General Synod: last minute plea to reject the Mission and Pastoral Measure
By Michael Lloyd
People who are involved in the life of a parish church know two things about church buildings. First, they know how they proclaim loudly and clearly that the Church is still here, the Church has not died, and the Church has not abandoned their community.
They know how church buildings remind people of God, of God’s desire to live amongst us, as exemplified in the incarnation, and as reflected in His presence amongst us now in word and sacrament by His Spirit. They know that, when God asked Solomon to build the temple, He instructed that it be adorned with precious stones ‘for beauty’ (2 Chronicles 3.6 KJV), so they know that the beauty of places of worship matters to God, and that a beautiful building reflects something of the beauty and glory of God. They know, too, that the closure of a church building unsays what their being open says. They know that the closure or demolition of a church building adds to the secular narrative that the Church is dying, that the gospel is no longer relevant.
They know that every closure of a church building speaks visually of the secularisation of the country – witness the recent headline on The Telegraph website: ‘Hundred Scottish churches up for sale as UK turns away from Christianity’.
But secondly, they know, too,
that church buildings can be a terrible financial burden. They know how much work they create, and how much anxiety their upkeep can cause to hard- pressed clergy, dedicated church wardens and small, faithful congregations.
So when the Mission and Pastoral Measure was published last month, we hoped that it would help us navigate the missional boon and the financial drain. Sadly, my sense is that it fails on both fronts. On the one hand, it helps dioceses score the missional own goal of closing churches. It appears to remove the requirement for the expert, independent advice of the Church Buildings Council and itsStatutoryAdvisoryCommittee to be sought before a decision is taken to close a church building – and a less informed decision is unlikely to be a better decision.
On the other hand, it does little to help struggling congregations keep their churches open and alive. It doesn’t streamline the process – it requires a report from the CBC/SAC after the decision has been taken to close a church building, so where is the saving in time? And why would we not want expert advice as early in the process as we can? MPM doesn’t even provide an exit strategy for what happens after a church building is closed. Closing a church does not remove liability for its continued protection – it merely shunts it around (usually to the dioceses).
I therefore urge Synod to reject the Mission and Pastoral Measure when it considers the proposals on the final day of its meeting. We need to do better. We need proposals that actually help us to do justice to both sides of this issue, and that help church buildings be the stone evangelists that they were made to be. We need their witness now, more than ever.
Michael Lloyd is Principal of Wycliffe Hall