Update: Graham Marriott, also of Meadgate Church, has a site as well. Drop by for song lyrics and sermons among other things.
One of the churches in the deanery has developed a new site - you may find it interesting to have a look. Certainly it intends to be a more "warts and all" exploration of child-friendly ministry than most comparable sites. Comments are welcome.
As for as I know, Peter's is the only other regularly-updated site operated by a member of a Chelmsford South deanery church - unless you count the official church sites, which exist mainly as advertising tools for the congregations concerned. If I've missed some interesting links, please do let me know.
Church is where the heart is 30 January 2009
Churchgoing is not in decline, according to figures released by Tearfund today (30 January 2009) which show that one in four adults in the UK attend church at least once a year.
According to research carried out by Tearfund, 12.8 million adults in the UK attend church at least once a year, of whom 7.3 million attend at least once a month.
Christian relief and development agency Tearfund regularly interview 7,000 members of the public about their churchgoing habits, as part of wider research about perceptions of society and world issues, and have identified an upward trend in church attendance.
‘We have noticed that in the last year, there has been a significant increase in monthly attendance, bringing the figure for autumn 2008 to 15 per cent after a number of years of reported decline,’ says Matthew Frost, Chief Executive of Tearfund. ‘Similarly, the proportion of UK adults attending church at least once a year has increased from 21 per cent in 2007 to 26 per cent in 2008, which is an increase from around one in five adults to around one in four.
‘Our understanding is that more people are attending now than before, even if that is only a couple of times a year rather than every week. This might mean going to church at one of the high points in their family’s year, such as Christmas or Easter, or attending Sunday services or midweek events.
‘This is of course immensely encouraging, because it shows that people are associating church and a belief in God with hope and joy, and a positive way to spend their time.’
The research questions were framed deliberately to exclude attendance for weddings, baptisms, funerals and other invitation-only events so as to concentrate on voluntary attendance.
Groups showing a larger increase in attendance than the average between September 2007 and September 2008 included 25-34 year olds (up 7% from 15% to 22%), 65-74 year olds (up 6% from 27% to 33%), and over 75 year olds (up 10% from 29% to 39%). Geographically, the highest increases were found in Wales (up 12% from 12% to 24%), South East England (up 8% from 19% to 27%), Scotland (up 8% from 19% to 27%) and Northwest England (up 7% from 21% to 28%).
Methodology: 7,000 adults are interviewed every six months (a different sample of 7,000 people each time), creating a representative sample of the UK population and forming the largest research sample of its kind. No other research into church attendance in the UK encompasses so many research subjects and asks for self-proclaimed attendance (compared to taking a register in church on a Sunday morning). Therefore, this research more fully captures people’s own perceptions of their attendance and takes into account the changing face of church: that many people now attend events and activities at times other than on a Sunday morning.
Overall headlines and trends: One in four UK adults (26% or 12.8 million) go to church at least once a year. The Tearfund data reveal that 15% of UK adults (7.3m) attend church at least once a month at 10% at least once a week (4.9m).
Contrary to reports that church attendance is waning, this tracking research (which interviews 7,000 adults every six months) shows that church attendance in Sep 08 was actually slightly higher than a year previously in Sep 07.
Significant increases in church attendance among UK adults (aged 16+) from September 2007 to September 2008:
at least annually +5% 21% to 26%
at least monthly +2% 13% to 15%
at least weekly +1% 9% to 10%
The broader trend over three years since the start of the tracking, shows that churchgoing is holding up well:
at least annually: Sep 08 recovery from low point of 21% in Feb 07 but still below Feb 05 level of 29%
at least monthly: Sep 08 and Feb 05 are equivalent, at 15%
at least weekly: Sep 08 and Feb 05 are equivalent, at 10%
The following segments have annual churchgoing levels consistently above average
(%s are Sep 08 scores vs. 26% among all UK adults):
Women (30%); 65-74s (33%); over 75s (39%); AB social class (34%); owner occupiers without a mortgage (32%); Greater London (30%); Northern Ireland (54%).
The following segments have annual churchgoing levels consistently below average
(%s are Sep 08 scores vs. 26% among all UK adults):
Men (21%); 16-24s (16%) ; 25-34s (22%); C2 social class (18%); DE social class (24%); single people (19%); council tenants (19%); NE region (18%); Yorkshire & Humberside (17%); Wales (24%).
By denomination, the ‘established’ churches have shown a much higher increase in monthly attendance than the smaller denominations:
Church of England +6%
Church of Scotland +6%
Others +0%
Read it all
We are very pleased to report that the Rev Carol Smith, Vicar of Moulsham St Luke, has been appointed to the post of Assistant Rural Dean.
the President of the United States recently announced a $700 billion bailout plans for banks and financial institutions. One of the ironies about this financial crisis is that it makes action on poverty look utterly achievable. It would cost $5 billion to save six million children's lives. World leaders could find 140 times that amount for the banking system in a week. How can they now tell us that action for the poorest on the planet is too expensive?
At June’s Deanery synod, we started a discussion of the way in which parish share is levied. The process will continue with three meetings of a review group appointed at the synod, and a vote of the whole synod on their proposals at September 11’s synod at Bicknacre.
The following points were made on sheets distributed to all participants:
A 10 participants wanted to move towards a “you get what you pay for” system; 5 wanted to move towards a “fair shares” system which does not take the number of ministers serving a parish into account; 5 wanted to maintain the status quo (a mix of these), and 20 expressed no opinion.
B 6 participants wanted affluence more strongly taken into account (though some specified this should be congregational affluence, not affluence of the area); 12 wanted affluence to be a less of a factor; 27 expressed no opinion.
C Most participants opposed any introduction of a congregation’s total income as a factor in determining parish share. There was no appetite for a hardship fund, a deanery mission fund or a deanery youthworker.
D Many respondents (19 for, only one against) wanted an “offsetting” scheme first suggested on this blog whereby “”It should be possible with the agreement of all parties for stipendiary clergy at parish A to help out at parish B for a certain percentage of their time, with a corresponding transfer of costs to parish B and a reduction in parish A’s parish share”.
We also broke into “buzz groups”. The following were the main points noted by groups on their flip-chart sheets or Christine’s feedback sheets:
1. We need to recalculate the grading, perhaps with a view to congregational affluence; We should not be taking into account the affluence of the area, but the affluence of the membership; We should judge congregational affluence, not area affluence; we could do anonymous congregational surveys to determine affluence; mean income of each church could be worked out (3 groups)
2. Changes to the system are definitely needed; the system needs to be changed so that it is perceived to be fair (2 groups).
3. We’re not sure if we need to make changes; Whatever system we come up with, there will still be winners and losers (2 groups).
4. Any changes need to be phased in gradually. (2 groups)
5. Membership is a better factor than attendance – as long as membership is not just the electoral roll; We need to find better ways to count both attendance and real membership. (2 groups)
6. We need to encourage mission through parish share; a “mission precept” so that where there is growth more resources are invested (1 group)
7. Overall annual income should be taken into account. (1 group)
8. We need to encourage generosity between the parishes. (1 group)
To be honest, apart from points D and 1 above (and maybe 4 and 5?) I’m not sure any of this feedback gives a clear mandate for radical change.
One final point: by my calculation, the churches of Chelmsford South Deanery should have sent around 86 people to Deanery Synod (all elected deanery representatives plus clergy plus treasurers). Only 40 people were there, and half of them did not fill in one of the individual sheets asking for their views! So if you're a member of one of these churches and you don't like the opinions about parish share that have been expressed - find out if your representatives were there, and how they represented you!
Dear Friends,
Nudist Colony in Galleywood
Yes, it’s true. A nudist colony on Bakers Lane, in Galleywood Church Parish. With a national magazine (“The Naturist”) associated with it – lots of pictures of naked people, whose particulars have been covered by strategically placed bowls of fruit or pieces of furniture. A weekend haunt for many Londoners, and a few locals.
No, it does not exist today – it was there in the late 1940s. Villagers who were at school in Galleywood in those post-war days remember cycling over to Bakers Lane, hoping to get a glimpse through the fence or get past the bouncers at the gate (they never succeeded). History does not record the response of the formidable Reverend Roughton, Vicar of Galleywood at that time, but I bet he wasn’t in favour of naturism. A few of the children from the Naturist Community even attended the Junior School in Galleywood – in school uniform, of course.
Why do I tell you this story? Well, partly for the pleasure of writing “Nudist Colony in Galleywood” as a headline in Viewpoint. And I think it’s important to hear again stories from the community’s history. But more importantly, I want to introduce a word to you. The word is “counter-cultural”.
A Counter-culture for the Common Good
“Counter-cultural” means “different from the way the majority of people in the culture act and believe”. In the late 1940s, before the swinging sixties, before global warming, in mid-Essex, taking clothes off in public was very definitely counter-cultural, and quite brave. Not commendable, but brave. So I got to thinking - what would be counter-cultural today?
- If a group of people believed that there was more to life than what they could see and touch and buy at Tesco’s, that would be counter-cultural. Believing in love and justice and hope and community and a real, personal God – that would be swimming against the tide.
- If a group of people determined to treat each person, regardless of their age or wealth or celebrity, as an eternal being that will have a continued existence when the galaxies have imploded into nothingness - that would be counter-cultural.
- If a group of people, faced with a culture that said “there is no public truth, I have my truth, you have your truth”, resolutely continued to say that God has chosen to reveal the truth in Jesus and the Bible – that would be counter-cultural.
- If a group of people said that they would continue to meet together once a week to worship God and hear what he has to say to them, even though the world around them gave a hundred other options for what they could do on a Sunday – that would be counter-cultural.
Ladies and gentlemen, there is such a counter-cultural community in Galleywood, believing differently from the majority beliefs of our culture, acting differently from most people in our culture. They are the church.
This is not the counter-culture of some kind of sect, that believes its members have the whole truth and doesn’t care about those outside the cult. This is a counter-culture for the common good, a group of people who are consciously living differently from those around them for the sake of the village, humbly trying to serve it any way we can. And being different from our culture doesn’t mean we’re weird or think we’re better than you are, either; we’re just normal people who have been surprised by the joy of experiencing God in our lives.
It takes a certain bravery to be counter-cultural. We’re all faced with friends, colleagues and neighbours who insist that knowing personally the God who made the universe is less important than earning an extra £25 a week, getting the latest bargains at Bluewater or taking the children to football practice. But every year, new people are deciding that they dare to shed their inhibitions and join this counter-culture for the common good. You can join us, too.
But, please – come clothed.
fondly,
Andy
This article appears as the Vicar's column in "viewpoint" magazine.
Here's a presentation made by Bob Jackson, the local archdeacon, at Solihull deanery. It made me laugh out loud as well as stimulating my thinking! The slides on church noticeboards might be a useful way to start a PCC conversation, I thought.
I received this from an anonymous source:
"A Proposal for Parish Share
Since Chelmsford South Deanery is searching for a new way of calculating Parish Share, and since in the Rural Dean’s words “it’s a vision thing”, I humbly propose the following mechanism. I hope it will be of use, if only as a discussion starter.
My proposals start from the premise that whatever mechanism we come up with should express a “longing for more disciples for Jesus” and “working together across parish boundaries”. With these clauses of the mission statement in mind, I propose
1. Completely de-coupling the average attendance count from the calculation of parish share. This way, churches that make more disciples for Jesus are not financially penalised for doing so. I accept that this would be to the financial disadvantage of parishes which are presently “over-staffed” (ie have more than one stipendiary clergy-person per 90 average attenders): Galleywood, Moulsham St John, Moulsham St Luke, South Woodham Ferrers; and that it would be to the financial advantage of parishes that are by this reckoning “under-staffed”: Great Baddow, West Hanningfield, Woodham Ferrers and Bicknacre. (If my calculations are right, it would make little difference to other parishes in the deanery). However, read on for ways in which the “losers” in the new scheme could greatly mitigate their loss.
2. Encouraging much more pooling of the time of stipendiary clergy, providing financial incentives for PCCs whose clergy work “across parish boundaries”. With the agreement of both PCCs, and without any formal pastoral reorganisation, a stipendiary in an “overstaffed” church (that is, a church with more than one stipendiary per 90 average attenders) could give, say, 15% of his/her time to a parish with no stipendiary clergy; the “receiving church” would gain valuable ministry, while the “sending church” would see their parish share decreased accordingly.
3. The establishment of a “hardship fund” for churches facing unforeseeable financial demands, eg the roof falling in. This is surely better than a system in which it is simply understood that churches facing this kind of hardship will default on their parish share payments.
My proposed formula (after adjustments for provision of housing, fees etc as at present) is as follows:
a) Each parish should pay £38 000 per stipendiary clergyperson, or pro-rata bearing in mind agreements between parishes for the informal redeployment of stipendiary clergy time. Churches without a stipendiary should be asked to pay £4000 to cover the training costs etc of their self-supporting clergy.
b) In addition, a charge to cover diocesan services and a deanery hardship fund would be levied on each parish. I would estimate that this would be at the rate of around £13 000, multiplied first by a factor relating to size of congregation (0.5 for parishes with average attendance below 50, 1 for those with 51-100, 1.5 for those 101-175, 2 for those over 175, 3 for those over 250), and then by a factor, as at present, to represent affluence.
Two imaginary examples of how this might work in practice:
1) Parish 1), A fairly large church in an affluent area has 200 average attendance and three stipendiary clergy. At present, it pays £120 000 parish share and employs a youthworker out of its own funds. Under the new formula, it would pay
a) £38 000 x 3 = 114 000
b) £13 000 x 2 x 1.25 = 32 250
Total £146 250.
Faced with the new demand, the PCC became extremely uncomfortable – until they received a call from church 2).
2) Parish 2), a very small church in a relatively deprived area, has 40 average attendance and no stipendiary clergy, and has been paying £29 000 parish share.
Under the new formula, it would pay
a) £4 000 for the retired clergyperson giving their time to take services
b) £13 000 x 0.5 x 0.75 = £4 200
Total £8 200
The parish was amazed at this total, and very pleased! However, the PCC resisted the temptation to tell everyone to reduce their standing orders or install a jacuzzi under the tower. Instead, with the full agreement of the retired clergyperson in situ, they approached Parish 1), and asked if that parish would consider seconding their youthworker and some young people to them one day a week to start a midweek youth service; for this, they would pay parish 1) £1 500 a year. In addition, they asked parish 1) if they would consider seconding one of their stipendiary priests to parish 2) for 50% of their time; in return, the retired priest at parish 2) offered to spend 50% of her available time at parish 1). Result:
v the total for parish 1) reduced to a manageable £127 250,
v the total for parish 2) was now a realistic £27 200 (plus the youthworker costs)
v parish 2) was revolutionised by the new youth congregation and the young families whom their new part-time stipendiary had been able to bring in
v the growth in discipleship of the people of parish 1) was stimulated by the experience and skills of the retired priest, who enhanced the ministry team enormously
v two parishes had learnt to work together across parish boundaries
v there were more disciples for Jesus.
I offer this proposal to all for their views and discussion."
Back as we were deciding on the text of a vision statement for the deanery, I remember Chris Poulard saying "the test of whether the vision is real to us is whether it inspires us when the big finance conversation comes up". Now is the moment for that test.
But we do not face the test alone. On 17 December 2007 some of the deanery leadership team were joined by Canon Don Cardy (Chairman of Diocesan Budget Committee) and Anthony Nicolle (Vice- Chairman of DBF) - who have kindly agreed to advise us.
Four themes emerged from a very helpful conversation:
1. Decline in attendance. Since 1991, average attendance across the deanery has declined by 30%; this is strikingly greater than both national and diocesan averages, and needs to be explained. Our advisers suggested encouraging each church to graph their attendance records, see what caused particularly sharp declines, and make some sensible projections and plans about the future. This has obvious relevance to conversations on finance, since shortfalls may have arisen as much due to a loss of members as due to individual members not being sufficiently generous.
2. Best practice in stewardship. As a group, we were clear that best practice for parishes includes moving towards the appointment of Giving Officers and the use of a stewardship programme such as TRIO. We noted some parishes (such as East Hanningfield and Great Baddow) moving in the direction of best practice.
3. Formula Revision. We set our synod on 9 September 2008 as our deadline; on this date, the synod needs to vote on a new formula for levying parish share. On June 11 there will be an open discussion at synod about the vision and principles that should inform this.
4. Advice to individual parishes. In the period February-September Don and Anthony have kindly offered their services to help individual parishes in the deanery; they have served other deaneries in this way with considerable success.
What do you think? Start having your say here!
|
RSS Feed