People don't seem to appreciate that small shop owners can't afford to stock their shelves with items that perhaps one person in six months may come in looking for (and then maybe decide it's too expensive and go elsewhere!) - they have to cater for demand, and if the demand is not there they have to find other ways of making an income. The same with churches - keeping big old draughty buildings going is very expensive and time-consuming, and pointless if they are only going to be used by a handful of people on the off chance that someone in the village may want to book a wedding this year!
Our local postmistress has recently retired; the business was pretty successful, but, after being on the market for over a year, the only offer she could get was from the local pharmacy (who had outgrown their premises), who, obviously, could not incorporate a post office into their business. So people currently have to travel 10 miles to the nearest f/t post office- which is also where the nearest bank is. The community council and other local agencies are trying to put together plans for a community-run local post office cum banking hub to meet a very real need.
People don't seem to appreciate that small shop owners can't afford to stock their shelves with items that perhaps one person in six months may come in looking for (and then maybe decide it's too expensive and go elsewhere!)
There are a few chains that capitalise on this situation, and often serve as the final nail in the coffin for the local-store - thinking of Dollar General/Dollar Tree in the US. The 'local' sized supermarkets can sometimes do the same in parts of the UK, but it tend not to be as 'successful' at doing this given geography.
The only offer she could get was from the local pharmacy ... , who, obviously, could not incorporate a post office into their business.
Why not? When we lived in Suffolk we sometimes visited Lavenham, where the PO counter was part of the pharmacy. Sadly it closed in 2016 "following a contract dispute with the subpostmaster" (according to the local paper).
And my own church, built as the surrounding estate was being built in the 1960s, housed the local PO for a while, before the shopping centre was finished. That room is still known as "the Post Office room"!
the only offer she could get was from the local pharmacy (who had outgrown their premises), who, obviously, could not incorporate a post office into their business.
In my (relatively "posh") part of Bristol my nearest Post Office is in the corner of a pharmacy.
the only offer she could get was from the local pharmacy (who had outgrown their premises), who, obviously, could not incorporate a post office into their business.
In my (relatively "posh") part of Bristol my nearest Post Office is in the corner of a pharmacy.
The PO in Our City High Street was, until recently, within a pharmacy. For various reasons, the PO has now moved to another nearby shop.
Maybe @Gallovidian's pharmacy just didn't have enough space for a Post Office?
I think space is one consideration, but also staffing - they struggle to staff the pharmacy at times... it no longer opens Saturdays. And of course running a post office is quite a commitment in terms of training etc. Plus, as the pharmacy is part of a 'chain' it probably just doesn't fit their business model.
the only offer she could get was from the local pharmacy (who had outgrown their premises), who, obviously, could not incorporate a post office into their business.
In my (relatively "posh") part of Bristol my nearest Post Office is in the corner of a pharmacy.
another one here - rural Northants - whose closest PO, in the next village, is in a corner of the chemist.
I think space is one consideration, but also staffing - they struggle to staff the pharmacy at times... it no longer opens Saturdays. And of course running a post office is quite a commitment in terms of training etc. Plus, as the pharmacy is part of a 'chain' it probably just doesn't fit their business model.
Yes, all true. The point we were making (as I'm sure you'll have gathered ) is that it's by no means obvious that a Post Office can't be incorporated into a pharmacy!
Churches can be - and are - used for a variety of non-religious purposes (housing a Post Office and/or a community shop, for example), but there does need to be a good deal of input from local people, or so ISTM. If that isn't forthcoming, or if there is simply no community (or population, or £££), what is to be done?
Or it is possible they are being polite, to the person who has just told them they give a chunk of their time to something - and not saying “why would anyone want to do that ?”
For the record, I didn't go round trumpeting that I was doing it.
People got to hear I was doing so.
This town is like that. Everyone knows everyone else's business.
the only offer she could get was from the local pharmacy (who had outgrown their premises), who, obviously, could not incorporate a post office into their business.
In my (relatively "posh") part of Bristol my nearest Post Office is in the corner of a pharmacy.
That looks a really positive project!
There was a recent thread on Twitter where someone had posted a photo of a cafe in a church with a comment to the effect - isn't it terrible when something like this happens! To which most people, thankfully, replied how good it was to see the church being at the heart of the local community and meeting needs rather than just sitting back complaining that no one ever comes to church any more!
On my last holidays in Englandshire I visited two quite similar historic churches in the centre of fairly busy market towns. One was open for visitors to look round, admire the architecture, and maybe say a prayer, with a lady sat very discretely at a desk to answer any questions. The other had two - very friendly - ladies sat by the entrance to welcome visitors - and invite you to have a coffee in the cafe at the back of the church (drinks were free, but cakes available to buy), while about a dozen young children were busy creating their own representations of the stained glass windows. There were leaflets on the tables encouraging you to stop and say a prayer, or join one of the services (a midweek communion was just starting in the lady chapel when I was there) and saying there is always someone to talk to if you are feeling lonely or would like someone to pray for you. I know which made the biggest impression on me!
That looks a really positive project!
There was a recent thread on Twitter where someone had posted a photo of a cafe in a church with a comment to the effect - isn't it terrible when something like this happens! To which most people, thankfully, replied how good it was to see the church being at the heart of the local community and meeting needs rather than just sitting back complaining that no one ever comes to church any more!
On my last holidays in Englandshire I visited two quite similar historic churches in the centre of fairly busy market towns. One was open for visitors to look round, admire the architecture, and maybe say a prayer, with a lady sat very discretely at a desk to answer any questions. The other had two - very friendly - ladies sat by the entrance to welcome visitors - and invite you to have a coffee in the cafe at the back of the church (drinks were free, but cakes available to buy), while about a dozen young children were busy creating their own representations of the stained glass windows. There were leaflets on the tables encouraging you to stop and say a prayer, or join one of the services (a midweek communion was just starting in the lady chapel when I was there) and saying there is always someone to talk to if you are feeling lonely or would like someone to pray for you. I know which made the biggest impression on me!
Well, the church without a cafe was at least open - maybe they simply don't have enough resources (human and/or £££) to do what the other church was doing? Putting a cafe and other facilities in an historic building doesn't come cheap!
That's very true. And as you say, just being open is a plus in this day and age. But a more pro-active welcome costs nothing, rather than just sitting behind a desk reading in case someone might want to ask a question.
But my real point was the injustice(?) of people saying such community resources don't belong in churches. Back in the day, churches - or cathedrals at least - were always used for a lot of things besides worship, and were genuine hubs of the community. If we can recapture that kind of relevance and service to our communities, perhaps we may find some folk inclined to open up more of their lives, ask for prayer for their needs, and maybe even join in with any acts of worship that are going on and realise that church doesn't have to be something 'holier than thou' that is all very nice, but irrelevant to them and the modern world?
Sadly, some folk seem to think that using church buildings like that is sacrilege! If nothing else, that suggests they don't know their history, and have divided "holy" from "secular" in an unhealthy way.
Sadly, some folk seem to think that using church buildings like that is sacrilege! If nothing else, that suggests they don't know their history, and have divided "holy" from "secular" in an unhealthy way.
IME it cuts both ways though - you might have some of the worshippers thinking that, but you're far more likely to have the wider non-churchgoing villagers thinking that - ie, putting things in the church is another reason *not* to go to church because it has sold out... so potentially you'd have to be at least wary of the risk of further alienating the fish you're trying to fish amongst!
I know some of these initiatives in Herefordshire, with ancient church buildings used very imaginatively indeed.
Don't underestimate the effort that went into initiating and maintaining these projects!
I take my hat off to them and I'm sure there are lessons there for other settings - whether Anglican, Free Church or whatever else - who wish to do likewise.
That's very true. And as you say, just being open is a plus in this day and age. But a more pro-active welcome costs nothing, rather than just sitting behind a desk reading in case someone might want to ask a question.
But my real point was the injustice(?) of people saying such community resources don't belong in churches. Back in the day, churches - or cathedrals at least - were always used for a lot of things besides worship, and were genuine hubs of the community. If we can recapture that kind of relevance and service to our communities, perhaps we may find some folk inclined to open up more of their lives, ask for prayer for their needs, and maybe even join in with any acts of worship that are going on and realise that church doesn't have to be something 'holier than thou' that is all very nice, but irrelevant to them and the modern world?
Yes, OK, but my point about the sheer cost (and effort) involved in putting cafe and other facilities into a church still stands. There are indeed other, and less costly, ways of being open and welcoming.
I know some of these initiatives in Herefordshire, with ancient church buildings used very imaginatively indeed.
Don't underestimate the effort that went into initiating and maintaining these projects!
I take my hat off to them and I'm sure there are lessons there for other settings - whether Anglican, Free Church or whatever else - who wish to do likewise.
I hate going in to ecclesiastical buildings used as cafés. They smell wrong and the atmosphere is completely destroyed. I know this makes me a heretic but there we are. Also peace is destroyed. Prayer and cafes are simply not compatible. So stuff your café.
On the financial front, I suspect, where there is the will, commitment and time, there are probably grants (locally and nationally) available to help make these kinds of projects more viable.
On the financial front, I suspect, where there is the will, commitment and time, there are probably grants (locally and nationally) available to help make these kinds of projects more viable.
Grants cover capital costs but won't cover running costs. Apparently such projects run on air.
I hate going in to ecclesiastical buildings used as cafés. They smell wrong and the atmosphere is completely destroyed. I know this makes me a heretic but there we are. Also peace is destroyed. Prayer and cafes are simply not compatible. So stuff your café.
Well, each to their own. I hear what you say...
Nevertheless, it might in at least some cases be possible to make sure that part of the church (the Lady Chapel, perhaps?) is entirely reserved - and suitably screened off - for those who do wish to simply sit and pray.
The complete closure of the church, and maybe its subsequent demolition or reduction to a *romantic ruin* is surely a less acceptable alternative?
I have no direct experience of how these things work, but a church-based cafe (which may only be open at limited times - 2 or 3 days a week) may well help to contribute at least some £££ to keeping an otherwise little-used building wind- and water-tight.
The complete closure of the church, and maybe its subsequent demolition or reduction to a *romantic ruin* is surely a less acceptable alternative?
Thing is as well, churches don't exist in a vacuum, even in the smallest places. There's a church in a village over my way that's quiet near to a certain large railway building project and had been fundraising for years to build a community cafe etc. In the meantime said project with its grant money has completely refitted the village hall to an incredible standard - leaving the church now fundraising to be an alternative community hub in a community of 400 people!
Then there's rural pubs... it would be quite easy for the church, the village hall, and the pub in a lot of villages (where they survive) to get into a fight over provision of the same services with the survival of each at stake if they're not the one that 'wins'
Well, precisely. The church will often be a second-rate community space, and if there is first-rate competition, such as a well-fitted parish hall and/or an accessible and welcoming pub, I don't see how being a second-rate alternative is giving the church a viable future.
This, I think, is one area where I am a bit of a fundamentalist, with an extremely small f. Churches are there to be churches, and this requires them to be spaces in which people can pray with a degree of relish. I'm not the only person on earth, by any means, for whom this requires the space to be set apart, and be free of sensory evidence of other activities. This means that apparently underused churches which do nothing other than open are very much more useful to me and my kind than ones which are constant hubs of community activity. The latter is not an unworthy use of a church, but it does prevent the church from being a church, in any sense other than hosting a liturgy at the appointed time/s, as far as I'm concerned.
It's a real dilemma, to which I'm not sure there is an answer, but there is still a point to be taken on board, that alternative uses diminish the building as a distinctive resource in its own right, even as it might allow the building to remain open and available.
This means that, ecclesiology aside, RC churches which open are far more reliably useful than C of E. They are nearly always just there to be churches, and that's just fine by me.
Certainly there is a very vibrant community centre in a neighbouring small town which has secured funding to revamp the building, provide a good quality kitchen, and now houses a regular pop up cafe, warm space, and various other community events. Currently we have nothing comparable in Wigtown - altho there are a lot of cafes already, associated with the booktown. If and when the church hall is sold off, this will release funds to adapt the church building to better fit the needs of the 21st century.
Certainly there is a very vibrant community centre in a neighbouring small town which has secured funding to revamp the building, provide a good quality kitchen, and now houses a regular pop up cafe, warm space, and various other community events. Currently we have nothing comparable in Wigtown - altho there are a lot of cafes already, associated with the booktown. If and when the church hall is sold off, this will release funds to adapt the church building to better fit the needs of the 21st century.
Hopefully the provision of a quiet space for personal reflection has not been ruled out of court in the 21st century.
Hopefully the provision of a quiet space for personal reflection has not been ruled out of court in the 21st century.
Yes, this. I entered a church in central London to do just that, and was glared at by those who had taken it over as a cafe. The stained glass windows had been blocked off, they clearly didn’t want people to come in to look at them or to treat the building as a church.
This may lead to another thread due to a tangent, but it got me thinking along the lines of this one. I was looking at a facebook page for a church which has set itself up on social media as a community organisation and calls itself a ‘worshipping non-religious church’.
(Tangent: isn’t this a contradiction in terms?)
If a ‘non-religious’ church building were to rent out space each week for others to worship in it, or to meditate in it, and to community groups including cafes and restaurants and musical groups and therapeutic organisations etc to use it thereby encouraging local commerce and social interaction, might that be a positive way forward?
There might be a small quiet chapel room too for quiet reflection, like those in hospitals.
Sorry, I'm going to bow out at this point. This is one thing where it's become clear to me that compromise really doesn't work, because the thing I'm looking to preserve is totally fragile, and the first thing to go as soon as other activities become a regular thing. So there you are - it really is a case of use it in its original form, or lose that altogether, however the amenity of the building is subsequently preserved.
Is it really, my understanding of worship in the CorE was that it was mainly programmed worship - which is mostly spoken or sung liturgy rather than quiet reflection ?
Yes, it is, absolutely, but outside of services, churches are frequently valued as spaces for quiet reflection. That, to me, really does take the whole building. It's an amenity that members of the surrounding community frequently value, but not to the point of paying for it. This is the nub of the problem.
Of course, we have to acknowledge that most churches are normally locked and inaccessible outside of organised services, so opening them up as a community hub would not be taking anything away!
Yes, it is, absolutely, but outside of services, churches are frequently valued as spaces for quiet reflection. That, to me, really does take the whole building. It's an amenity that members of the surrounding community frequently value, but not to the point of paying for it. This is the nub of the problem.
There is, I think, a cost to keeping a place open, in that people have to be present to make sure the place is kept safe and clean for those who are there. And in some places it has to be kept heated or cooled to hospitable temperatures, bathrooms stocked, etc.
These are not insurmountable costs, but I think that opening doors does bring in additional costs that are worth considering.
I've also known urban churches that set up "space sharing" arrangements with charities that allow for mutual use of the building, these can help with keeping the building used and covering costs, but they can get problematic if the church starts acting like a landlord. I'm not sure I've seen that approach done in rural settings, but I can imagine it.
I like the idea of a church being open, but there will be challenges, hopefully good ones.
There is a risk but I would love to know how often it happens. It's not unheard of, I know that. But neither, I remember being told, is it as frequent as many imagine.
I remember the church in my hometown having a fire set under one of the back pews a few years ago - fortunately this was discovered before any real damage was done.
There is, I think, a cost to keeping a place open, in that people have to be present to make sure the place is kept safe and clean for those who are there. And in some places it has to be kept heated or cooled to hospitable temperatures, bathrooms stocked, etc.
These are not insurmountable costs, but I think that opening doors does bring in additional costs that are worth considering.
If a parish or congregation is struggling to pay the clergy and heat the building on Sundays, being open throughout the week will indeed present insurmountable costs.
Back in the day, churches - or cathedrals at least - were always used for a lot of things besides worship, and were genuine hubs of the community.
And also back in the day, Jesus drove the money-changers out of the temple. One challenge is to decide which of your activities fall in to which category.
It is. And I think the reason drove out the money-changers was more to do with the fact that the traders were profiteering from their activities, in blatant collusion with the Temple authorities, rather than with parts of the Temple (and we're not talking about the specifically 'holy' areas of it) being used for non-religious activities.
As an aside, I wonder when the idea of churches being seen as "quiet reflective places to which one can go to escape the pressures of the world" came in? I accept, of course, the monks and others have often retreated to isolated places and chapels; but I'm thinking more of ordinary folk. I suspect that the concept is linked to the rise of Romanticism in the early 1800s, but that's merely a guess.
FWIW non-conformists don't tend to have the same way of looking at church buildings as Anglicans or Catholics - the buildings are very much seen as "meeting places for the people of God" and their worship areas are, traditionally, rarely open outside service times.
It is. And I think the reason drove out the money-changers was more to do with the fact that the traders were profiteering from their activities, in blatant collusion with the Temple authorities, rather than with parts of the Temple (and we're not talking about the specifically 'holy' areas of it) being used for non-religious activities.
As an aside, I wonder when the idea of churches being seen as "quiet reflective places to which one can go to escape the pressures of the world" came in? I accept, of course, the monks and others have often retreated to isolated places and chapels; but I'm thinking more of ordinary folk. I suspect that the concept is linked to the rise of Romanticism in the early 1800s, but that's merely a guess.
FWIW non-conformists don't tend to have the same way of looking at church buildings as Anglicans or Catholics - the buildings are very much seen as "meeting places for the people of God" and their worship areas are, traditionally, rarely open outside service times.
Is that a function of being non-conformist i.e. gathered congregations rather than a territorial parish structure, do you think?
Scotland has a Presbyterian territorial parish structure ,but there are not all that many 'ordinary' Presbyterian parish churches which are open for prayer during the week. Presbyterians in general see church buildings as 'meeting places for the people of God
That being said I am always glad to go into any church building of all denominations if I see them open during the week.
It is. And I think the reason drove out the money-changers was more to do with the fact that the traders were profiteering from their activities, in blatant collusion with the Temple authorities, rather than with parts of the Temple (and we're not talking about the specifically 'holy' areas of it) being used for non-religious activities.
As an aside, I wonder when the idea of churches being seen as "quiet reflective places to which one can go to escape the pressures of the world" came in? I accept, of course, the monks and others have often retreated to isolated places and chapels; but I'm thinking more of ordinary folk. I suspect that the concept is linked to the rise of Romanticism in the early 1800s, but that's merely a guess.
FWIW non-conformists don't tend to have the same way of looking at church buildings as Anglicans or Catholics - the buildings are very much seen as "meeting places for the people of God" and their worship areas are, traditionally, rarely open outside service times.
Is that a function of being non-conformist i.e. gathered congregations rather than a territorial parish structure, do you think?
No, I think it's a different concept of "holy space", i.e. what's important is the Spirit dwelling within the people who gather; the building is simply a convenient and useful space in which to gather but (theoretically!) has no intrinsic significance. Of course one must remember that, for many years, non-conformists could only gather in homes or other such places; conversely some older chapels do have huge significance for generations of families who have worshipped there.
Professional money changers in the Temple (exploiting the worshippers by charging exorbitant rates for special coins to be able to buy the animals needed for prescribed sacrifices) are very different from a group of volunteers serving cost price tea and cakes and offering a listening ear and a kindly, prayerful word to lonely folk!
I suspect they were more akin to those selling bogus relics and other 'tourist tat' to pilgrims visiting the various shrines of our medieval cathedrals... and perhaps some of that tradition survives in some cathedral gift shops today. But that's not what we are talking of in ideas for local congregations being more relevant and available to the communities in which they live and preventing church buildings from being redundant museums to a past age of piety.
There is, I think, a cost to keeping a place open, in that people have to be present to make sure the place is kept safe and clean for those who are there. And in some places it has to be kept heated or cooled to hospitable temperatures, bathrooms stocked, etc.
These are not insurmountable costs, but I think that opening doors does bring in additional costs that are worth considering.
If a parish or congregation is struggling to pay the clergy and heat the building on Sundays, being open throughout the week will indeed present insurmountable costs.
I’ve been told that from an insurance point of view it is better for a church to be open and unmanned each day so that there is a throughput of people keeping an eye on it, than it being locked up and potentially broken into.
I was always disappointed when visiting a town or village if the church was closed to visitors.
I’ve been told that from an insurance point of view it is better for a church to be open and unmanned each day so that there is a throughput of people keeping an eye on it, than it being locked up and potentially broken into.
But does that depend on where it is and whether it's on the churchgeeks trail? The church for the Norfolk hamlet where my sister used to live is "miles from anywhere", standing by itself in a field. The visitor throughput is zero; any intruder could strip the place bare without anyone seeing.
"Famous" village churches in the area (eg Salle, Cawston, Blythburgh) are a different matter as they got plenty of visitors.
I’ve been told that from an insurance point of view it is better for a church to be open and unmanned each day so that there is a throughput of people keeping an eye on it, than it being locked up and potentially broken into.
But does that depend on where it is? The church for the Norfolk hamlet where my sister used to live is "miles from anywhere", standing by itself in a field. The visitor throughput is zero; any intruder could strip the place bare without anyone seeing.
However the isolation is also protective in itself, I would suggest.
Comments
Our local postmistress has recently retired; the business was pretty successful, but, after being on the market for over a year, the only offer she could get was from the local pharmacy (who had outgrown their premises), who, obviously, could not incorporate a post office into their business. So people currently have to travel 10 miles to the nearest f/t post office- which is also where the nearest bank is. The community council and other local agencies are trying to put together plans for a community-run local post office cum banking hub to meet a very real need.
There are a few chains that capitalise on this situation, and often serve as the final nail in the coffin for the local-store - thinking of Dollar General/Dollar Tree in the US. The 'local' sized supermarkets can sometimes do the same in parts of the UK, but it tend not to be as 'successful' at doing this given geography.
And my own church, built as the surrounding estate was being built in the 1960s, housed the local PO for a while, before the shopping centre was finished. That room is still known as "the Post Office room"!
In my (relatively "posh") part of Bristol my nearest Post Office is in the corner of a pharmacy.
The PO in Our City High Street was, until recently, within a pharmacy. For various reasons, the PO has now moved to another nearby shop.
Maybe @Gallovidian's pharmacy just didn't have enough space for a Post Office?
another one here - rural Northants - whose closest PO, in the next village, is in a corner of the chemist.
Yes, all true. The point we were making (as I'm sure you'll have gathered
Churches can be - and are - used for a variety of non-religious purposes (housing a Post Office and/or a community shop, for example), but there does need to be a good deal of input from local people, or so ISTM. If that isn't forthcoming, or if there is simply no community (or population, or £££), what is to be done?
For the record, I didn't go round trumpeting that I was doing it.
People got to hear I was doing so.
This town is like that. Everyone knows everyone else's business.
It's getting less like that year by year though.
We have Post Office in our local pharmacy too.
https://www.hubcommunity.org/
This is a village church in Herefordshire - it's part of a five-church benefice - so actual religious services aren't all that frequent!
http://www.wyedoreparishes.org.uk/
The website is worth a look, as the benefice seems to be populated by some quite imaginative people...
There was a recent thread on Twitter where someone had posted a photo of a cafe in a church with a comment to the effect - isn't it terrible when something like this happens! To which most people, thankfully, replied how good it was to see the church being at the heart of the local community and meeting needs rather than just sitting back complaining that no one ever comes to church any more!
On my last holidays in Englandshire I visited two quite similar historic churches in the centre of fairly busy market towns. One was open for visitors to look round, admire the architecture, and maybe say a prayer, with a lady sat very discretely at a desk to answer any questions. The other had two - very friendly - ladies sat by the entrance to welcome visitors - and invite you to have a coffee in the cafe at the back of the church (drinks were free, but cakes available to buy), while about a dozen young children were busy creating their own representations of the stained glass windows. There were leaflets on the tables encouraging you to stop and say a prayer, or join one of the services (a midweek communion was just starting in the lady chapel when I was there) and saying there is always someone to talk to if you are feeling lonely or would like someone to pray for you. I know which made the biggest impression on me!
Well, the church without a cafe was at least open - maybe they simply don't have enough resources (human and/or £££) to do what the other church was doing? Putting a cafe and other facilities in an historic building doesn't come cheap!
But my real point was the injustice(?) of people saying such community resources don't belong in churches. Back in the day, churches - or cathedrals at least - were always used for a lot of things besides worship, and were genuine hubs of the community. If we can recapture that kind of relevance and service to our communities, perhaps we may find some folk inclined to open up more of their lives, ask for prayer for their needs, and maybe even join in with any acts of worship that are going on and realise that church doesn't have to be something 'holier than thou' that is all very nice, but irrelevant to them and the modern world?
IME it cuts both ways though - you might have some of the worshippers thinking that, but you're far more likely to have the wider non-churchgoing villagers thinking that - ie, putting things in the church is another reason *not* to go to church because it has sold out... so potentially you'd have to be at least wary of the risk of further alienating the fish you're trying to fish amongst!
Don't underestimate the effort that went into initiating and maintaining these projects!
I take my hat off to them and I'm sure there are lessons there for other settings - whether Anglican, Free Church or whatever else - who wish to do likewise.
But they take a lot of hard work.
Yes, OK, but my point about the sheer cost (and effort) involved in putting cafe and other facilities into a church still stands. There are indeed other, and less costly, ways of being open and welcoming.
Indeed, and lots of hard cash, too.
Grants cover capital costs but won't cover running costs. Apparently such projects run on air.
Well, each to their own. I hear what you say...
Nevertheless, it might in at least some cases be possible to make sure that part of the church (the Lady Chapel, perhaps?) is entirely reserved - and suitably screened off - for those who do wish to simply sit and pray.
The complete closure of the church, and maybe its subsequent demolition or reduction to a *romantic ruin* is surely a less acceptable alternative?
I have no direct experience of how these things work, but a church-based cafe (which may only be open at limited times - 2 or 3 days a week) may well help to contribute at least some £££ to keeping an otherwise little-used building wind- and water-tight.
Thing is as well, churches don't exist in a vacuum, even in the smallest places. There's a church in a village over my way that's quiet near to a certain large railway building project and had been fundraising for years to build a community cafe etc. In the meantime said project with its grant money has completely refitted the village hall to an incredible standard - leaving the church now fundraising to be an alternative community hub in a community of 400 people!
Then there's rural pubs... it would be quite easy for the church, the village hall, and the pub in a lot of villages (where they survive) to get into a fight over provision of the same services with the survival of each at stake if they're not the one that 'wins'
this is very cheery for an early evening
This, I think, is one area where I am a bit of a fundamentalist, with an extremely small f. Churches are there to be churches, and this requires them to be spaces in which people can pray with a degree of relish. I'm not the only person on earth, by any means, for whom this requires the space to be set apart, and be free of sensory evidence of other activities. This means that apparently underused churches which do nothing other than open are very much more useful to me and my kind than ones which are constant hubs of community activity. The latter is not an unworthy use of a church, but it does prevent the church from being a church, in any sense other than hosting a liturgy at the appointed time/s, as far as I'm concerned.
It's a real dilemma, to which I'm not sure there is an answer, but there is still a point to be taken on board, that alternative uses diminish the building as a distinctive resource in its own right, even as it might allow the building to remain open and available.
This means that, ecclesiology aside, RC churches which open are far more reliably useful than C of E. They are nearly always just there to be churches, and that's just fine by me.
Hopefully the provision of a quiet space for personal reflection has not been ruled out of court in the 21st century.
Yes, this. I entered a church in central London to do just that, and was glared at by those who had taken it over as a cafe. The stained glass windows had been blocked off, they clearly didn’t want people to come in to look at them or to treat the building as a church.
(Tangent: isn’t this a contradiction in terms?)
If a ‘non-religious’ church building were to rent out space each week for others to worship in it, or to meditate in it, and to community groups including cafes and restaurants and musical groups and therapeutic organisations etc to use it thereby encouraging local commerce and social interaction, might that be a positive way forward?
There might be a small quiet chapel room too for quiet reflection, like those in hospitals.
There is, I think, a cost to keeping a place open, in that people have to be present to make sure the place is kept safe and clean for those who are there. And in some places it has to be kept heated or cooled to hospitable temperatures, bathrooms stocked, etc.
These are not insurmountable costs, but I think that opening doors does bring in additional costs that are worth considering.
I've also known urban churches that set up "space sharing" arrangements with charities that allow for mutual use of the building, these can help with keeping the building used and covering costs, but they can get problematic if the church starts acting like a landlord. I'm not sure I've seen that approach done in rural settings, but I can imagine it.
I like the idea of a church being open, but there will be challenges, hopefully good ones.
If a parish or congregation is struggling to pay the clergy and heat the building on Sundays, being open throughout the week will indeed present insurmountable costs.
And also back in the day, Jesus drove the money-changers out of the temple. One challenge is to decide which of your activities fall in to which category.
As an aside, I wonder when the idea of churches being seen as "quiet reflective places to which one can go to escape the pressures of the world" came in? I accept, of course, the monks and others have often retreated to isolated places and chapels; but I'm thinking more of ordinary folk. I suspect that the concept is linked to the rise of Romanticism in the early 1800s, but that's merely a guess.
FWIW non-conformists don't tend to have the same way of looking at church buildings as Anglicans or Catholics - the buildings are very much seen as "meeting places for the people of God" and their worship areas are, traditionally, rarely open outside service times.
Is that a function of being non-conformist i.e. gathered congregations rather than a territorial parish structure, do you think?
That being said I am always glad to go into any church building of all denominations if I see them open during the week.
No, I think it's a different concept of "holy space", i.e. what's important is the Spirit dwelling within the people who gather; the building is simply a convenient and useful space in which to gather but (theoretically!) has no intrinsic significance. Of course one must remember that, for many years, non-conformists could only gather in homes or other such places; conversely some older chapels do have huge significance for generations of families who have worshipped there.
I suspect they were more akin to those selling bogus relics and other 'tourist tat' to pilgrims visiting the various shrines of our medieval cathedrals... and perhaps some of that tradition survives in some cathedral gift shops today. But that's not what we are talking of in ideas for local congregations being more relevant and available to the communities in which they live and preventing church buildings from being redundant museums to a past age of piety.
I’ve been told that from an insurance point of view it is better for a church to be open and unmanned each day so that there is a throughput of people keeping an eye on it, than it being locked up and potentially broken into.
I was always disappointed when visiting a town or village if the church was closed to visitors.
But does that depend on where it is and whether it's on the churchgeeks trail? The church for the Norfolk hamlet where my sister used to live is "miles from anywhere", standing by itself in a field. The visitor throughput is zero; any intruder could strip the place bare without anyone seeing.
"Famous" village churches in the area (eg Salle, Cawston, Blythburgh) are a different matter as they got plenty of visitors.
However the isolation is also protective in itself, I would suggest.