply
Keith Barber

12/02/2016

Cynic I may be, but my first response is to ask what is the hidden agenda. For I’m pretty certain there will be one, whether it’s about trying to create an ecclesiastical bulwark against disintegration of the UK or get ++Welby an ally or two in the aftermath of the huge and hostile reaction to the Anglican Primates’ decision to punish TEC (sorry Kelvin) for its moves towards inclusion of LGBT people.

Reply
1. Jeremy Bates
  
  13/02/2016
  
  Or perhaps it’s like the Easter-calendar announcement–a convenient way of changing the subject, at Synod and elsewhere.
  
  Reply
Father Ron Smith

12/02/2016

Whatever the motivation for this ‘secret’ accord with the Church of Scotland; simple courtesy would require that the Church of England promoters consult with their Episcopally governed equivalent in Scotia.

Another point is this; do the Presbyerians realise that they may have signed up to the catholic premise of recognition of the Real Presence of Christ in the Sacrament of the Holy Communion? Are they happy with that?

Reply
1. Edward Andrews
  
  12/02/2016
  
  Well actually the Presbyterians believe “Worthy receivers, outwardly partaking of the visible elements, in this sacrament, do then also, inwardly by faith, really and indeed, yet not carnally and corporally but spiritually, receive and feed upon, Christ crucified, and all benefits of His death: the body and blood of Christ being then, not corporally or carnally, in, with, or under the bread and wine; yet, as really, but spiritually, present to the faith of believers in that ordinance, as the elements themselves are to their outward senses.” You will see the word real is there. Don’t know what the 39 articles say you believe.
  Those of us who are big on the real presence use the Platonic rather than the Aristotelian understanding of reality.
  
  Reply
  1. Father Ron Smith
    
    12/02/2016
    
    Not believers, then, in con-substantiation? Freely translated as bread and wine ‘together with’ the Body and Blood of Christ? Note, not the more literal trans-substantiation, which would nean the disappearance of the bread and wine. (although as some of my more scientific friends would say, this is a tautology.
    
    What all must agree on, though, is that some members of the Church of England, and many of its constituent partner Churches of the Anglican Communion, do have a problem with the ‘Real Presence’ – a reality that, for me, and I suspect most Anglican Catholics, means that the substance of the bread and wine consecrated at the Eucharist is truly “The Body and Blood of Christ” in accordance with the dominical instruction: “This IS my Body, my Blood” (Not, you will notice, “this REPRESENTS my Body, my Blood”). ‘A Sacrament is an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace’ – this saying sums it all up pretty well, I think
    
    Reply
    1. Kelvin
      
      12/02/2016
      
      I think it is time to draw the discussion about the real presence to a close on this comment thread. It is hardly the main point and I’ve never ever known a comment thread about transubstantiation to be constructive.
      
      Comments on the Columba Declaration welcome. Comments trying to explain what transubstantiation *really* means – not so much.
      
      Reply
      1. Edward Andrews
        
        12/02/2016
        
        Thank you Kelvin. As I see it the C of E has come poaching in your preserves. This is wrong and unhelpful. If there were going to be Anglican/Presbyterian dialogue the SEC should be the lead player. I have my own problems with the declaration as a Member of the Church of Scotland who seeks an end to the United Kingdom. However as a Catholic Christian I am in solidarity with my SEC brothers and sisters who have been left out of the loop. Both the Cof E synod and the Kirk’ General Assembly should reject the document, but I don’t suppose that they will.
Augur Pearce

16/02/2016

A contribution to the ‘establishment’ discussion: In my book the terms ‘establish’ and ‘Church of England’ both have more than one meaning. ‘Establish’, for example, can mean ‘set up, bring into existence’ (sense E1), or it can mean ‘endow, privilege’ (sense E2).

Most people who use it of the C of E use it in sense E2, and they understand the C of E (in what I might call sense C3) as an association with its own rules, distinct from the English nation but privileged by law in various ways (with some concomitant obligations).

In fact I think this describes the C of S position fairly well, but is quite wrong as regards the C of E. The C of E (I contend) is not distinct from the kingdom of England, it is that kingdom ‘wearing its spiritual hat’ (sense C1). England, as church, has various spiritual responsibilities to discharge, and in order to do so, it establishes (=creates; sense E1), by its law, a complex of specialist institutions, offices, rules, and assets which itself becomes known derivatively as the C of E (sense C2).

One clear example of how the C of E (in sense C1) and the C of S have been differently understood from very early times is found in comparing Richard Hooker’s well-known words ‘There is not any man of the Church of England, but the same man is also a member of the commonwealth, nor any man a member of the commonwealth which is not also of the Church of England…’ with the Church Act 1567, declaring those ‘quha outher gainsayis the word of the Evangell ressavit and apprevit as the heidis of the Confessioun of Faith professit in Parliament of befoir in the yeir of God 1560 … or that refusis the participatioun of the haly sacramentis as thay ar now ministrat, to be na memberis of the said Kirk within this realme now presently professit’.

The Church of England, in short, is simply England; the Church of Scotland is a privileged sectional group.

Reply
1. Seph
  
  17/02/2016
  
  If this be so, it strikes me as uncomfortably caesaropapist. This may be one of the things that makes me uncomfortable when I am down south and find myself in a C of E church.
  
  Reply