"Actively" Church

I shared with my good friend and colleague, Christopher Grundy, that I believe the United Church of Christ needs to develop designations that help us move out of our "achievement" statuses.  I have become disillusioned and disappointed by the number of UCC congregations that are "Open and Affirming" or "Just Peace" and yet do not use those statements as "North Stars" for further action.

Sometimes I see those statements as all too often achievements by a solitary individual or small group in a local church that finally carried the day to get their church designated as "Open and Affirming" or "Just

Peace."  The local church then proudly posts these designations on their website, on their blog, and or in their bulletin without any reference to how it continues to embody these designations.  As in many institutional

settings, the description of a church becomes a noun (who they think they are) rather than a verb (what they do).  I am not saying that happens in every local church, but I am amazed by the number of local churches who become "Open and Affirming" never to revisit their growth and development with that identity or designation.

I would love to see the United Church of Christ continue to develop these designations as a rolling horizon, recognizing that we need to continue to grow and develop to be fully "Open and Affirming" and "Just Peace."  So, throughout the year, what has your church done to be considered "Just Peace" or "Open and Affirming?"  These rolling horizon designations

would be about a dialog between grass roots local churches and the national church.  Local churches would share some creative idea they employed and the national church would add it to the list for all other churches to learn by, recognize within their own work, and take hope from.

For example, we could use a model begun in the

Young Christian Workers Movement and advanced in Latin American base communities--see, judge (as to discern), and act.  out of see, judge (as to discern), act.  Celebration was later added to the process as people realized that the process left them with little energy to begin again.  

This is oversimplifying a process that can encourage deep systemic analysis, but here goes.  See:  (Open and Affirming) We could ask and answer how congregations might have engaged issues or communities surrounding the issue of the inclusion of the LGBTQ community.  (Just Peace)  We could ask and answer how congregations have lifted specific concerns about racial justice, violence, or building peace in their communities.  Discern:  We could ask what educational or immersion experiences congregations have used to further understanding of themselves and people not like themselves.  Act:  We could ask what their educational or immersion experiences led them to do in advocacy, pilgrimage, practice, mission, or evangelism (including others in their work or building the movement) Celebration:  We could ask how congregations celebrated the work they did over the course of the year or how they lifted up their identity in joyous proclamation.

Congregations would have to complete each one of these headings to be considered "actively" Open and Affirming or "actively" Just Peace.  The purpose is not to create a litmus test but to get congregations intentionally reflecting on their work, mission, and ministry.  In reflecting publicly, their information creates ideas for others, builds a feeling that a movement is afoot, and gives hope that we are not alone.

I also believe such reflection would make us more articulate as a denomination.  Let me give you an example.  Rev. Michael Neuroth is the UCC Policy

Advocate for International Issues.  He recently wrote a piece titled, "The True Cost of Drone Warfare."  In that piece he did an excellent job of helping us all discern further what it means to be a Just Peace institution/movement by spelling out some of its characteristics:

• Commits itself to working for systemic justice
• Commits itself to deepening friendships and covenants with all God's children
• Commits itself to claiming God's shalom for all
• Holding to the prophetic promise that "peace is possible"

Conversely, what is not Just Peace has these characteristics:

• Dims our hope and imagination for peace
• Blurs lines between civilian and combatant
• Distorts covenants between nations and peoples
• Pushes our nation to a constant state of war

I might look at the "opposites" of what is not Just Peace to offer what is:

• Just Peace lights the way for our hope and imagination toward peace.
• Just Peace seeks out ways to affirm our humanity even in the presence of war.
• Just Peace builds community, coalitions, and keeps covenant that furthers the welfare of people beyond our own races, ethnicities, and nations.
• Just Peace builds systems and infrastructure to make peace sustainable and resilient and undercut the arrogance and appetite for violence and warfare.

I know that Rev. Neuroth uses language from General Synod Resolutions, but he also cogently argues in a way that helps all of us better understand what it means to be Just Peace.  In so doing, I naturally compare and contrast my congregation to the criteria he puts forward.  I become much more articulate for helping my congregation discern how they shall be more Just Peace.  

So what about that idea?  What about deciding how we might become "Actively" Open and Affirming or "Actively" Just Peace using the base community process.  I would love to read the final step of the process--celebration.  How do other congregations actively celebrate their identity and work in way that gives them energy for starting the process all over again?  

I know there is much creativity out their in local congregations.  I would love to see how they sing, dance, and get goofy over their work and identity.  I believe that sharing would give my imagination flight and return the favor in some creative way.