Let us pray: O God, we often wish for stability, for things to stay the same, for life to be on an even keel. We sing of your eternal, unchanging nature, knowing that it is more about us than it is about you. We know we live in changing times, help us to discern your presence in the midst of the maelstrom of change which is all around us. Guide these words that they may help us in that quest. Amen.

Around eight-hundred people, plus a host of others who were following on the internet and through whatever news items they could glean from local and national media, are attending worship services all across our country and in select places around the world and are casting their minds back about fifty-eight weeks to the start of the fortieth General Council of The United Church of Canada. The theme of that seminal meeting of the widest of the circles comprising the church's conciliar structure was drawn from the reading we heard this morning from the prophet Jeremiah. Down to the Potter's House was the theme, chosen by the planning committee with significant input from the then moderator David Giuliano. Throughout the week we were encouraged and inspired by the metaphor of God the potter – using us as clay to form new and useful shapes as vessels of God's good news of justice and peace. We were also challenged by the image not just of being made new, but also being destroyed for the sake of a better and more utilitarian piece of pottery. During the final worship service, our resident potter, the Rev. Darryl Auten, created an almost audible gasp throughout the gathered assembly by taking what seemed to be beautiful pottery dishes and with a clear and destructive strokes of the hammer rendered them into shards of broken clay. Of course, the imagery was not lost on us – the passage talks about destruction as well as creation – but it can be much starker than we desire when we actually see the dust flying and the shards falling into a waiting receptacle.

Sometimes we need to actually witness or experience the kind of destruction that Jeremiah speaks of and which Darryl Auten exemplified in order to create something new. It's a hard thing to do. Especially when we are comfortable with the way things are – even if a little uneasy.

I've been left with a lasting memory of that closing worship in particular, but more generally of the work of the fortieth General Council as one which has influenced a good deal of my thought and reflection over the year since we all left Kelowna for home.

In the months following the General Council the church made ready for its 85th Anniversary – something which we celebrated on June 10th. In some of the lead-up to that anniversary, our General Secretary and friend of many here, Nora Sanders, expressed some surprise at the extent and depth of the Anniversary celebrations. It's almost as if we knew that #85 was the mark of something significant. Was it the start of a new era for The United Church of Canada? Was it the beginning of the end for us as a denomination? Just what lies in store for us over the next fifteen years for example when we reach the venerable (at least in human terms – pretty young in church terms) age of one hundred?

By the time the anniversary had come, the church was already in the midst of trying to come to terms with the nitty gritty decisions associated with change. A General Council with its inspiring worship, its touching moments, its moments compelling us to new faithfulness and dedication is important, but like all committees of the church whether locally, regionally or nationally, it was also facing some of the details which would contribute to the ongoing direction that the church would take. And so the General Council Executive met in May to consider the future as it would be determined by some hard facts – namely the number trends are all heading in a downward direction – people and dollars. We are faced with some of the same concerns in our own conference.

We have some within the church who are contributing their own points of view. You probably have not heard of David Ewart – a former General Council staff person from the early nineties who is now back in pastoral ministry in British Columbia. Some might call him a kind of prophet of doom, except that no one can deny the data that he uses to make some dire predictions. He has done some work with the United Church year book – the latest of which we received this summer. It's actually quite simple work. He takes the number of members reported by church congregations, the number of people attending worship, the number of people engaged in Christian Education and the amount of money raised for local and Mission and Service and plots them. The news is not good. If we follow current trends, he says, we won't have to worry about a 100th birthday because there could be no church around to celebrate it. Of course his point is that we need to do something to change these trends.

If I was reading the mood and decisions we made at GC40 correctly, then I think the church as it gathered in Kelowna last summer was saying the same thing – namely that the same old same old will not cut it, that we are a church which is ready, willing and able to change. There was a certain euphoria associated with that direction as we expressed it last August, but the realization of just how different and difficult it is going to be has been part of at least my thought processes ever since. Perhaps I am more influenced by it because of the role I am serving with the Conference. I see perhaps more than others, just how the new church – whatever that is – because the shape it will take is not fully formed – and the old church are so different from each other. And yes, there is a comfortableness about the old church – like an old familiar set of clothes, and a familiar living room chair – which we have molded and melded into a shape which suits us and fits us and which leads us into a comfortable place. That's because I'm an old church person. I grew up in the church. I am familiar with its ways, its language and culture. Part of me says that we should treat the issue that way – just as there seems to be a movement these days in broader society to preserve culture and to engage in cultural awareness training sessions. I've been part of those in the church – teaching people the language of worship, creating lexicons which define those churchy words we hardly find anywhere else – anthem, hymn, sermon, doxology, benediction, epistle, gospel and scripture to name but a few. The mind set is that we have something good here, even if it is distant from a large segment of society, but that if we work hard to explain it, and add value to both the history and the experience for people then they will be attracted to it and they can be counted among the “in” crowd. It's a culture, but it is a culture that is open to everyone – at least that's what we say – and I do believe that we believe it and try to live it.

So, in some ways I am not trained nor am I the right kind of person to be leading the church to some other place, to help it shift shape and change. I'm like the workmanlike potter who has developed over time and with practice how to pot a particular type of vessel. I'm good at producing them consistently and with quality, but they are not needed in the same way that they once were. Perhaps another way to describe it, is to conjure up the image of someone who has developed the skill to fix tube televisions and radios. A good skill to have a couple of decades ago, but not too useful in this day and age. Of course it is not just me. It is not too much of a leap to consider that most of us – because we are here, are comfortable with old way, are members of the culture because of immersion in it from birth, or because its ways and meaning has become important to us. There is hope that people can adapt and that the church can adapt, but I fear that there won't be enough of either to bode well for the future.

But of course all this talk of shape shifting and change is nothing if it loses the underlying issue. The question is a deeply theological question, namely: Where is God? Is God to be found in drawing people into the culture in helping them to discover the old way? In talking about ethnic and racial cultures I think many would say that indeed it is a way to rediscover a spiritual nature, a spiritual groundedness. How many times have we heard of people who delved back into their ancestry to find the place they were longing to be, a place that connected them with not only their cultural roots, but also their spiritual roots? Could it be the same for the church, or are we being called to something completely new, something that conforms itself to the culture around us – a culture which redefines the nature of community and communication, a culture which is social, and connected and very much less structured than our own church.

I believe the answer lies in connection with God, and in our understanding of the meaning and purpose of the church. The church is not the only way we have to connect with God, but it is a time honoured and well known source of connection with God – often the point of entry for people to establish and strengthen a connection with God. It's important to keep those two perspectives in balance. It was summed up for me last March by Stephen Willey, who was the guest speaker at a meeting of our conference Ethnic Ministry Committee. He was quoting a book by ___________ on the mission of the church. And it is with this quote that I end this week's reflection – admittedly an open ended ending – which of course is the point because we are in the midst of trying to discern not just what the quote means for us in this age, but also what shape the church will take as it lives into a new reality defined by the new realities all around us. Amen.