Update: Church of England press release here (really slips the leash in the last paragraph) and a round up of links on Echurch Blog.
A big batch of stats has just been released from the 2011 census. Of particular interest to people like me is the 'religion' question, which shows that 59% of England and Wales now identifies themselves as 'Christian' (down from 72% in 2011) with a corresponding rise in 'no religion' from 15 to 25%.
In the detail, there are all sorts of local oddities:
- You are more likely to meet a Satanist in Bolsover than anywhere else
- Oxford is the agnostic capital of Britain
- Knowsley has the highest percentage of Christians
- Norwich has the highest percentage of 'no religion: heavy metal' and rivals Brighton for being the most atheist area.
There are 2 data tables, religion by local authority, which has summary figures, and this more detailed set which breaks down the details - e.g. we discover that there are 4 Bahai in South Somerset.
No doubt everyone will draw the conclusions they want to draw - the Daily Mail will focus on 2.1m net migration, and over 7m Britons born in other countries; eco campaigners will note with dismay that we now have over 27m vehicles (up from 23.9m); but I wonder who will look at the near doubling of people in rented accommodation and the decline in home ownership (mostly on Labour's watch, as more and more of us were priced out of the market). It doesn't really suit any political party to draw attention to this. There's a few more of the headlines here.
As for me, I merely rejoice at the effectiveness of the other churches in South Somerset. About 200-250 of the professed Christians in the area come to our 2 churches (that's at least once per month), so with 100,000 Christians to go round, everywhere else must be packed.
Showing posts with label stats. Show all posts
Showing posts with label stats. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 11, 2012
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
The Leading of the 5000: Redesigning the CofE
Update (20/7/12): the Church in Wales has just released a report which might give us a few pointers
Update 2 (Dec 2014) Chelmsford Diocese is starting to take these stats seriously.
The latest stats from the Church of England don't tell us anything radically new, but the picture they paint is fairly consistent. From 2000-2010
Baptisms fell by 14%
Confirmations fell 39% to just 22,000
Church weddings fell 13.5%
Usual Sunday attendance fell 16% (see here and here for a breakdown by Diocese)
The number of funerals taken by CofE Clergy fell 26.5%
Easter attendance fell 15%
Christmas attendance fell 12%
Full-time clergy fell 14.5%
A couple of these stats have bottomed out recently - baptisms and weddings have been stable for the last 3-4 years. There are other fascinating stats, revealing that less than half of CofE churches have toilets and kitchen facilities, and less than half do anything involving the community on church premises. But it's the clergy numbers which I've been thinking about most.
In 2011 there were 7841 stipendiary clergy in the CofE. There were also over 1000 chaplains in various places, most of them ordained too.
The CofE is currently ordaining an average of 275 full time clergy a year. Our pension age is currently 68 - you can work until 70 if you want to, but others also retire early. The average age of ordinands (people recommended for training) is currently 43 for women and 38 for men. Male ordinands outnumber women about 3:2, so lets say the average age of ordinands is 40. Add on 3 years for arranging and completing training, and the average age of new vicars is 43.
Bear with me: if every year the CofE ordains 275 people, who work on average for 25 years, then our long-term full time workforce is 6875 full time clergy. Some of those will end up as archdeacons and bishops and cathedral staff (about 360 on current numbers) and others will end up in diocesan jobs, which leaves about 6200. There are currently around 1000 ordained clergy in chaplaincy jobs, in the NHS, armed forces, educational institutions, theological colleges etc.
Which leaves 5000 of us in parish ministry, some of whom will be in training posts, so not allowed (I nearly said 'not able', but that wouldn't be true) to run a church.
If the current figures merely flatline until we reach that level, each full-time vicar will be looking after an average of 3 church buildings in 2.5 parishes containing 10,000 people between them, with 200 regular (once a month or more) worshippers. They will take an average of 29 baptisms a year, see 5 new people confirmed, take 12 weddings and 34 funerals. Less than half of them will have any kind of informal meeting space, toilet facilities, or kitchen facilities within church premises, which will severely limit their ministry to the community. And they'll each have roughly 1 CofE school, no doubt with a 'tradition' that the vicar is chair of governors. Oh yes, and they'll be encouraged to develop 'fresh expressions of church' as well.
The stats project clergy numbers forward to 2016. I would suggest that someone needs to go further than that. We need to devise a way of being the CofE that can function with only 5000 full time staff, alongside the small army of volunteers, lay ministers and unpaid clergy. And we need to work out whether the paragraph above is a realistic job description.
One possible starting point: at present, 8 out of the 27 churches in our Deanery have membership in single figures. I don't know if that's typical, we probably have a higher proportion of rural churches than most. But that means that we have 8 churches which could currently meet from week to week in a house, rather than a 150-seater medieval Grade 1 listed building, which costs getting on for £10k a year to heat and insure. Yes those seats are needed for the baptisms, weddings and funerals (see above), but it's not as though there's a national shortage of church buildings at the moment.
Rationalising a bit might be part of the solution, though only part. That in turn begs a lot of questions about the parish system (maybe for another post! Sam Norton has already gone down this road), and there's other questions to ask about vicaring as a paid profession. What else should we do?
Whoever our next Archbishop is, the CofE needs some serious strategic thinking if we're not to collapse under our own weight. Despite a bewildering array of measures of church attendance, there isn't a single one that at the moment is out of the red. We have to face the facts of being a shrinking church if we want to stop being a shrinking church.
Update: I note the Baptist church are currently looking at how, nationally, they can function best in growing healthy, missionary churches. The Methodists are exploring how to be 'a movement shaped for mission', and have a national statement of vision and values, and priorities for themselves as a whole church. Hello CofE? National leadership on this stuff is possible....
Update 2 (Dec 2014) Chelmsford Diocese is starting to take these stats seriously.
The latest stats from the Church of England don't tell us anything radically new, but the picture they paint is fairly consistent. From 2000-2010
Baptisms fell by 14%
Confirmations fell 39% to just 22,000
Church weddings fell 13.5%
Usual Sunday attendance fell 16% (see here and here for a breakdown by Diocese)
The number of funerals taken by CofE Clergy fell 26.5%
Easter attendance fell 15%
Christmas attendance fell 12%
Full-time clergy fell 14.5%
A couple of these stats have bottomed out recently - baptisms and weddings have been stable for the last 3-4 years. There are other fascinating stats, revealing that less than half of CofE churches have toilets and kitchen facilities, and less than half do anything involving the community on church premises. But it's the clergy numbers which I've been thinking about most.
In 2011 there were 7841 stipendiary clergy in the CofE. There were also over 1000 chaplains in various places, most of them ordained too.
The CofE is currently ordaining an average of 275 full time clergy a year. Our pension age is currently 68 - you can work until 70 if you want to, but others also retire early. The average age of ordinands (people recommended for training) is currently 43 for women and 38 for men. Male ordinands outnumber women about 3:2, so lets say the average age of ordinands is 40. Add on 3 years for arranging and completing training, and the average age of new vicars is 43.
Bear with me: if every year the CofE ordains 275 people, who work on average for 25 years, then our long-term full time workforce is 6875 full time clergy. Some of those will end up as archdeacons and bishops and cathedral staff (about 360 on current numbers) and others will end up in diocesan jobs, which leaves about 6200. There are currently around 1000 ordained clergy in chaplaincy jobs, in the NHS, armed forces, educational institutions, theological colleges etc.
Which leaves 5000 of us in parish ministry, some of whom will be in training posts, so not allowed (I nearly said 'not able', but that wouldn't be true) to run a church.
If the current figures merely flatline until we reach that level, each full-time vicar will be looking after an average of 3 church buildings in 2.5 parishes containing 10,000 people between them, with 200 regular (once a month or more) worshippers. They will take an average of 29 baptisms a year, see 5 new people confirmed, take 12 weddings and 34 funerals. Less than half of them will have any kind of informal meeting space, toilet facilities, or kitchen facilities within church premises, which will severely limit their ministry to the community. And they'll each have roughly 1 CofE school, no doubt with a 'tradition' that the vicar is chair of governors. Oh yes, and they'll be encouraged to develop 'fresh expressions of church' as well.
The stats project clergy numbers forward to 2016. I would suggest that someone needs to go further than that. We need to devise a way of being the CofE that can function with only 5000 full time staff, alongside the small army of volunteers, lay ministers and unpaid clergy. And we need to work out whether the paragraph above is a realistic job description.
One possible starting point: at present, 8 out of the 27 churches in our Deanery have membership in single figures. I don't know if that's typical, we probably have a higher proportion of rural churches than most. But that means that we have 8 churches which could currently meet from week to week in a house, rather than a 150-seater medieval Grade 1 listed building, which costs getting on for £10k a year to heat and insure. Yes those seats are needed for the baptisms, weddings and funerals (see above), but it's not as though there's a national shortage of church buildings at the moment.
Rationalising a bit might be part of the solution, though only part. That in turn begs a lot of questions about the parish system (maybe for another post! Sam Norton has already gone down this road), and there's other questions to ask about vicaring as a paid profession. What else should we do?
Whoever our next Archbishop is, the CofE needs some serious strategic thinking if we're not to collapse under our own weight. Despite a bewildering array of measures of church attendance, there isn't a single one that at the moment is out of the red. We have to face the facts of being a shrinking church if we want to stop being a shrinking church.
Update: I note the Baptist church are currently looking at how, nationally, they can function best in growing healthy, missionary churches. The Methodists are exploring how to be 'a movement shaped for mission', and have a national statement of vision and values, and priorities for themselves as a whole church. Hello CofE? National leadership on this stuff is possible....
Thursday, May 10, 2012
Church of England Church Growth Research Project: Update
Tucked away at the end of a recent Research Bulletin from the CofE, are some details of a new research project into church growth:
The church growth research programme will consist of three inter-related strands and these are detailed further below:
Data analysis
As part of the research programme the research team will undertake a careful analysis of the full range of data that is collected by the central church as well as other existing data sets (such as that on deprivation). Work is already underway to prepare the data for analysis. The researchers will then test a range of hypotheses around church growth. They will look at the effect of particular factors whilst attempting to ‘control’ statistically for a range of other factors and interventions and so attempting to overcome the challenge of distinguishing between correlation and causation. There is potential to learn further lessons about what factors are associated with church growth from existing data, however there are some factors worthy of exploration which we do not currently collect data on. The second strand of the programme will seek to address some of these issues.
Church profiling
This strand will involve a survey of 4,000 churches plus some in-depth follow up interviews. Churches will be invited to take part following a careful sampling process to ensure that a wide range of contexts are considered. The surveys will collect a range of data enabling profiling of the factors associated with growing churches.
Cathedrals, Amalgamation of Benefices, Fresh Expressions and Church Planting.
This strand will consider a number of particular structural issues and approaches to mission and ministry and their implications for church growth. One sub-strand will explore factors relating to growth at Cathedrals. Another will look at the implications of various Benefice structures including multi-parish benefices and team ministries for growth. Other sub-strands will seek to explore the impact of Fresh Expressions and other forms of church planting on growth.
It's good to see this up and running, after initially surfacing in January, and a website 'soon' is promised for people wanting updates on the project. Whilst in the end church growth and decline is about people, and the mix of people and places (I heard 2 inspiring examples of this on Wednesday at a diocesan meeting, where the right people have clearly ended up in the right places and God is doing great things), the CofE has at last started taking seriously the masses of data it churns out and working out what to do with it.
The article concludes
This major study of numerical growth in the context of the Church of England should significantly increase understanding of factors related to church growth. In doing so, the programme will provide a range of tools to assist diocesan, national and parish church leaders to equip them in their efforts to grow the church. Linked to this, the research will inform the resource allocation decisions which are taken at all levels of the church. More robust evidence on how particular resource allocations affect the growth of the church should lead to a more effective deployment of the church’s finite (and in some cases shrinking) resources. Good.
The church growth research programme will consist of three inter-related strands and these are detailed further below:
Data analysis
As part of the research programme the research team will undertake a careful analysis of the full range of data that is collected by the central church as well as other existing data sets (such as that on deprivation). Work is already underway to prepare the data for analysis. The researchers will then test a range of hypotheses around church growth. They will look at the effect of particular factors whilst attempting to ‘control’ statistically for a range of other factors and interventions and so attempting to overcome the challenge of distinguishing between correlation and causation. There is potential to learn further lessons about what factors are associated with church growth from existing data, however there are some factors worthy of exploration which we do not currently collect data on. The second strand of the programme will seek to address some of these issues.
Church profiling
This strand will involve a survey of 4,000 churches plus some in-depth follow up interviews. Churches will be invited to take part following a careful sampling process to ensure that a wide range of contexts are considered. The surveys will collect a range of data enabling profiling of the factors associated with growing churches.
Cathedrals, Amalgamation of Benefices, Fresh Expressions and Church Planting.
This strand will consider a number of particular structural issues and approaches to mission and ministry and their implications for church growth. One sub-strand will explore factors relating to growth at Cathedrals. Another will look at the implications of various Benefice structures including multi-parish benefices and team ministries for growth. Other sub-strands will seek to explore the impact of Fresh Expressions and other forms of church planting on growth.
It's good to see this up and running, after initially surfacing in January, and a website 'soon' is promised for people wanting updates on the project. Whilst in the end church growth and decline is about people, and the mix of people and places (I heard 2 inspiring examples of this on Wednesday at a diocesan meeting, where the right people have clearly ended up in the right places and God is doing great things), the CofE has at last started taking seriously the masses of data it churns out and working out what to do with it.
The article concludes
This major study of numerical growth in the context of the Church of England should significantly increase understanding of factors related to church growth. In doing so, the programme will provide a range of tools to assist diocesan, national and parish church leaders to equip them in their efforts to grow the church. Linked to this, the research will inform the resource allocation decisions which are taken at all levels of the church. More robust evidence on how particular resource allocations affect the growth of the church should lead to a more effective deployment of the church’s finite (and in some cases shrinking) resources. Good.
Sunday, April 15, 2012
Cathedral Attendance Levels: A Question
A continued steady rise in Cathedral attendance was noted a couple of weeks ago on by the CofE, which generated some number crunching of Biblical proportions by Peter Ould.
Just 1 question: I'd like to see a comparison between those cathedrals which didn't charge for entry over the period, compared to those who did. Is there, for example, any connection between rising midweek attendance at services, and the fact that the only way to get into many cathedrals for free midweek is to, you guessed it, attend a service?
More telling would be if there was a significant increase in adult baptisms, confirmations from cathedral congregations, or people entering recognised forms of CofE ministry. On the figures, the number of baptisms of those aged over 12 has risen from 120 to 160 over the last decade, i.e. from roughly 3 per cathedral per year to roughly 4. That's good, and to be celebrated, but is what you'd hope for from a parish church which was doing reasonably well.
Just 1 question: I'd like to see a comparison between those cathedrals which didn't charge for entry over the period, compared to those who did. Is there, for example, any connection between rising midweek attendance at services, and the fact that the only way to get into many cathedrals for free midweek is to, you guessed it, attend a service?
More telling would be if there was a significant increase in adult baptisms, confirmations from cathedral congregations, or people entering recognised forms of CofE ministry. On the figures, the number of baptisms of those aged over 12 has risen from 120 to 160 over the last decade, i.e. from roughly 3 per cathedral per year to roughly 4. That's good, and to be celebrated, but is what you'd hope for from a parish church which was doing reasonably well.
Sunday, February 05, 2012
Sad Stats for Synod: Childrens Attendance 1989-2010.
Following on from yesterdays figures for adult attendance, here's the stats on childrens attendance at CofE churches from 1989-2010. I hope that Synod this week can take time away from rearranging the dog collars on our cruise liner, and the usual tittle tattle about Rowan Williams, to ask what this data means for us.
The same riders apply to these figures as to the adult ones: it's 2 different measures for the 2 decades (usual Sunday attendance, then average weekly attendance) and theres a gap for comparison between 1999 and 2000.
The good news is that 15 Dioceses saw childrens numbers grow in the Noughties, which for all except London was a reversal of decline the previous decade. So it is possible to turn things around. Remarkable as it seems from the stats above, Carlisle actually saw some growth from 2000-2010. Yes, the 90s were that bad.
Further good news, 42 out of the 43 dioceses have a better figure for 2000-10 than 1989-99. The bad news is that for the majority of those it still had a '-' in front of it, but at least that's going in the right direction.
And that's about all I can do to cheer you up. At every other level this is catastrophic. If any other sort of organisation had these sorts of stats, we'd be debating a lot more than bonuses. It leave it for others to print off this chart, leave it on every seat at General Synod along with yesterdays stats, and ask at what point Synod will give some concerted energy to talking about the future of the CofE. And no, the solution is not more church schools. The state education system cannot, and should not, do the church's work for it. And it's obvious from the data above that, even if it is, it's not doing it very well.
It's times like this when union with the Methodists seems like a good idea. Here is what their equivalent of Synod was discussing and endorsing a few months ago. A church shaped for discipleship and mission? Are we?
The good news is that 15 Dioceses saw childrens numbers grow in the Noughties, which for all except London was a reversal of decline the previous decade. So it is possible to turn things around. Remarkable as it seems from the stats above, Carlisle actually saw some growth from 2000-2010. Yes, the 90s were that bad.
Further good news, 42 out of the 43 dioceses have a better figure for 2000-10 than 1989-99. The bad news is that for the majority of those it still had a '-' in front of it, but at least that's going in the right direction.
And that's about all I can do to cheer you up. At every other level this is catastrophic. If any other sort of organisation had these sorts of stats, we'd be debating a lot more than bonuses. It leave it for others to print off this chart, leave it on every seat at General Synod along with yesterdays stats, and ask at what point Synod will give some concerted energy to talking about the future of the CofE. And no, the solution is not more church schools. The state education system cannot, and should not, do the church's work for it. And it's obvious from the data above that, even if it is, it's not doing it very well.
It's times like this when union with the Methodists seems like a good idea. Here is what their equivalent of Synod was discussing and endorsing a few months ago. A church shaped for discipleship and mission? Are we?
Saturday, February 04, 2012
Major Minus: Church of England Adult Attendance change 1989-2010.
In case anyone at General Synod gets bored of talking about bishops, here's some important information about the rest of the Church of England.
The table above shows the change in adult attendance by Diocese from 1989-2010. A couple of explanatory notes, then some comments.
Explanation/Health Warning.
1. The data above is taken from Bob Jacksons 'Hope for the Church', which covers 1989-1999, and the Church of England's published statistics on attendance.
2. Jacksons data is based on 'usual Sunday attendance', and the CofE stats on 'average weekly attendance'. There isn't a massive difference in the two measures - the latter is higher, and has declined slightly slower than uSa, which isn't available for the whole of the 2000-2010 period. So the table above isn't scientifically precise, but if it's out, it will only be by a percentage or two.
Comments.
1. The majority of Dioceses are doing better than they were. 16 had a worse figure in the noughties than the 90s, and 27 were better. Also those that improved saw much bigger changes: e.g. Manchester, Newcastle and Durham all had a percentage change which was 20 points improvement or more on the 1990s. For the first two, this saw a decline of around 20% turned into moderate growth.
2. And that's where the good news ends. It's a sea of negative numbers, North and South, urban and rural, pretty much wherever you look. The majority of Dioceses have lost over 1/5 of their membership in 20 years. That's 1/5 of the income, 1/5 of the ministers (because everyone's a minister), but strangely, not 1/5 of the parishes. In 8 Diocese the figure is higher than 30%. This is arterial bleeding, not a minor scratch.
3. I wonder if there are any Dioceses which have cut the number of parishes, church buildings, or central overheads, by the same number? I suspect not. The reality of decline is that we feel duty-bound to maintain the parish system and the local church building until it kills us. So the burden is never reduced, but it falls upon a smaller and smaller number of people.
4. Who is accountable for all this? Can we, will we, ask our bishops and clergy what they've been doing, and what they're doing now? Who is learning the lessons? Or are we (in Einsteins definition of madness) continuing to do exactly the same as before in the hope of a different result?
5. General Synod has 4 debates coming up on women bishops, and none on church growth/decline. I'm sorry but that's bonkers. Anyone who thinks women bishops is the biggest issue facing the church at the moment hasn't woken up or inhaled the coffee. There is no point re-arranging dog collars on the Titanic.
6. I have the figures for childrens attendance and they are even scarier. If the church is relying on children as 'the future of the church' then we're looking at a church 60% the size of what it is at the moment.
7. The CofE has only two realistic options. The first is to start strategic planning for a church which will be 20-25% smaller in 2030, based on the continuation of current trends. The second is to shift significantly towards leadership, investment and structures which are focused on growth. There are currently incremental steps towards the latter (Fresh Expressions, mission funding, Bishops Mission Orders etc.), and a vast amount of 'make do and mend' towards the former.
I don't know what it will take to provoke the necessary sense of crisis, the deepening of conviction that we need to tackle this issue, so that the CofE overcomes its sniffiness about 'bums on pews' and recognises that there's a reason the New Testament talks about the number of people being saved on a regular basis. It's because each of those people matters to God, and each of those people is someone we're called to reach with the gospel. The CofE is largely failing in that task, and until we have reckoned with that, we call into question our claim to be called a church at all. Are we actually doing the task our Master has set us?
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Painful Truths, Awkward Questions
In the last couple of days I've posted some breakdown of the Church of England attendance data for 2001-2010. Compared to the 1990s, it shows a continued, albeit slower, decline across the CofE. Only London diocese has seen its adult numbers rise from 1990-2010, every other one of the 43 dioceses has seen a decline. It's only slighly better with under-16's, with 3 Dioceses showing an increase in 1990-2010 (London, Canterbury and Southwark).
There are some truly frightening figures here. My own Diocese, Bath and Wells, is one of at least 6 which have seen a fall in adult numbers of over 30% in that 20 year period. Yes we have been sailing into some pretty strong headwinds: membership of all sorts of voluntary groups has been declining, culture is changing, Sundays have vanished as a day of leisure etc.
But, but..... we need to inspect some of those bullet wounds just below the ankle. Is it just possible that we may have got some things wrong? Like:
1. The parish communion movement. The CofE has developed a 'norm' of communion being held in every parish on every Sunday. As parishes have been amalgamated, this has put great pressure on clergy to run around dispensing holy wafers, and stood in the way of churches developing worship to reflect a changing culture. In turn it has become a totem, with many local churches fiercely protective of it. (I know vicars who bear the scars from relatively tame attempts to try somthing different) The original Lords Supper (correct me if I'm wrong) was a Passover meal. These weren't celebrated by a priest bussed in from Jerusalem, but by the head of a household. Once a year. How we got from that to where we are now is, well, too complex to go into. But we need a complete rethink, and yes I'm absolutely fine with so called 'lay presidency' at communion. It would set our clergy and our local churches free.
2. The parish system: there is more than one way for the CofE to be a mission presence in every community, and we don't need to have a building to do it. There are other ways, I think one is called 'people'. We could even (careful now) do this in partnership with other churches, rather than trying to do it all ourselves.
3. I'm afraid we have to ask questions about the quality of leadership in the church, both at local level, but nationally. What have our bishops and archbishops been doing? I applaud George Carey's 'decade of evangelism' in the 1990s (which is seen as a failure, but laid the foundations for some of the best work of the last 10 years) and Rowan Williams championing Fresh Expressions. And yes, the CofE is an impossible beast to lead. But what has our church leadership been doing whilst all this is going on, and how do we hold them to account for it? What is the point of the next General Synod holding 4 (count them) debates on women bishops, if the only decision the first female Archbishop will have to make is who will switch off the lights as they leave the building? Where is the sense of urgency?
Even from down here in Somerset I can smell the breath of fresh air which is Steve Croft, Bishop of Sheffield, making his principal focus as leader of the Diocese mission and church growth. But how many of his colleagues are doing the same? How many of our bishops and Archdeacons ever led a growing church? How many of our Dioceses make it a policy to only train curates in growing churches? And a hundred more questions.
My point is this, if we don't get our finger out on this one, there will not be much point in the church of England debating anything else. With the Ordinariate, we seem to have got more upset over a couple of dozen Papally inclined clergy following through the logic of their theology, than we have over hundreds of thousands of Christians who have lost their faith, left the church, dried out, burnt out or dropped out. And that's not to mention the millions that we've not reached at all.
If any Anglicans have got this far, next time you see your bishop, a question for him: "what are you doing to grow the church in this Diocese?" If he sticks around for a supplementary, then David Cooke has plenty more. And if you're reading this and you're on General Synod, then how about every February synod devoting a session to considering the mission stats that come out every January, and coming up with a plan of action in response?
There are some truly frightening figures here. My own Diocese, Bath and Wells, is one of at least 6 which have seen a fall in adult numbers of over 30% in that 20 year period. Yes we have been sailing into some pretty strong headwinds: membership of all sorts of voluntary groups has been declining, culture is changing, Sundays have vanished as a day of leisure etc.
But, but..... we need to inspect some of those bullet wounds just below the ankle. Is it just possible that we may have got some things wrong? Like:
1. The parish communion movement. The CofE has developed a 'norm' of communion being held in every parish on every Sunday. As parishes have been amalgamated, this has put great pressure on clergy to run around dispensing holy wafers, and stood in the way of churches developing worship to reflect a changing culture. In turn it has become a totem, with many local churches fiercely protective of it. (I know vicars who bear the scars from relatively tame attempts to try somthing different) The original Lords Supper (correct me if I'm wrong) was a Passover meal. These weren't celebrated by a priest bussed in from Jerusalem, but by the head of a household. Once a year. How we got from that to where we are now is, well, too complex to go into. But we need a complete rethink, and yes I'm absolutely fine with so called 'lay presidency' at communion. It would set our clergy and our local churches free.
2. The parish system: there is more than one way for the CofE to be a mission presence in every community, and we don't need to have a building to do it. There are other ways, I think one is called 'people'. We could even (careful now) do this in partnership with other churches, rather than trying to do it all ourselves.
3. I'm afraid we have to ask questions about the quality of leadership in the church, both at local level, but nationally. What have our bishops and archbishops been doing? I applaud George Carey's 'decade of evangelism' in the 1990s (which is seen as a failure, but laid the foundations for some of the best work of the last 10 years) and Rowan Williams championing Fresh Expressions. And yes, the CofE is an impossible beast to lead. But what has our church leadership been doing whilst all this is going on, and how do we hold them to account for it? What is the point of the next General Synod holding 4 (count them) debates on women bishops, if the only decision the first female Archbishop will have to make is who will switch off the lights as they leave the building? Where is the sense of urgency?
Even from down here in Somerset I can smell the breath of fresh air which is Steve Croft, Bishop of Sheffield, making his principal focus as leader of the Diocese mission and church growth. But how many of his colleagues are doing the same? How many of our bishops and Archdeacons ever led a growing church? How many of our Dioceses make it a policy to only train curates in growing churches? And a hundred more questions.
My point is this, if we don't get our finger out on this one, there will not be much point in the church of England debating anything else. With the Ordinariate, we seem to have got more upset over a couple of dozen Papally inclined clergy following through the logic of their theology, than we have over hundreds of thousands of Christians who have lost their faith, left the church, dried out, burnt out or dropped out. And that's not to mention the millions that we've not reached at all.
If any Anglicans have got this far, next time you see your bishop, a question for him: "what are you doing to grow the church in this Diocese?" If he sticks around for a supplementary, then David Cooke has plenty more. And if you're reading this and you're on General Synod, then how about every February synod devoting a session to considering the mission stats that come out every January, and coming up with a plan of action in response?
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
Diocesan Attendance 2001-10 for adults and children.
Here are the tables for adults and childrens attendance for the 2001-10 decade, based on 'average weekly attendance'. The original data is here on the CofE website and was published last week. I blogged the chart for the combined 'all age' figure yesterday.
First the adult attendance. Some headlines:
1. Only 6 out of 43 Dioceses saw an increase in adult numbers. But that's an improvement on the 1990s when London was the only one, and it's good to see that London is still growing (though more slowly)
2. The overall picture is still of shrinkage, but more slowly than in the 1990s, when the average Diocese was losing 12-15% of adult members, and the worst lost 28%
3. Each of these figures masks as much as it reveals. For example, Bristol Diocese saw its adult numbers drop from 15,400 to 12,600 in 2001-8. Since then they've grown again, to 14,200. So an 18% drop, followed by a 13% rise in 2 years shows as a 7.8% fall overall. Nearly all the growth in London happened in the early part of the decade, since when attendance has actually fallen off slightly.
Now the childrens chart. This is better:
1. 15 out of 43 Dioceses have seen growth here. It would be interesting to correlate this to spending from the money released by the Church Commissioners for mission. Quite a lot of this has gone on local children and families worker posts, are we seeing an effect? (and if so, would we see an effect if we released lay ministry into other age group specialisms, like the over-65s?)
2. The overall numbers here are smaller to start with, so change is generally more volatile, hence the bigger percentage swings compared to the adults.
3. This is an even more significant improvement on the 1990s, when only London saw a rise in numbers, and that was fairly small (4%). To put it in perspective, my own Diocese, Bath and Wells, which is 23rd in the table, would have been 5th in the 1990s table on these figures.
4. But we are seeing the virtual disappearance of the CofE presence among children in some places. Blackburn and Liverpool now have around 45% of the under-16s they had 20 years ago. Church schools do not compensate for this. If only they were as succesful at discipling children as the National Secular Society would have people believe they are.
My fear is that bishops/synod/etc. will look at these stats and say 'oh hurrah, things are getting better'. Well, they are, in the sense of a man who has one leg amputated one week and only has to have half a leg amputated the following week.
Some more commentary tomorrow, if I can restrain myself that long!
Monday, January 23, 2012
All Age Attendance 2001-2010, by Diocese
This is a bit of a test post, since I've had to use 4 different file types* to come up with the above table, starting with last weeks Church of England attendance stats for 2010 (pdf). I'm planning a post for Wednesday with the data for adult and childrens attendance separately, and perhaps a bit of commentary.
If there's any other amateur number crunchers out there, it would be helpful to combine these figures with Bob Jacksons for the 1990s to give the cumulative 1990-2010 figure. My sense is that a drip drip of yearly declines of 1-2% is never enough to distract General Synod from talking about sex for long enough to engage with mission (alert: tongue in cheek comment) (no, not tongue in cheek in that sense, please concentrate).
At least one Diocese has seen adult attendance shrink by 20% in both decades, a cumulative 36% drop. It would be bonkers if they were still trying to make things work in the same way as back in 1990, wouldn't it? ...........?
For info, this is based on the 'average weekly attendance' figure, which is the headline one the CofE likes to use. I'm sure that's nothing to do with the fact that it's higher than the other ones, and so keeps the headline figure above the 1m mark. There doesn't appear at first glance to be a massive difference in the outcomes by the different measures, but life's too short for me to do a thorough comparison by diocese!
(*Geek corner: pdf to Excel - almost by hand - for number crunching, Excel to powerpoint slide, powerpoint slide to Word, saved as picture from Word. There must be an easier way)
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Latest CofE Attendance Stats (2010): the Snooze Button Buster Remix?
The latest batch of attendance stats from the CofE has come out today, and it's not for those of a nervous disposition. The trend of decline is still there, and showing no signs of bottoming out or reversing. The only glimmers of light are an upward blip in weddings (early impact of the Weddings Project and their excellent website?) and baptisms (which are replacing weddings as the first public rite of passage for a new family, possibly because they don't cost so much).
Press release
figures
stats on Fresh Expressions nicely presented in a series of powerpoints. There's estimated to be 30,000 people who are part of a Fresh Expression, but who wouldn't otherwise be part of a church.
As and when I get time, there'll be an update here of the Diocesan 'league table'. Only 10 dioceses have shown an increase in adult attendance in 2008-10, and the overall picture is pretty grim. From 2000-2010 CofE adult attendance on Sundays fell 11%, that of children and young people fell by 23%. The only consolation is that this is marginally better than the 1990s (14%/28%)
And it's not that people are moving to midweek or monthly patterns of attending either: 'weekly' attendance is dropping faster than Sunday attendance for adults (-13%) and monthly attendance is -11% over the decade. So whichever way you look at the CofE cookie, it's crumbling.
Public Memo to General Synod: how about handing over one of the 4 allocated slots for debating women bishops to debating this stuff? After all, what would be the point of a perfect gender split in the house of bishops if the only thing they have left to debate is who will switch the lights off? At what point is this a wake up call, or will we just hit the the 'snooze' button again until next years stats?
Update: a very positive take on the stats at the Guardian, reflecting the good work done on the Weddings Project.
Press release
figures
stats on Fresh Expressions nicely presented in a series of powerpoints. There's estimated to be 30,000 people who are part of a Fresh Expression, but who wouldn't otherwise be part of a church.
As and when I get time, there'll be an update here of the Diocesan 'league table'. Only 10 dioceses have shown an increase in adult attendance in 2008-10, and the overall picture is pretty grim. From 2000-2010 CofE adult attendance on Sundays fell 11%, that of children and young people fell by 23%. The only consolation is that this is marginally better than the 1990s (14%/28%)
And it's not that people are moving to midweek or monthly patterns of attending either: 'weekly' attendance is dropping faster than Sunday attendance for adults (-13%) and monthly attendance is -11% over the decade. So whichever way you look at the CofE cookie, it's crumbling.
Public Memo to General Synod: how about handing over one of the 4 allocated slots for debating women bishops to debating this stuff? After all, what would be the point of a perfect gender split in the house of bishops if the only thing they have left to debate is who will switch the lights off? At what point is this a wake up call, or will we just hit the the 'snooze' button again until next years stats?
Update: a very positive take on the stats at the Guardian, reflecting the good work done on the Weddings Project.
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
When I Needed a Neighbour, You Were There, It's Just That Up To That Point We'd Never Spoken
The Observer published a major study of identity, belonging and UK attitudes at the weekend, a couple of the charts struck me:
For nearly 20% of people, they never feel part of their neighbourhood, and for another 18% there is at least 3 years of loneliness and alienation to get through before they feel that they belong and are accepted.
Here is a twofold challenge for the church, particularly the Anglican church, which works very much on neighbourhoods and the local setting:
- If you base your identity, appeal and mission on being 'the parish church for x', and then find that 20% of your parish residents don't feel like they belong to x, and a further 20% have, at best, a very weak sense of belonging, what does that do to your mission and ministry in this area?
(And on a wider front, if the CofE is based on the parish system, in turn premised on a sense of local belonging, and that sense of belonging is missing or tenuous for 40% of the population, then what does that say about the parish system?)
- How can the local church enable people to feel a sense of belonging to their neighbourhood?
According to the data, (p104) the groups which feel least sense of belonging to their neighbourhood are 25-35s, working people (as opposed to non-working) and white people. The sample sizes start to get a bit small at this level, but this raises a separate question. Does a group who wants to build community (church or otherwise) try to get these groups interested in their neighbourhood, or would they naturally find a sense of community somewhere else (e.g. workplace, club scene, sport)?
not that the church should be organised based on the latest opinion poll, but then neither should it be organised as if it operates in a historical and cultural vacuum. Plenty of chewy questions here...
Whether British citizens are born here or not, their weakest sense of belonging is with their local neighbourhood. Around 40% of the people who live around you don't feel like they belong.
Here is a twofold challenge for the church, particularly the Anglican church, which works very much on neighbourhoods and the local setting:
- If you base your identity, appeal and mission on being 'the parish church for x', and then find that 20% of your parish residents don't feel like they belong to x, and a further 20% have, at best, a very weak sense of belonging, what does that do to your mission and ministry in this area?
(And on a wider front, if the CofE is based on the parish system, in turn premised on a sense of local belonging, and that sense of belonging is missing or tenuous for 40% of the population, then what does that say about the parish system?)
- How can the local church enable people to feel a sense of belonging to their neighbourhood?
According to the data, (p104) the groups which feel least sense of belonging to their neighbourhood are 25-35s, working people (as opposed to non-working) and white people. The sample sizes start to get a bit small at this level, but this raises a separate question. Does a group who wants to build community (church or otherwise) try to get these groups interested in their neighbourhood, or would they naturally find a sense of community somewhere else (e.g. workplace, club scene, sport)?
not that the church should be organised based on the latest opinion poll, but then neither should it be organised as if it operates in a historical and cultural vacuum. Plenty of chewy questions here...
Friday, December 23, 2011
Vicar Burnout
A new survey of 3000 Anglican clergy reveals that nearly 1 in 5 of us feel 'burned out' at least once a month or more. The survey also states that this is 'not high when compared to other occupational groups" (p6). Well that explains a lot. If 18% of bankers, politicians, journalists, clergy, social workers, teachers, parents etc. are experiencing that much stress, it's no wonder we're surrounded by the fruits of ropey decisions.
Sam Norton has recently posted on the stats of church decline in the CofE. I hope the fact that we're experiencing similar levels of stress to everyone else doesn't lead the powers that be to go 'oh, that's alright then'. There are some serious structural problems with the CofE, and the jury is still out on whether the parish system is an effective neighbourhood mission strategy or a doddering sacred cow which needs to be put out of its misery before it topples over and crushes us.
Update: for some thoughts on where and when churches are effective in mission, try this (HT Thinking Anglicans)
"•If you want Christianity to shrink, give it wealth and privilege and back it up with the power of the state.
•If you want Christianity to show surprising resilience, suppress its structures and persecute its people.
•If you want Christianity to thrive, drop it into a free market environment and force it to hustle."
There, that was cheery! Merry Christmas everyone!!
Sam Norton has recently posted on the stats of church decline in the CofE. I hope the fact that we're experiencing similar levels of stress to everyone else doesn't lead the powers that be to go 'oh, that's alright then'. There are some serious structural problems with the CofE, and the jury is still out on whether the parish system is an effective neighbourhood mission strategy or a doddering sacred cow which needs to be put out of its misery before it topples over and crushes us.
Update: for some thoughts on where and when churches are effective in mission, try this (HT Thinking Anglicans)
"•If you want Christianity to shrink, give it wealth and privilege and back it up with the power of the state.
•If you want Christianity to show surprising resilience, suppress its structures and persecute its people.
•If you want Christianity to thrive, drop it into a free market environment and force it to hustle."
There, that was cheery! Merry Christmas everyone!!
Wednesday, November 09, 2011
Wikio Top 'Religion and Belief' Blogs, November 2011
Here's the latest top 15 from the Wikio rankings, which work by links between sites registered with Wikio, rather than traffic levels. Judging by one or two of these, they need to add 'Unbelief' into the category title:
1. The Freethinker
2. eChurch Blog
3. Islam in Europe
4. Phil's Treehouse
5. Thinking Anglicans
6. Anglican Mainstream (not a blog, it's a news aggregator)
7. iBenedictines
8. The BIGBible Project
9. Of Course I Could be Wrong
10. Nick Baines
11. Bishop Alan
12. Epiphenom
13. The Beaker Folk of Husborne Crawley
14. Lesleys Blog
15. Peter Saunders - Christian Medical Comment.
The top blog here is 209 in the general rankings. As you can only be included in one category, there's no sign of Cranmer (36) in this list, otherwise that would be far and away the top ranking Religion blog.
For those interested in life outside the ghetto, the top 3 blogs overall are Liberal Conspiracy, Left Foot Forwards (politics) and Sticky Fingers (parenting).
1. The Freethinker
2. eChurch Blog
3. Islam in Europe
4. Phil's Treehouse
5. Thinking Anglicans
6. Anglican Mainstream (not a blog, it's a news aggregator)
7. iBenedictines
8. The BIGBible Project
9. Of Course I Could be Wrong
10. Nick Baines
11. Bishop Alan
12. Epiphenom
13. The Beaker Folk of Husborne Crawley
14. Lesleys Blog
15. Peter Saunders - Christian Medical Comment.
The top blog here is 209 in the general rankings. As you can only be included in one category, there's no sign of Cranmer (36) in this list, otherwise that would be far and away the top ranking Religion blog.
For those interested in life outside the ghetto, the top 3 blogs overall are Liberal Conspiracy, Left Foot Forwards (politics) and Sticky Fingers (parenting).
Monday, November 07, 2011
Church of England Vital Statistics: Time to Call the Nurse? Or the Surgeon?
As the title suggests, 'Hope for the Church' wasn't all doom and gloom - in among the decline were signs of what the CofE could do to put things right, from smarter deployment of ministers, to better use of tools like Alpha and small groups.
The first two columns in the table above are taken from Jacksons book. The final one I've added myself, based on the latest Church of England statistics, published roughly a month ago.
In recent years, decline in attendance has slowed, but the above figures make pretty grim reading. Despite Fresh Expressions, a renewed emphasis on church planting, a plethora of Diocesan initiatives, mission fund money etc., there is no obvious and decisive turnaround in the fortunes of the Church of England.
The real danger is that the remaining pockets of health in the CofE are gradually eroded by the weight of the rest of it. Look at that 'churches open' figure. There are still around 16,000 Anglican churches, not far off the number in 1980, but run by 30% fewer clergy, and paid for and supported by 30%+ fewer adult members. With each church comes an obligation to retain a regular pattern of worship, the legal business of PCCs and AGMs, building maintenance etc. There is very little spare time and energy left for the average vicar after you've had to sort all this out for 6 churches.
In the meantime, those churches that are growing get hit with higher bills. Our Diocese has frozen its budget for 2011-12, which is good news. However, our church has grown slightly, and the vast majority of the other Anglican churches in Bath and Wells have shrunk. So any church, like ours, which holds or increases its membership, ends up paying more to compensate for those which have shrunk. There's a good principle there of the strong supporting the weak, which is fine. But how much weight can the healthy limbs of a tree support before they suffer damage themselves? There are plenty of good things going on in the CofE, hundreds of new church plants, lots of innovation, and the decade has seen a sea-change in attitudes towards mission, with a corresponding change in policies and deployment. But whilst the outlying vessels are going at a rate of knots, the main ship is looking very creaky.
Back in the summer, Andreas Whittam Smith of the Church Commissioners said this to General Synod:
“I have seen large companies perfectly and impeccably manage themselves into failure. Every step along the road has been well done.
“Every account is neatly signed off.”
Then finally they find they have “gone bust”, he said. “I sometimes feel the Church is a bit like that.”
He added: “I wish that all of us would have a sense of real crisis about this.”
At what point does the Church of England call time on a system set up in the Middle Ages, but increasingly no longer fit for purpose? At what point do we declare that the burden of maintaining 16000 historic buildings is no longer an asset to mission, but an impediment? At what point do we press the red button, and try to do things differently, rather than squeezing more out of less and hoping that somehow everything will get better?
Judging by these stats, the Church of England is a frog in the long slow process of being boiled. How hot does it have to get?
Update: if you need something slightly less depressing along similar lines, try this excellent post from David Cooke.
Friday, September 30, 2011
Call Waiting: A Church of England Initiative that Worked?
Back in 2008, the CofE launched the Call Waiting initiative, to encourage younger people to explore their calling and possible ordination. You can see the very good website here. A combination of demographics (an ageing church) and short-sighted policy (telling younger prospective leaders to go away and get a job for a few years and then come back to enquire about ordination when they were older - many never came back, and those who did were, well, older.) has resulted in an ageing cohort of clergy. The CofE stats published yesterday note that the average age of ordinands rose from 40 to 43 for men and 35 to 38 for women from 1999 to 2010.
That's ordinands, not clergy. 3/4 of vicars are over 50, and half of those are over 60. At 42, after 13 years of full time ministry, I'm still very comfortably a 'young vicar' in terms of age profile. And that worries me.
But now the good news. From 1998-2000 roughly 100 under-30's were ordained every year. It's not many, but it's ok. From 2001-9 it was nearer 80 a year, getting as low as 71 in some years. If you add on a 3-4 year curacy, that means only a handful who are still under 30 by the time they get their first post with real responsibility.
In 2010, out of nowhere 108 under-30's were ordained, up from 74 in 2009. That's the best figure since I was ordained in 1998. A data table tucked away on p56 of an Anglican stats report isn't exactly exhaustive evidence, but it's encouraging to think there might be a connection between the drive to recruit younger ordinands, and that starting to show up in the figures. It may, of course, be a blip. Or it may be that the CofE is at last waking up to the gifts that younger leaders have to offer.
That's ordinands, not clergy. 3/4 of vicars are over 50, and half of those are over 60. At 42, after 13 years of full time ministry, I'm still very comfortably a 'young vicar' in terms of age profile. And that worries me.
But now the good news. From 1998-2000 roughly 100 under-30's were ordained every year. It's not many, but it's ok. From 2001-9 it was nearer 80 a year, getting as low as 71 in some years. If you add on a 3-4 year curacy, that means only a handful who are still under 30 by the time they get their first post with real responsibility.
In 2010, out of nowhere 108 under-30's were ordained, up from 74 in 2009. That's the best figure since I was ordained in 1998. A data table tucked away on p56 of an Anglican stats report isn't exactly exhaustive evidence, but it's encouraging to think there might be a connection between the drive to recruit younger ordinands, and that starting to show up in the figures. It may, of course, be a blip. Or it may be that the CofE is at last waking up to the gifts that younger leaders have to offer.
Thursday, September 29, 2011
latest Church of England stats
Just gone up on the main CofE website. Summary is here, full 62 pages of charts etc. are here. The main new stuff (it has the attendance figures which were published earlier this year) is about giving and vocations. Parish giving has risen, bucking the general trend across the charity sector, and over 500 people were ordained in 2010. However due to lots of retirements, overall numbers of full time clergy continue to fall. This is projected to drop a further 10% in the next 5 years.
At some stage the CofE will seriously need to reckon with this: the number of churches, expectation of a weekly Sunday communion, heavy clerical dependency etc. But since the change is all incremental, it feels like a slowly boiling frog scenario, and there's a danger we don't respond until it's too late. Maybe it is too late already.
The main stats document also has lots of info on confirmations, baptisms, weddings, funerals, chaplans and cathedrals.
If I get a moment, there'll be more analysis in the next few days.
At some stage the CofE will seriously need to reckon with this: the number of churches, expectation of a weekly Sunday communion, heavy clerical dependency etc. But since the change is all incremental, it feels like a slowly boiling frog scenario, and there's a danger we don't respond until it's too late. Maybe it is too late already.
The main stats document also has lots of info on confirmations, baptisms, weddings, funerals, chaplans and cathedrals.
If I get a moment, there'll be more analysis in the next few days.
Saturday, June 26, 2010
Dancing Data
This has got to be the most creative presentation of stats on world poverty and health I've seen. Watch for the changes from 1960 to the present. Great way to capture the imagination, and communicate a message.
Had he simply produced sheets of paper with figures on, he wouldn't have got a standing ovation. The way you present the message is vital to how you get it across. The conclusion of the talk is all about this: how do you link data to design, so that the message can be heard. We need to see things as well as hear them.
Original vid and a sizeable online discussion here.
Had he simply produced sheets of paper with figures on, he wouldn't have got a standing ovation. The way you present the message is vital to how you get it across. The conclusion of the talk is all about this: how do you link data to design, so that the message can be heard. We need to see things as well as hear them.
Original vid and a sizeable online discussion here.
Friday, June 25, 2010
Faith, Volunteering, and Community Involvement
This from Christian Research's
On 29 April 2010 the Department for Communities and Local Government released two further topic reports from the 2008-09 Citizenship Survey relating, respectively, to Empowered communities and to Volunteering and charitable giving. The Citizenship Survey is conducted by face-to-face interview among a representative sample of adults aged 16 and over in England and Wales, including an ethnic minority booster sample. NatCen conducted 14,917 interviews between April 2008 and March 2009.
The Empowered Communities report includes an analysis by religion of participation in civic engagement and formal volunteering. Of the major faith groups, Buddhists are shown to be most active (69% participate), followed by Christians (64%), those identifying with no religion (58%), Muslims (48%), Sikhs (47%) and Hindus (46%).
In terms of influencing decisions in their local area, a rather different pattern emerges. Sikhs are most hopeful (61%), followed by Muslims (49%), Hindus (48%), Buddhists (47%), Christians (39%) and those of no religion (37%). All groups feel they have much less say over decision-making at national level, the high being 49% for Sikhs and the low 20% for those identifying with no religion.
The Volunteering and Charitable Giving topic report includes no breaks by religious affiliation, but the links between faith and volunteering are analysed. For example, of those who have engaged in formal volunteering during the past twelve months, 33% have helped religious organisations. The proportion of the population that undertake voluntary work rises progressively with age, from 22% among the 16 to 25s, to 50% for the over 75s age group.
Places of worship are a source of information about potential opportunities for formal volunteering for 21% of the sample, but especially for those aged 65 and over (35%). Religious motivations for regular formal volunteering are cited by 17% of all adults and by twice this number among the elderly and ethnic minorities.
When it comes to charitable giving, 74% of adults give to charity of whom one-fifth (15%) give through a collection at a place of worship.
The reports are available to download from the department for Communities and Local Government. But you'd better crack on, as 'all content on this website is being reviewed'
Research Brief is a monthly e-newsletter, and you can subscribe via admin (at) christian-research.org.uk
On 29 April 2010 the Department for Communities and Local Government released two further topic reports from the 2008-09 Citizenship Survey relating, respectively, to Empowered communities and to Volunteering and charitable giving. The Citizenship Survey is conducted by face-to-face interview among a representative sample of adults aged 16 and over in England and Wales, including an ethnic minority booster sample. NatCen conducted 14,917 interviews between April 2008 and March 2009.
The Empowered Communities report includes an analysis by religion of participation in civic engagement and formal volunteering. Of the major faith groups, Buddhists are shown to be most active (69% participate), followed by Christians (64%), those identifying with no religion (58%), Muslims (48%), Sikhs (47%) and Hindus (46%).
In terms of influencing decisions in their local area, a rather different pattern emerges. Sikhs are most hopeful (61%), followed by Muslims (49%), Hindus (48%), Buddhists (47%), Christians (39%) and those of no religion (37%). All groups feel they have much less say over decision-making at national level, the high being 49% for Sikhs and the low 20% for those identifying with no religion.
The Volunteering and Charitable Giving topic report includes no breaks by religious affiliation, but the links between faith and volunteering are analysed. For example, of those who have engaged in formal volunteering during the past twelve months, 33% have helped religious organisations. The proportion of the population that undertake voluntary work rises progressively with age, from 22% among the 16 to 25s, to 50% for the over 75s age group.
Places of worship are a source of information about potential opportunities for formal volunteering for 21% of the sample, but especially for those aged 65 and over (35%). Religious motivations for regular formal volunteering are cited by 17% of all adults and by twice this number among the elderly and ethnic minorities.
When it comes to charitable giving, 74% of adults give to charity of whom one-fifth (15%) give through a collection at a place of worship.
The reports are available to download from the department for Communities and Local Government. But you'd better crack on, as 'all content on this website is being reviewed'
Research Brief is a monthly e-newsletter, and you can subscribe via admin (at) christian-research.org.uk
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Social Attitudes: the God Question (s)
The recent 26th British Social Attitudes Survey has a full chapter devoted to 'Religion in Britain and the United States'. It opens "Religion is a cause of perplexity to the British. On the one hand it is associated with Christian virtue, traditional values, the Dalai Lama and all things bright and beautiful. On the other hand it brings to mind violent fanaticism, reactionary morality, Osama bin Laden, abuse and oppression. After a long history of religious turmoil and mistrust we no longer much mind (what religion our leaders are), but strong commitment makes us worried."
It's a fascinating essay, and pulls in data from the UK and USA to compare and contrast. Here are some of the questions, with a few thoughts:
1. "Do you regard yourself as belonging to any particular religion?"
(1983 figures in brackets)
No religion 43% (31)
Christian 50% (66)
Non-Christian 7 (2)
Of the 'Christian'
Anglican 23 (40)
Roman Catholic 9 (10)
No denomination 10 (3)
and other mainline denominations mostly showing a drop.
There seem to be two main stories: the falling away in identification with the historic churches, towards 'no religion' (which reflects the changing of the generations) or 'no denomination', and the impact of immigration, which has bolstered RC numbers, and seen a rise in non-Christian faiths.
2. Belief in God
I don't believe in God 18%
I don't know whether there is a God and don't believe there is any way to find out 18%
I don't believe in a personal God but I do believe in a higher power of some kind 14%
I find myself believing in God some of the time, but not at others 13%
While I have doubts, I feel that I do believe in God 18%
I know God really exists and that I have no doubts about it 17%
So about 1/3 have a definite faith, 1/3 have a fuzzier faith - either fuzzy about whether God is there, or what kind of spiritual entity God might be, and just over 1/3 are atheist or agnostic
It's useful to have this level of detail: there are surveys which report a majority as believing in God, but 'believing' and 'God' aren't straightforward categories.
3. How religious are you?
extremely/very 7%
somewhat 30%
neither religious nor non-religious 22%
somewhat non-religious 11%
very/extremely non-religious 26%
Which might in part reflect the British aversion to extremes. It's also a sign that if Christians want to communicate their faith, anything percieved as 'religious' packaging (e.g. the institutional church) is off to a losing start. 'Back to Church' Sunday will cut no mustard with people who describe themselves as non-religious.
4. How often do you attend religious services (apart from special occasions)
Never 62%
less than annually 5%
At least annually 15%
At least monthly 8%
At least weekly 10%
Less than 20% of those brought up as Anglicans, or calling themselves CofE attend monthly or more often.
This also shows that any attempt by churches to connect with non-Christians based on 'religious services' is probably a non-starter too. Weird stuff done by weird people in a weird building. This bears out some of the TEAR Fund research , which found that 26% of adults go to church once a year, and 15% go once a month or more. Jesus didn't start with religion, he started with relationships, perhaps there's something in that.
4. Does it do you any good?
there's a question on the 'personal benefits of religion'
65% agree that religion helps people to find inner peace/happiness
67% agree that it helps people to make friends
79% that it helps people to gain comfort.
Even among the 'unreligious', 49% agree with the first statement, and 58 and 68% respectively with the other two. More curious is the 10%+ of 'religious' people who don't agree with these statements!!!
5. Influence of religion
24% said religion is increasing its influence, 3/4 of these said that was a bad thing. This is the National Secular Society argument - that religion is both in decline, but becoming more politically influential.
57% said religion is decreasing its influence, and about 4 in 5 of these thought that a bad thing.
Overall, about 31% thought that more religious influence was a bad thing, and 50% that it was a good thing.
That's a big challenge: I know this lumps all religion together (it would be interesting to ask the question about particular faiths), but if Christians are seen as bad news by a significant section of our society, then a long hard look in the mirror is in order. It also begs the question of what's seen as 'religion' - is the creche provided by the Mothers Union for prison visitors, or the church-run food bank seen as an expression of religion? Or is it dusty bishops talking about sex and Islamic extremists?
6. Religion and Politics
75% said religious leaders shouldn't try to influence voting behaviour, and 67% think religious leaders should stay out of government decision making. Lords reform here we come... There's also a tendency to think that, if elected officials were more deeply religious, then laws and policy decisions would probably be worse. There's a Bush/Blair legacy to that which the report picks out.
What does this mean for the way the church engages with the General Election? I know of several churches who organise local hustings events, and encourage people to vote and engage with the issues, though it sounds like a more directive engagement (see recent RC interventions) might not go down so well. Perhaps it depends on the issue?
7. Moral Standards
89% say you should follow your conscience rather than what the leaders and teachings of your religion say. That pretty much reflects the number of people who are deeply religious.
60% agreed that there can never be absolutely clear statements of what is good and evil, or an absolute morality. That reflects where we are as a society - and a church identified with laws and rules isn't going to make much headway against that. I remember an Ethics seminar 15 years ago where we watched an hour of Eastenders and noted the dozens of moral issues raised in just a short time - processing morality through story and consensus, rather than principle and absolutes, is the flavour of things. I wonder also if this question is swayed by being part of the 'religion' section - things like racism, violence, etc. do seem to be seen in terms of moral absolutes, and nobody objects at public campaigns which try to enforce them (e.g. Kick Racism out of Football). Don't we still have some absolutes, but no longer on the turf which was colonised by Christendom?
8. Conversion
Only 17% thought it was acceptable for religious people to try to convert others, 81% took the opposite view. That raises lots of questions for mission!
About 3/4 of people think that being very religious means you're often intolerant.
9. Faith Schools
42% - no religious group should have its own schools
13% - some should have them, but not others
43% - any religious group should be able to have its own schools.
So this debate is truly alive and kicking. It's not going to go away any time soon.
There's a whole section on religious diversity and tolerance, which shows that we've still some way to go as a society. It also shows that Muslims have a serious image problem - about 1/3 felt 'cool' towards Muslims, (as opposed to neutral or warm) - far and away the least favourable result, apart from that for 'deeply religious' (29%) - most other religious groups were in the 5-15% range. A majority would be bothered by a large mosque being built locally, but relatively few by a large church. There's unease about the level to which Muslims are integrated into British society. The writers note: Muslims deserves to be the focus of policy on social cohesion, because no other group elicits so much disquiet.
Lots of food for thought here, both about perceptions and practices. Those of us percieved as being 'religious' are possibly trying to run a marathon with both legs tied together. Two responses are to abandon traditional religion, and its forms, for something more acceptable (but every movement becomes an institution in the end) or to try to make the case for religion (not a word I particularly like) being good news. That's not easy when there are plenty of examples of the opposite.
Plenty of chewing over to be done....
It's a fascinating essay, and pulls in data from the UK and USA to compare and contrast. Here are some of the questions, with a few thoughts:
1. "Do you regard yourself as belonging to any particular religion?"
(1983 figures in brackets)
No religion 43% (31)
Christian 50% (66)
Non-Christian 7 (2)
Of the 'Christian'
Anglican 23 (40)
Roman Catholic 9 (10)
No denomination 10 (3)
and other mainline denominations mostly showing a drop.
There seem to be two main stories: the falling away in identification with the historic churches, towards 'no religion' (which reflects the changing of the generations) or 'no denomination', and the impact of immigration, which has bolstered RC numbers, and seen a rise in non-Christian faiths.
2. Belief in God
I don't believe in God 18%
I don't know whether there is a God and don't believe there is any way to find out 18%
I don't believe in a personal God but I do believe in a higher power of some kind 14%
I find myself believing in God some of the time, but not at others 13%
While I have doubts, I feel that I do believe in God 18%
I know God really exists and that I have no doubts about it 17%
So about 1/3 have a definite faith, 1/3 have a fuzzier faith - either fuzzy about whether God is there, or what kind of spiritual entity God might be, and just over 1/3 are atheist or agnostic
It's useful to have this level of detail: there are surveys which report a majority as believing in God, but 'believing' and 'God' aren't straightforward categories.
3. How religious are you?
extremely/very 7%
somewhat 30%
neither religious nor non-religious 22%
somewhat non-religious 11%
very/extremely non-religious 26%
Which might in part reflect the British aversion to extremes. It's also a sign that if Christians want to communicate their faith, anything percieved as 'religious' packaging (e.g. the institutional church) is off to a losing start. 'Back to Church' Sunday will cut no mustard with people who describe themselves as non-religious.
4. How often do you attend religious services (apart from special occasions)
Never 62%
less than annually 5%
At least annually 15%
At least monthly 8%
At least weekly 10%
Less than 20% of those brought up as Anglicans, or calling themselves CofE attend monthly or more often.
This also shows that any attempt by churches to connect with non-Christians based on 'religious services' is probably a non-starter too. Weird stuff done by weird people in a weird building. This bears out some of the TEAR Fund research , which found that 26% of adults go to church once a year, and 15% go once a month or more. Jesus didn't start with religion, he started with relationships, perhaps there's something in that.
4. Does it do you any good?
there's a question on the 'personal benefits of religion'
65% agree that religion helps people to find inner peace/happiness
67% agree that it helps people to make friends
79% that it helps people to gain comfort.
Even among the 'unreligious', 49% agree with the first statement, and 58 and 68% respectively with the other two. More curious is the 10%+ of 'religious' people who don't agree with these statements!!!
5. Influence of religion
24% said religion is increasing its influence, 3/4 of these said that was a bad thing. This is the National Secular Society argument - that religion is both in decline, but becoming more politically influential.
57% said religion is decreasing its influence, and about 4 in 5 of these thought that a bad thing.
Overall, about 31% thought that more religious influence was a bad thing, and 50% that it was a good thing.
That's a big challenge: I know this lumps all religion together (it would be interesting to ask the question about particular faiths), but if Christians are seen as bad news by a significant section of our society, then a long hard look in the mirror is in order. It also begs the question of what's seen as 'religion' - is the creche provided by the Mothers Union for prison visitors, or the church-run food bank seen as an expression of religion? Or is it dusty bishops talking about sex and Islamic extremists?
6. Religion and Politics
75% said religious leaders shouldn't try to influence voting behaviour, and 67% think religious leaders should stay out of government decision making. Lords reform here we come... There's also a tendency to think that, if elected officials were more deeply religious, then laws and policy decisions would probably be worse. There's a Bush/Blair legacy to that which the report picks out.
What does this mean for the way the church engages with the General Election? I know of several churches who organise local hustings events, and encourage people to vote and engage with the issues, though it sounds like a more directive engagement (see recent RC interventions) might not go down so well. Perhaps it depends on the issue?
7. Moral Standards
89% say you should follow your conscience rather than what the leaders and teachings of your religion say. That pretty much reflects the number of people who are deeply religious.
60% agreed that there can never be absolutely clear statements of what is good and evil, or an absolute morality. That reflects where we are as a society - and a church identified with laws and rules isn't going to make much headway against that. I remember an Ethics seminar 15 years ago where we watched an hour of Eastenders and noted the dozens of moral issues raised in just a short time - processing morality through story and consensus, rather than principle and absolutes, is the flavour of things. I wonder also if this question is swayed by being part of the 'religion' section - things like racism, violence, etc. do seem to be seen in terms of moral absolutes, and nobody objects at public campaigns which try to enforce them (e.g. Kick Racism out of Football). Don't we still have some absolutes, but no longer on the turf which was colonised by Christendom?
8. Conversion
Only 17% thought it was acceptable for religious people to try to convert others, 81% took the opposite view. That raises lots of questions for mission!
About 3/4 of people think that being very religious means you're often intolerant.
9. Faith Schools
42% - no religious group should have its own schools
13% - some should have them, but not others
43% - any religious group should be able to have its own schools.
So this debate is truly alive and kicking. It's not going to go away any time soon.
There's a whole section on religious diversity and tolerance, which shows that we've still some way to go as a society. It also shows that Muslims have a serious image problem - about 1/3 felt 'cool' towards Muslims, (as opposed to neutral or warm) - far and away the least favourable result, apart from that for 'deeply religious' (29%) - most other religious groups were in the 5-15% range. A majority would be bothered by a large mosque being built locally, but relatively few by a large church. There's unease about the level to which Muslims are integrated into British society. The writers note: Muslims deserves to be the focus of policy on social cohesion, because no other group elicits so much disquiet.
Lots of food for thought here, both about perceptions and practices. Those of us percieved as being 'religious' are possibly trying to run a marathon with both legs tied together. Two responses are to abandon traditional religion, and its forms, for something more acceptable (but every movement becomes an institution in the end) or to try to make the case for religion (not a word I particularly like) being good news. That's not easy when there are plenty of examples of the opposite.
Plenty of chewing over to be done....
Monday, January 25, 2010
Church of England Attendance by Diocese, Table for 2001-8
The latest Church of England attendance stats were released last Friday - good round up of the coverage at Thinking Anglicans, and comments at Church Mouse. Inspired by Bob Jacksons book 'Hope for the Church', which set out the change in adult and childrens attendance during the 1990's, here are the tables for the first 8 years of the noughties.
Adults: the measure used here is average weekly attendance. There's been a slight shift away from Sunday attendance towards midweek attendance, which reflects the change in working patterns, and possibly that, since nearly 1/2 of Anglicans are retired (more on that story later...), they're a bit freer to come to services midweek than they were when working.
London 9.1%
Southwark 6.4%
Europe 5.8%
Manchester 3.9%
Ely 3.2%
Hereford 1.9%
Ripon & Leeds -2.2%
York -2.2%
Lincoln -2.8%
St Albans -3.2%
Chichester -3.5%
Carlisle -4.1%
Gloucester -4.3%
Derby -5.0%
Canterbury -5.2%
Rochester -5.3%
Newcastle -5.5%
Chelmsford -5.6%
Total C of E -5.8%
Bath & Wells -5.8%
Guildford -5.8%
Winchester -6.2%
Southwell -6.3%
Coventry -6.3%
Birmingham -6.6%
Durham -6.8%
Leicester -6.9%
Oxford -7.1%
Wakefield -7.1%
Peterborough -8.6%
Bradford -9.4%
Lichfield -10.0%
St Edmundsbury & Ipswich -10.0%
Exeter -10.5%
Chester -10.7%
Salisbury -11.0%
Blackburn -11.2%
Sodor & Man -12.5%
Truro -13.1%
Portsmouth -13.8%
Norwich -14.2%
Liverpool -15.2%
Worcester -15.7%
Sheffield -16.1%
Bristol -18.2%
Comments:
1. This is worse than last year - fewer diocese are showing overall growth - there were 9 in the 2001-7 period. London has fallen back a bit. A further 15 Dioceses showed only small decline (between 0 and 5%) in the 2001-7 period last year, that number has shrunk to 8.
2. Some of this will reflect the move away from weekly churchgoing towards 'regular' churchgoing. More churches are trying to offer a variety of services, rather than a 1 size fits all, and that results in people picking and choosing more, according to whether they like the choir, 1662 prayer book, or all-age celebration.
3. Fresh Expressions and cell groups aren't included in these figures. I have my doubts over how many 'Fresh Expressions' are actually FX of church, and how many are just a bit more diversity in the menu of worship. But that means there are other people who are members of Anglican churches but are not counted here.
4. This is still slightly better than the 1990's, but there comes a point at which you have to stop finding the comparison which makes everything look ok, and ask some hard questions.
5. How long does this go on before some Dioceses cease to be viable, and we merge some of them?
Here's the data for childrens attendance through the week. Looks both better and worse:
Southwell 51.7%
Southwark 25.5%
Winchester 20.0%
Ely 18.2%
London 15.2%
St Albans 11.0%
Bath & Wells 6.3%
Truro 5.9%
Gloucester 5.3%
York 5.3%
Newcastle 4.5%
Worcester 3.3%
Birmingham 2.8%
Ripon & Leeds 2.8%
Chichester 2.3%
Bradford 0.0%
Carlisle 0.0%
Coventry 0.0%
Guildford 0.0%
Manchester -1.1%
Lichfield -1.2%
Total C of E -1.8%
Oxford -3.4%
Canterbury -4.3%
Bristol -5.6%
Chelmsford -5.6%
St Edmundsbury & Ipswich -5.9%
Lincoln -6.0%
Salisbury -7.0%
Sheffield -7.1%
Rochester -10.3%
Hereford -10.5%
Europe -10.5%
Chester -10.8%
Peterborough -10.9%
Derby -12.1%
Norwich -13.3%
Sodor & Man -16.7%
Blackburn -18.1%
Liverpool -18.4%
Wakefield -21.6%
Leicester -25.8%
Exeter -28.9%
Portsmouth -29.0%
Durham -33.3%
Comments:
1. The picture here is more extreme at both ends. Some Dioceses are seeing their childrens numbers collapsing, others are seeing strong rises.
2. At the same time, I'm pretty wary of these figures. For one, they're off a relatively low base - a few thousand in most cases. Also, counting can make a big difference. One local school has its Friday assembly in the local Anglican church. If all 400 children are counted as worshipping at the church midweek, that one stat would add several percent to the Bath and Wells diocesan growth rate. It may be that Southwell and Southwark have done something remarkable (most of it in the last year), or we may be looking at blips.
Final thought: I'd like to see if there's any impact of mission strategies like Mission Action Planning, or encouragement of Back to Church Sunday. It's noticeable that the places where these two originated - London and Manchester Dioceses respectively, are both among the (few) growing Dioceses. But I'm not enough of a statistician, neither do I know enough of how thorough Diocesan backing for these strategies is, to have a crack at that one....
Adults: the measure used here is average weekly attendance. There's been a slight shift away from Sunday attendance towards midweek attendance, which reflects the change in working patterns, and possibly that, since nearly 1/2 of Anglicans are retired (more on that story later...), they're a bit freer to come to services midweek than they were when working.
London 9.1%
Southwark 6.4%
Europe 5.8%
Manchester 3.9%
Ely 3.2%
Hereford 1.9%
Ripon & Leeds -2.2%
York -2.2%
Lincoln -2.8%
St Albans -3.2%
Chichester -3.5%
Carlisle -4.1%
Gloucester -4.3%
Derby -5.0%
Canterbury -5.2%
Rochester -5.3%
Newcastle -5.5%
Chelmsford -5.6%
Total C of E -5.8%
Bath & Wells -5.8%
Guildford -5.8%
Winchester -6.2%
Southwell -6.3%
Coventry -6.3%
Birmingham -6.6%
Durham -6.8%
Leicester -6.9%
Oxford -7.1%
Wakefield -7.1%
Peterborough -8.6%
Bradford -9.4%
Lichfield -10.0%
St Edmundsbury & Ipswich -10.0%
Exeter -10.5%
Chester -10.7%
Salisbury -11.0%
Blackburn -11.2%
Sodor & Man -12.5%
Truro -13.1%
Portsmouth -13.8%
Norwich -14.2%
Liverpool -15.2%
Worcester -15.7%
Sheffield -16.1%
Bristol -18.2%
Comments:
1. This is worse than last year - fewer diocese are showing overall growth - there were 9 in the 2001-7 period. London has fallen back a bit. A further 15 Dioceses showed only small decline (between 0 and 5%) in the 2001-7 period last year, that number has shrunk to 8.
2. Some of this will reflect the move away from weekly churchgoing towards 'regular' churchgoing. More churches are trying to offer a variety of services, rather than a 1 size fits all, and that results in people picking and choosing more, according to whether they like the choir, 1662 prayer book, or all-age celebration.
3. Fresh Expressions and cell groups aren't included in these figures. I have my doubts over how many 'Fresh Expressions' are actually FX of church, and how many are just a bit more diversity in the menu of worship. But that means there are other people who are members of Anglican churches but are not counted here.
4. This is still slightly better than the 1990's, but there comes a point at which you have to stop finding the comparison which makes everything look ok, and ask some hard questions.
5. How long does this go on before some Dioceses cease to be viable, and we merge some of them?
Here's the data for childrens attendance through the week. Looks both better and worse:
Southwell 51.7%
Southwark 25.5%
Winchester 20.0%
Ely 18.2%
London 15.2%
St Albans 11.0%
Bath & Wells 6.3%
Truro 5.9%
Gloucester 5.3%
York 5.3%
Newcastle 4.5%
Worcester 3.3%
Birmingham 2.8%
Ripon & Leeds 2.8%
Chichester 2.3%
Bradford 0.0%
Carlisle 0.0%
Coventry 0.0%
Guildford 0.0%
Manchester -1.1%
Lichfield -1.2%
Total C of E -1.8%
Oxford -3.4%
Canterbury -4.3%
Bristol -5.6%
Chelmsford -5.6%
St Edmundsbury & Ipswich -5.9%
Lincoln -6.0%
Salisbury -7.0%
Sheffield -7.1%
Rochester -10.3%
Hereford -10.5%
Europe -10.5%
Chester -10.8%
Peterborough -10.9%
Derby -12.1%
Norwich -13.3%
Sodor & Man -16.7%
Blackburn -18.1%
Liverpool -18.4%
Wakefield -21.6%
Leicester -25.8%
Exeter -28.9%
Portsmouth -29.0%
Durham -33.3%
Comments:
1. The picture here is more extreme at both ends. Some Dioceses are seeing their childrens numbers collapsing, others are seeing strong rises.
2. At the same time, I'm pretty wary of these figures. For one, they're off a relatively low base - a few thousand in most cases. Also, counting can make a big difference. One local school has its Friday assembly in the local Anglican church. If all 400 children are counted as worshipping at the church midweek, that one stat would add several percent to the Bath and Wells diocesan growth rate. It may be that Southwell and Southwark have done something remarkable (most of it in the last year), or we may be looking at blips.
Final thought: I'd like to see if there's any impact of mission strategies like Mission Action Planning, or encouragement of Back to Church Sunday. It's noticeable that the places where these two originated - London and Manchester Dioceses respectively, are both among the (few) growing Dioceses. But I'm not enough of a statistician, neither do I know enough of how thorough Diocesan backing for these strategies is, to have a crack at that one....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)