The Episcopal Church is an institution in long term systemic decline. Just take a look at the 1997-2007 change in membership numbers documented here or really read thoughtfully the State of the Church report (especially the charts, page 14, page 17, etc.) there.
So: Where is the strategic discussion of evangelism and church growth? A parish involved in healthy evangelism has three things: a good newcomers ministry, a good ministry to the unchurched, and a ministry to the lapsed. In most Episcopal churches if you are very blessed you will find a somewhat adequate newcomer ministry. That is all. What about the unchurched? What about church planting?–KSH
oh Kendall, you know the problem with declining membership: Episcopalians don’t have many kids (taken verbatim from +Sam Candler). They don’t want to look any further than that, and perhaps realize discussion of it could be quite contentious – after all it would involve talking to “renegade” dioceses like SC. So I can’t say I’m surprised….
I must admit, I’m a bit perplexed by this thread. All the things you’re talking about Kendall relate to spreading the Gospel — the authentic Gospel of Jesus Christ. Hasn’t this been missing from the Episcopal Church for a very long time? Is it just missing from this GC? They have a new gospel. If the original Gospel message gets in the way they just change it. The institution of TEC is not interested in spreading the Gospel you’re talking about. They’ve made that very clear in numerous ways. This is not something newly missing from TEC. Their new gospel seeks to reaffirm the culture, not challenge it. Now that you and other orthodox Christians have effectively been driven from TEC they plan to reach out and bring their new gospel to the “unchurched” and the “lapsed” (which does not include the “schismatics”). All the statistics you point to that demonstrate that this policy is doomed to failure have no meaning to the “true believers” who now completely control TEC.
[blockquote]What about the unchurched? What about church planting?[/blockquote]
Sorry, but those peripheral issues have nothing to do with teh ghey, global warming, or the MDGs.
Kendall: Very perceptive comment. I have a few thoughts:
1. I don’t think that the current leadership of TEC (neither the institutionalist nor the ideological reappraisers) have any passion at all, nor do they see as really important, reaching out to the “lost” with the Gospel. Theologically, they have talked themselves into believing that it doesn’t matter.
2. Having observed many parishes and dioceses in both TEC and the ACoC, I can safely say that evangelism is simply not a passion or interest of most mainline Episcopalians. Again, most mainline Episcopalians simply don’t think it matters and they couldn’t really care less about evangelism. The only Episcopalians or Anglicans that I have ever heard speaking about evangelism have been of the evangelical or conservative variety.
3. Again, having observed many parishes and dioceses in TEC and the ACoC, I can say that the primary reason most mainline Episcopalians are concerned about church growth is that it represents an additional source of funding for “their” church. I can’t count the number of times I have heard it said that “Parish X needs to attract new members or it will go broke.”
4. So if you put it all together, it makes perfect sense that the national reappraiser leadership will have no interest at all in discussing evangelism or church growth. They have no passion for it, they see it as unimportant, and, in any case, it would demonstrate the crisis that TEC is currently in, and would so raise too many questions. At the parish level, there is similarly a disinterest in evangelism. However, it also makes sense that people will welcome warmly anybody who walks through the door and who looks like them and who looks like they can contribute financially to the parish – such people are not likely to challenge the parish status quo, but are likely to ease the financial pressures.
The numbers kinda speak for themselves, don’t they? I’ll be looking forward to a similar report in 2012, following the departure of at least 4 dioceses, and wonder how TEO will try to spin that.
Kendall’s question: “Where is the strategic discussion of evangelism and church growth?”
No. 2 (Chris Taylor)’s comment: “I must admit, I’m a bit perplexed by this thread.”
Well, it’s the apparent naivete of Kendall’s question that makes it a good one for a blog.
Yes, obviously the TEC policy looks more like one of ungrowth.
The reason is that in 2003 TEC acted so rashly etc. as to polarize the Episcopal Church in an unprecedented way. Many of us found ourselves no longer comfortable with either the hard-right or the hard-left alternatives that were increasingly being presented to us: comfortable, to be blunt, neither with Pittsburgh nor with 815.
Some (at least) moderates were perplexed, disenchanted, and alienated; and eventually many on the right wing left.
Now at GC 2009 we have proposals for change that is even more radical: a full-bore institutionalization of SSBs and ordination of openly non-celibate gays.
If GC says “yes,” it will cut itself off from even more of the AC–and hence look less attractive to Episcopal moderates (undoubtedly represented by many concerned bishops in Anaheim) who actually find the idea of being part of a larger Communion, not simply of a national church, attractive.
If GC says “no,” then, as already announced, some ultra-liberals could leave, disenchanted, and worship at an MCC or UCC church or, yes, St Arbucks or wherever.
This is just a historical overview from the point of view of evangelism. From the outside, it looks as if TEC has done a good, systematic job of alienating various constituencies one by one.
Of course, this was not their conscious intent. I agree with those who say TEC was surprised by the rending effect of their 2003 decision. But the results after a while begin to bear a resemblance to a policy–and, no, not a policy of growth but of sytematic, step-by-step ungrowth.
Kendall,
I think you are absolutely correct. Do you know any material that we can use to develop a ministry to the lapsed or non-Christians?