The Rev. Vosper Again

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
This tells us that Presbytery was not seeking to take back pastoral oversight from Toronto Conference for any unrelated reason.

Unrelated to the Vosper review, I mean.
 
I'll quite willing to contact both groups unless someone thinks there are better candidates. And, let's face it, there are few people in Canada with worse interpersonal skills than me, but I'm willing.
 
chansen said:
I'll quite willing to contact both groups unless someone thinks there are better candidates. And, let's face it, there are few people in Canada with worse interpersonal skills than me, but I'm willing.
Click to expand...

I vote for the song stir for greater dissonance ... a minor chord? Could stimulate sensations ...
 
Inukshuk said:
Great idea! Dialogue is always best.
Click to expand...
Sure, ask the West Hill folks and see what they say.

I suspect they would be here already if they wanted dialogue with the WC2 community but you never know.

Gretta was around in the early years of WC along with a few members of her congregation . . . Bluegreen, Wngs2Fly, BigDave, Theoblogger, Cjms, Excavator and Dandarii come to mind. I believe there were a few others who joined us but didn't post very often.
 
I'm going to start by pulling this out, because it insults the senses:
Dave Henderson said:
I wish Ms. Vosper and the West Hill congregation all the best.
Click to expand...
No, you don't. You wish them homeless.

Why do people mindlessly say things like this that clearly are not true? Just because it's the nice thing to say? Because "wishing them the best" is the expected thing to say?

No, you clearly want to see them turfed out, which means they will lose their building at the least. It is what it is.


Dave Henderson said:
Hi Chansen, I want to say from the outset that I am very uncomfortable commenting on Ms. Vosper, her church and her ministry, since this is a human resources issue now and as such should be treated with both sensitivity and circumspection. But since it has become a very public issue, I will reluctantly discuss some aspects of it. Newspaper reports state that Ms. Vosper's congregation is about 70 people. This is in Scarborough, a community with a population of more than 625,000. I worship at a church in Pembroke Ontario with a Sunday morning attendance that is also about 70 people, with a regional population base of about 35,000 people. I bring this up only because you state that "Gretta Vosper...[is] growing West Hill..." The evidence would suggest that West Hill is surviving, but not particularly growing. Again, I am not stating this in a mean spirited way. I wish Ms. Vosper and the West Hill congregation all the best. At the same time, it is my belief and the stated belief of the United Church of Canada that leaders in the church be in essential agreement with the existence of God, His son Jesus, who is the namesake of their faith, (that is Christ...Christian) and the Holy Spirit as revealed to us.
Click to expand...
If you want to use math, use it properly. To get anywhere close to that comparison, first take the population of Scarborough, and divide it by the number of United Churches that serve it. Now you have a ballpark approximation of the local population West Hill can be expected to serve. My nine-year-old daughter would know to do this. To skip this obvious first step is to skew things in favour of your argument so transparently that you're either completely innumerate or you think you can put one over on us.

Besides, by "growing", I mean that, year over year, West Hill is currently gaining members. That's growing. It shrunk before. I get that. It shrunk bigly. But now it's growing.

I think the UCCan assumed she would fail and they wouldn't have to do anything. West Hill would just be another United Church in the GTA with regrettable architecture in a neighbourhood with a growing recent immigrant population that has existing connections to different chuches, that can not hold on and closes or amalgamates with a neighbouring church, and that's that. Didn't happen. Now the UCCan has to force the issue.

As for the "...existence of God, His son Jesus, who is the namesake of their faith, (that is Christ...Christian) and the Holy Spirit as revealed to us," you can't reveal it at all. You talk about it. You make proclamations that are as fact-based as the Trump administration's inauguration attendance figures. But you have nothing revealed, and everything concealed. You believe on faith alone. And while many are saying how wrong Gretta Vosper is, I think it's important to point out that the standards you wish to impose on her are not based on anything you can reveal to anyone else.
 
@chansen,

I responded to this on the other thread. Do you want to move my response here or should I repeat myself? I think it was reply #133 on the intervention thread.
 
paradox3 said:
@chansen,

I responded to this on the other thread. Do you want to move my response here or should I repeat myself? I think it was reply #133 on the intervention thread.
Click to expand...

I tried moving it over but the problem is that it sorts above chansen's post (since he did a new post here throwing the times off). You can highlight your old post, copy it, and paste it into a new post here and then things will be in order.
 
Um, my post has disappeared but chansen's is still there.

No worries. I will just respond again.
chansen said:
Besides, by "growing", I mean that, year over year, West Hill is currently gaining members. That's growing. It shrunk before. I get that. It shrunk bigly. But now it's growing.
Click to expand...
Yes, your statement above is accurate.
chansen said:
I think the UCCan assumed she would fail and they wouldn't have to do anything.
Click to expand...
You are just surmising here about what happened.
 
I am. But it makes sense. And it's not like it's a central point to anything I'm saying.
 
chansen said:
I am. But it makes sense. And it's not like it's a central point to anything I'm saying.
Click to expand...
Okay, if you can surmise so will I. :)

I think it is more likely that the church hierarchy assumed Gretta's heyday was over after the uproar caused by her first book. Her second book caused very little reaction and was not even actively promoted by its publisher.

For a time it looked like Gretta was going to be content ministering to one rather unique congregation. I thought this myself for a few years.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top