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...