Statement of Need at 190809
Statement of Need
St Mary the Virgin, Barcombe.
January 2009
Grade II* TQ41 SW79
Current and Future Needs of the Church
Barcombe village is a desirable place to live with a very good primary school that acts as a magnet for young families.
We are a growing church averaging about 70 adults and 30 children at our main services. Currently the average age of our children is about 8. In 2005 we combined the congregations of St Francis and St Mary’s. The spirituality of the Church can be summed up as being 1/5 traditional BCP with 4/5 of the members preferring more modern worship.
Congregations have been growing at our festival services. Easter 06 (133) to Easter 08 (178). Christmas Day 06 (192) to 2008 (284). We have been holding larger services for the school and other groups (WI, Caring & Sharing, etc) with the result that average weekly attendance has risen from 136 to 148 since 2006. The main 10am service (discounting festivals) has grown from 86 to 93 since 2006. This has come from local people joining the Church rather than a statistical blip.
The effect of building the Conker Room in 2006 has been tremendous in deepening the fellowship of the Church and in improving and making connections with the rest of the village. It may account for much of this solid growth.
The Church did a Growing Healthy Exercise in February 2007. There were 64 members of the church present and two main issues came out from this and have formed our Mission Action Plan.
(i) A desire to learn to listen to God more in prayer
(ii) The hope of growing into a teenage friendly church.
We see the three proposed changes in the Church as being necessary to fulfilling this MAP.
Proposed Changes:
A) Projector Screens.
We would like to put up a screen in the chancel and another screen in the south aisle with a control desk at the back. Both screens are necessary and would enable everyone to see.
The growing number of songs, hymns and liturgies and the use of visual aids in teaching make these screens essential. As a Church we give to over 12 different charities who come to talk about their work. Many of them use powerpoint presentations to very good effect.
In the last two years we have bought a portable projector and screen and have used Songpro, a useful software for leading worship. Very often, the bible story is told using a photoshoot (sometimes done by the teenage youth group). These screens are needed not only in our outreach to young people but also in our inclusion of them in worship.
The portable screen cannot be placed high enough for all to see and the projector presents a serious trip hazard. This has to be set up each time in the middle of the chancel and cannot be easily or safely put to one side. This means that the altar and east window are permanently blocked from view during the service. The Health and Safety aspect of this raises many concerns. Picture the projector by the chancel step on a tall table with cables for power and to the laptop, surrounded by children who have come to the front of the church either to receive some input or to show the congregation what they’ve been up to. It is really quite precarious.
We would not expect the screens to be used continually throughout a main service and not at all at traditional services when it would be scrolled up and swung back Being able to display and retract the screens would enhance and improve the flexibility of our worship.
Since the proposal was passed by the PCC in 2008 for these changes, the congregation has continued to grow so that when we do use the one screen it simply isn’t enough. This is now hindering our choice of worship songs and the ability to visually present the gospel. The PCC firmly believe that both screens, well placed are essential.
It is noted that the Pulpit sits on three steps, two stone and a top step of concrete. The PCC would like to remove this top step as a way improving the visibility of the screen for the congregation. The DAC (April 2007) did not object to this as an idea.
Other Options considered:
In the past we have photocopied new songs and liturgies. This amounts to an unacceptable amount of paper over the year as well as the cost of printing. It would be too cumbersome and inflexible to turn these into a book. This would cut against the grain of modern culture which is less comfortable with books.
If we fail to achieve this, we will be limiting our range of hymns, songs and liturgies and failing to reach out to a non-book culture and be impeded in teaching the bible in this visual age.
B) In the Chancel.
We would like to remove the choir stalls and the Rector’s stall, to carpet the chancel and remove the carpet in the sanctuary. In the chancel we would like to put about 20 appropriate ecclesiastical chairs.
The preliminary advice of the DAC visit in April 2007 said that they “would not wish to raise serious questions on the proposed removal of the choir stalls”.
This is necessary for both parts of the MAP. With regard to part (i) of the MAP: We would very much like to be able to hold our traditional services of 8am, Matins and Evensong in this area. The acoustics are very good. At the moment the small congregations at these services are spread around the church, or in the case of evensong, spread up the South Aisle. If the congregation could be more gathered this would be beneficial to both the worship and the fellowship of the church.
However the collegiate configuration and general uncomfortable design of these choir stalls makes this impossible. Since 1980 the chancel has only been worshipped in regularly by the Rector. A flexible worship space would enable us to use the space for Taize worship and for the monthly Quiet Meditation service.
The removal of these pews would not prohibit the future possibility of a choir; indeed it would certainly improve our chances of re-establishing a modern choir. With the new arrangement, for example, the occasional Christmas choir would be heard better if they could be angled towards the congregation.
With regard to the part (ii) of the MAP: We have a number of growing children, learning musical instruments and others who can sing. Alas there is no space to be able to develop this aspect of worship. The current music group consisting of three guitars and a flute and a keyboard is crudely squashed into the gap between the pulpit and the front pew (north side). Often the flautist has to stand up on the chancel step. If ever we have drums (as we do from time to time) then they have to be placed on the opposite side of the main aisle. This then obstructs any wheelchair users we have (and we usually have 4 or 5) and it obstructs the children’s work at the front.
We would like to be able to put the Music group into the chancel where there would be plenty of space to develop their talents and expand this group. The open space would also enable us to use drama (something that we used to do in St Francis, pre 2005 but have been unable to do in the small space here). The Children’s Nativity service has grown to over 120. We encourage the children to come dressed as an angel / shepherd / king etc and to create a huge montage. An open chancel would be enormously beneficial as this service grows.
Our proposal is to put these choir stalls into local storage. In the event that a good home could be found for them we would again initiate faculty proceedings so that they might prove useful somewhere.
The need for the Chancel space to be used for worship is increasingly palpable. The addition of some teenagers to our music group means that they simply cannot operate in the small confined space between pulpit and the front pew. This is hampering the Church’s desire to see young people grow in their faith and contribute to the worshipping life of this community.
With the music group moved up into the Chancel, this would free up the front pew on the north side. This would enable us to invite some of the 5 or more regular worshippers who come in their wheel chairs and with their helpers from the nearby home for severely disabled young adults, to worship in this space this would improve their involvement in the service and greatly improve the circulation of people at Holy Communion (where they frequently find themselves is not always the best place to see what’s going on and gets in the way of people coming up to the altar rail for communion.
Other Options:
Move modern worship back to St Francis. This is simply not an option, not least because we are too big to move to St Francis (as well as Health & Safety issues re Sunday School) and because we’ve built the Conker Room. But also because this would lead to the demise of the Parish Church. The long term viability of the Parish Church requires us to improve and expand the worship we can provide.
Move the traditional services into the South Aisle. There is insufficient space in this cluttered aisle as it stands and such a move would then prohibit our plans for this space. It would also not solve the need for flexibility in the Chancel area.
Adjusting the pews by putting them on rollers would not be possible as they are quite tall and would be unstable. Dividing the pews into two and facing them east would begin to solve the desire to worship in the chancel but because of their instability they would have to be fixed facing eastwards and this would increase greatly the inflexibility of the Chancel.
If we fail to re-order the chancel, then we will miss out on the possibility of congregational worship in the chancel. We will be unable to develop the music group or any singing group or involve the young people in the leading our services. This reordering will enhance the traditional worship whilst failure to do so would hamper the development of modern worship.
C) The South East Corner.
We would like to remove the altar rail and the dais whilst retaining the unused altar. The RBL standards could be moved perhaps to the South West end of the Church. We would like to create an area for our post service healing ministry and for the many visitors to find a space to pray in after normal services. The positioning of the vestry makes the chancel area extremely busy after services and inconvenient for this ministry.
This is needed for the part (i) of MAP. For many years now there have been many people in the Church who are trained and able to pray with others after a service. However because of the structure of St Francis (pre 2005) and because of the structure of St Mary’s it has not been possible to develop a regular healing ministry where someone can find a space, not necessarily very private but slightly out of the way, where they can be prayed for.
We are aware that many people come into Church during the week and find it a peaceful place to sit in and to pray in. However there is no scope to develop this or to encourage them in their prayers. We have put up a prayer board in this South East corner which is occasionally used. However because this area is dark and dim and cluttered it rarely draws people to prayer in this area.
Having developed a prayer circle, we would like to have a focus for prayer and use the new found space to tidy away the clutter in an appropriately designed storage space. (We currently stack 50 chairs in this area which we need available for larger services (eg Baptisms, Weddings, Festivals).
The South East reordering also connects with the 2nd part of our MAP. Young people need to know and be involved in prayer ministry in order for themselves to experience and apply the power of God in healing. At the moment, the Friday teenage group is learning to pray for each other in a way that many adults are yet to learn.
A prayer corner of sorts has been established with a notice board for pinning up prayers during the week. There is a bowl with sand in it for those wishing to light small candles. This has proved helpful to many on Sundays. The stack of necessary extra chairs somewhat distracts from the quietness of this area (we hope that they will be stored away), as does the poor lighting. But it is the overshadowing presence of dais, curtains and altar that results in the prayer corner feeling reluctantly squeezed between the altar rail and the front pew in the south aisle. As the prayer corner is increasingly used for both private prayer during the week and for prayer ministry after a service, this is embarrassingly demonstrating the clear need to completely re-order this corner of the Church.
The initial proposal was for the complete removal of this second altar on grounds that it has not been used for Holy Communion certainly since 1973 and so it itself is not needed. However the PCC felt that a compromise might alleviate the concerns of Lord Monk Bretton. There would be a need to have some sort of table on which to place a cross or some other focus for our prayers and we believe that a reduced altar would be a good thing. The PCC have endeavoured to find one more step of compromise in retaining the entire altar. Thus ensuring the complete reversibility of this alteration.
The Monk Bretton window above will remain as an everlasting symbol of the influence of the Monk Brettons on this Church.
The artist’s impression of how this area would look has been pinned up in the church since November 2008 and has been welcomed by the congregation.
Other Options:
Squeeze the prayer ministry into the space that we do have. We are currently doing this. Even if adjustments to lighting could be made and even if storage space could be found elsewhere to de-clutter this place, it remains an unwelcoming area. Adding a circle of chairs to this would only exacerbate this, as we currently find.