From: Ted Endacott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Thu Sep 9, 2004 9:26:49 AM Australia/Melbourne
To: "Tom Stuart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Reason for the end of denominational allegiance
Hi Tom,
I am Ted Endacott, a reasonably benign influence in the Uniting Education Office. One of my jobs is to put a calming mug of tea into John Emmett's hand each morning.
Concerning denominations, there is a mass of anecdotal, qualitative and quantitative evidence that the "denominational tag" means very little these days. Those who browse the Religious Supermarket shelves are looking for something that matches their distinctive tastes, whether those tastes be for charismatic, liberal, justice, evangelical, high-church, GLBT or something else. Very few people would automatically go to "their denomination" after shifting to a new town. A cruise of the available churches takes place, with people looking for a congregation that matches their shopping list.
The implications of this are staggering, but most congregations/clergy/synods have not yet grasped the problems and openings. Here is an untidy list:
- the church notice board and literature needs to communicate a lot more than the denom brand. The distinctive local DNA needs to be proclaimed.
- each congregation needs to be self aware and intentional concerning the DNA. It is not possible to please everybody, so why try? Better to do some things really well, and some things not at all.
- when people come shopping for a spiritual home, they need to feel safe and welcome, but not to be smothered. Good information and conversations are vital. Training is needed. I recently visited a few Melbourne UCA congregations incognito. The most common response was to ignore the newcomer completely. Some places made clumsy attempts to gather information (name, address, income). Only one place seemed genuinely interested in meeting my needs, in listening, and in offering relaxed friendship.
- it would probably be a good idea to pass a law abolishing all the trad denominations, allowing congregations who are "birds of a feather" to form new groupings. At least the new denominational names would stand for something.
- a counter argument is that the present diversity inside each denomination is helpful in some way.
I will toss in a couple of responses below as well. Thanks for the ideas. You are onto something very important.
Greetings from
Ted Endacott
Uniting Education
On Thursday, September 9, 2004, at 12:18 AM, Tom Stuart wrote:
I’m reading a book at the moment that suggests that a large part of the decline of denominational allegiance is due to the fact that most denominations have moved so far, or lost altogether, the original charism (for the sake of a better word) that brought that denomination into being.
Spot on. The job now is to assess whether the original charism still makes sense. Some charisms have a 'use-by' date. Some need only minor tuning to become alive and attractive again.
That seems to suggest that all denominations have become indistinguishable in their nominalism.
No, I think that growing diversity of practice creeps into every denomination, until they all feature a similar range of distinctive styles (eg charo, social justice, evangelical, liberal, etc).
I wonder how many people who go to the churches where I worship know of Wesley and Calvin. While I think many would not even know these characters names I am certain that no one could articulate the unique contribution these made giving birth to Methodism and the Presbyterian church.
Yes, i am particularly concerned that the original Wesleyan concept of the church as a "movement" has been lost, with a clumsy, crumbling institution taking its place.
I’d never thought of it that way before.
Tom
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.milman.uniting.com.au
Ph: 6862 5502 Mobile: 0427 625 502
14 Bushman St
Parkes NSW 2870
