Hello dear readers.
This is a techie question. Have any of you used OpenOffice? The school is trying to move more to it and I would like people's impressions of it.
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Friday, December 28, 2007
What Politicans Should Learn From The Pope
I've been thinking some more about the death of Benazir Bhutto. And while now there are conflicting reports as to what actually caused her death (was it bullets or explosion?), it has very little to do with my proposition.
Do you remember when Pope John Paul II was shot? I do. And afterwards they covered the Popemobile.
When Benazir Bhutto emerged through the sunroof of her armoured vehicle, she became the most vulnerable (and in fact when she was shot). With her death, I think we should start asking our politicians to start riding around in some version of the Popemobile. While there are things it probably wouldn't protect a person from, at least there would be some protection from the majority of extremists. This way the pol could still be visible to the crowd and try to connect and be reasonably sure of safety.
Do you remember when Pope John Paul II was shot? I do. And afterwards they covered the Popemobile.
When Benazir Bhutto emerged through the sunroof of her armoured vehicle, she became the most vulnerable (and in fact when she was shot). With her death, I think we should start asking our politicians to start riding around in some version of the Popemobile. While there are things it probably wouldn't protect a person from, at least there would be some protection from the majority of extremists. This way the pol could still be visible to the crowd and try to connect and be reasonably sure of safety.
Is God Keeping You From Watching The Rose Bowl?
Hello dear readers.
According to the Religion News Service, the UUA is going to be doing some advertising during the bowl games.
I know that many of you dear readers probably like the UUA ad campaign; I think it's a waste of time and money. And I especially think that this one is a real waste of time.
For those of you who are football fans like I am, you know that the people who get the most attention are the people who hold up the John 3:16 signs. Unfortunately for us, we don't have a Bible verse that most of us agree on enough to hold it up on a sign at a football game.
Study after study have shown (and continue to show) that the best way to get people to come to church is through personal invitation. And yet, many UUs don't have the courage to invite someone they know to come to church with them. Growth does not come through osmosis friends. A church must work at it. How many UU churches have something like "Family and Friends Day"? Or any concerted outreach that doesn't involve advertising?
I want to hear stories. Let's talk about the ups and downs of church growth.
According to the Religion News Service, the UUA is going to be doing some advertising during the bowl games.
I know that many of you dear readers probably like the UUA ad campaign; I think it's a waste of time and money. And I especially think that this one is a real waste of time.
For those of you who are football fans like I am, you know that the people who get the most attention are the people who hold up the John 3:16 signs. Unfortunately for us, we don't have a Bible verse that most of us agree on enough to hold it up on a sign at a football game.
Study after study have shown (and continue to show) that the best way to get people to come to church is through personal invitation. And yet, many UUs don't have the courage to invite someone they know to come to church with them. Growth does not come through osmosis friends. A church must work at it. How many UU churches have something like "Family and Friends Day"? Or any concerted outreach that doesn't involve advertising?
I want to hear stories. Let's talk about the ups and downs of church growth.
Thursday, December 27, 2007
For Those Interested In The "Prosperity Gospel"......
here's a news story that you might want to read:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071227/ap_on_re_us/prosperity_preachers
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071227/ap_on_re_us/prosperity_preachers
Assassination Of A Leader
I've been watching the news most of the day to get as much information about the death of Benazir Bhutto as I can.
Those of us who have studied the Near East and the subcontinent for any length of time know just how important Benazir Bhutto was. It is a truly sad day.
Ms. Kitty has written more fully on being scared for leaders. I recommend her post to you.
Assassination is not a new trick in hoodlum's bags. The real shame is that one will never be able to stop extremists bent on making a point.
Those of us who have studied the Near East and the subcontinent for any length of time know just how important Benazir Bhutto was. It is a truly sad day.
Ms. Kitty has written more fully on being scared for leaders. I recommend her post to you.
Assassination is not a new trick in hoodlum's bags. The real shame is that one will never be able to stop extremists bent on making a point.
GA pt.3
Hello dear readers.
I already knew nothing was going to change regarding GA because there is some protest(I am the last person who wants the UUA to lose the estimated $800,000; and while it doesn't seem like it here, I don't protest that many things). That's why I wrote on the blog. I know that Homeland Security is in charge of the port and the convention center is in the port. Since this bed is made, I know it has to be laid in. That doesn't mean that I can't be concerned and voice that concern.
I know quite a bit about the GA process(I'm good friends with a former Planning Committee member). If I remember correctly, the Planning Committee went to the board this year and asked for the authority to change the 2010 GA if the labor issues were not resolved in Minneapolis/St. Paul. Now, my question is, if they could do this 3 years out, why didn't the same thing happen in 2005 when it was seen that things were not going to change in Ft. Lauderdale?
I already knew nothing was going to change regarding GA because there is some protest(I am the last person who wants the UUA to lose the estimated $800,000; and while it doesn't seem like it here, I don't protest that many things). That's why I wrote on the blog. I know that Homeland Security is in charge of the port and the convention center is in the port. Since this bed is made, I know it has to be laid in. That doesn't mean that I can't be concerned and voice that concern.
I know quite a bit about the GA process(I'm good friends with a former Planning Committee member). If I remember correctly, the Planning Committee went to the board this year and asked for the authority to change the 2010 GA if the labor issues were not resolved in Minneapolis/St. Paul. Now, my question is, if they could do this 3 years out, why didn't the same thing happen in 2005 when it was seen that things were not going to change in Ft. Lauderdale?
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
Skip Christmas......Celebrate Boxing Day
Hello dear readers.
I LOVE Boxing Day. I love it so much that I have come to the decision that from now on I will skip Christmas and do Boxing Day instead.
Why? you ask.
Simple. We had a party today and it was just wonderful. Just a group a people sitting around a table having dinner and good conversation; politics, religion, travels, education, hobbies and just about any other subject you can think of was talked about.
We did the dinner in traditional British style; leftovers redone. We made a Shepard's Pie, vegetable soup, had pears with a Stilton filling and petite quiche for appetizers, and served mince tarts and a cheese board for dessert.
It was quite simply one of the best days we've had this year. And just think about it; don't have to worry about presents or cards; the food you have is food you already have and you get to open your home to people you want to share it with.
So for all of you dear readers who think the cesspool that is known as Christmas is way too over-the-top, skip it and do Boxing Day instead. I think you'll enjoy it.
I LOVE Boxing Day. I love it so much that I have come to the decision that from now on I will skip Christmas and do Boxing Day instead.
Why? you ask.
Simple. We had a party today and it was just wonderful. Just a group a people sitting around a table having dinner and good conversation; politics, religion, travels, education, hobbies and just about any other subject you can think of was talked about.
We did the dinner in traditional British style; leftovers redone. We made a Shepard's Pie, vegetable soup, had pears with a Stilton filling and petite quiche for appetizers, and served mince tarts and a cheese board for dessert.
It was quite simply one of the best days we've had this year. And just think about it; don't have to worry about presents or cards; the food you have is food you already have and you get to open your home to people you want to share it with.
So for all of you dear readers who think the cesspool that is known as Christmas is way too over-the-top, skip it and do Boxing Day instead. I think you'll enjoy it.
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
The Most Wonderful Time Of The Year? pt. 2
ChaliceChick has asked me to explain a little more what I meant in my last post. I'll be happy to.
My question is about people for whom the holiday season is not the most wonderful time.
I'm thinking of a friend who just lost an in-law. Or someone who is in the grips of depression. Or the person who doesn't have much family and friends who are scattered.
In most churches during this time of the year, there is so much talk about anticipation and waiting and happiness and the coming of the light (that is what advent means after all), that I think there is a kind-of willful blindness to those who don't see the coming of the light or are grieving or are having some other problems.
I'm just wondering if/how churches deal with those who are suffering during this time of carols and presents and dinners and so forth. Is there any acknowledgement of the other side of the holidays and that even those who like this time of the year can feel a little "put-upon" by it?
I hope that makes some sense.
My question is about people for whom the holiday season is not the most wonderful time.
I'm thinking of a friend who just lost an in-law. Or someone who is in the grips of depression. Or the person who doesn't have much family and friends who are scattered.
In most churches during this time of the year, there is so much talk about anticipation and waiting and happiness and the coming of the light (that is what advent means after all), that I think there is a kind-of willful blindness to those who don't see the coming of the light or are grieving or are having some other problems.
I'm just wondering if/how churches deal with those who are suffering during this time of carols and presents and dinners and so forth. Is there any acknowledgement of the other side of the holidays and that even those who like this time of the year can feel a little "put-upon" by it?
I hope that makes some sense.
Monday, December 24, 2007
The Most Wonderful Time Of The Year?
As one of the people who has to work one or the other of my jobs during this time of year, I'm always mindful that there are many people for whom the holiday season is not that great.
How do we liberal religious folk deal with them? Do we deal with them at all? Or do we shunt them over to the side in this forced gaiety of the season and tell them to essentially "Wait 'til next year."?
How do we liberal religious folk deal with them? Do we deal with them at all? Or do we shunt them over to the side in this forced gaiety of the season and tell them to essentially "Wait 'til next year."?
Sunday, December 23, 2007
There Is A Difference Between A Cruise And A Convention, or GA Boycott pt. 2
After my first post about boycotting GA I thought I was done with the subject, but it seems that I'm not.
The people who say that those of us who want to boycott GA are being upset over nothing; that there are real issues with GA that we need to be talking about instead of ones that deal with civil liberties/security issues. And anyway....all sorts of people go through that port to go on their cruises so the screening people are probably more sensitive than most. Do I have the argument right?
Maybe it's just me, but I think something needs to be pointed out: THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A CRUISE AND A CONVENTION.
The cruise LEAVES the port at 4:00 (in most cases and in most ports). No matter what time you enter the port, you are going to be getting on a boat that will LEAVE at 4:00. It is not the same with a convention center. A convention, by necessity, means a lot of going in and coming out. So pardon me if I feel it wrong that I would have to show identification EVERY time I want to come back into the convention center.
I will give those who say that every thing will be ok a point; other conventions have been there with what seems to be little problem. I don't hesitate to point out that the Convention and Visitors Bureau isn't going to be the most forthright if there have been any problems. Have we talked to some of the other conventions to get their impressions?
I agree that there are other GA issues that we can talk about. I work my ass off on two jobs to save enough money to go to both GA and my District meeting every year, so I'm all for working on those other issues. But I don't think that just because there are other issues to resolve about GA that somehow we shouldn't continue to discuss this issue for this GA. If this makes me a sh*t-stirrer, so be it.
The people who say that those of us who want to boycott GA are being upset over nothing; that there are real issues with GA that we need to be talking about instead of ones that deal with civil liberties/security issues. And anyway....all sorts of people go through that port to go on their cruises so the screening people are probably more sensitive than most. Do I have the argument right?
Maybe it's just me, but I think something needs to be pointed out: THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A CRUISE AND A CONVENTION.
The cruise LEAVES the port at 4:00 (in most cases and in most ports). No matter what time you enter the port, you are going to be getting on a boat that will LEAVE at 4:00. It is not the same with a convention center. A convention, by necessity, means a lot of going in and coming out. So pardon me if I feel it wrong that I would have to show identification EVERY time I want to come back into the convention center.
I will give those who say that every thing will be ok a point; other conventions have been there with what seems to be little problem. I don't hesitate to point out that the Convention and Visitors Bureau isn't going to be the most forthright if there have been any problems. Have we talked to some of the other conventions to get their impressions?
I agree that there are other GA issues that we can talk about. I work my ass off on two jobs to save enough money to go to both GA and my District meeting every year, so I'm all for working on those other issues. But I don't think that just because there are other issues to resolve about GA that somehow we shouldn't continue to discuss this issue for this GA. If this makes me a sh*t-stirrer, so be it.
Friday, December 21, 2007
Be Good To Yourself, or Don't Have New Year's Resolution Guilt
Hello dear readers.
My mother's birthday is in early January so I was looking online for something else to give her along with what I've already planned. As she is a crafter, I decided to go to one of the crafting websites that we both like and came across this:
New Year's Resolutions
by AW
Okay, this year will be different. I am not going to vow to lose 20 pounds or get my house completely organized (although heaven knows I really should do both!). This year I am going to make some resolutions that will be fun to keep. Maybe then I will have a better chance at success.
And since a large part of my world revolves around (blank), I think it only fair that some of these fun-filled resolutions should help me develop my skills and knowledge as a (blank). Alright then, this year, I, AW, resolve to:
1. Learn at least one new (blank) technique.
2. Teach at least one person to (blank).
3. Make at least 6 items to give away to people who need and would appreciate them.
I must say that I like this person's attitude. Why should New Year's Resolutions be a kind of punishment? Why not have fun with them?
So dear readers, what good New Year's Resolutions do you have? Not the lose 20 pounds one; I mean the learn ballroom dancing/speak another language one?
What do you want to learn? What can you teach somebody? What can you make and give away?
My mother's birthday is in early January so I was looking online for something else to give her along with what I've already planned. As she is a crafter, I decided to go to one of the crafting websites that we both like and came across this:
New Year's Resolutions
by AW
Okay, this year will be different. I am not going to vow to lose 20 pounds or get my house completely organized (although heaven knows I really should do both!). This year I am going to make some resolutions that will be fun to keep. Maybe then I will have a better chance at success.
And since a large part of my world revolves around (blank), I think it only fair that some of these fun-filled resolutions should help me develop my skills and knowledge as a (blank). Alright then, this year, I, AW, resolve to:
1. Learn at least one new (blank) technique.
2. Teach at least one person to (blank).
3. Make at least 6 items to give away to people who need and would appreciate them.
I must say that I like this person's attitude. Why should New Year's Resolutions be a kind of punishment? Why not have fun with them?
So dear readers, what good New Year's Resolutions do you have? Not the lose 20 pounds one; I mean the learn ballroom dancing/speak another language one?
What do you want to learn? What can you teach somebody? What can you make and give away?
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
In Praise of the Girdle
Hello dear readers. This post is going to sound more like it belongs on PeaceBang's "Beauty Tips For Ministers", but since Ms. Bang is taking a well-deserved hiatus, I feel the need to write this.
I was flippin' through channels earlier today and for a couple of minutes ended up on a "What Not To Wear" wannabe. Now I'm not a fan of makeover shows (I think they say much more about the people around the person getting the makeover than the person getting the makeover), but I can occasionally stomach it to watch them trying on clothes.
As I was saying, I ended up on the WNTW wannabe. And the woman who was getting the makeover came out in a skirt and top outfit that would have been really cute on her if you didn't see her belly pooch.
While all the makeover shows talk about the need for women to have really good foundation wear (bras mostly), they have neglected one of the most valuable foundation garments: the girdle.
I don't really care how many shapers one has, they don't have the power that a really good girdle has. It holds you in in a way that the shapers cannot. Also the really good ones don't bind or constrict. And when you want to deal with more than one area, a one-piece (or full) girdle provides more coverage than two or more shapers.
So all my dear lady readers celebrate one of the best things to happen in foundation garments. The girdle is great and it's not the same one that your mother used 40 years ago.
I was flippin' through channels earlier today and for a couple of minutes ended up on a "What Not To Wear" wannabe. Now I'm not a fan of makeover shows (I think they say much more about the people around the person getting the makeover than the person getting the makeover), but I can occasionally stomach it to watch them trying on clothes.
As I was saying, I ended up on the WNTW wannabe. And the woman who was getting the makeover came out in a skirt and top outfit that would have been really cute on her if you didn't see her belly pooch.
While all the makeover shows talk about the need for women to have really good foundation wear (bras mostly), they have neglected one of the most valuable foundation garments: the girdle.
I don't really care how many shapers one has, they don't have the power that a really good girdle has. It holds you in in a way that the shapers cannot. Also the really good ones don't bind or constrict. And when you want to deal with more than one area, a one-piece (or full) girdle provides more coverage than two or more shapers.
So all my dear lady readers celebrate one of the best things to happen in foundation garments. The girdle is great and it's not the same one that your mother used 40 years ago.
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Why I Love The New York Times Online
Hello dear readers.
Lest you think that I have forgotten that I told you that I was in the process of writing a post about Oprah's speeches last weekend, I want to point you to Frank Rich's column in today's New York Times.
I shall be adding it to my post about the Oprah-Barack show.
If you want a direct link try: http://www.ntimes.com/2007/12/16/opinion/16rich.html?em&ex=1197954000&en=583bbb0a70ae5ebc&ei=5087%0a
Lest you think that I have forgotten that I told you that I was in the process of writing a post about Oprah's speeches last weekend, I want to point you to Frank Rich's column in today's New York Times.
I shall be adding it to my post about the Oprah-Barack show.
If you want a direct link try: http://www.ntimes.com/2007/12/16/opinion/16rich.html?em&ex=1197954000&en=583bbb0a70ae5ebc&ei=5087%0a
Saturday, December 15, 2007
How Do We Choose????
Since I'm waiting to see the reaction to my post about steroids and baseball, I must say that I didn't expect the response to my "Free Michael Vick" posts that I have gotten. I must say that I'm grateful for it. I thought I was going to get more vitriol from the PETA types.
I'm appreciative of Chalicechick's postings. I am especially interested in hearing that somebody might get 2 years for cockfighting. While I don't think that's likely to happen (going by my research into previous cases), it is interesting to find out.
I think this brings in a whole different issue: How much culture influences moral decisions and law.
Cockfighting happens in many places around the country with little notice and when most people hear about it they might cringe a bit but there's little outrage. If these same people hear about a dogfight, it seems as if the person involved is a different level of "slime". Yet, if we were in India where cows are sacred, they would have the same reaction to dogfighting that most Americans have to cockfighting.
So, how do we make the distinctions?
I'm appreciative of Chalicechick's postings. I am especially interested in hearing that somebody might get 2 years for cockfighting. While I don't think that's likely to happen (going by my research into previous cases), it is interesting to find out.
I think this brings in a whole different issue: How much culture influences moral decisions and law.
Cockfighting happens in many places around the country with little notice and when most people hear about it they might cringe a bit but there's little outrage. If these same people hear about a dogfight, it seems as if the person involved is a different level of "slime". Yet, if we were in India where cows are sacred, they would have the same reaction to dogfighting that most Americans have to cockfighting.
So, how do we make the distinctions?
Friday, December 14, 2007
There Are No Children Here, or There Is No Such Person As A Baseball Purist
So.....Former Sen. Mitchell spends 20 months on a report that has less power than the paper it's written on. Bully for him.
As someone who has never liked baseball (football and basketball are my sports), I'm still trying to figure out what the big deal is.
There are no children playing professional sports friends. If any of those who Sen. Mitchell names in his report as having taken steroids did it, they were grown when they did steroids (which are not illegal; if it weren't for steroids half of my family would be dead because of asthma); they knew the risks and chose to take them.
But what upsets me more than the fact that valuable news time was taken up by this, is the feigned outrage of so-called baseball purists.
As many of you dear readers will remember, I live near St. Louis. Everybody in the St. Louis area knew that Mark McGuire was taking something (anybody else remember when the Andro was discovered in his locker????), yet the Cardinals were breaking all sorts of attendance records. Why? Because people wanted to see Mark McGuire hit those home runs. They didn't care that he might have been taking something. The same goes for Roger Clemens or Barry Bonds or Miguel Tejeda or Sammy Sosa. People like power baseball. They go to the ballpark to see those home runs being hit and those fast balls go by batters.
There are no children here. Let's stop acting like there were.
As someone who has never liked baseball (football and basketball are my sports), I'm still trying to figure out what the big deal is.
There are no children playing professional sports friends. If any of those who Sen. Mitchell names in his report as having taken steroids did it, they were grown when they did steroids (which are not illegal; if it weren't for steroids half of my family would be dead because of asthma); they knew the risks and chose to take them.
But what upsets me more than the fact that valuable news time was taken up by this, is the feigned outrage of so-called baseball purists.
As many of you dear readers will remember, I live near St. Louis. Everybody in the St. Louis area knew that Mark McGuire was taking something (anybody else remember when the Andro was discovered in his locker????), yet the Cardinals were breaking all sorts of attendance records. Why? Because people wanted to see Mark McGuire hit those home runs. They didn't care that he might have been taking something. The same goes for Roger Clemens or Barry Bonds or Miguel Tejeda or Sammy Sosa. People like power baseball. They go to the ballpark to see those home runs being hit and those fast balls go by batters.
There are no children here. Let's stop acting like there were.
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Free Michael Vick, pt.2
I deliberately did not talk about Michael Vick's race because that is a side issue to me. I think the real argument will get lost if race comes into this.
I really think this is about the animal that was involved. I suggest this because I've never heard of someone receiving this amount of jail for financing, supporting or betting on cockfighting. Also, the treatment of racehorses (except for the really special breeds) would make most people sick; yet financing that and destroying the horse after it doesn't produce anymore is commonplace.
What makes dogs so damn special?
I know I've probably just made my dear animal-rights readers mad, but I really don't care. I just want an explanation.
I really think this is about the animal that was involved. I suggest this because I've never heard of someone receiving this amount of jail for financing, supporting or betting on cockfighting. Also, the treatment of racehorses (except for the really special breeds) would make most people sick; yet financing that and destroying the horse after it doesn't produce anymore is commonplace.
What makes dogs so damn special?
I know I've probably just made my dear animal-rights readers mad, but I really don't care. I just want an explanation.
Monday, December 10, 2007
A Football Aside
Hello dear readers.
This post will be very short as I am working on a post about Oprah's speeches this weekend, but as this happened today I felt compelled to comment.
Free Michael Vick!
23 months for financing dogfighting? Do those who get caught financing or training cocks to fight get the same treatment? Or was there something else going on here because he was a famous football player?
This post will be very short as I am working on a post about Oprah's speeches this weekend, but as this happened today I felt compelled to comment.
Free Michael Vick!
23 months for financing dogfighting? Do those who get caught financing or training cocks to fight get the same treatment? Or was there something else going on here because he was a famous football player?
Friday, December 7, 2007
Freedom REQUIRES Religion?????
Hello dear readers.
I've been looking over the UU blog response to Mitt Romney's speech yesterday and have found what I expected to find: dismay at his denigration of the nonreligious or other-religious.
I think those blogs are missing an even bigger point; the line in the speech where Gov. Romney says "Freedom requires religion." Let me tell you dear readers, this line scares me more than the assumption that the only religions that count are the ones that have a G-d (where does that leave most practitioners of the major Eastern religions?).
Freedom REQUIRES religion?!?!?!?!?!?
Even more disconcerting is the rest of the line in the speech: "And religion requires freedom." This my dear friends ignores most of human history (not to mention the real beginnings of the republic). Religion has been used to restrict the freedom of the "other" throughout time. Did Mitt miss that in history class?
Anyway....Jon Meacham and Sally Quinn were on Charlie Rose last night and gave what I thought was the best analysis of the speech so far.
I've been looking over the UU blog response to Mitt Romney's speech yesterday and have found what I expected to find: dismay at his denigration of the nonreligious or other-religious.
I think those blogs are missing an even bigger point; the line in the speech where Gov. Romney says "Freedom requires religion." Let me tell you dear readers, this line scares me more than the assumption that the only religions that count are the ones that have a G-d (where does that leave most practitioners of the major Eastern religions?).
Freedom REQUIRES religion?!?!?!?!?!?
Even more disconcerting is the rest of the line in the speech: "And religion requires freedom." This my dear friends ignores most of human history (not to mention the real beginnings of the republic). Religion has been used to restrict the freedom of the "other" throughout time. Did Mitt miss that in history class?
Anyway....Jon Meacham and Sally Quinn were on Charlie Rose last night and gave what I thought was the best analysis of the speech so far.
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
Have You Read.....Eat Pray Love?
I haven't. But since Oprah has had the woman who wrote it on her show twice in a few months, I'm assuming that lots of people on her staff (and Oprah as well) have read it and like it.
I'm usually scared of books that are TOO popular, so I'm debating if it would be a good thing to read. If you have a review of it, I'll be glad to listen.
I'm usually scared of books that are TOO popular, so I'm debating if it would be a good thing to read. If you have a review of it, I'll be glad to listen.
Monday, December 3, 2007
The Advent Sermon I Want To Hear
Hello dear readers.
This would probably work for any of the big days of the liturgical calendar, but it seems appropriate here.
------------------
A time comes in your life when you finally get it. When in the midst of all your fears and the insanity you stop dead in your tracks and somewhere the voice inside your head cries out "ENOUGH!" Enough fighting and crying or struggling to hold on. And like a child quieting down after a tantrum, your sobs begin to subside, you shudder once or twice, you blink back your tears and through a mantle of wet lashes you begin to look at the world with new eyes.
This is your awakening. You realize that it's time to stop hoping and waiting for something to change; or for happiness, safety and security to come galloping over the next horizon. You come to terms with the fact that there is no Prince Charming and you are not Cinderella and that in the real world there aren't always fairytale endings (or beginnings for that matter). And any guarantee of "happily ever after" must begin with you. In the process a sense of serenity is born.
You awaken to the fact that you are not perfect and that not everyone will always love, appreciate or approve of who and what you are; and that's OK. You learn that people don't always say what they mean or mean what they say and that not everyone will be there for you and that it's not always about you.
And you begin to sift through all the trash you've been fed about how you should look and how much you should weigh. What you should wear and where you should shop. Where you should go to school or what you should do for a living. Who you should choose for your friends. Who you should marry and what you should expect of a marriage. Those ideas about the importance of having and raising children or what you owe to your parents.
You learn that it is truly in giving that you receive the most. And that there is power and glory in creating and contributing and you stop maneuvering through life merely as a consumer looking for your next fix. You learn that principles such as honesty and integrity are not the outdated ideals of a bygone era but the mortar that holds together the foundation upon which you must build a life. You learn that you don't know everything and it's not your job to save the world. You learn to distinguish between guilt and responsibility and the importance of setting boundaries and learning to say NO.
You learn that the only cross to bear is the one you choose to carry and that martyrs get burned at the stake.
Then you learn about love. Romantic love and familial love and worldly love; how to love, how much to give in love and when to stop giving or walk away. You learn to look at things as they really are and not as you would have them be. You stop trying to control people, situations and outcomes. You learn that just as people grow and change so it is with love. You learn that you don't have the right to demand love just to make you happy.
You look in the mirror and come to terms with the fact that you will never be a perfect 10; nobody is, not even those airbrushed models. And you stop trying to compete with the image inside your head and agonizing over how you stack up. You learn that your body really is a temple and you begin to care for it with respect. You begin eating a balanced diet, drinking more water and taking more time to exercise. You learn that fatigue diminishes the spirit and can create doubt and fear. So you take more time to rest. And you learn that just as food feeds the body, laughter feeds the soul. So you take more time to laugh and to play. You learn that for the most part, in life, you get what you believe you deserve and that much of life truly is a self-
fulfilling prophecy.
You learn that anything worth achieving is worth working for and that wishing for something to happen is different from working toward making it happen. More importantly, you learn that in order to achieve success you need direction, discipline and perseverance. You also learn that no one can do it all alone and that it's ok to risk asking for help. You learn to fight for your life and not to squander it living under a cloud of impending doom. You learn that life isn't always fair; you don't always get what you think you deserve and that sometimes bad things happen to good people.
On these occasions you learn not to personalize things. You learn that God isn't punishing you or failing to answer your prayers, it's just life happening. You learn that negative feelings such as anger, envy and resentment must be redirected or they will suffocate the life out of you and poison the universe that surrounds you. You learn to admit when you are wrong and to build bridges instead of walls.
You learn to be thankful and to take comfort in many of the simple things we often take for granted; a full refrigerator , clean running water, a warm bed, a long hot shower.
Slowly you begin to take responsibility for yourself, by yourself and to make yourself a promise to never betray yourself and to never, ever settle for less than your heart's desire.
Put up a wind chime outside your window so you can listen to the wind. Make it a point to keep smiling, to keep trusting, and to stay open to every wonderful possibility. Finally, with courage in your heart and with faith by your side you can take a stand, take a deep breath and begin to design the life you want to live as best you can.
So, don't just wake up. Experience the awakening.
This would probably work for any of the big days of the liturgical calendar, but it seems appropriate here.
------------------
A time comes in your life when you finally get it. When in the midst of all your fears and the insanity you stop dead in your tracks and somewhere the voice inside your head cries out "ENOUGH!" Enough fighting and crying or struggling to hold on. And like a child quieting down after a tantrum, your sobs begin to subside, you shudder once or twice, you blink back your tears and through a mantle of wet lashes you begin to look at the world with new eyes.
This is your awakening. You realize that it's time to stop hoping and waiting for something to change; or for happiness, safety and security to come galloping over the next horizon. You come to terms with the fact that there is no Prince Charming and you are not Cinderella and that in the real world there aren't always fairytale endings (or beginnings for that matter). And any guarantee of "happily ever after" must begin with you. In the process a sense of serenity is born.
You awaken to the fact that you are not perfect and that not everyone will always love, appreciate or approve of who and what you are; and that's OK. You learn that people don't always say what they mean or mean what they say and that not everyone will be there for you and that it's not always about you.
And you begin to sift through all the trash you've been fed about how you should look and how much you should weigh. What you should wear and where you should shop. Where you should go to school or what you should do for a living. Who you should choose for your friends. Who you should marry and what you should expect of a marriage. Those ideas about the importance of having and raising children or what you owe to your parents.
You learn that it is truly in giving that you receive the most. And that there is power and glory in creating and contributing and you stop maneuvering through life merely as a consumer looking for your next fix. You learn that principles such as honesty and integrity are not the outdated ideals of a bygone era but the mortar that holds together the foundation upon which you must build a life. You learn that you don't know everything and it's not your job to save the world. You learn to distinguish between guilt and responsibility and the importance of setting boundaries and learning to say NO.
You learn that the only cross to bear is the one you choose to carry and that martyrs get burned at the stake.
Then you learn about love. Romantic love and familial love and worldly love; how to love, how much to give in love and when to stop giving or walk away. You learn to look at things as they really are and not as you would have them be. You stop trying to control people, situations and outcomes. You learn that just as people grow and change so it is with love. You learn that you don't have the right to demand love just to make you happy.
You look in the mirror and come to terms with the fact that you will never be a perfect 10; nobody is, not even those airbrushed models. And you stop trying to compete with the image inside your head and agonizing over how you stack up. You learn that your body really is a temple and you begin to care for it with respect. You begin eating a balanced diet, drinking more water and taking more time to exercise. You learn that fatigue diminishes the spirit and can create doubt and fear. So you take more time to rest. And you learn that just as food feeds the body, laughter feeds the soul. So you take more time to laugh and to play. You learn that for the most part, in life, you get what you believe you deserve and that much of life truly is a self-
fulfilling prophecy.
You learn that anything worth achieving is worth working for and that wishing for something to happen is different from working toward making it happen. More importantly, you learn that in order to achieve success you need direction, discipline and perseverance. You also learn that no one can do it all alone and that it's ok to risk asking for help. You learn to fight for your life and not to squander it living under a cloud of impending doom. You learn that life isn't always fair; you don't always get what you think you deserve and that sometimes bad things happen to good people.
On these occasions you learn not to personalize things. You learn that God isn't punishing you or failing to answer your prayers, it's just life happening. You learn that negative feelings such as anger, envy and resentment must be redirected or they will suffocate the life out of you and poison the universe that surrounds you. You learn to admit when you are wrong and to build bridges instead of walls.
You learn to be thankful and to take comfort in many of the simple things we often take for granted; a full refrigerator , clean running water, a warm bed, a long hot shower.
Slowly you begin to take responsibility for yourself, by yourself and to make yourself a promise to never betray yourself and to never, ever settle for less than your heart's desire.
Put up a wind chime outside your window so you can listen to the wind. Make it a point to keep smiling, to keep trusting, and to stay open to every wonderful possibility. Finally, with courage in your heart and with faith by your side you can take a stand, take a deep breath and begin to design the life you want to live as best you can.
So, don't just wake up. Experience the awakening.
Friday, November 30, 2007
Suffer the Little Children, or The Price of Milk As A Moral Issue
Hello dear readers. I just returned from grocery shopping and had this post in my head while on the way home.
I always base how I feel about the economy by one thing: the price of a gallon of milk. So I guess you can tell I'm not real thrilled about the state of the economy right now.
The cheapest I saw a gallon a milk today was $3.69. $3.69?!?!?!?!?! This is utterly ridiculous. Luckily for me, I only use milk for cooking and a gallon will last me a while. However I know this is not the case for many, if not most, Americans.
All the world's major religions call for showing compassion and remembering the least of these. Milk is one of the few universal foods and is an important part of the human diet. How does $3.69 for a gallon of milk show compassion? Is it remembering the least among us?
In all of my posts about church growth I've always talked about how me need to look at the megachurches and see what they are doing. I'm going to do it again here. Churches that grow talk about bread-and-butter issues, everyday life issues, in a way that those who don't have graduate degrees can understand. And they do it using scripture from holy books. How many UU churches are talking about the price of milk, not as an economic issue, but a moral one? Where are the UU churches that are talking about the bread-and-butter, everyday life issues that people really worry about?
In all the UU talk about social justice, where are the UU activists who are talking about the these issues? (yes I know that there is the UUs for a Just Economy) Are we working with other religious progressives who have been at the forefront with these kinds of issues?
I always base how I feel about the economy by one thing: the price of a gallon of milk. So I guess you can tell I'm not real thrilled about the state of the economy right now.
The cheapest I saw a gallon a milk today was $3.69. $3.69?!?!?!?!?! This is utterly ridiculous. Luckily for me, I only use milk for cooking and a gallon will last me a while. However I know this is not the case for many, if not most, Americans.
All the world's major religions call for showing compassion and remembering the least of these. Milk is one of the few universal foods and is an important part of the human diet. How does $3.69 for a gallon of milk show compassion? Is it remembering the least among us?
In all of my posts about church growth I've always talked about how me need to look at the megachurches and see what they are doing. I'm going to do it again here. Churches that grow talk about bread-and-butter issues, everyday life issues, in a way that those who don't have graduate degrees can understand. And they do it using scripture from holy books. How many UU churches are talking about the price of milk, not as an economic issue, but a moral one? Where are the UU churches that are talking about the bread-and-butter, everyday life issues that people really worry about?
In all the UU talk about social justice, where are the UU activists who are talking about the these issues? (yes I know that there is the UUs for a Just Economy) Are we working with other religious progressives who have been at the forefront with these kinds of issues?
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
I Believe The Children Are The Future? or, Who Do We Say That We Are pt.3
Dear Readers...I am going to say the most politically incorrect thing that can be said in UU circles, but I truly believe it.
The children are NOT the future of UUism.
The future is NOW people! Church growth does not happen because of youth programs. Church growth happens because you keep the ADULTS who bring the youth. (no ad campaign is going to work unless you have something to back it up) What are you offering them? Why do we have the same number of members now as we did 30 years ago?
Where is the Adult Religious Education curricula? Why has there not been the same effort in adult curricula that there has been in children/youth curricula?
UUs are squandering such an opportunity for real growth by not looking at the situation as it is. The growth in churches regardless of theological perspective is having adult programming that puts people in small group, intimate contact with others. Look at the megachurches (I know you don't want to, but you should). Do you see all the small groups that they have? Do you see what those groups are formed around? Do you see their educational offerings (not just about spiritual matters but on all kinds of things)?
The church is supposed to be about building relationships and spiritual/moral growth. We do ok with the kids in UUism. We just don't do it with adults. And that's the shame.
The children are NOT the future of UUism.
The future is NOW people! Church growth does not happen because of youth programs. Church growth happens because you keep the ADULTS who bring the youth. (no ad campaign is going to work unless you have something to back it up) What are you offering them? Why do we have the same number of members now as we did 30 years ago?
Where is the Adult Religious Education curricula? Why has there not been the same effort in adult curricula that there has been in children/youth curricula?
UUs are squandering such an opportunity for real growth by not looking at the situation as it is. The growth in churches regardless of theological perspective is having adult programming that puts people in small group, intimate contact with others. Look at the megachurches (I know you don't want to, but you should). Do you see all the small groups that they have? Do you see what those groups are formed around? Do you see their educational offerings (not just about spiritual matters but on all kinds of things)?
The church is supposed to be about building relationships and spiritual/moral growth. We do ok with the kids in UUism. We just don't do it with adults. And that's the shame.
Monday, November 26, 2007
The Oddities of Education
Hello dear readers. I hope all of you had the Thanksgiving that you wanted.
On this first post of the after-Thanksgiving break, I thought I would talk about somebody else. Those of you in the Central Midwest District, and even a few of you who are outside of this district, probably know Kim Hampton. I've known her a while because of my travels in the district and think she is a really nice person to know.
For those of you who know her, Kim is getting ready to enter seminary in January. In the little updates that she sends out, she sent this great little nugget:
I've finished all the paperwork that Earlham requires except for one; the health form. You
might ask.....why the health form? It's simple, I have to show proof of my immunizations.
Now, I haven't had to show proof of immunization at all since I became an adult, and the only
time my parents remember having had to show the little card was when they registered me
for elementary school. But now that I need it, I can't find it. So now I'm running around like a
chicken with it's head cut off trying to think of all the places that might have that information. It
always seems to happen that way.......
So I thought I would make this post an open one.....what oddities of education have you, or someone you know, run into? And how did you handle it?
On this first post of the after-Thanksgiving break, I thought I would talk about somebody else. Those of you in the Central Midwest District, and even a few of you who are outside of this district, probably know Kim Hampton. I've known her a while because of my travels in the district and think she is a really nice person to know.
For those of you who know her, Kim is getting ready to enter seminary in January. In the little updates that she sends out, she sent this great little nugget:
I've finished all the paperwork that Earlham requires except for one; the health form. You
might ask.....why the health form? It's simple, I have to show proof of my immunizations.
Now, I haven't had to show proof of immunization at all since I became an adult, and the only
time my parents remember having had to show the little card was when they registered me
for elementary school. But now that I need it, I can't find it. So now I'm running around like a
chicken with it's head cut off trying to think of all the places that might have that information. It
always seems to happen that way.......
So I thought I would make this post an open one.....what oddities of education have you, or someone you know, run into? And how did you handle it?
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
The Book Is Dead.......Again
I like Jeff Bezos. I loooooooooooooooooooooooooove Amazon.com. I think Kindle is a bad idea.
People have been talking about the death of the book since Gutenberg invented movable type. And while Bezos says that he doesn't think the book is dead, he's acting as if the book is dead.
Digital works for some things. Music. Movies. TV.
But not books. There is just something about holding that bound paper in your hands that does not come from e-(or digital) books. There's even some loss with having books on tape (or CD). [don't get me wrong, I enjoy books on CD when I'm traveling long distances] Reading a book is an experience. You can't dog-ear pages on a screen. You can't highlight lines that touch you.
So while I wish Jeff Bezos and Amazon well, pick on something else besides books. There are so many things that technology can improve on.......books aren't one of them.
People have been talking about the death of the book since Gutenberg invented movable type. And while Bezos says that he doesn't think the book is dead, he's acting as if the book is dead.
Digital works for some things. Music. Movies. TV.
But not books. There is just something about holding that bound paper in your hands that does not come from e-(or digital) books. There's even some loss with having books on tape (or CD). [don't get me wrong, I enjoy books on CD when I'm traveling long distances] Reading a book is an experience. You can't dog-ear pages on a screen. You can't highlight lines that touch you.
So while I wish Jeff Bezos and Amazon well, pick on something else besides books. There are so many things that technology can improve on.......books aren't one of them.
Friday, November 16, 2007
Who Do We Say That We Are? pt.2
Because Ogre and I seem to disagree about what Jesus said, I thought I would put the scriptures here on the page. The passage is Matthew 16:13-17. (I'm using the King James Version for fun)
Mt 16:13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
Mt 16:14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
Mt 16:15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
Mt 16:16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Mt 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
So it seems we are both right. I just think that we know the answer to the first question. We know what people, those who know about us anyway, say that we are.
My question is: Who do WE say that WE are? Part of the reason that the new UUA ad campaign is not going over well in a number of UU circles is that there is no there there. Unless we know what we are, there will never be a really effective broad based outreach/mission/planting program in the UUA.
So my question still stands: Who do we say that we are?
Mt 16:13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?
Mt 16:14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
Mt 16:15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am?
Mt 16:16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.
Mt 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.
So it seems we are both right. I just think that we know the answer to the first question. We know what people, those who know about us anyway, say that we are.
My question is: Who do WE say that WE are? Part of the reason that the new UUA ad campaign is not going over well in a number of UU circles is that there is no there there. Unless we know what we are, there will never be a really effective broad based outreach/mission/planting program in the UUA.
So my question still stands: Who do we say that we are?
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Just As I Am, or The Rubber Meets the Road with Congregational Polity
When I was flipping through the local paper for the umpteenth time yesterday, I really got down to reading this article that comes from the Charlotte Observer.
For those of you who know of it, Myers Park Baptist Church (in Greensboro) was essentially excommunicated from the North Carolina State Convention because they welcome gays and lesbians without trying to change them. After the vote to expel Myers Park, six churches quit in protest to what they call a violation of congregational polity.
It is my firm hope that the UU churches that are near Myers Park will stand with them and let it be known publicly that there are other religious entities that are willing to work with them in furthering the cause of welcoming GLBTs into our collective religious life.
But even more, I think that we as an Association must start speaking very loudly for the cause of congregational polity (and not just among ourselves). The Baptists are our cousins (just like the Disciples and their offspring,Quakers,Mennonites and the UCC to a lesser extent), and all of us should be very worried when a Convention of AUTONOMOUS congregations kicks out a member of that Convention because they are acting autonomous. What does this say about congregational polity? And is this a slippery slope, not just for the Baptists, but for us as well?
For those of you who know of it, Myers Park Baptist Church (in Greensboro) was essentially excommunicated from the North Carolina State Convention because they welcome gays and lesbians without trying to change them. After the vote to expel Myers Park, six churches quit in protest to what they call a violation of congregational polity.
It is my firm hope that the UU churches that are near Myers Park will stand with them and let it be known publicly that there are other religious entities that are willing to work with them in furthering the cause of welcoming GLBTs into our collective religious life.
But even more, I think that we as an Association must start speaking very loudly for the cause of congregational polity (and not just among ourselves). The Baptists are our cousins (just like the Disciples and their offspring,Quakers,Mennonites and the UCC to a lesser extent), and all of us should be very worried when a Convention of AUTONOMOUS congregations kicks out a member of that Convention because they are acting autonomous. What does this say about congregational polity? And is this a slippery slope, not just for the Baptists, but for us as well?
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Who Do We Say That We Are?
Yes dear readers, for those of you who know your Bible, you will recognize the title of this post as a re-framing of Jesus' question to his disciples: Who do people say that I am?
For this post however, I am not worried about what other people think about us but rather what we think about ourselves.
As I was doing some research today, I came across this survey on the Disciples of Christ website
(http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=jpybty63fj3u4jtg9drdkg_3d_3d). I am really struck by the introduction and thought it would be a good thing to ask UUs.
Here's the introduction:
Who do we say that we are? Identity is a vital concern for all parts of the church. Many long-time (Disciples) worry that we may be losing crucial characteristics of our common life. New (Disciples) want to know about the distinctive gifts of this community of faith. All of us need to have clarity about who we are in order to be faithful and effective witnesses to (Jesus Christ).
A church’s identity must be firmly rooted in scripture and yet flexible enough to adapt to changes in culture and the shifting demands of mission. Early Christians in Jerusalem had to learn what it meant to be faithful in Antioch and Rome. Our (Disciples) forebears, as they moved from the frontier to the city, had to rethink such matters as congregational autonomy and the goal of “restoring” the New Testament church. Today, we wrestle with what it means to be disciples of (our Lord) in a world that is increasingly pluralistic, globally connected, and yet so often violently divided.
Isn't that interesting? If you change the word Unitarian or Universalist for Disciples, this is something we need to wrestle with?
So here are the questions that have come to my mind:
1. What are the crucial characteristics of our common life?
2. What are the distinctive gifts of this community of faith?
3. Since the number of people in our communities of faith do not consider themselves Christian, what are we faithful and effective witnesses to/for?
4. In the same vein, what are we disciples of?
And the main question: Who do we say that we are?
For this post however, I am not worried about what other people think about us but rather what we think about ourselves.
As I was doing some research today, I came across this survey on the Disciples of Christ website
(http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=jpybty63fj3u4jtg9drdkg_3d_3d). I am really struck by the introduction and thought it would be a good thing to ask UUs.
Here's the introduction:
Who do we say that we are? Identity is a vital concern for all parts of the church. Many long-time (Disciples) worry that we may be losing crucial characteristics of our common life. New (Disciples) want to know about the distinctive gifts of this community of faith. All of us need to have clarity about who we are in order to be faithful and effective witnesses to (Jesus Christ).
A church’s identity must be firmly rooted in scripture and yet flexible enough to adapt to changes in culture and the shifting demands of mission. Early Christians in Jerusalem had to learn what it meant to be faithful in Antioch and Rome. Our (Disciples) forebears, as they moved from the frontier to the city, had to rethink such matters as congregational autonomy and the goal of “restoring” the New Testament church. Today, we wrestle with what it means to be disciples of (our Lord) in a world that is increasingly pluralistic, globally connected, and yet so often violently divided.
Isn't that interesting? If you change the word Unitarian or Universalist for Disciples, this is something we need to wrestle with?
So here are the questions that have come to my mind:
1. What are the crucial characteristics of our common life?
2. What are the distinctive gifts of this community of faith?
3. Since the number of people in our communities of faith do not consider themselves Christian, what are we faithful and effective witnesses to/for?
4. In the same vein, what are we disciples of?
And the main question: Who do we say that we are?
Sunday, November 11, 2007
The First UU Genius Award, or Why There Should Be a Boycott of the Ft. Lauderdale GA
Hello dear readers. I have decided to take a small break from posting about Independent Affiliates to post about another UUA thing that I'm interested in.....General Assembly.
Those who know me in real life know just how much I love GA. I love GA so much that I'm worried about this new "5th Principle" committee. I'll write about that in another post.
This post, however, is not about any future GAs; it is about 2008.
By sheer coincidence, my parents just returned from a cruise of the Western Caribbean. When they let me know that they were back home and to talk a little about the cruise, I asked them where the cruise started from. (I thought it was Ft. Lauderdale, but wanted to make sure)
"Ft. Lauderdale," was their reply.
"Did they check your ID?", I asked.
"We had it ready, but the lady said not to worry about it since we were with the cruise line and on one of their buses."
Once I got that confirmation, I became even more uneasy about the 2008 GA than I was before.
So I think it's time to give out the first Real Anonymous UU Genius Award to the person or persons who came up with the brilliant idea of having General Assembly at a convention center that's in the middle of a port; making race/ethnicity a bigger issue than most UUs think.
Let's examine this shall we. Having a government-issued ID is not that big a deal for most of us. The issue becomes the people who will be checking that ID. As it is in airports, so it will be at a port. I can see it now.....UU males of color(especially youth) are going to be profiled all in the name of national security and there's no protest the UUA can make because they knew this would happen going in.
I know that GA sites are chosen years in advance. However, my guess is that Ft. Lauderdale was chosen AFTER Sept. 11, 2001. If it was, why was it chosen? Or did this issue not cross the minds of whoever made this decision because, as UUism is 97% white, they would not be the target of the profiling?
So I have made my decision. I will boycott the 2008 General Assembly in Ft. Lauderdale in protest of the decision to hold it in a place that is so obviously fraught with national security issues and ignored our own commitment to anti-racism and anti-oppression. I would encourage you to do the same.
Those who know me in real life know just how much I love GA. I love GA so much that I'm worried about this new "5th Principle" committee. I'll write about that in another post.
This post, however, is not about any future GAs; it is about 2008.
By sheer coincidence, my parents just returned from a cruise of the Western Caribbean. When they let me know that they were back home and to talk a little about the cruise, I asked them where the cruise started from. (I thought it was Ft. Lauderdale, but wanted to make sure)
"Ft. Lauderdale," was their reply.
"Did they check your ID?", I asked.
"We had it ready, but the lady said not to worry about it since we were with the cruise line and on one of their buses."
Once I got that confirmation, I became even more uneasy about the 2008 GA than I was before.
So I think it's time to give out the first Real Anonymous UU Genius Award to the person or persons who came up with the brilliant idea of having General Assembly at a convention center that's in the middle of a port; making race/ethnicity a bigger issue than most UUs think.
Let's examine this shall we. Having a government-issued ID is not that big a deal for most of us. The issue becomes the people who will be checking that ID. As it is in airports, so it will be at a port. I can see it now.....UU males of color(especially youth) are going to be profiled all in the name of national security and there's no protest the UUA can make because they knew this would happen going in.
I know that GA sites are chosen years in advance. However, my guess is that Ft. Lauderdale was chosen AFTER Sept. 11, 2001. If it was, why was it chosen? Or did this issue not cross the minds of whoever made this decision because, as UUism is 97% white, they would not be the target of the profiling?
So I have made my decision. I will boycott the 2008 General Assembly in Ft. Lauderdale in protest of the decision to hold it in a place that is so obviously fraught with national security issues and ignored our own commitment to anti-racism and anti-oppression. I would encourage you to do the same.
Wednesday, November 7, 2007
What Drives Us? or, Is There Any Passion in Unitarian Universalism???
Hello dear readers. I have decided to bring this up again because it's something I think we need to be talking about.
And I guess I should point out again this post is not about SEX. This post is about PASSION, or in other words: what drives you?
The question about the UUA(or UUism): besides same-sex marriage, does the UUA(or UUism) have any passion for anything?
It doesn't seem to be spiritual development/formation or maturation, because if it were there would be more curricula out there. It doesn't seem to be religious literacy, or the kids who go through most UU Religious Education programs wouldn't come out as religiously ignorant as they were coming in and most adults would understand that the religious world is bigger than their past or current congregation. It doesn't even seem to be REAL social justice or we would be reaching out and working with the other religious progressives out there no matter what their religious stripe. (where is the UU version of Dorothy Day and the Catholic Worker movement?)
For all their faults (and speaking as a former fundamentalist I know there are many), mega-churches have passion. They know what drives them: bringing people to Christ. What drives the typical UU church? Where is their passion? In all this talk about growth in UU circles, nobody seems to be looking at the facts; the churches that are growing, no matter what theological stripe, have PASSION. They know what they want to do and try to find ways to do it. They have a story and can articulate it. They know their mission and can articulate that as well. These churches have DREAMS (and I'm not talking about strategic plans but real dreams). They see their place in the world. Most of all, they are NOT afraid.
So.....where's the UU's/UUA's passion?
And I guess I should point out again this post is not about SEX. This post is about PASSION, or in other words: what drives you?
The question about the UUA(or UUism): besides same-sex marriage, does the UUA(or UUism) have any passion for anything?
It doesn't seem to be spiritual development/formation or maturation, because if it were there would be more curricula out there. It doesn't seem to be religious literacy, or the kids who go through most UU Religious Education programs wouldn't come out as religiously ignorant as they were coming in and most adults would understand that the religious world is bigger than their past or current congregation. It doesn't even seem to be REAL social justice or we would be reaching out and working with the other religious progressives out there no matter what their religious stripe. (where is the UU version of Dorothy Day and the Catholic Worker movement?)
For all their faults (and speaking as a former fundamentalist I know there are many), mega-churches have passion. They know what drives them: bringing people to Christ. What drives the typical UU church? Where is their passion? In all this talk about growth in UU circles, nobody seems to be looking at the facts; the churches that are growing, no matter what theological stripe, have PASSION. They know what they want to do and try to find ways to do it. They have a story and can articulate it. They know their mission and can articulate that as well. These churches have DREAMS (and I'm not talking about strategic plans but real dreams). They see their place in the world. Most of all, they are NOT afraid.
So.....where's the UU's/UUA's passion?
Monday, November 5, 2007
What You Bring To The Party? or Independent Affiliates pt.4
Hello dear readers. I have a correction to make, and since it fits in with the rest of this email I hope you will be able to tell what that correction is.
Anyway, dear readers, this is my 5th post about the Independent Affiliates issue and I noticed that the first 4 all talked about the IAs that were rejected. For this post I thought it would be a good idea to talk about the 5 that were deemed worthy.
Let's look at the list of the approved IAs:
-Council of UU Camps and Conferences
-DRUUMM
-Partner Church Council
-Unitarian Universalist Urban Ministry
-Universalist Convocations
With the new rules about IAs, I can see how 2 of them made it through. A third one is a possibility. The other ones I question and I thought that I would talk about one of them in particular and then open the conversation. Those who know me in real life would be surprised by the one I'm going to talk about, that's why I'm not going to talk about that one but a different one.
The new rules state that an organization applying for IA status must present:
a statement outlining how its purpose, mission and structure models interdependence through engagement with our member congregations, coordination or collaboration of effort and resources; and a statement outlining how the organization supports the transformation of institutions and our world to be aligned with those values expressed in our Principles;
Now, dear readers, using this part of the rules, can anybody explain to me how the Council of UU Camps and Conferences got IA status? How do they SERVE congregations? (as there is a difference between serving and providing a service)
So, as the title of this post asks; what do these 5 groups bring to the party of Unitarian Universalism? How do they make us better? What was it about them that made them more worthy of IA status than the ones that were rejected?
Anyway, dear readers, this is my 5th post about the Independent Affiliates issue and I noticed that the first 4 all talked about the IAs that were rejected. For this post I thought it would be a good idea to talk about the 5 that were deemed worthy.
Let's look at the list of the approved IAs:
-Council of UU Camps and Conferences
-DRUUMM
-Partner Church Council
-Unitarian Universalist Urban Ministry
-Universalist Convocations
With the new rules about IAs, I can see how 2 of them made it through. A third one is a possibility. The other ones I question and I thought that I would talk about one of them in particular and then open the conversation. Those who know me in real life would be surprised by the one I'm going to talk about, that's why I'm not going to talk about that one but a different one.
The new rules state that an organization applying for IA status must present:
a statement outlining how its purpose, mission and structure models interdependence through engagement with our member congregations, coordination or collaboration of effort and resources; and a statement outlining how the organization supports the transformation of institutions and our world to be aligned with those values expressed in our Principles;
Now, dear readers, using this part of the rules, can anybody explain to me how the Council of UU Camps and Conferences got IA status? How do they SERVE congregations? (as there is a difference between serving and providing a service)
So, as the title of this post asks; what do these 5 groups bring to the party of Unitarian Universalism? How do they make us better? What was it about them that made them more worthy of IA status than the ones that were rejected?
Thursday, November 1, 2007
Will You Still Love Me Tomorrow? or Independent Affiliates pt.3
My last post was about passion (well written if I do say so myself) and since I asked questions about passion in a UU context, I thought in this post I would go back to the Independent Affiliate issue and tie it in.
Just to re-cap for those of you dear readers who might have forgotten, the UUA Board rejected 44 Independent Affiliates. Among those IAs that were rejected are:
-CUUPs
-HUUmanists
-UU Buddhist Fellowship
-UU Christian Fellowship
-UUs for Jewish Awareness
All of these groups share a couple of things in common. One, they are theological. Second, theses groups are passionate about what they do. Guess that comes with having a theology.
What makes a religious organization different from groups like the ACLU, John Birch Society and the like? They have a THEOLOGY and are passionate about it. And yet the Board has decided that a religious body should not have a relationship with the organizations that bring the RELIGION to the body.
Does this make any sense?
Just to re-cap for those of you dear readers who might have forgotten, the UUA Board rejected 44 Independent Affiliates. Among those IAs that were rejected are:
-CUUPs
-HUUmanists
-UU Buddhist Fellowship
-UU Christian Fellowship
-UUs for Jewish Awareness
All of these groups share a couple of things in common. One, they are theological. Second, theses groups are passionate about what they do. Guess that comes with having a theology.
What makes a religious organization different from groups like the ACLU, John Birch Society and the like? They have a THEOLOGY and are passionate about it. And yet the Board has decided that a religious body should not have a relationship with the organizations that bring the RELIGION to the body.
Does this make any sense?
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
Passion
No dear readers, this post is not about SEX. This post is about PASSION, or in other words: what drives you?
And even though I have written the only political post I plan to write, I am going to ask a question about a political person and then move into a more UUA-specific question about passion.
First to the question about the political person. Is Hillary Clinton passionate about anything anymore? I thought I knew Hillary. I admire her quite a bit. But looking at her these days is like watching paint dry. There is no spark in her. What happened? In days gone by, Hillary would have been at the forefront of the S-CHIP debate (no dear readers, this is not a post about SCHIP so please no responses about it). But have you heard from her at all during this? I haven't. Which makes this all the more frustrating; Hillary used to work on women's and children's issues. These were almost like air and water to her: essential. She used to be known as having so much passion for these issues that even her critics talked about the passion she had. Where did that passion go? Can't you run for President and be passionate at the same time?
Anyway.....that's enough about Hillary.
The question about the UUA: besides same-sex marriage, does the UUA have any passion for anything? It isn't spiritual development/formation or maturation, because if it were there would be more curricula out there. It doesn't seem to be religious literacy, or the kids who go through most UU Religious Education programs wouldn't come out as religiously ignorant as they were coming in and most adults would understand that the religious world is bigger than their past or current congregation. It doesn't even seem to be REAL social justice or we would be reaching out and working with the other religious progressives out there no matter what their religious stripe. (where is the UU version of Dorothy Day and the Catholic Worker movement?)
For all their faults (and speaking as a former fundamentalist I know there are many), megachurches have passion. They know what drives them: bringing people to Christ. What drives the typical UU church? Where is their passion?
In all this talk about growth in UU circles, nobody seems to be looking at the facts; the churches that are growing, no matter what theological stripe, have PASSION. They know what they want to do and try to find ways to do it. They have a story and can articulate it. They know their mission and can articulate that as well. These churches have DREAMS (and I'm not talking about strategic plans but real dreams). They see their place in the world. Most of all, they are NOT afraid.
So.....where's the UU/UUA passion?
And even though I have written the only political post I plan to write, I am going to ask a question about a political person and then move into a more UUA-specific question about passion.
First to the question about the political person. Is Hillary Clinton passionate about anything anymore? I thought I knew Hillary. I admire her quite a bit. But looking at her these days is like watching paint dry. There is no spark in her. What happened? In days gone by, Hillary would have been at the forefront of the S-CHIP debate (no dear readers, this is not a post about SCHIP so please no responses about it). But have you heard from her at all during this? I haven't. Which makes this all the more frustrating; Hillary used to work on women's and children's issues. These were almost like air and water to her: essential. She used to be known as having so much passion for these issues that even her critics talked about the passion she had. Where did that passion go? Can't you run for President and be passionate at the same time?
Anyway.....that's enough about Hillary.
The question about the UUA: besides same-sex marriage, does the UUA have any passion for anything? It isn't spiritual development/formation or maturation, because if it were there would be more curricula out there. It doesn't seem to be religious literacy, or the kids who go through most UU Religious Education programs wouldn't come out as religiously ignorant as they were coming in and most adults would understand that the religious world is bigger than their past or current congregation. It doesn't even seem to be REAL social justice or we would be reaching out and working with the other religious progressives out there no matter what their religious stripe. (where is the UU version of Dorothy Day and the Catholic Worker movement?)
For all their faults (and speaking as a former fundamentalist I know there are many), megachurches have passion. They know what drives them: bringing people to Christ. What drives the typical UU church? Where is their passion?
In all this talk about growth in UU circles, nobody seems to be looking at the facts; the churches that are growing, no matter what theological stripe, have PASSION. They know what they want to do and try to find ways to do it. They have a story and can articulate it. They know their mission and can articulate that as well. These churches have DREAMS (and I'm not talking about strategic plans but real dreams). They see their place in the world. Most of all, they are NOT afraid.
So.....where's the UU/UUA passion?
Monday, October 29, 2007
When I Say.....
When I say I am a Christian.....
I'm not shouting "I am saved". I'm whispering "I get lost. That is why I chose this way."
When I say I am a Christian.....
I'm not trying to be strong. I'm professing that I'm human, sometimes weak, and pray for
strength to carry on.
When I say I am a Christian.....
I'm not bragging. I'm admitting I have failed at a lot of things.
When I say I am a Christian.....
I'm not claiming to be perfect, my flaws are too visible but God believes I'm worth it.
When I say I am a Christian.....
I do not wish to judge. I have no authority. I only know I am loved.
I'm not shouting "I am saved". I'm whispering "I get lost. That is why I chose this way."
When I say I am a Christian.....
I'm not trying to be strong. I'm professing that I'm human, sometimes weak, and pray for
strength to carry on.
When I say I am a Christian.....
I'm not bragging. I'm admitting I have failed at a lot of things.
When I say I am a Christian.....
I'm not claiming to be perfect, my flaws are too visible but God believes I'm worth it.
When I say I am a Christian.....
I do not wish to judge. I have no authority. I only know I am loved.
Sunday, October 28, 2007
The Only Politcal Post You Will Read Here
See this man
Know this man
Touch this man
Embrace this man
Support this man
Believe this man
Trust this man
Belong to this man
Take care of this man
Love this man
Pray for this man
http://www.barackobama.com [Judgement+Character tempered by Experience=CHANGE we can believe in]
Why Barack Obama?
1. The U.S. has to stop this continual fighting of/about/for/against the 1960s. In this campaign there are only 2 choices if we want this to stop. Pick somebody born before Jan.1, 1946 (i.e. John McCain) or pick somebody born after Jan. 1, 1960. As long as there is a boomer president, the 1960s will never be over.
2. There needs to be new thinking on U.S. foreign policy. As JFK said "Never negotiate out of fear, but never be afraid to negotiate." Who in this race best represents that?
3. The country needs somebody who understands that most of the U.S. is Purple not Red or Blue.
That's enough for me.
Friday, October 26, 2007
Last Independent Affiliate Thoughts for the Week
Hello Dear Readers. This is going to be a short IA post because I'm heading out to St. Louis to see Barack Obama at St. Louis Union Station.
I printed out Linda Laskowski's IA post so I could read it and think on it. If you haven't read her post just follow this link http://pcdtrustee.blogspot.com/.
I continue to be stuck at this:
The easiest thing for us would be to react to whatever came before it, continuing a system by which Affiliates were actually encouraged to remain separate (more workshop slots, more opportunities for exposure), even though they may have had few resources and would have benefited from collaborating.
Why am I stuck? Mainly, dear readers, because more questions keep coming to my mind.
Question 1: How did the past rules regarding IAs encourage them to remain separate?
Question 2: Hasn't the General Assembly Planning Committee always had the authority to set the number of workshops that any organization gets? Or did the Board set that and the Planning Committee just implement and enforce it?
Question 3: "More opportunities for exposure"? Is there something wrong with IAs getting as many opportunities for exposure as they can?
Question 4: "few resources". What kind of resources are you talking about? Money? Or something else?
Question 5: Weren't many of these IAs collaborating already?
Question 6: What benefits of collaboration does the Board think the IAs were missing from their supposed non-collaboration?
That's it for today, dear readers, talk amongst yourselves. You can also read my first and second posts on the IA issue; "Opposite Side of the Street Parking" and "You're Breaking My Heart".
I printed out Linda Laskowski's IA post so I could read it and think on it. If you haven't read her post just follow this link http://pcdtrustee.blogspot.com/.
I continue to be stuck at this:
The easiest thing for us would be to react to whatever came before it, continuing a system by which Affiliates were actually encouraged to remain separate (more workshop slots, more opportunities for exposure), even though they may have had few resources and would have benefited from collaborating.
Why am I stuck? Mainly, dear readers, because more questions keep coming to my mind.
Question 1: How did the past rules regarding IAs encourage them to remain separate?
Question 2: Hasn't the General Assembly Planning Committee always had the authority to set the number of workshops that any organization gets? Or did the Board set that and the Planning Committee just implement and enforce it?
Question 3: "More opportunities for exposure"? Is there something wrong with IAs getting as many opportunities for exposure as they can?
Question 4: "few resources". What kind of resources are you talking about? Money? Or something else?
Question 5: Weren't many of these IAs collaborating already?
Question 6: What benefits of collaboration does the Board think the IAs were missing from their supposed non-collaboration?
That's it for today, dear readers, talk amongst yourselves. You can also read my first and second posts on the IA issue; "Opposite Side of the Street Parking" and "You're Breaking My Heart".
Thursday, October 25, 2007
You're Breaking My Heart, or Independent Affiliates pt.2
(as you can see dear readers, I try to come up with interesting titles for my posts)
So...the board has met. And the net result has not changed, there are only 4 groups/councils deemed worthy by the UUA of the status of Independent Affiliate.
Linda Laskowski, UUA Board member from the Pacific Central District, on her blog http://pcdtrustee.blogspot.com writes:
With the idea of "covenant" in mind, I wonder which organizations (other than our congregations) would be in the category of ones we would choose to covenant with as a UUA Board? Which ones are clearly in line with the purpose of the UUA to serve congregations, and would merit (and be willing to take) the time to delve deeper with us into what exactly serving congregations means?
I think those are legitimate questions, but first let's take a look at a small sample of the organizations that were not deemed worthy by the UUA Board of Independent Affiliate status(using Ms. Laskowski's list):
-Covenant of Unitarian Universalist Pagans aka CUUPs
-HUUmanists
-the Magi Network
-Unitarian Universalist Buddhist Fellowship aka UUBF
-Unitarian Universalist Christian Fellowship aka UUCF
-Unitarian Universalist Religious Naturalists
Did I miss the memo? Is Unitarian Universalism NOT a religious movement anymore? Why were all of the "religious" groups[in terms of theology] told that the board (of a religious organization, mind you) didn't want to have a relationship with them?
And let's look more specifically at the Magi Network. I don't know that much about them, but from what I little I do know, their mission is to plant churches. Isn't it a little odd that the Board says that its function is to serve congregations and yet it doesn't want to have formal ties with a group whose whole mission is to plant churches? I know I'm missing something here.
Now, there's another small portion of Ms. Laskowski's list we should look at:
-Council on Church Staff Finances
-Society for Ministerial Relief
-Unitarian Service Pension Society
-Unitarian Universalist Council on Church Staff Finances (don't know if it's the same as above but since it's a separate line, I listed both)
Not to offend, but what the heck were these doing as Independent Affiliates in the first place? On the face of it, shoudn't these have been a part of the Office of Religious Professionals (I can't remember the real name of the department on Beacon Street)? Even with lay people involved, these are things specific to church staffing and remuneration and should never have had to go through the process of trying to get Independent Affiliate status in the first place.
If I felt like it, I probably could go through the entire list (of which I knew of all but 3 of) and talk about them, but I want to get back to the body of Ms. Laskowski's post.
Why would the Board even walk into this buzz saw? The easiest thing for us would be to react to whatever came before it, continuing a system by which Affiliates were actually encouraged to remain separate (more workshop slots, more opportunities for exposure), even though they may have few resources and would have benefited from collaborating.
Where to begin. First, does the Board really care that some of these IAs had few resources? Even if grouped together, many of them still wouldn't have much in the way of resources. Next, the General Assembly Planning Committee has always had the ability to set the number of workshop slots any organization gets, if they get any at all. So whether an organization gets 0 slots or 50 slots, there was always going to be competition for workshops at General Assembly. Third, access to the website might be free for now, but advertising in the UU*World has never been free. And looking in the last issue of the World, only 5 IAs had the financial ability to pay their prices. [this is not an indictment of World ad prices, far from it] Would collaborating have changed that?
But more importantly, where does the assumption that these IAs weren't collaborating come from? Every time I'm at GA I see workshops put on by collaborating groups.
Finally, what is the difference between an Independent Affiliate and an Associate Organization? Could someone please explain it to me.
That's it for now. More later.
So...the board has met. And the net result has not changed, there are only 4 groups/councils deemed worthy by the UUA of the status of Independent Affiliate.
Linda Laskowski, UUA Board member from the Pacific Central District, on her blog http://pcdtrustee.blogspot.com writes:
With the idea of "covenant" in mind, I wonder which organizations (other than our congregations) would be in the category of ones we would choose to covenant with as a UUA Board? Which ones are clearly in line with the purpose of the UUA to serve congregations, and would merit (and be willing to take) the time to delve deeper with us into what exactly serving congregations means?
I think those are legitimate questions, but first let's take a look at a small sample of the organizations that were not deemed worthy by the UUA Board of Independent Affiliate status(using Ms. Laskowski's list):
-Covenant of Unitarian Universalist Pagans aka CUUPs
-HUUmanists
-the Magi Network
-Unitarian Universalist Buddhist Fellowship aka UUBF
-Unitarian Universalist Christian Fellowship aka UUCF
-Unitarian Universalist Religious Naturalists
Did I miss the memo? Is Unitarian Universalism NOT a religious movement anymore? Why were all of the "religious" groups[in terms of theology] told that the board (of a religious organization, mind you) didn't want to have a relationship with them?
And let's look more specifically at the Magi Network. I don't know that much about them, but from what I little I do know, their mission is to plant churches. Isn't it a little odd that the Board says that its function is to serve congregations and yet it doesn't want to have formal ties with a group whose whole mission is to plant churches? I know I'm missing something here.
Now, there's another small portion of Ms. Laskowski's list we should look at:
-Council on Church Staff Finances
-Society for Ministerial Relief
-Unitarian Service Pension Society
-Unitarian Universalist Council on Church Staff Finances (don't know if it's the same as above but since it's a separate line, I listed both)
Not to offend, but what the heck were these doing as Independent Affiliates in the first place? On the face of it, shoudn't these have been a part of the Office of Religious Professionals (I can't remember the real name of the department on Beacon Street)? Even with lay people involved, these are things specific to church staffing and remuneration and should never have had to go through the process of trying to get Independent Affiliate status in the first place.
If I felt like it, I probably could go through the entire list (of which I knew of all but 3 of) and talk about them, but I want to get back to the body of Ms. Laskowski's post.
Why would the Board even walk into this buzz saw? The easiest thing for us would be to react to whatever came before it, continuing a system by which Affiliates were actually encouraged to remain separate (more workshop slots, more opportunities for exposure), even though they may have few resources and would have benefited from collaborating.
Where to begin. First, does the Board really care that some of these IAs had few resources? Even if grouped together, many of them still wouldn't have much in the way of resources. Next, the General Assembly Planning Committee has always had the ability to set the number of workshop slots any organization gets, if they get any at all. So whether an organization gets 0 slots or 50 slots, there was always going to be competition for workshops at General Assembly. Third, access to the website might be free for now, but advertising in the UU*World has never been free. And looking in the last issue of the World, only 5 IAs had the financial ability to pay their prices. [this is not an indictment of World ad prices, far from it] Would collaborating have changed that?
But more importantly, where does the assumption that these IAs weren't collaborating come from? Every time I'm at GA I see workshops put on by collaborating groups.
Finally, what is the difference between an Independent Affiliate and an Associate Organization? Could someone please explain it to me.
That's it for now. More later.
Wednesday, October 24, 2007
The Substance of Things Hoped For, The Evidence of Things Not Seen; or Standing on the Side of Love?
I'm a member of the CLF. As a member of the CLF one receives a copy of QUEST. In the October issue of it, there is a sermon by Rev. John Crestwell, minister of Davies Memorial UU Church in Maryland. I've read and reread that sermon and as good as I think it is, there is one thing I disagree with; the main premise. I had thought I would write Rev. Crestwell but decided against that because it's such a minor thing in the marriage equality debate which is what the sermon was really about.
So dear reader I have decided to write the letter that I would have written Rev. Crestwell here and maybe morph it into a discussion with you about liberal religious hopes and dreams.
Dear Rev. Crestwell,
I have read and reread your sermon on marriage equality since receiving the October issue of Quest in the mail. I had debated writing you this letter but have decided that I should ask this question.
According to your sermon, you believe that Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. would have been for marriage equality. I couldn't disagree with you more. From everything that I've read and heard about him, Dr. King was a typical black preacher of his time. He would have had a hard time with the women's movement (just look at how he interacted with the women in his life). And if you look at his complex relationship with Bayard Rustin, you can see that Dr. King had more ambivalent feelings about homosexuality than most black preachers. (I know part of the complexity with Rustin was due to Rustin's association with communism, but that's another subject)
So I guess my question is this: is your belief that Dr. King would have been for marriage equality a matter of faith(using Paul's definition of it as being the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen)? Or is there something out there about Dr. King that I haven't seen?
My concern is that we liberal religious folk are trying to co-opt people that we admire and use them for causes that we are involved in even though those we admire may not or wouldn't have been.
Even though it doesn't seem like it, I did truly get something from your sermon. Thank you for taking the time to listen to me.
Blessed be,
the Real Anonymous
So dear reader, I pose the same question to you; have we co-opted people we admire for our own agenda even though that person may not or would not have agreed with it?
So dear reader I have decided to write the letter that I would have written Rev. Crestwell here and maybe morph it into a discussion with you about liberal religious hopes and dreams.
Dear Rev. Crestwell,
I have read and reread your sermon on marriage equality since receiving the October issue of Quest in the mail. I had debated writing you this letter but have decided that I should ask this question.
According to your sermon, you believe that Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. would have been for marriage equality. I couldn't disagree with you more. From everything that I've read and heard about him, Dr. King was a typical black preacher of his time. He would have had a hard time with the women's movement (just look at how he interacted with the women in his life). And if you look at his complex relationship with Bayard Rustin, you can see that Dr. King had more ambivalent feelings about homosexuality than most black preachers. (I know part of the complexity with Rustin was due to Rustin's association with communism, but that's another subject)
So I guess my question is this: is your belief that Dr. King would have been for marriage equality a matter of faith(using Paul's definition of it as being the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen)? Or is there something out there about Dr. King that I haven't seen?
My concern is that we liberal religious folk are trying to co-opt people that we admire and use them for causes that we are involved in even though those we admire may not or wouldn't have been.
Even though it doesn't seem like it, I did truly get something from your sermon. Thank you for taking the time to listen to me.
Blessed be,
the Real Anonymous
So dear reader, I pose the same question to you; have we co-opted people we admire for our own agenda even though that person may not or would not have agreed with it?
Theology of Abundance, or Fundraising-UU Style pt.2
In "Gone A'Traveling" I talked a little about the theology of abundance. In thinking som'more about it, I do have a question about how it can be used in a UU context.
Can a theology of abundance really work without G-d?
Hear me out on this. A theology of abundance requires that we humans let go and give things over AND believe that in giving things over, new avenues will appear. So my question becomes if we're supposed to give things over but we don't have G-d, what are we giving these things over to?
As a Christian, I have some concept of G-d, but I'm really wondering how this would work in a congregation that is avowedly humanistic/atheistic. I would really appreciate hearing from those who are involved in the money aspects in their congregations (of whatever theological stripe), whether you are a lay leader or minister.
Can a theology of abundance really work without G-d?
Hear me out on this. A theology of abundance requires that we humans let go and give things over AND believe that in giving things over, new avenues will appear. So my question becomes if we're supposed to give things over but we don't have G-d, what are we giving these things over to?
As a Christian, I have some concept of G-d, but I'm really wondering how this would work in a congregation that is avowedly humanistic/atheistic. I would really appreciate hearing from those who are involved in the money aspects in their congregations (of whatever theological stripe), whether you are a lay leader or minister.
From the Gulf Coast to Southern California
Hello dear readers.
Before I get started on the two UU-related posts that I have on my mind, I thought I would do this quick one on the fires in southern California and the one thing that looks completely different from the debacle that was Katrina.
Has anybody else noticed that instead of stopping people (i.e.-The Red Cross) from coming in and helping, the feds are actually WORKING with the people who want to help?
Also, the media have treated these evacuees differently than they have Katrina evacuees. Compassion is good, I just wish there had been a little more of it at the beginning of the Katrina coverage.
On to the next post.
Before I get started on the two UU-related posts that I have on my mind, I thought I would do this quick one on the fires in southern California and the one thing that looks completely different from the debacle that was Katrina.
Has anybody else noticed that instead of stopping people (i.e.-The Red Cross) from coming in and helping, the feds are actually WORKING with the people who want to help?
Also, the media have treated these evacuees differently than they have Katrina evacuees. Compassion is good, I just wish there had been a little more of it at the beginning of the Katrina coverage.
On to the next post.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Gone A'Traveling, or Fundraising-UU Style
By total coincidence this was the weekend that all the members of the house went a'traveling. Me by myself, the others together. It's a good thing about everybody in the house being adults, we're not obligated to go somewhere just because another member of the house wants to go somewhere.
As I was saying, I went a'traveling to visit some dear UU friends who live east of Eden. Part of the reason that I went to see them was that their church was having their annual auction and I'm always interested in how UUs fund raise. All-in-all it was a good evening, but as I sat there I wondered just how much money they made and how much more they could have made had things been a little different. More on that in another post.
So being with my UU friends this weekend has got me to questioning yet again: why are UUs sooooooooooooooooooooooooooo bad at raising money for their churches? For a group of people who, on the whole, have more disposable income than most others, UU churches seem to always be in a perpetual state of near desperation when it comes to money. It also strikes me as odd considering many members of UU churches fund raise for a living.
Why has the theology of scarcity taken hold in UU churches instead of the theology of abundance? Why do those who have less disposable income give more to their churches? (and yes, I do know some of this has to do with theology, but not as much as you might think) Why do UUs treat giving money to their church as an afterthought? On the flip side, why does the typical UU church as for so little (somewhere between 2-5%)? When Us/Us/UUs threw most of the Christian theological baby out with the bathwater, why did we give up the idea of TITHING?
As I was saying, I went a'traveling to visit some dear UU friends who live east of Eden. Part of the reason that I went to see them was that their church was having their annual auction and I'm always interested in how UUs fund raise. All-in-all it was a good evening, but as I sat there I wondered just how much money they made and how much more they could have made had things been a little different. More on that in another post.
So being with my UU friends this weekend has got me to questioning yet again: why are UUs sooooooooooooooooooooooooooo bad at raising money for their churches? For a group of people who, on the whole, have more disposable income than most others, UU churches seem to always be in a perpetual state of near desperation when it comes to money. It also strikes me as odd considering many members of UU churches fund raise for a living.
Why has the theology of scarcity taken hold in UU churches instead of the theology of abundance? Why do those who have less disposable income give more to their churches? (and yes, I do know some of this has to do with theology, but not as much as you might think) Why do UUs treat giving money to their church as an afterthought? On the flip side, why does the typical UU church as for so little (somewhere between 2-5%)? When Us/Us/UUs threw most of the Christian theological baby out with the bathwater, why did we give up the idea of TITHING?
A Book We Should All Read
Hello dear readers.
Well I spent the weekend out-of-town so there were no updates to the little blog here. More about the weekend in a separate post, but right now I thought I would bring to your attention a book by one of the best out there. For those of you dear readers who are Catholic, you've probably read this person. Even a good number of my fellow UU Christians have read this person.
Garry Wills, professor emeritus at Northwestern, has a book that came out on October 4. It's title is Head and Heart: American Christianities. It's a longish book at 500+ pages, but is comprehensive like all of Wills' books.
Maybe one day the UU Christian Fellowship will get him for something.
Well I spent the weekend out-of-town so there were no updates to the little blog here. More about the weekend in a separate post, but right now I thought I would bring to your attention a book by one of the best out there. For those of you dear readers who are Catholic, you've probably read this person. Even a good number of my fellow UU Christians have read this person.
Garry Wills, professor emeritus at Northwestern, has a book that came out on October 4. It's title is Head and Heart: American Christianities. It's a longish book at 500+ pages, but is comprehensive like all of Wills' books.
Maybe one day the UU Christian Fellowship will get him for something.
Friday, October 19, 2007
Where is Crick When We Need Him?
There are many things I could say about Dr. Watson's comments; I won't because if I do far too many of you dear readers will know who I am.
However, in thinking about the comments of the good Dr., it made me think that maybe this is just another salvo in the modern eugenics movement.
It's not as if the good Dr.'s comments are new (or even new for him); they are just another in a long line of comments made about the intelligence of those of darker skin tones and the parts of the world from whence they came.
So where does this leave the notion of colorblindness/race neutrality? If studied men and women like Dr. Watson do really believe that those of African descent are naturally less intelligent, where does this leave black children who tend to score lower on IQ tests and are then placed in Special Education to languish until they are put in jail/prison? Do they stand a chance at all?
However, in thinking about the comments of the good Dr., it made me think that maybe this is just another salvo in the modern eugenics movement.
It's not as if the good Dr.'s comments are new (or even new for him); they are just another in a long line of comments made about the intelligence of those of darker skin tones and the parts of the world from whence they came.
So where does this leave the notion of colorblindness/race neutrality? If studied men and women like Dr. Watson do really believe that those of African descent are naturally less intelligent, where does this leave black children who tend to score lower on IQ tests and are then placed in Special Education to languish until they are put in jail/prison? Do they stand a chance at all?
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Is God Keeping You From Church?
Aside from the fact that this is seldom the case for anybody(normally it's the "church" that keeps people from walking in the doors), I think the main problem with the UUA's new marketing campaign is that it is so blatently a marketing campaign. One of these days, somebody in Boston is going to remember the real facts....that most of the people who walk into a church are there at the invitation of somebody else.
This is not to say that targeted marketing doesn't work, it does, and the evangelicals have proven it; but just blanket marketing doesn't work. And nothing works better than the good old-fashion face-to-face, door-to-door neighborhood canvass. But as our lives have changed, that is not as feasible an option. The next best option, and one that I know many evangelicals have used, is leafletting a neigborhood inviting those in that neighborhood to join a church for services.
I'm digressing. Over at Philocrites (http://www.philocrites.com) a little while ago, Philocrites asked those of us who read his blog what campaign slogan we would come up with. At the time, I didn't like any of the ones that popped up in my mind. Now though, I've finally come up with one that satisfies me and I think would show some real creative tension for us.
So here it is, dear reader, my UUA campaign slogan:
Grounded in the Spirit...Acting in the World....the Unitarian Universalist Association
Whaddya think?????
This is not to say that targeted marketing doesn't work, it does, and the evangelicals have proven it; but just blanket marketing doesn't work. And nothing works better than the good old-fashion face-to-face, door-to-door neighborhood canvass. But as our lives have changed, that is not as feasible an option. The next best option, and one that I know many evangelicals have used, is leafletting a neigborhood inviting those in that neighborhood to join a church for services.
I'm digressing. Over at Philocrites (http://www.philocrites.com) a little while ago, Philocrites asked those of us who read his blog what campaign slogan we would come up with. At the time, I didn't like any of the ones that popped up in my mind. Now though, I've finally come up with one that satisfies me and I think would show some real creative tension for us.
So here it is, dear reader, my UUA campaign slogan:
Grounded in the Spirit...Acting in the World....the Unitarian Universalist Association
Whaddya think?????
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
The Board Meets
Hello Dear Readers.
This post will be short, as I am doing some other things at the moment. But, I thought I would remind you that the UUA Board will be meeting for the first time since the Independent Affiliate mess heated up this weekend, October 19-21, in Boston.
Wonder what hell in a handbasket they will send us to now? Read their agenda and reports at:
http://www.uua.org/aboutus/governance/boardtrustees/agendasreports/45679.shtml
Happy reading!
This post will be short, as I am doing some other things at the moment. But, I thought I would remind you that the UUA Board will be meeting for the first time since the Independent Affiliate mess heated up this weekend, October 19-21, in Boston.
Wonder what hell in a handbasket they will send us to now? Read their agenda and reports at:
http://www.uua.org/aboutus/governance/boardtrustees/agendasreports/45679.shtml
Happy reading!
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Opposite Side of the Street Parking (aka the Independent Affiliate Issue)
Hello Dear Readers.
I love "The Golden Girls". And since this post is about the Independent Affiliate issue, I thought I would use a scene from that show to help me illustrate my point.
Picture this: Dorothy and Sophia have just finished singing the first verse and chorus of "I Got You Babe" and Rose stops playing the piano abruptly.
Dorothy: Rose...what's the matter? There's another verse......
Rose: I'm sorry, but this song always takes me back to St. Olaf in the 60s. And the controversial issue that nearly tore the town apart.
Dorothy: What Rose....Vietnam?...Civil Rights?...Campus unrest?...
Rose: Opposite side of the street parking. Nobody could understand the concept. I mean because no matter what side of the street you park on there's always an opposite side.
As somebody who's been active denominationally for almost as long as I've been in it, I feel like one of the people of St. Olaf. In getting rid of all but 4 of the Independent Affiliates, has the board done anything but create opposite side of the street parking for IAs?
Have you seen the letter that many of the IAs received when they were told that they no longer belonged? I have. And let me tell you that it takes convoluted logic to a new level.
One of the suggestions that the board has is that similar, but different, IAs should form a council that could go back to the board and seek IA status. Isn't that just like UUs? Hey, let's form a committee of the committee of the committee. What exactly would this new council do except ferment dissension among the groups that form said council (because we all know that somebody is going to feel left out)? What benefits would this new council give to the IAs that form it?
Part of the reason IAs formed in the first place was that there was some need that grew out of the people of the congregations that the board says the UUA is there to serve. Doesn't it stand to reason that since IAs are a grassroots effort, that they inherently serve those same congregations that the UUA does? Is the board on a different planet than the rest of us?
My friends who are leaders in some of the IAs tell me that some of the IAs are going to be sending letters of protest to the board. I encourage you, if you are so inclined, to do the same.
I love "The Golden Girls". And since this post is about the Independent Affiliate issue, I thought I would use a scene from that show to help me illustrate my point.
Picture this: Dorothy and Sophia have just finished singing the first verse and chorus of "I Got You Babe" and Rose stops playing the piano abruptly.
Dorothy: Rose...what's the matter? There's another verse......
Rose: I'm sorry, but this song always takes me back to St. Olaf in the 60s. And the controversial issue that nearly tore the town apart.
Dorothy: What Rose....Vietnam?...Civil Rights?...Campus unrest?...
Rose: Opposite side of the street parking. Nobody could understand the concept. I mean because no matter what side of the street you park on there's always an opposite side.
As somebody who's been active denominationally for almost as long as I've been in it, I feel like one of the people of St. Olaf. In getting rid of all but 4 of the Independent Affiliates, has the board done anything but create opposite side of the street parking for IAs?
Have you seen the letter that many of the IAs received when they were told that they no longer belonged? I have. And let me tell you that it takes convoluted logic to a new level.
One of the suggestions that the board has is that similar, but different, IAs should form a council that could go back to the board and seek IA status. Isn't that just like UUs? Hey, let's form a committee of the committee of the committee. What exactly would this new council do except ferment dissension among the groups that form said council (because we all know that somebody is going to feel left out)? What benefits would this new council give to the IAs that form it?
Part of the reason IAs formed in the first place was that there was some need that grew out of the people of the congregations that the board says the UUA is there to serve. Doesn't it stand to reason that since IAs are a grassroots effort, that they inherently serve those same congregations that the UUA does? Is the board on a different planet than the rest of us?
My friends who are leaders in some of the IAs tell me that some of the IAs are going to be sending letters of protest to the board. I encourage you, if you are so inclined, to do the same.
Why 'The Real Anonymous' and 'It's 5 O'Clock Somewhere'?
I know what you're thinking dear reader; this person has it backwards.
Introductions are supposed to be the first post, not the third.
Well dear readers, since this is my blog, I will do anything I want whenever and however I want. :) There is a method to my madness though. I did not think I was going to do a blog; at least not like this. I want to talk about UUA and Unitarian Universalism-related things without worrying about how people who know me will feel about what I'm saying. Thus 'The Real Anonymous'. Even we people of reason have politically incorrect thoughts and this will be my place to air them. You are most welcome to join in the fun.
As to an introduction, I have been a Unitarian Universalist (denominationally) for 15 years. I am very active; another reason I want to stay anonymous. I have friends all over the UUA. I travel far and wide, so I notice the regional differences in congregations in the UUA a lot easier than many other UUs. You will probably learn more about me as I write and I hope you enjoy what you learn.
It's 5 O'Clock Somewhere?
Yes dear reader, Jimmy Buffet is right. It truly is 5:00 somewhere. Thus Happy Hour can truly begin. I have noticed, and you probably have too, that UUs tend to tell you what they really think when you give them a drink. In many UU congregations, your place in the social order is determined by whether you drink white or red. We will talk about the UU social order later dear reader, but I thought for this blog I thought it would be fun to play around with it.
My next post will be about the Independent Affiliate issue. Later.
Introductions are supposed to be the first post, not the third.
Well dear readers, since this is my blog, I will do anything I want whenever and however I want. :) There is a method to my madness though. I did not think I was going to do a blog; at least not like this. I want to talk about UUA and Unitarian Universalism-related things without worrying about how people who know me will feel about what I'm saying. Thus 'The Real Anonymous'. Even we people of reason have politically incorrect thoughts and this will be my place to air them. You are most welcome to join in the fun.
As to an introduction, I have been a Unitarian Universalist (denominationally) for 15 years. I am very active; another reason I want to stay anonymous. I have friends all over the UUA. I travel far and wide, so I notice the regional differences in congregations in the UUA a lot easier than many other UUs. You will probably learn more about me as I write and I hope you enjoy what you learn.
It's 5 O'Clock Somewhere?
Yes dear reader, Jimmy Buffet is right. It truly is 5:00 somewhere. Thus Happy Hour can truly begin. I have noticed, and you probably have too, that UUs tend to tell you what they really think when you give them a drink. In many UU congregations, your place in the social order is determined by whether you drink white or red. We will talk about the UU social order later dear reader, but I thought for this blog I thought it would be fun to play around with it.
My next post will be about the Independent Affiliate issue. Later.
A Little non-UUA Regional Stuff
Before I get started on an introduction and explanation as to why I am Anonymous, I thought I would talk about some non-UUA stuff happening in the area.
For those of you readers who don't know much about the Central Midwest District, it encompasses all of Illinois, most of Wisconsin, the eastern third of Missouri and a little bit of Indiana. Depending on where in the district you are, you live nearer to one of the two big cities: Chicago (the really big city) or St. Louis (the big enough city). On the map I am closer to St. Louis.
In St. Louis there's been a big to-do over the city's fire department. It seems that on the most recent test for people interested in becoming firemen 670 of 833 people failed. Before some emails were uncovered, there had been the suggestion that the results and the tossing out of the test was not due, in part to race. Oh, but what a wonderful thing email is; turns out that race was a MAJOR factor in both the results and the tossing out of the test. Seems like the demoted Chief was right.
If you're interested in these kinds of things, go to http://www.stltoday.com/ and put the words "fire department" in the search engine and you'll get more than you'll ever want to see.
For those of you readers who don't know much about the Central Midwest District, it encompasses all of Illinois, most of Wisconsin, the eastern third of Missouri and a little bit of Indiana. Depending on where in the district you are, you live nearer to one of the two big cities: Chicago (the really big city) or St. Louis (the big enough city). On the map I am closer to St. Louis.
In St. Louis there's been a big to-do over the city's fire department. It seems that on the most recent test for people interested in becoming firemen 670 of 833 people failed. Before some emails were uncovered, there had been the suggestion that the results and the tossing out of the test was not due, in part to race. Oh, but what a wonderful thing email is; turns out that race was a MAJOR factor in both the results and the tossing out of the test. Seems like the demoted Chief was right.
If you're interested in these kinds of things, go to http://www.stltoday.com/ and put the words "fire department" in the search engine and you'll get more than you'll ever want to see.
Monday, October 15, 2007
The Beginning
I loved my friend
He went away from me
There's nothing more to say
The poem ends
soft as it began
I loved my friend.
-Langston Hughes
Well here we are.
At the beginning.
You might be wondering why I am anonymous and in another post I will tell you.
For this first post though, I'm feeling a little weepy; I haven't talked to my best friend for weeks. And I miss her. Thus the poem from Langston Hughes.
So much is going on in our lives that I put a self imposed break on my communications with her. That break will be ending soon (thank ye gods!) and I will be able to talk to her about things going on. You, dear reader, might hear some of those things too, however with no where near the intensity.
Mostly this blog will be my thoughts about things going on in the UUA and in Unitarian Universalism more broadly. I promise my no-holds-barred opinions on all things U/U/UU and UUA.
So sit back and enjoy the ride.
He went away from me
There's nothing more to say
The poem ends
soft as it began
I loved my friend.
-Langston Hughes
Well here we are.
At the beginning.
You might be wondering why I am anonymous and in another post I will tell you.
For this first post though, I'm feeling a little weepy; I haven't talked to my best friend for weeks. And I miss her. Thus the poem from Langston Hughes.
So much is going on in our lives that I put a self imposed break on my communications with her. That break will be ending soon (thank ye gods!) and I will be able to talk to her about things going on. You, dear reader, might hear some of those things too, however with no where near the intensity.
Mostly this blog will be my thoughts about things going on in the UUA and in Unitarian Universalism more broadly. I promise my no-holds-barred opinions on all things U/U/UU and UUA.
So sit back and enjoy the ride.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)