my name is Phil and I'm an Anglican ordinand (that means I'm training to be a vicar). As part of my training I'm investigating what has come to be known as 'fresh expressions' of church or 'emerging church'
And one way that Phil has been investigating is to ask people what they think about various things via a questionnaire. As I was filling in mine, it occured to me that others might be interested in the questions and I would certainly like to keep a copy of my answers, who knows? You might even find bits of my answers useful yourself? So here goes.
The Church of England, at an official level at least, is now supportive and encouraging of Fresh Expressions of church (eg General Synod vote on Mission Shaped Church, Fresh Expressions initiatives etc.). Why do you think this is?
Two contradictory yet related reasons: negatively; concern over the loss of active membership and failure to recruit younger members. Positively; those who have been urging and pioneering and reflecting are being heard.
Should the Church of England be supporting and encouraging fresh expressions of church? Yes
Please give a reason for your answer ...
The cultural movements being experienced in the global North-West are likely to leave inherited expressions of church increasingly isolated from their cultural milieu and while a level of participation can and will be maintained in such expressions, they can never as such reach the mass of British peoples.
When does a fresh expression become a church and is this and important distinction?
Depends on definitions of 'church'. For me, I think something significant happens or would happen around the transition to 'self-governing' and 'self-financing' (cf Chinese '3-self' movement) or the nearest equivalent in their sponsoring set-ups. In Anglican /CofE terms that would probably mean paying share and having a PCC equivalent. Theologically I tend to feel that a degree of 'covenanting together' and the Eucharist make a church.
What would make a fresh expression of church specifically Anglican?
Structurally -see previous answer. Theologically is harder: commitment to serving the wider community, using 'language' (and I include semiotics in that) understanded of the people. An approach to formation consonant with 'lex orandi, lex credendi'. My test case would be multi-media worship: to make sure that definitions can include that.
Looking to the future, how do you think the current development of Fresh Expressions will affect the future of the Church of England?
Challenge to formally incorporate 'mixed economy' into church government and polity. Challenge to think about liturgy more comprehensively. Money will become a more vexed issue and the resolution of tensions currently showing up around ordained local ministers will need to be worked at. Tremendous anxieties and arguments about appropriate discipling and formation. Question about whether the CofE con hold onto fresh expressions or whether they split.
What are the greatest obstacles for the development of Fresh Expressions?
Vested interests and lack of imagination on the par of leadership hierarchically. Legalities being used by insecure clergy and churches to throttle back initiatives.
What do Fresh Expressions imply for the 'inherited church'?
A move away formally and structurally from presumption of geographical community. Challenges to methods of church government to allow flexibility, smallness, less hierarchy and yet accountability.
freshexpressions - an investigation:
Filed in: Christian, church, post-modern, mission, emerging
No comments:
Post a Comment