• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
Status
Not open for further replies.

higgs2

not a nutter
Sep 10, 2004
8,627
517
63
✟33,747.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Private

Is this a policy that everyone goes by, or is it your own personal procedure?
 
Upvote 0

Adammi

A Nicene Christian not in CF's Xians Only Club
Sep 9, 2004
8,594
517
35
✟33,901.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
I'm coming into this conversation very late, but my experience on Ash Wednesday was effected by this. The children went out to the nursery at the beginning of the service, came back for the imposition of ashes, went back out to the nursery, and then came back in for Communion. When they re-entered the sanctuary both times they were quite loud and got their families loud with them. I was distracted from the service for several minutes because of this. First off, I'm very pro-kids and think that they should be as involved in the church as possible, but several families didn't even seem to attempt to quieten their children. Children should be engaged in the service, but their engagement should not cause the engagement of others to be disturbed.
 
Upvote 0

Inside Edge

Senior Member
Aug 3, 2004
789
80
Vancouver, BC
✟23,865.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
What you (ProdigalSeeker) are referring to is mostly extreme scenarios, and no one here who has argued for the expectation of giving toddlers leeway and freedom in the service has suggested these extreme scenarios as part of their argument. It has been stated explicitly that toddlers running on, damaging, displacing or defiling the altar (let alone in a funeral) is beyond reasonable behaviour. So you may can-it with the exaggerated scenarios.

Higgs is reading my mind, as usual. Tolerating short outbursts of noise, or the coming-and-going of parents is a resonable expectation of the congregation. Most of the time, and from the position of most of us here, parents are far, far more sensitive about their kids' behavoiur than not. If my son starts screaming like a madman because we've made the altar area off-limits, no one is more aware of his disruption than I am. And again, most parents are equally as sensitive. If the outburst is a 10-second protest, we stay and I think it's reasonable to expect and ask the congregation to tolerate it and move on. If it turns into a full-fledged tantrum, off we go for a few minutes until he's calm and we come back. And if that happens twice, then people should appreciate that I'm removing him from the situation and should tolerate my coming and going.

I think the congregation should also be, or learn to be, ok with a toddler wandering around, exploring the space; flipping through the books (which includes dropping them once and a while), or dancing/swaying to the hymns and service music while it is on.

Parents should realize when enough is enough and not permit extended howling or shouting without withdrawing to calm the child down, just as they would in most public or social spaces. If the toddler's wandering turns into climbing through the pews or attention-getting measures such as tugging on people's clothes, etc, they should reign the child in to establish a difference between physically bothering people and just exploring. The congregation should accept the learning process involved and realize that a minor distraction from time to time is well worth having the little one around.

Silent toys, mats, etc to hold their interest and minimize the other activities that cause distraction, (like wandering around, climbing on things, etc) should be provided, or at the least, welcomed if the parents bring them in.

In my previous parish, the people made the conscious and intentional decision to be an open parish to young families. For years they had said constantly "we wish we had more children and young parents." But only when a new rector came in and challenged them, spelling out the things that they would need to commit to in order for that to happen, did it become a reality. It was not easy for everyone but the benefits were immense. Many of the older people in the church would often take a screaming baby off of a parents hands and rock it in the narthex, both for the joy of holding a baby but also to give the parents a moment's respite from new-parent life. The young parents interchanged as child-supervisors on the mats up front, and the noises of little feet on the tiles as they wandered around were less and less noticable as time passed, despite there being more and more children. We were blessed further with a very child-friendly priest (which is not an expectation, but a gift), such that when the babies would crawl up to her while she preached, she would pick them up and continue on.

The "complaints" of intolerance in this thread, I think, have nothing to do with extreme cases. What I think is unfair and even sinful, is for anyone to be "glaring" at anyone else for some minor disturbance. Such an action is mean spirited, impatient, and hateful. Doing so just because a toddler is walking up or down the aisle, or because they are turning pages of a book during confession, or because they speak up and ask a question to their parents is a really horrible thing to have happen in a church.
 
Upvote 0

higgs2

not a nutter
Sep 10, 2004
8,627
517
63
✟33,747.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Private

I can see how this would be distracting, and here are my thoughts. By making a conscious decision to keep the children in the nursery for the entire service except for the ashes and taking communion, the church is giving the impression to the children and probably to the parents that these are really the only important parts of the service. It is no wonder they were casual about the rest of the service.

It's a mistake many parishes make, in my opinion: shutting the kids up in the nursery or sunday school and then parading them about during the children's talk or communion or children's sunday once a month can give the impression they are more performing than participating.
 
Upvote 0

Inside Edge

Senior Member
Aug 3, 2004
789
80
Vancouver, BC
✟23,865.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Children should be engaged in the service, but their engagement should not cause the engagement of others to be disturbed.
This statement is pretty funny. It's like saying "It's ok for an apple to be red, but only if it is blue."

Over the course of a church service, you will not get an entire group of kids to act in such a way that they do not "disturb" the engagement of others on a regular basis. Based on your little qualifiying statement at the end, you might as well say that children should never be allowed in the service.

I love the idea of a group of toddlers and/or preschoolers that is "engaged in the service" for an hour or more - the concept alone is hilarious. At the risk of degrading children the world over: we might as well say that monkeys are welcome in our service so long as they remain engaged and don't distract the people's engagement of the service.

I can understand the frustration with some parents who might not have tried to calm their kids down and restore order a little faster; however, you have a few planks of your own to lay down for the "meet half way" bridge.
 
Upvote 0

Mrs.Sidhe

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2005
3,282
309
44
East Central Georgia
✟5,040.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
My thoughts exactly--very well put.
 
Upvote 0

Mrs.Sidhe

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2005
3,282
309
44
East Central Georgia
✟5,040.00
Faith
Pagan
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat

This is also a very good point. Honestly, if I may be blunt-- to those who have an issue with kids being in service stop shuttling the children back and forth from sunday school or the nursery and perhaps a child may learn not to cause a major disturbance.

Just a thought.
 
Upvote 0

Adammi

A Nicene Christian not in CF's Xians Only Club
Sep 9, 2004
8,594
517
35
✟33,901.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
No, my statement should be interpreted, "It's okay for an apple to be red, just as long as a red apple doesn't insist that every other apple be red."
 
Upvote 0

pmcleanj

Lord Jesus, have mercy on me, a sinner
Mar 24, 2004
4,069
352
Alberta, Canada
Visit site
✟7,281.00
Faith
Anglican
This statement -- "Children should be engaged in the service, but their engagement should not cause the engagement of others to be disturbed." -- is pretty funny. It's like saying "It's ok for an apple to be red, but only if it is blue."
Not really. Let us be fair. Here is a visitor to our church saying "the manner in which this congregation engaged their children didn't really work." He's not saying "Children shouldn't be engaged in the service SO THAT their engagement doesn't cause the engagement of others to be disturbed." He specifically affirmed the first point, that children SHOULD be engaged in the service. So the question is how.

The other question, of course, is whether we have to be black-and-white about this. Perhaps it were better to say "... doesn't cause the engagement of others to be disturbed too much." Visitors may not realize it, and those practicing personal instead of corporate piety during corporate worship may not, but it is impossible for "others" to be engaged in the corporate action of the Church if the Church is not permitted to gather. The absence of our children creates a disengagement for "others", too!

So, what could the church in question have done differently. Higgs and SirTimothy know already that I'm absolutely committed against the notion of sending children out for the lections and sermon, but that is the most common practice of Anglican Congregations, as SirTimothy bears witness in his original post. Certainly that practice inherently causes disruption -- in fact the logistics of "getting the children back from Sunday School" are something most such congregations struggle with. But if a congregation chooses to maintain this chosen* course of action, they still have options to mitigate the consequences.

At one parish they have installed a doorbell that the priest can ring as he's winding up his sermon. This rings in the Sunday School classroom so that they come back at the right time, neither too early nor too late.

At one parish, the priest simply ends his sermon and waits while a runner fetches the children and they all get settled with their parents. The congregation who aren't involved in settling them engage in silent prayer, so there's no liturgical action going on to BE interrupted.

At one parish, the children process in behind a small cross borne by one of their number, and sit together on the carpet at the front.

Perhaps there are other options, if we stay calm and undefensive and examine possibilities. None of these options are silent, and none have the effect of making the children's reappearance unnoticeable. But those were not the goals that were stated.

*and in my humble opinion misguided
 
Upvote 0

Timothy

Mad Anglican geek at large
Jan 1, 2004
8,055
368
Birmingham.... [Bur-min'-um]
✟32,765.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Awesome. I do remember hearing a story of one bishop when he visited a church, they took the kids out to sunday school for the sermon [I don't disagree with during the teaching session of the service, that being the sermon only, having age-appropriate teaching for children], and they wandered back in having spent the class decorating individual mitres they made [to explain what the role of Bishop was]. The bishop promptly saw them and insisted that he had to have one, and spent the entire service wearing it instead of his one, to the horror of some of the dear old ladies of the parish.

Tim
 
Upvote 0
C

ChaliceThunder

Guest
This is such a rich topic, I must thank SirTimothy for introducing it! I'm glad, ChaliceThunder, that you got engaged at this point!

Thanks, Pamela - I am glad as well. As a liturgist, this is one of my top issues.



So many of us live with churches that were never meant to welcome children...you speak the truth here. We often have to fight architecture, and as we all know, architecture almost always wins.


Front-of-the-church versus back

Our particular challenge is a cruciform church, with altar at the crossing - so sightlines are basically good for anyone in front pews in the nave, choir or transepts, but other than that, good views are difficult to be had.

One excellent step forward is that our GIANT circular altar rails have now been retro-fitted so that we can actually remove them on occasions. It's amazing how the architecture changes when they are gone - and people respond differently...especially children. They feel even more welcome to explore the area at the altar. (We don't often have tikes running about on the platform - but occasionally inquisitive ones will come up for closer inspection...it's great!)
 
Upvote 0
C

ChaliceThunder

Guest
Your insights are extremely valuable. These questions must be considered at all ages of development, with a careful eye on the congregation's mission. If you want to grow your congregation and spread the gospel, you MUST form your children. Failure to do so is a sure-fire plan to rob the church of its baptismal ministry.
 
Upvote 0
C

ChaliceThunder

Guest

I do agree with you that it IS common courtesy to temporarily remove a child who has been crying for some time, for whatever reason. (Although I think they should be allowed a grace period to calm down.)

However, and this has been mentioned before in the thread, it is absolutely childish for annoyed adults to make faces, grumble, or shoot the look of death at parents of a crying child. Adults who act in this fashion should also remove themselves until they can act like an adult.

Congregations that have signs saying "Children need not enter" don't happen in the main either.

Many churches are very effective at communicating that sentiment without using signage!
 
Upvote 0
C

ChaliceThunder

Guest
Of course the problem here is that the children were taken out, not once, but twice!

It is no wonder they acted up - they had nothing to anchor them.

I hate to be preachy - but I just do not understand why so many congregations send their children away during liturgy. I wonder how adults would feel if they were made to walk in, sit down, sing a hymn, and then go to the great hall or basement, and then return when it was time for communion.
 
Reactions: higgs2
Upvote 0
C

ChaliceThunder

Guest
I would only add to your sage comments, and I bet you would agree:

Why in the world would we want to make their entrance unnoticeable?
 
Upvote 0
C

ChaliceThunder

Guest
Sounds like a bishop who KNOWS how to teach and care for his flock!
 
Upvote 0

higgs2

not a nutter
Sep 10, 2004
8,627
517
63
✟33,747.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Private
I wonder how many people here have struggled to get young children ready for church, get them in the car in their respective car seats, and then parked at an unfamiliar church, gotten them out of their carseats, carrying one, holding one by the hand, with the third holding on to the strap of the diaper bag you have slung over your shoulder, straining to get them all into the church...

Taken them to the nursery once you find it and then, since they are terrified of being left with a stranger and you are uncomfortable leaving them in the nursery since there's only one person working there who looks a bit frail and several older kids who seem quite at home running around a little wildy (not to mention you value having them present with you in church)...

So you go back the the church and find a pew to sit in -- you walk in and look around trying to decide where to sit and there are several almost empty pews with one person sitting on the aisle... and you have to finally climb over a stranger with your kids and you're trapped in that pew...

And you are already hot and sweaty and out of breath from hauling your kids around and you feel like everyone is watching you...

and the service starts and everything's going well, and then your youngest two get fidgety, and the baby wakes up and you're rocking the baby and the 2 year old is whining a little bit, you shush her and give her a pen to color on the back of the bulletin...

And I wonder who has experienced that hot flush that travels over your face as the baby fusses, but you know that if you leave you have to take all of your kids out over the person on the end of the pew and that will cause a commotion...

And -- what happens next:

Someone turns and glares at you and maybe even pointedly informs you that there is a nursery

~or~

Someone leans over and whispers how wonderful it is to hear children's voices in church and smiles at you?

Which scenario would cause you to leave the service in tears and forget about going to church at all?
 
Upvote 0
C

ChaliceThunder

Guest
This just gave me an idea. In our congregation we have greeters and ushers, and they are all supposed to be welcoming and helpful. But I am going to look into the possibility of developing a group of welcomers who have a specific passion for welcoming families with children.

How our hearts can change, if only we would allow them to melt! Thanks higgsie
 
Upvote 0

Healed_IHS

Senior Member
May 5, 2007
962
33
49
Colorado Springs
Visit site
✟23,790.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Is this a policy that everyone goes by, or is it your own personal procedure?

Ummm, it's group concensus. That's how we prefer to worship.... some people like to believe they tolerate others viewpoints, but isn't it really they "tolerate" the ones they personally hold?
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.