Excellent!

Some quick thoughts . . .

Third paragraph .  .  . ". . .  Unitarians, pagans, and more . . ." 

While "and more" encompasses everything else, I'm wondering if "wiccans" could/should be included - it makes me think of Witch who I found to be very influential in my early years at Wondercafe.  I know we can't list every faith or religion - just wondering.

Last paragraph . . . "we welcome anyone to join us at the table . . ."

While the well known phrase is "join us at the table", was wondering if it could read "join us at the cafe"?

Well done, gang!

I think we thought "pagan" would cover "Wiccan" and be broader. Perhaps Rowan will chime in (or Witch, but he isn't around much these days).

Mendalla

Thanks Mendalla.

I like it.

Overall, generally speaking, I really like both this and the Mission Statement. However, since WC2 is being formed out of the WC community, which came together through the efforts of the UCCanada, I feel we really should include that WC2 will be a Christian site. Something like this would be good, "WC2 is an independent Christian community..."

I like it. I'm tentatively wondering about adding more to the value statement?

I'll be interested to hear what others think of this, esp. given that even the UCCan itself never, ever to my recollection plugged Wondercafe as being "Christian" and we emphasize the multi-faith aspect of the site right in that statement. Wondercafe has, in my experience, functioned best as a forum that is focussed on open discussion of all ideas, not on being part of a specific tradition or denomination. Wondercafe2 should, if anything, be even more so.

Mendalla

1.  The United Church of Canada did not plug this site as a Christian site.  never did.   A site that discussed Christianity, sure, along with other of lifes questions and faith.

2.  I would not name it as a Christian site. 

3.  I also recognize that it is Jae who gave the feedback. We dont' often see eye to eye on matters of faith or this site or the topics in it.

I think it's excellent!

(I feel like I'm representing the entire Southern Hemisphere  - now if I could just master this keyboard and Windows 8.1).

The UCCanada may or may not have ever said that wondercafe is "Christian." However, the ownership and operation of wondercafe by the UCCanada, Canada's largest protestant Christian denomination, implies that it is so. Since the implication is no longer readily apparent, since WC2 won't be a product of the UCCanada, I feel we should include "Christian" in the statements.

I do think it's important not to get too bogged down in detail conflict.. Some areas of conflict here have gone on forever without a resolution.

"Good enough" works for me - like parenting and most things......

thanks PP

good show you Wholly Trinity (pinga, mendalla, chansen) :3

i'm glad that you managed to imply the fact that this community is a place for conversations and not to get Facts...that's what wikipedia is for...

and i also agree that wc was never a Christian site.  it is made up of people from all different walks of life, sombunall of who self-identify as some kind of christian (whatever that means to the person).  if anything, we're 'really' a sharing in the common human experience site...

Link to wc2:mission:   http://www.wondercafe.ca/discussion/social/wc2-mission-possible

I agree.

Never have we been a solely Christian site. I think this would scare people away.

Good job team!!!!

I'm going to ask...very gingerly, on tippy toes...could we add the words 'respect' or 'respectful discussion' to the sentence about open mindedness and free expression? For me to keep in mind as much as anyone...Also wondering about 'compassionate community' which on the whole WC is and has been. Just a couple of suggestions.

Definately not a "christian site". i like the term "interfaith' that Kimmio brought up. But then- would Atheists feel included in that?

I agree with the fact that it shouldn't be named as a Christian site.

I've heard of other interfaith groups, at universities and so on, where atheists were involved.

I've been away from the Wcafe for awhile and hope my chiming in is okay. I am delighted to see this idea. I think this statement is very clear and would agree that it shouldn't be named as a Christian site.

beloved, i missed your part about "table" to "cafe"  .  That is interesting...we invite everyone to the table which has a certain meaning in christian circles with communion.  I wonder what it means to folks who are from other faiths or communities.  It also has an interpretation of folks sitting down to dinner, pull up a chair and join in the dialogue.  You have my mind pondering that part.

*** waves at motheroffive**

How about inviting everyone to "the cafe table"? 

Hi Mendalla,

I'm not sure what to think.

I doubt that it was ever envisioned that WonderCafe.ca would be exclusively Christian.  You cannot invite folk in for open-minded discussion and limit the perspectives brought to the table at the same time.

I'm also mindful that some who came at the original invitation and some who continue to remain (most espectially those who define themselves as Christian) generally do not hold The United Church of Canada up as being Christian.  At best we are apostate and they are rarely reluctant to point to that apostacy as the reason for our denominations decline.

Add to that the number of complaints over the years about how WonderCafe.ca has targetted "conservative Christians" and has discouraged the "sharing of scripture" and I think that the attempt to narrowly define what WonderCafe2 will be is an attempt to gain an upper hand.

Given that such a narrow definition was not in play when The United Church of Canada launched the site seven years ago I fail to see any legitimate reason to narrowly define the successor site.

Further, if WonderCafe.ca has not been "Christian" enough for any the time to find a forum that is "Chrisitan" enough is now.

On the whole we could always hope for more respectful dialogue all around.  That is more a matter of self-discipline than it is worldview so narrowly defining what WonderCafe2 will be will not help in that regard, in fact, I think would permit members not to exercise any discipline of self.

Grace and peace to you.

John

I understand that "wonder" is the common ground for our conversations. While we each have a distinctive standpoint, I trust not one of us would want any particular standpoint to be granted priority.
.
George
.

Mendalla, chansen, pinga - you have done a wonderful job.  Appreciate your hard work.

I think it is important to encourage other faith traditions to participate in discussion, people who do not follow organized religion, atheists and agnostics, and therefore, would see the "Christian" label as very limiting and excluding.  Surely there is enough of that in our world.   We need other points of view to broaden our understanding and make us more tolerant and compassionate as people.

It would be interesting to have more discussion and respectful dialogue with Muslims, Hindus,  Bahai, topics on Native Spirituality and so on.  Perhaps that is to dream big, and not sure how to encourage those folk other than by word of mouth.

Excellent work!  I'm particularly impressed by the level of communication you three are actively modelling.  Keeping us all informed, requesting and considering suggestions.  Had the UC approached the closing of the WC in the same spirit that you are working to create WC2  there may have been more respect for them. less grief for participants and less work for you. 

I only have a couple of quibbles ,that were, I think, part of the original words from the UC -

Wondercafe wa a daring effort by the United Curch of Canada to reach out to Canadians who may not attend church in new and exciting ways,   

I would like us to reach out to  'others', not just Canadians.  I am puzzled by the last bit as I don't seem to know anyone who  attends church in new and exciting ways! 

Would this maybe work better if we 'reach out to others with whom we share this wonderfilled world?

Gecko, what a great point.  I too would love to see that.  We did include our list as primarily those in the direct sphere around us, rather than a global sphere.

Edit:  by us, i mean the united church of canada / christianity circles....not me personally as I have lots of folks who are Hindu in my circles

Agreed. I think the UCCan backing did lead to a rather strong Christian orientation in the original and being independent of a denomination/tradition is something I hope we can leverage to draw more variety of religious experience.

I actually have a hook into the Bahai community now via my wife and son (a colleague of hers whose son has, quite coincidentally, become a classmate and friend of my son) and from what I know of them, something like WC2 might be right up their alley, much as I feel it is for UUs.

Mendalla

Who are we?

We are the world.

Anything else would be exclusive.

I like beloved's idea and have been pondering it myself. A possible new wording drawing on her thoughts and others:

Through our online community, we welcome anyone to come in, pull a virtual chair up to the cafe table, and join in the conversation.

Or something like that.

Mendalla

Now I have that awful US charity song from the eighties stuck in my head.

And "We are the cosmos" is even less exclusive. What if a Klingon or Twi'lek wants to join?

Mendalla

Hi Kay, that part speaks to the history of how we were formed.  ie, Wondercafe was

It was wondercafe's goals lifted from this site.

What we would like to do is reach out globally 

Why limit it to just the κοσμοσ? What if beings from other dimensions desire to chime in. Let's just say, We are everywhere.

Those extra-dimensional beings are a strange bunch though. Rather like Unitarians that way. 

Mendalla

It seems I'm alone in my desire to have WC2 as a Christian site. I'm disappointed, but not tremendously surprised. I'm not going to argue against the consensus. Don't nobody expect me to be anything other than my own conservative evangelical baptizing self though :)

Well, we are everyone end everything: known, unknown, not yet known, and unknowable.

That should just about cover ALL of IT, eh?

Hi M05

I like it.

Mendella re the addition/modification, it feels a bit clunky.

I am tempted to drop the word "cafe", as the imagery of the virtual chair to the table gives those who either don't do communion or aren't christian a reference.  for those who are communion people..approaching the table has a reference that gets lost a bit with cafe table.

what do others think?

haha, and this is why we did it over a phone... or this thread would be 20 pages long with about 100 different mods in it!

Hi....

Years ago, while exploring the possibilities of our time, and learning how to shape graphic images electronically, I composed the image below. It makes present the diversity of perspective entertained in a circle of conversation located in our indigenous context.

George

Why did you choose to not include a cross?

Hi, again...

Might we use "join us in the circle" or "join us in the conversation" where we have "join us at the table"?

George

Hi Jae,

Thank you for noticing. The cross is where I died to my own bias. I assume that others who are crucified with Christ will also not want to be self-serving. Of course the history of Christianity is rife with the contradiction of this notion.

George

I like the second one, actually. Simpler than mine but keeps the conversation element.

Mendalla

this may be where my united church of canada bias comes in...

i like table over circle....in part because of that connection with communion.

I'm partial to baptismal font.

"Join us in the baptismal font." Can we go with that?