Decrying the decline of “christianity” in Britain has come from various angles over the past year or so. Church attendance is diminishing, its membership ageing. “Unbelief” appears to be growing. Though I would argue that it was always there and only now is it getting better, perhaps more accurate, press. Fifty percent of people living in Britain today describe themselves as being of “no religion”. How many of those are believers (in a real or vague sense) is difficult to ascertain – only that they do not see themselves as a member of a particular church or denomination. Ninety percent of those who are raised not associated with a religious tradition, do not later join one, or identify with one. That last figure, is interesting, but not entirely unexpected. Religious practice is something that you need exposure to to get below the surface of watching a liturgy, reading a few patristic writers, or looking around a darkened medieval church. Christianity in Britain seems to find itself in a situation where it is no longer a force to be reckoned with. Politicians and social and public figures, according to Rowan Williams, see religion as a “problem”, an “eccentricity” practiced by fringe elements and ethnic minorities. This last point should come as no surprise. Consider for a moment what popular media covers when it reports on religious issues: radical fundamentalists, and other “fringe” groups. Sadly, we Indie folk get lumped in with the latter group. We are viewed as a novelty, even though we represent a 200 year old tradition within sacramental Christianity.

Are we getting an accurate picture? Thinking about the possible numbers of Indie OC/IC folk for a moment. I am unaware of any accurate figures detailing the number of OC/IC believers. The last such figure I know of is from the 1920 US census. When the surveys are conducted there is not a space for Indie folk. Many people in our “sub-group” will say that they are “catholic” simply to make things easier, or because there are no other options. By the way – I always pick “other” and then fill in the blank if one is provided. If we had an accurate statistic of our own numbers then we might not be asking – is Christianity declining – because we would be asking a different question: How is Christianity changing, such that we are observing people abandoning large parish buildings in favour of smaller more intimate groups? Why? For starters I think that the Indie movement is larger than we think. When you are only counting church membership in the big-tent denominations I think you’re not getting an accurate picture of the health of the faith.

Is it that Christianity is declining, or is it perhaps more accurate to say that the nature of Christian expression is changing? I have seen quite a few pieces over the past couple of years suggesting that people simply cannot identify “Christianity”. When you consider the statistic I mentioned earlier – that the majority of those not raised in a religious tradition will not then seek to participate in the life of one – it is no surprise that people are ill informed, or wholly ignorant of what “Christianity” is. Thus, if people are no longer seeing the church building as a part of their life, they are no longer learning about the faith and its praxis, we should not be surprised to see figures suggesting that Christianity is in decline in Europe. It is! I’m not being alarmist. This is only one feature, in a much larger picture. I actually think that there are more “believers” out there than the statisticians have found. I think that what we are seeing is that the nature and expression of Christian practice are changing. People are relying on their online interactions more and more. People are avoiding or abandoning the scandal and infighting of the “institutional” churches. What we are seeing is an absence of “brand loyalty”. That is to say that people are not committing themselves to a particular “christian” identity. A Pew study a year or so ago showed that in the US even those who openly identify themselves as Christian are picking and choosing elements of praxis and belief from a variety of religious traditions, and spiritualities. The nature and expression of Christianity is changing.

Where do we Indie folk fit in this picture? Because Indie communities are less likely to be your stereotypical parish, it is safe to say that we are a feature of this change. However, I wonder, are we in a leadership role giving shape to the change, or are we merely following the path of least resistance to gain a few followers here and there? Are we allowing old models of “church” to die out, while thoughtfully examining and testing new ones? I believe we should be – the shape and nature of Indie communities is such that we have the creative advantage that could strengthen existing communities, and bear witness to the life and faithfulness of the OC/IC tradition. We need to be careful not to fall into the trap that so many of us witnessed in the late 80s and early 90s of reform or change, simply for the sake of change and reform. Change is adapting to new circumstances, it has substance and meaning. Change is not successful, it does not build up the community, when it is done on a whim of an individual, or a community.

Below are some of my ideas. They are not novel in themselves, but in a context, in our context I think that they can bring something useful to the table.

•        We live in a mobile society; people want to take it with them. I wonder if the decline in church membership is a product of our mobile society. Generally, we no longer live in the same geographic location for as long as we once did. You no sooner move to a place, settle into the life of a faith community and you move – again. I seem to recall once seeing a statistic that in the US people don’t stay in the same job for more than five  years on average. Jobs being a main cause of people moving from one place to another. It is easy to see how this can be disruptive, it is no wonder that many people have turned to less stationary sources for spiritual growth and communion. Our increased ability to be, and remain interconnected, wherever we are through such things as social networking, the internet, mobile phones, video phones (e.g. SKYPE), allows us to participate in an active, engaged community scattered over a wide geographic region, that may only meet in a given place quarterly, or once a month. Outside of that physical meeting however, the conversation, and the relationships within the community continue wherever individual members might be in real time. This reality – and it is already a nebulous reality in the Indie community, may mean that we develop further adaptations consciously managing issues related to this new way of being in communion, being church. For example, we might find it necessary to continue the oft maligned practice of ordaining more people than is traditionally deemed necessary – if it means that an increasingly mobile membership can easily “take it with them”, sharing with others the OC/IC tradition, introducing them to our expression of sacramental Christianity. This would mean however, that we have a much needed conversation within the movement about ordination, what it means, how it works. It also means that we will need to take serious steps to reign in the abuse of the office, laying out broad principles of quality control, that heretofore have not existed in any real or consistent manner.
•        Who are you? A lack of understanding or knowledge about the basic shape of Christianity is certainly a contributing factor to the notion that the faith is in decline. “They devoted themselves to the teaching of the Apostles. . .” Luke’s idealised image of the post-Ascension community in Jerusalem is not pure myth. Surveys have shown that a congregation that has a clear understanding of who they are and what they are about thrives. This is not to say that Indie communities ought to take on the Fundamentalist perspective of everything is a black and white choice. We are after all sacramental Christians and that means we are those who revel in the grey. We stand in the tension between black and white, and celebrate it. Can you put your finger on a few lines to give a total stranger an idea of what Indie Catholicism is? Indie communities tend to “assume” a knowledge of sacramental christianity, of the historical OC/IC ethos, and “Christian culture”. I think that this is a mistake – we are missing an opportunity here to not only empower and breathe new life into our existing communities, but to reach out to nones. We need to have the conversation about our core identity from one bishop to the next, one community to the next. More importantly however is the very real need to empower individuals within the community to own that identity and put it into action. Only then will we find our communities adapting well to new circumstances, weathering trials, and flourishing.
•         Make resources, and make them accessible. Home grown Indie resources (such as this, this, this, this, and this) designed for individual and communal use are sorely lacking. Just as we “assume” an understanding of Christian ideas and culture, we tend to “borrow” (or continue to use) the resources of other churches without adapting them to a new situation, a new setting – an Indie OC/IC setting. If we are to see stronger communities within the movement, people need to have access to clear useful resources. Prayerbooks are one of the most popular Apps for phones and tablets. Books, blogs, and pamphlets covering a wide variety of topics of theology and praxis from an Indie perspective not only aide existing members in their participation in the community, but they can also be an effective way to reach out to new people. People may not necessarily participate in a specific community, but they are seeking moments of solitude, reflection, engagement, nourishment. I have on more than one occasion heard someone describe their path to conversion from one tradition to another. A common thread through them all is how reading one book, one essay, hearing a talk, or watching a video or documentary inaugurated the process. I have met many others who, while never setting foot in a church, regularly read or view resources from a particular set of writers, artists, creatives within a given tradition. These resources feed their hunger for spirituality and engagement with God. Who is my neighbour – the one I will never know.
•        Its all about “attitude”. A group’s attitude colours everything they do. Indie communities have a number of historic attitude challenges, for example some communities are reactionary, others look to the idealised past, rather than the now, and the future, still others emphasise a particular issue almost to the exclusion of all others. I have discussed these and other elements of OC/IC communal life throughout the blog. A community’s attitude can have the effect of narrowing its ability to adapt to the changing landscape. Attitude can greatly strengthen the community’s ability to adapt, develop, and grow – not just in terms of numbers of members, but more importantly, in terms of its engagement with the active life of a sacramental believer. What is the overarching attitude of your local community? What is the tone, the approach to change, and issues of bishops, clergy, and laity in your community? Is the boundary set too close, or is there plenty of room to expand into the unknown, the unexpected?
•        Be visible. There are no accurate numbers on the size of the Indie community. One reason for this is that it is difficult to create a clear “category” for OC/IC ISM and “other related, but not related” groups. The reasons are relatively unimportant, however, it does mean that we have no idea if the tradition is growing, declining, or static. Nor do we know more nuanced demographic data such as the age range, the continuity of Indie adherence within families etc. This lack of statistics says a great deal about the nature of Indie Catholicism, and how we are perceived by outsiders. It means that if we are to be, or continue to be leaders of adapting to the modern sacramental Christian landscape, we must actively seek to engage, befriend and learn from one another. Moreover, those conversations held in appropriate forums can expose nones and others to the living OC/IC tradition, challenging or dismantling historic stereotypes some have about OC/IC communities.

My list is not about “getting bums on seats”. It is about a much needed conversation about how Indie communities can and in some cases are already adapting to the changing expression of sacramental Christianity we see around us. I think it is better that we use the existing shape of OC/IC communities to be proactive, to lead, rather than to follow (or struggle to keep pace). I believe that any adaptation we undertake ought to focus solely on strengthening existing communities, and empowering Indie believers. Growth in any given community is perhaps a beneficial by-product, but faithfulness is the first objective.

Have a look at these videos over at the Guardian. I thought it was a very well put together “intro” to Green-theology. Where would you start if you were to put together an Indie Green Manifesto?

If you’re not already a fan of Retronaut – I cannot recommend it to you enough – it is one of the most interesting, quirky sites on the net.

In a recent edition are these pictures of an abandoned church in Buffalo, looking through them I started “feeling” a sense of loss, mourning even, for the many individuals who contributed to the life of that place.

Then I started thinking about the two churches my own family were associated with – one Old Catholic, the other Roman – both now defunct.

Nothing we do is permanent – but it is rather unsettling to view a place with so much individual and collective “spirit” invested in it – even during your own lifetime – as you would a Roman temple, or Egyptian tomb.

Stepping away from the physical building for a moment I find I’m more interested in the loss of community, identity, and with it belonging. My grandmother lived through the change of her local parish church slowly shutting down, its community dissipating, people she’d sat with and visited in church for years no longer there – having had to find another parish – and there feeling like a stranger no doubt. She often commented on how she felt the loss, how sad it was, and how odd it felt.

Indie communities have an unfortunate tendancy to be highly fluid and very impermanent. It is perhaps one of the more difficult aspects of being active in the movement; you no sooner get settled in the life of a community when it shifts or dissipates.

I’m not merely talking about change – change is a natural part of life, and to think that it would not not also be reflected in our faith communities is naive (I guess this is perhaps one of the most effective arguments against “Traditionalists”?).

Some changes are more than that however, they quickly, dramatically alter the nature of a thing. The priest moves and the community dissipates because there is no replacement. A clique within the community “makes its move” and fractures the whole. A dispute with a bishop, or within the wider synod throws everything into chaos. Many of us in the movement have seen this, or lived through this at least once.

What if we were to reflect on the images of hollowed, empty, abandoned church buildings from a generation earlier and use these as a point of reference?

Consider how people, individuals and groups, invested their time, creative talent, hard earned money, and most importantly their spiritual activity and alliance in making this “place” (community) their spiritual home.This community was an integral part of their personal and collective identity. This community was an expression of their faith and devotion. These are only a few of the points we might reflect on.

Now put it in the context of our own Indie setting. For most of us the “building” can be little more than a metaphore – an “icon” if you will – drawing our conscious thinking to bear on our actions. If we kept in our mind’s eye the most haunting shadow of a former community – such as one of the images in this photo essay – asking some of these questions not only of ourselves, but those within whom we have each invested our own time, talent, and relational energy – would we then find that we have more creative ways to overcome the challenges of the historic fluidity and impermanence of our Indie communities?

The spirit of a place, the shadow of the soul of the community that called it home, can I believe be a moving “icon” for Indie folk seeking to invest in their long-term relationship with one another, and within the tradition.

The BBC has an interesting – if not slightly ghoulish – article about a new technology for disposing of corpses.

Two methods are described. First is called alkyline hydrolysis – which basically turns the soft tissue into sludge, which is then sluiced away into the sewage system; the remaining bone and metal are sorted, and reduced to dust – ready to be returned to the family. Second is “promession” or freeze drying. This method is as described on the box – the corpse is subjected to liquid nitrogen, agitated to break it down, dried, and returned to the family.

Over the centuries humans have had many “technologies” (can we use that word in this context?) for disposing of the dead. Egyptian mummification, being one of the more famous, involves eviscerating and drying the corpse, while also preserving key organs to be interred outside the body. In the Himalayas there is (increasingly rare) sky burial – the body is broken up by a specialist and fed to vultures. Cremation – long popular in pre-christian Europe and the Mediterranian was revived (I think I have the time-line right) in the 19th century – and “industrialised” very quickly thereafter. Charnal houses are another method – the body is buried for a period, exhumed, the bones cleaned and sorted, and in some cases (I think this is still occasionally done on Athos) the biography of the individual written on their skull. In Indonesia one community wraps the dead in layers and layers of cloth and keeps them “resident” at home for up to five years before moving them to a communal storage facility. We humans have many ways of ditching the dead.

Each method reflects that community’s approach to an individual’s place in the community, the link the living community shares with its dead, death in general, as well as that community’s understanding of the nature of the body – and indeed the corpse.

So here’s my question – what do these “new technologies” for corpse disposal say about some fo these deeper questions we have about relating to the living, and the dead?

From a Christian standpoint how does liquifying granny’s corpse fit into our theology of the body? Our sense of respect for the life and identity of that individual?

The BBC article puts these new technologies in the context of being increasingly green in our approaches to corpse disposal. I’ll be the first to support that – but I wonder is something lost when it becomes a purely sterile, industrial process? Do we who remain loose out on important psychological and spiritual stepping stones when the corpse is “processed” whether by modern industrial cremation, liquifaction, or freeze drying?

And is this really any different from sky burial, and mummification? I suspect one thing is very different – there is no “ritual” linked to corpse liquifaction – thus, the process of saying goodbye seems somehow disjointed or interrupted. Likewise with modern industrial cremation.

I’ve been doing some research in preparation for a possible paper on Vilatte and have been struck by the regular appearance of ethnicity as a theme in the early history of the OC/IC movement. It has me wondering what – if any -  is the legacy of “ethnicity” in the contemporary movement?

When Vilatte was first installed as an Old Catholic mission priest in the Episcopal diocese of Fond du Lac in the late 19th century his principle target was the Belgian and French Canadian inhabitants. They did not use the Episcopal BCP, but the Old Catholic liturgy in French, as well as traditional French & Belgian festivals and customs. The mission was an effort, on the part of the then Episcopal bishop J.H. Brown to address the needs of the 30 different ethnic groups he found in his diocese. The Francophone inhabitants would not accept an Episcopalian priest because they believed that the Anglicans did not have valid Apostolic Succession, and that they were Calvinist heretics. What is more their uniquely English prayerbook, with customs and traditions that were aligned with the Episcopal Church’s English-Scottish heritage, where unfamiliar to the French and Belgians who were by and large “nominally” Roman Catholic.

Brown’s problem was not unique. The Roman Catholics were also struggling with ethnic tensions. When for example Fr. Charles Chiniquy was sent by Bishop Van der Velde of Chicago to Bourbonnaise, Illinois he noted that it was because the largely Francophone population there were suspicious of Irish and German priests. When Frederick Katzer became Archbishop of Milwaukee in 1891 his nomination was opposed by some in the Irish Catholic community who saw his appointment as part of a program of “germanisation” of the archdiocese. The emergence of the PNC in 1917 was largely the result of tensions between the Polish and Slovak community and the largely Irish Roman Catholic hierarchy.

Vilatte’s work, the work of Charles Maguire, and that of the PNC (which also has some historic connections to Vilatte and his work) all have a common theme – a strong emphasis on a particular ethnic group. If we look at the Old Catholics on the continent they are organised along national (ethnic) lines – the Dutch, Germans, Swiss, Slovaks, and Czechs – so in some respects it was only natural the Vilatte and the leading figures of the PNC, for example focussed on particular national groups – enabling them to build communities and provide a continuity of mission, ministry, and identity.

There does however, appear to be a significant flaw in this model when carrying it from Europe to the US – where there are no “national boundaries” or even significant ethnic regions. It creates a situation whereby the Independent Catholic community from its very beginning serves a specific niche constituency. The problem has not gone unrecognised – as early as the 1970s OC/IC clergy were struggling to overcome the problem of being shoved into a particular niche.

While the ethnocentricity of the movement has been slowly dissipating, it seems that the niche seed, having been sown and set root in the late 19th century, now produces a different but equally challenging fruit. A quick survey of OC/IC communities and their self descriptions will easily demonstrate the point. There are indie communities that reject the ordination of women, reject the use of modern language in liturgy, object to the ordination of gays, and actively abhor particular theologies. On the other end of the scale we find indie groups that are focussed solely on a particular theology, that encourage the ordination of women and gays, will only use modern or “politically correct” language in worship. Obviously these are “extremes” however, across the spectrum of the OC/IC community it is not difficult to find this niche mentality in what seems to be the majority of synods and congregations.

So what is the problem with this model – it has been around for over a century?

“Problem” might be too strong a word – but it certainly has established a challenge to indie communities in that an emphasis on particular issues, theologies, and identities limits the mission and vision of a community. This effectively creates limitations and barriers to that community handling change, and the challenges of being an all volunteer community. If our communal focus is on a particular spiritual discipline, or theological school, and one or more members start to explore another discipline or theology this poses an uncomfortable challenge to the identity and praxis of the whole.

By accepting the status of niche communities I cannot help but wonder how this might negatively effect our identity as truly “catholic”. That is to say that a catholic sacramental community is one that strives to benefit from the whole collection of gifts within the whole body of the baptised, practising community of faith. Thus, to over-emphasise a particular “set” at the expense of the rest would seem to weaken an identification with catholicity.

Independent Catholic communities face the very real challenge of continuity and cohesiveness. One might think that maximising on the niche mentality would easily bring stability, and ensure a cohesive identity. While this has some truth to it – the PNC is a good example of this – consider the added challenges of the niche culture in our movement and it might be time to examine some other models.

I’ve long argued that “Gnosticism” or as I generally refer to it “neo-gnosticism” has no place in the Indie community. It is, has been, and will always be, antithetical to Christian teaching and praxis. Tom Write, the Anglican bishop of Durham, offers in this video a wonderfully refreshing take on Gnosticism.

I’m a huge fan (read pusher) of home-grown scholarship in the Independent Catholic community. I’ve argued many times on this blog that we “appropriate” too much from other traditions without necessarily thinking it through in our own context. I also think that with the availability of modern technology it is now, more than ever before, more feasable to circulate Indie scholarship within the community and beyond – cultivating our own voice, rather than simply riding on the coat-tails of the voices of other traditions.

Recently I’ve been playing with a great new research tool called Zotero – it is a plugin for Firefox (and I think Explorer and Chrome) that allows you to archive articles from the web, take notes in them, sort them, and tag them. It also handles PDFs, pics, video clips and collects all the relevant bibliographical data so you can automatically create a bibliography when working in say Word.

Speaking of working in Word – Zotero makes inserting citations and your own notes a snap with a handy plugin.

I could go on and on about how useful this little program has been for me in my own research projects over the past two months; and cannot reccomend Zotero enough.

Ekklesia has an interesting post today outlining Stanley Hauerwas’ Ten Theses about the church as social ethic; inviting reflection & engagement.

Barrow observes that Haurwas’ theses assume that the ekklesia is a wholly voluntary community, and that its total independence from the state liberates Christians to best realise their vocation as believers.This is nothing new to OC/IC believers – we’ve been living the faith in this context for over 100 years. What interests me however, is the challenges being a wholly voluntary community brings with it, and how we might better establish relationships of trust within the context of our tradition – for the purposes of better realising our faith in the Christ.

Most famously, he has declared: “The church does not have a social ethic; the church is a social ethic”. What is interesting to me is that over the past 20 years of active involvement in the OC/IC community – too often it seems that, clergy in particular, treat their role in the indie community as a “hobby” or an “employment scheme” rather than as a praxis, a way of life interconnected with other OC/IC believers. This statement of Hauerwas’ is a sharp reminder that while we have lived with part of the idea of radical reform of our ekklesial life for over a century – we’ve wandered off the path a bit, into the bramble bush.

Barrow suggests some of the “edits” he would potentially make to Haurwas’ theses before offering a useful summary of all ten. I’m interested to play with these ten ideas in the hopes that it might also be a useful in an OC/IC context. Just as Barrow invites readers to engage within his Anglican/Protestant context – I’d be very glad to enage with other Indie folk as I play with them.

I have been doing some research with the aim of writing an essay on Apostolic Succession in an OC/IC context. I’ve been doing some reading in the 19th century background – on the theory that it set the tone for indie discussion and “use” of Apostolic Succession that we still (unconsciously) use today. I came across a “pamphlet” (a book really) by the Roman Catholic Bishop Ryan Vincent of New York published in the 1880s arguing, as you might expect, that the Anglican claim to Apostolic Succession is invalid. Ryan’s book is also interesting because in it he also responds to a pamphlet by an unnamed Old Catholic bishop (I’m wondering if this might not be Abp. Villatte?).

The following passage caught my attention: “In the whole history of the Christian Church, there is nothing more evident than this, that when a bishop or priest, or bishops and priests, revolt against ecclesiastical authority, or contumaciously err against faith, they were silenced, suspended, deprived of their faculties, deposed from their sees. The Church, which had commissioned them and given them authority, jurisdiction, a right to teach, and assigned them a mission in which to exercise their ministry, simply revoked their commission, recalled her grant of power, and annulled all license to act for her, in her name, or by her authority. Thus she acted towards the validly ordained and rightly consecrated heretical Donatist, Eutychian and Arian bishops; and who among our orthodox Anglicans or Episcopalians will recognise such excommunicated, deposed and deprived heretical bishops as successors of the Apostles? She holds the same principles today; schismatical and heretical bishops such as the bishops of the Greek Church, the Jansenist bishops of Holland, and even Reinkens, the itinerant Old Catholic bishop of Germany, even if validly ordained, have no share in the Apostolical commission . . .”[1]

There are a number of things we could play with here but what grabbed my attention is the idea that “The Church” – and in the opinion of Bp. Ryan the “only” authentic church, that is Roman Catholicism – is inerrant. The idea that “The Church” is inerrant is not new, and it is still (at least officially) held by a number of Christian bodies. It creates a nice, relatively neat, “lock” on the ultimate source of authoritative teaching and praxis. So – an errant priest or bishop can be declared heretical, or schismatic, have his faculties revoked, and thus be held to no longer participate in Apostolic Succession. Nice in theory – but as we all know it never really worked on the ground.

If we accept the idea that it is through discernment that the community recognises that the Holy Spirit is working through an individual – and therefore selects that person for a particular ordained service – then is it also possible to acknowledge that through a similar process of discernment that same community can recognise when or if an individual has lost the “confidence” of the Holy Spirit?

What if the priest(s) or bishop(s) challenging the teaching or praxis of “The Church” truly represent Gospel teaching – and that “The Church” is wrong?

Finally how does this idea of the inerrant church play out in OC/IC circles? In the early 90s there was a lot of discussion, even controversy across the Indie community about fleeing the “traditional”, “authoritarian” models of church. In some instances any attempt at establishing some order and consistency resulted in community breakdown, or at the least a great deal of upset. It would seem that we have effectively broken the link between Apostolic Succession and the authority of the ekklesia. How does this then affect our understanding of Apostolic Succession? How does it impact our interaction with the ekklesia; what is its function and value?

If as OC/IC believers we believe that somehow the idea of “the church” is an inerrant body then we’ve got an enormous mess on our hands that needs to be cleaned up. Alternatively, if we don’t believe that the church is inerrant – it does raise some questions about the reason for and value of Apostolic Succssion in our tradition because it means we need to have a very adult conversation about the nature of authority within the Indie movement – something that to date, in my own experience, very rarely happens.

It is not an earth shatteringly new “concept” or observation, but Bp. Alan’s note yesterday about leadership – in particular leadership in the context of Christian praxis is well worth playing with.

At every level, including Primatial shenanigans among people who should know better, there is a profound gap between sincere faith with enthusiasm and the discipline to turn the high energy, love and prayer among Christians into something transformational for the world

Being Anglican Bp. Alan’s reference points are going to be different (though not perhaps as one might immediately think) from the experiences of us Indie folk. But I think he raises an interesting issue about the relationship between being a believer and being a believer who is in community with other believers. There is a huge gap between the experience of an individual – and say how faith and praxis are transformative for an individual, and the experience of a group, as any OC/IC believer can attest to.

For many of us we come into the “community” seeking that sense of being a part of a transformative body but we find that while the ideal is alive and kicking – the life on the ground lacks real leadership, and just a little discipline. Two features of being in the ekklesia that are essential.

Here we are faced with an awkward truth – many in the Indie community want that experience of transformation – but actively reject any notion of structure, and discipline because to them it is a mark of the life and strife of the church they recently fled. How do we get over this “hump”? How do we go about re-building what has been lost only this time, hopefully, in a more healthy and constructive – Gospel centred fashion?