Reignite

This is part of a continuing series of posts running up to the growth-themed Annual Meetings. Questions to ask (from Lyle Schaller, Growing Plans, 159-160) 1. How does our theological stance and our understanding of our mission shape our strategy? 2. Who are the people we are seeking to reach and serve? What are their unmet religious and personal needs to which we will attempt to respond? 3. How do our traditions, our customs, and our history shape our strategy? 4. What are our assets, strengths, resources, and distinctive gifts as a denomination that will serve as the foundation for our strategy?

There is a motion proposed for the Unitarian Annual Meetings calling for the right of same sex couples to get married in places of worship. It's proposed by the congregation in Oxford and they've already managed to get some good publicity about it here in the Oxford Mail . Maybe we could get a lot of national publicity for this. There's no point doing it if we don't.

As part of my placement with the chaplaincy at Manchester University this week I was in one of the student bars. Me and one of the chaplains were doing 'Pints of View' where we sit in the main bar of the huge hall of residence and try to get some conversations going around religious and ethical issues. Last week was just me and the chaplain, sitting in the bar thinking - how the hell are we going to get people to talk to us? This week we had lollipops and postcards with questions on, and a guest speaker from the local humanist group. But there was still only us, the invited speaker and one other person for the first hour and a half. Then a student stumbled across us saying 'oh can I have a lolly?' And stayed to talk about religion. From then on we had a really vibrant table with loads of people wandering in and out of our conversations, talking, disagreeing, thinking in a cheerful non-confrontational way. It was a brilliant evening, and the kind of thing that is the rea...

Here's a video about Sanctus1, a emerging church in Manchester. It's not above criticism, but it's the kind of thing worth paying attention to. Not quite sure about the whole 'we're orthodox' speech.

Ron Robinson over at Planting God Communities has recently pointed his readers towards older posts that are worth rereading. In one , about growth, he quotes Lyle Scaller who says: "The single best approach for any religious body seeking to reach, attract, serve, and assimilte younger generations and newcomers in the community is to launch three new missions annually for every one hundred congregations in that organization. A significant fringe benefit of this policy is that it usually will reduce the resources for continuing subsidies to institutions that will be healthier if they are forced to become financially self-supporting." This, for British Unitarianism, would mean about 5 new churches a year. Assuming a 'mission' is the same as a 'church' (broadly, broadly defined). I wonder if anything like this kind of a conversation will happen at the 'growth-orientated' Annual Meetings coming up. OK, let's be really pessimistic and say 1 new congregat...

This afternoon I got delivered a bunched-up package from Essex Hall, the headquarters of British Unitarianism. Along with other stuff from the mailing came an advert for a new Unitarian car sticker. I'm not going to get one. The main reason for this is that I don't have a car. But in addition to that I really don't like the stap-line. It's the same standard one Essex Hall have been using for a long time (anyone know how long?), 'for free and inquiring religion.' Is that really the message we want to give to people? What does it even mean? 'Free' to most people means you don't have to pay for it. 'We're a free church,' 'Great! No collection!' The concept of free religion needs explaining, you can't get it across in one line, so let's not try. 'Liberal' would be better, most people would have some idea what that means. 'Inquiring'? When I hear this word I think of an old man with half-moon spectacles reading ...

There's a certain attitude that I have noticed both within Unitarianism and within British culture in general. I'm calling it 'ought to' evangelism. Within British culture there are some Christians who have this attitude. The attitude is - this is a Christian country - you ought to be Christian. You get it a lot at Christmas, 'ah,' they say, 'you're spending time with your family and giving presents on the 25 December, so you really ought to go to church, because that's really what it's all about you know.' It's a Christendom attitude that comes from a perceives position of dominance and privelege. It assumes people are already basically Christian, and just need to be guilt-tripped to returning to church. The similar attitude comes from some Christians within Unitarianism. They say, 'Unitarianism is a Christian religious community, so you ought to be Christian if you're a Unitarian.' It too comes from a position of presumed ...