On November 7, a settlement was reached between atheist United Church minister Gretta Vosper and the Toronto Conference of the United Church to let her stay on the job—despite not believing in God.
Vosper, the minister at West Hill United
Church since 1997, publicly declared herself an atheist in 2013.
Things came
to a head in 2015 when she publicly criticized the denomination for posting a
prayer on its website after the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris.
In her open letter, she
denounced the “existence of a supernatural being
whose purposes can be divined and which, once interpreted and without mercy,
must be brought about within the human community in the name of that being.”
In 2016, the Toronto
Conference conducted a review that found Vosper “not suitable” to continue as a
minister because she was no longer in "essential agreement" with the
church's statement of doctrine.
The Conference also found she was "unwilling and unable" to reaffirm the vows she made when she was ordained in 1993.
The Conference also found she was "unwilling and unable" to reaffirm the vows she made when she was ordained in 1993.
The Conference went on to ask the General Council, the top governing body of the United Church, for a formal
hearing to determine whether she should be placed on the Discontinued Service
List (Disciplinary)—fired, in other words.
Before that took place, an attempt was made to mediate the dispute. It failed.
The hearing by the General Council was then scheduled
for November and December, this year.
But before it took place, the Toronto Conference and Vosper reached a settlement.
But before it took place, the Toronto Conference and Vosper reached a settlement.
In a brief joint
statement, the Toronto Conference, Vosper and West Hill Church said the
parties had "settled all outstanding issues between them."
The terms of the agreement are confidential.
Those are the essential
ingredients of the story. What to make of it? I have a few thoughts.
First, I am saddened by the comments being made by other
Christians about the United Church.
There has been some self-righteous
piling on by some people. To me, it feels smug and self-congratulatory;. "See! We told you they really weren't Christians."
It's also hypocritical. While I don’t support
Vosper being able to retain her job in the United Church—she’d be much more
suitable in a Unitarian Universalist pulpit—people from other denominations
need to think carefully before they throw stones.
After all, Roman Catholics
have their terrible child sex abuse scandal, and evangelicals in the U.S. keep
voting for Trump. Other denominations have various skeletons of their own in
their closets.
Second, not all United Church members or congregations agree with
the decision.
The United Church is not
monolithic or hierarchical. It has a governing structure, but basically operates on a congregational model.
In that model,
individual congregations and conferences are free to make their own
decisions about the best ways to be the church in their communities (subject to
agreed-upon denominational guidelines).
The Toronto conference can reach this agreement with Vosper, without consulting other conferences. There’s no United Church
pope who can enforce the rules.
In my own denomination, which also operates on a congregational model, there are clergy and churches that make me feel uncomfortable with their views about women,
the environment, and politics.
But I cannot force them to leave, just as they cannot make my church change its perspectives.
But I cannot force them to leave, just as they cannot make my church change its perspectives.
Third, while the reasons for the settlement are not being
disclosed, there is a suspicion that money—or lack of it—is an important reason.
I'm told that is top of the list for some United Church members and staff when they discuss the issue. Lawyer's fees are expensive!
And no wonder; the United Church is facing severe financial challenges. When I once asked one of the denomination's fundraisers what the church's fundraising strategy was, I was told: "To slow down the inevitable crash.”
And no wonder; the United Church is facing severe financial challenges. When I once asked one of the denomination's fundraisers what the church's fundraising strategy was, I was told: "To slow down the inevitable crash.”
The decrease in giving across Canada has resulted in changes to the governance structure, and also to a downsizing of the denomination's staff.
The issue of cost was hinted at by Vosper’s lawyer, Julian Falconer.
He was quoted as saying “both parties took a long look at the cost-benefit at running a heresy trial and whether it was good for anyone (and) the results speak for themselves.”
He was quoted as saying “both parties took a long look at the cost-benefit at running a heresy trial and whether it was good for anyone (and) the results speak for themselves.”
It could be that Toronto
Conference officials had to make a stark choice between paying to fire Vosper
or to keep open some homeless shelters or services for at-risk youth.
Fourth, I feel sorry for my friends who work for the United Church.
They have been put in an
awkward place by this decision. Without any information about why the
settlement was reached, they cannot offer any explanations—whether they oppose it
or not.
"We are caught between a rock and a hard place," says a friend who works for the United Church.
"We are caught between a rock and a hard place," says a friend who works for the United Church.
Asking your staff to shrug their shoulders and say don't know does not constitute a good communications strategy for any organization.
Fifth, most denominations are lousy at handling disputes like
this.
Whether its congregations,
conferences or whole denominations, Christians of all kinds have trouble
dealing with difficult disputes.
No matter what happens, we want to get along, be nice, and make everyone feel welcome—no matter how badly they behave.
No matter what happens, we want to get along, be nice, and make everyone feel welcome—no matter how badly they behave.
It takes a lot for a
church or denomination to actually disbar, disfellowship or fire someone for
any reason.
This is partly because many
groups are ill-prepared to deal with difficult people or situations.
It is also because they have an innate disposition towards repair and restoration of broken relations.
It is also because they have an innate disposition towards repair and restoration of broken relations.
Which is not a bad thing, in
the main. In the past, too many churches were harsh, judgmental and exclusive, making people feel unwelcome over trangressions of all kinds.
(In my own denomination, at one time people were excommunicated for marrying someone from another Christian church.)
(In my own denomination, at one time people were excommunicated for marrying someone from another Christian church.)
This desire to make things right goes double for the United Church, which is even more disposed towards inclusion and understanding than many other church groups.
The denomination sees itself as a
big tent, with room for everyone. Including now, it seems, also Gretta Vosper.
Sixth, although Vosper has taken things to the extreme, many Christians today no longer believe in the traditional God she is rejecting; one who is harsh, judgmental, punitive, requires women to not be leaders and who hates gays.
A few other reasons have also come up since this blog post was was published.
One is the idea that a heresy trial in the 21st century would be ridiculous and make everyone look bad. (Shades of Monty Python and the Spanish Inquisition.)
Plus, in our increasingly secular country, who would care?
There is also the worry that the church, no matter how solid its reasons, wouldn't win. And even if the church won in the court of doctrine, in the court of public opinion it would be a big loser.
Vosper and her supporters are masterful at public relations.
Also, there is also the feeling that by not pursuing the case it will fade away more quickly. That's a viable public relations strategy. Take a quick hit, grimace at the pain, done.
Going all the way would only turn the spotlight on Vosper for weeks or longer, giving her a bigger pulpit, and making the agony for the church last longer.
(It could also be that the settlement also binds Vosper to silence about this in the future. So far, except for a post on her website announcing the settlement, and her relief that the "ordeal" is over, she has not said anything else that I am aware of.)
Finally, there is the feeling the church has bigger issues to worry about, like how to serve a hurting world, not to mention all the internal issues the denomination is dealing with these days.
Sixth, although Vosper has taken things to the extreme, many Christians today no longer believe in the traditional God she is rejecting; one who is harsh, judgmental, punitive, requires women to not be leaders and who hates gays.
Many people who grew up with that kind of God today feel no any affinity for that type of deity—no matter what denomination they belong to.
Many are asking deep questions and expressing fresh doubts about faith. Does God really intend to send all unbelievers to Hell? Does God really hate gays? Is the plan for the world to burn it down and start over, or should we care about climate change?
Some are expressing these questions and doubts quietly, since they are members of churches that would frown on them.
Some are expressing these questions and doubts quietly, since they are members of churches that would frown on them.
And yet, this kind of questioning is a good thing. It's healthy. And the United Church, to its credit, is a denomination that not only permits, but encourages, that kind of exploration.
Gretta Vosper may simply be the most egregious result of the United church's willingness to be generous and open to all sorts of questions and ways being Christian in the world.
Gretta Vosper may simply be the most egregious result of the United church's willingness to be generous and open to all sorts of questions and ways being Christian in the world.
A few other reasons have also come up since this blog post was was published.
One is the idea that a heresy trial in the 21st century would be ridiculous and make everyone look bad. (Shades of Monty Python and the Spanish Inquisition.)
Plus, in our increasingly secular country, who would care?
There is also the worry that the church, no matter how solid its reasons, wouldn't win. And even if the church won in the court of doctrine, in the court of public opinion it would be a big loser.
Vosper and her supporters are masterful at public relations.
Also, there is also the feeling that by not pursuing the case it will fade away more quickly. That's a viable public relations strategy. Take a quick hit, grimace at the pain, done.
Going all the way would only turn the spotlight on Vosper for weeks or longer, giving her a bigger pulpit, and making the agony for the church last longer.
(It could also be that the settlement also binds Vosper to silence about this in the future. So far, except for a post on her website announcing the settlement, and her relief that the "ordeal" is over, she has not said anything else that I am aware of.)
Finally, there is the feeling the church has bigger issues to worry about, like how to serve a hurting world, not to mention all the internal issues the denomination is dealing with these days.
* *
*
The story isn’t over yet. I think there is more that could be told. I intend
to keep following it, to see if anything else turns up.
In the meantime, I anyone who reads this blog post, including United Church members and staff, to send me their ideas and views and information about the decision about Gretta Vosper.
You can leave comments here or e-mail me at jdl562000 AT yahoo.com. If you wish to remain anonymous, please say so.
In the meantime, I anyone who reads this blog post, including United Church members and staff, to send me their ideas and views and information about the decision about Gretta Vosper.
You can leave comments here or e-mail me at jdl562000 AT yahoo.com. If you wish to remain anonymous, please say so.
Depending on how much more I can find out about this situation, sometime in the future I might publish more on this topic.
To read more about this, check out:
Articles about Vosper in
the United Church Observer.
