Sorry - I meant CHANGE!

I would have liked to have seen one or two of your ideas because i think many of us are struggling with that.

I am at the point where I can no longer deal with business as usual, yet am not sure what  or how that change should take place.  The presbytery system has been a bee in my bonnet for some time now, especially when they use their powers to make decisions which the individual churches should be making for themselves.

The traditional worship service in which many older people seem to find comfort is not too relevant for me anymore, -- and I am one of the younger older ones!

We in the evangelical church are holding our own, and the charismatic churches are on the rise.

 

I'd say there will be churches in Canada for decades to come. They may not be mainline ones though.

 

 

1968 was a watershed year.  People born then and later, for the most part, have little interests in institutions (churches, fraternal organizations, etc.).  Even the evangelical churches are in decline as a percentage of the population.

 

The change I would like to see would be for congregations to see themselves as partners with and children of God -- to move beyond comfortable worship patterns (traditional for people over 65 and under 35; contemporary for baby boomers) and mouthing the words to being open to and receiving a deep, spiritual connection with God and everything else.  If we do not feel like intrinsic parts of a greater whole, it is hard to make the commitment and do the work needed to connect with those outside of the church -- how we are is more important than what we do.

Actually thats not what Stat's Canada is reporting.....less people in general are not attending church.....I think the evangelical/charismatic churchs will feel it last....saying that, perhaps they are better positioned to meet the needs of folks as they are smaller and can adapted to change (in whatever form) quicker than the larger mainlaine ones...

The problem with statistics for Evangelical churches is that they tend to not assign a great deal of effort to tracking attendance in the same way as mainline churches.

How does the the church need to change to attract new members?

 

Insiders don't know what it takes to attract people from the outside. It would be best to address this question to those whom the church wants to attract, via a nation-wide opinion poll.

 

What if the majority says: drop the BS and stick to basic humanism.

 

(By "BS" I do, of course, mean "Belief System." :-)

 

Then what do we change to? A Gretta Vosper style With-or-Without-God church?

 

Speaking strictly for myself, I wouldn't mind.

 

Hi... 

 

The church, the body of Christ, is doing well. I will encourage the institutions of religion to seek her where she may be found. This will mean coming out from the way things are, undertaking a passage through liminality, and so discovering the substance which has long been lacking.

 

I have seen a cloud the size of a human hand. Every day, in every place, persons are stepping out. Those with eyes to see know as much or more than I, concerning the unfolding purpose of God in this time and place.

 

George

Sometime ago I was reading about a house where Jesus was present. Inside folk were gathered to the teaching he was making known by word and deed. Word spread round and people crowded in to notice what was going on.

 

The words on the page described four friends carrying a stretcher of sorts. On the stretcher a person without power to walk on his own. This person was lifted up to, and lowered down through, the roof of the house where Jesus was.

 

The story opened my eyes to see something that matters. Nothing follows where Jesus is talked about but not present in spirit and in truth. When Jesus is present, in the union of any two or more, an attractive spirit is established; the centre of an expanding circumference of inclusion.

 

A spiritual script is vacuous where there is no spiritual fruit. We can talk about God as much as we like. Talk is cheap. It is doing what we hear which will lead us into that for which we knock, seek and ask. From just beyond the threshold of human reason, beckons a way forward; saying simply, count the cost, take up the cross, and follow me.

 

I was born, raised, schooled, hired and retired according to the pattern of this world. A pattern which included the institutes of John Calvin and the insights of Adam Smith its as determining concepts. George Grant has well articulated this foundational alignment. In America, Herman Melville spelt it our in his opus "Moby Dick."

 

There is a sense in which the world we knew has in truth come to an end. The world into which we were born, through which we had travelled to the last of its days. We heard about its ordained passing not so very long ago. 

 

Now we are in a nether world, which we may resist and refuse or through which we may freely pass, to enter and inhabit a spiritual purpose; each according to election and calling. All holding fast to God and neighbour by undivided love..

 

Every day, by ones, by twos and by threes, persons are stepping out of the boat. The inviting voice has become more compelling than any other voice and all other voices. Each hears it in a particular place. All are by that hearing joined in a web of creative freedom, responsibility, creativity and courage.

 

There is a spirit hovering over the dark and brooding patterns of our time under the sun. A voice is speaking, "Let us...!" Where this voice is heard a seed is planted. That seed will fall into the ground and die. From its death a new beginning will rise.

 

Wittgenstein spoke of a picture that held us captive. That picture was shaped by our language and we were not able to escape it. That is, not able until we found the courage to try.

 

Goethe has let me see that the whole universe will conspire to bring about the longing for what is most wanted in a time such as this. Our longing for change is the longing of the universe itself. A universe much abused by the history of fallen will in human form.

 

The Kingdom of heaven is at hand...! Its time to change the way we think, speak and act. Not rearrange - change; make manifest something different.

 

Having been at it for some number of years now, I can tell you it leads to strange and wonderful things. What I imagined as possible in the spirit is now coming into its maturity. Feels just a little like walking on water in response to the beckoning word of the eternal present in this moment of time.

 

Now is the acceptable time. Today if you will hear the approaching word. Today, here.

 

George

 

 

Not many bring their kids or grandchildren to church anymore. We aren't passing on tradition like we used to and IMO it's created a generation that probably feels very uncomfortable in a church setting if they do happen to be there somehow.

Hi Happy Retiree,

 

 

Christendom died,  Now institutionalism needs to die.

 

Apart from that if you want people in the pews you need to put them there.  It really is as simple as that.

 

The open door policy of the Church which, during Christendom, said "The doors are always open, come on in" needs to change for the true open door policy of the flourishing Church, "The doors are always open, go on out."

 

The Church exists to serve, it should never exist to be served.  We've known that since the mid 60's.  It is well past time we started doing something with that knowledge.

 

Grace and peace to you.

John

 

When I first read Gretta Vosper, it was quite contrary to what I had always been taught to believe and it left me sort of hanging out in space with an empty feeling.  Now, I am more comfortable in my thinking and know there are many many different ideas about what God is, or if God is.  In that way, I have trouble with the traditional church service which puts words in my mouth and prayers in my mouth which I may not necessarily believe.

 

Yes, exactly!

 

Maybe that's why the medieval mystic, Meister Eckhart, said: "I pray to God to rid me of God." Or the modern day mystic, Allan Watts: "Atheism in the name of God."

 

I've been contemplating how we do Sundays for some time now. Why do we sit in long straight seats listening to someone speak to us? Why do we stand on command and sing songs that are posted on a wall? Why do we pray scripted prayers. Etc.

 

Another question I've had I think relates to what John has mentioned above. Do we exist to worship god or to worship the "_______ Church"? (fill in the blank with your favourite denomination)

 

That being said, I don't know what to suggest for the church as a whole. It does make me more mindful of my own personal spiritual practice and how I live my life. I do think we need to act courageously and maybe not worry so much about the survival of the church/institution. If it is meant to survive, it will. After all, aren't we a group that believes in resurrection?

Hi Northwind,

I have worked on these questions for some time. Basically, simplistically, each of the structural details you notice served the needs of an industrializing world very well. Persons were socialized, by the structure of the liturgy,  to be passive before authority. We learned to arrive on time and do as we were told; we were being conformed rather than transformed.

 

George

Yes, authoritarian, that's what Christian religion has been for a long time, and still is, to a large extent.

 

How can we reverse that? Is it possible to get back to the Jesus movement, with spontaneous meetings, healing, preaching, teaching, and doing good? Jesus was not an authoritarian. But "he spoke as someone having authority, not like the scribes."

 

"By whose authority dost thou speak," the Pharisees asked Jesus.

 

"I speak by the authority invested in me by my heavenly father," answered Jesus.

 

On another occasion he said: "I and the father are one."

 

Perhaps it would be best for us to forge a link with our creative source, find out for ourselves what Jesus was talking about, become our own authority, and take it from there?

 

EVERY Christian has a different idea of what a "Jesus movement" is. Everyone thinks theirs is the correct interppretation. In a sense, you're all correct, as you can interpret the words and deeds attributed to Jesus in many different ways.

 

                  

Has Gretta Vosper's congregation attracted new members - particularly young adult members?   Have they retained these people over a period of years?   Has their church grown, stayed about the same, or is it smaller than it was before?       I think these questions need to be answered before we can hold it up as a role model of how the church needs to change.

I lived in Vancouver twice. While there I took notice of the way in which professional buskers practiced their craft. There are three basic elements to being a successful busker. These are:

 

1] Attract a crowd

 

2] Hold the attention of the crowd

 

3] Pass a hat to gather the offerings of the crowd

 

I have been using this method with some success while offering ministry services to rural communities around the city of Kamloops. Some weeks ago, I asked permission to host a "pot luck" liturgy. I simply worked the room, in the way a busker works a crowd. Persons were asked to provide songs as we went forward. Persons were invited to read lessons for the day. Persons were asked to share insights related to the texts. The hour went very quickly and was very much appreciated.

 

Once settled in Winnipeg I will find Churches who will allow me use of some space on Sunday evenings. I will "occupy" those available spaces and begin gathering a community of seekers and adventurers. This will be undertaken as an example of what is possible where creativity trumps conformity. I will document the process online.

 

I did a similar experiment while in the seminary. I "occupied" a space that was only nominally used. In a corner I set up a small desk where I could work. Every morning I brought cookies baked the evening before and put on a pot of good quality coffee. There was a small basket for free offerings of support.

 

I did this for one semester. During that time I developed a substantial "customer" base, regulars who came for the coffee and cookies.These included students, teachers, support staff, administrators and off the street walk ins. There were times in which I provided child support for parents enrolled in some program or another. Many came for a coffee and stayed for conversation.

 

I used the walls for graphic presentations and hosted several workshops during free evenings. Once a month I hosted an open mike coffee house.

 

At one time the seminary hosted an Anglican Bishop on sabbatical. Persons from all around were lined up to obtain a few moments of time with this distinguished person. I sat in conversation with him for 5 to 10 minutes just about every morning. I brought him daily newspapers and he enjoyed them with his cup of coffee and cookie. He used me as an informant, asking many questions about the seminary, the city and the country. I in turn asked him many questions about his experience and his insights. When he left, I felt as though I had been blessed with an apostolic blessing.

 

During the semester my effort earned me $1000 over costs. I distributed this as support to students struggling to make ends meet.

 

This project was undertaken as an "occupation" of the space. At the outset, I met with strong opposition from the administration side. I was told that my actions were not permitted and that I had to have authorization to go forward. I begged to differ and persisted.

 

This was a creative initiative in the early days of our denomination's struggle with relevance and solvency. Even so, there was no official recognition and no hint of approval. To the end of the project, some on the administration refused to give credence to the initiative and considered me nothing more that a pain in the neck. Something I have learned to expect when stepping outside "institutionalised" consciousness.

 

What can we do to change? We can begin by encouraging and supporting creative initiative rather than punishing it. That will go a long way towards the future we are longing for.

 

George

 

 

 

Hi seeler:

 

I can't answer any of these questions. Maybe paradox3 could, or would? She lives in the vicinity.

 

As I said, I'm speaking strictly for myself.

 

I think far too much is being made of doctrinal belief. For me, spiritual experience is the essential element of faith, not unquestioning belief in doctrine. Moreover, what ultimately matters is what we do, not what we believe.

 

I think when Martin Luther said that we are saved by faith, or grace, alone, what he meant by faith or grace is spiritual experience, not unquestioning belief in doctrine. After all, he himself was saved by spiritual experience. Whatever doctrines he came up with were just an afterthought to his experience.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, chansen, I know.

 

But more than going back to the Jesus movement, I recommended going back to what Jesus presumably did: connecting with or experiencing the ultimate source or creative force of the universe, and taking it from there.

 

Jesus and his followers had only first century concepts to explain their spiritual experiences and their world. But we live in the 21st century, not the 1st., and should use 21st century concepts to explain our experiences and our world to ourselves and others!

 

To remain stuck in 1st. century concepts is, in my opinion, the second biggest folly of Christianity. The biggest folly, of course, is to believe in them absolutely.

 

4              'When through fiery trials your pathway shall lie,

                my grace, all-sufficient, shall be your supply:

                the flame shall not hurt you; I only design

                your dross to consume, and your gold to refine.

 

My partner and I attended a high school presentation for GSA/Pride presentation.  There were speakers etc but one thing really stuck out in my mind…..  TD bank had a video clip showing adults coming out and the struggles they had as youth.  It was very moving….moving to people my age….  There was no real way for the youth to relate to the video…..while the intent of the video was amazing and moving – it was lost on most of the young folks as they couldn’t relate to video.

This Sunday one of the hymns we sang was How Firm A Foundation – I usually play for church when I attend so I don’t really get to sing along….today, I had a Sunday off – from playing anyway, and I was appalled at the language in the hymn….especially verse 4.  I sang this hymn, loving the tune, however the lyrics were completely foregin….so I stated looking through VU and MVU.

I was amazed how out of touch we are to the people we think should attend church – heck – I am 54 and have no idea what the last line means in the verse above…and if I had to think about what I am singing why would I?

We have spent so much time worrying about male/female references that we now need to start working on keeping things simple – folks our youth text…..text…text… how would the church need to change to meet this challenge.

This is why UU'ism often takes familiar hymn tunes and uses them with different lyrics. There is simply no updating one can do to the old words that will make them palatable even though the music may be wonderful. Of course, we then spice things up by adding contemporary songs from writers like Carolyn McDade, Shelley Denham Jackson and others, including many who are UU.

 

This is also where a lot of my struggle comes from when I tilt between UU and UCCan. Liturgically, I love a well-done UCCan service and I do find my UU fellowship's services aren't always serving my worship needs. OTOH, even in a fairly liberal UCCan congregation like the ones I've checked out, use of old, theologically difficult (for me) language can intrude on the experience since it doesn't always fit with where I'm at or even where the church itself seems to be at.

 

Mendalla

 

Yes, Mendalla, the language of UCCan liturgy can be awkward, and the lyrics of some hymns are difficult to stomach, but I love the music and try to take the lyrics metaphorically. Unfortunately, the language is designed to be taken literally, and sometimes one has to stretch the metaphor to the breaking point to make it fit.

 

 

 

 

Is there any way the church can be a bit more fun and playful and not take itself so seriously? Can we have spontaneity? Imagination? Or do things have to be planned to a tee? I think serious adults in a serious world with serious problems- sometimes we forget to be playful, to have fun, to be spontaneously creative. It's important, it's healthy, it's healing. The evangelical churches at least have lively upbeat music and it's fun in that sense- despite differences that there may be with theology. Does fun have a place in sincere life affirming worship? I think so. Laughter yoga anyone? I need some of that.

 

We've tried that with a few services and it works for some but not others. For instance, our attempts at lighter, more deliberately fun services have stiffed as often as they have succeeded.

 

The problem is having a worship leader who is capable of hitting the right balance between control and spontaneity. In UU'ism, we have fairly participatory services and that means lots of opportunity for things to happen spontaneously. It also means that if the worship leader doesn't plan and arrange things carefully, it can get rather tedious. Spontaneity does not automatically make things exciting and fun, just opens the door to the possibility. It can also lead to tedium and repetitiveness, just of a different kind than a rigidly liturgical service.

 

For my part, when I am leading or helping lead a service, I try not to script myself too tightly. If something happens or comes up that I can incorporate or riff off of, I try to leave room to do that. For instance, one Sunday I heard something on the news (forget what) that stuck with me. I was the service leader (= lay reader in UCCan) and worked that story into the "Welcoming" at the beginning of the service. Or something said by a kid during Children's Time may resonate with my sermon if I am the worship leader so I'll work it into the sermon on the fly. When I was more active in doing services, I did some where I invited other members to participate by giving readings or reflections. I didn't screen them, just recruited them, told them how much time they had, and left them to their own devices as to what to say. Sometimes what they said helped me in what I was saying and, again, I had the wiggle room to do it.

 

Conclusion? More spontaneity in a service is not a bad thing and can be (but isn't automatically) a good thing. For it to work, you need a worship leader who can keep the right balance between liturgy and spontaneity.

 

All IMHO and IME, of course.

 

Mendalla

 

I agree a good facilitator makes a difference. I took an arts and social change course awhile ago that had as a key element- 'play'. It was, I found , a very spiritually enriching course. The facilitator had great ideas for creative play and she kept it organized enough to keep the enthusiasm going. She and some of her colleagues work with all kinds of groups bringing fun and creativity into the 'work' environment- businesses, healthcare, and religious groups too. She had to work at encouraging some of us to loosen up and not be afraid of play- reminding us that it's a lost art among adults. I think it's why my husband likes playing sports more than going to church. It's liberating to run around and play, be into that 'zone' and not be self conscious. The church is very self conscious I think- which is good on a certain level- an impediment, perhaps, on another.I can be self conscious too, including in church because there's a strong feeling that there's an acceptable protocol and I don't want to screw up. So, rather than risk it, maybe some people would rather avoid putting themselves in that situation. Many people deal with expectations of protocol all week long and need a break also.

 

Hi Kimmio:

 

At the lay services I conducted, I frequently incorporated jokes into my sermons. Poking fun at myself, the church, the general seriousness of life and of worship. Worship need not always be solemn, but should be joyful, a celebration of of life.

 

 

:) awesome. Our ministers aren't somber or anything- far from! They have senses of humour that shines through from time to time, for sure. But the order of things, the more 'traditional' liturgy and music can be a bit dour- to me anyway. It's out of step with a socially progressive church. My church offers alternatives at other times/ on other days that I appreciate, but I often can't make it because I work afternoons/ evenings nowdays. So, the standard Sunday mornings are my available time lately but not a style I connect with well. Guess the church can't be everything to everyone, though.

Hi Kimmio:

 

Try the UU. If you live in Vancouver, you'll probably find one.

It may also be the case that we are all incorrect. Most likely some are correct and some are not.
.
So how do we distinguish between the correct and the incorrect? This seems a necessary condition if we are to make progress along the way of human hope in the world as it is.
.
My personal struggle to discover and embrace what helps, and to prefer what helps to what hinders, is foundational. In this way I am liberated and transformed. It is not my business to change others. The practice of such meddling brings much harm.
.
Is it not true that progress in the way opened by Jesus will make manifest the outcomes we see in the gospel about Jesus. These outcomes have absolutely nothing to do with correct doctrine. They have everything to do with consequential action.
.
Jesus wants no worshippers, unless that worship consists in the disciplined practice of service in and through all our relations.
.
Who is Jesus? An upstart peasant who earns the wrath of Church and State for his practice of radical freedom. This is the person I admire and respect.

Add two thousand years, and you might be talking about Pussy Riot.

Hi Arm, sorry I just clicked flag while intending to click quote. Admin, please disregard. Clumsy finger. Yes, there's a UU I've been to before and that wasn't really what I was looking for either- a bit academic, and at the time I was looking for Christian focused and that Christ is at the core while learning about other faiths is still important to me-but I found them to be good, smart, interesting people, those UU's- nod to Mendalla ;) not too different from UCC. The UU church is not close to me either but I might go again sometime. Actually, I do like my church overall and they do offer a lot of different things- but lately haven't been able to go. Maybe that's why I'm complaining. It's not them, it's me! ;) The alternative events happen less often and not on Sunday mornings. Sunday mornings, with some exceptions, stick to traditional worship style and order of things.

Hi Kimmio:

 

I'm sure Admin won't banish me for being flagged as offensive by you.

 

If I lived in Vancouver, I'd check out Canadian Memorial with Bruce Sanguin as the minister. I've read most of his books, and agree with almost everything he said. Four or so years ago, paradox3 and I hosted a book discussion group on his book "The emerging Church" here on the Cafe. His congregation must be the most progressive UC congregation in Canada! I think he points the way to a future Church.

 

 

 

 

Memorial is one I would definitely consider if I was in Vancouver. Heard Bruce preach at a church in London 2 or 3 years back and was very impressed with both his ideas and how he presented them.

 

Mendalla

 

 

Yes, that's right, I live in the vicinity and was part of Gretta Vosper's congregation from 2000 - 2005. 

 

The congregation has changed substantially since that time.

 

The congregation as I knew it pretty much split down the middle within a few years of the theological shift.  There were many departures from WHUC . . . there is now a large contingent of former members at a nearby United Church. Plus there are a few of us attending other UCCAN churches in our Presbytery. And I can think of some families who drifted away without making any new church connections. 

 

The flip side of this is that many new members have been attracted by the progressive nature of the worship at WHUC. Not sure how many of them would be "young adults" Seeler. And I am not sure if they have experienced a net gain or loss in their membership.  I am guessing the overall numbers are much the same (compared to 2005 when I was still attending) but I don't know this for certain. 

 

Cjms would be able to tell us but I haven't seen her posting here for quite some time. Ditto for the other WHUC members who have popped into Wondercafe on occasion. 

Hi paradox3:

 

Thank you for this.

 

Yes, I remember, cjms was a member of West Hill United (Gretta Vosper's congregation) She alerted me to their website. I followed what went on there for a while, but not any more. I am mystic, favouring experiential spirituality. I didn't think WHUC promoted experiential spirituality any more or any less than other congregations. In fact, one of my critiques of her book was that she did not particularly favour mystical or spiritual experience, which I consider the most essential element of faith.

 

I have offered my opinions on Gretta Vosper's book "With or Without God" repeatedly here on WonderCafe, when we discussed her book some years ago. In her book she describes herself as a "wounded female," and her mother as one, too. I always wondered whether the book and her extremely progressive worship style might not be some kind of an attempt to get back at the Church that wounded her and her mother?

 

In the process of reading Dr. Stephen Harper's book, They are just not into you, and his belief is that it is almost pointless trying to be an attractional church.  Most people outside of the church today will not come into church until they have good encounters with members outside of the church, members engaged in mission.  He also deals with language, music and other issues.

 

When the church is doing more in the community that is helpful and supportive, the more people in the community may become involved in church.

lol Chansen: I absolutely hope that Pussy Riot gets their place in history!  Excellent point.

Basically. It is dangerous business standing for something. Most dangerous is standing forward in freedom. This is what I hear when I listen for the narrator's voice in the gospel about a radicalized itinerant encouraging critical consciousness as liberation from religiously endorsed political power.
.
Just now there is a spiritual body at work in the world. This body has no infrastructure or suprastructure. Everyday this body grows towards the satisfaction of it's creative determination.
.
Can a leopard exchange it's spots for stripes?
.
George
.

This little church in Australia looks like they're onto something. I like their approach- what the future of church could look like, and is happening more and more. Although, their numbers look small in the photos and the average age looks to be over 60 still (but maybe those are just the people visible in the pics). What's happening is younger people who left church or haven't had much experience with it don't know church like this exists. And (in my opinion) they won't, likely, until there are more of them to go to, because gradually the old school ones will have changed, not their faith, but their approach. They've been in the news recently, too.

http://anggos.com.au/

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/3695857/

Most of the Old Order Amish have no churches but hold church services in their homes.

 

I don't regard the Amish as a shining example for us modern Christians. I do, for instance, not agree with their literal interpretation of scripture and their practice of "shunning," which seems particularly uncharitable and unchristian. But "Home Church" seems like a good idea.

 

I admire their farming methods, though, and their way of life.

 

 

 

 

.... perhaps... get out of always 'worshipping' the same way over and over... consider letting go of the 'order of service' and return to exploring 'ceremony'.. .which is loving what is in the present moment and celebrating that... wx (((o)))

Since it is summer, I'm taking the opportunity to visit other congregations. Last Sunday in a little church, the Lay Pulpit Supply, who is a musician changed the order of service.

Throughout the service she would have a scripture reading, then a hymn, and then talk about the hymn - it's author, its composer, its words, its theology, and how it can speak to us. One psalm we sung twice: check out Psalm 100 (page 820 and 822 in VU) and compare the two versions. Throughout the service there was a mix of old and new. Oh yes, we had a call to worship, an offering (with the offering hymn explained), and a benediction.

It was a beautiful service.

That's an excellent idea. I can get behind That one.

 

A Strong Church   -----You need God involved ----

 

http://www.intouch.org/broadcast/this-week-on-tv

 

A Strong Church

Dr. Stanley describes the many characteristics that make up a strong church and what we can do to contribute to the strength of our own church. Churches must have a vision that extends beyond their doors. They need to be involved in spreading the gospel in their communities and around the world. When we are committed to following God, He will open doors of opportunity.