Anyone have a crystal ball?

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
paradox3 said:
UUs have two statements of principles and sources which seem to serve as their foundation..
Click to expand...
Basically. There's currently 7 Principles and 6 "Sources of Our Living Tradition" but they are being amended again as a result of some soul-searching over BLM and other justice issues.
 
Mendalla said:
Basically. There's currently 7 Principles and 6 "Sources of Our Living Tradition" but they are being amended again as a result of some soul-searching over BLM and other justice issues.
Click to expand...
Interesting. There must be an established process for dealing with something like this.

We are much more unwieldy. Personally I am a fan of our New Creed which is no longer new at all.
 
paradox3 said:
There must be an established process for dealing with something like this.
Click to expand...
It has to be moved, discussed and voted on at both the UUA and CUC AGMs, where every congregation is supposed to have a representative (not sure London has sent someone every year). Ideally (but I am not sure if it happens this way) each congregation would first have some kind of internal discussion and maybe vote so the reps know what their congregation's position is. It is now technically possible for UUA to adopt and CUC to reject (or vice versa) but that could get awkward given that UU ministers can move between Canada and the US. CUC split from the UUA a couple decades ago after being essentially the Canadian branch of the UUA for many years.
 
Mendalla said:
It has to be moved, discussed and voted on at both the UUA and CUC AGMs, where every congregation is supposed to have a representative (not sure London has sent someone every year). Ideally (but I am not sure if it happens this way) each congregation would first have some kind of internal discussion and maybe vote so the reps know what their congregation's position is. It is now technically possible for UUA to adopt and CUC to reject (or vice versa) but that could get awkward given that UU ministers can move between Canada and the US. CUC split from the UUA a couple decades ago after being essentially the Canadian branch of the UUA for many years.
Click to expand...
somewhat similar to the Remit process in the United Church that is followed when major changes are proposed.
 
Carolla said:
somewhat similar to the Remit process in the United Church that is followed when major changes are proposed.
Click to expand...
Due process was followed when we expanded the basis of union to include the three subsequent faith statements.

Now we have more statements of doctrine than ever. Not sure this situation has clarified much for us though
 
paradox3 said:
@Mystic
Upthread you.mentioned the need to differentiate between Jesus's intentions and the intentions of the gospel writers.

Would you be able to provide an example or two?
Click to expand...
In the Q pericope on loving your enemies (Matthew 5:43-48 // Luke 6:37-36) there is a major difference between Matthew and Luke:
"Be merciful as your heavenly Father is merciful (Luke 6:36)."
"Be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect (Matthew 5:48)."

Which is the original version of the saying? Well, in copying Mark, Matthew injects the demand of perfection where it is absent from Mark:
For example, consider the story of the rich young ruler:

"Jesus...said, "YOU LACK ONE THING; go, sell what you own and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; then come, follow me (Mark 10:21)."
"Jesus said to him, "IF YOU WISH TO BE PERFECT, go, sell your possessions, and give the money to the poor, and you will h;ave treasure in heaven; then come, follow me (Matthew 19:21)."
So scholars conclude that Luke's version of Q ("Be merciful..." is more original than Matthew's "Be perfect."

Then consider a second Matthean change of Mark in the story of the rich young ruler:

"As He was setting out on a journey, a man... asked Him: "GOOD TEACHER, What must I do to inherit eternal life?"Jesus said to Him: "WHY DO YOU CALL ME GOOD? No one is good but God alone (Mark 10:17-18)."
"Then someone came to Him and said: "TEACHER, WHAT GOOD DEED must I do to inherit eternal life?" And He said to him:" WHY DO YOU ASK ME ABOUT WHAT IS GOOD? There is only one who is good."

Matthew changes "Good teacher" to "Teacher" and "Why do you call me good?" to a question about the nature of goodness to remove the implication that Jesus denies both that He is good and that He is God. Jesus reserves the title "God" for "the Father" and believes that His goodness is derivative of the Father's goodness.
 
Re: Q pericope. I had to look this up. I am familiar with the idea of a hypothetical Q source used by Matthew and Luke. Pericope was a new one for me.

If I am following this correctly we can't tell if Matthew or Luke is true to Q in the example of perfect vs merciful you have provided.

So we look elsewhere to see how Matthew has changed wording from Mark. And then we assume he keeps the same theme going when copying from Q.

Is this it in a nutshell?

Will try to get my head around the rich young ruler later.
 
paradox3 said:
Personally I am a fan of our New Creed which is no longer new at all.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's a bit weird to be calling something that's been around since I was a UCCan member "new" but whatever. I guess it is still "new" compared to something like the Apostle's Creed or Nicene Creed or older Protestant confessions like the Westminster. I left before the Song of Faith came along so I've only given it a once over and then only because of discussion of it on WC Classic so, yeah, the New Creed is kind of my UCCan statement of faith, at least as of when I left.
 
We also have a new Call and Vision with its own logo:

Deep Spirituality. Bold Discipleship. Daring Justice.

There is a series of related documents which I should probably peruse more carefully. I learned about the initiative from @Carolla here on WC2.

Can't say I have heard anything about this in my local congregation. But to be fair I was.pretty much absent throughout the pandemic
 
Mendalla said:
Yeah, it's a bit weird to be calling something that's been around since I was a UCCan member "new" but whatever. I guess it is still "new" compared to something like the Apostle's Creed or Nicene Creed or older Protestant confessions like the Westminster. I left before the Song of Faith came along so I've only given it a once over and then only because of discussion of it on WC Classic so, yeah, the New Creed is kind of my UCCan statement of faith, at least as of when I left.
Click to expand...
Rumor has it the creed was never meant to be called A New Creed. It was printed that way in the hymn book because it didn't have an actual title.
 
paradox3 said:
Deep Spirituality. Bold Discipleship. Daring Justice.
Click to expand...
Which, let's face it, looks rather like something created by a marketing department and focus groups. It's very high-level stuff that looks and sounds good in an ad but not everyone is going to get the same meaning from them. So very, very high-level, not all equivalent to a creed or confession that actually spells out what you believe in a more concrete way.
 
A few congregations and denominations have some variation of:

Open doors. Open minds. Open hearts
 
Last edited:
paradox3 said:
A few congregations and denominations have some variation of:

Open doors. Open minds. Open hearts
Click to expand...
Yeah, a simple motto is always a good thing. I am not saying it is a bad thing, just that one must recognize that it is a very, very high-level thing that reflects mission and values rather than informing them. I am still fond of the UU fellowship's motto, "Challenge the Mind - Nourish the Spirit - Act in the World" (or "Challenge - Nourish - Act" in shortened form on logos and such).
 
My view

I don't think one needs a Crystal Ball to know the future of the Church ----The scripture tells you what will happen -----and no one will fix it as it is in God's Plan ------

The Church will and has to die ----that is predicted in the last days ----there will be a great falling away ----and that is happening now----God has been taken out of most Churches and replaced with mostly unrepented Ministers ----the church buildings have become the main focus and in many cases have become the idol ---money is running out cause people are fed up with all the hoop la ---and discord and division that is in churches today ----

God's people are the church -----not the building -----

Jesus preached to everyone ---no one was excluded and the out doors was mainly His Church building ---

2 Thessalonians 2:1-3 AMP​

3 Let no one in any way deceive or entrap you, for that day will not come unless the [c]apostasy comes first [that is, the great rebellion, the abandonment of the faith by professed Christians], and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction [the Antichrist, the one who is destined to be destroyed],

1 Timothy 4 AMP
Apostasy​

​​
But the [Holy] Spirit explicitly and unmistakably declares that in later times some will turn away from the faith, paying attention instead to deceitful and seductive spirits and doctrines of demons,
2 [misled] by the hypocrisy of liars whose consciences are seared as with a branding iron [leaving them incapable of ethical functioning]

Man made Religiosity is dying Out-----as it should -----
 
Imagine a house were passion is indulged behind closed dores ... and hate runs free !

According to protocol this is placed in your mined/psyche and thus disposed of because mental things are pho bias ...
 
Last night at my Spiritual Nurture group, on the topic of Celtic Christianity we explored some writing of mystic Teilhard de Chardin. There were many notable comments that warrant more thought. One being - "evolution is what Christianity is about" - I don't think it was his comment, but it stuck in my mind. If we hold this perspective to be true, I suppose the institutional church is also called/expected/forecast to evolve. Its form within Christianity may look quite different in future in ways we do not yet know. I suppose evolution is mostly something we understand/recognize in hindsight even as we embrace future unknowns.
 
For the last 40 years, people have moved away from institutions. Covid reminded people that we need each other and structure can be helpful.

We are in the process of experimenting with new firms of structures and revising old structures. Many regions, at least three that I know of, are experimenting with congregational cooperatives.

I believe there are opportunities for blended online and face to face ministries with individual congregations providing online opportunities for engagement linked to occasional or regular face to face gatherings that could be worship services, lunches, or other gatherings. These cooperatives could be multi denominational and even multinational.

Evolution produces diversity. It would make sense for Christianity to become more diverse in how faith communities function.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top