Responding to the CofE response

The Church of England has submitted its response to the government consultation on the future of Civil Partnership, (which closes on Friday), and this post is my response to that. I have to be clear that I am writing this full of the anger and pain of my initial reading, rather than waiting to calm down.

Before I get into dealing with content of the response which represents the Archbishops Council and House of Bishops I want to clarify my own situation, which is more fully detailed in this post I wrote responding to the House of Bishops Pastoral Response to Same Sex Marriage. I am a cis gendered person who is in a civil partnership with a transitioning male. In order for him to get his Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC) we will need to transfer our civil partnership to a marriage. If civil partnerships are revisited it may provide us with the opportunity to stay in our civil partnership thus allowing me to retain my identity. If it is not altered we will have to transfer to a marriage before the GRC is granted (whilst my partner still has the same sex birth certificate). The other choice we have is to dissolve our  relationship totally before the GRC is granted and then get married afterwards losing a range of legal rights. We would like to retain our civil partnership but are not allowed to. Married couples where one is trans are no longer required to transfer their marital status in this way for a GRC to be granted.

I am not a Church of England adherent, rather I am a member of the Methodist Church. However, I am living in an ecumenical area and the denomination is on a journey of working more closely with the Church of England.

The response is calling for retention of Civil Partnerships but asks for them not to be made open to opposite sex couples. It also explicitly refers to people in the situation myself and my husband are in but without apparent understanding of the GRC process and the order in which things work.

With regard to the importance of keeping civil partnerships it makes an argument based upon the view that marriage and civil partnerships are inherently different. It also says "If civil partnership was to be abolished, such couples would be faced with the unjust  choice of either marrying (which might conflict with their religious beliefs about the nature of  marriage) or losing all public and legal recognition of their relationship." What this last sentence fails to mention is that based on the most recent Church of England guidance clergy from that denomination who are in civil partnerships would face the choice between losing the public and legal recognition or losing their jobs. Thus, the retention of civil partnerships is vital if the Church of England is to maintain its current position.

The next part of the response asks that new civil partnerships also continue to be granted. This part of the response is focused around having respect for those who have beliefs about the nature of marriage being between a man and a woman being respected.

With regard to civil partnerships being opened up to opposite sex couples the opposition given relates to their argument that the need for civil partnerships comes from marriage being distinctly different from other forms of partnership and being specifically between a man and a woman.

With regards to the potential costs of getting rid of civil partnerships the issues relating specifically to Church of England clergy are not mentioned.

Then comes the part of the response which refers to the situation of couples such as me and my husband. I am going to copy this in full so people are clear on what is said before I unpack it.

"Paragraph 3.19 notes the question of couples in a civil partnership where one member undertakes gender reassignment. They would currently have to dissolve their civil partnership and then marry. We agree that it should be made as straightforward as possible for such couples to translate their civil partnership into a marriage, just as same sex couples currently in civil partnerships will be able to make the transition into marriage once the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Act is implemented. Such a couple would have made the transition from being, in law, a same sex couple to being an opposite sex couple, and we see no reason why the category of civil partnership should be  extended to opposite sex couples who currently have the option of marriage. However, we believe that, because the relationship remains one between the same two individuals, and where their bonds of affection and commitment are untouched by the gender reassignment of one party, the transition to marriage should be made in such a way as to emphasise the continuity of the relationship."

The current legislation in fact allows for us to transfer our relationship to marriage and then to remain married. The situation will be that it will be regarded as a "same sex" marriage by those who seek to make a distinction on the basis of a gender from the point at which is transferred to the point at which the GRC is granted. It would only be dissolved if we sought to avoid falling for a short while into that category which the church will not recognise as legitimate. The writers of this response have gotten hold of part of the issues involved but not the full picture. In seeking to respond sensitively and compassionately they have created another contradictory mess.

They give no idea of what alternative transitional arrangements should be and or when they should be made. One can only assume they are advocating the idea that when a GRC is granted that is the point that a switch in relationship status should occur. This would require a significant amendment to both the Same Sex Marriage Act and the Gender Recognition Act, although to be honest if I have to transfer I would prefer it to take this form. 

I find what they are saying regarding the "transition from being, in law, a same sex couple to being an opposite sex couple" and not seeing any "reason why the category of civil partnership should be extended to opposite sex couples" interesting. The central thrust of their arguments for keeping civil partnerships and the difference between marriage and other forms of relationship seems to be based around biological understandings of what it means to be male and female and around understandings of sexual behaviour in same sex and opposite sex relationships. In the case of female to male transition a significant number of people choose not to have phalloplasty  (genital surgery) due to the level of risk involved. Thus in such relationships the sexual behaviour is exactly the same as between lesbians, whom they won't allow marriage to.

There is a clear recognition of the correct gender status of the trans person in this statement, but if this understanding is followed through it invalidates many of their previous arguments against marriage being legitimately between people of a same sex. This part of their response appears to be a position of convenience rather than a well thought out response. It seems to me that the CofE are wanting to have it both ways. They clearly want to hold on to the position already stated that they feel same sex couples should be in a civil partnership rather than marriage and that civil partnerships should not be open to opposite sex couples. However, gender is not as clearly defined as they would seek to claim it is and the existence of trans couples such as ourselves gives a real problem to the arguments they are making.

The problem with the law and this response to the consultation is it seeks to work on binary categories and understandings of gender and relationships which we are increasingly seeing as inadequate. Couples such as myself and my partner in many ways go beyond the existing categories or the traditional understandings they are based upon.

An additional note is that by using the binaries and seeking to promote categories of relationship based upon them the CofE is totally ignoring the reality of gender queer people whose gender identity goes beyond being male or female.  

In terms of a Methodist response to the Civil Partnership consultation it doesn't seem one has been published, which makes sense as the report from the same sex marriage consultation is not available yet.

Being Led into the Wilderness

Ric Stott has been exploring Lent and talking about the freedom which comes from getting lost. He is an artist who is also one of the Venture FX pioneers. Within his post he talks about the way in which getting lost is a terrifying experience which goes against our natural instincts yet can give some new and interesting results.

I largely agree with what Ric says but I want to take issue with a tiny part of it. Within his post he talks of Jesus getting lost in the desert but omits to mention that Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert.

It might seem like a small thing but I think it's really important because getting lost implies an accident or mistake of some kind, but this was a place Jesus was intentionally led into, there was no accident about it.

At the beginning of Lent Jesus being led into the wilderness was a theme I found myself exploring within a sermon and part of the conclusion I came to was that Jesus was led out into the wilderness because he needed some serious thinking space. The Spirit led him into this wilderness because he needed to be alone to work out what he was going to do. He needed to be away from everybody else's advice to be able to hear God and to come to his own conclusions about the future without all the outside voices crushing in.

This being alone is something in our modern society we can find difficult. There are many people now who feel uncomfortable with silence or with the thought of not having access to the latest information at the tip of their fingertips.  But there are times when we need to give ourselves a chance to be alone with God and times we need to allow ourselves to be led into the wilderness.

I would say moving into the wilderness is difficult in part because being or feeling alone isn't easy. Being disconnected from the centre of things can make us feel uncomfortable. Spending time being rather than doing is challenging because we can't hide from our thoughts in the same way as we can when we are in the middle of activity.

Recently I read Digital Vertigo: how today's online social revolution is dividing, diminishing and disorienting us . It's an interesting book which discusses the reasons for the rise of social media and highlights the dangers of it. One of the things it makes clear early on is that it is getting increasingly difficult to get lost. Whilst we may think we are embracing increasing freedom via digital and mobile technology Andrew Keen, the book's author, argues that we are becoming increasingly constrained by rules and understandings of identity. I would argue we are also being put in a position where it is increasingly difficult to have the time to think without others influencing our thoughts.

I believe the Spirit does still seek to lead us into the wilderness so, as Stott says, we can encounter God, each other and ourselves. What we need is the courage not to get lost but rather to be led into this place and that may mean turning off our technology in order to be able to hear ourselves think.  

As I've written this Rachael Held Evans has come to mind. In the mist of debates around evangelicalism and the debates around same sex marriage and the World Vision flip flop (mess) she has posted about needing some time out. In the mist of all the current debates too many people seem to have become entrenched in identity labelled positions. Too many seem to be feeling wounded and hurt by a debate which is pitting friend against friend and losing sight of what we have in common. Perhaps there is a call for us to get out of those trenches and start be led into the wilderness but as Ric has made clear "it's an experience which is as terrifying as it is liberating".

Reflections on my journey as partner of a trans man

As regular readers of this blog will be aware my partner is a trans man, i.e he is going through gender reassignment from female to male. Occasionally I have time to stop and reflect on the steep learning curve I've been on. I want to take this opportunity to share some of the knowledge I've gained on how to support a trans person, as a result of my times of getting it right and wrong.

1. Be aware of your language and the impact it can have.

In the beginning I had to have it explained that tranny is a hate term and under no circumstances to be used. But it goes beyond this I have inadvertently hurt my husband at times through my use of language and have only realised when I have spotted his body language. An area of particular discussion and misunderstanding was my use of the language of disability, because it was the only way I could get my head around being transsexual not being a choice and requiring medical treatment including surgery.

2. Sensitively communicate your own understandings and fears of what is happening

Following on from the point above, when I explained to my partner why I struggle using anything other than the medical model to process the transition we came to an understanding about the paradigms each of us were using and why we were using them. Throughout the process it has been important for me to explain what my fears are so that, on occasion, they could be totally quashed for the nonsense they were, but at other times they could be appreciated for sensible concerns. Throughout the process what has been important is to create an environment where the one emotion which is avoided is guilt. My husband can't help being trans any more than I can help struggling with some aspects of it.

3. Get to know the practical difficulties your partner is facing

Being trans creates practical difficulties for the person going through transition. I learnt pretty early on that for my partner there are two quite big ones. The first was using toilets in public places. There are some environments where using the male toilets can be difficult for him, particularly if they are busy or the doors on the cubicles are a bit dodgy. I have learnt that when making decisions as to where to go thinking about that is important. I am becoming somewhat of an expert on knowing where to find gender neutral toilet facilities.

The other big practical problem has been finding adult masculine shoes in a small enough size. This was something I knew was a real source of difficulty for my husband and so I did some searching around and we discovered Dr. Martens were the best brand to go for. They've recently opened a store locally, and in the sale I noticed they had some shoes which were ideal for the look he is developing on special in the sale. Knowing the issue I immediately went in to check if they would still be available later on, and when the answer was negative I got them there and then.

4. Understand the law is an ass but going with the flow is important

In this post I explain about the wonders of the GRC system and the nonsense of the spousal veto which I am expected to engage with. Whilst I do consider the law an ass and would be quite happy to dig my heels in, saying I want to stay in a civil partnership with him or refuse to sign the spousal veto because I think having to exercise power in that way is repugnant I know I can't. I know that in the coming months when he applies for the GRC it is one of the most significant steps in his transition process and I just need to go through the process of jumping whatever hurdles the law puts up so he can get that bit of paper.

5. Be ready with hugs

Going through transition is never easy for anybody. However, liberating it may be as a process it does involve facing up to the gender dysphoria, going through a process of assessments in order to access treatment, taking hormones, surgery and facing a world which doesn't understand and has a tendency to stare at anybody it views as different. There is also a great deal of fear of rejection which goes along with this journey. Add in the fact that most trans people face some kind of verbal or physical abuse at some point in their journey and you will understand at times it can be an extremely painful process sometimes. Therefore, you do need to be ready with hugs sometimes.

6. Trans isn't the defining feature of the person

My husband has a range of attributes and features beyond being trans. His gender identity is only part of who he is and it is certainly not the defining feature. I have chosen to stay with him because I fell in love with a range of things about him before he came out as trans; his intelligence, his faith and his sense of humour amongst other things. Those things are still there and are far more important aspects of him than the fact he is trans.

Using Hornby to help us read Hagar

Long Way Down is a new film adaptation of Nick Hornby's book about a group of people who meet at the top of a notorious suicide spot, ready to throw themselves off, but due to the presence of each other don't jump that night. It is a bigger budget film than Fever Pitch, his first film to be adapted to the big screen, and that is clear in some ways. However, it retains a special charm which is unique to his work, I think, and which Fever Pitch best exemplifies. This charm comes from the way in which Hornby details the complexity of humanity in a way which combines humour with a rare observational skill. Within this he captures something which can be found across cultures but is particularly British.

As I say being suicidal is a central theme to the film but so too is overcoming those feelings. There is also talk of an angel which comes into the film, although this is an invention to make their story more fun as they engage with the media.

I want to go back to Hagar's story which can be found in the bible in Genesis  21 verses 8 -21 and look at how we can be helped to better understand it and how to help communicate it to a contemporary generation if we view it through a similar lens to Long Way Down and through the writing of Nick Hornby.

The first thing about Long Way Down is the characters involved present us with a picture of humanity which isn't always pretty and contains information which may revolt us on one level. Martin is a character whose media career is in tatters after he has been to prison after sleeping with an underage girl for example. Yet, we are taken on a journey which enables us to move on from that to look at the bigger picture, whilst never being asked to excuse an act which we may find abhorrent.

This approach of looking at the story without making moral judgements about the characters is useful to help us engage with Abraham and Sarah as key figures but people whose mistakes are at the root of Hagar's pain. Using this technique we can explore what it might have meant to Abraham to be a Ishmael's father and yet have to send him and Hagar away.

Secondly, Hornby uses within the film is to look at difficult topics as part of life without getting hysterical about them. It is a fact that many people have suicidal feelings at different points in their life and will sometimes act upon them. Hagar was suffering from depression as a result of her experiences and for her laying down her son to die when their food and drink had run out and then preparing to die herself was the logical consequence of what she had to face. The suicidal feelings or feelings of despair are not put forward as anything other than what they are, logical responses to difficult situations in which people find themselves or ways to deal with not being able to cope with facing oneself.

Yet, within the film there is a clear message that whilst suicide and giving up on life may be logical responses they are not the answer there is something more to life and life can change. This is the case for Hagar too. She does have an encounter with an angel and it does change her life by pointing her to resources which can help her - in this case a well. We don't know fully what happens to Hagar and her son Ishmael, just as we don't know fully what happens in the lives of each character in Hornby's film. However, we do know that Ishmael grew up learning successful hunting skills and that Hagar was able to provide the dowry to be able to find him a wife from her own people in Egypt. It doesn't matter that we don't know the detail in either the film or the bible story. What does matter is that we know that after an initial experience these people were able to change their lives around in a way which may not have been easy for them but which was positive.

One of the characters in Long Way Down is a single parent of a severely disabled son. And whilst the single parent aspect is not really explored in this film it is something Hornby has come up in other of Hornby's books adapted for film. About a Boy, takes up this theme and shows the despair which can come from single parenthood too. The early part of Fever Pitch also has single parenthood as a sub-plot theme. They are always portrayed as normal people who happen to be single parents either with or without the care of their children. Whilst the impact of that might be depression or difficulty it is not the sum total of who they are. Through their interactions with others their lives are changed in positive ways.

So I challenge you to re-read the story of Hagar and Ishmael as if it were a Hornby novel or the script of one of his films and see it appears to you then. It may help you to see what this story of an ancient single mother has to say to a contemporary audience.

Women's World Day of Prayer

Tomorrow (Friday 7th) is the Woman's World Day of Prayer (WWDP). This is an annual international event which happens around the same time as International Women's Day, (which is the 8th March). Every year there is a focus on one country, and the women of that country are involved in putting together the worship resources. Last year it was France, this year it is Egypt.

It has a rich history beginning in the 19th century in North America and spreading to the UK in the 1920s and 1930s. Thus, it provides a direct link with first wave feminism and the spiritual thread of this movement which saw women working for equal participation during that period, although often not connecting directly with the formal Feminist movement.

Men are welcome at Women's World Day of Prayer events, but this is essentially a feminist celebration of international sisterhood and shared faith - although many of those involved would have 40 fits if they heard people using that sort of language in regard to this event. I was therefore relieved to read on the website that the UK WWDP committee had decided to retain the word "Women's" in the title. There had been debate about this over the last year, but apparently 90% of responses indicated that in the UK the gendered title be retained. The website indicates the question hasn't gone away forever, but for the moment we can continue to celebrate this as an event put together by women.

For me this is one of the most moving and important services I will attend annually. There is something about these services and the way that they are designed so many of the participants find themselves contributing in some way that touches me very deeply within. These services also teach us much about the experience of women in different parts of the world, whose stories may not otherwise be heard. They are, even if the language is never used, in their own ways celebrations of Christian feminism or at the very least the principals at the root of it.

The bringing together of women of different ages and denominations from a variety of different social and cultural backgrounds is a very powerful.

As I looked at the revamped UK WWDP website and the images on it I felt sad that the pictures of the women on there didn't seem to fully reflect this rich diversity.

The website does give details of local services, although it appears not all are on there. When I put Milton Keynes in the website the ones at the Church of Christ the Cornerstone tomorrow didn't come up. The details are, however, on the new - somewhat busy - Cornerstone website if you are interested in attending the services at either 12:30 or 6pm. All would be more than welcome.

Lay Women - Getting the Balance

Christian Feminism is about more than women in leadership, attitudes to male headship and gender inclusive words within liturgy and music. For me it's about seeing what the bible has to say and what in turn as disciples of Christ we should be doing in relation to ensuring that all people, regardless of gender, are treated with equal respect in our society. A large part of that involves shining a light on areas of marginalisation and invisibility, particularly on those areas of life which disproportionately impact  women but tend to be ignored. Today I want to pick up on a major concern that the Church Growth Research Project findings on Fresh Expressions which I've been talking about recently have given me as a Christian Feminist.

The CGRP Fresh Expressions findings indicated that women are more likely to be lay than ordained leaders in Fresh Expressions and they are more likely to be leading in a part time or spare time capacity. Now, as somebody who believes everybody has an equally worthwhile ministry whether lay or ordained the difference in the data on that issue don't bother me. What does concern me far more is the split between those who are employed full time and part time and those are leading, presumably unpaid, in their spare time.

I could get into the difference in value which this data suggests we appear to put on certain types of activity in terms of the way that the men are more likely to be involved in activities relating to youth, young adults and the middle aged whilst women are more likely to be involved in work with babies, toddlers, children and their parents. The split is more even when it comes to Third Age initiatives with older people. However, that is not where my concern lies.

I am worried about what the data about those leading in their spare time might be disguising and how this might be contributing to a wider culture in the church which may be at best hindering people following biblical instructions for healthy living and at worst actively working against women's health, particularly. We don't know from the study what those who are leading in their "spare time" are doing in the rest of their lives. I suspect for many it will be paid employment and domestic duties around their homes including the care of families.

For women who may already be doing a triple shift (with a paid job, caring responsibilities and domestic responsibilities) the dominance of this type of unpaid "spare time" leadership gives another layer to their lives. Now, I know men may also face this too and it is not a wholly female issue, but as with so many feminist issues the data shows us it disproportionately relates to females.

I want to place this working of a triple or even quadruple shift in a biblical context. The idea of Sabbath rest is one which God instigated for good reason. Whilst I think that we need to be wary of going back to Edwardian understandings of this which were based around a system of double standards and not getting caught by the neighbours it is something important. We are intended to have rhythms of life which allow for life. This is understood by those who seek to encourage full time paid leaders to take a day off each week and work two of three parts in the day (i.e. if working the evening to try and not work morning or evening). Now I am not naive enough to think that for many full time leaders life works out like that (I know too many who are working themselves into the ground). However, the principal is becoming increasingly understood as important for clergy.

I would argue that for many of these "spare time" volunteers these leadership responsibilities may be getting in the way of taking a proper day off each week and forcing them to work three part days. Events don't just happen they also involve planning meetings and other tasks being performed. When one adds in their domestic responsibilities as well I worry about if and when these people (who are disproportionately women) are able to rest.

This isn't just an issue for Fresh Expressions, increasingly this is an issue for the wider church because the pool of volunteers able to contribute in their spare time is decreasing. Thus, more is being landed on the shoulders of those who are actively involved year on year.

As I finish writing this I want to say I fully believe in a mix of lay and ordained leadership but I really do think in a changing society and changing church where we are experiencing both growth and decline we need to think seriously about the demands we are placing upon people. Discussions about our future organisation need to take into account not only buildings, finance and professional staff but also the way we can help volunteers keep better, more biblical, rhythms of life. To do this we need to understand the realities of life for both genders in our society.

By the way if you're interested in engaging with Christian Feminism the free one day Reclaiming the F Word conference coming up in Manchester at the beginning of March, organised by the Christian Feminist Movement in partnership with St. Peter House Church and Chaplaincy, would be a good place to start. It seems to have a good range of speakers and be covering a range of topics.  

More gaps in the jigsaw?

In my last post I looked at how single parents were a group who were missing from the analysis of church growth. This was one group who are invisible in the discussion of church growth.  I don't think this is the only group who it would be interesting to look at if the data were drilled down in further research, particularly in relation to Fresh Expressions of church. Today I want to think about the reasons why single people without children and LGBandT people are also worthy of inclusion in future research into this area. I passionately believe we need to look more at how changes in the nature and shape of family fit into the changing picture of religious practice in the UK.

Single people without children are a group who are under-represented in traditional forms of church according to Kristin Aune and others. They are also a group whose presence in the UK has grown in recent years as the average age of marriage and life expectancy have both increased. Like single parents with children this begs questions as to whether Fresh Expressions have been more successful in reaching this group and to whether the growth of this group may be one aspect of the complicated picture of decline in the church too.

LGBandT people are another group who have been growing in visibility in our society and who have been contributing to the changing nature of family types, particularly the LGB community. They are another part of the jigsaw which can't be missed and may be a part of the church growth picture which has been missed.

With regards to faith their engagement we have seen the growth of Metropolitan Community Church (MCC) as a denomination. At the same time I believe, from anecdotal evidence, we have also been seeing an increase around the country in LGBT groups which meet on a regular basis giving opportunity for the unchurched and particularly dechurched to come together with those who engage in formal worship who can be classified as churched for fellowship and worship.

The LGBT groups may meet in church buildings they are often go beyond the traditional denominational divisions involving people from a range of church traditions. Because of this aspect of their nature they don't fit into the categories which Fresh Expressions research focus upon, (using the classifications from the Church Growth Research Project). Yet these groups do meet a number of the identifiers that the Church Army's Research Unit gave for identifying Fresh Expressions. I want to raise the question as to how, if we want to get an accurate picture of what is happening in the UK we begin to include this part of the jigsaw?

The involvement of young people in MCC churches in this country has been looked at by Ria Snowden and Yvette Cooper from the WeeksCentre in their project on Queer Religious Youth. Their findings are interesting and include discussion of how people who find a home in these churches are often looking to fit in. It would be interesting to see how their findings do or don't overlap with the discussions on who is attracted by different types of church.

In March a collection edited by Snowden and Cooper, Queering Religion, Religious Queers, is due to be published. This publication contains a range of papers from around the globe including one by John J. Anderson on ordination and queer identity in mainline Protestantism. I believe this volume may give weight to the argument that sexuality needs to be taken more seriously as a category within broader discussions of ecclesiology relating to what the social characteristics of people attracted to particular forms of church are.

A final missing part of the jigsaw of what is happening in the UK which I want to consider is the relationship between one off or less regular events and the wider church and wider community. Having listened to a couple of pioneer ministers/leaders locally talk about the start up phases of what they are doing and the range of activities going on I can identify this as one aspect of Fresh Expressions work - as they tease out what is going to become the ongoing focus.

But I want to look beyond Pioneer ministry and again turn to the LGBandT community to explore this. Within the LGBandT community there are a range of events which are less frequent. These range from formal gatherings of LGBandT Christians at events such as those run by Two23 on a quarterly basis in London to once a year pride events, (such as the annual service run by Christians at Pride in London) and the Transgender Day of Remembrance (TDOR).

TDOR is a growing international, annual event which seeks to remember the victims of transphobic hate crime who have died in the previous year. In Milton Keynes services of remembrance have taken place for the last two years. The 2013 act of remembrance was well attended, with the majority of attendees having no active faith involvement. The event took place in a civic church building and was organised by the chair of the churches mission and social responsibility committee who is also a Methodist Local Preacher.

However, it was clearly separate from the church and was not a church event. This was for several reasons. Firstly, the main reason for using the church building was not that it was a church but rather it was a room of the right size, in the right location which was a safe space. This safe space element was important and created a paradox. The nature of the church and its buildings meant it was a safe space. However, in wanting to ensure it continued to be a safe space the organiser was clear he wanted to avoid potential conflict and thus wanted the event to have an autonomy which required it to not have to go through discussion at committees. Secondly, in maintaining this autonomy he was able to partner more effectively with local LGBandT organisations. The local community interest company who run the LGBandT pride event in the town acted as a partner organisation and provided funding for the room hire.

In terms of what the event involved there was poetry music, the central reading of names and remembrance of those whose names were not known or who had taken their own lives and a prayer (written by a rabbi) where those who were able were invited to pray and those who would prefer to were invited to just reflect.

Where do events like this which take place in the rooms of civic churches, but are separate from them fit into the picture? I would argue, as I did in my first post on the subject of church growth that we need to look at the micro picture including at the other room bookings and users of our churches to get the widest picture.

As I write all this I am aware of the practicalities of research particularly with regards to time and funding. I am also fully aware of the argument that some things are best left undisturbed to happen without attention being drawn to them. I know too that there is an argument that my examples focus so much on the micro level that they are not useful in helping us get the big picture. However, I want to argue that in an increasingly diverse society getting the true picture of church growth and decline and faith in the UK will involve looking at smaller jigsaw pieces and taking the time to seek out those bits of the picture we might have left out in the past for the sake of convenience.