* * *

Advisory Council – Meeting, January 12, 2012 – 7:30pm at the church-house

Present: Tyler, Paul, Jesse, Lynette, Karen

Business arising from last meeting:
-web-site updates being done
-follow-up to Jack’s email – getting commitment from All Saints people for 2012 – Lynette to send out email to All Saints people

Relations with Faith Lutheran
-discussion of Dec 24 and Jan 8 services
-looking towards Jan 21 meeting

Souper Sunday
-Jan 15 – Curtis Aguirre presentation; soup – Sundmark/Stebner; buns/cream/butter – Karen; dessert – Paul/Myrle
-Feb 19 – discussion re: program; Tyler to plan it.

Dates in February
-RIC Sunday / OutWeek – Will do RIC Sunday on Feb. 5^th to start up out week.
-Bishop’s Study Conference in Feb.12-15 Tyler to go.

Other business
-will do another faith [World Religions] exploration through Lent; Tyler is extending invitations to a couple of communities for conversation

Next meeting: February 16
Adjourned at 9:30pm

We watched a film called The Economics of Happiness.  It’s a film that re-frames the trend towards globalization, which has sometimes been seen as a good or inevitable thing, as one where trade agreements have a corrosive effect on social connections and economy, and favour business interests.  It features a number of intellectuals and politicians who speak for localized food, economy, and culture (but not to the exclusion of cross-cultural relations), and who see the decline in environment as a problem with a solution if we were to, collectively, change our systems so we were not producing and consuming at the rate we have in recent decades.  Among the contributors to the program were Helena Norberg-Hodge, Vandana Shiva, and David Korten.

It seems to me that there are a couple of directions that people could go after viewing such a film.  It’s possible to miss the opportunities for growth that are suggested – like living with less, living on less, and seeking out good relationship with neighbours near and far.  So one might see such a film and say, “we’re sunk – our social and economic climate, along with the environmental crises everywhere, mean that there is no turning back”; alternatively, we might say, “we don’t need to feed into consumer-culture in the way we have for the past fifty years; let’s change how we live so all might have life!”

If we feel that there is no turning back, I think we might do well to ask ourselves how much of our living – and therefore our perceived happiness – is wrapped up in a culture and society where we’re told how to feel.  That is, we’re told we need to look a certain way, own certain things, consume certain products – and if we don’t, we can’t possibly be happy.  On the other hand, can we see ourselves embracing a way of life where we don’t need to “keep up with the Joneses,” so to speak?

To live differently will mean making choices about where one buys their groceries and daily needs; it means making choices when it comes to participating in the electoral process; it means making a conscious effort to support the living of others – people and planet.  So it’s not as simple as saying, “I’ll only stop shopping at that particular big-box store.”  It means looking at the labels and finding out where and how products are produced, and then choosing ones that are made in decent conditions, and not too far away.  It means researching the platforms of candidates and political parties to find out what their agendas really mean – and how those agendas affect others, near and far.

In the church-year, when we hear the story of Transfiguration (Mark 9:2-9), we hear of Jesus and his disciples going to a place away from the public-eye.  As they are away, Jesus is ‘transfigured’ – his disciples see him in a new way, and his divine nature is revealed to them (even to the point of God’s voice coming to them in a cloud, “This is my son, the Beloved – listen to him!”).  Jesus’ life and words were about living in good relationship, and not accumulating things so that those with more were ‘rich’ and those with less were ‘poor.’  This continues to be a challenging word for us, today – living in such a way that all have enough, so that all might have a full life.

All who hunger, sing together, Jesus Christ is living bread. Come from loneliness and longing. Here in peace we have been fed. Blest are those who from this table live their days in gratitude. Taste and see the grace eternal. Taste and see that God is good.

(Worship hymnal #461)

We’re being pushed to new places!  We must take responsibility for our future as a community of faith!

This month, we will do two things that connect us with life around: we observe Reconciling In Christ Sunday on February 5^th, and Ash Wednesday is February 22^nd.  To where are we being called?  Is our existence, primarily, for ourselves, or do we exist for the betterment of life for all?  (And, if so, are we willing to work at laying the foundations for a community of faith that will continue into the future?)

The hymnist writes of how we are connected in the Eucharist, and how we are also connected in song!  There is also a statement of the reality in which many find themselves, today: loneliness, longing, unrest.  In the story of Jesus Christ, we are invited into living the hospitality, the generosity, the Sabbath rest, the non-violence, the non-covetous way, which we’ve seen in Jesus’ life.  We are invited into another way that challenges the way life tends to be around us in society.

Read the words about prophetic voice and discernment in this newsletter – collectively, as members of the body of Christ, we must discern  God’s call to us in this place at this time.  Yes, we are facing obstacles, but we’re a creative bunch!  We have gifts that need to be shared in this area at this time!

Seeing other congregations that have difficulty moving into new places because of issues around size and building, we are – by contrast – “unencumbered.”  How might our ability to provide a spirit of openness in this city be carried on through our currently-small size?  Let’s share ideas this month! -Pastor Tyler Gingrich

* * * * * * *

THANK YOU…

As far as mainline church-groups go, All Saints has a good web-presence.  We have a YouTube channel, a Facebook page, this pastor blogs and is even known to tweet now and then…!

It’s helpful, these days, to be ‘available’ to those who may not be likely to darken a church door-way.  We have the task of dispelling certain negative stereotypes out there.  (And, if you happen to be one of those just checking us out, I commend you!  I’m conscious that church isn’t put too high on our society’s list of priorities, these days – and often with good reason.)  In order to let people know that we are not the church that they hear about on the news, or read about in the headlines – you know, the ones that hold up signs about God hating whomever, or the ones where the clergy abuse children, or the ones that take extreme action against doctors who supposedly perform abortions – in order to let people know that we are not that church – and in fact we do care about those of other faith-traditions, and we do welcome LGBTQ people into the life of our community, and we do talk about how different people may understand God or prayer – in order to let people know that we are perhaps even a place where they might find meaning, we believe we need to make ourselves available to their needs.

So, it was a pleasure to get a ‘shout out’ from a high-school chum on his blog, recently.  Benjamin Freeland, a writer living in Edmonton, was writing about blog-names and noted this one!

The big thing with church, and invitation, I find, is getting people “out there” to simply come and see.  Come and see that we care – about people and planet – and that we want to live what we say we believe about grace, hospitality, generosity, and welcome.

I’m struck by how things have changed so rapidly in the past decade.  We’ve gone from having a few people on the internet to having everyone on the world wide web.  We’ve gone from having a few people using cell phones, to the vast majority using them.  We’ve gone from having a few people questioning the existence of God to best-selling books declaring, with certainty, that there is no God.

And other things have changed, too – the globe continues to warm.  Species continue to struggle for existence. Our dependence on fossil fuels goes on, apparently with little change. Those are changes that ‘continue,’ but have significant consequences for the future.

What inspired me to put these musings online is an article I read about people dying (being hit by cars, etc) because of wearing headphones.  Not that long ago, new laws were put in place in various cities around North America about driving and texting or speaking on one’s cell phone, and the dangers of it.  There’s a funny video that Rick Mercer made a number of years ago, as Blackberry devices were becoming popular – mocking the way in which people tend to focus on their hand-held gadgets, but not much on what’s around them.

We have all sorts of ways to connect, today, we’re able to communicate more often and more quickly than ever before.  While we are in touch with each other – via email, social networking sites, phones, video-conferencing – we seem to be less-in-touch with the world around us.

As the old saying goes: “stop and smell the roses!”

Whether it’s people who have been trying to pinpoint a date, and those dates come and go, or whether it’s holy texts that may or may not be saying something about when time will end, no one really knows.

A recent article says that the world has about another 500 million years to go.  …given the amount of time that we’ve had recorded history – I think we can say ‘things will go on indefinitely, until further notice’ (!).

With Baptism of Our Lord Sunday, yesterday, I appreciate what John Dominic Crossan writes about John the Baptist and his movement, versus the Jesus movement…
“John [the Baptist]’s theory was […]: oppression by Roman power was a punishment for Israel’s sins, and that sinfulness impeded the promised advent of God. What was needed, therefore, was a great sacrament of repentance, a popular repetition of ancient Israel’s coming out of the desert, crossing the Jordan, and entering the Promised Land. In that process, the Israelites would repent of their sins as they were “baptized” or immersed in the Jordan, their moral cleansing symbolized by the physical washing.

A critical mass of repentant people who had “retaken” their Promised Land would prepare for, or possibly even hasten, the start of God’s Great Divine Cleanup. In the meantime, of course, and no matter how nonviolent his proclamation was in theory, John was planting ticking time bombs of eschatological expectation all over the Jewish homeland. So Antipas executed him. Notice one very important aspect of that action. If Antipas had considered John a violent threat, he would have also rounded up as many of John’s followers as he could catch. The fact that he did not, and that he executed only John, tells us that Antipas was responding to somebody who opposed the Roman system nonviolently.

One of the surest things we know about Jesus is that he was baptized by John. This means that Jesus had, at least originally, accepted John’s message of the imminent advent of an apocalyptic and avenging God.

It seems that Jesus started by accepting John’s theology of God’s imminence but, precisely because of what happened to John, changed from that to a theology of God’s presence. John expected God’s advent, but Antipas’s cavalry came instead. John was executed, and God still did not come as an avenging presence. Maybe, thought Jesus, that was not how God acted because that is not how God is. Jesus’ own proclamation therefore insisted that the Kingdom of God was not imminent but present; it was already here below upon this earth, and however it was to be consummated in the future, it was a present-already and not just an imminent-future reality.

Jesus could hardly have made such a spectacular claim without immediately appending another one to it. You can speak forever about the future-imminence of the Kingdom, but unless you are foolish enough to give a precise date, you can hardly be proved right or wrong. We are but waiting for God to act; apart from preparatory faith, hope, and prayer, there is no more we can do. When God acts, it will be, presumably, like a flash of divine lightning beyond all categories of time and place. But to claim an already-present Kingdom demands some evidence, and the only such that Jesus could have offered is this: it is not that we are waiting for God, but that God is waiting for us.  The present Kingdom is a collaborative eschaton between the human and divine worlds. The Great Divine Cleanup is an interactive process with a present beginning in time and a future (short or long?) consummation. Would it happen without God? No. Would it happen without believers? No. To see the presence of the Kingdom of God, said Jesus, come, see how we live, and then live likewise.” (Crossan, God & Empire, pp. 102, 111 ff.)

It is not that we are waiting for God, but that God is waiting for us.

And this star, as bright as day, that will never lead astray with its message so appealing, is the word of God, revealing Christ, the way, the truth, the life

(Worship hymnal #301)

As Pastor Dan Erlander says it, we “live wet.”  As baptized followers of Jesus, that rite of welcome to the family of God is a constant reminder of who we are – it is an identifying trait!  We are “followers of the way” of Jesus Christ – part of his movement of truth and life.

Luther writes in the Small Catechism about Baptism: “What then is the significance of such a baptism with water? Answer: It signifies that the old creature in us with all sins and evil desires is to be drowned and die through daily contrition and repentance, and on the other hand that daily a new person is to come forth and rise up to live before God in righteousness and purity forever. “

As I enjoy watching my children grow – even as I continue to age, myself – I realize more and more that the process of maturing has to do with recognizing that our personal needs are not the only ones, or even the most important ones.  It’s a realization that we are all connected – and we are to open up, and move away from a ‘curbed in on self’ way of being.

Baptism reminds us of our inter-connectedness in life, and invites mindfulness of others.

-Pastor Tyler Gingrich

* * * * * * *

Isaac Newton is to have said, “tact is the knack of making a point without making an enemy.”  Is it possible for us to acknowledge that no one has the definitive answer.  That is, no one really knows the “why” of why we’re here – why there’s life and conscious life; no one really knows where we’re heading – in the next few centuries, or after death, or the ultimate fate of the earth; no one knows our ultimate limits – whether we’ll ever be able to live forever, or travel through time, or what-have-you.  Though, we are quick to argue over our assumptions of any of these things.  I wish we could be open to a variety of perspectives.

One of the ways I’ve sometimes seen things is that many do not want to be responsible: people will look to pin blame somewhere – or, at least, on someone.  So, for example, there are those who will say that religion – or a certain religion – is to blame for holding back scientific advancements, or instigating wars, or allowing abuses of human rights.

We build our perspectives based on how we allow ourselves to be convinced of certain things.  It’s been said that we tend to read things that support our previously-held assumptions.  But where are those things learned in the first place?

I think culture and home life are major influences.  If we’re raised in a culture and home that promotes openness and acceptance, we learn to value other perspectives.  If we’re raised in a culture and home that promotes certainty and legal process, we learn to value those perspectives which can be validated in the ways we’ve learned.  I say that home life and culture are ‘major’ influences because I acknowledge that they are not the only influences.  One’s personal experience tends to lead to certain perspectives – perhaps more than anything – and one’s personal experience can be shaped outside the home and by interacting with other cultures.

Ideologies are formed by a variety of perspectives.  There are theological perspectives, and political perspectives, and both are things that can be framed by leaders within theological or political groups.  I believe George Lakoff – a linguistics professor – is right when he points to examples of how politicians have used words to convey certain frames, and perhaps even mislead people in order to garner votes.

A ‘frame’ is a point of reference.  It is how one views the world.  We attach certain meaning to certain words – so some words form a positive frame of reference in our minds, whereas other words form negative ones.  For example, think about how the word “green” has been used in the past decade – everyone wants to be “green” and, therefore, environmentally conscious.  It’s a popular thing to be!  With such words, people can influence a person’s likelihood to support.

I wonder if we can recognize those points-of-reference, and acknowledge that we each come from a certain perspective with certain influences in our lives.  And, if we can do that, and allow different frames legitimacy (as long as they, in return, also reciprocate that openness and legitimacy), we might be able to speak about bigger ideas and broader concepts.  To my mind, this also may be a significant step towards peaceful living together.

It seems to me that we find value in feeling ‘at home’ somewhere.  Sometimes it’s a physical location; other times, it’s with certain people or participating in a certain occasion, and location has less to do with one’s comfort level.  It has to do with positive association.  And, if we can not feel comfortable and ‘at home,’ we have a hard time feeling whole.  (In the film, the children try to get back home by running away from the school to which they had been taken.)

With children, it is so important to help them have a sense of self and to have a sense of place. I find that to be the case, more and more, as I grow into my role as a parent to a couple of dear children.  And the names and words we use to describe and call our children form their identity – for better or worse.  The old saying, “sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me,” is not true.  Just ask the young woman who was taken from her home by her mother and raised under another name.  Or ask the child who was named after a terrible dictator, and who was taken by child social services because of his name.

In the case of children who were once taken from their families, and then told that what they had learned (eg. the language and culture of their parents) was wrong, just imagine the awful feelings that would go with that.  Sadly, that is the case with many who have grown up in such places as residential schools (whether in Australia, or Canada, or elsewhere).

We continue to struggle with matters of identity and naming when we expect that there be an English-version of someone’s name.  A poster hangs on the wall in my house, “How to Build Global Community.”  It has many suggestions for building global community, a couple of which are, “listen to music you don’t understand – dance to it” and “learn a second (or third) language.”  When I was in high school, I remember a poster on my Japanese language teacher’s wall: “monolingualism can be cured.”

The words we use, and the images they conjure in each of our minds, affect our individual ability to feel whole.  It seems odd – how could words and images hold so much power? – but it penetrates to the core of our being.  We attach meaning to those words and images, based on the experiences that they recall for each of us.

In the story of Jesus’ birth, there are names that are ascribed to him: “Jesus” (“one who saves”) and “Immanuel” (“God among us”).  In the story of every baptized person, we connect ourselves to the story of Jesus – we name ourselves “Christian” as a follower of the way of Jesus.

Don’t underestimate the power of language and words.  And use the images for good – to build a framework for each person to see how we are connected, how we are all worthy of respect and love, and how we are all to engage in just living.