PeaceBang

11 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

1. I have found healing through strong relationships with other members of my Unitarian Universalist congregation. Members of the congregation have offered listening, acceptance, and encouragement during challenging times in my life.

   I have found participation in small group ministries to be especially worthwhile. In these groups, we may not all understand the sacred in the same way. That makes our discussion, worship and prayer more rich, rather than less.

   Furthermore, since one’s personal beliefs often change over time, I find comfort in knowing that my small group friendships are not based on a shared theology, but rather on a shared commitment to exploring spiritual issues together. During critical junctures in my life since joining the congregation, my small group friends have provided support and insight.

   Comment by Shelby Meyerhoff — July 8, 2007 #

2. I want to thank you, Peace Bang, for being sympathetic to my conversion towards Christianity and away from Unitarian Universalism.

   In reference to the post you’ve cited, I’ve noted that Unitarian Universalism is wholly different in other regions of the country rather than the South. Perhaps that’s part of the problem. We are so indebted to this outsider philosophy that it ends up being to our detriment. We see constant evidence of Fundamentalist Christianity and other such general perversion of the Good News and thus we cling to this brotherhood/sisterhood of the oppressed.

   I have gotten to travel extensively and note that this is not the case at all in New England and on the West Coast. Indeed, more than a few comments to my blog indicated this. Red State Unitarianism has some major challenges to face and has not satisfactorily dealt with them to my liking.

   I went to one church where I was not taken seriously until I preached a sermon and made myself some sort of novelty. The last church I visited was ripe with negativity. To make a long story short: a petition had been circulated amongst the congregation attempting to drive off the then-interim minister because he dared mention the name of Jesus openly and more than a few times. The assistant minister left under a cloud of suspicion. I myself was guilty of being caught in the middle of a transitional phrase of a church of disgruntled and disaffected. Hardly a place to find loving community.

   I could chalk it up to bad luck, but I really believe that red state Unitarianism has some major issues it needs to address else it will turn off more members than it attracts. Few people have devoted themselves to this pursuit and my hope is that very shortly many will.

   Comment by Comrade Kevin — July 8, 2007 #

3. As regards the comments to the post on CK’s blog (at least up to the seventh)…

   I know that people wanted to show CK that his experience wasn’t indicative of UUism everywhere, but he already seems aware of that fact. Instead I gathered that he was discussing issues with the UUA as a whole, as a movement, or more pointedly, as a faith. He gives more specific examples of his dissatisfaction, leading up to the post under discussion, here and here.

   I also feel that there is justification for wanting to respond to such criticism with counter-examples (hence I am not critiquing blog replies to take the responders to task nor judging the worth of the replies or their authors), but I couldn’t help but notice that there was no recognition that maybe *his* experience was more common and the better experiences were more rare, or, just as possible, that such experiences may happen in their own congregations but that not everyone is aware of it.

   It also struck me that with a couple exceptions, concern for Kevin was limited to a very small part of the replies, usually “sorry” and a couple times a sort of (paraphrase) “best of luck with finding whatever works for you”.

   It is WAAAAAAAAAAY to easy to read stuff into brief remarks, and to many it may look like I am implying that the replies in question are proving CK’s points. That’s not why I bring it up. Instead, it is to offer this challenge - what *else* can we say to the CKs out there? What response does UUism offer? How do UUs create/show that community of caring and healing?

   And just as relevant, how do we incorporate that to the UU culture at large? That is, rather than as just having a handy response for the disaffected, how do we reach out to visitors and members alike and make them feel comfortable enough to seek *and* find such support?

   Comment by tinythinker — July 8, 2007 #

4. Once upon a time (early 1990’s?) the now defunct UU District of Michigan did a study of persons who had left UU churches, in an effort to find out why they left. It was an exercise in taking seriously the experiences of people like CK.

   What they found were a few large minorities. Those who left to find something more Christian or Theistic. And those who left to enter a purely secular existence devoid of religious community. Of those who left for other religious bodies, most left for the Episcopal Church, United Church of Christ, Unity Church, and Reform Judaism. Based on that experience the Michigan district experimented with a new church plant that was expressly Unitarian and Universalist in the classical Christian sense of those names. The church still exists in Fenton, MI with some mixed success. Culturally it is somewhat different from other UU churches in the region, and the new district is poorly equipped to deal with its continuing needs.

   I have to say, in reference to CK, that many of my experiences in Mid-Western UU churches are simmilar to his. There is a smug confidence that we are the only enlightened folk around, and a sick desire to contrive feelings of persecution that are out of sync with the reality at hand. We also often can’t agree on which religious language to use, so we talk past each other and very little that is spiritually meaningful is said. We have so few shared practices. Unity has meditation, and so do the Quakers. Episcopalians have the rich ritual tradition of the Book of Common Prayer. Reform Judaism continues its task of making Torah relevant to the world today. And we have what? Quite often endless debates about if we can say certain words, if we can perform certain rituals, we have lectures on comparative religion, and loads of talk about government policies. Like CK I’ve often needed more than that. I’ve needed a shared language for meaning-making, and spiritual practices that can be practiced as a community without having to constantly return to square-one debates about if/how a UU is allowed to do that.

   I continue to flit about the fringes of the UUA, in congregations that are not considered mainstream by most UU’s. These have been explicitly Christian churches in the UUA; old, rural, Universalist churches that have maintained a gospel of universal grace for all humankind; and the oddball inter-denominational church that has the UUA as one of its affiliations.

   Perhaps instead of saying to CK that his experience is a fluke, we should ask ourselves if there is some horrible truth in his words. A truth we are reluctant to admit. A Quaker colleague of mine said forcefully when he told me why he would never join a UU congregation. “It is a fringe movement, having a fringe conversation, and is proud that it is irrelevant to most of humanity.” A cruel reversal, since one of the hallmarks of liberal theology is a desire to be relevant to today’s human condition.

   Comment by Derek — July 8, 2007 #

5. You know, I just don’t get a lot of what’s going on in the blogosphere. But I do get what’s going on at my church, which is overwhelmingly healing and hopeful, and I’ve posted about it here.

   Comment by Ellis — July 9, 2007 #

6. Despite our oft-professed desire to return to community, this debate is still focused on the individual experience and what is “lacking” for that person, and how we might “provide what is missing”, without acknowledging that “the missing bits” are what bring us all to church in the first place. But the catch is, we might all have different missing bits! We start off catering to every wounded ex-Christian who cringes at the “G” word. Then we reject that, and we say that the “G” word is what’s been missing, and we end up catering to those who find meaning in that construct. Then those who have a different construct say “Whoa! I’m leaving if I don’t get [X]” and pretty soon we are not debating theology in a respectful “what’s your path and how do you live it” kind of way. Instead we are demanding that our own personal Gods be worshipped by everyone.

   Don’t get me wrong. I love a good throwdown between my Gods and the other constructs out there. I usually walk away with something new and beautiful, and that’s the joy I find in exploring theology in community. But theology is only one part of the UU faith community. I think our strength and healing is found in the fact that even the word “God” is not big enough to describe the wholeness (and Holiness) of the universe. I wouldn’t want to trade in the diversity of our societies for a uniformity of theology. I don’t want to talk about God every Sunday, because then I don’t get to hear other perspectives. Likewise, if we never talked about God, I’d be sad. But when someone says “I went to a UU church once and they never mentioned God so I never came back” and we say “Gee, isn’t that terrible”, I think we miss the point. Chances are, if you came back next week, we would be talking about God. Or not, depending on the congregation. You could walk into one of the New England churches and say “Wow, I though UU’s never talked about God and here I am reciting the Lord’s Prayer, I’m outta here.” It doesn’t mean they should stop doing what they do. Being UU is complex, and it’s not for everyone. I love the diversity of religions in the world, and I don’t think that everyone is secretly UU. But for those who do find something in our churches, when we can stand in community with different Gods but a shared vision of the world and a shared love for one another, then I believe we can heal, be strengthened, and find power.

   Comment by bluish seminarian — July 9, 2007 #

7. Bluish, that’s a big statement but it never acknowledges a reality called the Church. Does UUism want to claim to be part of the Church or not? Even your use of the term “faith community” has certain connotations that many UUs would indignantly reject. Right now UUism is trying to have it both ways (we’re part of the Church/no we’re an entirely new thing) and, in my opinion, is making a mockery of its heritage and earning its contemporary reputation as an eccentric group of self-important malcontents. We’re not just accountable to UU community but to the historic Church. A group of people doesn’t get to use the signs, symbols, worship format, architecture and tax-free status of the Church without being accountable to it.

   Comment by PeaceBang — July 9, 2007 #

8. Peacebang,

   I believe Unitarian Universalists would gain more from promoting critical engagement with our religious history, than from pursuing accountability to the historic Church.

   Unitarian Universalists can gain theological insight from studying American religious history, especially when it is presented in a way that invites critical reflection. When I read Christian history, I hear larger theological questions that are quite relevant even to non-Christians, such as “How does the Spirit communicate with us?” “Is God’s love something we earn, or something freely given?” “Does everyone have the same innate potential to lead a good life?” I personally find it very inspiring to learn how Christians have grappled with these questions.

   I also think Unitarian Universalists could engage with the Bible in a similar way, by discussing how the questions and stories can be related to our own lives whether or not we are Christian. We can also raise awareness of the diverse range of hermeneutical approaches that Biblical scholars employ.

   However, I’m not sure this kind of critical engagement is the same as being “accountable…to the historic Church” as you described it. Historically, many of our religious ancestors strongly identified as Christian, even as they raised theological questions. Today Unitarian Universalist engagement with Christianity should be different. We need to include acceptance of those who say, “well, I’ve read the Bible and reflected carefully on these stories, but I just don’t feel called to follow Jesus, nor do I look to the scriptures as a source of spiritual direction” or even “I disagree with Jesus’s message and I object to much of what is in the Bible.”

   I’m also skeptical of how feasible it would be to be “accountable…to the historic Church,” even if we did pursue this course. It seems to me that many Christian groups right now are debating what the criteria is to be part of the Church, and who gets to decide, so that there is no unified Church to be accountable to, and no clear criteria for how that accountability would be defined.

   Comment by Shelby Meyerhoff — July 9, 2007 #

9. Peacebang, I’m going to resurrect this thread, because it’s something I grapple with on a daily basis. I am a spiritually open and ritually eclectic person; I’ve ministered musically in Reformed synagogues, Episcopal churches (high and low), American Baptist, and (yes) Wiccan circles and pagan networks. I am now at my first UU position. How to choose hymns and anthems that support the sermon, provide liturgical flow, and have a spiritually meaningful component is shockingly difficult. Many of the best and most suitable music uses the word “God,” and (Oh NO!) often refers to Jesus. The word “God” is tolerated if I don’t overuse it. But if I use the J-word too often, I am severely and immediately criticized. Then if I don’t use the J-word often enough, I hear about that, too. The same group of people who wish for non-theistic language also want more classical or traditional music. WTH? Traditional church music without Jesus mentioned? I guess “Jesu Christe” is ok because if it’s in Latin it doesn’t count??? So I began to change a few words here and there to “UU-ify” the language of our anthems, which actually became ridiculous. (My husband said “why don’t we just say ‘Jello’ whenever the words say ‘Jesus?’ Everybody likes it, and there’s always room for it.”) Finally I had to write a newlsetter column in which I told the congregation to trust me: I don’t have a religious agenda, but a spiritual one. I also told them I would trust them as well: I would trust them to use their own brains; I trust that all references to the Divine in the music I choose will be interpreted in any way they wish or need. I don’t care what images they have, or whether they believe in God. But they have chosen to call their institution a “church,” and that implies a spiritual component, which I believe can exist with or without a belief in God. I feel shackled by the bonds of the congregation’s contentiousness.

   I marvel at how a denomination that is so proud of its inclusiveness should be so bitter and exclusive to the Christians (or even the theists) in its midst. Yet everybody wants that special Christmas Eve service, and to sing the old carols with the original words. I suppose Jesus, who advocated a radical form of inclusivity based on loving others, is not so radical or his teachins so alarming when he is kept eternally in the manger.

   You can’t have it both ways, UUA-ers. You are either inclusive or not.

   Comment by Suzanne — May 7, 2008 #

10. This is an old post but here’s my 2 cents-
    I think a big part of the problem here for Comrade Kevin and others who leave UUism is that they expect it to fulfill all their spiritual/religious needs. I get inspiration, enjoyment of music and fellowship out of UU services but I get more spiritual depth out of Pagan rituals. I don’t expect to get the same things in a UU context, or for everyone to worship the same Gods I do- in fact I come there to learn from other points of view.

    Comment by Mariah/Caelesti — May 8, 2008 #

11. I know this is an old post, but it is near the top of the list when I google Ex Unitarian. There is now a website directed toward Ex Unitarians- fallenchalice.com

    Thanks for helping to get the word out

    Comment by Fallen Chalice — January 21, 2009 #

Leave a comment

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

XHTML: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>