|
Project 2000, off and running!This past summer I approached Richard Fairchild
with an idea that had been percolating in the back of my mind for some
time. I asked Richard if there was anything he could do to help me
promote the idea behind "Project 2000" which was to initiate a
grassroots debate about the 20 Articles of Faith of the UC of C. I am not too sure about the chronology here, but in short order a three-way conversation was going on between Richard, sysop of United-Online in BC, David Keating, sysop of Osiem in Central Ontario, and myself in Thunder Bay, Ont. Thanks to the technical expertise of Richard, David and my friend JP Fraser (sysop of Superiornet) a three-way connection was established for me to do my thing. David even went so far as to appoint me host of the site he had created to accommodate this effort. Not having any expertise with this sort of thing, I thought I could just tell people about it once, sit back and watch the debate unfold. I soon found out that it doesn't work that way. In circumstances such as these, one has to start the ball rolling and keep it moving. Having had that concept driven home to me, I have set out to act as I think one should act in the position of host. To me that meant that I had to initiate the debate. Well, so be it, and here goes. Apart from that, here is hoping that all United Church members (lay as well as clergy) will get involved in this debate. Here are some general questions I think are
relevant: These, and other questions can and should be asked. These, and other questions ought to be wrestled with if for no other reason than that we have to safeguard the mental well-being of our offspring. Before we go on, a short word about "structures". We (the members and adherents of the UC of C) have grown up with, and are therefore more or less comfortable with, a hierarchical system, a system in which orders are issued from on high and the lower ranks simply obey and execute. We can turn this in an argument of the pros and cons of such a system, but that is not the purpose of this exercise. What sort of image is associated with such a system? A pyramid. Instead of staying with the hierarchical system, why don't we consider a different "power" structure? The image associated with it is the one of an artesian well. In such a system decisions and strategies are arrived at by consensus. There is no "boss" who orders anybody around. The community gathers and talks about its problems till a concensus is reached on how to proceed. The hope is that both the clergy and the lay people of our church can interact in this fashion and design articles of faith that accurately reflect the current mindset. A word about "Permission to proceed". In the debate that ensued after the Phipps interview, one could hear the shock at the audacity of those who supported (and still support) the moderator, and strong is the current of sentiment that resists changing the 20 Articles of Faith. It needs to be pointed out that what is proposed here is nothing new for the United church of Canada. One only has to contemplate the fact that the UC of C recently came out with its own New Creed. This New Creed is not at all like the Apostles and/or Athanasian creeds. Yet, it has displaced them for all practical purposes. Think of the new hymn books that we have switched to in the last 20 years. They speak a different language, and express old ideas in different ways. But even though they have displaced the old hymn books, they sing the same story of God and its Love for its Creation. May we change? You bet, we are allowed. One only has to read Matthew, chap 5 to hear Jesus address a whole set of rules and regulations, only to turn them upside down by expanding on them. May we change? You bet, we may. One only has to think about the great commandment that we are to love the lord our God and the injunction that we are to do so with all our hearts and souls AND minds. May we change? Yes, we may. From where I sit, the "power" of the Christian religion is that it can lead to personal and societal freedom. On a personal level, the Christian religion has given me the opportunity to wrestle with my understanding of God, Life and Good and Evil. Christianity has provided me with the wherewithal to work my way towards the light. The road is long. The trip is arduous. Is it worth it? Given the vista and the scenario one becomes part off, the answer is YES! By all means, change. Chance with the times, and use all new knowledge available to clarify and spread the "Good News". I have just recently been informed that there is a move afoot to declare the "old" Articles of Faith so-called "historical documents". If my understanding is correct, that would mean that we would no longer use them, but that we would not do away with them as we would enshrine them. If that is the wish of this Church, so be it. But that would mean that we need new Articles of Faith to replace them with. Why not take this opportunity and start working on their design? Is the desire there to do it? I am betting
(although I am not a betting man) that the hunger and the interest is
around. All we need to do is go out and tell the story in the vernacular
of this age. For your information: Shalom, and may the Spirit of God lead the way. Le chaim! (to Life) Peter.
|
.