Dear Friends,
If you had been around in the Sixties (which I guess is true for many of us), and had you stopped someone in the street to ask them for the time, the chances are that they would have referred to their watch, which would have carried the logo “Made in Switzerland”.

The reason for this is simple. Until 1970, the Swiss dominated the watch industry right around the world. They made the best timepieces, the best mechanisms, and they were committed to constant refinement of their industry. One after another, they came forward with improvements such as the minute hand, the second hand, new ways of working with gears, springs, jewels and internal workings. They even led the way in water-proofing and self-winding models. In 1968, the Swiss made 65% of all the watches in the world, and were laying claim to around 90% of the resulting profits. There was no reason to think that this dominance of the industry might change, but something quite remarkable happened.

Within the space of a decade, the Swiss watch industry virtually disappeared. From 65% of the market in 1970, they ended up with less than 5% in 1980. Their profit percentage similarly dropped to below 15%, and 50,000 of the 62,000 jobs in the Swiss watch-making industry simply disappeared.

So what happened?
I’ll come back to that, but let’s think about SJR for a moment.
In Methodist terms, we are a strong church. We do a number of things very well, as was evident at a recent meeting where I discussed these very matters with a church focus group. We have a wonderful building, which is comfortable and very well maintained. We have a fine tradition of quality music in the church, and have many gifted musicians, not all of whom take part, but they are there nonetheless. We have vibrant youth groups, for girls and boys, as well as a good number of youngsters in our Junior Church.

Financially, we are fairly secure, although we are heavily dependent upon income from lettings to balance our books. Our pastoral care system works well, and we have a good and effective social programme, particularly for the older members of our church family. We also have many people involved in the church programme.

We have the usual tensions around the church of course, especially when it comes to styles of worship. There are many who prefer the more traditional approach, with Wesleyan hymns, choir, organ, liturgy, lectionary etc., and there are those who would prefer a more contemporary approach to our worship, particularly with regard to music.

Alongside this, I received a number of requests for a “family-friendly celebration” on Easter Sunday. Having discussed this at length with the Stewards, we agreed that we should offer Holy Communion on Maundy Thursday evening, on Easter Sunday at 8am and also in the evening at 6.30pm.

We also agreed that we would do all we can to ensure that the morning service that day will be a joyous celebration for all the church family, which will be visitor-friendly and include a clear message of new life in Jesus. In making these arrangements, we hope to ensure that the worship needs of the entire church family are being met. It will also give us an opportunity to reach the hearts and minds of our visitors and guests with a clear and challenging presentation of the Easter message.

Now I fully realise that such a change will be new to many at SJR, but I would ask that you engage positively with this initiative. Why not invite your friends, your family, your neighbour, to breakfast at SJR that day, and ask then to stay on for the celebration? I can promise a life-changing message, great music, and an uplifting and joyful experience for all. Surely that is what Easter Sunday is all about!

Anyway, back to Switzerland, and those watches!
It’s all down to one thing – the quartz crystal movement, ironically invented by a Swiss. Because it had no spring, no jewels, no internal winding mechanism, the Swiss watch industry rejected the quartz crystal out of hand. They just could not believe that such a paradigm shift could possibly impact on their traditional way of making watches. Sadly for the Swiss, Seiko, Casio and similar far-Eastern companies embraced the quartz mechanism, and the rest is history. Within the space of a decade, the entire industry changed, and Switzerland were left far behind. It was not that they were doing anything wrong as such, but rather that they refused to rethink how they did business. Past success had blinded them to the fact that the world was changing, and they could not see that past accomplishment was no guarantee of future success.

What time is it? Perhaps it’s time to look at our watches, and see what God is doing!
Every blessing,

Terry

For me, I am stuck somewhere in the middle, and I long ago realised that it is impossible to keep everyone happy all of the time on these matters. For example, if we have a service consisting entirely of modern music, I get groans (in fact, sadly, some folk just stay away). On the other hand, if we offer worship which is entirely organ and hymns, I get just as many groans, particularly from our younger members (who, in turn, also stay away!). The difficulty is that when I try to mix styles in a service, I get groans from all sides.

This is something we do need to address as a priority at SJR. In time, this may mean perhaps a change in our Sunday or weekly  programme to incorporate different styles, old and new, so that everyone has an opportunity to encounter God in a meaningful way. For the moment, I have a suggestion, from the heart.

It is a plea for graciousness, goodwill and patience from all sides. In trying to meet these impossibly opposing expectations of worship, this will mean that there will be times when the worship style is not exactly how you would like it. I would like to think that our Christian family is strong enough to put into practice what we often sing – “Each other’s needs to prefer, for it is Christ we’re serving”. This means that no-one should ever say it has to be “my way, all of the time”. It also means recognising that other people also have needs, and sometimes this means letting go of our own preferences.

I have a couple of real life examples for you to think about. I understand that for some years at SJR, Holy Communion has been “from the book”. To be honest, it always strikes me as rather strange that liturgy from the Worship Book is now seen as traditional, especially when I recall that for centuries, Methodism was a Free Church (actually, we still are!), with no liturgy, no lectionary, no read prayers and pretty much everything spontaneous. Anyway, setting aside the history, please bear in mind that for a significant number of worshippers at SJR, worship read from a book just does not work. For this reason, from time to time, I preside at Holy Communion, and I do not use set liturgy. Actually, I still use the official book most of the time, but I make a point of not doing so on occasions in order to include those who prefer a non-liturgical service.

My point is this. If you are one of those who prefer to read prayers from the Worship Book, that is fine. Three out of four of my communion services have been from the worship book, so your needs are being met and will continue to be so. But please don’t give me a hard time just because it’s not done “your way” all of the time!

I have a similar situation with Easter Sunday. You will know that Easter Sunday is the high point of the Christian year, and in most churches, there are usually many visitors, some of them making their one and only visit of the year to church (until Christmas, of course!). It is a simple fact, if somewhat uncomfortable for religious people, that Holy Communion is a major embarrassment for visitors to a church, and it is not good practice to celebrate Holy Communion when there are likely to be a high number of newcomers and guests at worship.