Thursday, 21 December 2006
Which way now?
As I have said in previous posts, two key questions the United Reformed Church must address are, what is our identity and what is our purpose? Or to put it another way, in the form that others may ask us, 'Who are you?' and 'What do you do?'
The United Reformed Church has a severe loss of identity and purpose, which though disabling, may be by design. Those within the church who still believe our short term goals should be further organic union, particularly at local level, envisage a church which fades away as a distinct denomination and simply joins with whoever is most appropriate locally.
However, another option is to re-invent ourselves as a distinct 'brand'. A small, reformed church, mainline AND progressive. Comfortable being itself, yet still wholly committed to ecumenical working wherever appropriate.
There seems to be two clear directions before us, I know which one I favour and believe will bear the more fruit.
Which do you favour? I'd really appreciate your comments and posts before I do more work/thinking in this area.
Finally, to aid your deliberations, below are excerpts from this years Catch the Vision report. Enjoy!
Catch the Vision Report 2006
There are no unity schemes on the far or near horizon. For thirty years the driving dynamic of the United Reformed Church has been unity. It has made us a movement, a pilgrimage, a people of no abiding city. But is God now asking something extra of us? Are we now being asked to balance our willingness to ‘die’ with a passion for ‘life’ and mission? CtheV 2006, 2.6
In a world where calls for unity receive no positive response, we could opt for the ‘homeopathic’ form of ecumenism. This is the ‘dilute until no one knows you’re there’ option, and it has a certain validity. Well, it says, pull down the shutters. That was an interesting experiment. Let’s sell off the silver and throw in our lot with the parish church or the Baptist meeting and strengthen the Christian presence. CtheV 2006, 2.7
Or we could opt for the ‘passion fruit concentrate’ version of ecumenism. That says, we might be a peculiar flavour, but the drinks cabinet would be much worse off without it. CtheV 2006, 2.8
‘We are not persuaded that our particular offering to the future great church and indeed to the future of Christian witness in our three nations will be best served by dilution’. CtheV 2006, 2.9
Historically we know about living a radical witness, … we know about reconciling diversity. We know what it is to be captivated by Scripture and have our lives turned upside down. It happens week by week and month by month. It’s electric and wonderful, and we don’t know why we don’t shout about it. We might be an odd flavour, but we’re a catchy one. People might get to like us. CtheV 2006, 2.10
Christ’s gift is not that we are either ‘united’ or ‘reformed’, but that we are ‘united and reformed’. CtheV 2006, 2.11
Let’s not be ashamed about being here. Let’s be ourselves. Let’s be glad to be ourselves. Let’s not apologise for being the United Reformed Church. Let’s celebrate God’s gifts, and think about possibilities and mission and growth. Let’s get confident, secure in the gospel. Our ultimate unity lies there after all, CtheV 2006, 2.12
[We see] both a God-given opportunity to leave behind the evangelical-liberal divide, and the possibility of a process of renewal which could gather the church into a community of difference makers for Christ’s sake. We have seen a vision. We intend to follow it, and make it the key feature of ‘Catch the Vision’ 2007. CtheV 2006, 4.5
13:15 Posted in Advertising, Catch the Vision, The FIVE Marks of Mission, The United Reformed Church | Permalink | Comments (2) | Email this
Comments
I can see the difficult dilemma facing the URC. It has become a very small denomination and is reducing still. But the problem is one which I have seen starkly over the years. In some cases it would be better to merge with another local church. But the fact is that the people who would make a new start with the neighbours would be two thirds of the number at the URC. Then a further third (half of those who joined the new fellowship) would soon vote with their feet. This would become a shadow of the former URC.
The way forward comprises two things: the re-dedication of the membership to evangelism (emulate Jesus) and the disposal of buildings that drain finance. The first ought to enable the second to happen. For the last few years we have watched our numbers fall rapidly but the same has not happened to our buildings. To be honest, if people can see what a drain the buildings are for a church determined to carry out Jesus' instruction - Feed my sheep - they will bite the bullet. This is where the leader's challenge lies.
I believe that it is far better to look at how to preach the gospel and go for it before the church gets too small. These days, because there is no URC for 35 miles, I am a member of a Methodist church after 55 years of involvement with the URC and Congregational church. I live in Wales where there are many churches so small you wonder why they still exist and what they can do.
There seems to me to be no reason why new life cannot be breathed into the URC churches that remain, providing they are numerically strong enough to be the basis of a new start. It is, of course, a matter of courage. A book written in 1965 begins like this, "How shall we sing the Lord's song in a foreign land?" is a question the Church, always finding itself in but not of the world, urgently needs to reconsider today. That question still remains to be answered in 2007.
For years we have been challenged by Moderators to look at how we can work as LEPs. But that pattern often no longer fits today's difficulty. The expression, "Catch the Vision" does. We need VISION urgently. Many years ago on Whit Sundays I helped carry a church banner that read "Where there is no vision the people perish." That is so true today.
Posted by: Keith | Monday, 25 December 2006
I see the church as being there to maintain and attempt to preserve what it has, or rather had. It is difficult to speak to generally because I am sure that there are one or two thriving URC churches somewhere in the country. For most though they have an ageing congregation that is still doing what it has always done (but with powerpoint) desperately hoping that the good times will return.
They won't. Those days are gone.
The new world... I think we should move completely away from denominations. They mean nothing to those outside them and are totally confusing to those outside the church.
Let groups of people emerge that are agile and mobile and able to bring people to encounter God through the work they do in their communities. The old denominational structures can be maintained as training bodies paid for at the point of delivery.
Get rid of the buildings and hire community space.
The internet enables people and groups to interact and support one another in the way that the old denominational structures did.
The tools are all there. There is nothing to stop us just doing it.
Posted by: chedlee | Tuesday, 16 January 2007
The comments are closed.