Church of England

[Dod101]

The irony is that when plans are announced to close a village church, the locals, who may attend church only for the occasional christening, wedding or funeral are usually very vocal in their opposition to closure. Unfortunately they are not prepared to sign up to financially support the church.

there are patterns here.

CF village pubs, and once a year visitors. To financially support that pub doesn't even need anyone to "sign up" - just walk in and buy a drink (soft drinks are available ).

Same same .

Not sure I understand. No ‘signing up’ is required at any church I know. People are welcomed whether as a one off visit or if becoming a regular. Of course some sort of offering is usually expected but there is no penalty for not making a contribution.

Dod

[88V8]

...village pubs, and once a year visitors. To financially support that pub doesn't even need anyone to "sign up" - just walk in and buy a drink (soft drinks are available ).

Not sure I understand. No ‘signing up’ is required at any church I know. People are welcomed whether as a one off visit or if becoming a regular. Of course some sort of offering is usually expected but there is no penalty for not making a contribution.

Not in this world perhaps....

V8

[stewamax]

Of course some sort of offering is usually expected but there is no penalty for not making a contribution.

Not in this world perhaps....

I pictured St Peter jangling his keys, holding open the Pearly Gate in one hand, a proffered collection plate in the other, and a sign on the wall "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God"

A great moral dilemma... get it wrong and it is red-hot pitchfork time

[didds]

Not sure I understand. No ‘signing up’ is required at any church I know.
Dod

Dunno what you meant by this previously then?

Dod101 wrote:
The irony is that when plans are announced to close a village church, the locals, who may attend church only for the occasional christening, wedding or funeral are usually very vocal in their opposition to closure. Unfortunately they are not prepared to sign up to financially support the church.

[Dod101]

Not sure I understand. No ‘signing up’ is required at any church I know.
Dod

Dunno what you meant by this previously then?

Dod101 wrote:
The irony is that when plans are announced to close a village church, the locals, who may attend church only for the occasional christening, wedding or funeral are usually very vocal in their opposition to closure. Unfortunately they are not prepared to sign up to financially support the church.

Well no church that I know requires a contribution to its finances for anyone to get over the door or even to become a regular attender. That is what I mean by ‘signing up’. Obviously it is expected that a regular attender will understand that a church cannot exist on air and so the attendee is likely to make a regular contribution of his/her own volition .

Usually when a decision is taken to close a church it is because the financial drain to maintain the premises is just too much. Quite often regular attendance may be down to less than 20, sometimes single figures, but they often seem to close voluntarily. My comment about locals objecting to a church closing refers to what appears to be a lack of appreciation that churches do not exist in a vacuum nor often, do they have a big organisation behind them, able to maintain every individual church. They need local support and seldom get it from those who do not attend and yet it is those locals who are often quite vocal in complaining about the church closing.

Dod

[didds]

yeah , understood all of that (hence my previous CF village pubs etc). I just didnt get what you mean by "signing up" to a church etc,.

cheers

[1nvest]

I realise religion seen by many here as somewhat wacky and outdated. But I feel little sad about the imminent extinction of the church of England. Having been brought up in it (and methodist), and attended on and off over my adult life.

The decline now seems certain given the attendences in the pews are largely very elderly, except family services, which often I think is basically childminding. Once this generation passes on, I guess churches will convert to housing and museums.

I think secularisation is largely the reason, with society at large being un-religious, and un-churched now. But the Liberal bishops and Welby have to take blame too.

If the bloke/woman at the front thinks it's clap trap, why should I bother? Indeed.

The woke/climate change/lgbt+/politically correct version of christianity is a turn off for those in the pews. I think even if they don't believe themselves, they'd be better preaching a biblical christianity, if they were genuinely interested in saving the CoE.

As it is I guess extinction in a generation is inevitable ,and the bishops know this so just hanging on to their palaces and pensions long enough before the game's up. Do you agree, or even care?

Yes CoE churches are mostly tumbleweed. A church is the people. Other communities are more prepared to come together as a community and support those in need. CoE, mostly white (fading indigenous) have opted to go down the divorce/break-ups/others pathway. Our local catholic church is packed/over-flowing at every mass. As is the local Mosque. Local CoE's are rarely occupied, mostly when weddings or funerals and even then there's loads of room.

[Nimrod103]

I realise religion seen by many here as somewhat wacky and outdated. But I feel little sad about the imminent extinction of the church of England. Having been brought up in it (and methodist), and attended on and off over my adult life.

The decline now seems certain given the attendences in the pews are largely very elderly, except family services, which often I think is basically childminding. Once this generation passes on, I guess churches will convert to housing and museums.

I think secularisation is largely the reason, with society at large being un-religious, and un-churched now. But the Liberal bishops and Welby have to take blame too.

If the bloke/woman at the front thinks it's clap trap, why should I bother? Indeed.

The woke/climate change/lgbt+/politically correct version of christianity is a turn off for those in the pews. I think even if they don't believe themselves, they'd be better preaching a biblical christianity, if they were genuinely interested in saving the CoE.

As it is I guess extinction in a generation is inevitable ,and the bishops know this so just hanging on to their palaces and pensions long enough before the game's up. Do you agree, or even care?

Yes CoE churches are mostly tumbleweed. A church is the people. Other communities are more prepared to come together as a community and support those in need. CoE, mostly white (fading indigenous) have opted to go down the divorce/break-ups/others pathway. Our local catholic church is packed/over-flowing at every mass. As is the local Mosque. Local CoE's are rarely occupied, mostly when weddings or funerals and even then there's loads of room.

Surely the foundation of any church or mosque has to be a belief in the supernatural, and as a result compelled to follow a set of rules laid down thousands of years ago. Don’t you find it very worrying that adherents of Catholicism and Islam have a far greater belief in something which is unproven by science [Deletion] than “adherents “ of the Church of England? The latter would seem to be taking a rational view of life, death and the real World. [Deletion]

Moderator Message:
Suggesting followers of a particular religious belief are hysterical and/or suggesting they are lunatics is disparaging to to them and has been deleted. Please follow the rules of this site when posting. Thanks. - Chris

[1nvest]

Surely the foundation of any church or mosque has to be a belief in the supernatural, and as a result compelled to follow a set of rules laid down thousands of years ago. Don’t you find it very worrying that adherents of Catholicism and Islam have a far greater belief in something which is unproven by science [Deletion] than “adherents “ of the Church of England? The latter would seem to be taking a rational view of life, death and the real World. [Deletion]

I'm Catholic, attend church, but have little regard for the doctrine, I partake for the community spirit. Helps others, but periodically that turns around and supports you in times of stress/difficulties in ways that acquaintances down the pub or friends/family cannot. White males such as myself have been social engineered to be outcasts, seen policies that have driven declines in family values and community spirit (isolation), whereas other communities are generally more communal. The community decline is even more pronounced for CofE, I imagine that some elderly CofE widows who have rarely attended church can be very isolated/lonely both physically and spiritually. In every case across time/history the indigenous are made outcasts and their population reduced to minorities. The engineering to dissuade families (high divorce rates, reduced birth rates, not attending community gatherings etc.) are just directed in order for others to ultimately prevail. Another couple of decades and Britain will more likely be predominately non-white, with a Islamic majority as that has the most aggressive expansion/dominance policies (out breed/migrate, consider all others as evil). There are already signs that that doctrine has permeated right through both Local Authorities and State as discriminatory evidence is indicating (return of defaced Passports/Birth Certificates etc. for having the 'wrong' religion declared on the forms).

Spiritually, I opine it to be less rational to believe that scientifically the universe ('god') doesn't exist. When children are raised in the absence of anything other than they're just a insignificant single ant of billions then that's inclined to induce selfish behaviour and isolation. The CofE is reaping what it has sowed - forget family values, marry for the party and divorce/separate some time later, doesn't matter if you marry into the same sex, disregard everyone else - just think of yourself etc. The CofE is founded on a pure selfish foundation - the desire of a King to divorce his wife, not honour his for-better-or-worse promise. But so also do most if not all other religions have their negative side histories. You have the option to detach from each/all ... isolate, or affiliate to the one you opine to be the least worst and at least have some additional element of community. Each to their own.

[Nimrod103]

The CofE is founded on a pure selfish foundation - the desire of a King to divorce his wife, not honour his for-better-or-worse promise. But so also do most if not all other religions have their negative side histories.

An accident of history. AIUI annulment of marriages (by the Pope) was relatively common when dynastic requirements demanded. But of course only for kings and princes. It was Henry VIII's misfortune that he had been forced to marry a Spanish princess, and the Pope at that time was under the control of her brother in law, the Spanish King. Up until the time of Edward the Confessor it had been quite common for English kings to take more than one wife, but that practise was discontinued under the ever so saintly Edward, and the puritanical Normans.
Anyway, the divorce gave rise to the Reformation, and for the first time English Christians were able to read for themselves what it actually said in the Bible. As I recall, the Bible doesn't say anything about just having one wife. That was an invention of one of the Popes.

[bungeejumper]

As I recall, the Bible doesn't say anything about just having one wife. That was an invention of one of the Popes.

Neatly counterbalanced by the recollection that the Koran doesn't ban alcohol - it was added much later as an afterthought by some killjoy religious council or other. Not that Turkey or Egypt (or Indonesia for that matter) would ever have had much truck with a ban in any case.

Speaking of which, one result of the Reformation was that churches stopped serving beer in church. (A tradition that had put bums on seats and thus helped to save souls.) It's an odd thing to look out of my window at the 15th century CofE church across the road, and reflect that it would once have exercised a doubly spiritual function. Right now, the church is planning an entertainment event at which alcohol will be sold on the premises, and apparently they've got to get a special dispensation from the bishop. I don't think the catholic French would have spent much time worrying about that little problem.

BJ

[kempiejon]

My religious studies is a bit pop but I'm sure the old testament was OK with many wives but by the new edition just one wife to which the husband should be true and vice versa for the ladies. The Torah is good with polygamy but later on the rabbis decided against it, at least one of the sects still allows it. The Quran does say intoxication is haram though doesn't specifically mention alcohol, nor heroin, pot etc. God gives you a body in perfect condition and you should keep it as such until you return it to him.

There was a fair bit of wine in the bible wasn't there, all that bibbing, turning water into it but I think Jesus swore off the drink, was that at the last super, until he met the disciples in heaven.

Of course back when the all the rules were worked out and then later written down the water wasn't that good to drink.

[Adamski]

Latest from the CoE is dropping the word church as part of a rebrand and replacing with community. "Peter on this rock I will build my Community". Last year they were considering a general neuter god, now this. You have to laugh.

I have an idea. With "England" now being associated with the far right. And to avoid misogyny and being arrested as a terrorist. The CoE can drop church and England, and simply be called "of". And God as "they". That'll bring the punters back

[scrumpyjack]

Not sure I understand. No ‘signing up’ is required at any church I know.
Dod

Dunno what you meant by this previously then?

Dod101 wrote:
The irony is that when plans are announced to close a village church, the locals, who may attend church only for the occasional christening, wedding or funeral are usually very vocal in their opposition to closure. Unfortunately they are not prepared to sign up to financially support the church.

Perhaps they feel that if the CofE can dole out £100 million in 'compensation' for slavery, when it seems doubtful they had profited from it nor were responsible for it, donations are not needed?

https://historyreclaimed.co.uk/the-chur ... ave-trade/

[gryffron]

I thought the Church of England was almost single handedly responsible for the abolitionist movement which got rid of slavery worldwide. They have less cause than almost anyone else in the world to apologise about slavery. This despite the bible dedicating numerous chapters to the correct ownership and treatment of slaves.

Gryff

[kempiejon]

I thought the Church of England was almost single handedly responsible for the abolitionist movement which got rid of slavery worldwide. They have less cause than almost anyone else in the world to apologise about slavery. This despite the bible dedicating numerous chapters to the correct ownership and treatment of slaves.

Gryff

I think that's the old bit of the bible. Not saying CofE isn't into all the books but it's a lot more Jesus than the bits with instructions about slaves, stoning and monsters seen in the early scriptures.

[Harry23]

Latest from the CoE is dropping the word church as part of a rebrand and replacing with community. "Peter on this rock I will build my Community". Last year they were considering a general neuter god, now this. You have to laugh.

I have an idea. With "England" now being associated with the far right. And to avoid misogyny and being arrested as a terrorist. The CoE can drop church and England, and simply be called "of". And God as "they". That'll bring the punters back

When the CoE replaces "church" with "community" it may have an interesting effect on its 39 Articles, for example number 20:

"XX. Of the Authority of the Church.
The Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies, and authority in Controversies of Faith: and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God's Word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another. Wherefore, although the Church be a witness and a keeper of Holy Writ, yet, as it ought not to decree any thing against the same, so besides the same ought it not to enforce any thing to be believed for necessity of Salvation. "

Changing it to "The community hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies" gives it a quite different connotation, it almost sounds democratic and the ordinary members will be able to create their own ceremonies

https://anglicansonline.org/basics/thir ... icles.html

[stewamax]

...the Bible doesn't say anything about just having one wife. That was an invention of one of the Popes.

The Papacy itself has not always been celibate: Adrian II, John XVII and Clement IV were married. Others are known to have been widowed before being elevated to the Papacy or to have had mistresses and begotten children.

The Bible (KJV - 1611) may be unspecific about monogamy, but the male marital vows in the contemporaneous C of E Book of Common Prayer (BCP - 1662) are specific: Wilt thou have this woman to thy wedded wife, to live together after God's ordinance in the holy estate of Matrimony? Wilt thou love her, comfort her, honour, and keep her, in sickness and in health; and, forsaking all other, keep thee only unto her, so long as ye both shall live?

The BCP was until the 20th century the definitive compendium of the 'role' of the C of E and its adherents. And it is notably forthright and blunt about the purposes of marriage in language of matchless felicity and memorable turn of phrase. It is still canonically valid, although most C of E priests plump for watered-down demotic ‘alternative’ versions. Perhaps today's liberated happy couple would be put off by being told that their marriage "...is not by any to be enterprised, nor taken in hand, unadvisedly, lightly, or wantonly, to satisfy men's carnal lusts and appetites, like brute beasts that have no understanding;....duly considering the causes for which Matrimony was ordained.
First, It was ordained for the procreation of children, ....
Secondly, It was ordained for a remedy against sin, and to avoid fornication; that such persons as have not the gift of continency might marry, and keep themselves undefiled members of Christ's body.

[ursaminortaur]

I thought the Church of England was almost single handedly responsible for the abolitionist movement which got rid of slavery worldwide. They have less cause than almost anyone else in the world to apologise about slavery. This despite the bible dedicating numerous chapters to the correct ownership and treatment of slaves.

Gryff

Although the Church of England was involved in the abolitionist movement I think the leading lights were mostly Methodists and Quakers.

[ReformedCharacter]

I thought the Church of England was almost single handedly responsible for the abolitionist movement which got rid of slavery worldwide. They have less cause than almost anyone else in the world to apologise about slavery. This despite the bible dedicating numerous chapters to the correct ownership and treatment of slaves.

Gryff

Although the Church of England was involved in the abolitionist movement I think the leading lights were mostly Methodists and Quakers.

From the 1780s to the 1840s, an influential group based in a small village south of London committed themselves to fight for positive social change. Named the 'Clapham Saints', though later referred to as the Clapham Sect, the members were evangelical Anglican social reformers. 'The Saints' was a disparaging name ascribed to those attending Holy Trinity Church (now St Paul's Parish Church) on Clapham Common, whose curate Henry Venn was one of the founders of the Clapham Sect, along with figures such as William Wilberforce and Henry Thornton.

https://artuk.org/discover/stories/the-role-of-the-clapham-sect-in-the-fight-for-the-abolition-of-slavery

RC