So there are atheists in the United Church of Canada.
It shouldn't come as much of a surprise that after years of saying “All are welcome in this place” that the result is a range of views within the church about the existence of God, especially as we seem to live in a society becoming ever more secular and inclining to require evidence for what we are willing to believe.
I suppose a space journey through emptiness four and a half hours away at the speed of light should have some bearing in putting early concepts of the Heavens to rest. Now I think we will have to stick with a range of ideas about a God who is here on Earth, interventionist or metaphorical, according to our personal views about what we need as individuals or what is needed to make the world a better place for all.
Many of you will remember a Church where stewardship visits were required. Members of the Board visited families to discuss church affairs and receive input on any topic of concern. Tea was taken. The main concern of the Board was of course financial, especially if giving were down, and members who appeared to have stopped attending attracted particular notice.
Was there some problem with the minister? Were the sermons not what they needed? Has pastoral care failed them somehow? And, most worrying, had they moved to a rival church? One such family who had ceased to attend St Andrew's United in Fort Langley had indeed done just that. They had switched to one of the new evangelical congregations being formed in Langley at the time. Were they willing to share the reason? Indeed they were. And at some length.
The gist of the explanation for their move was that the United Church had become too open, with a loss of defined beliefs and the new church provided a much clearer statement of what it stood for. The United Church was losing its way. There had to be a point where belief is meaningless if anything goes. Where were the old standards? This is a slippery slope and decline is inevitable.
The idea that there were atheists in the church was far from the conversation, but I suspect that there are still many people who would prefer a prescriptive church where they are told what to believe and may feel that things have gone a bit too far and it is time to take some kind of a stand on what their church should tolerate.
When a minister of the United Church of Canada declares herself for atheism in the Church and still retains her position with her own church and a sizeable congregation things appear to be coming to a head. That Gretta Vosper has changed the practicing of religion in her church drastically and has been on a personal speaking crusade to persuade Christians that more change is needed has brought her into conflict with those responsible for allowing her to act as a United Church minister. She may require to be defrocked and no longer allowed to preach her heretical doctrine with the apparent acceptance of the body of the kirk.
A group of us read her book With or Without God a few years ago and found it an interesting basis for discussion. The idea that, for example, the cross should be removed from the sanctuary as no longer representative of what Christianity is about was rather a shock and generated argument about what the United Church could tolerate in the breadth of its beliefs. Given the tenor of the present times I'm sure the committee responsible for questioning Ms. Vosper and recommending her suitability for continuing in her position will have similar arguments that should interest all of us. The letters to the Observer should be interesting.
After all, if you can't have a good argument about religious beliefs within the Church, where is there a better place to have it.
Written by: Derek Bisset