X is for ...

Categories: uncategorized

Date: 06 November 2005 10:12:02

... well, it has to be xylophone. Perhaps I should suggest that the church organ be replaced by a xylophone. Seriously, though, church seems to have been dominated in recent weeks by the need to (1) replace the organ, (2) refurbish the building in line with disability requirements, and (3) replace the heating system (which, interestingly enough, means removing the pews). All of which comes down to one thing - money.

Last week's sermon was devoted to an exhortation to tithe (which, again interestingly, our rector interprets as giving one tenth of one's income to the church). I suggested to him after the service that it would be reasonable to regard one's tithe as being contributed to the whole work of the kingdom of God, which would allow a share to be given to Christian and (I believe) secular charities. I'm not saying that we give a tenth, and then sit back - but I do hold that when I give to Tearfund, say, at least part of my motivation is that God commands me to do so. The rector had not made his point of view explicit during the sermon, but it was sufficiently implicit for me to ask him about it, and be somewhat surprised at his response. I suppose that I would take the view that if I gave a tenth of my income to the church, then I would want a greater say in how it was spent, and would probably wish for the amount that I would have given directly to charities to be given anyway by the church.

Whatever ... he and the vestry (which in the Anglican church means the local church's ruling committee - I used to think that it meant the room where the vicar changed into his robes) are, understandably, exercised by the need to raise sufficient money to pay for the work to be done. Friday was a day of prayer and fasting (in which I didn't participate). I have spent a considerable amount of time thinking about what happens to the money I earn, and am making some significant changes (including an increase in the amount which our local church receives from me each month).

And the organ is to be replaced by an electronic equivalent (don't breathe a word to Prince Charles). If you will permit me a little more introspection, I've been wondering why it is that I don't like the sound of the organ. I am generally an aficionado of classical music. You would expect me to be a fan of the organ (indeed, I very nearly learnt how to play it). And yet it is with a sinking of the spirit that I hear its sound. Is it because I associate the organ with boring church services which I was forced to attend as a youngster?

I wish, fervently, that our church would 'wake up and smell the coffee'. How can you say that the Christian faith is exciting, and then insist that when Christians meet to worship God they have to do it according to an ancient set of rules - sitting and standing when told to - listening for half an hour to the opinions of one man (or, occasionally, woman) - and then being given no opportunity to say what they think (except privately to the preacher, who may well ignore what they've said). I am continually trying to accommodate my behaviour to the requirements of 'the church'. Couldn't they, just once, modify the way they do things to suit me? Which might also lead to changes which would make spending a Sunday morning in church more attractive to the many who vote with their feet.