I wasn’t invited, didn’t know anybody and wasn’t sure if I had to be registered previously or Steve Nash good to be welcomed.  I called ahead to find out if it was on and was very surprised when someone was waiting for me at the door after hearing that a new guy might show up.   Within ten minutes my host introduced me to all the other guys on the court, explained the house rules (one player had a predilection for travelling but they never called it; small gym so the wall was inbounds; everyone helped clean up afterwards) and passed me the ball.

After the game I was invited to join them for a beer at one of their homes and the next day I got an e-mail thanking me for coming, giving me a list of names (James had the red shirt and Jim had the killer jumpshot) and offering me a genuine invitation to come back and play.   I’m sore, out of practice and out of shape, but very much looking forward to playing again next week.

How many groups rent our church space throughout the week and just might be doing a better job at being church than we are?

I know, I know, we all try and there are amazing stories and congregations out there and you are in one of them. Keep up the good work!  But I would still bet that if I you and I were to go to an AA group meeting in a church basement right now or a senior’s drop-in, a pickup basketball game or a vegan inspired interpretive dance troupe, we would get a lesson in how to be a welcoming community.

It’s simple stuff really: asking someone’s name, not for the guest book, but for introductions to others; explaining some of the house rules; focusing on another’s needs before your own.  And here’s the best one:  being genuinely pleased that someone took the effort to share an experience with you.

It was clear that my new basketball friend loved his group, was proud to be part of it and uphold its traditions.  That he seemed as interested in me having some of those same feelings for that group was, well, gospel.

The study also examined private religious behaviour such as prayer, meditation, worship and the reading of sacred texts on one’s own.  “While only about one-third (32%) of adult Canadians attend religious services at least monthly, over one-half (53%) engage in religious activities on their own at least monthly.  Those who worship together publicly are most likely to also pray or read scripture at home (75%), but of those who infrequently attended religious services over the previous year, 37% engaged in religious practices on their own on a weekly basis.  Furthermore, of those who never attended services in the previous year, 27% engaged in weekly religious practices on their own.  These two groups (“infrequently” and “never”) represent 21% of the adult population.

Now, I do believe there is great truth in the maxim that “liars can figure” and “figures can lie,” and this study included all religions, not just Christianity, but I would also take away another message from this study.  From a theological perspective, we talk about the story of God, as told from Genesis to Revelation, as being the story of a Creator who has always and continues to seek relationship with the whole of creation, including humanity.  As well, I think we human beings were created to hunger and thirst after a connection with something more than ourselves, something sacred… God.  Does this not ring true with the key message coming out of Emmaus – that first and foremost, individuals seek a personal experience of Jesus Christ, more so than knowledge about him?  So, when the institution of the church no longer attracts them, many individual human beings still intentionally seek the sacred.  Does that not say volumes about our institutions?  People need God, even though they may not recognize or enunciate that specifically, and some may even deny it (evangelical secularists).  The study also, for me anyway, gives us reason to hope and to move forward as God’s people in the 21^st century.  There are people living in the houses all around our church buildings who seek the sacred, who seek God.  If the conduit into the church building seems to be plugged, we need new ways to be able to talk with non-church-goers about experiencing God… out there, where they are.  How do we share our experience of the living Christ with our neighbours?  With our colleagues at work?  With members of our own family?  Sex, politics and religion used to be the taboo topics for polite conversation; sex and politics disappeared from that list long ago.  Fear (9/11 and empire-in-action related) has, I think, retarded the opening of public conversation on how we experience sacred moments, but it is coming.  Some congregations are being proactive about learning to verbally communicate what used to be private experiences.  We have much to learn together.  Our communities of faith will grow as we are able to share firstly with each other, and then with everybody else.

Thoughts?  If interested, you can check out the Statistics Canada survey at the following address:

www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/11-008-x/2006001/pdf/9181-eng.pdf

“I am leaving this weekend”, said Rev. Shaun Seaman from a church in Kanata, Ontario, “with a new sense that my congregation will be able to find the resources it needs to accomplish God’s mission”. Rev. Zander Dunn explained that although he was not a man of great wealth, he himself wanted to see a financial planner about how his resources could better help the church. And Herb Gale said that he was surprised and delighted at the interest in resourcing the church’s future among this group of clergy.

Where did that hope come from? From discussions about the history of the church and its resilience over thousands of years.

We all know that doesn’t mean change is easy. For the church to stop lamenting a lack of numbers in its pews or money in the bank will take determined effort. For the church to learn new things might be awkward. For the church to make radical decisions, like selling old buildings, will be excruciating. But when we remember that God remains with us–just as God has always remained with the church–there is hope for us yet.

This is the perfect time to think about it of course, because it is October 31. On that day in 1517, Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the castle door in Wittenberg, Germany. It was the beginning of what we now call the Protestant Reformation, as Luther was excommunicated from the church for his ideas, but then began a whole new movement which was joined by many others such as Zwingli and Calvin and Knox.

It is easy to talk about that time in history and its sweeping changes as if they were all logical and clear cut. In reality, however, those were times of fear and anger, and times of incredible change. It had extreme political and historical ramifications, not to mention the intimate and personal change that those reformers must have endured themselves.

We might be preoccupied with Halloween today, especially if we have children or grandchildren. But let’s not miss looking back and remembering the Reformation, too. As we strive to move ahead in the spirit of Emmaus, it could be a source of hope. The church has been through an enormous amount of grief and change, but God held us fast. Hundreds of years later, it is no different. We are still called to cling to a vision of hope, and then have the courage to live our heritage in new and faithful ways. As we are so fond of saying, we are reformed and reforming. Right?

We all know that type of store no longer exists in even the most modest of small towns. Near our cottage on Six Mile Lake, the small town of Port Severn has such a store, but the slightly larger town of Coldwater, only ten miles south, has a supermarket run by a major grocery chain.

It seems to me that the vast majority of our churches are run like a “Mom and Pop” operation in a world where people are looking for a “supermarket” experience.

I’m not suggesting that every church has to become a supermarket, but is it possible that in larger urban and suburban areas that we might be able to combine the resources of several smaller churches in order to plant a church that could offer a wider variety of Christian resources and experience? Such a church could have a team of clergy and lay people with different areas of “giftedness” working together to provide ministry to seniors, middle aged, young people and children. The music could be of excellent quality. The facilities would provide a range of meeting places serving the needs of individuals, small groups and larger meetings of several hundred people. We could provide for quality audiovisual and sound system equipment. There might even be different worship spaces and services to provide different styles of worship – contemporary worship, traditional worship and smaller chapel like spaces for less well attended mid-week services.

As it is now, most of our churches are of only one style with a “lone ranger” minister expected to possess every possible clergy ability and gift required to meet the needs of the church.

Is it possible that there are other ways of doing “church” that may more effectively help people to experience the presence of Christ in their lives?

It seems to me this is an experiment worth trying.

There’s only one question: Are there any visionary and courageous congregations and presbyteries who are willing to take up the challenge and try being the church in a new and different way?

My sense is that we, in our congregations, spend much time looking inwardly and when looking and acting outwardly, do so only on a few specific “safe” mission projects. Perhaps we are too process-oriented; what is the point of changing a process if our vision is limited or off centre? If we only look inwardly, we will fade into the history books because there are fewer and fewer people on the inside and the folks on the outside have no interest in us. What would happen if we evaluated new visions and worked together on larger community issues and projects? [There would be no intention (or likelihood) of anybody converting anybody else from one religion to another. Interfaith dialogue helps us deepen our roots in our own faith because we are caused to ask ourselves questions and seek answers.]

Could we, therefore, be seen as “people of God” together? Could we together make more significant contributions to societal needs? Could we talk about what it means to be people of God in other arenas where we co-habit – e.g. the work place, the shopping centre (consumer society) and – dare we – the voters’ booth? These new (to me) thoughts caused me to think about what is really important to me as a follower of Jesus in my 21st century Canadian context. This thought would be more relevant in some parts of Canada than others, obviously, but where appropriate, would it be worth exploring possibilities? New paths sound exciting; I’d love to follow one or two of them and see where they led. I know we have some adventurous congregations and presbyteries among us; taking some calculated risks might be helpful. Maybe there is interfaith common action already happening of which I am not aware. I’d love to hear some stories!

Presbyteries are geographically based: could they develop an “interfaith interaction” arm that could explore possibilities and help congregations as a group to look up and see who their neighbours (and faith cousins) are in local temples and mosques? Turning around on the road to Emmaus might lead us to new routes back to Jerusalem. Radical discipleship might even be fun!

But I wonder.  I wonder if there is not a better way to do Presbytery.  At the last two presbytery meetings we had wonderful presentations from the Emmaus event participants inviting us to think of Presbytery differently.  Before the Emmaus event at one of the committee meetings there was talk about some presbytery somewhere that dealt with all of the business, indeed the entire meeting was in the context of a worship service.  Hmm… that’s interesting.

I wonder what Presbytery would be like if it were a worship service …

A call to worship for the entire presbytery – a call to worship God in all we do

A gathering prayer – recognizing the joy of God in our relationships one to the other, recognizing the power of our relationships to each other in the love that is Jesus the Christ

A time of confession for the Presbytery – recognizing our failures in our relationships to each other, a time to pray for our brokenness and competition and distrust and dislike, a time to confess to God that we as a Presbytery have agendas different than the Great Commandment and the Great Commission, agendas perhaps that serve the purpose of not rocking the boat, of not upsetting the status quo, a time of identifying in our presbyteries where and when it is so easy to be lulled into serving these other gods

A time of hearing God’s word, a time of hearing what is happening in God’s world, a time to be encouraged and refreshed, a time of reaching for and embracing the hope that God so plentifully supplies

A time of intercession, a time of hearing what is happening in the life of each congregation, a time of sharing celebrations and concerns, a time to offer support and encouragement, counsel and wisdom to each other all as part of the body of Christ

A time of thanksgiving to God recognizing that God is the one who is to be praised, God is the giver of all good gifts, God in Christ is the one who gives us strength and courage for the journey

A time of offering in which we dedicate ourselves anew to our purpose as God’s own people as congregations and as a presbytery

A time of commissioning in which together we identify what God is calling us to do in the next days, weeks and months.

I wonder…

Is it possible to effectively deal with all the presbytery business in the context of worship.  What might it mean?

Here are some possibilities:

• Dispensing with committees
• Make congregations responsible for reports to the presbytery with respect to work being done within the congregation and in the community
• Asking (requiring) each congregation to adopt ‘mentors’ (both clergy and laity) from neighbouring congregations to help them when they are making reports to the presbytery, seeking counsel and wisdom from those neighbouring mentors assuring that things are done ‘decently and in order’ but in the context of building strong relationships
• Redefining the role of the moderator and moderator’s support team to check in with congregations to ensure they have the mentors necessary for the work they are planning or implementing
• Retaining only one committee – the business committee to address the logistical and housekeeping details as necessary

I wonder.  Can it be done?  Is it possible?

I wonder what you wonder.

The outcomes of [the Emmaus Project] are quite closely aligned with what is envisioned in the reconfiguration of the LMA and provide a direction for future mission and ministry within the PCC.

This explanation of the vision behind the reorganization may help to provide more context for the coming changes and give the wider church a sense of what this strategy is trying to achieve. At the very least, it is evidence that we are part of a large, ongoing conversation about the future of the church.

I’m thinking, “They’re not going to make it …”

Now, nobody wants to see a congregation close down … we just hate to do that. People get upset. They’ve been worshiping there all their lives. Just let it go on for a little longer … Don’t be mean to them …”

And I understand that … but, I need to tell you, sometimes I wonder, “If an alien species came and observed the tribe we call Presbyterians. Tried to figure out the purpose of our group, I’m worried that they might come to the conclusion that we’re “a society for the preservation of old buildings.”

I love the Presbyterian Church in Canada – its history and its traditions … but that’s not why Jesus went to the cross. I seem to remember Jesus looking at the magnificent Temple at the centre of Jerusalem and the Jewish religion, and he said to his disciples, “Do you see these great buildings? There will not be left here one stone upon another …”

And then, in the Gospel of Mark, “Jesus said, “You can’t put new wine into old wineskins.”

And that’s the way it turned out for the followers of Jesus. They tried to stay within traditional Judaism – the synagogue, Temple worship – but the old structures wouldn’t … couldn’t … accommodate … adapt, to the new ways of the disciples of Jesus. They were rejected or tossed out … the old wineskins couldn’t hold the new wine.

Now, am I going to tell you I’ve got the answers … no …

I have way more questions than I have answers, but I have this sense, the way we’re doing things now isn’t going to work that much longer.

Is it possible, the Holy Spirit is crying out for us to change course, and will we … can we change course before we run aground?

And while there’s still time, will we – our Presbyteries and the Presbyterian Church in Canada – will we risk our very existence, the very life of this church of ours – this church I’ve loved and served all my life – will we put it’s very life in danger in order to be faithful to God?

And you see, here’s what I think – I don’t think we have a choice, because we’ve pledged our very souls – to the one who said to us, “Whoever would save his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.”

Now I don’t know if that’s a threat or a promise – maybe both, but for Jesus, it was the way he lived … it was the bottom line, “Risk it all to follow me … all of it …” – for him, it was the only way …

Dr. Marilyn Craven

Today I attended the Charles H. MacDonald memorial lecture at Knox College in Toronto. Dr. Marilyn Craven, Associate Clinical Professor in the Department of Psychiatry and Behavioural Neurosciences at McMaster University, addressed mental health and ministry. It was an afternoon well spent.

Dr. Craven identified clergy as front line mental health workers. Along with family physicians, ministers are often approached by those suffering from mental illness, and they regularly encounter people in their community who are showing signs of distress. She suggested that some 300, 000 Canadians with mental health disorders contacted a clergy person in the past year alone.

Unfortunately, she also pointed out that studies show less than 30% of clergy can recognize mental health issues and many feel unprepared to deal with them effectively. Most religious leaders are not adequately connected to their local mental health care providers and do not know how to access available support.

Dr. Craven believes that clergy could play a key role in helping more people get the help they need.  That means we need to become better informed about mental health issues, and about the community agencies who provide mental health services. The good news is that just five hours of education in the area of mental health can leave clergy feeling more equipped!

What does any of this have to do with the Emmaus Project, you ask?

Our presbyteries are well positioned to help fight the stigma of mental health issues. Clergy, says Dr. Craven, “can educate congregations and governing bodies about the biological basis of many serious mental health disorders”, emphasizing recovery and normalcy. This would be great work for presbyteries yearning to do work that builds up the body of Christ. We could do simple things like host education events, share information, or arrange for more experienced clergy to mentor those who are new to the presbytery. 

We know that clergy tend to have higher-than-average rates of stress-related illness, and some suffer from mental health disorders themselves. Not only that, but as Dr. Craven suggested, “Every front line mental health worker needs mentoring and support”. That means that every clergy person will benefit if our presbyteries pay attention to issues of mental health. If we hope to make presbyteries strong and healthy, we need to be courageous enough to tackle this issue together. Are there physicians, psychiatrists and other mental health professionals that could share their gifts and experience with our presbyteries? Can we create opportunities for safe conversations among ministers and elders? How can we support one another as front line mental health workers?

This reorganization is designed both to meet the needed financial savings and to better organize departmental units to meet the needs of a changing church. Key in the reorganization has been seeking efficiencies by combining work areas, and developing a vision of being an even stronger resource for presbyteries and congregations in their ministries.

Signposts for our journey together created at The Emmaus Project Event.

I wonder how other Emmaus-minded people across the country see and feel this announcement. I am quite sure there are many of you who are passionate about this.  Was it necessary? Did it move us in the right direction? Did it go far enough? Too far? Would you have done something differently?