On Tuesday evening Oshawa Presbytery met at St. Paul's and we debated an interesting "proposition" (no longer called a motion for some reason) about censoring clergy who are no longer in essential agreement with the Basis of Union of the United Church. It came from a minister whose pastoral charge was once in Scarborough Presbytery and adjacent to that served by the Rev. Gretta Vosper. Rev. Vosper has received a lot of attention because of her book With or Without God and her leadership in a congregation where God or gods are often not mentioned and scripture omitted entirely from worship. She is certainly not a Christian in any orthodox sense and unapologetic about her stance.
The thrust of the proposition was that clergy who are no longer in "essential agreement" (an official term) should be disciplined or removed from service, that the property should come under the control of presbytery, and the individual memberships of the congregations they represent should be called into question.
As a court we chose not to transmit this proposition to Conference but it was the source of lively conversation in the clergy lectionary group I attend and at the presbytery meeting. It was simply too broad for comfort and there are legal ramifications of which we might not be aware. But the stance of Vosper and others like her does not sit well with the majority of United Church clergy I know, nor with me. I have been mulling this over for the past couple of days.
We like to speak of the "big tent" of the United Church, with room for a wide range of theological outlooks. I offered to my colleagues that tents have entrances and exits and they have rooves and walls. To speak of a tent that has no parameters is to concede that we are just sleeping under the open sky.
While we are constantly refining our understanding of an infinite God, and seeking the Christ for our age, we are people of a living God and a living Christ. I think it's time for our General Council to re-read the Manual of the United Church and have the courage to act. It's probably time for the denomination to wish Godspeed (or ___speed) to some of these folk and even let them take the buildings with them. We are Christ's church, with or without Gretta Vosper.
8 comments:
Your use of the words "sleeping under an open sky" sum up what to me would be a perfect wording of the understanding of our life here. To be open with no fences or borders. I have heard Rev. Gretta Vosper speak, it was a very moving and meaningful service. I say "here's to a religion under the open skies"
With respect, I doubt you will choose to sleep under an open sky tonight. As a long time back-country camper, I appreciated my tent when the rain came and the mosquitoes buzzed. I love the night sky but shelter makes sense at times.
I would imagine that in your household there are basic rules which you all live by, even though you have differences of outlook and opinion. You probably also choose who can be a long-term resident.
I figure Ms. Vosper and others who share her ideas have chosen to leave Christianity and I have no animosity about that choice. But the United Church is still Christ's church and she should have the courage of her convictions. If I chose to convert to Buddhism (a religion for which I have considerable respect) I would assume that I would leave the ministry of the United Church.
I have questioned whether I have the right to call myself a Christian. My faith has taken me through a long winding road, and many stages and phases, and I feel thankful no one has come behind me with a big boot and kicked me out the door while I go through it all. If I had been asked to leave, I would have been left with only my unbelief. So much of the journey seems to be in the balancing of both brains. Having the option to participate over the years, despite my unbelief, allowed me the opportunity to at least keep searching for the threads that would lead me further. I still wish that I could magically believe, for instance, that Jesus literally rose from the dead. I can’t yet say with honesty that I believe, yet I also can’t say that I don’t. Wishing to believe may be as far as I ever get. I can see why this “new” type of religion might appeal, and even have its benefits, but I believe also that if my own personal goal wasn’t to explore and grow into a stronger understanding of Christianity, than I should feel compelled to explore non-Christian roads. I think when a church gets to the point where unbelief isn’t balanced with belief, then the possibility for its members to grow in faith diminishes entirely. There is no more struggle, and it seems to me that no matter how far I grow, struggle arises again and again and this pushes me further. I have a much deeper faith with struggle, than I do without it. I can say that I have never felt, while attending Church, even during my phase of complete unbelief, that I ever felt offended by a lack of support for my unbelief. It isn’t even a sensitive issue. I kept going to church, because I wanted to understand what makes intelligent people believe. I could not have found what I needed in a church that no longer searches for that answer.
I feel like I need to respond to your reply. In the United Church I have always felt everyone is welcome regardless of beliefs or lack of beliefs, maybe I was wrong.
The United Church has always understood that doubt is not the opposite of belief. In fact we encourage people to ask questions and journey through uncertainty. I can't think of any occasion when a layperson has een "excommunicated" for his or her views. I have had countless conversations with people of all ages working through their faith and never suggested that someone was in error for thinking.
Still there has never been any question about whether we are a theistic denomination or that our faith in God is expressed through a relationship with a living Christ. Every person who is baptized in the United Church is baptized into Christ and every person who joins the church expressed a faith in Christ.
Those who are called into leadership go through a process of discernment which invites them to explore, then declare that faith. Through the years some who felt called to ministry realized that they were not in "essential agreement" with the tenets of the faith, so chose not to be ordained or commissioned. Others have felt that they must withdraw from a leadership role as a result of their crises of faith or changing views.
The UC does hold its leadership to a high standard in that regard and in my view should. I have gone through my own periods of doubt and uncertainty but I remain a Christian in a Christian church. As I offered earlier, if I chose another religion or no faith, I should leave.
Jesus, son of God, was one of the few things in the United Church I felt I could say for absolute certain was the belief of my church, and the rest of my statement is much more wobbly. I had wondered when this United Church would be called into question. I can't imagine how I would feel if I arrived at church one day to be told we weren't so sure about God anymore. My leap of faith, and the work I have put into it, and the reward that has come from it would feel ridiculed and unfounded. And it isn't that I don't have doubts, like most Christians I believe from time to time, might experience. In fact, often strength comes from those very doubts. And I agree that we don't judge those people who choose to profess another faith (I am not sure what qualifies a faith) or social conscience, I just can't feel right that someone walking through the doors of that church is led to believe that the United Church central theme is no longer Christ. We have been labelled wishy washy before, but for reasons that caused us to look deeply at our understanding of Jesus and how he might respond to a much different world than he knew.That to me is a living faith. I attended a funeral today where a gifted,minister of confident faith (of the Presbyterian denomination, from Scarborough, no less) guided a family to the comfort and hope that their loved one was in the Lord's arms. I like to think there will be Someone waiting for me, when my time comes, and I don't like the thought that one minister can rewrite a whole congregations history to their own tune, but then still lean on the United Church foundation. My belief is they should put their new found faith to the test on its own merits and break away. We are a church of generous interpretation, offering the opportuity to grow and learn together,at our own pace which is the work of our faith but I do think when our central tenet is denounced, that work does need to be done elsewhere.
This has been quite a hot topic in the church lately, and Greta Vosper's name has become famous in our church because of it.
During my final year of school, the year I was to be commissioned into the United Church, I read through the Articles of Faith in which we were to be in "essential agreement." I struggled. What does "essential mean?" How much of this document written in 1925 did I need to agree with? I journalled, I talked with peers, I talked with my instructors, and I even tried writing the articles into modern language. Could I be commissioned into the United Church and keep my integrity if I couldn't be in essential agreement with these 20 Articles of Faith.
I do believe I am called to ministry in the United Church of Canada. This is where I belong. The new statement of faith, called "A Song of Faith," is a statement with which I could come to essential agreement. I am still exploring and I believe some of my own beliefs would be considered unChristian, but I was baptized into this catholic church, and I feel this is where I belong and this is where my faith exploration will happen.
I don't feel the United Church should be given the authority to show someone the door. I believe this would be a mistake. If Greta Vosper decides that she does not believe in God or in Christ, she needs to come to her own decision as to whether to leave the church, hopefully with the love and support of others. In the meantime, she is obviously filling a need. She has many followers, many people who are struggling with their faith and need other options. Maybe we will soon see a new kind of faith emerge.
To see the Articles of Faith, go to: http://www.united-church.ca/history/overview/basisofunion
For the Song of Faith, go to:
http://www.united-church.ca/beliefs/statements/songfaith
Actually Deb, the Manual specifies that both clergy and members can be disciplined and removed from congregational life for disruptive,
or unethical behaviour. Unfortunately it has been necessary with clergy in the past.
I have no problem with people starting new religions, but not under the umbrella of a faith which still adheres to scriptures where Jesus invites disciples to take up the cross and follow him.
Post a Comment