Uncategorized

If you haven’t written on AI or seen a mention of AI in your daily life – what have you missed?

Just reading a report from the Author’s Licensing and Collecting Society – a group who helps author’s get remuneration and has oversight responsibilities for what author’s generate/create.  The report is called:  A Brave New World?  A survey of writers on AI, remuneration, transparency and choice.

In a concluding statement, Tom Chatfield, ALCS Chair, author and tech philosopher attempts to bring forth the strong place of creativity in our world.  Here is a true creative writing by a human:

“Both creators and audiences deserve better than a future of endlessly opaque algorithmic outputs. The purpose of reading isn’t to consume as many words as possible, just as the purpose of writing isn’t to fill the world with torrents of text. What matters is the human connections and experiences woven through creative work. Writing, reading and storytelling are how we forge meaningful bonds between people; how a society explores its values and makes sense of its experiences.”

How much is creative work (human) valued and respected in an algorithmic age?  This is the question Chatfield asks – a question our son has asked as an artist.  We might go even more basic in the question – What human work will be valued and respected in an algorithmic age?

I co-wrote a book after the pandemic had basically quieted (you can still pick it up on Amazon.ca – This is Us!  Canadian Small Churches in Action:  The Covid Years).  We (Nate Stacheruk, Matthew Cunningham and myself) reviewed 35 podcasts on small churches in Canada that I had done during COVID.  In the end we came up with some summary conclusions and the following after Covid epilogue.  Nothing new – but a few years later I don’t think we were far off:

Simple church. Significance is not based in paid leadership, building size or weekly attendance. The church as the gathering is the definition of church more than the building, a denominational legacy structure, paid staff reputations or even size of attendance. The simple church leans into a much needed understanding of the small church as a model and example.

Gift-based function. We will be more active in promoting a gift ministry style – so each small grouping is individually their own church. We have lived with an overwhelmingly traditional/one style fits all so non-conformists were persecuted. We will need to move to a more open source type of church.

Liturgical service. Service will become an integrated way to live. Worship is all of life – so the liturgical (service) calendar is always full. Churches will seek to expand their sense of liturgy to include set times of vertical worship, outreach in service to the community/world, socialization to the kingdom.

Facility in-focus. Small churches will decide the financial viability of maintaining a facility. Physical buildings can be a great advantage until the cost of repair, utilities, etc becomes too high. We will prioritize people over facilities.

Shared instruction/preaching. In a video saturated world, there are many accessible audio/visual instructional/preaching offerings. In our current society we are used to the use of microphones and being willing to be out-front. Speakers are able to be nurtured even in the smallest of churches.

Elastic MOU’s. As the universal church, we will seek to understand each other, finding were we can bend and be flexible. Finding the core of unity will continue to be a vital pursuit. But unlike an approach that seeks to make the definition of the church super detailed and restrictive, most churches will seek to find small points of agreement. Networks will proliferate to achieve projects/resources to benefit the local/small church.

Curated Resources. Various church formats will need to examine their viability along with understanding the best practices to achieve the best results. Collating and curating resources to assist in this ecclesial literacy will become the emphasis of broad networks (which will serve denominations/networks)

Expansive F2F. Cross fertilization of ideas will be increasingly acceptable. Instead of entrenched debate there will be a desire for loving discussion. Workshops will proliferate – both to share ideas but also to share stories. Use of Zoom will continue to provide virtual connection. This posture shift will cause churches to listen while not compromising truth.

A furious pounding of the keyboard on my laptop brings me to the end of the day.  I had inspiration to write the text for a sermon I am preaching on December 22nd at the Clearview Community Church in Kindersley, SK.

The theme is Love – the fourth Sunday of Advent.  In my past few weeks I have experienced funerals and new births.  Both have celebration combined with anticipation.  When a new child is born we are excited to see the next steps – the first steps.  When someone dies we are placed in the midst of the last steps.  Both usher in a time of uncertainty.

But love . . . where there is a full experience of love there is no fear.  Certainly many disparate emotions may rise and fall.  Certainly we will catch ourselves guarding ourselves “just in case”.  But the deeper we sink into love the less we need to try to control life or to be driven by every wind of insecurity.

How far can we sink?  I haven’t reached the bottom yet.  I’m not planning on stopping the plunge to the depths of love while realizing that I can’t force or cause or create love.  Somehow the ability to plunge into love is the ability to surrender my own efforts and let the love of Jesus take care of me. 

How far have you dived?  Are you choked up trying to go deeper?  Are you open to releasing that last breath and letting Jesus breathe life from his love into you?

This morning I awoke with the word “consistory” in my brain.  As some of you who know me will recognize – my brain does tend to wander and to gather all sorts of facts and fictions.

I thought I would test out this word.  Turns out this was a council of people who decided on such things as defamation and other moral rights and wrongs.  Used as an ecclesial court (church court) but also as a governing political court, the actual activity of these courts (although still in use as a laity court in some church polity) became non-existent a few centuries ago.  With the decline of their powers and the disuse of the laws governing these courts and their decisions, the whole area of the consistory came into “desuetude”.  As some explanations say – although these courts remained “on the books” they lost power because of a state of disuse – signalling that receiving a subpoena to attend a consistory for a “crime” had no power.

Got to love that word – desuetude.  I immediately saw two parts to the word –  “de” which is often used as a prefix to negate a noun, and the word “sue” which has legal implications of taking action against a party who has wronged us.  So . . . I guess because of desuetude you cannot go to the consistory to gain justice.  Put that into a sentence and fire the crowd up (or as we used to say in the old days – stick that in you pipe and smoke it, which really didn’t fire a crowd up but rather sent them out of the room because the smoke was too much!).