Thanks to Amelia for this extensive contribution (which was intended for the list but didn't get there), and to the others today also.
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Amelia Koh-Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, 3 June 2004 09:33
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; Insights List (E-mail)
Subject: Conversations about Bandy

Hi David,
 
I am one of the people trapsing along to do the Bandy-thing in Melbourne and then staying for an additional couple of days with Synod-mission-educators. My motivation is less about the Bandy-stuff and more to do with being up-to-date with what the other Synods and our Board of Mission are likely to be referring to as they go about with business. One of the things I am working on is summary notes of the main points he makes - so people can get an idea if they want to read the 4 books that are being promoted. I didn't comment before because the first discussion points referred to one of the books I haven't read yet. To my knowledge there are at least 4 staff from Board of Mission and 3 staff from Board of Education and quite a few people from NSW-ACT Presbyteries who will be going - so the Bandy material will have quite an impact in NSW-ACT - even if it only talking and contributing to thinking. (The networking side of being there and the corporate thinking time will probably end up as important as the content we cover).
 
So for, I have read two of the Bandy books - Moving off the Map and Christian Chaos. They both make quite interesting reads. One positive aspect is that Bandy has started to talk about post-Christendom paradigms. He has stated fairly clearly that churches need to think again and not assume that insular attitudes will work anymore. His work compared declining churches with thriving churches and identified some of the inward-outward looking patterns associate with each. This echoes some of what we are familiar with in NCLS material. Bandy went a bit further to do more than analyse research data. He offered a tick-list of strategies. I recognised some of the suggestions as things that some places are trying instinctively (or because they have been inspired - maybe both).
 
For example, he asserted that for congregations to be able to respond to rapid change they have to change how decisions are made and implemented - give a framework within which you can do anything rather than have to have every step of every move approved by committee - wow what a challenge to the UCA - interconcillar may have to learn to work differently! Nevertheless, I have seen a couple of congregations do this very well and they do develop a culture of permission-giving and being supportive of creative growth. Bandy said that if your Core Congregational Values and framework were clear (the boundaries of what you can't do need to be clear too) then you could give permission for people to be creative within the framework - as long as they didn't contravene the no-go zone they had implicit approval to try.
 
Is this useful for us? In a recent Presbytery Consultations Training Day at Sydney North I passed on some of Bandy's questions for Congregations from Moving off the Map. I suggested that people who would be facilitating Presbytery Consultations with Congregations could read through these just to get their minds into gear about what signs of life and vitality they might be looking for. There is certainly some useful material. The concepts may need to be reworded for some of our contexts, but the material is certainly worth a read.
 
Personally, I think we need to get even more radical in our thinking than Bandy does, but this is probably a good place to help people think more expansively. One of the things I would like to talk about during The Visit in July is - in quite a lot of places in the pretty foreseeable future we will be doing mission planning and mission education with groups that are not congregations. I believe that we will see a shift within the next 5 years that sees the UCA move from a Congregationally-focussed church to a Combo of Congregations and other groups - we will start by calling the alternative groups Faith Communities (because we already have a name in the Regulations for Faith Communities) - however, these faith communities will not be aiming at becoming congregations - instead they will be developing into something else. What? ...Hmmm?
 
I am preparing some information-sessions for people who want to explore the Bandy material further - if anyone wants to host or be part of a face-to-face group gathering of interested people please let me know. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
Blessings,
 
Amelia
 
Amelia Koh-Butler
ELM Associate Director (Education for Mission)
...part of the Board of Education of the NSW-ACT Synod...
 
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of David Powell
Sent: Thursday, 3 June 2004 7:18 AM
To: Insights List
Subject: Feeling left out: Hunter Harvest and Bandy

I was surprised how much mention of 'my club' was important to me in watching this program.
I remembered seeing the smiling faces of those youth group leaders and hearing the word 'Uniting'.
And I remembered waiting for the same word from that Presbyterian minister who listed a long string of participating denominations.
It didn't appear.
 
So perhaps indeed it was grassroots support, but not institutional.
 
I'm more interested in why that distressed me so much, because, like others in this thread, I personally don't connect with this type of thing.
Maybe it's the irony of a church labelled "Uniting" that misses participation in a uniting event.
 
It's a similar feeling to the one I got when I realised that the Bandy programme is being sponsored by all our surrounding states including South Australia, but 'my club' (NSW Synod in this case) has opted out.
Our Sydney Presbytery Mission Officer is trooping off to participate, and Bandy's thinking has influenced his reports and I guess the mission plan we're developing.
So I guess I'd better try to find a copy of his book.
Here in this forum there was the start of a debate on some reasons why Bandy might be off-the-mark theologically, and for that contribution I'm thankful.
But the debate didn't seem to go very far.  Maybe it's too hard for us all to get the book.  (I was ignorant enough to contribute ideas based only on that contributor's remarks!)
 
David

Reply via email to