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 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 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?

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.

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?

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?

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?

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.

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?

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?

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?

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?