Ringing Forums

I don't understand the desire to prop up the current associations, most of which aren't fit for purpose any longer. — John de Overa

We have joined the local Association and we've had advice and funding from the BRF, which was helpful. We now go as a group to occasional branch outings - it's noticeable that our tower usually makes up 1/3 - 1/2 of the attendees. — John de Overa

It seems you've answered your own question. Associations are supported where they give a perceived benefit.

Why not just let groups of ringers form up and then decide what scratches their particular itches? — John de Overa

The Whiting Society of Ringers did that in 1968. What stops any group of ringers from doing what you suggest right now?

Though that would seem likely to lead to greater fragmentation.

There are a myriad of issues with the current structures — John de Overa

That may well be true, but what is the new structure that will replace it, how will it remove those problems without creating a myriad of new ones?

The legacy of our Victorian structure is that ringing is very fragmented with around 50 territorial societies all doing their own thing in different ways. If only they were better able to work together, so much more could be achieved. — Roger Booth

Surely the legacy of our Victorian structure is that what was entirely fragmented began to be pulled together in regional and national organisations.

Being caught with naval rope used to lead to you dangling from the same! — J Martin Rushton

I feel that's an overly harsh tower rule that won't be aiding recruiting and retention :wink:

Yes, but that's not a reason to be fearful of putting anything online. — John Harrison

I fear we’ll have to disagree on that point.

Information Commisioner’s Office advice

I'm sure the mods will understand :smile:

I do hope this comparison isn't suggesting that 62 is old!
— Nigel Goodship

I hope not, otherwise I am :lol:

But it seems to be commonly regarded as "too old" in the ringing world... — John de Overa

It’s odd to me that when I was young, it was all about experience, now that I’m old, it’s all about potential :smile:

I suspect that it maybe when information like a tower correspondent is updated, those responsible for updating that information may not even know all the places where it is published online. I look after a little social media empire (never tell anyone who doesn’t need to know that you are retiring :wink: ) and my motto is wrong information is worse than no information.

I too am wary of putting personal information online. If you put your name, address, email, phone number and birthday in the public domain I suspect those who commit online crime, identity theft, fraud etc. will be delighted. The contact form seems the best compromise.

Another logo to add to the publicity material :smile:

Can't see a downside to being listed.

It will require a lot of money and a lot of vision. — Tristan Lockheart

And a great deal of effort and time. How many will be willing to stand as a local official if it requires a great deal of unpaid work (or paid) to administer, fund and organise a network of buildings?

Bell ringing as a pastime has been compared to cycling and running, but I think heritage railways are probably a closer fit. It’s an activity that can only take place in a limited number of locations, using expensive and heritage methods.

Hmmm, "super-benefice" sounds suspiciously like a Methodist circuit. "parish hubs", well each Methodist Minister has several chapels within the circuit under his care. "train laity to take on clergy responsibilities", well of course Methodism has always relied on its Local Preachers to take a larger percentage (possibly majority) of services. Perhaps Welby has been studying Wesley? — J Martin Rushton

A closer analogy might be a ringing hub where resources are gathered and applied where needed. Methodist circuits, in theory, provide a minister for each church (rotate after 3 years I think) and support when a minister is needed for services. Like an archdeaconry in CofE.

Having recently joined a PCC, the cost of maintaining a Victorian pile is high, the cost of maintaining clergy is also considerable, the suggested donation for a parish being 80K annually.

It could be that the C of E is planning to dispose of assets it no longer has need of, to support those that are still viable. Bell ringing is a by-product of CofE churches, they don’t exist just to keep the bells dry :smile:

Perhaps the CCCBR could organise a new bell ringing centre in Wigan so that bell ringers own the bells they ring. In that case, some-one is going to need deep pockets.

Historic England has some advice on Bells and Bell Frames which might have some bearing on the discussion.

Isn't the Keltek Trust an existing mechanism for dealing with unused bells?

Is there a similar trust for almost unused forums? :wink:

Encouraging the Church of England to see their church bells as a saleable asset seems a dangerous precedent. Cash strapped parishes may decide that the whole business of supporting a ring of bells is not worth the effort and either do away with them altogether or go for a more economically viable recording of bells.

The art we practice is archaic, if you question the need to have bells, you question the need to have bell ringers or change ringing at all.

I am assuming that the instrument, be it a piano or a ring of bells, having been unused for a decade that the church has tried and failed to put it to use. — Peter Sotheran

Then it would be up to the church to dispose of the assets as they see fit. It would seem odd, to me at least, that ringers who haven't been using the bells should try to lay claim to them.

I can revise my earlier comment - if some bequeathed a rather fine grand piano to church but it was never use and stood idle for a decade or more, what should the church authorities do? Keep and let it slowly deteriorate through lack of use and the conditions in whixh it is stored? Or would it be more beneficial to sell to someone who can make good use of it and use the income to add to the usable assets or functions of the church? — Peter Sotheran

It would be best to find someone who could play the piano, so it could be played where intended :smile:

As he says it must be a no brainer. If you inherited a rather fine grand piano but no one in your family played and it stood in the corner untouched bar the occasional dusting, what would you do? Keep it 'because granny always loved it' or sell it on to someone who can make good use of it? — Peter Sotheran

That presumes granny hasn't nicked it from the local church. This seems to ignore the fact that bell ringers do not own the bells they ring. It also assumes that ringers are able and willing to travel reasonable distances to ring.

Thanks Lucy

Excellent initiative. Was there positive feedback on the survey itself?

Yes, thanks Simon :smile: