Response 4: "Post-Modern Lyrics" - A Song of Faith 2006

Our Words of Faith:
Cherished, Honoured, & Living
Response Sheet

Name: ______________ Date: __________ (optional)

Session 4: “Post-Modern Lyrics”

“A Song of Faith” 2006

How do you respond to the ‘Preamble’?


How do you respond to Appendix A – “Intended Audience”?


How do you respond to Appendix A – “Status”?



Read through the statement – what shape or sections can you find?



Look closer, at the words and phrases, the diction: what jumps out?






Our Words of Faith:
Cherished, Honoured, & Living
Response Sheet

Name: ______________ Date: __________ (optional)

Session 4: “Post-Modern Lyrics”

“A Song of Faith” 2006

Are these “our” words of faith – in the group, the congregation, the wider church?


What group, or part of the wider church would buy or reject them anytime?


Are they ‘cherished’, ‘honoured’, ‘living’? Which word fits this creed best?


Do these words express and inform, or reflect:
a) Continuity with historic, older ways…?
b) Current practice of the United Church… as it is emerging?
c) Local practice of Thornhill UC…?

What parts, lines, or words were easiest for you to say with us?



What parts, lines, or words were hardest for you to say with us?
Here are notes from participants' responses:
Session 4: “Post-Modern Lyrics”

“A Song of Faith” 2006

How do you respond to the ‘Preamble’?
• A statement for OUR Time? – standing comfortably side by side – good attitude!
• I think this statement is a brave attempt to provide a verbal picture of our faith in the UC. It is long (too long) but if it could be shortened it would be more acceptable and easier to read.
• Agree with the intent reflecting the spirit fo UCC – ‘for our time’ are important words
• Good – especially last paragraph

How do you respond to Appendix A – “Intended Audience”?
• This generation
• This statement will most certainly appeal to new ordinands
• The suggestions to reach out to others to find similarities discuyssion with other faith groups is a good idea – I like the reference to spiritual freedom
• Lengthy – but good

How do you respond to Appendix A – “Status”?
• Not intended to replace ‘historic’ statements made by former generations – sounds OK!
• ‘Comfortably side by side’ is misleading. The 1925 Articles have evolved into the Song of Faith – there is progressive movement forward in time, eg to much more inclusivity
• Like the idea of standing ‘side by side’ – don’t see a need for the 1940 statement of faith except historically

Read through the statement – what shape or sections can you find?
• We still talk a god who is addressed as if ‘he’ is a supernatural being with dimensions. I don’t.
• Purpose and intended audience
• Social justice has increased in emphasis very significantly
• Too many – quite repetitive

Look closer, at the words and phrases, the diction: what jumps out?
• God is the creator
• Acknowledgment of past hurts, failure of church to live up to its vision
• No desire to tell church what to believe ‘seems to believe’ – is that typical of UC thinking?
• Recognition that the practical use of the document will be determined by the use it finds in the life and work of the church.
• Less theo speak and much more secular common, current language, while maintaining a high level of English – inclusive of wide range of belief
• Overall, a positive ‘feel’ – long, but easily read


Are these “our” words of faith – in the group, the congregation, the wider church?
• Yes
• Yes, yes, yes
• I think if I were to read it every day it would become part of me!
• For the most part I tink the group understood this as ‘our’ words of faith. The congregation (TUC) will I think find the statement too long and words flowery
• ?

What group, or part of the wider church would buy or reject them anytime?
• Those who wish more definitive exclusive terms
• Traditionalists perhaps, people who grew up in the church

Are they ‘cherished’, ‘honoured’, ‘living’? Which word fits this creed best?
• Living
• Too early to be cherished and honoured – many are still unaware it exists!
• Living
• Living – more attuned to this day!
• Honoured..

Do these words express and inform, or reflect:
a) Continuity with historic, older ways…?
• Check
• Yes
b) Current practice of the United Church… as it is emerging?
• Yes
• Check
• yes
c) Local practice of Thornhill UC…?
• Open
• Check
• Yes

What parts, lines, or words were easiest for you to say with us?
• A statement for our time
• God is holy mystery beyond complete knowledge above perfect description’
• Paragraph beginning ‘the fullness of life includes…’
• P5 worship – scripture p6 peace, justice, p7, p9
• 95% was easy to say
• ‘God’ of many names, creator, redeemer etc
• We witness to Holy Mystery that is Wholly Love
• Most of pages 3-9



What parts, lines, or words were hardest for you to say with us?
• None, really. However, I like to think of G.O.D., not a god, God with dimensions implied – G.O.D. is beyond dimensions..
• We speak of God as one and triune
• P6 God bears the sin, grief and suffering of the world in Jesus’ resurrection
• The parts that personify God
• Triune, heaven (a place), risen Lord (from dead)
• Triune God… God bears the sin etc – is this the same as Jesus died for our sins?
• God’s Mission’ Isn’t it our mission too?
• Christ’s return? What does that mean?


Notes from final sessions on Song of Faith, Dec 11, 13:
• Need editor – long, repetitive
• Gobble-dy-gook
• Explain us to ourselves, explain us to others, in conversation
• ‘essential agreement’
• Song of Faith easier for ordinands
• Subordination, or side-by-side?
• Covers it all: God Jesus Spirit, sin – inclusive, easier to read – simple, poetic
• New younger generation finding a voice, reclaiming older truths missing in mid-century words – joyful, celebratory, less comfortable for my style, but good for the church
• Beautiful – says a lot of good – but flowery, says a lot at length – how many will read it?
• Sounds progressive – but then orthodox and body flesh incarnation and evil terms
• Admitting church is imperfect, sin is not just personal
• Sin can be passive acquiescence, by government, to earth, wealth, power
• Can be a helpful complement to too-succinct New Creed
• What the tolerant must tolerate – diverse voices
• Primary mission of the church is reconciliation? Proclamation? Commendation? Transformation?
• Really like song of faith progressing beyond old words
• Despite long flowery speech, lots of good stuff in it
• Expected it to be dry – wasn’t – new creed favorite, affection, song of faith spongy and elusive, hard to get into – will new reader give it time?

• Ambitious broad goals – trying to be all things to all people?
• Broad spectrum – broader now – trying to please everyone, ends up pleasing no-one?
• Last page ‘weasel words’, denial of responsibility
• Motherhood, mamby-pamby nothing left out, no-one offended – not a business plan!
• Not for all time, but for our time, spirit vast and wild – opening up
• String of one-liners, hard to find order –
• Need topic, theme – can’t focus in reading it
• 1st 3 lines popular
• Excludes the narrow
Closing Notes (cont’d)
• If the audience is 40 year old lapsed former UC – missed
• Audience is our generation in the church?
• These words sound like clergy, from that subculture, not real people
• Reflects the elite of the mainline UC
• Recognized ideas I hold – so I’m not the only one!
• Upper class talk – not short clear for average retail use
• Run on and babble
• Too long, unwieldy
• Padding – like a student trying to reach a word count and sound smart
• Psalms managed brevity – why can’t our song?
• Mamby pamby broad inclusive – that’s what UCC is…
• Ambivalence: can’t get past size and variety of language, like a group wrote it
• Works for ordinands’ scruples – anybody can fit in
• Attempt to make intelligible failed – poorly executed – but spirit of inclusivity in it
• Convoluted, repetitive, nothing to object to – or believe in – but not divisive
• State your case, live it, get on with it – this is a big creative writing exercise that tries to be everything and ends up nothing

• Not (yet) our words of faith – not well known enough
• Can’t think of any group in the UC that would reject it, so all encompassing that it should offend no one.
• Can’t say it is cherished, honoured or living – but it might someday be considered honoured, don’t see this as ever becoming a living document – way too long and wordy, I only see this ever being reference material which dooms it to sitting on a shelf
• Easiest parts – much is truly eloquent and beautiful, but way too long, some portions seem redundant, then towards the end it comes across as though the committee was working through a checklist and at the last minute needed to address a few elements to cover all the bases. A pity because I really like much of it, however I find it uneven overall. Nevertheless, I can appreciate the opinion that it should be adopted because I saw that it did speak to many in the discussion group, and would be valuable (necessary?) for new ordinands, so that we don’t have just the basis of union.
• Hardest parts – One quibble – still talks about God incarnate

Read more...

Response 3: "Modern Poetry" - A New Creed 1968-80-94

Here are responses from participants:
Session 3: “Modern Poetry”

“A New Creed” 1968/80/94

How did it open, and how does it now – and how is that unlike earlier words?
• Aapostles Creed opens with ‘I believe in God”, The Niecne “We believe in one God” – the newest creed says “We are not alone We live in God’s world.” It moves from the I believe with the importance of context of God’s world, God centre
• Man to we
• We are not alone, man is not alone
• Short, succinct, clear – prosaic poetry, creates images, metre poor
• Narcissists’ creed?

What had changed in the national and global context from 1940 to 1968/80/94?
• WWII and women in workplace
• Youth of 60’s, hippies, the Me generation in the West
• Greater disparity between rich and poor
• WWII, Nuclear technology, terrorism
• WW2, rise of Islam

What had changed in the United Church of Canada from 1940 to 1968/80/94?
• More relaxed, more variety in curriculum, involvement with youth and women
• Jesus talk, not old creeds
• UCW formed – membership drop, red hymn books, negotiations with Anglican church, catechism published, residential schools closing, new curriculum, more lay people involved in ministry, all persons acceptable, church much more open, doubt accepted
• Environmentalism
• When I first joined the UC it was so dull and staid – no liturgy – no stoles – robes. After the C of E high church it was stunning! I like the way our liturgy changes, especially in the communion service, over time.

Read through the creed – what shape or sections can you find?
• The first section deals with the Trinity – God, Jesus and spirit. God and us are evolving as God continues to create. The second half deals with the church and our call to be the church
• 1 God, 2 Jesus, 3 People, 4 Assurance
• 7 points: (see appended note)

Look closer, at the words and phrases, the diction: what jumps out?
• Man is not…
• Simple inclusive language
• Short and sweet (compared to the lengthy Song of Faith)

Are these “our” words of faith – in the group, the congregation, the wider church?
• Yes, yes, yes
• 80% yes


What group, or part of the wider church would buy or reject them anytime?
• Reject: Trinitarians, bible worshipers, those emphasizing some aspect eg baptism or bodily resurrection
• Certainly these words would appeal to those who like the simple language and I thing to young people –
• Traditionalists might find the richness gone and so less appealing

Are they ‘cherished’, ‘honoured’, ‘living’? Which word fits this creed best?
• Cherished and living
• Living
• Living
• living

Do these words express and inform, or reflect:
a) Continuity with historic, older ways…?
• Yes
• Yes – trinity basis of Christianity, work of church
b) Current practice of the United Church… as it is emerging?
• Yes
• Check
• I hope so
c) Local practice of Thornhill UC…?
• Yes
• Check
• I hope so

What parts, lines, or words were easiest for you to say with us?
• Opening and closing 2 lines
• God is with us – and is creating – to love and serve others – seek justice and resist evil
• Virtually all easy to say
• Who works in us and others by the spirit
• To live with respect in creation
• To love and serve others
• To seek justice and resist evil
• The whole was easy for me to say (except perhaps for the ‘risen’)
• I like the “in life beyond death, God is with us”, we are not alone – God is with us





What parts, lines, or words were hardest for you to say with us?
• Crucified “and risen”
• ‘God’s world’ seems too restrictive – surely it’s ours as well – in the universe – ‘who has come in Jesus – to all humanity…
• ‘judge’ – what does this mean- is this the ‘wrath’ of a loving God/Jesus?

Subsequent Notes:

7 points of A New Creed:

1. G.O.D. is!
2. We know G.O.D. is physically, mentally and spiritually present. G.O.D. is processing and evolving
3. Jesus exemplified the word made flesh, to reconcile and make new,
4. And works in us and others by the Spirit. We know G.O.D. is in community, and we are called to be the community.
5. G.O.D. is present in all Creation
6. G.O.D. is love! Therefore we choose to love and serve others, to seek justice and resist evil,
7. And like Jesus, all willing to be crucified and risen. In life, in death, in life beyond death, G.O.D. is! Thanks!

I did not speak quite correctly about the opening phrase in the 1968 creed.

Yes, there is the possibility of other beings (angels and demons, not just physical “extraterrestrial”; in more modern times, chimpanzees, dolphins, and other highly intelligent animals may also qualify).

But what may have been more on the mind of the writers is the change in science that has just reached common knowledge.

The scientific understanding at the start of the 20th century was that the universe consisted only of our Milky Way galaxy. Those objects that have been observed that we now understand are other galaxies were thought to be small nebulae within our galaxy. Edwin Hubble made observations which he interpreted as proving that the universe is much much larger with all these other galaxies located very far outside of our Milky Way. This work was done in the 1930’s, and was still being debated in the scientific community by the 1940’s. So the 1940 statement of faith probably did not have to deal with this expanding universe question for the average church-goer. However, by the mid 1960’s with space exploration in full swing and the average person learning about the new size of the universe, it may have become a crisis for many people that we now are only an insignificant member of a species (1 in many billions) on a very small planet around an average star in an average galaxy in a near-infinite universe which may have have many many other sentient species (SETI).

What is man? David seems to have anticipated the question much earlier than our generation. We have come face to face with a first realization of what “infinity” means in a somewhat tangible way. As a result, we have become very uncomfortable and feel insignificant, with life/existence having little meaning.

So the statement “we are not alone” may have been an affirmation that in an infinite universe, God has chosen to be our companion.

We have come to realize that our significance is not based on the physical size or location of our existence, but that it is based on God’s valuation of our existence.

Against this tide of hopelessness, Christians are re-discovering God as the center of our existence and our raison d’être: to celebrate God’s presence... to server others... to seek justice... to proclaim Jesus ... our HOPE.

The ancients (David) were very wise, in hindsight, we just need to grow up a little to understand them.

The repeated “we are not alone” at the conclusion is almost a desperate appeal against hopelessness.

Maybe that was one of the reasons for the 1968 Apollo 8 astronauts to read Genesis during their Christmas telecast from Moon orbit.

It’s only in retrospect that the emphasis has changed to sexism (being the current hot-topic). Or people are just simply ignoring the difficulty with the infinite and switched to the other 1960’s woman’s equality issue, being much more easy on the mind.

So the 1968-1994 “A New Creed” is a masterpiece of understatement with very deep meaning behind almost every single word. Yet it is simple enough that a child can understand and accept as a statement of faith. A theological counterpart to “E=mc2”.

• “Our” words – I think so – in the group, congregation and wider church. Some might reject portions but I think most would buy into them.
• Yes – I think the creed is cherished, honoured, living – but that could just be me, because I have said it so often and identify most closely with this creed, and now also have a somewhat sentimental attachment to it. I feel this creed most closely expresses who we are, more so than the song of faith ever will be, because the latter is too long. This creed is succinct enough to be the UC “elevator pitch” for those who don’t know who we are or what we believe.
• Reflects current practice and local practice – yes
• Parts easiest to say – all of it
• Parts hard to say – nothing, in my mind I can get around the “come in Jesus, the Word made flesh”. I don’t interpret this necessarily as God incarnate, but maybe I am kidding myself!



Read more...

Response 2: Mid-Century Meanings 1940

Our Words of Faith:
Cherished, Honoured, & Living
Response Sheet

Name: ______________ Date: __________ (optional)

Session 2: “Mid-Century Meanings”

1940 Statement of Faith

Read the Preamble (page 1) – for hints of why we updated the Basis of Union


What had changed in the national and global context from 1905 to 1940?


What had changed in the United Church of Canada from 1905 to 1940?



Read the 12 headings – compared to the 20 of 1925 – what’s changed?



Look closer, at the words and phrases, the diction: what’s changed?



Are these “our” words of faith – in the group, the congregation, the wider church?


What group, or part of the wider church would buy or reject them in 1940 or now?


Are they ‘cherished’, ‘honoured’, ‘living’? Which word fits this statement best?


Do they express and inform, or reflect:
a) Continuity with historic, older ways…?
b) Current practice of the United Church… as it is emerging?
c) Local practice of Thornhill UC…?

What parts, lines, or words were easiest for you to say with us?



What parts, lines, or words were hardest for you to say with us?
Here are notes from participants' responses:
Session 2: “Mid-Century Meanings”

1940 Statement of Faith

Read the Preamble (page 1) – for hints of why we updated the Basis of Union

What had changed in the national and global context from 1905 to 1940?
• Depression – war – men and women donned uniforms, women ‘went out to work’ – life changed – rationing – blackouts – bombing, etc
• Depression, world wars
• WWI, depression, WWII (one year) – prohibition, internal migrations, media (radio, movies), Christian vs Christian in WWI so whose side is God on?
• Much had changed but not much had changed in stated theology
• Stock market crash
• Music – jazz – Glenn Miller, big band, swing – emotion, longing, yearning
• Silent movies to talkies – newsreels, Walt Disney
• Urbanization
• Suffrage for women – persons case

What had changed in the United Church of Canada from 1905 to 1940?
• Much had changed but not much had changed in stated theology – social gospel more important than expressed in this document.
• Statement of faith does not seem to be so dogmatic and rigid, but allows some questioning –
• migration of people within Canada to cities and moving across Canada
• Social activism was added
• 1904 work began on Basis of Union, 1925 first General Council, 1925-29 colleges, offices of Methodist, Presbyterian, congregational churches merged – 1962 UCW formed
• Memory work children’s programmes, mission bands, young peoples union
• Pentecostal, Fundamentalism, Social Gospel, evolution/creationism choices developed
• New hymnals
• Families divided, communities in conflict about union and continuing Presbyterians

Read the 12 headings – compared to the 20 of 1925 – what’s changed?
• Exclusive language – to the inclusive in the 70’s – Apostles and Nicene Creeds not used
• Inclusive language?
• More king and father and military words than earlier documents had
• 8 of the 20 are dropped: revelation, divine purpose, creation, sin of man, grace of god and others gone – were they no longer acceptable?
• Not much had changed in stated theology
• No longer ‘descended into hell


Look closer, at the words and phrases, the diction: what’s changed?
• Both - written for clergy, not laypersons
• This document is of historic value only
• Ideas are separated for clarity –
• Words simpler
• Less repetition
• From legalese of a merger to college talk of academics
• 1925 words flowery – too wordy
• 1940 words simpler
• But after reading all these words my mind boggles!
• The 1940 statement leaves much to be changed and modernized!
• Human ‘above’ vs nature and creation
• Continuing revelation
• Assumes old science foundations and language
• Easier to identify wrong jarring bits than general OK parts
• Nothing I reject – might add
• Masterful condensation of earlier
• Lowest common denominator

Are these “our” words of faith – in the group, the congregation, the wider church?
• NO
• NO – underlined twice
• These words have greater appeal to me than the older words and I believe within the group. I am uncertain about a wider group.


What group, or part of the wider church would buy or reject them in 1940 or now?
• Most, I hope
• Expect that most would REJECT – underlined 3 times
• I think that the traditionalists might not like change but those who are searching for understanding and clarity would
• Episcopalians – reject – what is apostolic

Are they ‘cherished’, ‘honoured’, ‘living’? Which word fits this statement best?
• Perhaps ‘honoured’ in the archives!
• These would be honoured as they form history but have been updated and so may not have wide appeal
• Honoured
• Honoured, perhaps





Do they express and inform, or reflect:
a) Continuity with historic, older ways…?
• Check
• Yes
• Moving and changing
b) Current practice of the United Church… as it is emerging?
• No
• Not quite there
• NO – underlined twice
• x
c) Local practice of Thornhill UC…?
• X
• NO – underlined twice
• Uncertain
• No

What parts, lines, or words were easiest for you to say with us?
• Like the Preamble calling for Christians of each new generation to state it afresh
• ‘freedom of choice’ in man and man’s sin
• III Holy Spirit with exception that the Kingdom is here and now, not something in the future
• Preamble – but Christians of each new generation are called to state afresh, etc – no statement of ours can express the whole truth of God
• Holy spirit – 1st 2 lines, we believe in the holy spirit by whom God is at work in the minds and hearts of people
• The church – we believe all members of the church are one in him etc
• The ministry – Okay
• Holy Scriptures 1st sentence
• Most of sacraments…

What parts, lines, or words were hardest for you to say with us?
• God – overrules all things – god made man
• Jesus Christ – do not believe in ‘atonement’
• IV holy trinity
• V man and man’s sin
• VI redemption
• X sacraments – baptism – God’s cleansing from sin’
• XII the consummation – too judgmental
• Too much emphasis on sin and redemption
• Male gender throughout somewhat marginalizes women
• Wrath of God may result from freedom of choice
• Jesus, our Judge?


Subsequent notes

The 8 points of the Canadian Centre for Progressive Christianity

By calling ourselves progressive, we mean that we:
1. centre our faith on values that affirm the sacredness and interconnectedness of all life, the inherent and equal worth of all persons, and the supremacy of love expressed actively in our lives as compassion and social justice;
2. engage in a search that has roots in our Christian heritage and traditions;
3. embrace the freedom and responsibility to examine traditionally held Christian beliefs and practices, acknowledging the human construction of religion, and in the light of conscience and contemporary learning, adjust our views and practices accordingly;
4. draw from diverse sources of wisdom, regarding all as fallible human expressions open to our evaluation of their potential contribution to our individual and communal lives;
5. find more meaning in the search for understanding than in the arrival at certainty; in the questions than the answers;
6. encourage inclusive, non-discriminatory, non-hierarchical community where our common humanity is honoured in a trusting atmosphere of mutual respect and support;
7. promote forms of individual and community celebration, study, and prayer that use understandable, inclusive, non-dogmatic, value-based language by which people of religious, skeptical, or secular backgrounds may be nurtured and challenged;
8. commit to journeying together, our ongoing growth characterized by honesty, integrity, openness, respect, intellectual rigour, courage, creativity, and balance.
• I think the statement is cherished and honoured, but not so much living
• Statement expresses continuity with historic ways – yes; current practice - possibly in wider UC; local practice – not explicitly
• Parts easiest to say – I found overall I could say most of it comfortably, partly because it avoids whole sections of the Basis of Union, eg. virgin birth
• Parts hardest to say:
I. God orders and overrules all things to the accomplishment of his purposes – predestination? Free will?
II. Jesus, Son of God incarnate – still haven’t made up my mind on this
IV. Not sure about the whole Trinity thing
VI. Not sure how Jesus’ death on the cross break the power of sin?
IX. Makes it sound like Judaism and the Old Testament are partial / incomplete / insufficient if “fullness of truth and grace came by Jesus Christ”.


Read more...

Responses to 'Older Words', Ancient Creeds, Basis of Union

Our Words of Faith:
Cherished, Honoured, Living
Response Sheet

Name: ______________ Date: __________ (optional)

Session 1: “Older Words of Faith”

Basis of Union – Articles of Faith

Read the headlines aloud – ask who recognizes them, from when & where.

Are these “our” words of faith – in the group, the congregation, the wider church?

What group, or part of the wider church would buy or reject them in 1925 or now?

Are they ‘cherished’, ‘honoured’, ‘living’? Which word fits this statement best?

Do they express and inform, or reflect:
a) Continuity with historic, older ways…?
b) Current practice of the United Church… as it is emerging?
c) Local practice of Thornhill UC…?

What parts, lines, or words were easiest for you to say with us?


What parts, lines, or words were hardest for you to say with us?




Our Words of Faith:
Cherished, Honoured, & Living
Response Sheet

Name: ______________ Date: __________ (optional)

Session 1: “Older Words of Faith”

“Ancient Creeds” - Apostles & Nicene Creeds

Read them aloud – and ask who recognizes them, from when and where.

Are these “our” words of faith – in the group, the congregation, the wider church?

If not, whose words are they – what group, or part of the wider church?

Are they ‘cherished’, ‘honoured’, ‘living’? Which word fits this statement best?

Do they express and inform, or reflect:
a) Continuity with historic, older ways…?
b) Current practice of the United Church… as it is emerging?
c) Local practice of Thornhill UC…?

What parts, lines, or words were easiest for you to say with us?


What parts, lines, or words were hardest for you to say with us?


Here are some notes from participants in our sessions:
Session 1: “Older Words of Faith”

“Ancient Creeds” - Apostles & Nicene Creeds

Read them aloud – and ask who recognizes them, from when and where.
• I remember them when I was a teenager preparing to join the church in Hartland NB
• Used to know them both by heart!
• From Church of England childhood, sung Eucharist

Are these “our” words of faith – in the group, the congregation, the wider church?
• NO – underlined 4 times
• NO
• No
• NO
• I find the creeds more dated/distant than articles of faith
• No – not current – gender based – reference to “Virgin” Mary
• Maybe for ‘wider church’
•
If not, whose words are they – what group, or part of the wider church?
• ‘elderly’? (crossed out) – not known
• Somewhere in the wider church?
• Maybe for wider church
• Some of our congregation and wider church might accept the language – it is not what works for me.
• Wider church, perhaps
• Wider Christian church probably more confortable than many in the UC
•
Are they ‘cherished’, ‘honoured’, ‘living’? Which word fits this statement best?
• Honoured – underlined 3 times – noted ‘archaic’
• Honoured, maybe
• Honoured understood as archaic
• archaic
• As discussed, these creeds may be honoured as out historic words but they are no longer relevant.
• Cherished? Yes, emotional ties to youth and family origins
• Honoured? Yes
• Living – no
• Honoured
• Honoured
•


Do they express and inform, or reflect:
• Continuity with historic, older ways…?
• YES
• Check
• Check
• check
• Yes
• Yes
• Yes – this is our heritage
• Yes
Current practice of the United Church… as it is emerging?
• NO
• X
• x
• No
• No
Local practice of Thornhill UC…
• NO
• X
• x
• No
• No, although these words might suit some

What parts, lines, or words were easiest for you to say with us?
• ALMOST NOTHING
• None
• We believe that God has revealed himself in nature and history, and in the heart of man. Holly Spirit dwells in every believer as the spirit of truth, power, holiness and love.
• First two lines
• I believe in God
• Both get tricky immediately after the first paragraph!
• Communion of saints

What parts, lines, or words were hardest for you to say with us?
• ALMOST ALL
• Trinity
• Holy Scriptures – some not very ‘holy’ – not only infallible rule of faith and life
• Sovereign design – predestination
• Article 5 – sin of man
• Article 7 – conceived of Holy Spirit – suffered for sins of the world, intercedes for us
• Rose from dead ascended into heaven
• Article IX
What parts, lines, or words were hardest for you to say with us? (cont’d)
• He descended into hell
• Most of it
• Very patriarchal, exclusive, supernatural, unbelievable, judgmental, fearful
• Creed and Lord’s Prayer are too anthropomorphic
• Too much father language
• Virgin birth
• Descended into hell
• Resurrection of the body??
• He was crucified for our sake? Uncomfortable with the whole sacrifice/propitiation thing to appease a judging God
• Descended into hell
• Rose again from the dead
• Not really sure about “Holy Ghost”
• Resurrection of the body
• Born of the Virgin Mary
• Conceived by the Holy Ghost
• Born of the Virgin Mary
• He descended into hell
•

Basis of Union – Articles of Faith

Read the headlines aloud – ask who recognizes them, from when & where.
• Never heard them before

Are these “our” words of faith – in the group, the congregation, the wider church?
• I do not think so – they are certainly not mine
• Hard to say they are “ours” if so few people are familiar with them

What group, or part of the wider church would buy or reject them in 1925 or now?
• Actually, I found I was okay with most of it

Are they ‘cherished’, ‘honoured’, ‘living’? Which word fits this statement best?
• Cherished – check
• Honoured – check
• Living – not really
• Honoured in that they reflect heritage





Do they express and inform, or reflect:
a) Continuity with historic, older ways…?
• Yes
• Check
•
b) Current practice of the United Church… as it is emerging?
• I suspect many people would stumble over the same parts as I did, but much of it still resounds
• No
•
c) Local practice of Thornhill UC…?
• Not sure
•

What parts, lines, or words were easiest for you to say with us?
• Of God to the end of “truth”. I am not sure about any of the balance…

What parts, lines, or words were hardest for you to say with us?
• This is very dogmatic and unworkable for me.
• Article 19 – I do not believe in a Hell nor in any physical resurrection
• II – scripture inspiration, infallible
• VII Jesus the only mediator between God and man / satisfied Divine justice
• XI ? sonship ?
• XIX – NO!
• XX – make disciples of all nations – teach okay – but convert??
• I am unable to say, in good conscience, any of the older creeds – makes me feel hypocritical, because I cannot believe in the God described therein. I believe that there are too many words whereas my faith and belief is very simple – to love and care for others.

Notes from Discussions:

 These older words of faith are not ‘our’ words of faith!

 We’ve got some nostalgia, and respect for antiquities

 If the church rejects all of the three newer statements, we’re left with these older words alone, which bother us more than the newer words…

 We are not a dogmatic bunch – would never kick anybody out, though they might exclude themselves from our ‘impure’ or ‘sloppy’ church

 Notes from Discussions:
Notes from Discussions: (cont’d)
 We get on with helping, doing, and don’t have much patience for expressly articulating why we do and help..

 Can you be ‘bilingual’ – able to think and speak in these old terms, and not need to translate every word into current diction without dissonance?

 Integrity and hypocrisy – we want to rationalize and come to peace with – or reject – these older words – but it would take so much time…

Additional Notes forwarded

Would like to see all these documents be honoured as historic documents and replaced with one only…

What words of faith do I accept for my faith?
How would I describe my faith? What do I believe?

“This I Believe”

I know and belive that you are here, God,
Beside me as I write
I know that you guide and direct me
to use my mind and my sight for the good of others.
I know and feel your presence, not only when I search for help
I know and believe that you send others
to comfort me in my sadness,
to help me grow in kindness,
to urge me to laugh in gladness,
to raise me up in spirit,
so that I, in turn, do for others
what you have done for me.
You are with me all the while.
You protect me from the world’s dangers.
Forever, you show your love, mercy and forgiveness
in the reflection of others.
Thank you.
Read more...

Introducing Background for 'Our Words of Faith'

Our Words of Faith:
Cherished, Honoured, and Living ?


(i) Introduction


Our national United Church is asking local churches what we believe.
Our council will speak for us, whether to claim any or all of 3 statements of faith as ‘subordinate standards of faith’ in our denomination:


Statement of Faith (1940)
A New Creed (1968/80/94)
A Song of Faith (2006)




A. Older Words of Faith
Sun Nov 20 noon, repeated Tues Nov 22 7:30pm
We’ll start with the older words: Bible, creeds, Basis of Union, Articles of Faith


B. Mid-Century Meanings
Sun Nov 27 noon, repeated Tues Nov 29 7:30pm
We’ll visit some 1940 words, written amid World Wars and Depression: 'Statement of Faith'


C. Modern Poetry
Sun Dec 4 noon, repeated Tues Dec 6 7:30pm
We’ll echo a ‘New Creed’, from ‘hip’ 1968, revised ‘80 and ‘94


D. Post-Modern Lyrics
Sun Dec 11 noon, repeated Tues Dec 13 7:30pm
We’ll sample a ‘Song of Faith’ to see if we can sing along to it


Find this background package posted here at www.hereticslikeus.com in the first week of November, or pick up a paper copy at the church library desk. Come to any one or all 4 sessions (each one repeated Sunday after church and Tuesday eve).  If you miss the sessions, we'll leave this posted online, and welcome your responses!


Bill Bruce takes the risk of going first, online and at church – then you respond:
Which, if any, of these words are ‘cherished, honoured, and living’ for you?


If you just happened on this - you can find us at:
Thornhill United Church
25 Elgin St (at Dudley)
Thornhill ON L3T 1W5
905 889-2131
http://www.thornhillunitedchurch.ca/

Click on 'read more' below, to see a summary of the questions we are being asked, to inform your browsing and participation in this study a bit more. 

(i) Our Words of Faith – Framing the Questions

Our national church is asking local congregations what we believe.

Since 1925, our United Church ‘Basis of Union’ already says that scripture is our main standard, and ‘Articles of Faith’ clarify our interpretation of scripture. Do we believe even that stuff, here and now, us, at Thornhill UC? Are these historic statements “Our Words of Faith”?

Each of 3 statements of faith may be recognized in 2012 as a ‘subordinate standard of faith’ and included in our Basis of Union through this year’s process: 1940 Statement of Faith, A New Creed (1968/80/94), and A Song of Faith (2006). Are these, any more than the others, “Our Words of Faith”?

Do each, or any of these ‘words of faith’ reflect

a) continuity with historic, older expressions you knew?

b) the practice of the United Church as you experience it now (emerging)?

c) the faith of our worshipping community at Thornhill UC?

Here is some background reading, in an accessible format, based on a study guide also available at www.united-church.ca by the same name. On the next two pages are some orienting comments and questions for the 4 sessions. Appended are the texts of 3 historic statements, and the 3 new ones that we’re asked to weigh as possible additional and 'subordinate standards of faith'.  Are they 'Our Words of Faith'?  Are they 'Cherished, Honoured, and Living'?

How would you vote, if you were a council member? Join the conversation, here onsite on 4 Sundays, repeated 4 Tuesdays, or online at www.hereticslikeus.com.

Background reading is posted here, and copied at the church in November. Each week before the session, I’ll post some notes about additional preparation for the Sunday or Tuesday sessions. Each week after the sessions, I’ll post some notes about our discussions during the Sunday and Tuesday sessions.

Questions? Answers?Contact Bill Bruce:
bill@thornhillunitedchurch.ca
905-889-2131
416-275-3547 Read more...