We should expect better, but sometimes you just have to despair.
A link to a BBC website this morning led me to the following quote by the Editor of the Church of England Newspaper (sic):
Editor of the Church of England Newspaper, Colin Blakely, said dioceses across the country were facing serious problems that were partly due to declining church attendance. He said: “With such a massive drop in the number of people going [and] the number of people who are giving to the church – that’s going to affect all sorts of things.” Three dioceses had already been merged in the north of England because of declining revenues, he said.
This little organ really should change its name as it is not the ‘Newspaper of the Church of England’. That aside, and allowing for the possibility that the editor has been either misunderstood or misinterpreted, what he says is decontextualised nonsense and the last bit a downright lie.
First, projections to 2057 assume nothing happens between now and then – that you can draw a straight line from now until then. Just take a moment to reflect on that.
Second, that numbers affect money, and that this “affects all sorts of things” is such a bland truism that it beggars belief it was even said.
Third, and most seriously, three dioceses in the north of England have not been merged and finance is not the driving factor in proposals to merge three dioceses. In fact, finance rarely comes into it. It is about a pile of other stuff – like better support of clergy and parishes, more flexibility of development of clergy, etc. – and not about money. None of the three dioceses has financial alarm bells ringing.
So, my question is: is the quoted editor going to demand a retraction?
This lazy reportage, in which disconnected factors are linked together, owes everything to the inability of some journalists to avoid squeezing everything into a single assumed narrative: that church is defined by ‘emptying pews’ and everything we do is aimed at stopping people leaving or saving money.
It’s enough to make you weep.
Posted with Blogsy
October 11, 2012 at 10:49 am
The BBC link does not work; you need to remove the .com from the end.
October 11, 2012 at 11:01 am
To be fair Nick, most of the Church of England is in decline at the moment, even London (as I demonstrated here – http://www.peter-ould.net/2012/07/27/church-decline-in-england/). There are signs of convert growth across the country (http://www.peter-ould.net/2012/09/22/church-growth-adult-baptisms/) but at the moment that doesn’t seem to be countering the effect of people leaving / dying.
And yes, a straight linear regression is a pointless exercise – far better to look at the overall figures for the differential trend. But even that isn’t healthy in places.
October 11, 2012 at 11:08 am
If only all such damaging falsehoods were so readily and capably rebutted!
October 11, 2012 at 11:16 am
Thanks, Peter. I hope I have corrected it now.
October 11, 2012 at 11:31 am
Peter Ould, my point is about confusing flatline projection as if it were fact or inevitable. I am fully aware of the challenges – which are not new – but that is not the point here.
October 11, 2012 at 12:37 pm
Oh well on that we can agree!
October 11, 2012 at 1:12 pm
I have checked up the recent editions of CEN and nowhere in them has the editor written anything like this. CEN appears to have reported the proposals and some of the responses in the dioceses concerned. Especially the Bishop of Wakefield’s disapproval but also his constructive suggestions. Also last week the Dean of Wakefield’s attitude about any loss of cathedral churches anywhere.
October 11, 2012 at 1:16 pm
Ken, it doesn’t say – and I didn’t assume – that this was published in the CEN. I assume they phoned him.
October 11, 2012 at 1:36 pm
Yes Nick I realise that you did not so assume. If someone at BBC Sussex phoned him did they possibly misunderstand him? I assume he knows what has been proposed about the 3 dioceses as correctly published in CEN! What is sure is that he has not said any such thing as “Three dioceses had already been merged” in his paper or so it appears to me.
October 11, 2012 at 2:03 pm
The BBC link is here I think… http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-19902257
October 11, 2012 at 2:05 pm
Colin’s a friend of mine so that probably colours what I think. The likelihood as you accept is that he probably didn’t quite say what he is quoted as saying. While I think it is highly likely that he gave the BBC reporter an example of research it’s uncharitable to assume that anyone could possibly believe that you could just simply extrapolate in a linear fashion. This is just one way in which those responsible for the research presented it. Secondly, I have no problem with him pointing out to the Beeb that numerical decline has financial implications. It may be obvious but it’s clear that in a conversation of this kind with a non specialist that the obvious is going to be touched on. You know from your own experience that these are longer conversations of which only a few lines are reported.
And of course, he’s not going to demand a retraction because it’s not worth anyone’s time and effort. The only line which is demonstrably inaccurate and can’t be defended as a matter of opinion is that the merger hasn’t yet gone ahead (in my view probably a misunderstanding on the part of the reporter). I’m sure you will reasonably deny it but you could be interpreted as suggesting that people are lying rather than mistaken – unfair in my opinion.
According to my memory of the history of religious publishing the CEN has had this name since the 1950s when The Record and The Church of England Family Newspaper were merged. It’s a bit too late to start changing names now or indeed complaining about it.
October 11, 2012 at 2:14 pm
Sorry, I should also have said that if anyone points out an obvious inaccuracy in a Beeb report they will probably correct it. This could be done by Colin, you or any reader.
October 11, 2012 at 2:57 pm
I am puzzled as to the role of the Church of England Newspaper. Its website proclaims it as………. ‘the longest established journal reporting on Church of England affairs …………coverage of church news and developments, issues affecting Christian life in this country’………..etc etc ad infinitum.
The BBC clearly phoned its editor to comment on the financial problems faced by the church in Sussex. Is its editor an idiot ?
October 12, 2012 at 9:05 am
Friday morning and no signs yet of Colin Blakeley seeking a retraction.
The Dioceses Commission is clear about its hopes from the process of merging the 3 dioceses.”The Commission firmly believes that the scheme represents a once-in-a generation opportunity for reinvigorating mission which should be grasped. It intends to issue a revised scheme embracing all three dioceses by the end of October, together with a fresh report which will both address concerns that have been put to the Commission, and set out the benefits to mission that it believes will come from a new single diocese.”
October 15, 2012 at 5:08 am
Western Protestant societies dismantled themselves. And after doing such they either justify their actions, or try to put themselves back together. We must understand the communist insurrection by way of the Counterculture–and reject it. Reinvigorate reactionarily; avoiding all rationalizing.