Stone the crows, the God squad's still here

[adderslj]

While most of the coverage of the first results of the recent UK census has focused on the 370,000 practicing Jedi in the UK, relatively few have picked up on the most surprising fact: Over 70% of people still classify themselves as Christian.

That's a pretty hard thing to believe given that only around 11% of the population go to church regularly. The hope for the Christian faith in there is that the dropping church attendance are nothing to do with a rejection of the messages of Christianity, but a rejection of the form of Christian worship we'd slipped into. It's the "go and get lectured at on Sunday and then forget about it for the rest of the week". I can see this even in my church, where we often get bigger attendance for Wednesday night Alpha and Bible study. Hell, sometime we get more people to church cleaning than we do to the Sunday service.

I actually don't have a problem with that. To me, time spent in the company of other Christians and study of the Bible are the foundations of a church community. Everything else springs from that. Those initial steps on the Christian path give you a growing hunger for all things Christian, and so you move into more conventional worship from there. The new Archbishop of Canterbury has some interesting things to say about the presentation of the unchanging message in a recent interview, where he comes across as both conservative and forward thinking. That's a good approach for the modern church, in my eyes. Too much damage has been by senior clerics questioning the fundamental tenets of the faith.

70% of the population has some identification with the Christian faith. It's up to those of us who still believe that a parish church has a strong role to play in communities, especially at a time when those communities are disintegrating, to find a way of making those churches welcoming places once more.

Comments

[maliszew.livejournal.com]

Do you think it's primarily a question of the form of worship that's off-putting to nominal Christians? In my experience, most of the people I know who no longer attend church regularly do so not because they dislike the liturgy but because they don't actually believe what their religion teaches. They might, in a pinch, when asked by a pollster, identify themselves as "Christian," but that's just a stock answer that reveals little about their real beliefs.

Maybe what I've experienced is a peculiarly Catholic phenomenon. When Catholics leave the faith, they really leave the faith, perhaps. I do know many Protestants who hold to the notion that weekly church attendance is "superfluous" so long as they believe and lead a good life. That's not something I find among Catholics, practicing or not. Like I said, though, my experiences may be colored by the religious ghetto I inhabit.

Re:

[adders.livejournal.com]

I think the ArchBish puts it pretty well in the interview. His point is that the debate about Chrsitianity has got hung up on things like "So, I'm not allowed to screw outside marriage", and so people never hear the real message and the reason for that rule.

Thus, for many people it's easier to be nominally Christian if you stay away from church. The presence of other Christians tends to make you think about your choices.

[maliszew.livejournal.com]

That's fair enough, I guess, but what is it that's keeping people away from church? It can't imagine it's just a question of the liturgy or the preaching alone.

[adders.livejournal.com]

Well, it's the two in combination, I would have thought. Frankly, liturgy and preaching is no fun at all if you're a nominal Christian, and fascinating to (most) active Christians.

[maliszew.livejournal.com]

There was a period during which I didn't much like attending Mass, but I still went because I felt I should. Catholic theology holds that mere attendance is an occasion of grace, even if you're not attending to the mysteries with great devotion or even belief. I can attest that it's true in my own life. I found my enjoyment and appreciation of weekly liturgy grew by attending. I realize that's not a solution for everyone, but I do wonder sometimes whether making liturgy more "accessible" or "welcoming" is necessarily the best way to go.

[adders.livejournal.com]

You're misinterpreting me. I am in no way advocating making liturgy more "accessible". I am advocating churches putting in place a route into the church that is accessible, which eventually leads to a wider particpation in church life.

Wheeling people into church and presenting them with liturgy from a standing start is an excellent way to stop people ever getting involved in the church again. Introducing them to the general concepts of Christianity in a more personal setting and developing their spiritual life through Bible study and prayers meetings seems to be a more sensible way of helping new Christians grow.

I've only been an active Christian for a couple of years, after decades as an agnostic. If my reintroduction to the faith had been through a Catholic service (whether Roman or otherwise), I ight not be a Christian now. After two years of a developing relationship with God through Jesus, I now throughtly enjoy liturgy and fid it to be a valuable part of my spiritual life at the services I attend in Suffolk and Bristol. Back when I first came alive in my faith, I wouldn't have done so.

[maliszew.livejournal.com]

Ah. It's a fair point, I suppose. What it sounds like you're advocating is the return of a catechumenate, whereby potential Christians are slowly initiated into the Faith. The early Church used this method and the Catholic Church continues to do so to this day, as do the Orthodox churches. Catechumens are in fact forbidden from attending the full liturgy until they are baptized or otherwise fully initiated into the Church. They are sent away from Mass by the priest after the Liturgy of the Word and before the Liturgy of the Eucharist.