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?

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.

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.

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".

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.

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?

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.

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.

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?

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.

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?

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?????

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!

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.

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.

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.

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.