cf: We Quit

* The resignation of the UUA president a short while back and the ensuing politics left me sad.

* The politics since seem to havebecome uglier and quite hurtful. I am mainly an observer. My first observation below is a synecdoche for a more serious and pervasive problem, in which power seems to be manifested as principle, a horrid self-righteous party-line.

* I heard the vigorous, politically correct sermon at an important gathering from someone who appeared to be dangerously obese who said that we must stop shaming fat people. 
     (I don't shame fat people; I admire some overweight people greatly; we are all sinners. On the other hand, I do not wish to celebrate obesity, caused in part by corporate greed in marketing, affecting insurance and personal health costs--now forty percent of Americans are obese. I worry that that people who eat too much, especially red meat, are violating the environment as well as their bodies. Addictive behavior is better treated than enabled.)
     Of course the sermon included subjects like racism, sexism, homophobia, and other such concerns, but never placed them in what might seem to me a religious context. Even when I agreed, I found it like a campaign rally speech, rather than a religious reflection. I like to be able to respect a person whose views differ from mine, but it is harder to do this when it is insinuated that I must agree with the speaker or else I must be cancelled. I can respect someone with whom I disagree; I don't need to silence that person. 

* I read the Eklof booklet and think he is entitled to his opinion, which I found cogently expressed and worthy of discussion. I agreed with much of it. I find fault on both sides. 

* The folks who asked me to participate in the 50-year ministry panel  this year were exceedingly nice, and I even got a thank-you note, but I was asked to redo part of my video remarks because I used the politically incorrect term, primal, even though this is in an area of my expertise as a seminary professor. I hesitated at first, but thought I might make a worthy contribution to the panel about community ministry and identify ways in which the liberal religious movement might move forward. In response to the request I received, I decided to use a somewhat problematic term that seemed mutually agreeable. (As a professional writer and editor, I am used to accommodations.) Interestingly, the person who asked me to do this did not express any personal discomfort with primal, but was concerned about how others might react, and I honor that intent but regret an environment that made that caution appropriate. Strong group-think and triangulation seem to have overtaken a movement that has claimed to be composed of, and for, independent thinkers. 
     As I said in my 50-year remarks, the denomination has been side-tracked -- I used the term hijacked -- from its core function by particular social-power interests instead of embracing those interests within its proper focus.

* This all began, at least it seems to me, in the 60s, when one group demanded reparations at a General Assembly, and attempts at recovery and balance have had varying success and now seem mired. At the New York GA (1969?), the vote was to establish an office of gay affairs -- later renamed gay concerns. I spoke against it (even though I myself have been sometimes given the gay label) because a religious organization, in my view, can be too easily distracted by social-political efforts ineptly pursued. I said if this were an area worthy of focus, a study of the spiritual dimensions of same-sex behavior throughout history and cultures might make a signal contribution to the concerns then and since in American society. Perhaps this could be coordinated with our seminaries and the world's scholars and great universities. Instead, we got an internal denominational lobby.

* While I have been a part in training five UU ministers, I have served the larger community in sundry capacities, and have been awarded recognitions from many religious communities and continue to serve in many ways. For example, I sit on the Episcopal Diocesan Commission on Ministry, which is sort of like the UU Ministerial Fellowship Committee, so I am actively interested in what makes a good minister. (We also license lay ministries.) From what I can see, the diocese here may be far more liberal, theologically and demographically, than any of the UU congregations in the KC region. The Cathedral parish is a wonderful mix of races, sexualities, economic conditions, etc, folks in prominent leadership roles that would make UUs envious -- plus the highest quality of music and artistic expressions, not to mention a long tradition of social service. It is a church whose central function is worship. 
     I cherish and have maintained correct relationships with local colleagues through our cluster meetings, which seem to have escaped the problems that have led me to sign the We Quit letter. Although my academic and community expertise may be of little value to my local UU colleagues, I take the covenanted relationship with them as a matter of honor and care.
    UUism seems to be in the process of forgetting the best of its heritage. On a denominational level, it no longer seems what it was when I discovered liberal religion in 1960, not what I read about in my studies, not what I experienced with my three beloved congregations. Alas.