In 2007, while I was researching clergy roles and identities, I jumped at the opportunity to spend a few days with the chaplain at the Repton School. It was the only pulpit from which I agreed to speak during my research work because it is such a different sort of ministry setting. Repton is a beautiful place, and I was graciously received and enjoyed my time there.

I was keen to visit for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that William Temple was Headmaster at this historic school early in his ordained ministry. The students didn’t know much about him, and so my chapel address was based around a sermon he gave during his tenure. It is one of my favorite short pieces, called “The Sin of Stupidity”. After the assembly, the Headmaster asked if I could find him a copy–fortunately, the book in which it is contained (Studies in the Spirit and Truth of Christianity) was in the school’s library, so it was easily located.

Later that evening, while conversing with the Chaplain, I asked him what he hoped he could accomplish with the students. Even though the school has a strong historic Church of England affiliation, few of the students come from devoutly Christian homes. What the Chaplain said was interesting to me. He said that he hoped that they could see the church as ‘a resource for the rest of their lives, a place that they could dip into and out of when needed.’ He said he hoped that, even if they were never regular churchgoers, they could appreciate the good that the church was capable in the world, that they would support its presence, and have good associations with the institution.

As I thought about this, I was reminded of a quote about the church from the sermon Temple preached at his enthronement as Archbishop of Canterbury. He spoke of the church as the ‘City of God’, not as a sealed fortress:

The City of God, which has sometimes appeared like a beleaguered fotress, again stands befor us with gates wide open so that citizens of all nations may enter, but also that its own citizens may ride forth… (in The Church Looks Forward, 1944)

It is, or could be, a place where those sympathetic to Christian purposes in the world might find resources and refreshment, a time and place to regroup and strengthen before going out to do that nine-tenths of the work. They might not visit frequently. But the important thing is free egress and ingress. It is not the Augustinian eschatological city, a goal at the end of the Christian’s earthly pilgrimage (or, as I have also heard ‘the waiting room for heaven’). Rather, it is a base of strategic operations, one that can be returned to when needed, and where the Past-Christian might reliably find what she needs for the next period of life.

As well, it is equally welcoming to the needy and hurting world–not separate from it, but ready to interact with it to fill needs and heal hurts. It is open to attack, but welcomes all even if they might compromise it.

This is a very different Church as City of God than we usually encounter. I think it is worth retrieving.


2 thoughts on “Re-equipping

  1. I’m not this classy, I usually phrase it as Motel Six church, aka, we’ll leave a light on for you. Perhaps if I was quoting Archbishops, I’d have been more popular with the insiders. Keep writing, Wendy, I need the sanity. šŸ™‚

    One of the worst things about seminary was that we never, ever talked about the lives of people the other 6 days a week (unless they were the altar guild). Or anything useful or relevant for people whose actually growing in their spirtual lives had advanced past altar guild membership. Mostly people who had survived their spiritual adolescence were just considered trouble makers.

  2. Heather, we talked a LOT–maybe too flipping much–about the ‘lives of people the other 6 days a week’. But it was always running on the assumption that the other six days were there only to serve the one day (and if you could bring them in on one or more of the other six–for a service, for a committee, a club, whatever, all the better). It was all rather bass-ackwards.

    What was never spoken about in the 1990s, that grand era of the failed promise of ‘congregational development’ (if it hadn’t failed, churches wouldn’t be declining…), was that people might be moving past being congregants in the 1950s way. Church every Sunday, all or most of your charitable giving and volunteering happening through the church raising kids so they only contacted other Christians (and really only PLUDs–People Like Us, Darling), focusing your social and professional circles on those who attended your church or a limited range of acceptable other churches.

    We never talked about the societal changes that were changing church attendance patterns. But there was a great deal of yammering about how to ‘develop congregations’. It isn’t working. Surprised?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s