The latest report from the Church of England Research and Statistics Department makes for interesting reading.
There has been a strong reaction to the report from the Gay and Lesbian Community because there is no attempt to understand or map the extent of those in the churches whose sexual orientation is gay or lesbian.
The three cohorts measured by the survey which claims to be about mapping diversity in the churches are ethnicity, young people (children) and those with disabilities.
Apparently 35000 individual responses were returned, according to a report on the demography of the United Kingdom some 5 - 6% of the population is gay or lesbian which suggests that the Everyone Counts survey is under reporting some six to seven hundred people who if they had been asked, and if they were confident that their answers would be treated with respect might have answered yes to a question about sexual orientation.
One correspondent of mine described his being Gay as 'a gift'.
What is it about the Church of England?
When R S Thomas, the priest and poet retired he apparently took his cassock and surplice and burnt it on the beach.
I have been sorely tempted at times to follow his example.
Instead I have spent time as a Locum Chaplain in the Diocese of Europe and am now a member of the Guild of Priests at the Cathedral in Carlisle, but my disappointment in the Church remains.
Indeed as far as the local church is concerned I have become 'unchurched' and for the very good reason that the indoor critic, who is a wheelchair user, cannot physically enter any of our local church buildings because of steps, unmade gravel paths and lack of disabled parking.
As Bill Clinton commented 'its the economy stupid' well in our case it's 'the practicalities stupid'.
I met the indoor critic in 1967 when I was a student at Salisbury Theological College and she was a student at Salisbury School of Art.
Whilst I wasn't the only heterosexual student at Salisbury in 1967 it was pretty obvious that the heterosexual population wasn't 95% either.
Which means of course that the Church of England has maintained a conspiracy of silence for the 45 years that I have been ordained and that conspiracy is reflected in the diversity research reported in Everyone Counts.
It makes it pretty clear that not everyone does count.
I was privileged to spend a semester in 1985 as a Proctor Fellow at the Episcopal Divinity School, Cambridge, Mass.
By 1985 in the States the heterosexual population in the school was indeed a minority.
I attended worship in a Church in New York where I was greeted by the woman Priest wearing a badge that announced my Church has got Aids.
But still the Church of England buried its tonsured head in the sand about issues of human sexuality and sexual orientation.
But if the Gay and Lesbian and Transgender community is excluded from the debate about diversity in the church some of the other statistics are also, in my view, questionable.
I cannot sensibly comment on the findings with regard to urban areas but the summary of findings with regard to rural areas is in my view questionable to say the least.
The report states:
35% of Churches are in rural hamlets and isolated areas.
1% of the population lives here and the average congregation includes 35 people with average age of 56 with 12% being young people and a 20% being over 75.
I have to say that I find these statistics, based on my own experience in the deanery where I live and the churches where I occasionally lead worship, to be largely unbelievable.
It could of course be that when the vicar is away and the congregation realises that I am coming to take the service that they stay home to make jam or bake cakes or go to the pub for lunch?
But I tend to read the notices and check the service register and on the whole the two or three retirees that I meet are the same two or three who were there last week and will be there next week.
As you move from Town to Urban and Conurbation Churches so according to the report, the statistics improve and the congregations increase to an average of 100 plus.
Initially the Diversity Audit (2007) was carried out to map ethnic diversity in Diocese around the country.
When the survey was repeated last year questions were added with reference to disability and young people.
In a response to the reaction of lesbian, gay and transgender people to the omission in the survey the researcher commented:
'I am sorry for the hurt and disappointment raised by members of our congregations who feel that the lack of a question on sexual orientation meant they are not a valued part of our church'.
The offer of additional questions may not be sufficient to redress the balance or heal the hurt, I am not able to say.
Where I am personally affected however is with regard to disability which was another 'question' in the survey.
The commentary on the responses to the question identified the high proportion of 'other' as the selected response, which 'raises questions about what is missing from our understanding of the data'.
It is important to acknowledge that the congregation we tend to join when we worship (Carlisle Cathedral) makes us welcome, has ramps etc and is accessible.
It is also important to recognise that 12th Century buildings were not designed with access in mind.
But faced with a range of disabilities, many of which are exacerbated by age, it seems to me that if the church is to be inclusive then it needs to recognise what aspects of its attitudes and architecture effectively excludes people, it is not that something is missing from the churches understanding of the data, it is what is missing from its understanding of disability, especially now in the present political climate where disability hate crimes are on the increase and welfare support is being withdrawn.
I always expect better from the church and I am always disappointed.
There has been a strong reaction to the report from the Gay and Lesbian Community because there is no attempt to understand or map the extent of those in the churches whose sexual orientation is gay or lesbian.
The three cohorts measured by the survey which claims to be about mapping diversity in the churches are ethnicity, young people (children) and those with disabilities.
Apparently 35000 individual responses were returned, according to a report on the demography of the United Kingdom some 5 - 6% of the population is gay or lesbian which suggests that the Everyone Counts survey is under reporting some six to seven hundred people who if they had been asked, and if they were confident that their answers would be treated with respect might have answered yes to a question about sexual orientation.
One correspondent of mine described his being Gay as 'a gift'.
What is it about the Church of England?
When R S Thomas, the priest and poet retired he apparently took his cassock and surplice and burnt it on the beach.
I have been sorely tempted at times to follow his example.
Instead I have spent time as a Locum Chaplain in the Diocese of Europe and am now a member of the Guild of Priests at the Cathedral in Carlisle, but my disappointment in the Church remains.
Indeed as far as the local church is concerned I have become 'unchurched' and for the very good reason that the indoor critic, who is a wheelchair user, cannot physically enter any of our local church buildings because of steps, unmade gravel paths and lack of disabled parking.
As Bill Clinton commented 'its the economy stupid' well in our case it's 'the practicalities stupid'.
I met the indoor critic in 1967 when I was a student at Salisbury Theological College and she was a student at Salisbury School of Art.
Whilst I wasn't the only heterosexual student at Salisbury in 1967 it was pretty obvious that the heterosexual population wasn't 95% either.
Which means of course that the Church of England has maintained a conspiracy of silence for the 45 years that I have been ordained and that conspiracy is reflected in the diversity research reported in Everyone Counts.
It makes it pretty clear that not everyone does count.
I was privileged to spend a semester in 1985 as a Proctor Fellow at the Episcopal Divinity School, Cambridge, Mass.
By 1985 in the States the heterosexual population in the school was indeed a minority.
I attended worship in a Church in New York where I was greeted by the woman Priest wearing a badge that announced my Church has got Aids.
But still the Church of England buried its tonsured head in the sand about issues of human sexuality and sexual orientation.
But if the Gay and Lesbian and Transgender community is excluded from the debate about diversity in the church some of the other statistics are also, in my view, questionable.
I cannot sensibly comment on the findings with regard to urban areas but the summary of findings with regard to rural areas is in my view questionable to say the least.
The report states:
35% of Churches are in rural hamlets and isolated areas.
1% of the population lives here and the average congregation includes 35 people with average age of 56 with 12% being young people and a 20% being over 75.
I have to say that I find these statistics, based on my own experience in the deanery where I live and the churches where I occasionally lead worship, to be largely unbelievable.
It could of course be that when the vicar is away and the congregation realises that I am coming to take the service that they stay home to make jam or bake cakes or go to the pub for lunch?
But I tend to read the notices and check the service register and on the whole the two or three retirees that I meet are the same two or three who were there last week and will be there next week.
As you move from Town to Urban and Conurbation Churches so according to the report, the statistics improve and the congregations increase to an average of 100 plus.
Initially the Diversity Audit (2007) was carried out to map ethnic diversity in Diocese around the country.
When the survey was repeated last year questions were added with reference to disability and young people.
In a response to the reaction of lesbian, gay and transgender people to the omission in the survey the researcher commented:
'I am sorry for the hurt and disappointment raised by members of our congregations who feel that the lack of a question on sexual orientation meant they are not a valued part of our church'.
The offer of additional questions may not be sufficient to redress the balance or heal the hurt, I am not able to say.
Where I am personally affected however is with regard to disability which was another 'question' in the survey.
The commentary on the responses to the question identified the high proportion of 'other' as the selected response, which 'raises questions about what is missing from our understanding of the data'.
It is important to acknowledge that the congregation we tend to join when we worship (Carlisle Cathedral) makes us welcome, has ramps etc and is accessible.
It is also important to recognise that 12th Century buildings were not designed with access in mind.
But faced with a range of disabilities, many of which are exacerbated by age, it seems to me that if the church is to be inclusive then it needs to recognise what aspects of its attitudes and architecture effectively excludes people, it is not that something is missing from the churches understanding of the data, it is what is missing from its understanding of disability, especially now in the present political climate where disability hate crimes are on the increase and welfare support is being withdrawn.
I always expect better from the church and I am always disappointed.
