Greta- something new-DKS posted on FB

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
crazyheart said:
How you can help: Supporting Gretta and West Hill during the UCC Review Process
transparent.png
Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 04:44PM
This past May, Gretta was notified by the Toronto Conference of The United Church of Canada that she would be required to submit to a review of her “effectiveness”. This review is intended to examine her theological beliefs as expressed at the time of her ordination. This is the first time that an ordained minister in the United Church has been subjected to this type of review and a special process was sought by the Conference from the General Secretary of the General Council. Although the impetus for it is not fully clear, it appears to stem from a significant increase in recent media attention being paid to Gretta and West Hill United because she has publicly identified as an atheist, a label which is consistent with her lack of belief in a theistic, interventionist, supernatural being called God.
Burlington%20event.jpg
Gretta Speaks at Burlington Baptist in 2008
We find it troubling that no one representing any level of the church has been to visit West Hill in over a decade to see what we are doing or to discuss our ministry. No one has found the work we do at West Hill important enough for the wider church to suggest it be the focus of a conversation at Presbytery, Conference, or elsewhere.
Similarly, no one from any of the church courts has tried to engage Gretta in dialogue about her beliefs and ministry despite her accessibility and willingness to respond to any who inquire. The requirement to appear before a review committee is the first invitation to dialogue but it falls within the disciplinary structure of the denomination.
Despite the lack of invitation to dialogue on the part of the church, Gretta and her legal counsel asked the General Secretary and her team of advisors to enter into a conversation with a view to exploring an alternative to the normal judicial process. That request was denied. The response from the church continues to be no dialogue, no conversation.
During this time many of you have been asking “what can we do?” In the hopes that a conversation with the church would be forthcoming we kept saying……”stay tuned”. Now that the church has formally drawn that line in the sand we are asking for your assistance. There are a number of ways you can be involved and we are asking you to do that.
These are links to some of the ways you can get involved. If there is something else you would like to do and you have the know how and energy to do it, please be in touch (That's our special email address for this initiative) and let us know.
Thanks so much for becoming involved. We firmly believe, and have always believed, that this work is work that belongs within The United Church of Canada. Thank you for helping us make sure that it remains so.
Update on Wednesday, August 19, 2015 at 12:00AM by West Hill United
Don't forget to spread the opportunity to share news of or support for Gretta and West Hill but posting to Facebook or Twitter or cotherwise sharing with your friends and contacts. If you are within a United Church, that night be ther perfect place to start! And thank you. Let usnknownifnyou have Andy further organizational needs, do connect with us,
West Hill United | Post a Comment | Share Article
Click to expand...

Burlington Baptist - that's interesting. What were people's reactions to her there, I wonder? I'm actually surprised that she spoke there.
 
If a Baptist church was gracious enough to have her as a guest speaker - surely a pretty liberal church like UCCan could make room for her to have one little congregation who likes her style. She's actually not, it seems to me, doing anything that opposes the core values of the faith. Maybe it's semantics people are all up in a bunch about - but the question is, for her and everyone, WWJD? (whether you believe in a historical Jesus or not I think that is the minimum question).Would he think she was doing something wrong? If not leave it alone. If so, work to try to correct the behaviour. Isn't that the same for everyone in the church, though? If she's not doing something wrong within the context of WWJD, whether it's with the UUs or UCCan or anywhere else outside of it for that matter - if those are our values, then maybe it's much fuss about nothing. If those are not our values maybe that's the problem.
 
Last edited:
Kimmio said:
Burlington Baptist - that's interesting. What were people's reactions to her there, I wonder? I'm actually surprised that she spoke there.
Click to expand...
That's a really good point. Are they part of the same Fellowship as Jae?
 
chansen said:
That's a really good point. Are they part of the same Fellowship as Jae?
Click to expand...

Based on their website, no. They are affiliated with "Canadian Baptist of Ontario and Quebec and the Canadian Baptist Ministries" not the FEBC.
 
crazyheart said:
As I understand it, she wants monetary support to pay her lawyer.
Click to expand...
I don't doubt that. Lawyers are expensive. If the result is Gretta is DSL'ed, I expect the UCCan will need a good one. How do you implicitly approve of the position taken by an *18 year* member of your organization by not warning her or taking any action whatsoever against her, and even have past moderators (Mardi, at least) say that she has a place in the UCCan, and suddenly move to remove her for a position she has held for more than a decade? And not expect that she will have a grievance? Any other business, and she would have a bulletproof argument. This could get expensive for both sides. The UCCan could be on the hook for tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Someone here with a better grounding in employment law? I have a little, and from what I remember, this could end badly for the UCCan. I really think they will still find a way to make no decision. Someone is going to talk some sense into them, possibly a lawyer. They can't embrace her with open arms, but rather than be responsible for a giant clusterfark, they'll make this go away.
 
I went looking for video footage or a transcript of Gretta's talk at Burlington Baptist. I couldn't find anything, but I did stumble upon this blog post of hers, and I think I really get why she is doing this. I think it is more about WWJD, in essence, than "What do we believe?" - what about "What do we value and how to we apply it to making a better world?" and taking the idolotry out, healing from the damage done in the name of God, and putting more focus on community and social support and cooperation in. Would Jesus be opposed to that? I don't believe so. I imagine him being happy she reached out to a baptist church and they let her speak. Not so sure WWJD, about speaking fees, if there were any, is all - turn over tables? But he might do that in any church today anyway. That she is crossing divides and maybe mending them, is a good thing.

http://www.grettavosper.ca/tag/uk/
 
Last edited:
Historical Jesus??????????

You mean a character attribute that hasn't yet been buried and is thus presently rogue and about as light intellectual material or flighty thoughts? Total surrounding spirits to the isolated emotional sorts ... thus those damed spots where thoughts cannot penetrate as seminal ... ethers as you can't say seminal fluidly here or the anti learning group would be dis-cussed and the thinkers would be buried in cusses ... the anima behaviour of hybrids ... without any-Muse ... or plural forms thereof as MOzin along ... hidden as an MO?

Is it possible to connect discrete words in networking with the Great Fisherman who lied about the importance of braen fude?
Why is it so hard to find truth in a myth that is beyond us ... and our intellectual capacity? Was it too buried in the great cover-up ... did result in a Grand Shadow form how Eva ... and Va in Gael is equivalent to allez ... a travelling Z as sum of the somnolent soul? What is the awakening icon in this numbed world? A tine or a thorn, or a burr in the ass about truth as we get down to the golden point ... intelligence passes in time and few notice to pick on some ...
 
Mendalla said:
Based on their website, no. They are affiliated with "Canadian Baptist of Ontario and Quebec and the Canadian Baptist Ministries" not the FEBC.
Click to expand...

I poked around on the CBM site. I didn't see a long explanation or description about "beliefs". But this stood out:

"The Christian movement is inspired by acts of peace, justice, and reconcilliation." ...."CBM programs involve diverse parties engaged in acts of repentance, confession, forgiveness, social reconcilliation, and new commitments."

http://www.cbmin.org/our-work/peace-justice-reconciliation/

Very simply "WWJD" stuff. I respect that.
 
Last edited:
Kimmio said:
I poked around on the CBM site. I didn't see a long explanation or description about "beliefs". But this stood out:
Click to expand...
Kimmio said:
"The Christian movement is inspired by acts of peace, justice, and reconcilliation." ...."CBM programs involve diverse parties engaged in acts of repentance, confession, forgiveness, social reconcilliation, and new commitments."

http://www.cbmin.org/our-work/peace-justice-reconciliation/

Very simply "WWJD" stuff. I respect that.
Click to expand...

Actually, the CBOQ (and counterparts in other regions of the country) seems to be more the denominational body with CBM as their "Mission and Service" arm.
 
Mendalla said:
Actually, the CBOQ (and counterparts in other regions of the country) seems to be more the denominational body with CBM as their "Mission and Service" arm.
Click to expand...

Okay. A quick look at the CBOQ page and I found this:

http://baptist.ca/churches/joining-cboq/

Obviously more evangelical beliefs which is fine - it's the lived out values and purpose that concerns me. I applaud both Gretta and them for engaging in conversation (her whole thing is with OR without God - finding the common human purpose). I wish we could hear or read about how it went, though.

I think the whole controversy around Gretta should be dropped. Maybe her "atheist" view helps to bring the non-religious into community with the religious, connecting communities to do the WWJD work without the necessity of a certain belief, and who cares if that crosses into UU territory. It's not a turf war. Maybe UCCan should do more ecumenical bonding with UU anyway -and with anyone to the right or left or non-Christian as they already do. I don't think the purpose of churches is to set up exclusive belief clubs but provide community support and to help transform the world into a better place. Some would see that as lived out acts of worship of God (vs symbolic ritual) others as just the right thing to do - either way, it happens as opposed to not happening.
 
Last edited:
I just thought of something. My retired stepdad volunteers 3 or 4 days a week at a Catholic soup kitchen. He's integral there. He is not Catholic but has Christian values but not necessarily conservative Christian beliefs. He sees through that and just does what he feels it's important to do. Now, what would be the purpose of the Catholic church he serves at not allowing him to be there, or him refusing to serve there because he's not Catholic? Nothing. No good purpose at all. Only division and alienation - and those in need losing out.

So, taking it up to the top of organizations, - or to the bureacracy, rather - why can't they think of it the same way instead of a competition? More purposeful, value driven work instead of exclusive beliefs?
 
chansen said:
Someone here with a better grounding in employment law?
Click to expand...

Would you settle for someone who has studied how this works in the UCCAN?

For starters the only time this becomes testable in a civil court is if it can be proven that the Church failed to fairly use their own polity.

So for example. If I am terminated without cause (allowable) but the Church contravened its own protocol. Held that vote without me being able to be present or did not give the other appropriate notice or extended voting privileges to adherents I have a case for shenanigans and a decent lawyer should be able to win that case for me.

Such tactics have had marginal success in the courts. On the whole Judges generally look for bad faith (deliberate runs around accepted practice and polity as opposed to errors in following accepted practice and policy).

On the whole the Church's track record in contested dismissals tends to favour the Church not being found negligent in its handling of matters.

Here is what we know about the case to date.

A complaint has been received and Toronto Conference has looked into the complaint according to outlined policy and procedure. No grounds for complaint against Toronto Conference because of that.

Toronto Conference was puzzled about how to proceed based on the complaint and they asked for guidance from the General Secretary. No grounds for complaint against Toronto Conference because of that.

The General Secretary outlined a process to move the review forward. Which is actually part of her job. No grounds for a complaint against Toronto Conference or the General Secretary for that.

The reverend Gretta Vosper has appealed the ruling of the General Secretary. Which is the reverend Vosper's right to do. A three member panel from the national judicial review committee will hear the grounds for the appeal and rule on whether it is to be upheld or dismissed. No grounds for complaint in any of that as all parties are acting appropriately within the polity of the UCCAN.

If the appeal fails the review of the reverend Vosper will continue. Nothing in that is grounds for a complaint against Toronto Conference, the General Secretary or the Judicial Review Panel members.

The review will determine one of three outcomes.
1) take no action
2) Remedial action designed to bring the Reverend Vosper into compliance with the Church
3) Placement on the Discontinued Service List.

Options 1 and 2 are not grounds for a complaint against Toronto Conference.

Option 3 only becomes open for criticism if it can be determined that in some way the Church was not true to its own processes or polity. So, for example the review panel finds no grounds for action and Toronto Conference moves to place the reverend Vosper on the DSL anyway, that would open Toronto Conference to the possibility of a wrongful dismissal hearing. It would not itself constitute wrongful dismissal unless there was a very clear evidence that the Toronto Conference was simply acting in a vindictive manner.

Alongside of that is the fact that the Reverend Vosper continues to participate in media events and it is quite possible to point to factual errors of record that the Reverend Vosper is making that could be seen as evidence that she rejects Presbytery or Conference's oversight. Generally a lawyer advises a client to shut their trap when any kind of disciplinary hearing begins in order to mitigate the ammunition that may be used against their client. In this the reverend Vosper is most unwise.

She may think that she is poisoning the well against the body that has oversight. That is not the same thing as immunizing yourself from the outcome of oversight.

In other words it is entirely possible to win in the court of Public Opinion and lose in every other court that has the power to speak to your employment as a United Church minister. Deliberately poisoning the well against your employer probably doesn't build your case for wrongful termination.
 
What do optics have to do with those of blind faith ... just following what they were taught to do without rationale ... pure emotions?
 
How, John, is Gretta "poisoning the well"?

Besides, the point I was making, was that she has been an atheist for what? A decade? And even a moderator, years ago, seemed to have no problem with it. Gretta would have an expectation by now that her lack of belief is tolerated in this setting. Now, suddenly, it may not be. What changed? Is it reasonable for Gretta to assume that her job is safe from any action against her for not believing?

That's how I read it. I could be wrong.
 
chansen said:
How, John, is Gretta "poisoning the well"?

Besides, the point I was making, was that she has been an atheist for what? A decade? And even a moderator, years ago, seemed to have no problem with it. Gretta would have an expectation by now that her lack of belief is tolerated in this setting. Now, suddenly, it may not be. What changed? Is it reasonable for Gretta to assume that her job is safe from any action against her for not believing?

That's how I read it. I could be wrong.
Click to expand...


Leads back to the age old question: "What do we really know?" Perhaps we just imagine what the patriarchy has told us is true ... when in truth the truth is hard to find when following the father of the lyre Da Vide us (aD onus?) and thus the conquering begins ... it is a sophisticated process and real people on this side of the mire do not like sophistication ... only the KISS ... Jesus said ... and thus that feint BUSS with outside intelligence ... the other as hated !

In the process the heavenly is hammered own ...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top