Hi MikePaterson,

Your guess is as good as mine.  Seriously.

The United Church of Canada as an institution has, in an effort to put a preacher in every pulpit, turned away from Ordained and Commissioned clergy to build up Licensed Lay Worship Leaders and Designated Lay Ministers.

I use the phrase "turned away from" deliberately and with reluctance, not malice.

The result has been to structure ministry in such a way as to make the traditional models and paths unappetizing.  Which means that the "educated clergy" the United Church of Canada has long prided itself in having are going the way of the dinosaur.  And few, save for the dinosaurs, have a problem with that.

The inequity in the learning models alone is disheartening.

Arguably as a denomination we have been doing that for quite some time already.  What is most puzzling about that is I cannot find many leaders in the denomination who, as individuals, are okay with that and yet, when the various courts gather it is all talk and dreams and very little action.

As others have pointed out elsewhere in subtler ways.  The writing was on the wall for the institution some time ago and congregations have begun to look less and less to the higher courts and more and more to minding their own business.

Their will be mixed success with the congregationalism that is emerging.  Only those congregations who manage to attract members and convince members that the ministry is worth supporting will flourish.  Of those survivors they will be forced to amputate themselves of buildings and staff.

There are areas where that is a fair point to make.  Ministry is not a second profession for me.  My call came relatively early and I followed.  At the time the arrangement was simple.  You give us your life and we'll look after it.  The economics make that a harder arrangement to manage and yet changes have been made, increment by increment which make a sudden flip of that arrangement a burden that suddenly falls only on the shoulders of the clergy who agreed and gave their lives.  The arrangement now has become give us your life and if we can manage we'll look after it.

If I was able to secure another job so that I had an income and that job gave me the flexibility of continuing in ministry I would not have a problem with that model.  At the same time I'm not quite done paying the financial burden to equip myself for this vocation.  If I can at least break even that would be appreciated.

I doubt that it is clergy who are holding on to the Church buildings.

I'm not aware that this is an either/or area of life.  Some of us have very healthy spiritual lives and enjoy playing around in the fields of doctrine.  Nor, quite frankly, have we arrived where we are today because we have spent too much time working through doctrine.  If anything I suggest that because we have supported a Burger King spirituality (do it your way) we have fostered the indiviudalism which is eating the foundation of community that congregations rest on.

The abdication of the priesthood of all believers for the "professional clergy" model wasn't a helpful move either.

Belonging to all of life is prayer I am mindful that much of what I do constitutes prayer.  This discussion, for example, is but one prayer that will be offered to God asking for guidance.

Only if my new employer who is not the Church is happy paying me to pray.  This presumes we are no longer receiving an income from the Church we will be ministering to and with.

I am firmly convinced that the source of all trouble in the United Church is more grass roots than it is the various courts.  True, the courts are mired in institutionalism, that can be broken provided we can find individuals to populate those courts who have no interest in seeing institutionalism continue and as I said before, as individuals most are against it in the courts most fall prey to it.

Congergations aren't hurting for members because of any decision that has been made at a higher court.

Congregations are hurting for members because existing members do not do what needs to be done to bring new members in.  And the reason why they don't do those things is because they aren't interested in what new members need, they are interested in how new members help them not to have to change.

Very hard to say.  How much can you prune away before the plant can no longer sustain itself?  How much can you let rot before the integrity of the whole is threatened?

How can a congregation look at the empty pews in their midst and blame that on folk who don't have a pew in that congregation?  I don't know how they can do it.  I know that they do.  

We lost two families because of the boycott resolution.  I can see their point of view.  I don't know how a group of people making a decision (be it smart or dumb) impacts upon the relationship that we had as a congregation.  I expect that it was simply an excuse.  Which means the real problem was right here in the congregation and rather than giving any of us the opportunity to address that problem and potentially fix it.

And for us to blame GC-41 for making a decision (whether we think it wise or foolish) for people not wanting to hang-out with us means we aren't willing to look in the mirror at what it is that we are truly offering.

To be sure there is probably enough thinskinitus in the mix to make any kind of resolution and reconciliation difficult.  We are where we are because we shy away from the difficult and settle for the easy.

The blazing oil platform suggests that there is enough feul for a raging fire for years to come.  All indicators suggest we are closer to the smouldering ruin of what once blazed fiercely.  Still, if we can cap the fuel source now their might be something to salvage later.

Grace and peace to you.

John

Waterfall, the General Council Office isn't building new offices itself, but will rather be a tenant in a development by Bloor St. United Church (see here). The General Council's current lease expires in 2015. From what I've heard, the new location will offer savings in rent compared to the General Council Office's current arrangement.

Some good (and true to my experience) info waterfall.  I went to the UC because I was invited.  I probably wouldn't have turned up if I was totally unchurched.  It might be helpful if invitations from friends and neighbors included the service of actually picking them up and taking them there.  

 I quit after several years because I wasn't learning anything about this religion other than through the hymns and sermon. Neither was I included in any of the church activities.  Just showing up, doing some superficial social greeting, spending about an hour and then going home didn't provide me with any of the normal human things like community and mutual sharing and  caring.

Thanks Aaron, that makes sense. I'm also wondering why they just don't use a church that has been closed?

The United Church's focus on adding layer upon layer of ministry strikes me as flailing. Dump it all. Have ordained ministers. Period. The create training programs for lay leadership in areas like worship, pastoral care, and, yes, the sacraments.

Tell congregations that they can either call an ordained minister or send one or more of their membership to take that training to perform sacraments and then be a lay-led congregation.

Set up an arrangement similar to the one the CUC has made where specially ordained lay members get a license to marry (we call them lay chaplains and their training in entirely focussed on rites of passage)*.

IOW, go the UU route - either a congregation is lay-led or calls an ordained minister.

The benefit of an ordained minister is that you get a full-time (or at least permanent part-time), highly trained individual who is focussed entirely on providing ministry. The benefit of being lay-led is that small congregations who lack the financial base to pay a salary, housing allowance, and benefits don't have to pay these costs until they feel ready**.

Being lay-led is not the easy path. Ask the UU congregations that are lay-led (as we have been at times). You need a strong pastoral care committee/team/whatever to do and coordinate visitation and other support systems. You need a strong worship committee with a pool of leaders/speakers they can call on to prepare and deliver services. You need lay leadership that is strong and vibrant and prepared to step up and be the "face" of the congregation. And so on.

This may be more congregational than the UCCan is prepared to go. It does not preclude having a presbytery with some kind of oversight role, though it assumes that some of the congregations in that presbytery will be lay-led and therefore you will have more lay persons involved at the presbytery level. It will likely mean a weaker presbytery. After all, if you're letting congregations run themselves without a minister, it becomes harder to ask them to submit to a higher court unless things are really, seriously dysfunctional.

What it does do is provide simplicity and a clear choice between ordained and lay ministry with none of the complexity that the UCCan has created in between.

I'm not saying that this model is right for the UCCan. I'm simply tossing out a model for folks to chew on.

Mendalla

* congregations with ministers often still ordain lay chaplains. The chaplains provide rites of passage to non-members (e.g. marriages to unchurched folks or people whose churches won't marry them for some reason) which allows the minister to focus on serving the members and friends of the congregation.

** Admittedly, many UU congregations who are lay-led aren't doing so purely out of financial necessity but also out of the strong anti-clerical streak that still exists in the more humanist parts of our tradition.

You were actually one of many I was thinking of when I posted that Kay. I often think of the churches that I've attended throughout the years, whether it's just visiting or my home church, and I always notice there are the "outspoken" within each community. You know the "Mrs/Mr. Know it all" or the "Mrs/Mr. Nobody can do it better than me" or the one that ALWAYS takes the lead. Inevitably it always leads to church being done the same way for all eternity. When I look a little deeper I see those that sit in the background and suddenly you see some gifts that are not tapped into. The lady that is persistent in making some prayer shawls...wouldn't she be great for furthering the ministry of welcoming others? Or the man who loves to work with his hands, wouldn't he be great to build faith in others? Sometimes it's the quiet and steady in faith that hold such amazing qualities that would enrich the church.

I often think about who Jesus chose for his ministry, the most unlikely. Fishermen....really? Tax collector....come on! They were not flambouyant or even thinking they were capable, but with Jesus' instruction and belief in them they were remarkable. He seemed to see something in them that they themselves did not.

It's something that I see in you Kay. You have a gift for hospitality and I'm sure at the onset most churches wouldn't see this, but as you slowly venture into the unknown God will surely reveal who you are to others and to yourself. (I sincerely hope you take this as a compliment)

Oh as a side note: When I attended the Anglican church there was a Bishop in the Diocese of Niagara who openly stated that if anyone didn't feel welcome when they walked into any of the churches within his diocese, he would personally take them out for lunch and listen to their concerns. I thought that was cool and probably kept alot of churches on their toes as to not having the Bishop take the time to do what they should have been doing in the first place.

There is significant concern in Toronto over the inappropriate design for the site and the change it would bring to the neighbourhood.

http://bit.ly/12WvMMT

Basically, it gives the congregation a perpetual endowment to keep running. It also buys into the Toronto condo market.

That's pretty much as it actually is.

The area where I grew up (central Bavaria) has been heavily Roman Catholic for 1,500 years. But in recent decades, church attendance declined sharply, there as everywhere else in Europe and the Western World.

The Church at large seems unable to do anything about it, but the Benedictines, the first monastic order of Christendom, are successfully active in reversing the trend.

The stately Benedictine Abbey of Plankstetten, near where I grew up, is holding regular meditation retreats. These retreats have become very popular, and buses from as far way as Munich bus people to these events. Religious dogma is not pushed, mediation is taught and practiced, and only the spiritual advice that is truly welcomed by the participants is given. Everyone is permitted to experience and express their own spirituality in their own way. Other monasteries in Europe are doing the same.

Perhaps the monastic orders are doing again what they did 1200 or so years ago: transforming spiritual chaos to spiritual order, bringing spiritual enlightenment to a spiritually Dark Age? Perhaps there is a lesson in that for the UCC?

This seems to be a worthwhile 'experiment' - though meditation has been a crucial component of spiritual lives since 'forever'.  The various types of churches seem to have tossed meditation into the New Age camp, almost as if they are afraid of it. When I discovered meditation during my teen years  I was totally amazed.  When I shared that discovery with the congregation I attended I was sharply scolded - meditation is Buddhist and real Christians have nothing to do with it!

A few days ago on FB I read an article about an Anglican church in the US who offer a 'traditional' service on a regualr basis.  They use the Book of Common Prayer, as Anglicans have for many centuries.  They chant, there are candles and clouds of incence.   These things got tossed out long ago along with meditation.

The people who attend and appreciate this rediscovered type of worship are mainly the local university students.

Thanks for you thoughtful comments, John. I think I agree with almost every point you make  and view you expresss there. 

I'm not sure how "urgent" it all is… but I am persuaded that we definitely need to be kicking these  questions around for all we're worth.

Hi MikePaterson,

However urgent it is today, it will be more urgent by this time tomorrow.

Grace and peace to you.

John

DKS - by putting the topic in the bulletin (print out of blog) it created excellent discussion.

i also wrote:

"find out what their intended audience desires and needs and find out a way to fulfill this..."

that is what the UCC should be doing

(i am also writing from a nonchurched perspective, so i start out not being a part of your club, as it were and thus, can bring certain perspectives that you perhaps haven't considered because of your churched background)

the entity known as 'UCC' is made up of people who believe and promote its existence.  it has a financial existence.  it has a legal existence.  it has a spiritual existence.  it has a historical existence.  it has an emotional existence.  it has a physical existence.  maybe there are others.

(and 'economy' means more than what you don't like, m'dear.  economy also means karma -- the interrelated web of cause and effect)

i'm sure money enables the ministers to be ministers and enables things like WC to exist, enables whatever evangelical work the UCC wants to do, pays administrative costs, pays for the really good drugs and drink and food at the yearly UCC moots, pays for your and my medication (well, perhaps not that)...

anyway, that's enough...

i'm unchurched.

church and things like that aren't an important part of my life.

they are an interesting part of my life.  i am fascinated by people and their experiences.

i've had some amazing experiences, some deep experiences at places of worship, even though i don't believe in their particular thing...

when i first go to a place of worship, i try to notice everything (or notice that i am paying attention to everything)...i open doors.  i touch surfaces.  i smell.  i ask questions.  these get internalized, being made into a 'ok, this is what this place of worship is like' so that if i go again, i notice some of the newness has gone away, more into habit...

i try to find out what people's beliefs are at that particular place of worship.  one of the most common things is that people within the same congregation often have differing beliefs with regards to their religion when i am alone with them, but when around a group or with a minister, they act different (or even think differently?)

immediate turn offs:

'you NEED my Deity'

'you're going to Hell'

'why haven't you paid on your first visit?'

'i hate/dislike [insert particular group/religion]'

'[insert particular group/religion/belief] is crazy/stupid'

immediate turn ons:

laughter

smiling

openess

touching

hugging

riffing

prat falls

really good drugs/food/drink

music

poetry

movies

interactive sermons

when i can keep out of my own way and listen/experience

How aboot people like you, revjohn?  Travelling itinerant professional listeners who are able to then base their healing on whatever BS (belief system) the listener espouses?  Kind of like a psychotherapist?

Or maybe, in your case too, a shaman of the community, whose 'job' it is to save them from 'demons' of the community?

Can UCC Ministers operate without a UCC administrative structure?

Bob Dylan declared that the times were changing. Some became fans and some took heed.

Some of us, here as elsewhere, are now aware that the changes we made in the late sixties,and early seventies positioned us well outside the boundary of inclusion. Our determinations, on the foundation of the changes that chose us, have been contrary to the state and its dominion over us all. Further, we have recognized that the Church is deeply complicit in the bias and trajectory of the state. This awareness has drawn us into a new sphere of influence.

From the outset I have openly and consistently questioned the institutional norms by which the United Church has been governed into the present dilema. The problem did not come into us from outside. We created the problem by resort to means better suited to the world of politics and economics. This we includes me and all those whose lives I have had the privilige of sharing.

It is persons met while in the employ of the United Church that offer me hope. Set these persons free from the burden of maintaing the structures of imperial religion. Gather them in small circles of accountability, dedicated to the discipline of  spiritual maturation by dedicated practices of social intervention, acting locally and decisivley, for restoring spiritual health and wellness at home and in the neighbourhood.

The change is happening folk. Every day persons are being presented with alternatives and they are stepping out. New social economies are forming throughout the earth. These are rooted in egalitarian ethics, where the good of my neighbour stands as the heart and soul of my own good. They are rooted in simplicity, refusing the distortions and mutilations of creation by which the marketplace is filled to overflowing with the unnecessary and the harmful.

You make a big point with the memories/no memories of "church" observation, Waterfall.

Geo: right on! there's an overwhelmening need to get real with the reality faith opens.

The elderly as a resource, Waterfall?

This too is crucial, and problematic. It's crucial because we are seeing current projected rises in the raw number of Canadians aged over 50. (See: http://www.statcan.gc.ca/tables-tableaux/sum-som/l01/cst01/demo23g-eng.htm). As they enter retirement, many may be open to relevant church involvement… if it excites their impulses to faith.

Should we be making targeted overtures here? 

Why not? It’s certainly an opportunity to buy the institutional church some time. I do hope it’s occurred to the consultants to strategise this. There is a moment of necessary adjustment when retirement comes along.

It's problematic all the same… it could deepen a perception of church is just for the aged.

The “no memories” group is one that I‘ve had quite a bit of contact with and here my experience has been a desire to talk about the “more” of being human… something beyond the moral, political and social issues.

But common stereotypes are that churches (all churches) aren’t open, that they judge and moralise and reject perfectly good science… there is no entry point for exploration. I am forever arguing with these friends that churches aren’t all like that. They say they can’t imagine me stepping inside a church… so I’m obviously not very persuasive.

Their impressions are shaped by media coverage of sectarianism (in Scotland), fundamentalist judgementalism and pedophile priests, and cartoon imagery of god as a lightning-bolt wielding old man, “Christians” in their view are naïve, critical, sexist, superstitious and ignorant.

Certainly they do not “get” the symbols. The cross is widely associated with horror movies and cultism: Hollywood has seen to that. The Bible is widely seen as bad history and superstition… the concept of scripture, even as a literary form, is alien. "Beauty" is a sexualised notion, "truth" is relative because it id a "thing" not an activity o way of life. That there's not enough time in the day for genuine curiosity. The perceived "needs" of the moment are often everything.

In eastern Europe, I’ve met some younger people drawn into church involvement (Orthodox) by the fact that it was marginalized under Communism, associated with resistance and activism and has a deep cultural significance. They get into the mysticism, icons and ritual… it’s very “other” from the dirty grind of life in a struggling post-Soviet economy.

We don’t have the appeal of the Orthodox, and can’t wholly deny the perceptions of our own thinking un-churched. I used to think that we live in a “secular” society: spiritually agnostic. I now think we are seeing are shift to militant atheism.

Life in the social mainstream is incredibly noisy and incessant volume seems to be winning over meaning.

According to the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission’s 2012 annual Communications Monitoring Report television viewing was up slightly at 28.5 hours a week in 2011 from 28 hours a week in 2010 and radio listening crept up a fraction, to 17.7 hours a week from 17.6.
At the same time, Canadians are using the Internet more, upping the amount they download every month — whether it’s watching movies or video chatting with the grandchildren. In 2011 Canadians downloaded more than 20 per cent more from the Internet every month than they did in 2010. That’s a lot of input for an hour or so of church a week to compete with.

We have to remember that social awareness here and now is youth-dominated and preoccupied with entertainment and personal attractiveness. It’s virtually at the level of brainwashing in the mainstream media. They actively market narcissism and entitlement. And, what is interesting — even amazing — is that many young people continue to reject it, especially when they begin a family… despite the statistics and the  entertainment media telling them it’ll never work. That’s become a courageous step.

That brings it back to the “main course” (after attending to the washrooms, worship space, etc) and the main course has to be a satisfying experience from the start. And, rather than replicate the bustle and noise and endless inputs of “the real world”, “church” needs to show it’s otherness: it’s prayerfulness, its stillness and silence, its reflectiveness, its open-ness to ideas and challenges and discussion

At the centre of all of that need to be Jesus’ teachings — which are especially cogent, radical, hope-filled and challenging in the present times… rather than adoration of a virgin-born, resurrected alien with a lot of parallels to Isis and Mithras and a kind of Star Wars/Lord of the Rings moral attunement.

The teachings get some of them going. So does their place in the whole picture of wisdom-seeking traditions: the admission that human beings have been wrestling with existential questions since the beginning of history and continuously ever since… and that it continues with ongoing scholarship now, today. 

More Christians need to be able to talk confidently about what was great about the medieval mystics, for example, about what scripture is and how the New Testament came together …that there are other Gospels, and what they say… and feel comfortable talking about the core relevance of it all to their own lives. We need to educate ourselves and raise the ante on behalf of faith and fulfillment. We also need to witness trust in the mystery, joy, love and heightened spirituality. And we do that by going there.

I think we talk too much about death and not enough about life: life is what fills younger people’s awareness and involvements, life is what retirement should be for: finding meaning in personal relationships and commitments that are sometimes too draining. In youth and in retirement… these are vital issues.

About social issues, justice, politics. Jesus certainly has challenging things to say across this whole board… and they're relevant right now, immediately. And they resolve into one word: love. Is “love” a simple sexual impulse? Can it be something else at the core of one’s being? What are the implications of that? Will it hurt?

Hi Mike, I agree there are many obstacles no matter what direction the church chooses. It just seems to me that you can only work with what you have and what the mainline churches have right now is an aging population. Rather than accepting defeat and watching the population fade into the sunset it seems to me that even they have not been inspired to their/our usefulness. Slipping into a comatose spirituality that is on automatic pilot is probably just as dangerous as "the militant atheism" that you mention. What makes Christianity unique and inspiring is getting whitewashed not just by atheism but by the very churches that began with the teachings from the Bible. Suddenly what the church has to offer has become embarassing to talk about. We've become "hip" and embarrassed if we have to say that Jesus is the son of God, or was resurrected from the dead or even speak about salvation. Everything has become about a spirituality that is dependent on how we choose to interpret it. No one needs the church for that. We can do that anywhere and most do. Is it any surprise that church is not required. Athiests are now learning the Bible, not because they want to believe but because they know that by knowing another culture and becoming familiar with it, it provides the inside knowledge to bring down the "enemy". Without the faith required to understand the Bible and bring it all into another dimension they provide "surface only" carricature of the deeper understandings that make it appear cartoonish and unreal.

I think of Betty White and George Burns and how well they relate to young people. Their bodies are old but their spirit is young. The Bible itselft seems to think one can be effective at any age. We shouldn't relegate people to be mere bench warmers on Sunday and give them a free pass to become inactive just because they have put in their time and deserve to rest on their laurels. Being part of a congregation that places most of the focus for rejuvination on the young must be disheartening in itself. I think of all the "Kays" in the world that are just waiting for the opportunity for someone to tell them what they can do. They're poised and ready with no direction or encouragement. Churches in the throws of death need a "spiritual massage" to rejuvenate the flame that is smoldering deep within.

Any culture, anywhere is dependent on the elders for the continuation and survival of who they are. Just ask the First Nations. They also are battling with reclaiming their identity and it's the elders that hold the memories they so desire, because the younger generations can't remember who they are.

We are all from God and we all have a spiritual nature. Many are starting to forget. I personally see the church like Jonah in the whale. A certain reluctance to speak about salvation maybe? Even from those that have heard it.

It isn't often that we have a chance to hear the Moderator doing a non-United Church guest preaching gig, but here he is preaching yesterday at Toronto Metropolitan Community Church.

http://bit.ly/12YS0T4

there is something definitely to be said for the Vatican's philosophy of Gradualism...

and alas, i can't seem to watch Fay Pat's video in the link you gave above my post here; I get the web page, but the actual video is black; perhaps I have to be a Toronto citizen to actually watch it? ;3

another thing to think of is: what is the purpose of the UCC? what does it do? what doesn't it do? and to whom?

a UCC sermon?

(i love that phrase "we are g_ds with anuses")

Yes, Inanna, we are gods in biological form, equipped with biological organs. Our most important organ, however, is our brain. Our brain is what makes us into creators, in the image of the ultimate creator. We should learn to use it wisely, in full awareness of our creativeness and godliness.

I think this is the major failing of the conventional Christian Church: By putting a supernatural God out there as the only possible form of God, it failed to activate the god within.

We are as gods, and must get good at it.

-Stewart Brand

Sadly it won't play for me - the video screen is simply black. What did he say?

Are we able to speak frankly? That is, may we plainly say that the predicament of the United Church, in the context of the the rising corporate state, is grounded in the failure of covenant loyaltiy? More pointedly, are we willing to embrace the healing potential given in a sound diagnosis of the ills we now experience?

We are in Lent. This allows us to follow Jesus as he negotiates the perils of a religious and political milieu hostile to the prophetic word and action he makes manifest. Why is this the case? Is it not plain to us that, from Samuel till today, prophetic critique of institutional precept and practice renders the appointed agents of God's intervention vulnerable to the diverse strategies of refusal?

Is the perennial problem not located in the compromise of priests, prophets and pundits for the sake of personal convenience and temporal advantage? As another has wondered, would we continue to serve our communities if we were not paid wages? Or, if we had to support ourselves by some other employment?

This week we have a passage from Paul to the Philippians. What on earth does this mean to us?  Where is our treasure? To what are we loyal?

Hey, I hear Randi's having a militant atheist cocktail night over at 'Chateau Blaspheme'-- let's go :3

Do you use them before or after you drink the cocktail?

snicker...snicker...lol...rofl...roflmao

somegalfromcan

You can access the moderator's service at the MCC archives.

http://www.mcctoronto.com/video/sunday-services-archive

Well said, GeoFee.

Chansen, love your metaphors: I missed the cocktail swords but I saw the plastic, and got the "little". Well put.

Thank you. It is a MOST remarkable presentation. It includes Premier Kathleen Wynne, speaking of her roots in the United Church (and she still is) as well as the Moderattor. She says she will work hard to make this a just and more fair society. Let's hope.  

I remember the days described by Brent Hawkes. I occasionally attended MCC in the mid-70's when only Holy Trinity Anglican would allow MCC to worship. I also remember the 1990 and 1994 General Councils where MCC was denied status as an Ecumencial Delegate, after really nasty fights on the floor of the court. Now the Moderator speaks at MCC. That's positive change.

You drink the cocktail and eat the cherry or olive first. Then you are in the right frame of mind to use the sword.

Thanks to Mike and George in particular for challenging concepts.  Thank you to Waterfall for some excellent contributions.  Our focus at the church I am serving as Transition minister is to make connections with people between 45 and 65, and to respond to any other connections that may happen along the way.  Our mission is to be a place of unconditional love and acceptance witnessed by radical inclusion and generous responses to opportunities to make a difference in the lives of others.  We strive to provide a worship experience marked by excellence and relevance.  We have big questions about the building, and are probably 6 months or more away from making a decision.

The experience of many is that a physical location is important for helping ground a sense of identity and place.  The challenge is to make our building as useful as possible.

Thanks SG, but sadly I'm still having the same issue (the video screen is black and won't play). 

Jim: the crunch is often the location of a church as well as the nature of the building.

An option may be to sell a location and apply the capital to a less pricey patch of ground and the construction of a simpler, durable, low-maintenance, energy-efficient, acessible and needs-appropriate facility. If we knew what the essential elements of a "worship space" really are in this day and age it'd be a great place to start. Maybe some faith communities could get with a portable installation that could transform a rented space appropriately. 

This is where I'd love to see the churches sponsor an architectural competition to generate a range of options that everyone could consider.

It could release a lot of resource back into the LIVING faith.

Somegal: me too… I can't get a picture (or sound). The file seems to have gone.

This is key.

They are means available to our use, serving the purposes to which we are called and for which we are equipped. They offer wonderful opportunity for support and encouragement to the neighbourhoods in which they are situated.

Just think, in every Canadian community, as elsewhere, there is a building dedicated to the glory of God. Surely none would take it that this indicates a need on the part of God. Rather, it indicates a resource to be deployed in the service of the need of those who dwell in its vicinity.

In our congregations we have nurses, teachers, social workers, carpenters, mechanics and persons gifted by God with every manner of insight and skill. Can we imagine such communities mobilzed for social action, by which the neighbourhood is blessed and encouraged to flourish?

Would the glorification of the name we honour not be manifest in the gratitude expressed by single parents, famililes on social assistance, the elderly and the very young whom we have touched by the unreserved sharing of our spiritual and material resources?

This is wholly possible and requires only one small step to be realized. While small, that step is life changing. It is a simple matter of exiting the economy as it is structured, for the advantage of the few at the expense of the many, and setting out to establish a new economy; predicated on love of God expressed as love of neighbour.

Taking this step we declare, with body as with mind, the ending of the world as it is and the emergence of the world as it may be by God's energizing grace.

I'm glad it's not just me. Perhaps someone could provide a brief recap of what he said?

After. Without the swords, the little orange slices fall in the drinks and dilute the alcohol.

I'm missing the "militant" part. You keep putting "militant" and "atheism" back-to-back, like there is some connection. I think you're just desperate to put atheists in the worst possible light, and "militant atheists" is no more applicable than "baby-eating atheists", even if those can be delicious with a little butter and garlic.

If the point you're trying to make is that atheism is a threat to Christian churches in Canada and elsewhere, I agree wholeheartedly. But we're not even your worst enemy - Christians are. Many Christians make Christianity look a lot more looney and backward than any atheist ever could. When your kids come of age, do you think it's more likely that they start reading Hitchens and Dawkins, or that they turn on the TV and see what the forces of Christianity have accomplished today?

Look at WC - we've had dozens of pious nutcases through here who shine like warning beacons for instability and bad ideas. Yet, you seem convinced that atheists are out to destroy Christianity. More correctly, that's anti-theists, but you have waaay bigger problems than the people you've failed to convince.

Chansen:

You've successfully identified ONE of my points, and seem not to like it. Or understand it? Maybe you're not getting out much. No matter. Some of your further observations are close to ones I've made in this thread. There were several more and you may like to move on to some of the more interesting or complicated ideas based of some familiarity with actual UCC worship and culture. Ones that have something constructive to contribute to the question this thread's trying to address.

Despite the over-reaching of your delightfully robust ego, I was not calling you a "militant" anything.

I was saying that we are living in an economy-dominated culture that, far from being neutral to anything but "loopy" Christianity, actually exclude, shuts it doors to, spiritual values  …in a determined way  … in an uncompromising way …in a combative way …in, one might hazard to say, in a militant way.

"The Economy" admits only monetarist and materialist values. Ask Milton Friedman. Ask Maggie Thatcher (who was a chuchgoer when it suited, but that is not a behaviour that reliably indicates spiritual values). It was not this way 30 years ago when many of today's UCC members were in their youth. I believe we have moved beyond simple "capitalism". I could argue that at length but…

Maybe you'd back to something you can get your comprehension around, something you do have a sincere interest in: what would that be?

Start a thread and let us know.

Okay, so when you wrote...

...you weren't calling me, an atheist, "militant". Right. Good to know.

All I'm saying, is that the atheists aren't doing anything "militant" and we aren't striking anything except keys on a keyboard. Though there are people like me who will debate the topic, if anything, most atheism is a "so what?" kind of atheism. The religious make claims of the own transformational experiences or arguments based on their own reading of the bible, and young people look at these claims like they look at late night infomercials, roll their eyes, and carry on. They just aren't buying what you're selling - they're not setting fire to your store.

If your claims of militancy are anything more than hyperbole, let us know.

Yes, one might say that, if one wanted to lose all credibility.

You sound like someone in desperate need of a blog. Luckily, you already have one.

Any apparent lack of comprehension of your thousand word essay above on my part is due to me falling asleep halfway through it, somewhere around the part where you started ranting about the kids watching TV and being on your lawn. Seriously, you want to preach openness to challenges and tolerance, all while you're flaming me. You've written before about how arrogant you were as an atheist, and I bet you were, but switching teams didn't make you a better person.

Finally, you don't have a wisdom-seeking tradition in Christianity - you have an answer-having tradition. The good teachings are not unique to Christianity, and they are weighed down by bad teachings that you scramble to explain away. Your real enemy isn't atheists, or anti-theists, or idiot Christians - it's the free exchange of information. What's really screwing with Christianity is the Internet, and the ability of young people to access a variety of sources of information. First you lost control of the messages going to young people, and now you're losing the young people.

It'd be so nice if you did just a little bit of research, reading and thinking before you come out with your strings of misperceptions, your bald assertions, your endlessly repetitious self-affirmations. Oh well, someone has to keep your spitits up and I guess you have the recipe. Stick with it.

Cute. You still haven't given us one example of this "shift to militant atheism." I called out that comment, and in reply, you've gone after me. You're one of those judgemental embarrassments to Christianity you were talking about.

another sermon

follow the Velveteen Jesus give them your money :3

also, a typical interaction between a typical bleeding heart Liberal and the Forces of Commercialism

"You have 10 seconds to comply..."

Pot, meet kettle.

That deopends on what kind of discussion you want to create. I find the bog entry not particulalrly helpful and unintentionally creating anxiety.

One of the best resources for in depth, scholarly, reflective discussion of the United Church of Canada is Touchstone Journal. Published since 1983, it is independent of the denomination. Many issues up to 2011 are on line and free.

http://touchstonejournal.ca/index.htm

This thread is an example of many churches I know. nitpicking!! Is this the change that we need?