This week we are thinking about "The Church Building", and the suggested Bible Readings are:
Luke 4: 16
“When he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, he went to the synagogue on the sabbath day, as was his custom”
Luke 9: 57 – 58
As they were going along the road, someone said to him, "I will follow you wherever you go." 58 And Jesus said to him, "Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay his head."
All readings are from the NRSV and copyright © 1989 National Council of Churches, USA
At Foxton Methodist Church, when I arrived as the minister, we had a church building that was cold, damp, and which needed a great deal doing to it - it was also not very flexible. We also had 12 tired members, for whom this building had become a major drain on their energy and time.
In the centre of the village was a new, modern, village hall. After much heartache, prayer and meetings, we made the decision to let go of our building, and to move the church, from our building to the village hall, where we began worshipping in the bar. For the joint acts of worship with our Anglican friends we used one of the bigger rooms, in which case there were two available to us, one holding about 80, the other well over 120.
Our last service in the old building was Palm Sunday 2007, meaning that our first act of worship in the new place was Easter Sunday morning. On the morning of Easter Sunday 2007, we all stood at the end of the worship in a circle. One of the members stated what we were all so aware of, “God was with us”. Rarely have I felt the presence of God in such a real way as with those dear friends on that morning, as we stood together having just shared the Lord’s Supper together. Where was the church? The church was gathered in the bar at the village hall! From here on, they were a people set free to explore new ways of worship and to express their faith. In the next year, they leafleted the whole village twice; once to tell them what we were doing in our “Month of Evangelism” and once to ask the people what they wanted from their Methodist Church so that we could serve the community better. At the harvest festival, which began on the allotment by the way, they had approaching 100 people attending the worship. They had been set free from their building, and this allowed them to be the church. What we saw was growth in the members, growth in attendance, and growth in the membership. Not everyone can do this, but I believe that this shows how much our buildings can hold us back, and what having the right building can do to set the people of God free.
The discussion material for this week, starts by highlighting that we use the same word for the community of the faithful, the building that they meet in. I feel that in fact you have to add to the list the fact that actually we use this word for Universal gathering of the saints, the collection of all the Christians, the local gathering of a denomination, the gathering of denominations in a place, and so on – it's confusing isn’t it?
The word “Church” is simply our derivation of the German word Kirche, which you can trace back to the Greek word kuriakon – meaning a thing that belongs to the Lord. What is interesting is that we then use this word to translate a different Greek word, the word ekklasia, which was the word that the early church used of themselves. It was a word that the church knew from everyday usage, but not as a religious word, but instead it related to an assembly of people from self governing city - a council if you like.
Now depending upon your point of view, this is either fascinating or boring – you decide, BUT. . . the reason that they used it, was because in the Greek version of the Old Testament this was the word that was used to describe an assembly or congregation of Israelites, especially those who were “within the covenant”. Suddenly we are back on Methodist home ground – Covenants are things that we understand, for we are people who re-enter into the eternal covenant that God offers his people every January. Likewise, we understand, that Jesus' blood was shed to bring in the New Covenant, hence why this forms part of our understanding of what happens at the communion rail.
So, we are a group of people who are within the covenant – I like that, I like that a lot. It means that we remove barriers of denomination, geography, and churchmanship. It takes me back to my belief in the One Holy Catholic Church, and my Methodist Catholic Spirituality. It means that I understand that we are a group of people who have entered into a covenant relationship with God and who are simply asking what our role is – no caveats, no limitations. It means that in terms of what we are called to do, we are ruling nothing in, and in terms of who we need to be in partnership with we are ruling no Christian partner out. It also means that it is ONLY when we have done this, that we can then ask the simply question, “now what buildings do we need?”, recognising that some of those building may already exist, and that some of them may not be owned by us, but only rented.
In our groups on Tuesday and Wednesday there were five questions to stimulate the discussion, based on the bible readings quoted at the start – these have been re-produced by permission of the publisher:
1. Is the common use of the same word to describe both the community of faith and the building it meets in helpful or confusing? If confusing, which description should we change, and to what?
2. Is the building the physical structure that gives identity to the community of faith, or merely the frame around the picture? Do we serve the building or does the building serve us?
3. Is our building in the right place? Is it the right building? Or is it the right building in the right place but unsuitable for present day needs?
4. Where does the shoe pinch? In what ways does our building need overhauling and re-equipping if we are to be liberated in our worship and effective in our work together for God?
5. What should we do about it? Let the ideas flow!
Taken from “Re-pitching the tent – Third Edition, by Richard Giles ©2004 Canterbury Press, an imprint of Hymns Ancient & Modern Ltd. Used by permission.
Thoughts from the Tuesday House Group – Week 2
ReplyDelete• Use the term Church Fellowship rather than Church Family, which may portray to some people a ‘closed shop’
• There were differing view on whether the church served us or we served the church. It was felt that some church base was needed.
• Some people thought the building was in the right place.
• We did consider altering the existing church to fit our needs.
• Most others thought the building was in the wrong place as it may create a barrier if we want to encourage the people of the Harwood community to join us, and in that case it was felt that it was unsuitable for our needs.
• If the church was interlocked with the hall it would be easier and less daunting for people who do not attend church to make the transition from attending community activities into the church.
• Combined church/hall could mean that the church could be open more often for individual prayer. It was also suggested that a small prayer room could considered.
• A new church could provide us with better facilities for the use of up to date technology.
• A large entrance hall would be an advantage with a clear view into the church. To have designated ‘welcomers’ as well as door stewards – to use the welcome packs when required.
• Designated creche facilities need to be provided – sound proof and in view of the church also that services could be relayed into the area.
• A well presented coffee shop/café was a good idea – the entrance to face on to Longsight.
• Most people thought that chairs would be an advantage in church (as long as there was enough space in between the rows).
• Need to consider what is wrong with our present building and not make the same mistakes.
• Most of all we must equip ourselves for all that can be done within the community of Harwood.
Margaret Krawec asked me to post the following:
ReplyDeleteSome Further Thoughts After Last Thursday's House Group On The Topic 'The
Environment of Change.'
Having decided to look again at the five questions we had been asked to consider, I realised that three of them use the word 'change', while the remaining two questions contained the words 'transformed' and 'different' respectively. Whilst reflecting on the word 'change', a saying of Jesus from The Gospel of Thomas came to mind.
"Let him who seeks not cease from seeking until he finds; and when he finds, he will be turned around; and when he is turned around, he will marvel, and he shall reign over the All."
It seemed to me that 'to be turned around' is to be changed, transformed or be different. I discovered that the words translated 'turned around' could also be translated 'disturbed' or 'troubled'. Change can frequently disturb or trouble us. Also 'to be turned around' implies we see things differently. Jesus then said that when we are 'turned around' -changed, disturbed, out of our comfort zone, we begin to view life and the whole cosmos from a different perspective - God's viewpoint, not ours, consequently we will marvel, be astonished, full of wonder and awe, or in current jargon, experience the WOW factor! For we can begin to reign, i.e. rule, govern, direct by and through His Love All Creation.
What a gift! But also an encouragement to allow ourselves to 'be turned around', changed, transformed, so that we can play our part in transforming society and the environment.
Note on The Gospel of Thomas.
It is said to be a recording of sayings of Jesus written by the Apostle Thomas. It was hidden by monks in the 10th century in the sands of Egypt, when many books were ordered to be destroyed, and discovered in 1945 by two peasants looking for fertiliser, along with several other books, which are now called the Nag Hammadi Library.
AMEN!!
ReplyDeleteI have posted this in both the "Change" section and here, since I guessed that people would look in the latest section for new input. But also because I wonder if we should take this thinking one stage further. Is this about changing the church, on the basis of the community input we get, or instead is this about changing society, and changing the church to enable us to do this. Because if it is the later, and I think that it is, it means that in fact on top of the discussion about the church's agenda driving its choice of buildings, you then have a kingdom agenda for the community and the world, which the church buys into and plays its part in. This means the the ownership of the Mission, then ceases to be ours (which it never was anyway) and instead becomes all about God's ownership, of God's Mission, and us being given a part of it. All of which takes me back to my sermon on the 17th.
p.s. At the risk of going off at a tangent (and only because it is my dissertation from my theology degree), "The Gospel of Thomas" was written in Edessa in the 3rd Century by a guy called Tatian, and is part of the "Thomas Cult" that grew up in that place. It was originally written in Syriac, and should be placed alongside the "Acts of Thomas" which come from the same source. For more info please see either "Thomas and Tatian" by Nicholas Perrin, or "Thomas, the other Gospel" by the same person (but much more readable).
A thought from the Wednesday group :
ReplyDeleteOur building needs to have a visible working space which can be seen as the hub of our activity. Here we would have our technology ie computer, photocopier etc (oh! yes and an office for the Lay Worker He He!)This would be a busy part of our building as people from the community are coming and going to their various activities throughout the week. In this way our faith community would be interacting with the people who use our building day by day.
Would love to know what the younger members thoughts were on such things as Eco Friendly, sustainable materials, Carbon Neutral, Fair trade etc or what else we should be incorporating into our thinking as a new building in the 21st century.
ReplyDeleteCame Across this from David Deekes the former General Secretary
ReplyDeleteWe need the whole Church to be reshaped for mission.
We need to be released from the ways of being Church which distract us from our primary vocation or which drain our energy.
Skilled help and inspiring vision is needed to make the changes from where we are now to more people-centred and flexible structures for the future.
We must encourage innovation and creativity and make Christian fellowship infectiously attractive.
Is a single word confusing? For me it is not confusing as such but I do think there should be a distinction between the two, a meeting house, a community centre, a chapel would describe the building and the church describes the people. However, if you asked most people to identify the church how many would point to the grey brick builds that does not look too inviting? Maybe it is a good thing to have a building which looks nothing like the stereotypical 'church' to challenge peoples perception of the worship inside. Should we change the identity of the building or the people. How about both? You want to reach out to a community who I don't think will understand that the church is the people so don't describe them as such. You are reaching out to a community who think of the church building as a cold place for hatches, matches and dispatches, so don't make it one.
ReplyDeleteI think that peoples judgement of the community of faith is all to often based on the building where they meet, and all this without stepping inside. Can we as people do anything to overcome this perception, I would hope so, but the building can also do a lot to help. Do we serve the building - unfortunately I think this is always a great risk. Without care, running a building becomes a focus and there should be a constant review of where the focus is and be prepared to terminate the link where necessary.
I am not sure about the second part of question 3. Surely if the building is not suitable for present day needs then it cannot be the right building. Are the current premises right? - in my opinion - no - none of them meet the needs. Are they in the right place? - that depends on what you want them for. I think that having the building on a main thoroughfare has the advantage of creating its own publicity but as will all advertising it has to be marketed correctly.
Make the building attractive / open / flexible / warm and if nothing else sell some nice cakes.
I think if you mention the word church -most people assume that you are talking about the building rather than the people within it. But, yes, we see all around us the church buildings that have become something different - a block of flats (well, luxury apartments), shops, casino's. And so, many of us would agree that the real church is the people, the building just happens to be a gathering place. Perhaps the important issue here is the derivation of the word church - meaning 'a thing that belongs to the Lord'. How wonderful - we, the people, belong to the Lord! We are his but in belonging to him, we are at his disposal, so to speak. He owns us. We are there to be used by him, to his praise and glory. In the same way then, our building also belongs to him. He owns it and it is there to be used to his praise and glory. If either the people or the building are failing him, then something needs to be done. If our focus is that both BELONG to God then isn't that some of what Which Way? is all about? The people and the building are both important but not in their own right, rather in terms of what they can do for God in the 'greater scheme of things'.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of the building being the physical structure that gives us identity... well, yes it does. I think the building speaks volumes to 'the outsider' about the church as people. A certain very large church in Bolton had a relatively recent redevelopment resulting in a very nicely furnished building with all the mod cons, etc. However, there are no windows. You can not see in. As a passerby, you have absolutely no idea what is going on inside the building. (They have a lot of very high tech, expensive equipment inside - I think it was built this way for security reasons!) At the same time, just as passers by have no way of seeing what is going on inside, those inside have no way of seeing what is going on outside. Useful! Whilst there, they can focus fully on God - no distractions, but does it make them more insular? I am not suggesting for one minute that in this particular case it does but does a very open building allow a very open relationship with its surrounding community? They see in, we see out, we can all see and meet each others needs. The building becomes a picture frame - showing off the 'picture' that it contains as the beautiful thing that it is. And if the Church (as in the people) is truly belonging to God, carrying out his will, it will be a truly beautiful picture worth framing with a suitable frame.
Our situation is very lucky. On a main road, just about as central to the community as we could hope to be. But the building itself needs work. It is too structured, lacks flexibilty etc. Developing in a relationship with God is not about turning up at a lecture theatre and being preached at for an hour. But it is about worshipping, discussing, chatting, socialising with other people. We can watch some pretty decent services on the tv from the comfort of our own armchairs, there is a vast array of books/DVD's etc on offer that give a fabulous insight into enjoying and getting the most out of a relationship with God but being together with other people, discovering God alongside real people who are really there alongside you offers a whole different dimension. We need a building that allows this relationship, that does not restrict the way that we can interact with each other. We should be striving to be the best that we can be as individuals, as a church, as part of the local community, as part of God's entire creation. We might be a small, insignificant Church in a small northern town in a small country that takes up little space on a world globe BUT we belong to God and he can use us in our tinyness to change history, to affect the world! Father, we and our building belong to you - do with us as you will.