Today I have been asked to construct a 10-year time line for my congregation - not entirely easy since the minutes books are closely guarded by the former church secretary - so that we can use this as part of an input to thinking about our future.  The idea is to undertake what the Mennonites evidently refer to as neutralising history, that is, identifying feelings and laying them down in order to move on.  All very commendable, but it raises a few questions for me, especially in the light of my research, specifically where is the line between neutralising and neutering our history?  How do we distinguish between letting it go and saying it doesn't matter?  How do we allow our past to inform our present and shape our future without retaining some sense of the tensions that arose?

My guess is that endeavours such as the South African Truth and Reconciliation Committee are moving along this path - the past is recongised for what it is, issues are worked through and lessons learned so that all can move into a more hopeful future.

I also feel that tracking the journey we've come on, seeing how we have changed along the way, is very valuable, but I retain a sense of caution over the nomenclature.  Neutralising is too easily equated to cancelling out, and cancelling out to forgetting, and forgetting to deeming irrelevant, and that isn't a good thing in my view.

Lots of people speak of no sense of connectedness to their denominational history, and I suspect this is because it is judged irrelevant as a reuslt of collective amnesia and tension free (so-called neutral) history writing.

Somewhere there is a balance to be struck whereby the past is recalled, recognised and moved on from in a way that helps us live a more healthy present.

It will be interesting constructing this time line, and seeing how people respond to it - and I suspect we will be anything but neutral in our sharing!