David Ewart

Welcome

Welcome to my personal blog. Right now most of my writing will be for my weekly reflections on the lectionary, Holy Textures. But you can expect erratic postings on leadership, the state of the United Church of Canada, brain-mind research, and anything else that catches my fancy.

You can subscribe to receive an email letting you know of any updates or changes. You will get an email if there is a change, and your email will not be shared or used for any other purpose. Or you can subscribe to receive updates via an RSS feed.

Yes, Statistics Really Can Encourage Us To Embrace God's Mission

Below is my response to another colleague, Barry Morris, as part of an on-going email exchange within Vancouver Burrard Presbytery.

> I wonder about leaning as much as we are prone to, though, on statistics:
> are there stats, pray tell, on "conviction" or lack of, I
> wonder? Stats may give us a bit of a sense of what has come to
> be and is now in the past, as "trend" or pattern; but can stats
> really encourage us to embrace and risk -- faithfully,
> prophetically -- what convictions of God's mission summons us
> to? I wonder....

Barry, the answer to your questions above is, "Yes."
 
I don't have them at hand, but of course there are surveys that measure "conviction."
 
But more importantly it is precisely statistics that make us aware that that homeless person over there is not just the victim of personal life circumstances, but in fact is part of a growing trend - which might then lead to asking, "Why are there so many homeless people?"
 
It is statistics that reveal systemic issues and transform the personal into the political.
 
You yourself don't quote statistics, but you implicitly use them all the time when you raise issues of various imbalances between various groups.
 
I myself try to quote statistics carefully because I am aware of the power imbalance between those comfortable with such data, and those are immediately gripped by math phobia.
 
But just as it is important not to dismiss the question, "Why are there so many homeless people?" nor to use fantasy-world reasoning to address it; I believe it is crucial for us as a church to really ask ourselves, "Why has church attendance declined?" and not use fantasy-world reasoning to explain it away.
 
Church attendance HAS declined and it ain't coming back. But if we believe it is important to evolve a FORM of being sustained by our environment so that God's dream for justice might continue to live through us, then this is an urgent question that needs to be addressed now.
 
In my not so humble opinion, justice-seeking is a fruit, not a root, of Christian community.
 
And while I'm no fan of endless navel gazing, I believe if we don't address these issues of how to be sustained within our present culture, then it will not be us who will be around to seek justice.

Sincerely,
David Ewart, Minister
Capilano United Church

Drawing Sustenance From What There Is More Of In Our Environment

Below is my response to my colleague, Bruce Sanguine, as part of an on-going email exchange within Vancouver Burrard Presbytery.

> What I hear you saying, David, when you say we haven't done anything wrong,
> is that there is a systemic dimension to this that you've alluded to.

That is correct Bruce. If the statistics were that everyone else was doing fine, then that would indicate that indeed there was something specific to US that needed to be looked at. However, the data (and I am reporting on news that comes via the Christian Century) is that there is now an across-the-board decline in worship attendance (though more severe in Canada than the USA) - and in many other "old-line" volunteer organizations.

However, you are also correct in that WE do have problems in how we have responded to this change in our culture - in our environment.

Instead of adopting ways of drawing sustenance from what there is more of in our environment - we have adapted - maladapted, actually - to what there is less of. Worship attendance (i.e., people's participation) has steadily declined for 50 years, and we have responded NOT to the loss of people - but to the loss of their offerings by adapting relying on rental income.

This strategy has worked. We are still functioning even though we are dramatically under-peopled relative to our building capacities. But this is a mal-adaptation that is beginning to bear its unsavoury fruit.

For one. Many of those buildings that provided the excess rental capacity are now 50 to 60 years old and in need of major capital repairs (roofs, boilers, drainage, etc.). But many congregations no longer have the people, the skills, the money, or the hope for the future to undertake these demanding / draining projects.

For another. We have developed an ethos that is adept at decline. We sometimes even laud decline as "the faithful remnant." And we have become experts at critiquing our culture - pointing out what is wrong in it.

And. We have had a catastrophic failure of imagination - failure to image that God is actually also present in the culture - even in the changes we most harshly critique. If we cannot figure out how to be church with sports and shopping on Sunday and everyone connecting via online social networking - then we are dead.

And. Like many others, I'm prepared to lay some of the blame for our maladaptation onto unforeseeable consequences of the 1925 formation of our church.

Creating a nation-based church meant that we cut ourselves off from organic relationships with other nations and nationalities, and so we have have no natural connections with subsequent immigration. We are mired in a white-bread, middle class milieu.

And the mish-mash decision-making structures that were adopted have left us with an impossible to manage organization where those who have authority have no real liability for the consequences of their decisions; and those with responsibilities have no authority.

We give authority only to groups - some of which exist only for a week every three years - and all of which have revolving membership and therefore lose institutional memory / focus / purpose. Long-term strategic planning, implementation, and evaluation is nigh-on impossible in this scenario.

Meanwhile, those individuals who are the front-line workers have no authority.

Every level of our church is riddled with case studies of in-the-trenches folks frustrated because they can do nothing without the approval of a GROUP who do not have the passion / commitment / experience / knowledge to be fully aware of what's at stake, and who will not have to bear the consequences of their decisions, and so can - and do - make terrible, real-world decisions for fantasy-world reasons. (And I stress the word "group" because the issue is NOT the goodness of the individuals in the group. I myself am often part of such groups and am frustrated by the stupidity of me being required to make decisions like this.)

I love the life that is embodied in our church. And I believe that life is worthy of continuing into the future.

But I am very aware that life continues from one generation to the next only when the FORM which embodies that life adapts itself so as to draw sustenance from what there is more of in its ever-changing environment. And for reasons I've named above, I'm not optimistic that we have the structures for such adaptive change.

But as I near retirement, I must say that I am committed more than ever to continuing to discern how to align my life with God's presence in our environment, and be sustained by that - even though the form of it feels alien and strange, I believe the life found there will feel strangely familiar.

Sincerely,
David Ewart, Minister
Capilano United Church

Click here for an easy to print or email Adobe PDF version of this post. 

The United Church of Canada at 100

A while back I published a note with data from the United Church Year Book up to the year 2007, and what it might look like if the trend for the past decade, 1996 - 2007, continued unchanged to our 100th Anniversary in 2025.

Through the wonders of technology, I have been able to make a video slide show and have uploaded it to YouTube. You can view it by clicking here -The United Church at 100 (Revised May 7, 2009).

Let me know what you think by posting your comments below.

Or join the livelier conversation over at The United Church of Canada's WonderCafe.

If the technology has worked, I'll eventually post a longer version of the above with a more detailed analysis and comments. Stay tuned. 

United Church of Canada People Trends

As of 2007
Using Data from the 2008 Year Book
Prepared by David Ewart, www.davidewart.ca, February, 2009.

Click here for an easy to print or email Adobe PDF document of this post.

Membership (Line 16)

1965 was the peak of Membership in the United Church of Canada.

From 1945 to 1965, our Membership increased by 42% from 750,000 to 1,064,000.

If we had been able to maintain the 1945-1965 rate of growth from 1966 to 2007, our Membership would have been 1,825,000 by 2007. Our reported Membership for 2007 was 545,000 a decline of 50% from 1965.

Compared to where we thought we’d be in the 1960’s, we are missing 1,300,000 members. Or, to put it another way, our congregations should have 3 times more members and attendance than we currently have.

However, when considered as a percentage of the total Canadian population, our Membership actually declined from 1949   to 1965, from 6.0% to 5.4%. Thus, even during our post-war “boom,” we were not keeping pace with the overall population increase and were already declining as a church.

Future Trends: If our membership follows the same trend as it has for the past 10 years, then by the years 2010, 2015, 2020, and 2025 our Membership will be: 498,000, 421,000, 343,000 and 266,000 respectively – a further loss of 279,000 members, or 50%. See Chart 1.  

In 2007, our Membership is 1.6% of the Canadian population. If the trend for the past 10 years continues unchanged, then by the years 2010, 2015, 2020, and 2025 our Membership will be: 1.4%, 1.1%, 0.8%, and 0.4% respectively. See Chart 2.

Congregations (Preaching Places) (Line 1)

From 1945 to 2007, the number of Congregations has declined from 6,780 to 3,360 – a loss of 3,420 Congregations, or 50%.

Future Trends: If the trend for the past 10 years continues unchanged, then by the years 2010, 2015, 2020, and 2025 the number of Congregations will be: 3,225, 2,980, 2,735, and 2,490 respectively – an additional loss of 930 Congregations, or 27%. See Chart 3.

Total Church School Membership (Line 21)

From 1961, when it was at its peak, to 2007, the Total Church School Membership (Officers, Teachers, Scholars) has declined from 757,000 to 80,700 – a loss of 676,300 Church School Members, or 90%.

Future Trends: If the trend for the past 10 years continues unchanged, then by the years 2010, 2015, and 2018 the Total Church School Membership will be: 55,800, 16,900, and 0 respectively – a total loss of our Church Schools in less than 10 years time. See Chart 4.  

Average Weekly Attendance (Line 20)

Data for Average Weekly Attendance at Sunday Services of Worship was first gathered in 1977. From 1984, when it was at its peak, to 2007, the Average Attendance has declined from 403,700 to 204,400 – a loss of 199,300 worshippers, or 50%.

Future Trends: If the trend for the past 10 years continues unchanged, then by the years 2010, 2015, 2020, and 2025 the Average Weekly Attendance will be: 179,700, 134,300, 88,900, and 43,600 respectively – an additional loss of 160,800 worshippers, or 80%. See Chart 5.

 
 

 

It's Not About Leadership

Click here for an easy to print or email Adobe PDF version of this note.

I've got a shelf full of books about leadership. In fact it is now about 50 years since I took my first leadership training to become a counselor at YMCA Camp Stephens. Since then I've done dozens of other trainings, including a Masters degree.

And maybe it's just because I'm such a thick-headed, slow learning failure, but I've come to the conclusion that what ails us is NOT leadership. Or at least, its not about having new, improved leaders.

Tell Yourself a Self-Correcting Story

Click here for an easy to print or email Adobe PDF version of this note.

Perhaps I'm just making this up - reading into the Bible something that isn't actually there - but one of the things I love about the stories in the Bible is that they are self-correcting.

That is, just when the Holy Spirit has gifted me with a blinding revelation of THE Truth, THE Way, and THE Life, another part of the Bible will correct my unqualified self-confidence.

After many decades of resisting the notion, I am becoming a believer in the Calvinist Doctrine of Total Depravity. That is, even my best and "purest" ideas will always be faulty, always be limited, always overlook some crucial point, always be tainted with self-justification and self-righteousness; never be fully and only reflecting God's glory and purposes.

That is why the story I tell myself needs to be a self-correcting story. That is, it must contain within itself, the seeds of its own correction. Because the story I tell myself will inescapably and unavoidably contain within itself the seeds of my own (and my world's) self-destruction.

The Long Emergency Update

As I keep musing about the state of the United Church of Canada, I keep adding things to my article / sermon, The Long Emergency.

You can open an the Adobe PDF version of this update by clicking here.

The most recent change is a new footnote where I add some cautions about the successful resiliency by which the congregation has met the challenges of the past 40 years.

-----

The caution about the successful resilience and creativity is 5 fold:

First. The successful resilience has addressed only two of the three crucial ABC’s of congregational life: Building maintenance and Cash. It has failed to respond to Attendance.

Second. The result is that many congregations now have buildings and budgets that are way out of proportion to their actual attendance. When this happens, buildings and budgets become burdens instead of assets. They require a disproportionate amount of the congregation’s volunteer time and effort. Fewer and fewer resources are available for supporting and developing attendance.

Money CAN Buy You Happiness

Once again science is proving what the church has been teaching all along.

Click here for an easy to print or email Adobe PDF version of this note.

In this case, scientists have found that giving money away increases happiness.

UBC researcher Elizabeth Dunn and colleagues from the Harvard Business School reported findings from 3 studies. (Click here to open an Adobe PDF version of the study media release from UBC.)

Longevity

Turns out Canada's most stridently non-religious newspaper can't avoid spirituality.

Even though the Globe and Mail never mentions Christianity unless there is a scandal or a conflict, Judith timson's, April 29, 2008 Life Section column, Longevity: The New Boomer Status Symbol, listed 9 items that contribute to longevity that author Dan Buettner had observed in his studies of communities around the world with higher than average longevity.

The first 4 have to do with common sense diet and exercise. The last 5? In one way or another, all are associated with traditional religious practices:

• Have a strong sense of purpose
• Take time to relieve stress - observe a Sabbath, meditate, pray, nap, play
• Belong - participate in a spiritual community
• Put loved ones first
• Join the right tribe - hang with others who practice a healthy life style.

Children's Spirituality and Happiness

Click here for an easy to print or email Adobe PDF version of this post.

In case your attention was elsewhere on Good Friday, March 21, 2008, the national edition of the Globe and Mail had an interesting Commentary by Lorna Dueck which was based on an earlier, February 7, UBC Report, "What Makes Kids Happy?"

Turns out a significant factor in kid's happiness is spirituality.

Gender, money, private or public schooling had little to do with whether kids were happy or not; but spirituality played a noticeable role.

The authors of the UBC Report were careful to make an all too common distinction between "religion" and "spirituality." I'm assuming this may have been motivated because of their interest in how public schools might use their findings, and therefore they need to stay away from "religion."

Naturally, I am a little skeptical that a child's in-born spirituality would have much chance of developing apart from being nurtured by participating in healthy, explicitly religious, relationships within their family and religious community of synagogue, mosque, temple, church, etc.