FOTOS and the next Step.

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
Yes - just saw that on fb & printed it. Not yet read - maybe on the weekend. Lots of charts & numbers - wondering if there's much synthesis or analysis.
 
[QUOTE="GordW,
THoughts? REactions? COnfusions?[/QUOTE]

Yawn.....looks like the UCCan is pretty much neutral/divided. No surprise there. Except when it comes to oversight and then all the maneuvering of who's in charge comes into play. Again, no surprise. Same old stuff...
 
Right now I'm trying to decide how to evaluate responses to what I believe are essentially the wrong questions we should be asking ourselves.

I'm very much on record as seeing FOTOS as a huge exercise in denial. So the answers really speak to a level of delusion about what is really going on.

"I'd join your church if you could demonstrate functional mechanisms providing oversight for both Clergy and Pastoral Charges" is saying nobody.

Yet, the denomination is hell bent on insisting that is precisely the problem.
 
Just trying to update myself here.

So the Presbyteries' response was posted over on United Future on September 17. I agree wth @GordW - - not much analysis. A few comments were made on the UF site.

I see that the Conferences' response was posted on United Future on September 26. There was absolutely no discussion on the UF site about this report.

Now I gather we are awaiting the final recommendations from the comprehensive review folks, expected early in 2015. Recommendations were to have been presented to the Executive of General Council in November 2014. Does anyone know if this has happened?

Does anyone have any further information to contribute?
 
Yes, I think it did happen paradox3. I believe the revised report is due out in March of this year.
 
revjohn said:
"I'd join your church if you could demonstrate functional mechanisms providing oversight for both Clergy and Pastoral Charges" is saying nobody.

Yet, the denomination is hell bent on insisting that is precisely the problem.
Click to expand...

Governance is a problem, but only for those already inside. For those of us outside, good governance is something we may want to see in a church (I do, at least) but it is not what will get us in the door. In fact, I'm not sure there is anything the UCCan can do on a national level in that regard. Much of the work of getting people interested is ultimately going to be done a lower levels. I would not rejoin the UCCan because of anything I see nationally (because they can't really offer anything denominationally that UU'ism can't), but I might if I find a local congregation that appeals to me in some way.
 
I wonder if a significant part of our UCCAN church leadership is playing to their strengths rather than to the needs of others inside and outside of the church. (Our training focuses on theology, justice/social action, history, structure, pastoral care, education, and worship with token bits of spirituality and relationship building; we are inclined to focus on how society should change to meet our vision for the world; others need affirmation and connection, and opportunities to work towards their visions). Our pride leads us to wanting to be agents and directors of change rather than instruments of change. If control is our church agenda, then governance will be our leadership focus. It is tough for our church leadership to admit that future growth or life of the United Church depends mostly on local congregations putting the needs and hopes of people in their communities first, and using leading knowledge to do that well: in worship, in welcoming, in providing care and encouragement.
 
revjohn said:
Right now I'm trying to decide how to evaluate responses to what I believe are essentially the wrong questions we should be asking ourselves.

I'm very much on record as seeing FOTOS as a huge exercise in denial. So the answers really speak to a level of delusion about what is really going on.

"I'd join your church if you could demonstrate functional mechanisms providing oversight for both Clergy and Pastoral Charges" is saying nobody.

Yet, the denomination is hell bent on insisting that is precisely the problem.
Click to expand...
Revjohn, what are the questions that you feel should have been asked?
 
Pinga said:
Revjohn, what are the questions that you feel should have been asked?
Click to expand...

A) Who is responsible for the growth and/decline of the local congregation?

B) Why do we believe that the world outside the Church is put off by our current governance models when they wouldn't be able to describe it to begin with?

C) Why do we as a denomination refuse to share our faith with others.

That kind of thing.
 
Seem like good questions.

What other questions would folks ask?


Note: I can see organizational questions, such as oversight are reasonable; however, they are only one part of the necessary questions as you point out.
 
New Comp Review update. The report is still coming out too late (our last currently scheduled Presbytery meeting before C42 is next week, and I suspect there are others in the same state). Lots of holes not mentioned here...like finances, like oversight of faith communities, like a statement of why the United Church exists--our purpose and mission. I hope the full report fills those in.
http://www.united-church.ca/communi...nd+Information+|+The+United+Church+of+Canada)
 
I think my presbytery has decided to call a special meeting in regard to the report. I appreciate this, as I'll be going to GC42, and it will be helpful to hear the collective thoughts about the report.
 
WE may well call an extra meeting as well, just after Easter when we already have an Executive meeting scheduled. Mind you for us that is a fairly expensive proposition.
 
Indeed GordW - the associated costs of face to face meetings are significant. I wish we could move to using more technology in this realm - which for sure is not the same as face-to-face discussion.
 
Conference calls, even if using gathering communities can work... The challenge is that there are individuals that will not have any difficulty, and others who have no idea of virtual conference etiquette & also.... the power items....

In the same way that at conference, presbytery, there are those who know how to speak, when to speak, who to watch, what mic to use, when, etch .....to influence decision..... when you switch to virtual there are those who will know how to use it... and a bit of an upset of the status quo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top