|
Pain in the Body of ChristAt different times in the history of the United Church of Canada issues presented themselves that were controversial and that were only resolved after long, and often, heated debates. Under those circumstances it stands to reason that some people "won" and others "lost". Regardless of the meaning of those words, it was often said that the "losers" suffered (emotional) pain. So in this instance. It has again and again been drawn to the attention of the participants in this debate about the Divinity of Jesus, that large numbers of parishioners feel acute pain at the consequences of what is being said. Below you find material that reflects those
feelings.
It seems obvious from the ardent discussion of Bill Phipps interview with the Ottawa Citizen and the subsequent brouhaha that there is a severe sense of pain in the Body of Christ. We clergy who have responsibility for the apostolic faith feel it most strongly, perhaps because we recognize the seriousness of the issues and are most threatened by the negative reactions Phipps' comments have generated from people inside and outside the UCC fellowship. John Maich's experience in St. Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, was matched by a similar pastoral experience in the Maritimes. Undoubtedly many others in pastoral offices have had the issue thrown in their faces too and are much distressed by these "fiery darts." OTOH, when has there been such a discussion of Christology in the UCC? I am becoming painfully aware of how much such a discussion is needed, not in an informal setting like this, but in a rigorous forum where we involve theologians of stature, pastors in the field and laypeople from congregations. In recent weeks, I have been reading through Douglas John Hall's three volume work, "Thinking ... Professing ... Confessing The Faith: Christian Theology in a North American Context." This has been very instructive for me as a retired minister who studied Christology in the late 1940s at McGill under J.S. Thomson, the former Moderator. This has enabled me to see how much heresy still thrives in many parts of the Body,not just our UCC. What surprises me most is that so many people are surprised and hurt to learn that we do have different and confused conceptions of who Jesus is and what he means for us and our times. As far as I can see this is a healthy wounding, if
I may be so bold as to put it so. After all, it may only be the kind of
kick in the pants the Holy Spirit gives us now and then to move us into
a wholly new field of witness and service.
In Reply to: Pain in the Body of Christ posted by John Shearnan on December 07, 1997 at 05:45:54: > It seems obvious from the ardent discussion of Bill Phipps interview with the Ottawa Citizen and the subsequent brouhaha that there is a severe sense of pain in the Body of Christ. I would agree that there is pain...but I must also share that I am celebrating, and so are some of my fellow church mates. We celebrate the diversity within the church. Celebrate that the moderator is strong enough to share his faith and hold on. Celebrate that this dialogue is now occurring other than in the fringes, down the halls, quietly in bible studies. > We clergy who have responsibility for the apostolic faith feel it most strongly, perhaps because we recognize the seriousness of the issues and are most threatened by the negative reactions Phipps' comments have generated from people inside and outside the UCC fellowship. In response to the above, I must ask why you feel you are responsible for the faith. My understanding is that the basis of the United Church includes a strong lay leadership. If I am correct, and I know we have a strong lay leadership at Wesley United in Cambridge, then I think I, as a lay person, also bear responsibility for the faith. I know when I am at work, I represent the UC of C, as I do when I am volunteering at a community event. I did note you used the word "apostolic". If the faith you are referring to is strictly the area which ordained clergy can do -- the sacraments then I am even more confused...Does this area of the sacraments have some likelihood of being differently impacted than the rest of the congregational life and worship? The other part I am confused about, and would love to have you expand upon, as why do you as clergy feel the impact more strongly...I don't understand this? Are you implying as a clergy your faith is stronger or different? Your relationship to the UC of C? Your relationship to the congregation? I am confused. This could be because I see the role of a clergy as providing avenues for growth in faith. It cannot be spoon fed or dictated or I won't grow as me, just as a clone of the clergy, and if my faith is challenged, it won't be mine to support. >John Maich's experience in St. Paul's Hospital, Vancouver, was matched by a similar pastoral experience in the Maritimes. Undoubtedly many others in pastoral offices have had the issue thrown in their faces too and are much distressed by these "fiery darts." I have had wonderful people approach me and tell me they are enthused by the discussion. One person said that it has opened doors in her faith she did not know were open...interesting, huh? Another feels energized by church again, the discussions at coffee & conversation are about faith... > OTOH, when has there been such a discussion of Christology in the UCC? I am becoming painfully aware of how much such a discussion is needed, not in an informal setting like this, but in a rigorous forum where we involve theologians of stature, pastors in the field and lay people from congregations. In recent weeks, I have been reading through Douglas John Hall's three volume work, "Thinking ... Professing ... Confessing The Faith: Christian Theology in a North American Context." This has been very instructive for me as a retired minis ter who studied Christology in the late 1940s at McGill under J.S. Thomson, the former Moderator. This has enabled me to see how much heresy still thrives in many parts of the Body, not just our UCC. What surprises me most is that so many people are surprised and hurt to learn that we do have different and confused conceptions of who Jesus is and what he means for us and our times. Heresy ....confused conceptions... Could you help me out here also...what is heretical about the discussion we are having on the net? I went to the dictionary again, as heresy has a negative connotation to it for me...Per the WWWebster dictionary, heresy is something contrary to the dogma of the church...or another definition against generally held beliefs...hmmm..maybe you could state how you are using it in this context.. "Confused conceptions" implies a judgment call. Could you help me understand where the confusion is about Jesus? > As far as I can see this is a healthy wounding, if I may be so bold as to put it so. After all, it may only be the kind of kick in the pants the Holy Spirit gives us now and then to move us into a wholly new field of witness and service. Amen to that...
In Reply to: Re: Pain in the Body of Christ posted by Jayne Little on December 07, 1997 at 20:49:32: : I would agree that there is pain...but I must also share that I am celebrating, and so are some of my fellow church mates. We celebrate the diversity within the church. So do I, though speak out of a different context. I am aware of several clergy person who have been very distressed by the challenge this situation has presented to them. One has been told by his Board to let the matter die; another is very afraid that the conflict will drive people away. On the whole I agree with you that the dialogue will in the end be quite healthy, as painful as it undoubtedly is for some. I am also aware of lay people who are being attacked at work by their more exclusivist fellow workers for the "sins of the Moderator." Yes, I do feel responsible for the faith, a responsibility I share with lay leaders of the church as well. One of our UCC traditions comes from the Scottish Presbyterian system in which the clergy are the "teaching elders" and the lay leaders are the "ruling elders." The older structure of Session and elders in local UCC congregations maintained this tradition. Together we are to guide the church in their spiritual witness. Implicit in this was a very strong element of educational leadership. I hope we have not entirely forsaken that heritage. : I did note you used the word "apostolic". I meant no more than the "apostolic tradition" as it is understood and interpreted in our contemporary context. We take the tradition as we have received it, interpret and apply it to our own context. I would hope that all aspects of pastoral ministry are integrated around this principle. : The other part I am confused about, and would love to have you expand upon, as why do you as clergy feel the impact more strongly .... No, I do not have a "higher" concept of the clergy's role in ministry than that of the lay person. I don't believe in a hierarchical membership or ministry in the church. We have different functions, but no higher or lower status. Again, I was speaking out of the particular context in which I have been engaging in this debate. : This could be because I see the role of a clergy as providing avenues for growth in faith. It cannot be spoon fed or dictated or I won't grow as me, just as a clone of the clergy, and if my faith is challenged, it won't be mine to support. I heartily agree; but I do realize too that there are those who do appear to want to control and restrict the beliefs and credal statements of the church to what was written in the Basis of Union, for instance, or by the Council of Chalcedon in 461 AD. : Heresy ....confused conceptions... Could you help me out here also...what is heretical about the discussion we are having on the net? As one who was at one time accused of heresy in a
formal letter attempting to block my appointment to a particular office,
I have no trouble with open discussion in the church. But there are some
who do feel that Bill Phipps has crossed that boundary. I do not share
that view, nor do I entirely agree with all he is reported to have said.
Be that as it may, we can no more control discussion - and should not
try to do so - than we can control what appears in the media. I want an
educated freedom for all. That is why I also share your enthusiasm for
discussion on the 'Net and in local congregational settings.
Unfortunately, some of us cannot abide such diversity and open
discussion of the essentials of our faith.
In Reply to: Re: Pain in the Body of Christ posted by Jayne Little on December 07, 1997 at 20:49:32: :Celebrate that the moderator is strong enough to share his faith and hold on. Celebrate that this dialogue is now occurring other than in the fringes, down the halls, quietly in bible studies. Although I too think it is great that some discussion is going on other than in the fringes, I understood that the Moderator isn't holding on. I understood that he renounced his earlier statement regarding the deity of Christ. His statement of faith made on Vision TV (transcript on United Online) says that he believes "Jesus is God incarnate". Now I do want to be sure, so I wrote the Moderator and asked whether he was recanting. No response yet. Mark.
In Reply to: Re: Pain in the Body of Christ posted by Mark Fearnall on December 08, 1997 at 05:48:34: Hmmm, renounce...I would have used the word clarify, but then again, I could be wrong... I have been following the thread about VST (located "below" this thread). It has specific references to the words chosen. You may wish to review the comments made on Dec 8th. I am having difficulty with this thread; however,
as it is to me like studying a verse in the bible, without reading the
whole chapter, or a line in a poem without reading the poem. It is very
difficult for me to determine the context in which the statements were
made... jayne
In Reply to: Re: Pain in the Body of Christ posted by Jayne Little on December 08, 1997 at 21:06:05: : Hmmm, renounce...I would have used the word
clarify, but then again, I could be wrong... That is why I wrote the Moderator, I don't think his clarification (if that was what it was) was that clear. I have noticed that the Moderator hasn't replied nor has any of the discussions touched the issue of worship. I think that would help to clarify the issue. Can we or can we not worship Christ Jesus? The Moderator said we can't (I recorded this, and the Moderator has not denied saying it at Parkdale United). No clarification can help that statement, but renouncing it would. That's why I am hopeful that the Moderator has renounced his original comments. December 8's (I assume you refer to the comments of George and David) comments do not help in that regard. Mark.
In Reply to: Re: Pain in the Body of Christ posted by Mark Fearnall on December 09, 1997 at 05:59:58: > Can we or can we not worship Christ Jesus? Mark, I remember worshipping with you and the God's people near Sauble Beach when my parents had a trailer there. Why does you question matter so much to you? Whose permission do you need? Surely any Moderator's pronouncement is not the same as a papal bull. If you need/want to worship Jesus Christ what is stopping you? In our denomination we do not need any permission. There can be any range of beliefs expressed. Some of us will agree, and some of us will not. Soit. I recognize that some of us would feel m ore comfortable if we knew what we should believe but for me that is the wonder of the mystery that God is. And God understands our needs, strengths, and vulnerabilities. I'm really concerned that any pronouncement or
renouncing of a Moderator of our church would be so important for you.
Perhaps I don't understand. Nenke:-)
In Reply to: Re: Pain in the Body of Christ posted by Nenke Jongkind on December 09, 1997 at 18:26:37: : Can we or can we not worship Christ Jesus? I don't require anyone's permission... But that isn't the reason I find it an important question. We were discussing whether Bill was making a clarification or recanting. In that context, this question helps matters (at least for me). The worship of Jesus was part of the issue that arised in the time of Arius. If Jesus is a creature we cannot worship him, that would be idolatry. Vice versa, if Jesus is God then worship should be given to Christ by the body (the church). Can we believe these two "very diverse" things, and remain united? Others will answer how the feel, my answer is an absolute NO. I know I will be accused of not respecting people's beliefs. I don't see it that way. I have accepted in the past, and continue to accept, some diversity. This would be a view that goes over the line. I must add, It saddens me when I am not accepted for this strong position I believe. At Presbytery last night I was once again confronted by this "diversity that does not accept all diversity" once again. If you want to read a better explanation of my
position see my web site : I'm really concerned that any pronouncement or renouncing of a Moderator of our church would be so important for you. Perhaps I don't understand. Nenke:-) I thought it would be important for everyone, but
then perhaps I don't understand.
In Reply to: Re: Pain in the Body of Christ posted by Nenke Jongkind on December 09, 1997 at 18:26:37: : Can we or can we not worship Christ Jesus? : Mark, I remember worshipping with you and the God's people near Sauble Beach when my parents had a trailer there. AHA! Another alumni of South Sauble Beach Community Church? I served that summer field in the mid-70's. : Why does you question matter so much to you? Whose permission do you need? Surely any Moderator's pronouncement is not the same as a papal bull. If you need/want to worship Jesus Christ what is stopping you? In our denomination we do not need any permission. There can be any range of beliefs expressed. Some of us will agree, and some of us will not. Soit. I recognize that some of us would feel more comfortable if we knew what we should believe but for me that is the wonder of the mystery that God is. And God understands our needs, strengths, and vulnerabilities. ' Exactly right, Nenke. With the exception of the ordination/commissioning vows, which are set in the Basis of Unions and require a remit to change permanantly, worship in the United Church is governed by the local Session or equivalent and by the words "shall" and "may". There is *no* "must" in our worship . : I'm really concerned that any pronouncement or renouncing of a Moderator of our church would be so important for you. Perhaps I don't understand. Nenke:-) Frankly, I can choose to listen to the moderator
or ignore him. I've chosen the latter, as I've found nothing helpful in
anything he has said, so far... other than the inappropriateness of his
remarks...
In Reply to: Re: Pain in the Body of Christ posted by Mark Fearnall on December 08, 1997 at 05:48:34: > I understood that the Moderator isn't holding on. I understood that he renounced his earlier statement regarding the deity of Christ. His statement of faith made on Vision TV (transcript on United Online) says that he believes "Jesus is God incarnate". Mark, I noted this 'apparent' correction in the Moderator's visit to VST. Subsequent discussion here at Vancouver School of Theology seems to indicate that many who were concerned with the Moderator's initial remarks are relieved by his confirmation of the traditionally held Christology. One professor whom I have talked with about the Moderator, expressed that the statement "Jesus is not God" is a theologically loaded statement and can be interpreted to mean any number of things. For example, to expand on the statement "No, Jesus is not only/just God" affirms that Jesus is the fully human, fully God person held up by tradition. Perhaps this is what our Moderator meant? I'm afraid that the Moderator is slightly lacking
in polish and precision and that it is this quality that has opened the
discussion and not necessarily a deliberate theological statement. Of
course, it is just an opinion and if it is true then I am afraid that
the UCC will have to wade through much more discussion.
In Reply to: Re: Pain in the Body of Christ posted by John Maich on December 08, 1997 at 11:10:27: :I find it refreshing to see that the General Council would elect someone who isn't politically adept. Apparently there is some area of the Church which remains distinct from the world. I am saddened that GC would elect someone who is such a poor communicator. The essence of the Christian faith is story-telling.. sharing what we believe, telling our story and the story of Jesus Christ.. and inviting others to engage that story. I find no excuse for such poor communication skill
that the moderator has exhibited. It has nothing to do with being
"touched" by the world. If we live in the world, communication is
essential.
In Reply to: Re: Pain in the Body of Christ posted
by David Shearman on December 10, 1997 at 06:05:05: : I find no excuse for such poor communication skill that the moderator has exhibited. David, Point taken, I concur with the necessity of
the story telling skills. But is GC entirely to blame? Rt. Rev.Bill
Phipps has a long history with the UCC and I doubt his poor
communication skills sprang up overnight.
In Reply to: Re: Pain in the Body of Christ posted
by John Maich on December 10, Let's be clear. Bill Phipps is an excellent
communicator. Bill is very adept at Communication skills and media savvy are as much
about our "listening" for Phipps has said his piece, and he will have more
to say. What follows is for the rest To do otherwise merely perpetuates a malignant
game that places our congregations This debate about the Phipps interview long ago
ceased to be about what the man I still recall the words of Prof. David Demson at
the retirement of Prof. Heinz Demson - who studied in Germany - understood the
significance of the tribute he Single-minded obedience to the call of Christ is
not about political or theological
In Reply to: Re: Pain in the Body of Christ posted
by Brad Morrison on December : Let's be clear. Bill Phipps is an excellent
communicator. Bill is very adept at I'm sorry but the moderator is, IMHO, a poor
communicator. He acknowledged As for Prof. Gunether, I'm one of his students.
His Jesus of History/Christ of faith Posted by Mark Fearnall on December 11, 1997 at 06:37:24: In Reply to: Re: Pain in the Body of Christ posted
by Brad Morrison on December : Single-minded obedience to the call of Christ is
not about political or theological Hi Brad, I will give some thought to your comments. They
are interesting and well-written. I Just to clarify about Ottawa Presbytery. We did
not forbid the Moderator to come Mark.
|
.