Moderator: Neil Heath
Ed Pettibone wrote:Ed: Sandy, I have some questions about the experience You report from the Church with which you worked this summer.
1. Was the survey team Southern Baptist from the south?
2. Last summer how long had the new church plant been established?
3. How many members did they have last summer and how many do they have now?
4. Would you name 5 cities in the North East that you believe to be in similar a circumstance.
My team partner and I heard similar reports when we went to the South East Side of Indianapolis in the summer of 1991 for a church planting Praxis, a credit course at SBTS. We found nothing like what had been reported to the home mission board by the Indiana State Convention, when they asked for students from SBTS to do a survey. Unfortunately the more complete account of that experience which I reported on these boards disappeared with the complete archives of this site several years ago. BTW, census track info is more meaningful than is zip code areas when doing Church plating studies.
Here is a table that Google turned up for me on Religious affiliation in Pittsburgh.
Religion Pittsburgh, PA United States
Percent Religious 60.57% 48.78%
Catholic 38.44% 19.43%
LDS 0.40% 2.03%
Baptist 2.31% 9.30%
Episcopalian 0.64% 0.63%
Pentecostal 1.31% 1.87%
Lutheran 2.36% 2.33%
Methodist 4.40% 3.93%
Presbyterian 3.97% 5.51%
Jewish 1.37% 0.73%
Eastern 0.83% 0.53%
I have some questions about the experience You report from the Church with which you worked this summer.
1. Was the survey team Southern Baptist from the south?
2. Last summer how long had the new church plant been established?
3. How many members did they have last summer and how many do they have now?
4. Would you name 5 cities in the North East that you believe to be in similar a circumstance.
My team partner and I heard similar reports when we went to the South East Side of Indianapolis in the summer of 1991 for a church planting Praxis, a credit course at SBTS. We found nothing like what had been reported to the home mission board by the Indiana State Convention, when they asked for students from SBTS to do a survey. Unfortunately the more complete account of that experience which I reported on these boards disappeared with the complete archives of this site several years ago. BTW, census track info is more meaningful than is zip code areas when doing Church plating studies.
Here is a table that Google turned up for me on religious affiliation in Pittsburgh.
Religion Pittsburgh, PA United States
Percent Religious 60.57% 48.78%
Catholic 38.44% 19.43%
LDS 0.40% 2.03%
Baptist 2.31% 9.30%
Episcopalian 0.64% 0.63%
Pentecostal 1.31% 1.87%
Lutheran 2.36% 2.33%
Methodist 4.40% 3.93%
Presbyterian 3.97% 5.51%
Jewish 1.37% 0.73%
Eastern 0.83% 0.53%
Michael Wrenn wrote:I don't want to make it sound as if I am totally isolated. This past year, I was accepted as an Associate Clergy member in the AMiA's Fellowship of St. Aidan and St. Columba, a fellowship of clergy of episcopal rank who support the goals and purpose of the AMiA and wish to be formally affiliated with the AMiA.
Also, I am exploring a similar relationship with a newly organizing fellowship of Mennonites called EVANA.
Still, I do miss belonging to a local church in which I could have face-to-face fellowship and communion, and in-person worship. I am now considering driving 2.5 hours to a Choctaw Mennonite congregation in east-central MS. At least they are communicating with me. I could probably go only once a month, but I would do that.
Thank you all for your replies.
Ed Pettibone wrote:Yes Sandy, I saw the period after Catholics but I see no transition of thought before you start about the African American population, nor when you attempt to tell me what I know. The fact is I do not know "that most people who claim a "religious affiliation" have dropped out of their church completely", especially among African American Catholics. Many of the people with prior church experience that I encounter and who are not involved in any church feel they are not wanted in most churches and have given up on finding one where they will be accepted. I agree that the folk who are actually involved in church a local church are in many places, few and far between. Shoot, that would include some who show up most every Sunday. I also question the validity of a survey showing only two people in two zip code areas of Pittsburgh who are affiliated with a church given I do not equate "affiliated with" and "being a member of".
Sandy wrote:Ed Pettibone wrote:Yes Sandy, I saw the period after Catholics but I see no transition of thought before you start about the African American population, nor when you attempt to tell me what I know. The fact is I do not know "that most people who claim a "religious affiliation" have dropped out of their church completely", especially among African American Catholics. Many of the people with prior church experience that I encounter and who are not involved in any church feel they are not wanted in most churches and have given up on finding one where they will be accepted. I agree that the folk who are actually involved in church a local church are in many places, few and far between. Shoot, that would include some who show up most every Sunday. I also question the validity of a survey showing only two people in two zip code areas of Pittsburgh who are affiliated with a church given I do not equate "affiliated with" and "being a member of".
The percentages of "religious affiliated in any general survey you can find, or census tract information, will not even really tell you how many people you will find from any given neighborhood who are in church on any particular Sunday. The membership reports of the Pittsburgh diocese would not even support the claim that 38% of the population is Catholic. The percentage of African Americans who are "affiliated" is higher, and at least in this area, among church planters, that is taken into consideration when siting new church plants.
I know what you're getting at when it comes to wanting a definition of who conducted the survey, what denomination they were from, and where they were from. There's always an underlying accusation of "proselytizing" when it comes to Southern Baptist church planting efforts outside Dixieland. In some places, that may be the case, I don't know. They're certainly not stepping on any toes here. I couldn't care less about a survey that shows "religious affiliated". I don't consider it "proselytizing" if a church planter moves into an area where the few remaining established churches are in survival mode, and there's little if any evangelistic activity going on. And I don't believe in "turf protecting" either. If a church planter from the SBC comes into an area in a city that has been identified as having a low population of Christians, and few active, viable churches, then it is better for the local population if they go to work, rather than waiting for the "traditional" denominations to get around to it. In partnership with NAMB, the state convention here has just three church plant coordinators in an area with 16 million people that includes all of Pennsylvania and the southern half of New Jersey. I don't see any place where the SBC church plant work is stepping on anyone else's toes, or proselyting anyone else's members. The cities, particularly the inner city areas, are teeming with people, and almost vacant of churches of any kind. And that's where the baptisms numbers are highest. There's be plenty of opportunity for any denomination that wanted to invest in church planting here.
Sandy wrote:Your rant is an indication I hit the nail on the head. You're bent out of shape because the SBC is on your turf. Bottom line.
Sandy wrote:Your rant is an indication I hit the nail on the head. You're bent out of shape because the SBC is on your turf. Bottom line.
Timothy Bonney wrote:Also Michael, if the address you give to send in membership forms for your church is your address then the population of your community is under 100 people. How many churches do you think there should be in a community of 100 people? How many viable churches can you have with 100 people?
Timothy Bonney wrote:Sandy wrote:Your rant is an indication I hit the nail on the head. You're bent out of shape because the SBC is on your turf. Bottom line.
The problem for me Sandy is that, whatever the SBC says officially, I've known more than one SBC pastor who would tell Methodists, Presbyterians and even American Baptists that they don't attend a "real" Christian church.
And for those of us who baptize infants, its really heart warming (actually indigestion making) when someone puts up a new SBC (or other similar evangelical) church in an area and starts trying to get our members to come to their church to get a "real" baptism.
I know the reason always is given that you don't go after "active" members. But note that you decide who is active by your definition rather than those persons in another denomination deciding who is active by the definition of their own denomination.
When I was an American Baptist I signed a ministerial ethics covenant that I'd not proselytize from other Christian churches. Would that SBC pastors would take similar vows. (And other Christians that poach someone else's members.)
William Thornton wrote:Timothy, does the UMC define or explain what constitutes 'proselyting'?
Timothy Bonney wrote:Michael, you still haven't said why you don't start a church that you currently claim to be a Bishop in. I don't quite get why a Bishop in Church A would be encouraging church planting from denomination B. If you are a Bishop, take your authority as a Bishop and start a church. Why ask someone else's Bishop to do what you aren't doing?
Michael Wrenn wrote:
Let's just say that I have not found this area to be receptive to the combination of traditions that the CAC encompasses. I believe people don't understand it, are confused by it. I believe they think you have to be one thing or the other. I think they don't understand how you can have both "apostolic succession" and a Baptist/Anabaptist "priesthood of the believer" in the same Communion.
KeithE wrote:I wish you God's speed in finding a good situation to minister in. Northern MS is doubt doubt challenging for a moderate like yourself. That you have spent much time studying and have tried various positions just shows your persistence and openness (not vascillation).
I know a great couple who may be retiring in January to Oxford area. Excellent behind the scenes church workers of a moderate Baptist persuasion.
Timothy Bonney wrote:Michael Wrenn wrote:
Let's just say that I have not found this area to be receptive to the combination of traditions that the CAC encompasses. I believe people don't understand it, are confused by it. I believe they think you have to be one thing or the other. I think they don't understand how you can have both "apostolic succession" and a Baptist/Anabaptist "priesthood of the believer" in the same Communion.
I've read parts of your website. I'm certainly attracted to Celtic elements of what you are doing. But I much prefer fully episcopal system of church governance.
I'm a member of the Community of Aidan and Hilda, which was founded in Great Britain but has a fair number of members in the United States. The community is not a Church/denomination. It is made up of Christians of various Christian Churches who gain inspiration from Celtic Christianity and following the Celtic practice of having a Soul Friend (anamcara) to help you in your spiritual path some what akin to a spiritual director. We also develop our own rule of life to guide our own spirituality.
Michael Wrenn wrote:Timothy, do they have a website?
Timothy Bonney wrote:I don't understand your insistance that Methodists would have planted societies (that's what was planted not churches at that time) in areas with few if any people that were not showing signs of population growth or at least stability. You keep insisting that the Methodists did something they didn't do.
As to my job, I'm appointed to an urban congregation in a transitional middle and lower middle class area in a city with a population of 80,000 and a community of over 120,000. My appointment isn't dependent on finding creative ways to start a church with almost no people.
Again, the goal is to lead people to Jesus Christ, not provide every flavor of church in a given area only to have that church fail because there won't be enough members to sustain it.
Timothy Bonney wrote:Michael Wrenn wrote:Timothy, do they have a website?
https://www.aidanandhilda.org.uk/index.php
The US website is down for some reason. I'll have to check on that. This is the UK website.
Michael Wrenn wrote:Just wanted to add this to what I said previously: I'm reminded that it was easier for Baptists to start congregations in rural areas even more so than Methodists. Baptists didn't need a circuit rider to bring the Gospel to them and set up a church. A Baptist farmer who felt called to preach could gather a handful of people together and start a church themselves. They could start baptizing and serving the Lord's Supper, with or without an ordained minister; they could draw up their own articles of faith, and own and control any property. They didn't need anyone outside of their group to give them permission to do anything or to take ownership of their property. It was similar with the Quakers -- get two people together and you had a church.
Return to CBF Missions and Ministry Forum
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest