Conference lgp30::christian-perspective

   Ron,

   Some thoughts.  I ask questions as part of the creative process,
   all answers are valid, not all may be used.

   While I'm not familiar with the readings the question
   of "who are you?" has a familar ring.  Think about the ideas embodied
   in the question.  Are we asking who are they preceived to be or who
   they preceived themselves to be?

   I looked the word Autonomy up to assure myself of it meaning first.
   It refers to being self contained or self governed.  Considering
   Christ centered to me would mean placing your life in his hands for
   guidence, I was immediately faced with two conflicting concepts or
   so it might seem.  You might persue the idea of autonomy of faith,
   as this is the first fragment of an idea I had.  One cannot live
   by the strength of anothers faith, you must be secure and self
   contained within your faith if it is to sustain you.

   Your second question along the same line might be when the seven deadly
   sins replace confidence in your faith.

   As they say, take what you can use...

   Allison

    Some questions come to mind that I suspect different Christians, from
    different denominations and theologies, would answer differently:
    
    How does the notion of autonomy jibe with the idea of "surrendering
    yourself to Christ"?
    
    How does the notion of autonomy jibe with the authority of the Bible or
    church?
    
    -- Mike

    How does autonomy and power work with and/or against each other within
    the church, within each individual's approaching both subjects?
    
    	Ron
    

    
    re Basenote
    
    Autonomy = self contained and self governed.
    
    The idea of "autonomy" seems to suggest something other than Christian,
    if Christian means "followers of Christ", and that requires obedience
    to the guidelines setforth by Christ...which means we are not entirely
    self contained or self governed, but necessarily the responsibility of
    self containment and self government is shared between the individiual,
    church and Christ/God's Word...we are not entirely autonomous if in
    Christ.
    
    However, I can perceive of an autonomy of the person who is a "strong
    meats" eater, and has been weaned of the milk, who is expected by God
    to be self contained and self governed..."When I became a man I did
    away with childish things"...a childish thing is the need of a
    "governor" or "container of self" if you cannot contain or govern
    yourself you are not a mature adult.  
    
    "Self contained and self governed" says nothing about the guidelines
    and standards by which one contains and governs self.  And in this
    sense we understand "free will".  The bible says, "I place before you a
    blessing and curse, life and death".  God has established the
    perimeters and we did not have a choice to be here or not.  But within
    this HERE and now reality we are faced was a choice, and we have "free
    will" to choose between the two, blessing and curse, life and death. 
    Self contained and self governed" relates to the choosing and not to
    the establishment of the realm.
    
    Playtoe

    re .4
    
    Autonomy became important to the congregational polity to differentiate
    itself from "structure" such as that within the Church of England or
    the Roman Catholic Church.  Congregationalists professed Christ to be
    the head of the church and the UCC uses such language in their "Basis
    of Agreement on the union of the four original and separate
    denominations" founding the UCC.  In other words, people could
    communicate directly with God without intervention by others.
    
    Now it seems to me that many within the UCC have forgotten the intent
    of autonomy and have used it to express power contained and controlled
    by "self" whether self is the individual or the wish of "their" church.
    
    I think autonomy gives one the freedom to choose to belong to God's
    movement over time and over space and to work within the Spirit of
    God's intentions for all creation together, one with the other. 
    Autonomy is a choice for togetherness rather than separation, of being
    cooled from the hot sun by another's shadow and cooling others by our
    own shadows.
    
    "That we may be one" is the motto used within the UCC as it suggests
    our being together, all ministering in His name.
    
    How can we teach, convince and/or persuade the congregants of such a
    message?
    
    	Shalom,
    
    	Ron
    

     My dictionary defines autonomous as self-governing.  Seems to me  this
     would  tie  into  free-will.  The importance of free-will, or autonomy
     (if you'll accept that the two words can be interchanged), is that  it
     places  responsibility  for  choices  and  actions directly on the one
     doing the choosing and the acting.  Our man-made laws are based on the
     assumption  that  adults are autonomous.  If I commit a crime, I can't
     blame it on my parents' upbringing.  In other words, we  don't  choose
     to  act  because  of  our environment, but in spite of it.  This gives
     meaning and value to our choices.

     As an outsider I would say that if one chooses to follow  the  way  of
     Christ, that choice would be meaningless if it was made by one who did
     not have autonomy.  Even when people choose to submit  their  will  to
     Christ's  will,  this  is  *not* a one-time decision, but an *on-going
     decision* because people are still autonomous  and  can  change  their
     minds   at   any  time.   Otherwise  such  a  decision  would  not  be
     challenging, it would not be meaningful, and it  would  not  have  any
     value.   And  there is no reason to reward (provide heaven for) anyone
     who is not autonomous because if they acted  rightly  it  was  because
     they couldn't do otherwise.

     Think "Peace",

     Alvin

    How would you address members of a congregation that has, for the past
    several years, taken on the persistence that although there is a
    governing body (the Association or Conference levels w/i the UCC), they
    as an "autonomous" body can and do choose to do as they please?
    
    Most times, the actions of the church are in direct opposition to the
    "norms" recommended by the state, regional and/or national committees
    within the UCC.  The church is perceived by others within the same
    geography as a church in trouble - financially, membership role,
    spiritually; yet, the church continues to hold on to their notion of
    "autonomy".
    
    My plan is to develop an interpretation of the journey of Saul on the
    road to Damascus, to try to get under the skin, into the head and heart
    of the "old" Saul and the "new" Paul.  Hopefully I can find a message
    within which the congregants can find meaning, truth, motivation to
    turn from their earlier ways and to turn toward God.
    
    Please keep your suggestions coming as they are rich in loosening some
    of my stiffness.
    
    	Shalom,
    
    	Ron
    

     RE: .7

>    My plan is to develop an interpretation of the journey of Saul on the
>    road to Damascus, to try to get under the skin, into the head and heart
>    of the "old" Saul and the "new" Paul.  Hopefully I can find a message
>    within which the congregants can find meaning, truth, motivation to
>    turn from their earlier ways and to turn toward God.

     Sorry, but, respectfully, this approach sounds convoluted to  me.   If
     your  real  message  has to do with the congregation's relationship to
     it's governing body, I think trying  to  squeeze  a  metaphor  out  of
     Paul's  conversion  experience  will  only  confuse  the issue.  May I
     suggest you go back to your  roots!   What  is  the  history  of  your
     denomination?  What were the founders thinking when they established a
     governing body?  What Scripture did they base  their  convictions  on?
     Is  there  a  Creed that embodies your uniqueness, and, if so, can you
     use it as the basis  for  your  sermon  (or  whatever  you  call  it)?
     Reminding  your  congregation  of  their  church's original vision and
     their history and then speaking in this context to the  issue  of  its
     relationship  to  the  governing  body may, it seems to me, put things
     into better perspective and bring home your real message.

     Peace,

     Alvin

    re .-1
    
    I think your ideas are sound and I agree that I must be careful not 
    to send a metaphor that might lead one off in a stray direction.
    The UCC was founded on a scriptural basis and I do have that 
    material available.
    
    On the other side, I've found that a message is often better
    understood when people can draw from an illustration.  Sometimes a
    direct approach has the affect of turning people's defensive nature
    into a roaring flame; thus lessening the worth of the intended
    message. (Several good examples of "direct" approaches that fail can
    be observed in the responses to other recent basenotes :-) ).
    
    Thanks for your redirection.
    
    	Shalom,
    
    	Ron
    

    BTW, the Scripture being used is:
    
    Acts 9:1-20		The Road to Damascus
    Psalm 30:4-12	Anguish in the evening, joy in the morning
    Rev 5:11-14		Slain Lamb
    John 21:1-19	Commissioning Peter to "feed my lambs"
    

     RE: .9

>    On the other side, I've found that a message is often better
>    understood when people can draw from an illustration.  Sometimes a
>    direct approach has the affect of turning people's defensive nature
>    into a roaring flame; thus lessening the worth of the intended
>    message. (Several good examples of "direct" approaches that fail can
>    be observed in the responses to other recent basenotes :-) ).

     Yes, excellent point (and example :^D).

     I don't know how old the UCC is, but hasn't  this  situation  occurred
     before?   Perhaps there's experience in the governing body itself that
     you can draw on.  

     Best of luck!

     Peace,

     Alvin

Note 444.7

>    How would you address members of a congregation that has, for the past
>    several years, taken on the persistence that although there is a
>    governing body (the Association or Conference levels w/i the UCC), they
>    as an "autonomous" body can and do choose to do as they please?

Ron,

	Correct me if I'm wrong, but as I recall, the UCC (The United Church
of Christ) has its roots in the Congregational Church.  And in the Congreg-
ational Church, which I believe had its roots in the movement called the
Independents in England, the local church was the ultimate decision and policy
making unit.

	This form of church government is not uncommon.  It's really very
similar to Unitarian-Universalism.  (I mention UU's specifically because I
know we have some UU readership here in C-P and this might help them better
be able to identify with the situation)

Peace,
Richard

Note 444.7

>    How would you address members of a congregation that has, for the past
>    several years, taken on the persistence that although there is a
>    governing body (the Association or Conference levels w/i the UCC), they
>    as an "autonomous" body can and do choose to do as they please?


Ron,

	As individuals, we all have an emotional need for both autonomy
(independence) and a sense of belonging (interdependence).  I believe this
is also true of various collectivities, including churches.

	Our society is still largely caught up in "Me-ism."  Consider the
calculated appeal of such advertising slogans as:

	"Have it *YOUR* way"

	"*YOU* deserve a break today"

	Why, even the Army changed their slogan from the seemingly selfless,
"You can make a difference," to the more self-centered, "Be all *YOU* can be."

	Yet, without a sense of connection to others and to God, we stand in
isolation -- a cold and empty feeling, no matter how gratified and fulfilled
we might otherwise feel.

	As Christians, we have a rich heritage.  We're connected to
inspirational people of the past and present, like Francis of Assisi, Albert
Schweitzer, Mother Theresa, Lucretia Mott, Martin Luther King, Jr., Desmond
Tutu, Oscar Romero, and list could go on and on.  Most importantly, we're
connected to the very Author and Source of life.  Indeed, who would want
to ignor these connections?  They are part of 'who we are'!

	Oh, I can see that I'm starting to ramble.  So, I'll just say
goodnight and God bless your efforts.

Peace,
Richard

    re .12
    
    Richard,
    
    I'm in full agreement with your understanding of the closesness in the
    original polity when comparing UU and UCC - before they became 
    denominations.  That is, congregationalism does stress the authority
    for the governing of the church to be at the local church level.  That
    is, nobody else, no other "higher" structure can have control over the
    life and practices of the local church.
    
    It was in 1957 that the merger took place uniting two very different
    bodies, the CC (Congregational Christian - which was already a merger
    of Congregational and Christian churches) and the E&R (Evangelical &
    Reformed churches which was a merger of those two separate 
    denominations).  The 1957 celebration is unique in that the merger
    occured by the joining of hands of delegates from all the churches
    in the about to be formed UCC denomination and pledged union prior
    to there being a written and agreed upon Constitution.  This, the
    members, felt could be done because they knew in their hearts that
    by having Christ be the head of the church could only mean that 
    they would be able to come to terms in a Constitution.
    
    And so each church has delegates that vote on matters of polity
    before each state's Conference and each state has delegates that 
    meets in synod every two years to work out changes, to sustain 
    present polity.  Each delegate is considered, not to be a voice
    for the local church or the state, to be a vote as a full member,
    as a full part of the body of Christ.
    
    Yes, the UCC does not dictate what each church must do; but, it does
    have guidelines on certain procedures within the denomination.  For
    example, this year a motion is coming before the RI Conference's
    Annual Meeting in May to have the UCC be declared as open and
    affirming.  A motion will be made to support the ordination of gays,
    lesbians, bisexuals (I don't think the subject of transsexuals is
    part of the motion - but there can always be amendments!).  Sure, many
    churches might choke on this for awhile and not every church will 
    claim to participate in this cause.
    
    There are other churches, like mine, which seems to choke on anything
    that is recommended by the UCC at either state or national level - and
    I mean anything.  It's similar to the relationship I currently have
    with one of my four daughters.  Whatever I suggest, you can be sure
    she will go the other way.  (So I have [please forgive me!] on
    occasion used my knowledge of her predictable response to influence
    what I "suggest" to her!)
    
    Out church is in trouble; it's acting like a renegade; it's turning
    off potential members from wanting to become members.  It's doing 
    "secretive" things that other members aren't aware of and these
    things are being done by the few "powers to be".  The members
    go merrily on their way claimning "autonomy" is the right of the
    local church.  My thought is that the powers to be, who are really
    great and loving people, are also really scared people who are
    afraid that their church is going to go bust.
    
    I have a love for the people of the church and am very aware that I
    am not their savior - but they do have one, and we're in the season
    when wew celebrate the risen Christ.
    
    Maybe my sermon title should be "Autonomy or Trust?"
    
    Please keep the comments coming.
    
    	Shalom,
    
    	Ron
    

    re .13
    
    Richard,
    
    You might be "rambling" - but you're a "rambling rose!" - and it
    Spring so keep the petals pushing!
    
    	Shalom,
    
    	Ron
    

    Ron,

     It is my understanding that UCC is fairly open on transsexuals
     in that they respect them for who they are not what they might have
     been.  With regard to ordination, if they allow for both women and
     men they can surly have no problem.  When persons are treated with
     respect and dignity all good can come.

     I am finding this topic interesting in it development.

     Peace,
     Allison

    Re; 5
    
    I think we agree on the nature of Christian "autonomy".  So, next...
    
>    How can we teach, convince and/or persuade the congregants of such a
>    message?
    
    I've come to believe that it's our "imagination" that causes us
    separation from God...what we THINK separates us indeed separates us! 
    As it is written, "they could not enter in because of their unbelief". 
    God didn't prevent them from entering in, but they couldn't because
    they didn't believe, their "imagination" became vain, and "their
    foolish hearts were darkened"...OK.
    
    In that light, it seems to me that the best way to persuade or convince
    a person is to explain, define, illustrate and when possible "imitate"
    (ie role play, present examples, parables, etc) in clear and relevent
    terms such that the person gets a clear and sound understanding of the
    right/correct/desired(?) perception of a thing.  That once the person
    sees clearly the path to take, they will choose it, if God be willing. 
    
    We can't "force" any one down a path, it may not be their time, and we
    do more harm thing good.  I think we create love when we show the way
    to life and yet do not "force" or demand that another follow it.  I
    think a good person will say "Thank you"...and love you for helping
    them find the truth.  Maybe they have some loose strings to tie  up
    before taking up the path...or something.
    
    Anyway, I'm saying to convince or persuade regarding "autonomy", and
    we're talking about "freedom WITHIN the perimeters and/or boundaries
    setforth by God", we need no more than illustrate (over and over in
    as many ways as possible, in as many areas of life as possible)
    examples of HOW we are expressing our "autonomy" in decision making. 
    Showing how the SAME law and spirit allies to all, but this person
    chose this and that person chose that, and what became of them...They
    had autonomy but the CHOICE they made is essential to the matter of
    success....I'd try to equate the AUTONOMOUS CHOICE with the need to
    make the RIGHT CHOICE...illustrate how success is the objective WE
    should desire in autonomy...and not just autonomy just for the sake of
    autonomy, cause sometimes people defiantly reject the success choice
    because people pressure them to make it and deny them their sense of
    autonomy...
    
    I know from some of my replies in previous discussions, I sound as if I
    don't "Practice what I preach"...but of course there are mitigating
    circumstances.  I have defined things (above) for how to deal with
    adults...but the immature and childish have to be given a little
    different approach.  You can't let children and immature people tell
    you what is best, or leave it to them to decide for themselves what is
    best...with all respects....you can't give "autonomy" to children or to
    immature individual's, they must be "responsible" individuals...do you
    agree with that?
    
    If so, you might perceive that there's a upper limit  (God's Will) and
    a lower limit (mature and adult) that is necessary for "autonomy".  You
    might explain that aspect as well.
    
    Just some thoughts on the IDEA of autonomy...
    
    Playtoe, In the Spirit of Truth

    Re 7
    
>    several years, taken on the persistence that although there is a
>    governing body (the Association or Conference levels w/i the UCC), they
>    as an "autonomous" body can and do choose to do as they please?
    
    If I may interject...
    
    Of course, if we grant the people their autonomy they have the right to
    do as they please...but let's not forget, that that must be within the
    boundaries and limits set forth by God.  If their choice is one that
    does not lie within those boundaries, the pastor should point that out,
    and tell them that that cannot be done under the auspices of the
    church, but they can do it outside of the auspices of the church...and
    if they choose to continue let them go..."you have warned them, you are
    relieved of your responsibility in that matter."  You are the WATCHMAN
    over the people and that's all...they have "autonomy".
    
>    Most times, the actions of the church are in direct opposition to the
>    "norms" recommended by the state, regional and/or national committees
>    within the UCC.  The church is perceived by others within the same
    
    This should not be...right.  If it is not in agreement with the state
    region and national idea, the single church has no authority to corrupt
    the image of the state, region and national church body...and it should
    be looked at in that regard...else they should separate and start their
    own situation.
    
    I'm speaking technically...rather harsh rules but we're dealing with a
    nation and we have to consider the grave consequence for millions for
    allowing certain opposing conduct to flourish.
    
>    My plan is to develop an interpretation of the journey of Saul on the
>    road to Damascus, to try to get under the skin, into the head and heart
>    of the "old" Saul and the "new" Paul.  Hopefully I can find a message
>    within which the congregants can find meaning, truth, motivation to
<    turn from their earlier ways and to turn toward God.
    
    This is the "lower limit", the "immature, childish" bottom I spoke of
    earlier.  God "forces" Saul to look at it a certain way...and Paul was
    born a new creature for doing so, he benefited from that which he
    thought was meant to destroy him!  Even with the immature and childish
    it is the same.  They think that you are trying to destroy them by
    making them do or think things they don't want to...but they are
    immature and childish, and they don't know it until they are forced to
    higher awarenesses and then look back and they have to say, "Man, you
    were right, and THANK YOU for helping me out"...TRUST in the Lord, Ron. 
    Don't be afraid to go against the grain of immature and childish ways!
    
    Playtoe

Looks like Ron and I will be preaching on the same Sunday.

The lessons from the lectionary I've been provided with are as follows:

	Psalm 30.4-12

	Revelation 5.11-14

	John 21.1-19

Peace,
Richard

    So you're using the same texts!  Great!  
    
    I just noticed that C-P will be power outaged this Fri am and Sat; so,
    comments on our sermons need to be addressed before the "light" :-)
    goes out!
    
    	Shalom,
    
    	Ron
    
    ps: I'm working toward approaching "Who are you?" via how one looks
    (perplexedly, at best) at oneself; am using Pauls's conversion for
    material.  I'm focusing on how others perceive who you are - how that
    affects them and how it affects yourself.  I'm also focusing on how one
    perceive others - and the dynamics of "your" perception.
    
    When Peter (already knowing the answer) asks Jesus who He is, Peter is
    a model of how we might be and act within the presence of the Christ.
    
    My goal is to work toward the notion that it is not "Who we are" but
    who, through the grace of Christ, we may become.  
    
    It is Holy Communion for us this Sunday and a time when we a fed yet
    again with the Holy Spirit of Christ - it is with this feeding that we
    are nourished, cared for and loved - today, tomorrow and forever. 
    Praise be to God!
    

Ron,

	I focusing in more on the phenomenon of failing to recognize
Christ.

	Mother Theresa, who serves and cares for the poorest of the poor,
has said that when she looks into their faces she sees Jesus.

Peace,
Richard

Ron,

	The sermon I delivered Sunday was well received, I think.  I believe
the most accurate barometer is whether or not I'm asked to preach again. ;-}

	How did it go for you?

Peace,
Richard

    Richard,
    
    I'm glad your service went well.  There was little (as in none) doubt
    that things wouldn't go just great for your church and yourself!
    
    Our service also went well.  My spouse did a really job job as worship
    leader and her tone put me into a sense of being in the presence of the
    Holy One and this calmed me completely.  My sermon was delivered as a
    fully prepared sermon with only a few inserts and I was told by some
    people that the message was meaniongful to them.  We were also told by
    several people that our shared ministry approach was really excellent.
    
    We had my "Incare" advisor present from the Church & Ministry Committee
    as an invited guest.  Also, friends of ours who are in a new-start
    church as of a year ago and who were to have their first full service
    in their new church setting (rather than in a closed school basement
    where they've met for the past year!) on the same day as our service,
    surprised us with a visit to our church.  He said that their church
    would be there many more Sundays but we were preaching that day! 
    Pretty nice friends!
    
    I did choke a little during Holy Communion (and not on the bread (or
    popcorn :-) )).  The bread had been placed by the Deacons on the plate
    in one bulky hunk.  The bread had been cut partially by knife in a
    pattern that I was unaware of and cut such that the cut in the loaf was
    away from me, ie. out of my sight.  So, when I began with the "Words of
    Institution" part of Communion, I got side-tracked on how to tear the
    loaf apart and then lost my train of thought.  Somehow I was at a loss
    for "this is my body broken for you" and I'm not exactly sure of the
    words used by me!  
    
    Hopefully, if anyone even noticed, they may appreciate even more my
    humanness - I certainly did!
    
    After the service, we mixed with our friends (church friends, etal) and
    then went for Thai food in Providence with our longstanding friends
    from the other church.  After that, I brought the church's new
    travelling Communion set to two people: one in a nursing home and one
    who recently was checked into the mental health center of a neighboring
    hospital because of intense depression and an attempt on her part to
    end her life.  To me, these kind of visits are the highlights of
    ordained ministry - plus you get to check in as clergy and don't have
    to pay for parking at the hospital ;-)
    
    	Shalom,
    
    	Ron