The Rev. Vosper Again

[Luce NDs]

The church creeks along ...

Perhaps befouled with all that's whitewashed dere ... Muddy Waters?

 

[paradox3]

This is where I wrestle with her. Obviously given my own trajectory, I have no issue with her theological outlook or conclusions. While I'm less resolutely atheist than she seems to be, I'm certainly well beyond any kind of traditional theism. However, what baffles is the expectation that the church will change to accommodate her. I didn't expect that. I was happy to let the UCCan be the UCCan and moved on. And with my family history of involvement in the church, it's not like I lacked a deep connection to the denomination. I guess she has a sense of mission that I lack, but when there's an alternative that fits better, that's how I tend to lean.

Yes, she has that sense of mission for sure. Was just speaking with another former member today who said his major problem with gretta is not her theology, but the way she wants to impose it on others. That is certainly the way we experienced her leadership at West Hill. I just posted some thoughts about this earlier today on FB. Would it be bad form to copy them here, I wonder? FB comments, particularly if they are replies to other comments, seem to get buried quite quickly. Maybe I will later.

 

[Mendalla]

Yes, she has that sense of mission for sure. Was just speaking with another former member today who said his major problem with gretta is not her theology, but the way she wants to impose it on others. That is certainly the way we experienced her leadership at West Hill. I just posted some thoughts about this earlier today on FB. Would it be bad form to copy them here, I wonder? FB comments, particularly if they are replies to other comments, seem to get buried quite quickly. Maybe I will later.

If they are your own, go ahead. No reason I know of not to. If it was someone else's, then I would say link or embed, but you own your own posts and copy them as you please.

 

[paradox3]

Okay, here is the first one. It is in the context of a conversation with a current member who I know from years ago. I had earlier stated that I believed the change process at West Hill lacked transparency.

Visionworks is an inspirational document originally created in 2004. It has been revised twice and West Hill folks frequently reference it.

I said on FB:

"First about visionworks 2004. On the committee, we were specifically instructed to avoid matters of belief and unbelief. I was not under the impression we were writing a theological statement as we considered how we wanted to live in community. But it seemed to evolve into a theological statement within months. Before I left in May 2005, the chair of the board suggested to me I study it in order to understand Gretta's theological stance. I kid you not. You can imagine my frustration as I pointed out to him I was part of the committee which created it."

 

[paradox3]

I continued on FB:

"And for the rest of my story now. I arrived at West Hill in May 2000 and initially was delighted with gretta. I was with her up to and including the launch of the CCPC in November 2004. But things began to fall apart for me the very next day. There was an opportunity for discussion after the worship service and I was not impressed with how one particular questioner was handled. Advent was soon upon us and I became suddenly aware of how much things were changing. A pivotal moment was the singing of Go Tell It On the Mountain with altered lyrics. Perhaps I should have seen it coming earlier but I did not. In retrospect I should have paid more attention at other pivotal moments. Will speak to early 2005 later."

 

[paradox3]

And in conclusion:

"Early in 2005 Gretta held a series of evenings to explain progressive Christianity to the congregation. There were about 40 people present and I don't recall if you were there or not. The third session was another pivotal moment for me. The gathering was like being at an academic lecture with pages of handouts provided. I learned that night I was a liberal but not a progressive Christian according to Vosper. It was all presented to us as a fait accompli. The ship was already sailing in her direction and it simply wasn't changing course. Objections were raised & were mostly ignored. I left the congregation in May of that year and there were many subsequent departures. I have no doubt that you now enjoy a good & participatory relationship with Gretta. But she had to get rid of us all first before this could happen."

Wow! FB posts are different than talking on WC2. No paragraph breaks and I am much more comfortable here. But I wanted to bring my comments over intact.

Interested in any reactions . . . P3

 

[Redbaron]

I'd be interested in the difference between 'liberal' and 'progressive', if it could be done without reams of handouts...

I continued on FB:

"And for the rest of my story now. I arrived at West Hill in May 2000 and initially was delighted with gretta. I was with her up to and including the launch of the CCPC in November 2004. But things began to fall apart for me the very next day. There was an opportunity for discussion after the worship service and I was not impressed with how one particular questioner was handled. Advent was soon upon us and I became suddenly aware of how much things were changing. A pivotal moment was the singing of Go Tell It On the Mountain with altered lyrics. Perhaps I should have seen it coming earlier but I did not. In retrospect I should have paid more attention at other pivotal moments. Will speak to early 2005 later."

Hindsight is very often far clearer than foresight... please be gentle to yourself, for not being able to see into the future.

 

[Mendalla]

Sounds to me like the deck was being stacked, @paradox3 . She knew who would support her and wanted the congregation to look like that. Not how a minister should operate. The congregation should be the priority, not the minister.

Reminds more and more of the case in Kitchener where a UCCan called a minister who was ordained in the UCCan but was working as an evangelical preacher, thinking he would grow the congregation. Instead, he basically ran his own ministry and largely neglected the folks who called him. At least that's the story as I heard it. I knew a girl who went to that church.

 

[GordW]

I'd be interested in the difference between 'liberal' and 'progressive', if it could be done without reams of handouts...

My impression, remembering the CCPC faith statement on the website of the time and a comment passed on to me from a colleague who had Gretta speak in THunder Bay around that time is that Progressive Christianity as Gretta understand (or understood) it didn't have to mention Jesus.

 

[paradox3]

Sounds to me like the deck was being stacked, @paradox3 . She knew who would support her and wanted the congregation to look like that. Not how a minister should operate. The congregation should be the priority, not the minister.

Reminds more and more of the case in Kitchener where a UCCan called a minister who was ordained in the UCCan but was working as an evangelical preacher, thinking he would grow the congregation. Instead, he basically ran his own ministry and largely neglected the folks who called him. At least that's the story as I heard it. I knew a girl who went to that church.

Sounds like a very similar situation. Gretta was called in 1997 and the congregation was looking for a progressive perspective, as I understand it. The previous minister was Bruce Sanguin, also a progressive voice, but he has since distanced himself from Vosper.

In the early days of her ministry, God was still present in her worship style. According to her narrative, she spontaneously gave a sermon in 2001 which completely deconstructed God. Funny thing is I never heard such a sermon nor was I aware of anyone else discussing it. Gretta had some supporters going back to those early days & I could name a few of them.

She also worked at stacking the board in her favor. Many of those on the board who initially supported her later found themselves at odds with her theological direction. Not my story to tell but I notice that some of those early board members are now found in the group of former WHUC folks.

 

[paradox3]

My impression, remembering the CCPC faith statement on the website of the time and a comment passed on to me from a colleague who had Gretta speak in THunder Bay around that time is that Progressive Christianity as Gretta understand (or understood) it didn't have to mention Jesus.

Indeed. I have also heard that she has said at some speaking engagements there is no place for Jesus in progressive Christianity. Admittedly, I have never personally heard her say this. But it does not surprise me.

 

[paradox3]

I'd be interested in the difference between 'liberal' and 'progressive', if it could be done without reams of handouts...

Those handouts hit the recycling bin many years ago. As I recall, "liberal" christianity was pretty much mainstream for this denomination. "Progressive" described her direction which has changed somewhat over the years. But even then we were going to toss out everything in the Christian tradition which could not be understood literally.

 

[paradox3]

Will pop over soon to the Observer website. I have told some of the story there and will get busy cutting and pasting.

 

[BetteTheRed]

If someone knows how to insert a PDF document, I've got a scan of the CCPC's "8 points" from 2005. Still sounds pretty Christian to me.

 

[paradox3]

If someone knows how to insert a PDF document, I've got a scan of the CCPC's "8 points" from 2005. Still sounds pretty Christian to me.

No mention of Jesus, though. Quite unlike its American counterpart at the time.

I understand the American group has since moved closer to Gretta's stance but I have not followed them closely.

2005 sounds like it would be about right. CCPC didn't come out with the "points" until a while after its launch.

 

[paradox3]

Here is what I was searching for. A response posted on the Observer website which addresses another former member. Three of us have checked in there recently.

"Hi T. As another former member, I can certainly understand the sense of futility you are describing. I, too, had a private conversation with Gretta. To her credit, she understood my point of view & was willing to listen, but I received a very clear message about where she intended to lead the congregation. I also had a meeting with the M & P committee, wrote a letter to the board and had a conversation with the board chair.

The members of the M & P committee were extremely kind but their bottom line was "the board is supporting Gretta". The board chair was pleasant enough but he was either unwilling or unable to address any of my concerns. His personal loyalty to Gretta seemed to trump all other considerations. He saw Gretta as a "brilliant" individual, more advanced in her thinking than the rest of us. His message was that we all simply needed to trust her leadership.

Many from outside have wondered why those of us who were unhappy did nothing official, i.e. gather 10 signatures and file a complaint. Over the years some of us may have wondered this ourselves. But it was a chaotic time and I think there are a variety of reasons folks declined to take this course of action."

 

[paradox3]

If anyone has questions, please ask. The story is a bit pieced together.

No energy to do a rewrite although I considered it.

 

[Mendalla]

You know, it's too bad she took the approach she did. There was definitely some middle ground you could have landed on.

That said, I am guilty of having supported a minister who perhaps also went too far in trying to remake a congregation in her preferred image (in the opposite direction, away from a strong humanist history towards a more spiritual path). She ended up leaving but it took two interim ministers to put the pieces back together before we could call another settled minister. At the time, I was a strong supporter as was the board, but in retrospect, it's uncomfortably similar to the WHUC situation. And I wonder if I was on the right side.

 

[Delightful Life]

@Inannawhimsey You were editing as I was posting.

Yes, you are correct, it is an opinion piece.

We will get a more balanced piece if Doug Todd does one in the Vancouver Sun.

My brain runs so much faster than my physical self lol

Motioning Frozen,
Inannawhimsey

 

[Delightful Life]

I'd be interested in the difference between 'liberal' and 'progressive', if it could be done without reams of handouts... e.

I'm still trying to figure that oot

I mean, it seems that the neurology of Conservatives and Liberals are actully different from each other and their moral sense is actually different (like Liberals moral sense only vigilant on 2 areas where Conservatives seem 2 b vigilant in all areas) and that at least some of this is genetic...

Progressives seems...a tribal marker? Or some kind of denotation given to a policy or a behaviour or human being after the fact that is deemed not harmful ever? Its strange the words we use.

Abused comfort,
Inannawhimsey