Toddlers in worship

[higgs2]

The above, most of the time.... sometimes a person is oblivious, and we turn and smile... if that doesn't work, the next time less of a smile. Pretty soon people understand that "hey, maybe EVERYONE doesn't want a baby crying over the sermon- and hey the priest isn't just preaching to hear themself speak" (most cases).

Then again some people don't or won't get the message.

That's sad.

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

 

[higgs2]

What, exactly, do you believe is the purpose of communal worship?

 

[Adammi]

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.

 

[Inside Edge]

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.

 

[higgs2]

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.

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.

 

[Inside Edge]

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.

 

[Mrs.Sidhe]

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.

My thoughts exactly--very well put.

 

[Mrs.Sidhe]

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.

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.

 

[Adammi]

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.

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."

 

[pmcleanj]

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

 

[Timothy]

May I share a cool experience?

I just got back from the consecration of the new Bishop of Chicago (my former rector and boss).

They held the event in a HUGE arena. What I found wonderful was this: they had specially prepared a place front and center for young children, right in front of the altar. They put down comfy blankets and a labyrinth rug, plenty of crayons and I think I saw some Godly Play materials. There were a couple of welcoming adults to help supervise. The kids who were there spent part of the time being transfixed by all the pointy hats and smoke; and part of the time coloring or stepping on the mat, or almost anything else. It was wonderful to behold!

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

 

[ChaliceThunder]

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.

Good sight-lines for the little ones is absolutely essential to engaging them in worship. Children MUST be able to see what's going on to engage in it, especially while their verbal skills are still nascent as is the case with toddlers. And they have to be physically comfortable: pews are too wide and too high for their little legs and backs to be comfortable, which is why the carpet is a good idea.

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

-of-the-church is an ongoing discussion. Many parents prefer the back because it's easier there to slip out to the nursery, crying room, or bath-room. I prefer the front because I've never seen decent sight-lines from the back, and because distance lessens the degree to which the children experience engagement in the activity going on in the Sanctuary.

Of course, distance lessens everyone's experience of engagement -- and as you point out, some of the protestant/western norm is to avoid engagement in the communal worship and action of the Body. One of the churches we visited and were tempted to make our home at, had rearranged the nave to put a very narrow central chancel in the middle of a long oval of pews, so that there were only front, second- and third-row pews: you couldn't get any further away than that. But they decided at the end of a several-weeks-long experiment with the arrangement, to move them 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!)

 

[ChaliceThunder]

I'd like to get back to Inside Edge's comment -- or endorsement of my comment, to the effect that parents of young children who need help in setting appropriate expectations can't find the help they need, because of unrealistic or contradictory advice.

It takes a fair bit of consideration to enunciate our expectations, let alone formulate them in the first place and then evaluate them wisely. But perhaps those of us who ARE willing to take on that responsibility could do a bit of that here for the sake of our several members who are in the position of BEING parents of young children. The effort of people who will have official responsibility for the pastoral care of parents and children and other members of the Body who also need consideration, that is, of our seminarians and aspirants, might be particularly valuable.

I was thinking of something in the format (and obviously the age ranges are approximate since they are so broad and children so variable):

===========================
When a child is a baby (eighteen months or younger), what should we expect from:
- the child --
- his parents --
- the congregation --

When a child is a toddler (eighteen months to three years old), what should we expect from:
- the child --
- his parents --
- the congregation --

When a child is a pre-schooler (four or five years old, what should we expect from ;
- the child --
- his parents --
- the congregation --

When a child is a school-child, what should we expect from:
- the child --
- his parents --
- the congregation --

When a child is a teenager, what should we expect from:
- the child --
- his parents --
- the congregation --

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.

 

[ChaliceThunder]

But we are not talking about exclusion, from what I gather. It's the congregations response when a child starts crying and the parent doesn't have the common courtesy for the rest of the congregation to take time to step outside for a bit or children wandering during the service.

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!

 

[ChaliceThunder]

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.

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.

 

[ChaliceThunder]

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

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?

 

[ChaliceThunder]

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

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

 

[higgs2]

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?

 

[ChaliceThunder]

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?

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

 

[Healed_IHS]

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?