Page 44 - PC Winter 2023-24

Connection
REFLECTIONS
Imagining Your Church’s Future
44
PRESBYTERIAN
WINTER 2023
presbyterian.ca
By the Rev. Mark Tremblay, Calgary, Alta.
The church is in a transitional period. We are experiencing a multi-generational reconfiguration of spirituality and religion around the world. It is a time of discom- fort and disruption. But it is also a time that is full of opportunities for how the church might contin- ue Christ’s ministry in the world and in our communities.
Making decisions and discern- ing God’s will proves to be more challenging at this time as it is difficult to understand where the church is going. It is like standing at a crossroads and not knowing which path to choose. Instead of thinking that our choice is be- tween two possibilities only, we need to remember that the cross- roads has at least four choices. Professional Futurist Jim Dator has recognized four archetypes of which future might unfold. Church communities could use these, collectively, to discern their own future.
These four archetypes or cate- gories are growth, constraint, col- lapse and transformation. In her book, Imaginable: How to Create a Hopeful Future, Jane McGonigal defines each archetype as follows:
Growth is a story about more of what is already being experi- enced. Current trends and condi- tions, both good and bad, con- tinue to grow as they have in the past, but now at a faster rate.
Constraint is a story about accepting new limitations. We respond to a threat or problem by agreeing to new restrictions and new kinds of self-discipline. Desperate times call for desper- ate measures! This is a story of individual sacrifice for the greater good.
Collapse is a story about a sud- den shutdown or tragic failure. It occurs when something we take for granted is no longer reliable or available—its absence leading to shock and sometimes chaos. Major social systems become strained beyond the breaking point, causing new kinds of suf- fering and social disarray.
Transformation is a story about system-changing innovation or breakthrough. It stretches our imaginations, challenges our as- sumptions, and suggests that what was once considered im- possible can now be realized. Transformation is often aspira- tional, setting a new course for individuals and organizations.
McGonigal recommends creat- ing scenarios to help us imagine the future. A scenario is a virtual safe space created to explore the future. It is a “detailed description of a par ticular future” that could happen. Scenarios can be used to imagine what it would be like when circumstances change, and they
should be inspired by real things that are happening now. To help create a scenario one must gath- er current clues, called signals, that are manifesting to suggest that things are already star ting to change today. Signals represent concrete, specific, vivid indicators of how the future might look.
They indicate technologies and habits of the future that are being tested, experimented with and in- vented today. These clues provide the basis of possible changes to explore in a scenario.
In addition to clues, we might also find future forces, trends or drivers of change, that will or are making a disruptive or transform-
ative impact on the way things are. For example, one of the future forces McGonigal identifies is “ef- forts to combat social isolation.” Loneliness has motivated many people and groups to find ways to counteract it and to create activi- ties to prevent it. Loneliness has huge implications for our psy- chological, physical and spiritual health. Is this not an invitation waiting for a response?
Any decision-making about the future can be explored through each of these archetypes by cre- ating a scenario that can be tra- versed for the kind of future each path yields. With a small group of people, learn more about how to spot signals and recognize forces to be able to imagine possible future scenarios. The futurists’ mantra is that foresight about what lies ahead can provide in- sight for decision making and ac- tions today. Clarity, not certainty, is needed.
When thinking about the future it is important not to try to pre- dict the future and decide ahead of time which pathway is the right one. Creating and exploring pos- sible futures must be done by identifying real clues and recog- nizing forces. Imagining scenari- os based on those clues and forc- es is a safe way to explore what the future could be like and at the same time holding our “normalcy bias,” our innate expectation that the future will be like the present, in check.
The Present Crisis: Vengeance
By the Rev. Philip J. Lee, retired minister living in Fredericton, N.B., author of the blog, “The Present Crisis,” which is published at medium.com/@pjlee_39329
“Beloved, never avenge your- selves, for leave it to the wrath of God” (Romans 12: 19).
At a recent rally of the Conserv- ative Political Action Conference, former President Donald Trump muttered the word revenge and then went on to assure his au- dience: “I am your justice; I am your retribution.”
Revenge, justice, retribution— against whom? Presumably against Democrats, leftists, the United States Department of Jus-
tice? His admiring listeners seem to know because they responded with loud approval.
Trump’s promise, despite his support from about 80% of white Evangelical Christians, is at an opposite pole from the Apostle Paul’s admonition to the Church in Rome. Paul warns them that revenge will not work, that we flawed human beings are not wise enough to mete out a proper vengeance to our fellows.
Of course, we need to have laws, we need to elect or ap- point officials to carry out the laws, to punish those who vio- late laws. Paul was certainly not an anarchist. In another letter he urges that “all things should be
done decently and in order” (I Corinthians 14:40). The motive for “decency” and “order,” for the good governing of human affairs, can never be associated with revenge. If “honesty is the best policy,” revenge may be the very worst policy.
Again, the Apostle tells his fel- low Christians to leave “venge- ance to the wrath of God.” The “wrath of God” is Paul’s term for God’s justice. He goes on to quote Jewish law. The full text of his reference is: “You shall not take vengeance or bear any grudge against the sons of your own people, but you shall love your neighbour as yourself. I am the Lord” (Leviticus 19:15).
The “wrath of God” is closely connected with the “law” of God. God’s justice is normally exer- cised within the context of law. If there is a legitimate grievance, if some action is so atrocious and unfair that it requires punishment beyond the scope of the legiti- mate courts, then leave it to the One who is all knowing and all discerning. Only God’s outrage can be equated with justice.
By “leaving it to God” we are not by any means advocating a sor t of Christian quietism. What comes to my mind as a good example of political action influ- enced by Christian ethics would be the Allies’ action following World War II. After the surren-
der of Nazi Germany, there were two dominant responses by Al- lied nations in dealing with their defeated enemies. One was the Nuremberg Trials in which the surviving chief perpetrators of war crimes were tried in ac- cord with existing military and international law. The other was the Marshall Plan, which, rather than punish the German people, helped them restore their econ- omy and move toward establish- ing the stable democracy they now enjoy.
Did the United States and the other Allied nations dispense an adequate revenge against Ger-
many for the Holocaust and all
Continued on page 45