Author: Jana

Today, I had the opportunity to attend an outdoor service at Half Moon Bay, N.Y. This is a gorgeous natural cathedral where the congregants join together in a bay, and gather around a rock outcrop which provides a small stage area, and a rock pulpit. The services here are in the summer and were started back in 1877. There are so many great things to contemplate: the high cathedral ceilings, the rock face behind, the act of binding the boats together, the readings and the preaching literally coming from the rock, the echo of the hymns as the choir and congregants sign in the bay surrounded by rock… The inter-denominational service today was led by a member of the Anglican Church of Canada from Trinity College, Toronto. It was a beautiful service for many reasons, however the one that left the largest impression on me was the space, the environment. As churches, I think we tend to focus on worshiping in the same place, the same building, in the same pews. I value tradition, particularly because it is something that always seemed endangered in our secular world. However, I think we tend to do the same things, expecting the same result, and sometimes I think that we need to change the space, move the pews, orient the church different, and if necessary to find a completely different environment. The church, while carrying traditions, should find ways of being refreshing, invigorating and resilient, without becoming sleepy, dull, and rutted. And I think for me, and for many others we take the church location for granted, which is our own misfortune. So, today I will breath in the air of the “tallest cathedral ceiling” and dream of loftier things.

Some congregations are better than others, but it doesn’t seem to matter where you go, there is always church politics. Aka there is always a person who deems something “unnecessary”, and is rather outspoken about this. For me, this is something that I seem to often come head-to-head with, no matter how much I endeavour to avoid it. It is frustrating! And I wonder how many people have left the church over it. Over some piddly difference, that means diddly squat, but someone deems is absolutely necessary to point out and against over and over again.

The title of this post reads like a Big Bang Theory episode title, which is perhaps a bit ironic. Ironic, because the characters in Big Bang Theory are scientists, who although perhaps not wealthy, are financially stable (which is something that many in my generation are not). I love being a church member, and I put as much in the offering as I can afford (and sometimes a bit more) and I try to help out with various projects that my church is a part of: donations to the food bank, local outreach, etc. Recently, I was hit up for another donation (and although I knew that it was not in our budget) I gave in (who wants to deny a good cause?).

The financial deterrent is something that I think drives away the few people of my age who are interested in being part of a church family. I myself, feel that I am badgered because it is perceived that I am not contributing as much as those who have two incomes, are retired, and no longer have dependents. Perhaps, I am being overly sensitive, but I really do no think that I am alone with this. My partner and I often look at our bills each month and rejoice on the occasional month when what we brought in equals what we put out, forget trying to pay off our debts! Some day when we don’t have young children, a mortgage, and we were both well employed we’ll get there. It isn’t that we don’t want to help others in our community who are struggling, and we try whenever we can through other non-financial means. Our community, our friends, our families, seem to appreciate what we can offer, but some days it seems like our church keeps asking more and more, and when you say ‘no’ you are looked at with suspicions that you are being selfish. This shaming, is anti-Christian, and anti-community. While many people are aware from remembering their own experiences or from their own offspring, there are always the privileged few and far too often they are the ones who run the boards and the programs. The church is so much more than money, and outreach is so much more than money, and I think when we make it all about finances we lose something. For me, I feel undervalued and marginalized by part of my own community, and if I was more on the fringe I would be gone. I am not on the fringe, and as such I have to stand up for myself, and for the many others like me. Next time, I will stand firm and say no when it is just not in the budget that month.

Ecumenism is something that has always been of particular interest to me. I have always found the different ways we find ecumenical collaboration within the church interesting. Recently, I went to an ecumenical service, and it was notable the similarities between denominations, as it was also notable the differences.

In terms of similarities, the different representatives (often yes, the ministers) from the denominations emphasized our commonalities, and diminished our differences. This I felt reflected our strengths (our commonalities), but also our weakness of not standing firm in our diversity. I think with noting our similarities and differences there is a profound opportunity to acknowledge and allow conversation about our respective denominations.

The main difference I noted between denominations was respect. Some denominations were not respectful of other clergy, but more importantly there were many that were not respectful of different theologies and held that their theology was the “one true theology”. Coming from a tradition that is fairly respectful, and being at a public ecumenical event that did not make space for my theology (I don’t believe I have a ‘Mansion in Heaven’) was disheartening. As the ecumenical movement continues these are two areas that I forsee as important to ongoing collaboration: acknowledgement of our differences, and respect for all those differences, whether they are theologies, practices, or worship leaders.

While this recent experience was disheartening for me, I think it emphasizes very much the requirements of ongoing ecumenical work and why this continues to be so important over a hundred years after the first ecumenical initiative.

This past week has been a celebration of our National Indigenous Heritage, as well as the first steps on the journey to Truth and Reconciliation. The Anglican Church of Canada put out a series of videos ranging from Native bishops up to the Primates reflections on what truth and reconciliation mean to me. This in turn got me thinking about what Truth and Reconciliation mean to me.

For me truth is the honesty of admitting past wrongs, prejudices, discrimination, and injustices. As a nation, a church, and even as a person of a younger generation these to me acknowledged. Part of that falls to education, and social justice work. It also means apologizing for these sins and continuing re-examination to intentionally move as a nation, as a church, as communities, and as individuals in a different direction. This is our history, and our cross to bear. We must acknowledge, we must repent, and we must walk in a new way. Hopefully, as we change our country and world will change. Change does not always come quickly, forgiveness and trust, also do not come quickly. However, this is the path we must go and maybe one day generations from now our brothers and sisters can walk hand in hand “in the land that God has planned where love shines through”.