@pease When you consider that every single church in the UK has a long south-facing roof yet most aren't allowed to have solar panels or tiles ... so much for being a "green" church. And plain secondary double-glazing would also go some way to helping with old draughty buildings.
This.
And why on earth do they insist that slates must be used as replacement roof tiles, when the last ones were stolen because they are so valuable and costly !?
@pease When you consider that every single church in the UK has a long south-facing roof yet most aren't allowed to have solar panels or tiles ... so much for being a "green" church. And plain secondary double-glazing would also go some way to helping with old draughty buildings.
This.
And why on earth do they insist that slates must be used as replacement roof tiles, when the last ones were stolen because they are so valuable and costly !?
You can at least use substitutes for lead these days.
@Baptist Trainfan You do know that when you say "English Heritage" there is no set of rules, or centralised opinion on such things? EH delegates to local Heritage Conservation Officers so you are at the mercy of the likes and dislikes of the local person, and they can vary widely from place-to-place. For example I know of 2 listed barns one mile apart but in two different council areas; one was allowed to install powder-coated aluminium framed double-glazed windows, the other insisted on wooden frames and single glazing. And my friend J has been refused permission to reinstate Victorian sashes and told instead to stick to the 1950s Crittal that looks like a scar on the facade, the reason being the Crittal "tells the story" of the building.
Our Place, which is not listed TBTG, had some lead stolen one dark night - mostly flashing etc. on the south side (invisible from the street), but we were allowed to replace it with a suitable non-lead substitute.
Sod's Law dictated that there should, of course, be heavy rain during the fairly brief interval between theft and replacement, so there was some water damage to the south aisle ceiling...
A neighbouring church - a modernistic 1960s building - has had severe structural problems ever since it was built, and is currently disused. The congregation, however, is very active, and uses the hall - the original mission church - for all services and other events.
Some years ago, an interfering busybody - not a member of the congregation - caused the church to be listed, with the result that it has proved very difficult to find enough £££ to restore the building without too much alteration...
If you have a listed building English Heritage etc may not permit them.
The building I was referring to was grade 2 listed. The lead-alike was more expensive to source and fit but was harder to remove and with much lower scrap value a less tempting target.
According to the New Testament Judas was a thief. He stole from the purse.
He would think of things to his advantage. He would not be concerned about the general finances of the group but what he could get out of it. Not a good person to look to for opinions.
He was also a terrorist. How does that and being a thief invalidate his opinions?
In what way was Judas a terrorist? Are you mixing him up with Simon the Zealot?
Nope. But I was going with minority interpretation that I now really don't like the look of, by three orders of magnitude, I now favour the majority interpretation, as the text does,
Judas's epithet "Iscariot" (Ὶσκάριωθ or Ὶσκαριώτης), which distinguishes him from the other people named "Judas" in the gospels, is usually thought to be a Greek rendering of the Hebrew phrase איש־קריות, (Κ-Qrîyôt), meaning "the man from Kerioth". This interpretation is supported by the statement in the Gospel of John 6:71 that Judas was "the son of Simon Iscariot". Nonetheless, this interpretation of the name is not fully accepted by all scholars. One of the most popular alternative explanations holds that "Iscariot" (ܣܟܪܝܘܛܐ, 'Skaryota' in Syriac Aramaic, per the Peshitta text) may be a corruption of the Latin word sicarius, meaning "dagger man", which referred to a member of the Sicarii (סיקריים in Aramaic), a group of Jewish rebels who were known for assassinating people in crowds using long knives hidden under their cloaks. This interpretation is problematic, however, because there is nothing in the gospels to associate Judas with the Sicarii, and there is no evidence that the cadre existed during the 30s AD when Judas was alive.
The Sicarii didn't exist until 40 years later.
So, Judas Iscariot was just a thief. At first. Knowingly darkly chosen as the treasurer and his betrayer by Jesus.
I think there’s a huge difference between being and/or doing ‘church’ and implementing the teachings of Jesus. Maybe a simple, good metric is whether the latter represents a bigger expenditure than the former. I dunno. Heating, cooling & plumbing an historic cathedral seems less offensive on that score than, say, this: https://youtu.be/48PEdd3RiMw?si=C2xyfPjyshhQrTL5 , but as it is with so many moral ambiguities: whose is it to say, really?
OMG we need a Mystery Worshipper to do a review of Prestonwood, stat!
I wouldn't want to inflict that responsibility on anyone.
Just keeping moving keeps you warm. As a dancer I approve of this. As an ex leader of the Christian Dance Fellowship of Britain I really approve of this.
Just keeping moving keeps you warm. As a dancer I approve of this. As an ex leader of the Christian Dance Fellowship of Britain I really approve of this.
As a disabled person who can't walk without the help of two crutches, I would feel...erm...disadvantaged if required to dance in church...
For those of you who aren't disabled, well, go for whatever lights your candle.
@pease When you consider that every single church in the UK has a long south-facing roof yet most aren't allowed to have solar panels or tiles ... so much for being a "green" church. And plain secondary double-glazing would also go some way to helping with old draughty buildings.
This.
And why on earth do they insist that slates must be used as replacement roof tiles, when the last ones were stolen because they are so valuable and costly !?
You can at least use substitutes for lead these days.
[I have read subsequent posts]
Your problem there is different dioceses have different ideas… I’ve come from one that allowed -when ours got nicked - fake lead, to another where Thou Shalt Use Lead And (I very much kid you not) Welsh Slate….
For avoidance of doubt, we are not in Wales. We are in a diocese that has yet to come to terms with the astronomical prices connected to there being, er, essentially no active Welsh slate mines…*
*overseas readers might be interested to know that this is a statement of the bleeding obvious that now goes back many years, it’s not policy failing to keep up with something happening last Wednesday.
It is, as you imply, incredibly frustrating to the poor sods who have the responsibility of looking after these ancient buildings. A former Vicar of Our Place's next-door parish had only just been inducted, when malefactors stole umpteen thousand £££s worth of lead from the church roof (it's a mediaeval building of some importance). Almost the poor woman's first act as Vicar was to camp out on the tower roof to raise funds for replacement of the lead - the tower roof was about the only place which the thieves didn't reach!
Some countries (Sweden? Norway?) have a *church tax* as part of their income tax policy, though one can opt out of it if one wishes - the money then presumably goes into the country's general tax pot, so to speak.
It appears to relieve individual churches of much of the financial burden of maintaining what might be a building used for worship only by a small congregation.
[
....The conflation of worshipping community with historic building preservation society does no-one any favours. It's hard to see this deteriorating arrangement being addressed any time soon.
Amen to that. Our home church is the Canadian equivalent of a listed building, so a massive recent restoration had to follow the rules as interpreted by the 'heritage consultant architect', with original style slates and copper gutters and rones. This was madness, and in accordance with the pronouncements of a certain local prophet of doom, as much copper as could easily be pulled down from the ground was soon stolen. This is a congregation that is healthy by most measures, but younger and much less wealthy than its founders, so the endowments and deep pockets are long gone. For a while I pursued a lonely campaign to give the place to the city in exchange for the use of it on Sundays and some weekday evenings. It is well-known as an excellent concert venue with a fine classical organ and good acoustics, but no - it is a house of God, a place of worship. We'll fit the concerts in when it is convenient so to do, but no more. I could go on about the cost of rebuilding huge, neglected stained glass windows too, but I won't. I'll concede that the congregation regularly makes quite decent cash from the building being used as part of a film set. Lately, we have been visiting other churches where (amongst other reasons) more of our modest offerings go to support the work of the broader church.
On the other hand, being without a church building of your own doesn't always work out...
Our Place used to have a neighbouring Baptist congregation. At one time, they had their own little Chapel several streets away, but this was closed and demolished when a new Community Centre was opened in a restored former laundry (!). The Chapel was tucked away in a side street, but the Community Centre is on the main road, net to s bus stop etc., so more accessible.
The Baptists rented a small office in the building, and arranged to use the main hall on a Sunday morning for their worship service (the Centre was mostly closed on Sundays).
This obviously saved them the expense of running and maintaining their own building, BUT they found that there was no physical focal point for their ministry. In fairness to them, they worked very hard to be a force in the community, such as it is (Our Place has the same problem), and managed without a regular pastor for several years. Their numbers dwindled from 35 or so pre-Covid to just half-a-dozen a year or so ago, when the remaining members joined the large and flourishing Baptist church in the town.
Our major expense is people - we employ a full-time priest, a parish secretary / admin person, choir director, organist, and someone to run the nursery during the main service. Every now and then there's a suggestion that the nursery should be staffed by volunteers rather than employing someone to do it, which would be fine if people actually wanted to volunteer, but it turns out that the people saying "this should be done by volunteers" mean "this should be done by volunteers who are not me".
There are quite a lot of general maintenance kind of tasks that could be done by parish volunteers, or could be purchased, somewhat interchangeably depending on whether people are able to give their time or their money.
We also set aside a chunk of our income for major repairs - from time to time we'll need new windows, or new heating, or a new roof, or whatever else, and we're trying to set aside enough on a regular basis that we can pay for those needs when they arise.
My church is unable to meet its obligations out of income. It relies on fundraising for specific projects, and has various endowments which may only be used for certain purposes, though it seems to me the interpretation of those purposes has broadened somewhat over the years.
Just keeping moving keeps you warm. As a dancer I approve of this. As an ex leader of the Christian Dance Fellowship of Britain I really approve of this.
As a disabled person who can't walk without the help of two crutches, I would feel...erm...disadvantaged if required to dance in church...
For those of you who aren't disabled, well, go for whatever lights your candle.
Just looked at the American requirements for national historical designation. Turns out our church building could make the requirement. In US, a building has to be at least 50 years old, be tied to a historical event or significant person or unique architecture. The building was built in the 60s and was one of the first buildings with the sanctuary in the round.
Hey, I know, 50 years pales to the designations in Europe. What can I say? We are a young country.
But I would not want to even encourage the church council to apply for it. We have several deficiencies and upgrades we can deal with now, but could not if we had the historical designation, like installing insulation and adding solar panels.
The church camp that I helped build while growing up there is on the national historical registry. It is 70 years old. It was built by WWII veterans for the benefit of their kids, and it is one of the few church camps on National Forest leased land. They have had several problems with upgrading the camp. They wanted to install double pained windows, but it practically took an act of congress to get that done. Finally happened, though. The Forest Service wants the camp to repaint the exterior of the cabins now. They have a redwood finish now, but there are no redwoods in the area. However, the National Registry will not let them do it since that would be a major change in the exterior of the building. It actually wants add more cabins, but cannot do so on the existing property. However, there is another ten acres that abut the property that is available for a new lease. Consequently, the camp is in negotiations to acquire that property to add new buildings.
In other words, I am betting the upgrades to the churches you are talking about would be difficult if the building is on a historical registry that is probably what is preventing any new up grades there. It is not the diocese, or even local governments, it is the restrictions of the registry.
To be fair dancing is not everyone’s cup of tea. I was being somewhat jocular.
Sure, @Bishops Finger, I didn't take it that @Hugal was saying that dance was compulsory.
On the 'moving around' thing, provided we are physically capable of doing so, I think there is something in that. I'm getting used to people wandering around during Orthodox services lighting candles or venerating icons and so forth, even though I only tend to do that myself before the service starts.
Old habits die hard. I tend to stay in one place once things get going.
Perhaps I ought to do a little jig and see what happens?
Just keeping moving keeps you warm. As a dancer I approve of this. As an ex leader of the Christian Dance Fellowship of Britain I really approve of this.
The homeless community that huddles around Prestonville Baptist Church will be glad to know that they just need to dance. As their nighttime temperatures dip below freezing for the next five days or so they'll be so relieved, all while knowing that Jesus still got his annual ostentatious birth production! The current leader of the Christian Laser Light Show Fellowship really approves, too!!! LOL
Enough candles can add quite a bit of heat to an enclosed space.
When our family visited the cathedral in Cologne, I was struck by how dark the interior stone was inside the building, then I realized it was likely because of the soot from hundreds of years of candles and incense.
It is something to see how the interior of Notre Dame shines after the removal of all the soot that had been in the building--at least from the pictures
Just looked at the American requirements for national historical designation. Turns out our church building could make the requirement. In US, a building has to be at least 50 years old, be tied to a historical event or significant person or unique architecture. The building was built in the 60s and was one of the first buildings with the sanctuary in the round.
Hey, I know, 50 years pales to the designations in Europe. What can I say? We are a young country.
But I would not want to even encourage the church council to apply for it.
The thing, someone else, anyone else, could nominate your church. Nomination, of course, doesn’t mean approval. And a nomination will not be approved if the owner opposes it. That is key, I think—no property can be added to the registry without the consent of the property owner, or in the case of a district, without the consent of a majority of the property owners.
I know many churches that could be on the registry, but have chosen night up be.
Can a property in England, Wales or Scotland listed without the consent of the owner?
Can a property in England, Wales or Scotland listed without the consent of the owner?
Yes they can, anyone can nominate a building to be listed via various bodies in the constituent nations. They'll then assess the nomination and approve it for listing subject to Ministerial approval (which I think is normally pro-forma)
Although in most of the cases we are discussing buildings would have been listed as such for many years, and the point at which they would have been nominated is now in the distant past.
Can a property in England, Wales or Scotland listed without the consent of the owner?
Not only without their consent, but even without their knowledge until after the event.
Some years ago I was living in a house in Wales, which belonged to a Charitable Trust (of which I was a Trustee, and looked sfter the property on their behalf). One day a letter arrived from Cadw (the Welsh heritage body) informing us that the building was now Grade II listed.
Our church was in danger of being closed by the diocese. A parishioner got it listed. It was later upgraded to 2*. It has made getting repairs done very expensive as original materials have to be used.
When we stayed in a hamlet in Germany for a couple of weeks (sorry, I cannot remember the name of the town), the local Evangelische Kirke was being renovated by the government (the government owns the Kirke), as they were peeling away layers of old paint they came across gold leaf that had been painted over, and it had a beautiful baptistry that was being restored. Had a scene of a lake in the original. The whole hamlet was excited by what they were finding. Would like go go back and see the results. Wonder if it starked any renewed interest in church attendance.
I know of a church in South Wales where some extraordinary late medieval wall-paintings were discovered underneath the plaster a few years ago, rare survivals from before the Reformation.
It's not led to any increase in attendance as far as I can gather.
I think I've already mentioned a 1960s church in Our Town, which was threatened with demolition, and replacement by a more user-friendly building. The 1960s church is of a striking and original design, but badly constructed, subject to water penetration, and with an inflexible liturgical layout.
A local man, whose family had been associated with the church since it was built, and who himself had been a server there in his youth, took exception to the plans, and managed to get the church registered as a Listed Building. Some 15 years on, the church is still in existence, but all parish activities are concentrated on the hall. There have been plans for refurbishing the 1960s church (finance to be raised by selling off some land for housing - about £1 million would be needed), but I'm not sure where matters stand at this moment.
To be fair dancing is not everyone’s cup of tea. I was being somewhat jocular.
Sure, @Bishops Finger, I didn't take it that @Hugal was saying that dance was compulsory.
On the 'moving around' thing, provided we are physically capable of doing so, I think there is something in that. I'm getting used to people wandering around during Orthodox services lighting candles or venerating icons and so forth, even though I only tend to do that myself before the service starts.
Old habits die hard. I tend to stay in one place once things get going.
Perhaps I ought to do a little jig and see what happens?
I think I've already mentioned a 1960s church in Our Town, which was threatened with demolition, and replacement by a more user-friendly building. The 1960s church is of a striking and original design, but badly constructed, subject to water penetration, and with an inflexible liturgical layout.
A local man, whose family had been associated with the church since it was built, and who himself had been a server there in his youth, took exception to the plans, and managed to get the church registered as a Listed Building. Some 15 years on, the church is still in existence, but all parish activities are concentrated on the hall. There have been plans for refurbishing the 1960s church (finance to be raised by selling off some land for housing - about £1 million would be needed), but I'm not sure where matters stand at this moment.
In our similar case we applied for Lottery funds and got £600,000 just before Covid to repair the roof, replace rotten iron window frames, and renovate the multi-colourd painted ceiling. By the time Covid had passed and we could start the work prices of materials had increased so much that we could only afford to do the roof.
To be fair dancing is not everyone’s cup of tea. I was being somewhat jocular.
I am glad. I have only a temporary bad back in mitigation but Satan would be having to dig his snowplough out before using it to drive to work before I dance in church.
Oi, @ChastMastr oh, believe you me, I've done all the 'shondera-hondera aveabicardi sellimahonda' stuff. Sometimes it sounded better than that ... 😉
I've also danced in church.
I'm not ashamed of doing either but I'm not in any hurry to do it again. Besides, I pulled a tendon the last time I did some 'Dad Dancing' by skanking and pogo-ing at a ska / punk gig with my daughter and her boyfriend.
I tell a lie. I've done some since, at local music festival and later at a Blockheads gig. I was more careful that time.
I don't have any objection on principle to people dancing in church. It's entirely up to them. As long as people aren't coerced to join in and I'm pretty sure @Hugal isn't advocating any such thing.
It's all down to context.
All this stuff makes sense in its own particular context, whether we are talking about icons and incense or guitars and synths or whatever else.
I think I've already mentioned a 1960s church in Our Town, which was threatened with demolition, and replacement by a more user-friendly building. The 1960s church is of a striking and original design, but badly constructed, subject to water penetration, and with an inflexible liturgical layout.
I wonder why these defects apply to so many buildings of the period, especially Catholic churches (and our own St David's Hall)? I suspect that concrete technology was not sufficiently understood at the time.
The building looks amazing, but I wouldn't want to have to pay to heat it ...
I think the church I referred to was designed and built without much thought to the difficulties of maintenance, and without much thought of the general disastrous decline in church attendance which was to begin in the 60s...just at the time the building was opened...
In addition, the ancillary structures (vestry, office etc.) were badly built, and subject to so much water ingress that - according to another local priest - the vestments in their cupboards were already unusable several years ago.
One idea put forward to reduce heating costs in the church proper was to install a glass ceiling a few feet above head height - this would keep the heat in, and also retain the natural light.
We went to visit a hospital patient this morning and drove past our old church building, standing empty. Mr. Lamb still yearns to re-acquire it (with what money?) and fill it with people (which he might actually have a chance at, supposing God granted him 30 more years of life).
I think the church I referred to was designed and built without much thought to the difficulties of maintenance, and without much thought of the general disastrous decline in church attendance which was to begin in the 60s...just at the time the building was opened...
I believe that church attendance actually went up in the 1950s, possibly due in part to the evangelistic efforts of one W F Graham, before slumping catastrophically in the 60s due to the consumer society/rise in car ownership/liberalising social attitudes/decline in deference/social mobility/doubting theologies/inward migration/"The Forsyte Saga" - or whatever!
Yes, it has been said before that the 1950s were times of modest growth - at least for the C of E, but no doubt for others as well.
In the late 60s, the Church Of My Youth (low-church Prayer Book Evangelical in those far-off days) had a regular attendance of 350+ on a Sunday morning, and 150+ in the evening. The senior Youth Group (16-18 year olds) had about 100 members meeting on a Saturday evening...
I understand that the Church of Scotland had some growth in the 1950s. Methodism was also growing to some extent too.
That said, I read a very well researched account of Methodism in the Huddersfield area in the 1920s. The decline during that decade was very marked. It was blamed on the cinema, a regular bus service and the widespread availability of the bicycle.
I feel the western church as a whole declined because the people got too complacent. There was the feeling everyone is a Christian. Evangelism became dirty word. No one was doing the inviting. Easier to blame the decline on other things, than to admit it is our own d---- fault.
But the church is growing in Africa! That is because people will actually talk about Jesus.
I know our congregation went through a bit of a decline over the past twenty years. Then we got a young mother who invited the mothers of her kids play group to check us out, Now we have babies everywhere. I just hope the next generation of parents and kids will continue to do the invitin,
I understand that the Church of Scotland had some growth in the 1950s. Methodism was also growing to some extent too.
Using the figures in Callum Brown's The Death of Christian Britain; Understanding Secularisation 1800-2000, there was a modest increase in the proportion of Scots who were members of the Church of Scotland in the 1950s. There was a more marked increase in the number of children attending Sunday School, although that might simply correlate with the post-war baby boom. The decline in church attendance was already noticeable in the 1950s, although initially this mostly reflected a reduction in those attending two services on a Sunday. From about 1960 on, both church affiliation and church attendance dropped.
Scotland has a legacy of too many churches. In 1843, the Disruption, the Church of Scotland split. The new church, the Free Church of Scotland, embarked upon an ambitious programme of church, manse and school building. There were sufficient churches in Scotland in 1843; ten years later the number of churches had increased hugely, whilst the number of members hadn't increased to fill all the new churches. Moreover, many of the new churches were built close to the existing churches. Scotland has been over-provided with churches since 1843, although the process of selling off surplus churches has been ongoing for decades now.
I feel the western church as a whole declined because the people got too complacent. There was the feeling everyone is a Christian. Evangelism became dirty word. No one was doing the inviting. Easier to blame the decline on other things, than to admit it is our own d---- fault.
But the church is growing in Africa! That is because people will actually talk about Jesus.
I know our congregation went through a bit of a decline over the past twenty years. Then we got a young mother who invited the mothers of her kids play group to check us out, Now we have babies everywhere. I just hope the next generation of parents and kids will continue to do the invitin,
Sure. I know people with connections with a charity in Kenya. They say you can't walk down the street without someone stopping you and asking whether you are 'saved'.
My brother was on a train recently here in the UK when an African woman next to him leaned forward and asked a German visitor opposite, 'Are you Christian?'
The German woman replied, 'Well, I am Roman Catholic...'
'That's not what I asked,' responded the African woman sourly. 'I asked "Are you Christian?"'
Ok, there are major cultural issues at play here. It's not simply a question of people from certain cultures being more vocal and direct.
Back when the churches and chapels here in the UK were fuller than they are now, not all of them would have been of the 'Are you saved?' variety.
Church attendance in the Western world didn't start to decline simply because people stopped inviting their friends and neighbours to church.
Most churches in Eastern Europe aren't overtly evangelistic in the US sense or the Two Thirds World sense but decline hasn't been as marked there (yet) as it has been in Western Europe and parts of the US.
There's a whole range of factors and forces at play to account for that. Sociological, cultural, socio-economic.
I'm not suggesting that the decline in church attendance in the textile towns of the West Riding of Yorkshire from the 1920s was purely down to the availability of bikes, buses and the cinema.
What I am saying is that there were a whole raft of reasons and factors at play.
This isn't an attempt to 'blame' anyone or anything, but to understand the complex and interwoven forces at work.
Western Europe isn't Africa.
The north-eastern USA or the Western seaboard aren't Africa. Neither are they Idaho, Alabama or Nevada.
There are wider forces and influences at play in all these places, including your own church situation, than whether people are inviting their friends and neighbours to church services.
Oh, and @Baptist Trainfan you can cycle along the canal towpath from Huddersfield along the Colne Valley easily enough ... 😉
But no, I wouldn't fancy cycling up to Golcar or up towards Castle Hill and Almondbury.
There are of course websites suggesting that the reason churches are no longer full is because of female priests/modern versions of the Bible/worship songs/liberal theology or whatever. These blinkered views seem to completely ignore societal factors.
Comments
This.
And why on earth do they insist that slates must be used as replacement roof tiles, when the last ones were stolen because they are so valuable and costly !?
You can at least use substitutes for lead these days.
Sod's Law dictated that there should, of course, be heavy rain during the fairly brief interval between theft and replacement, so there was some water damage to the south aisle ceiling...
A neighbouring church - a modernistic 1960s building - has had severe structural problems ever since it was built, and is currently disused. The congregation, however, is very active, and uses the hall - the original mission church - for all services and other events.
Some years ago, an interfering busybody - not a member of the congregation - caused the church to be listed, with the result that it has proved very difficult to find enough £££ to restore the building without too much alteration...
The building I was referring to was grade 2 listed. The lead-alike was more expensive to source and fit but was harder to remove and with much lower scrap value a less tempting target.
Nope. But I was going with minority interpretation that I now really don't like the look of, by three orders of magnitude, I now favour the majority interpretation, as the text does,
The Sicarii didn't exist until 40 years later.
So, Judas Iscariot was just a thief. At first. Knowingly darkly chosen as the treasurer and his betrayer by Jesus.
I wouldn't want to inflict that responsibility on anyone.
As a disabled person who can't walk without the help of two crutches, I would feel...erm...disadvantaged if required to dance in church...
For those of you who aren't disabled, well, go for whatever lights your candle.
[I have read subsequent posts]
Your problem there is different dioceses have different ideas… I’ve come from one that allowed -when ours got nicked - fake lead, to another where Thou Shalt Use Lead And (I very much kid you not) Welsh Slate….
*overseas readers might be interested to know that this is a statement of the bleeding obvious that now goes back many years, it’s not policy failing to keep up with something happening last Wednesday.
Some countries (Sweden? Norway?) have a *church tax* as part of their income tax policy, though one can opt out of it if one wishes - the money then presumably goes into the country's general tax pot, so to speak.
It appears to relieve individual churches of much of the financial burden of maintaining what might be a building used for worship only by a small congregation.
Amen to that. Our home church is the Canadian equivalent of a listed building, so a massive recent restoration had to follow the rules as interpreted by the 'heritage consultant architect', with original style slates and copper gutters and rones. This was madness, and in accordance with the pronouncements of a certain local prophet of doom, as much copper as could easily be pulled down from the ground was soon stolen. This is a congregation that is healthy by most measures, but younger and much less wealthy than its founders, so the endowments and deep pockets are long gone. For a while I pursued a lonely campaign to give the place to the city in exchange for the use of it on Sundays and some weekday evenings. It is well-known as an excellent concert venue with a fine classical organ and good acoustics, but no - it is a house of God, a place of worship. We'll fit the concerts in when it is convenient so to do, but no more. I could go on about the cost of rebuilding huge, neglected stained glass windows too, but I won't. I'll concede that the congregation regularly makes quite decent cash from the building being used as part of a film set. Lately, we have been visiting other churches where (amongst other reasons) more of our modest offerings go to support the work of the broader church.
Our Place used to have a neighbouring Baptist congregation. At one time, they had their own little Chapel several streets away, but this was closed and demolished when a new Community Centre was opened in a restored former laundry (!). The Chapel was tucked away in a side street, but the Community Centre is on the main road, net to s bus stop etc., so more accessible.
The Baptists rented a small office in the building, and arranged to use the main hall on a Sunday morning for their worship service (the Centre was mostly closed on Sundays).
This obviously saved them the expense of running and maintaining their own building, BUT they found that there was no physical focal point for their ministry. In fairness to them, they worked very hard to be a force in the community, such as it is (Our Place has the same problem), and managed without a regular pastor for several years. Their numbers dwindled from 35 or so pre-Covid to just half-a-dozen a year or so ago, when the remaining members joined the large and flourishing Baptist church in the town.
There are quite a lot of general maintenance kind of tasks that could be done by parish volunteers, or could be purchased, somewhat interchangeably depending on whether people are able to give their time or their money.
We also set aside a chunk of our income for major repairs - from time to time we'll need new windows, or new heating, or a new roof, or whatever else, and we're trying to set aside enough on a regular basis that we can pay for those needs when they arise.
We have people who dance in wheelchairs.
Hey, I know, 50 years pales to the designations in Europe. What can I say? We are a young country.
But I would not want to even encourage the church council to apply for it. We have several deficiencies and upgrades we can deal with now, but could not if we had the historical designation, like installing insulation and adding solar panels.
The church camp that I helped build while growing up there is on the national historical registry. It is 70 years old. It was built by WWII veterans for the benefit of their kids, and it is one of the few church camps on National Forest leased land. They have had several problems with upgrading the camp. They wanted to install double pained windows, but it practically took an act of congress to get that done. Finally happened, though. The Forest Service wants the camp to repaint the exterior of the cabins now. They have a redwood finish now, but there are no redwoods in the area. However, the National Registry will not let them do it since that would be a major change in the exterior of the building. It actually wants add more cabins, but cannot do so on the existing property. However, there is another ten acres that abut the property that is available for a new lease. Consequently, the camp is in negotiations to acquire that property to add new buildings.
In other words, I am betting the upgrades to the churches you are talking about would be difficult if the building is on a historical registry that is probably what is preventing any new up grades there. It is not the diocese, or even local governments, it is the restrictions of the registry.
Sure, @Bishops Finger, I didn't take it that @Hugal was saying that dance was compulsory.
On the 'moving around' thing, provided we are physically capable of doing so, I think there is something in that. I'm getting used to people wandering around during Orthodox services lighting candles or venerating icons and so forth, even though I only tend to do that myself before the service starts.
Old habits die hard. I tend to stay in one place once things get going.
Perhaps I ought to do a little jig and see what happens?
The homeless community that huddles around Prestonville Baptist Church will be glad to know that they just need to dance. As their nighttime temperatures dip below freezing for the next five days or so they'll be so relieved, all while knowing that Jesus still got his annual ostentatious birth production! The current leader of the Christian Laser Light Show Fellowship really approves, too!!! LOL
When our family visited the cathedral in Cologne, I was struck by how dark the interior stone was inside the building, then I realized it was likely because of the soot from hundreds of years of candles and incense.
It is something to see how the interior of Notre Dame shines after the removal of all the soot that had been in the building--at least from the pictures
I know many churches that could be on the registry, but have chosen night up be.
Can a property in England, Wales or Scotland listed without the consent of the owner?
Yes they can, anyone can nominate a building to be listed via various bodies in the constituent nations. They'll then assess the nomination and approve it for listing subject to Ministerial approval (which I think is normally pro-forma)
Although in most of the cases we are discussing buildings would have been listed as such for many years, and the point at which they would have been nominated is now in the distant past.
Not only without their consent, but even without their knowledge until after the event.
Some years ago I was living in a house in Wales, which belonged to a Charitable Trust (of which I was a Trustee, and looked sfter the property on their behalf). One day a letter arrived from Cadw (the Welsh heritage body) informing us that the building was now Grade II listed.
I know of a church in South Wales where some extraordinary late medieval wall-paintings were discovered underneath the plaster a few years ago, rare survivals from before the Reformation.
It's not led to any increase in attendance as far as I can gather.
A local man, whose family had been associated with the church since it was built, and who himself had been a server there in his youth, took exception to the plans, and managed to get the church registered as a Listed Building. Some 15 years on, the church is still in existence, but all parish activities are concentrated on the hall. There have been plans for refurbishing the 1960s church (finance to be raised by selling off some land for housing - about £1 million would be needed), but I'm not sure where matters stand at this moment.
Or say, “Shamala hamala.” 😛
https://youtube.com/shorts/NQq9Dt0s_5E?si=4UKKkpFjKo8OBwOt
Humorously autotuned:
https://youtube.com/shorts/EXoEbWI7kLs?si=jgNWzYBwuZw1w_oY
Humorously autotuned and animated:
https://youtube.com/shorts/9BjcwXBqCa0?si=KARXQG4B5rscYUZ3
In our similar case we applied for Lottery funds and got £600,000 just before Covid to repair the roof, replace rotten iron window frames, and renovate the multi-colourd painted ceiling. By the time Covid had passed and we could start the work prices of materials had increased so much that we could only afford to do the roof.
I am glad. I have only a temporary bad back in mitigation but Satan would be having to dig his snowplough out before using it to drive to work before I dance in church.
I've also danced in church.
I'm not ashamed of doing either but I'm not in any hurry to do it again. Besides, I pulled a tendon the last time I did some 'Dad Dancing' by skanking and pogo-ing at a ska / punk gig with my daughter and her boyfriend.
I tell a lie. I've done some since, at local music festival and later at a Blockheads gig. I was more careful that time.
I don't have any objection on principle to people dancing in church. It's entirely up to them. As long as people aren't coerced to join in and I'm pretty sure @Hugal isn't advocating any such thing.
It's all down to context.
All this stuff makes sense in its own particular context, whether we are talking about icons and incense or guitars and synths or whatever else.
The building looks amazing, but I wouldn't want to have to pay to heat it ...
In addition, the ancillary structures (vestry, office etc.) were badly built, and subject to so much water ingress that - according to another local priest - the vestments in their cupboards were already unusable several years ago.
One idea put forward to reduce heating costs in the church proper was to install a glass ceiling a few feet above head height - this would keep the heat in, and also retain the natural light.
We went to visit a hospital patient this morning and drove past our old church building, standing empty. Mr. Lamb still yearns to re-acquire it (with what money?) and fill it with people (which he might actually have a chance at, supposing God granted him 30 more years of life).
In the late 60s, the Church Of My Youth (low-church Prayer Book Evangelical in those far-off days) had a regular attendance of 350+ on a Sunday morning, and 150+ in the evening. The senior Youth Group (16-18 year olds) had about 100 members meeting on a Saturday evening...
That said, I read a very well researched account of Methodism in the Huddersfield area in the 1920s. The decline during that decade was very marked. It was blamed on the cinema, a regular bus service and the widespread availability of the bicycle.
But the church is growing in Africa! That is because people will actually talk about Jesus.
I know our congregation went through a bit of a decline over the past twenty years. Then we got a young mother who invited the mothers of her kids play group to check us out, Now we have babies everywhere. I just hope the next generation of parents and kids will continue to do the invitin,
Using the figures in Callum Brown's The Death of Christian Britain; Understanding Secularisation 1800-2000, there was a modest increase in the proportion of Scots who were members of the Church of Scotland in the 1950s. There was a more marked increase in the number of children attending Sunday School, although that might simply correlate with the post-war baby boom. The decline in church attendance was already noticeable in the 1950s, although initially this mostly reflected a reduction in those attending two services on a Sunday. From about 1960 on, both church affiliation and church attendance dropped.
Scotland has a legacy of too many churches. In 1843, the Disruption, the Church of Scotland split. The new church, the Free Church of Scotland, embarked upon an ambitious programme of church, manse and school building. There were sufficient churches in Scotland in 1843; ten years later the number of churches had increased hugely, whilst the number of members hadn't increased to fill all the new churches. Moreover, many of the new churches were built close to the existing churches. Scotland has been over-provided with churches since 1843, although the process of selling off surplus churches has been ongoing for decades now.
Sure. I know people with connections with a charity in Kenya. They say you can't walk down the street without someone stopping you and asking whether you are 'saved'.
My brother was on a train recently here in the UK when an African woman next to him leaned forward and asked a German visitor opposite, 'Are you Christian?'
The German woman replied, 'Well, I am Roman Catholic...'
'That's not what I asked,' responded the African woman sourly. 'I asked "Are you Christian?"'
Ok, there are major cultural issues at play here. It's not simply a question of people from certain cultures being more vocal and direct.
Back when the churches and chapels here in the UK were fuller than they are now, not all of them would have been of the 'Are you saved?' variety.
Church attendance in the Western world didn't start to decline simply because people stopped inviting their friends and neighbours to church.
Most churches in Eastern Europe aren't overtly evangelistic in the US sense or the Two Thirds World sense but decline hasn't been as marked there (yet) as it has been in Western Europe and parts of the US.
There's a whole range of factors and forces at play to account for that. Sociological, cultural, socio-economic.
I'm not suggesting that the decline in church attendance in the textile towns of the West Riding of Yorkshire from the 1920s was purely down to the availability of bikes, buses and the cinema.
What I am saying is that there were a whole raft of reasons and factors at play.
This isn't an attempt to 'blame' anyone or anything, but to understand the complex and interwoven forces at work.
Western Europe isn't Africa.
The north-eastern USA or the Western seaboard aren't Africa. Neither are they Idaho, Alabama or Nevada.
There are wider forces and influences at play in all these places, including your own church situation, than whether people are inviting their friends and neighbours to church services.
Oh, and @Baptist Trainfan you can cycle along the canal towpath from Huddersfield along the Colne Valley easily enough ... 😉
But no, I wouldn't fancy cycling up to Golcar or up towards Castle Hill and Almondbury.
It was quite intense but soon fizzled out.
We could have all sorts of discussions as to why that might have been. Why revivalist movements of the 19th and early 20th century kind quickly faded.
I don't think it was just because they stopped inviting people to church.