The Rev. Vosper Again

[chansen]

You may not need to keep repeating your worldview as an atheist. We hear you.

Could we say the same thing to Christians? Or does hypocrisy not apply in this case?

 

[Luce NDs]

Could we say the same thing to Christians? Or does hypocrisy not apply in this case?

Recycle is critical thus the continuum of go rounds ... keeps the cosmos in a whirl 've it's own ... and spinoffs as ∞ ... a mire icon ...

 

[paradox3]

We could say the same thing to anyone (including myself) who keeps making the same point over and over again. As various posters have noted, many of our discussions here on WC2 are becoming somewhat repetitive.

In the Vosper case there are often new nuances to be considered but on some occasions we are just repeating ourselves.

 

[Jaebius]

This. Exactly this. Having been in a church with a congregational polity, I can safely say that polity has its issues, too. There is really nowhere to turn if the congregation is being dysfunctional or badly run. I do think it is the best polity for UUism, but it has its trade-offs.

Nowhere to turn? In such a case we can turn to our denomination for guidance, support and assistance. I'd rather be in a church with such a system than one in which a body of strangers can come in and make sweeping changes such as who is our key leader.

 

[Luce NDs]

Nowhere to turn? In such a case we can turn to our denomination for guidance, support and assistance. I'd rather be in a church with such a system in which a body of strangers can come in and make sweeping changes such as who is our key leader.

Ignorance or great understanding ... an expectation beyond mortal accumulation (moral cliché)?

 

[crazyheart]

Are the members of the congregations not

Presbyters. If this is true how can the Presbytery take all the responsibility

and be forever known as them? Most congregations say in referring to the other

court of the church, OH THEM.

 

[paradox3]

Presbyters = all ministry personnel and one lay person from each congregation. Possibly more than one lay person depending on congregational size. AFAIK.

 

[Mendalla]

Nowhere to turn? In such a case we can turn to our denomination for guidance, support and assistance. I'd rather be in a church with such a system than one in which a body of strangers can come in and make sweeping changes such as who is our key leader.

Sometimes, that is what is needed. What if the factions can't reach a consensus on asking for help? Usually, you get a congregation that fails or splits. And the presbytery in the UCCan, as pointed out above, isn't strangers. It is clergy and lay reps from all the churches in their geographical area. Treating presbytery as an "other" is a problem in and of itself.

I am not saying a church court polity is better than a congregational one, just that both have their own problems and benefits.

 

[Jaebius]

Sometimes, that is what is needed. What if the factions can't reach a consensus on asking for help? Usually, you get a congregation that fails or splits. And the presbytery in the UCCan, as pointed out above, isn't strangers. It is clergy and lay reps from all the churches in their geographical area. Treating presbytery as an "other" is a problem in and of itself.

I am not saying a church court polity is better than a congregational one, just that both have their own problems and benefits.

They may very well be strangers. Or at least the majority of them may be to you. That you may know a couple from your congregation is no guarantee that you're going to know any of the others.

As for the factions that you speak of, it's why we do things democratically, with votes on such things as asking for help.

I do agree with you on your final paragraph.

 

[Luce NDs]

Are the members of the congregations not

Presbyters. If this is true how can the Presbytery take all the responsibility

and be forever known as them? Most congregations say in referring to the other

court of the church, OH THEM.

If "th" is silent as the crossed "ð" ... disposed as eth'a would that be the ignored or denied "eM" standing for the unknown paradigm ... socially non-existent psyche? There went the conscience ... subtly! A'mere quiet icon as if it were Semite thingy ... hugh's stretch?

 

[BetteTheRed]

I find it highly unlikely that Presbytery was unaware of the situation; I think it much more likely that there was a silent tacit agreement that they'd let it go and see where it went. Especially since both Gretta and one (or two - I don't know the original size of the congregation) were presbytery members.

 

[paradox3]

I find it highly unlikely that Presbytery was unaware of the situation; I think it much more likely that there was a silent tacit agreement that they'd let it go and see where it went. Especially since both Gretta and one (or two - I don't know the original size of the congregation) were presbytery members.

Yes, the old Scarborough Presbytery was aware of the situation. There was a motion made in 2005 to review Gretta's ministry and it was defeated by a narrow margin. We can only speculate as to the reasons the motion was defeated.

Toronto Conference restructured from 9 presbyteries to 4 in 2009 & WHUC became part of the new South East Presbytery.

 

[crazyheart]

Are the members of the congregations not

Presbyters. If this is true how can the Presbytery take all the responsibility

and be forever known as them? Most congregations say in referring to the other

court of the church, OH THEM.

Let me make this clearer, I hope. Presbyters, as P3 says is

Presbyters = all ministry personnel and one lay person from each congregation. Possibly more than one lay person depending on congregational size. AFAIK.

what I was trying to say is that the Presbytery is made up of all ministry personnel

and lay people soooooooooo members of the congregation could be Reps from their congregations

,therefore, Presbyteries are us.

 

[crazyheart]

Are the members of the congregations not

Presbyters. If this is true how can the Presbytery take all the responsibility

and be forever known as them? Most congregations say in referring to the other

court of the church, OH THEM.

Let me make this clearer, I hope. Presbyters, as P3 says is

Presbyters = all ministry personnel and one lay person from each congregation. Possibly more than one lay person depending on congregational size. AFAIK.

what I was trying to say is that the Presbytery is made up of all ministry personnel

and lay people soooooooooo members of the congregation could be Reps from their congregations

,therefore, Presbyteries are us.

 

[crazyheart]

I am confused, now. What about you?

 

[paradox3]

I am confused, now. What about you?

What are you confused about, Crazyheart?

I get what you are saying re: the disconnect between congregations and presbyteries.

 

[Luce NDs]

What are you confused about, Crazyheart?

I get what you are saying re: the disconnect between congregations and presbyteries.

Life is chaos ... if not a struggle ... would there be pain to learn? Some poet paraphrased that précis ...

However many of the literal sorts do not accept such squeezes as literary devising ... getting out of the tight spot early! Primal recess ...

 

[revjohn]

The March Issue of The Observer reports that a "last ditch" effort to suspend the review was attempted.

A proposal in Toronto Southeast Presbytery to suspend proceeding was defeated as was a call for Toronto Conference to return responsibility for discipline and oversight to Toronto Southeast Presbytery. (looks like two ditches there not sure which was the actual last ditch).

Commentary of the Presbytery meeting is interesting,

Most of the speakers supported Vosper and the motion, but when votes were counted, less than a third of the approximately 100 Presbytery members in attendence were in favour.

Which appears to be a theme that gets repeated over and over and over again with respect to this issue.

The review will take place later this year barring the appearance of any further last ditches.

Pet Peeve, When will writers for The Observer clue in to the fact that "Defrock" is not our language. You would think that a magazine that reports on the condition of The United Church of Canada would use the language of The United Church of Canada and not Roman Catholicism. Admittedly that might strike some as a petty observation. I actually think that the term is being applied derogatorily and pejoratively which is not observing so much as it is manipulating sentiment.

 

[Pinga]

Letter to the editor time, Rev john

 

[chansen]

Pet Peeve, When will writers for The Observer clue in to the fact that "Defrock" is not our language. You would think that a magazine that reports on the condition of The United Church of Canada would use the language of The United Church of Canada and not Roman Catholicism. Admittedly that might strike some as a petty observation. I actually think that the term is being applied derogatorily and pejoratively which is not observing so much as it is manipulating sentiment.

The effect is the same. You may say that "defrock" is derogatory and pejorative, but I think "DSL(D)" is a cold and detached way of saying the same thing.

End of the day, everyone knows what "defrock" means. "DSL(D)" sounds like a broadband Internet technology.