- Do you have a decent church website?
- Is it up to date?
- Is it responsive – ie does it work on mobile phones?
- Does your own online profile feature your ideas and hopes and dreams other than a desire for people to turn up to church?
- Do you know what you are doing with twitter and facebook?
- Who could you learn more about social media from?
- Do you have a compelling reason why people should come to your church other than where it is or what denomination it belongs to?
- Can everyone in the church tell you in one sentence what that compelling reason is?
- What is your beginners’ course like?
- What comes after the beginners’ course?
- Do people like the preaching?
- Do people enjoy the music?
- Have you dealt with conflicts from the past?
- Are the people friendly?
- Do you have any new groups starting soon?
- Do you talk about making the world a better place?
- How will people experience joy if they come to your congregation?
- If someone from your past turned up unexpectedly at worship how would it make you feel?
- How do you identify newcomers and what do you offer them?
- What problems will arise if you do grow and how will you deal with them?
- Do claims that you welcome everyone stop you working at welcoming those who traditionally find it hard to find a home in church?
- Do you use language that is inclusive of everyone?
- How do you know?
- 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?
- Do you want to grow or not?
10 responses to “So, let me get this right…”
-
I think you have understood if correctly (or at least as fully as it can be understood).
This just shows how confused the church has become, or how keen it is to tie itself into the proverbial knots to appease both progressives and traditionalists.
Either way, this position is both absurd and intellectually unsustainable.
-
Kelvin can I ask what submissions you are referring to, is there a new one?
-
I think that, once marriage law is passed, current civil partnerships can convert to marriage by filling form, etc. Don’t think they said what happens if the couple want a religious marriage – or did I miss that?
If our churches persist in saying no to marriage, wouldn’t it be better to do the blessing after they’ve converted their civil status – as in some countries where every marriage is a civil ceremony, and any religious service is done afterwards
I hope everyone has completed the most recent consultation paper -
I think that the church wants to have its cake and eat it too. It wants everyone to be happy, and this is probably the best way that it knows to do this.
Is it ridiculous? Of course.
-
There is to be a new one. I’ve not seen it. I understand that the position that the Faith and Order Board is holding to is that “church teaching” is what Canon 31 says – that and nothing else and therefore we are doctrinally against change.
Is that not the case?
-
So far as I understand it, the SEC has not moved in its position since the first response at all.
The first response included this:
Question 10: Do you agree that the law in Scotland should be changed to allow same sex marriage?
The Canons of the Scottish Episcopal Church (Canon 31) state that the doctrine of the Church is that marriage is ‘a physical, spiritual and mystical union of one man and one woman created by their mutual consent of heart, mind and will thereto, and as a holy and lifelong estate instituted of God’. In the light of that Canon, there is no current basis for agreeing that the law should be changed to view marriage as possible between two people of the same sex. -
The SEC’s last response was in line with what the current law was, indeed still is, this consultation asks a very different question. To which the answer ‘well it isn’t legal, so we can’t say’, (I paraphrase) can’t be the answer this time, can it?
Of course Canon 31 also states it is a “lifelong estate” but had clause 4 added at a later date to allow for divorce and remarriage.
-
-
I was watching the evidence to the Westminster parliamentary committees the other day. In all these things, even from churches which are prepared to be tentatively in favour, or declining to be opposed, what is missing from all the evidence is the human experience of joy and delight that actually characterises a true and good wedding, of any combination of partners. How can we get across the compelling and converting happiness when processes take the form they do?
-
Is there any way of getting hold of the board – of ordinary church members getting hold of it and making it listen?? I mean I know my approach tends to lack in subtlety what it makes up for in directness, but then, well, it is very direct.
-
Rosemary, of all the many beautiful sentences you have written, that is the very very best.
Previous Posts
-
The Anglican News in Brief
Wakefield Diocese (the first to vote about it in the Church of England) rejects the Anglican Covenant. The excitement causes Kirstin to use a naughty word.
-
Japan – the smaller pictures
I’m finding it difficult to hold in my head all the details coming through about Japan. Sometimes its easier to grasp the smaller pictures than to get a grip of the bigger one. A long time ago I was at college with someone who has ended up in Japan – Vicky. She married a Japanese…
-
Forgetting to press the button
By the way, the reason that last Sunday’s sermon has not appeared on the Cathedral website is that though I carefully rigged up the camera, I forgot to press the button to start the recording. All of which makes me think that the time is coming for me to let go of the responsibility of…
-
To the Tower
Off to the Tower yesterday afternoon – my annual trip up the tower at St Mary’s to the ringing chamber for the Bell Ringers’ AGM. It was great to see the ringers and to be able to congratulate them in person for their achievement during the year. There are one or two new members of…
Leave a Reply