One of the local (Grace) Baptist churches used to be called 'Mt Zion' but was rebranded to be '<street name> Baptist Church' due to political sensitivities I believe, not wishing to give any 'Zionist' vibes.
There is a lot strong faith and good teaching in HTB style churches. Just because it is not stylistically your type of Church doesn’t mean it is shallow. They are still C of E after all. Just another avenue to explore
No beef with htb - I am a charismatic myself.
Certainly no beef - we've got Twangists's ham and English mustard
There is ISTM something to be said for eschewing too much esoteric churchspeak and jargon, particularly in naming and/or advertising, whether outside the church or online.
No matter what you call Your Place, or how you describe your services, there will always be some to whom the whole thing is a mystery. If they do come though the door, welcome them unobtrusively, but warmly, and let them find their own level, so to speak,
People are where they are, not necessarily where you would like them to be.
The 'Community Church' title is an interesting one, as it appears to be growing in popularity as a name among Baptist churches whereas it used to be almost exclusively a Pentecostal or independent charismatic thing.
I think you are reading too much into this - it may be picked purely because it has a neutral sound and avoids a label that is increasingly seen - by outsiders - as a purely sectarian one (I'm sure many of us have had conversations along the lines of 'Why are there all these different churches that disagree with each other?').
Which just goes to show that many of these groups are becoming virtually indistinguishable to anyone other than the cognoscenti. They all tend to sing the same songs and have a largely charismatic-lite style.
I don't think this is necessarily a justifiable conclusion, I don't think that the name itself is indicative of that kind of convergence (apart from existing in the same society). In practical terms the actual convergence is to a position where some doctrinal positions are rather loosely held and not seen as a distinctive (although I suspect you'd be similarly resistant to a party line being enforced).
Ok. Perhaps I've over-thought it.
On the 'party-line' thing ... There's one of those everywhere. Or several within the same congregation. But yes, I'm not keen on 'enforcement.'
I don't know if this is a thing where you are but....
One of the local churches has just announced a new name for itself, it's 3rd name in roughly 30 years. Apparently they have a new vision to match which as far as I can see involves very much what you'd expect - worshipping god, telling people about jesus etc etc.
Several other churches in this neck of the woods are on their second name at least.
Given that most non churchgoers are pretty indifferent to such things I'm left wondering what these rebranding exercises are meant to achieve and what they actually achieve (apart from hassle updating the charity commission and bank accounts)?
A church in the locality where I grew up got up a few noses when it decided it would stop calling itself Name-Place Presbyterian Church, and start calling itself Name-Place Church. There is already a Name-Place Parish Church (Anglican). So it seemed a little greedy for the Presbeys to claim to be 'the' church for Name-place. And it was clear that, if anything, the new leadership were doctrinally more presybterian than even its former incarnations, with a tempting lure of being less liturgically formal and dressy-uppy. Thus giving an attractive mixture of appearing casual, relaxed, and unchurchy while being, if anything, more strict on who is and who isn't a 'real' Christian. I understand a few moved to the local Anglican Church when they were told that their attendance wasn't sufficient to guarantee a place at the communion table, eg. And some very long-term members found their membership very easily disposed of by the new leadership who weren't keen to negotiate the changes they were going to implement.
The re-branding is interesting. There's a real commercial feel to their PR stuff. And the church is successful in some of its local projects for the community which is commendable. But why they felt the need to ditch their distinctive Presbyterian identification in that way is unclear.
Given the general indifference to churches and Christianity, I don't think it really matters what a church calls itself. The majority of the population will still pass it by, and give no thought to it whatever (although Our Place's neighbours would love the church to close, so that they can grab some extra parking places... I know this, as one of them told me so.).
I think it matters as a kind of 'declaration of intent'. If a church calls itself 'Verve' or 'The Zone' you pretty much know you aren't going to get choral evensong.
But yes, as far as the vast majority of people are concerned we may as well as shut up shop.
My father-in-law is retired Church in Wales vicar. Quite traditional service wise. He stayed in one parish for a long time. After him the next vicar was Anglo Catholic, he was followed by a Charismatic Evo. The poor congregation didn’t know where they were.
One of Our Place's neighbours has suffered a similar fate:
MOTR Parish Eucharist (Family Service monthly) with MOTR vicar, who went on to a more A-C parish;
Evangelical vicar who kept the same services;
Moderately Anglo-Catholic vicar (Walsingham priest) who re-introduced incense (on High Days and major Festivals) without anyone complaining much;
Evangelical vicar who has done away with Organ, Choir, Processions, and Robes (those being Things of Satan), but is just about managing to do a *Communion* service each Sunday (but not on Ash Wednesday). Music provided by a *worship band* of elderly folk.
Congregation has dropped off from about 80 to 30. I know of several who are hanging on, in the hope that the evo vicar will soon leave.
My father-in-law is retired Church in Wales vicar. Quite traditional service wise. He stayed in one parish for a long time. After him the next vicar was Anglo Catholic, he was followed by a Charismatic Evo. The poor congregation didn’t know where they were.
Sadly, I don't think that's unusual. I won't name names but I could cite an instance not a million miles from where you are where a young evangelical vicar was pitched into a parish which didn't share her theology or churchmanship.
She did her best but crashed and burned. She should have been posted somewhere more appropriate and been given proper support.
Is this a function of denominations which "place" clergy with little reference to the local congregation? (Which isn't to say that the "congregational choice" favoured by the Baptists etc doesn't have its weaknesses).
Is this a function of denominations which "place" clergy with little reference to the local congregation? (Which isn't to say that the "congregational choice" favoured by the Baptists etc doesn't have its weaknesses).
Mostly it's a symptom of only the evangelicals producing vocations in large enough numbers to be self-sustaining, and in fact over-producing such that there aren't enough posts in evangelical churches to go around. That works if their formation has been thorough and they value other traditions within the church but there are strong hints that the CofE's training model is defective, with local schemes tending to skimp in ways that full time residential courses did not. Sending people away to vicar school has its problems, particularly for older ordinands, but the alternative needs work.
Is this a function of denominations which "place" clergy with little reference to the local congregation? (Which isn't to say that the "congregational choice" favoured by the Baptists etc doesn't have its weaknesses).
Mostly it's a symptom of only the evangelicals producing vocations in large enough numbers to be self-sustaining, and in fact over-producing such that there aren't enough posts in evangelical churches to go around.
But as per your first sentence, the prior problem is that the other traditions are not self sustaining, and that's the reason excess evangelical ordinands become an issue.
Is this a function of denominations which "place" clergy with little reference to the local congregation? (Which isn't to say that the "congregational choice" favoured by the Baptists etc doesn't have its weaknesses).
Mostly it's a symptom of only the evangelicals producing vocations in large enough numbers to be self-sustaining, and in fact over-producing such that there aren't enough posts in evangelical churches to go around.
But as per your first sentence, the prior problem is that the other traditions are not self sustaining, and that's the reason excess evangelical ordinands become an issue.
In my experience discernment panels are very hot on sticking to the published criteria, and advisers are drawn from a wide range of churchmanship and theological outlook.
If a church calls itself 'Verve' or 'The Zone' you pretty much know you aren't going to get choral evensong.
Are you absolutely sure?
Fair enough, but generally speaking, a name is a pretty good indicator of what you are going to get.
For instance, I don't know whether it's still going but I knew of a rather health-wealth flavoured charismatic church which called itself 'Relentless.'
That's a pretty good indicator that you aren't going to get Fr Thomas Keating style 'Centring Prayer' or a traditional non-conformist style service or a vested procession with all the trimmings.
For instance, I don't know whether it's still going but I knew of a rather health-wealth flavoured charismatic church which called itself 'Relentless.'.
There is a church here called "!Audacious". Apparently it has about six branches, mostly in northern England.
Comments
Certainly no beef - we've got Twangists's ham and English mustard
No matter what you call Your Place, or how you describe your services, there will always be some to whom the whole thing is a mystery. If they do come though the door, welcome them unobtrusively, but warmly, and let them find their own level, so to speak,
People are where they are, not necessarily where you would like them to be.
So do they have a service called 'The Eleven' then?
Ok. Perhaps I've over-thought it.
On the 'party-line' thing ... There's one of those everywhere. Or several within the same congregation. But yes, I'm not keen on 'enforcement.'
Seriously?
A church in the locality where I grew up got up a few noses when it decided it would stop calling itself Name-Place Presbyterian Church, and start calling itself Name-Place Church. There is already a Name-Place Parish Church (Anglican). So it seemed a little greedy for the Presbeys to claim to be 'the' church for Name-place. And it was clear that, if anything, the new leadership were doctrinally more presybterian than even its former incarnations, with a tempting lure of being less liturgically formal and dressy-uppy. Thus giving an attractive mixture of appearing casual, relaxed, and unchurchy while being, if anything, more strict on who is and who isn't a 'real' Christian. I understand a few moved to the local Anglican Church when they were told that their attendance wasn't sufficient to guarantee a place at the communion table, eg. And some very long-term members found their membership very easily disposed of by the new leadership who weren't keen to negotiate the changes they were going to implement.
The re-branding is interesting. There's a real commercial feel to their PR stuff. And the church is successful in some of its local projects for the community which is commendable. But why they felt the need to ditch their distinctive Presbyterian identification in that way is unclear.
Ha ha ha ...
But yes, as far as the vast majority of people are concerned we may as well as shut up shop.
MOTR Parish Eucharist (Family Service monthly) with MOTR vicar, who went on to a more A-C parish;
Evangelical vicar who kept the same services;
Moderately Anglo-Catholic vicar (Walsingham priest) who re-introduced incense (on High Days and major Festivals) without anyone complaining much;
Evangelical vicar who has done away with Organ, Choir, Processions, and Robes (those being Things of Satan), but is just about managing to do a *Communion* service each Sunday (but not on Ash Wednesday). Music provided by a *worship band* of elderly folk.
Congregation has dropped off from about 80 to 30. I know of several who are hanging on, in the hope that the evo vicar will soon leave.
Sadly, I don't think that's unusual. I won't name names but I could cite an instance not a million miles from where you are where a young evangelical vicar was pitched into a parish which didn't share her theology or churchmanship.
She did her best but crashed and burned. She should have been posted somewhere more appropriate and been given proper support.
In theory at least, Orthodox churches choose from within the parish itself rather than dropping someone in from outside but it does vary.
I've long since given up trying to work out what criteria the CofE uses.
I'm not sure any system is fail-safe.
Mostly it's a symptom of only the evangelicals producing vocations in large enough numbers to be self-sustaining, and in fact over-producing such that there aren't enough posts in evangelical churches to go around. That works if their formation has been thorough and they value other traditions within the church but there are strong hints that the CofE's training model is defective, with local schemes tending to skimp in ways that full time residential courses did not. Sending people away to vicar school has its problems, particularly for older ordinands, but the alternative needs work.
But as per your first sentence, the prior problem is that the other traditions are not self sustaining, and that's the reason excess evangelical ordinands become an issue.
Oh absolutely.
I don't think there's a bunch of broad church and Anglo-Catholic candidates being disproportionately weeded out by BAPs.
Fair enough, but generally speaking, a name is a pretty good indicator of what you are going to get.
For instance, I don't know whether it's still going but I knew of a rather health-wealth flavoured charismatic church which called itself 'Relentless.'
That's a pretty good indicator that you aren't going to get Fr Thomas Keating style 'Centring Prayer' or a traditional non-conformist style service or a vested procession with all the trimmings.
The same comment applies.
After I left I discovered that every other Christian I spoke to referred to it as "Riverside" which was the name of the building.
Old names die hard.