PeaceBang
The manic mind of the minister -- Auntie Mame Meets Cotton Mather. Blogging about Unitarian Universalism, UU Christian spiritual practice, occasional cultural and political ravings, and the inner life of ministry. PeaceBang is the alter ego of a small town pastor serving an historic New England Unitarian Universalist congregation.
NOW IS THE TIME Strong-Arming
April 28, 2008 on 1:39 pm | In Inspirations, Unitarian Universalism | Friends,
I am not trying to be a trouble-maker here, but since there are so few forums for Unitarian Universalist laymen and women and ministers to speak frankly together about Associational issues of concern, I thought it worthy to pull this comment from “Rev E” from the previous post and to invite further reflections on her experience:
I don’t see many comments about PeaceBang’s lead-in, which was the tremendous pressure put on us clergy last year to hold an “Association Sunday,” and help raise funds for the UUA’s “Now Is the Time” campaign.
Although it’s slightly off-topic, I’d like to weigh in as a minister who *did* designate the UUA as the recipient of our regular “half basket” giveaway (in October), but who bitterly resented the UUA’s process & tone during its campaign, for the following reasons:
1. It’s not an exaggeration to say that I felt downright harassed by the UUA, and in particular by Stephan Papa’s team (whom I’ve dubbed the “Papa Posse”). They literally chased me down the corridors of Portland’s convention center, left many high-pressure voice mails for me at the office, and otherwise insinuated the primacy of their project into the fabric of my congregation. I don’t think my experience was unique; many of us were virtually strong-armed into either holding an Association Sunday, or defending our (unpopular) decision not to.
2. UUA material crowed about the need for money for “growth” and “advertising.” Like PeaceBang, I’m not thrilled with the content of our TIME magazine ads, but I’m satisfied enough with the sheer publicity. When I received detailed information about the funds raised, however, only in the small print was it mentioned that 25% of those monies would be given to congregations with ministers of color. Ministers of color? FINE. Admirable, even, for an Association with a commitment to anti-racism & multiculturalism. But it’s the *process*, people! Don’t tell me that 25% of a stated goal of one million dollars (!) falls under the category of “publicity.” I still feel misled by the UUA’s lack of transparency around the use of those funds.
3. Call me a fool, but I honestly thought that Association Sunday was a one-time deal. Perhaps I just wasn’t paying attention. Now that I understand that the UUA expects this to be an annual event, I just feel weary. The only silver lining in this gray cloud of disappointment is that my District has chosen to distribute its “Now Is the Time” payout back to us, the congregations, in the form of grants.
Thanks to all in the PeaceBang community for your thought-provoking comments, and all that I learn from you.
Thank you for your honest critique, Rev. E, wherever you are. I echo your sentiments. I was also very put off by the strong-armed tactics used by “the Papa Posse,” and will not fall prey to them again. “Fool me once…” and so on. I must also be naive, because I assumed that NOW IS THE TIME/Association Sunday was a one-shot deal, and will have to speak with my lay leaders about the implications of an annual expectation that we do this. I personally don’t intend to support a second big additional gift to the UUA for advertising or anything else in the coming fiscal year. I want to know much more about how the monies raised last year were/are being spent, and to what good end.
And in case I wasn’t clear about this: I think it truly offensive for the UUA to leave messages on any minister’s private study line requesting that we call a UUA staffer to discuss our participation in a fund-raising campaign for them. The barrage of e-mails and mailings we also received were overkill and thoroughly obnoxious (and how much did they cost??)
Again, if this sort of campaign happens on a rare occasion and has clearly exciting outcomes, I’ll tolerate it with little grumbling. But to hear that “Association Sunday” may be an annual expectation is not only exhausting, it is very upsetting (perhaps we’d like to vote as congregations on this? How many of us want to pay for what amounts to piles of junk mail generated by NOW IS THE TIME?), and I hope it’s not true. Our congregations serve the good of the Association by being strong, well-regarded local congregations, by giving our fair share in dues for the services we receive from HQ, and by sending a team of committed delegates to our General Assembly. Requests for gifts above and beyond these should be few, far-between, and made with far more respect and less pushy, cheerleadery, “All the cool kids are doing it! CMON, quit worryin’ about all those pesky details about how we’ll spend the money” fervor. Like I said, fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, not gonna happen.
28 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Powered by WordPress with Pool theme design by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.
Valid XHTML and CSS. ^Top^
So whom do we call to get answers? I wonder. That’s not a hypothetical question.
We all deserve a breakdown of costs, including what percentage was spent on fundraising.
Comment by Scott Wells — April 28, 2008 #
Papa was here earlier this month, and he asked for a $50 donation from everyone. (We did Association Sunday late.) Excuse me?
Comment by chutney — April 28, 2008 #
My own tactic with the posse was to just say no.
No, I’m not interested in an annual Association Sunday. No, I won’t promise to do it again this year. No, I don’t want to talk about it again. No.
I recommend this to everyone who feels strongly about this. Hard as it is to muster your Used Car Salesman Defense against your own beloved colleagues, the way to make this thing go away is to vote with your feet.
Comment by Christine Robinson — April 28, 2008 #
Hm. Sounds as though the questions I was asking at the time about “Now is the Time” haven’t yet been satisfactorily answered.
Until they are, perhaps the campaign should be renamed “The Time Is Up”, at least in the UU Snarkosphere.
(BTW, last I checked, “now” does not mean “again”.)
Comment by fausto — April 28, 2008 #
Unfortunately, I have been guilty of being an instigator of one of these special collection Sundays. It is strange what you don’t see from the inside of denominational administration.
This was almost 10 years ago. I was a campus minister (lay), employed by a UU district, serving a cluster of colleges in a metropolitan area. Because the District did not budget adequately to fund the program, and because they did not want to raise fair share dues to a level that would fund the ministry programs they insisted upon, I was told to organize special Campus Ministry Sundays at every congregation in our district. Most congregations said no. It made my board furious with those congregations, and in my performance review they expressed their disappointment that I was not more insistent and persuasive with the congregations. One minister who told me no, kindly explained to me that if he had to have a special Campus Ministry Sunday, he would also open the door to having special Sundays for many other special UU ministries (UUSC, UUUNO, various camps, etc.). With 52 Sundays per year, and dozens of specialized UU ministries, how many Sundays would be left for regular church services?
At that time I was clue-less. Now that I have experience with parish ministry, I get what the problem is, and why there is a sacrifice with the quality of worship when you have alot of annual, special cause Sundays.
There is a disconnect that people get into when we work at the administrative end of the denomination, and do not understand (or possibly remember) first-hand what it takes to craft high quality Sunday services. It is hard to be moving, or prophetic, when you are frequently persuading people for donations for special causes. And being persuaded for money, is not the kind of spoken ministry most people desperately need from their spiritual community.
Comment by Derek — April 29, 2008 #
What I’m left with musing about in this whole discussion is how utterly human it is that religious organization as liberal as the UUA gets caught up in politics. It seems to reaffirm the little voice in the back of my head that nags me about how all religion is a human imposed institution and therefore utterly flawed… In other words, it makes me want to retreat back into my world of being “spiritual but not religious.” I guess I have to realize, though, that because religions are organized by man, they are doomed to be wrought with politics and flawed.
Still, I suppose it’s better than some types of religious organizations. At least UUA fosters this kind of discussion…
Comment by Mars Girl — April 29, 2008 #
Mars Girl, you said:
What I’m left with musing about in this whole discussion is how utterly human it is that religious organization as liberal as the UUA gets caught up in politics.
It’s not the politics of the thing that bothers me. It’s the disingenuity: the disingenuity of fundraising without offering any transparency or candor about how the money is intended to be used; the disingenuity of trying to convert a one-time appeal into an annual obligation; the disingenuity of trying to cloak moneygrubbing in a mantle of worship (note to clergy: Remember Jesus in the Temple?); the disingenuity of using the principle of congregationalism to justify concentrating power and decisions in a closed, secretive central authority.
And that’s no hyperbole.
Comment by fausto — April 29, 2008 #
I’m neither a spokesperson for the UUA nor particularly invested in defending the UUA, but I do think one misimpression is circulating: Association Sunday was not introduced as a one-time event.
Back in March 2007, Bill Sinkford wrote to parish ministers asking them to host an Association Sunday; you can find a copy of the letter on page 9 of this Stewardship and Development Office report to the UUA board:
In that same Stewardship and Development report is an early iteration of a Frequently Asked Questions document about Association Sunday, which says:
Bill Sinkford introduced Association Sunday and the Now Is the Time campaign in his UU World column in the Fall 2007 issue (just after launching the campaign at the 2007 General Assembly):
(That same issue UU World reported on General Assembly, but the story does not mention the prospect of future Association Sundays. Neither does UUA.org’s reporting on Sinkford’s General Assembly announcement. It’s possible that the public launch of the campaign during plenary did not refer to multiple Association Sundays, although the accompanying printed material did.)
It is for others to decide whether the material promoting the campaign effectively communicated its goals and whether UUA representatives were persuasive in arguing the merits of the idea. But it’s not true to suggest that a one-time fundraiser is now being turned into an annual event after the fact.
Comment by Philocrites — April 29, 2008 #
P.S. The UUA’s Stewardship and Development Office is surveying people about priorities for the 2008 Association Sunday fundraiser. The survey says: “Association Sunday 2008, Growing in Spirit, will raise funds for spiritual deepening and excellence in our shared ministry.” You have until May 1 to weigh in on how the UUA can best apply funds toward this goal.
Comment by Philocrites — April 29, 2008 #
It sounds like the decision has already been made, but without much detail or context:
“Funds raised at the next Association Sunday will support improved theological education for lay leaders and for promoting excellence in professional ministry.”
http://www.uua.org/leaders/leaderslibrary/leaderslibrary/interconnections/101149.shtml
NOW IS THE TIME . . . to keep the pressure on.
Comment by Scott Wells (Boy in the Bands) — April 29, 2008 #
Now is the Time is a five-year, $50 million campaign–we’re currently in year two, so it isn’t going anywhere soon. Some more details, including ideas about how to spend specific amounts ($1 million for youth ministry staff grants, etc), are available at http://www.uua.org/giving/nowis/index.shtml
Association Sunday is officially a recurring annual event. Association Sunday 2008 is scheduled for October 12. Last year’s Association Sunday-raised funds went to such activities as the Time Magazine publicity campaign. This year’s theme is “Growth in Spirit for all Unitarian Universalists.” It’s not clear how this fits with the UUA’s current preference to only focus on congregation members. Some more details are available at: http://www.uua.org/giving/associationsunday/index.shtml
Comment by Jeff W. — April 29, 2008 #
I took the survey mentioned by Philocrites. But I have to say, that I find most of the choices uninspiring. They are not the sort of things I would invest my donor dollars in. I noticed that church planting/extension was NOWHERE on the list of priorities.
Comment by Derek — April 29, 2008 #
a few thoughts:
1. it’s times like these (and the annual pledge drive my church does which always reminds me of the NPR pledge drives in which I just turn off the radio…) when I wonder if all those millions of Muslims and Jews are on to something with their whole required percentage given each year (to the religion and to charity) and to be done with it. I understand the classist issues with this, but if it was really about percentage and not amount I feel like it might be less pressure. ($50 in one sunday! I’m a college student 10% of my yearly income comes out to under $100!)
2. While I’m on the subject, what kind of environment is this to raise children in? The idea of begging for money every week, every year (and not just a dollar in the collection plate) makes it seem like you have to pay for religion the same way you pay to go to the movies, however, unlike going to the movies, I can be spiritual outside of a church, and I can do it for free. It is clear that the UUA as an organization has decided to abandon their youth and young adults by cancelling YRUU and CUUYAN in hopes of youth and young adults going to congregations, however nothing makes me want to go to a congregation less (and I actually enjoy going to church!) than people begging for money. My money’s going towards tuition, food, books, rent… I’ve put countless hours into my religion (from being an RE teacher, to serving on comitties, to singing in the choir, to working for the district youth steering committee, to being GA staff etc.) That should be enough for me to be able to count on peacfull Sunday mornings, in our capitalist society the whole world’s begging for my money, I’d like it if my church wasn’t.
(sorry for the extream length of this comment)
Comment by Flo — April 29, 2008 #
Okay, an update. For what it’s worth, my congregation gave double the normal plate offering for Association Sunday. Our plate offerings have more than tripled since we started giving away the plate, so this is a big deal.
I guess they weren’t put off by it at all.
When I worked for Methodists, though, almost every Sunday of the year was claimed by one national program or another as a “Special Sunday.” It bred widespread cynicism about those programs. All the ministers I knew tossed those flyers right into the circular file.
Comment by chutney — April 29, 2008 #
Our church has been splitting the plate (50/50) with a different group every month (or every two weeks?) for the last year. One month it was the young adult group at my church going to New Orleans for a service project; most recently it was for a group in Portland who does writing workshops with low income and homeless folks. I like this kind of thing.
I don’t know if offerings have gone up or down.
As for Muslims doing their annual donations - they do, but don’t think that’s all they give. A lot of fundraising goes on throughout the year, not just in the mosque, but at community dinners, conferences, lectures, etc. There is plenty of “begging” throughout the year.
Donating time is important, and people tend to be really good about that, but unfortunately we don’t live in a country where the congregation/temple/mosque can pay the electric bill with volunteer hours. Maybe we can create a society where that is the case!
I can’t tell you how many weekends at the mosque (for arabic class and what-have-you) I and the other kiddies spent with our coats and gloves on because there was not enough money for heating.
When I walk into our new, million dollar, earthquake proof, “green” addition at First Unitarian Church of Portland, I feel good, but I also think, “Wow.” I can’t even fathom what would happen if the UU parents came to drop their kids off at RE and saw exposed, rusted piping in the restrooms, could see their breath in the air while it’s 35 degrees outside, and had to squint in the classroom because half the lights weren’t on (to save costs).
I don’t think UUs have any idea how good they’ve got it at their churches. I’ve never even been in one without a/c!
Comment by h sofia — April 29, 2008 #
Fausto,
I hear what you are saying… I have the same expressed problem with the government and the taxes I pay to them…
Comment by Mars Girl — April 29, 2008 #
The idea of begging for money every week, every year (and not just a dollar in the collection plate) makes it seem like you have to pay for religion the same way you pay to go to the movies, however, unlike going to the movies, I can be spiritual outside of a church, and I can do it for free.
God does not pay the salaries of the staff at your church. God does not pay the mortgage on your church building. God does not pay your church’s utility bills.
So if God doesn’t pay those bills, just who do you think is going to?
Spirituality may be free, but churches aren’t. [Wormwood, we’re not talking about a stewardship campaign that supports our own congregations, which I’m sure we all support. We’re talking about a “denominational” initiative to support… well, something that none of us has been able to figure out, because the folks receiving the money haven’t sufficiently explained what how intend to spend it. None of us argues the need to be generous stewards of our own congregations. BTW, we pay dues per member from our congregations to our “denominational” HQ, and they have other fund drives like “Friends of the UUA” and even others that “reach out to/prey on” our members for contributions, too. - PB]
If you get something out of the hard work of your minister/church staff, or out of your church building, why would you feel offended at being asked to support them?
If you can’t afford to give, don’t, and don’t feel guilty about it! But someone has to give, if you want to keep the doors open. And people tend to “forget” unless they are reminded periodically…
Comment by Wormwood's Doxy — April 29, 2008 #
Wormwood, you’re absolutely right, but the issue here isn’t the practical necessity of supporting one’s individual church. The issue is (1) being pressured to give extraordinary donations to a highly touted but poorly explained inititative launched by the denominational association, to be used for purposes that are not at all transparent, in addition to the regular financial support that the member churches already do contribute to denominational operations, and then (2) being asked to convert what was originally presented as an extraordinary, one-time initiative into an annual fiscal (and liturgical!) habit.
Comment by fausto — April 30, 2008 #
Rev. Papa was our guest minister for Association Sunday ‘07. Here’s a link to the sermon audio:
http://www.fplex.org/media/podcasts/2007/service-2007-10-21.mp3
Comment by Chris — April 30, 2008 #
Sorry, Fausto—I was responding to Flo’s comment, above…which seemed to me to be a more general criticism of the church’s “begging.”
I can see why the initiative you are talking about is a different kettle of fish. I just get really annoyed with people who are happy to use the services of the church, but then complain about being reminded that supporting the church takes dollars.
Pax,
Doxy
Comment by Wormwood's Doxy — April 30, 2008 #
Fausto, whether or not Association Sundays are a “highly touted but poorly explained inititative,” as I’ve already pointed out the first Association Sunday was not introduced as “an extraordinary, one-time initiative.” It was introduced as a five-year initiative.
Comment by Philocrites — April 30, 2008 #
When the whole Association Sunday thing was launched, I was still a staff person at UUA HQ. I remember thinking (and saying, to some people involved) that one Sunday every few years is OK, but once a year (even for “only” five years) seemed a bit much.
As someone deeply committed to supporting the institutions of our faith, I completely agree that making this an annual thing was a mistake. I, for one, managed to get the congregation I serve to share our plate in January with the campaign–and I don’t want to do that again. There are much more compelling justice causes out there that I’d rather see us be generous towards.
I think that rather than a once-a-year-for-five-years initative, they might launch a once-every-five-years one. I could stomach such a thing that often.
in peace,
Michael
Comment by Michael — April 30, 2008 #
Philo, you refer to communications with parish clergy that were not widely shared with the lay membership. I don’t think there was or is much awareness among the laity that the “Now” initiative was intended to be recurring, and that is the fault of the sponsors, not the laity.
The more important point, however, is that what we see is a lot of effort being expended on fundraising, but without nearly as much effort going toward explaining to prospective donors precisely what the campaign entails, what their money will buy, or what it has bought to date. Both problems arise, it seems to me, from a combination of inadequate planning and poor communication. It’s difficult to raise money for a campaign whose purpose seems to be primarily communication if you can’t even communicate effectively with your pool of prospective donors.
The impression it leaves is something like this:
UUA: “Dad, it’s Saturday night. I need money.”
UUs: “Really? What are you going to do with it?”
UUA: “Oh, I dunno. Good stuff.”
UUs: “You going to spend it all on beer again?”
UUA: “Um…”
UUs: “You going to ask me for the car keys next?”
UUA: “Um…”
UUs: “Tell you what. You tell me how you spent that money I gave you last weekend. Then you tell me how much you need tonight and what you’re going to do with it. And oh, by the way, the lawn needs mowing.”
UUA: “Um…”
Comment by fausto — May 1, 2008 #
It’s easy to be critical, but how is the UUA supposed to raise money then? When they were all nice and low-key about fundraising, there wasn’t enough money to do any publicity at all, nor any money to try to turn our lilly-white denomination into something more closely resembling the surrounding culture. Lots of commenters above are calling for “transparency,” and I’m as cynical as they next guy when it comes to the UUA, but my perception is that none of this was hidden — from the very first letters on this subject, I was well aware that the money raised was going for a variety of things, not just for ads in Time magazine. My church chose not to participate in Association Sunday this year, but we had good reasons for that decision, and we didn’t get all in a snit about it.
No doubt the UUA made lots of mistakes during this campaign — I’d start with the fact that if you want to get people under the age of forty into our churches, you don’t advertise in dead tree publications. But the UUA’s mistakes don’t deserve the excoriation that’s going on here. So I have been asking myself what’s going on…
Well, if you’ve ever been a part of a church that has a large endowment, all the above discussion sounds very familiar. In churches with large endowments, giving is frequently half that of similar churches in the same area — whenever someone raises the prospect of a face-to-face canvass, the anxiety level goes up perceptibly — and when you do have a successful canvass one year, and say you’re going to have another canvass next year, there will be substantial resistance. Now the UUA doesn’t have an endowment, but the Veatch Fund consistently bails us out, year after year, acting just like an endowment.
Which leads me to say that we in the UUA need to talk openly and non-confrontationally about money. If you people don’t like Association Sunday, instead of being so doggone destructive, why not come up with some constructive ideas, for pity’s sake?
Oops. There, I’ve gone and done it again. Once again I’m the turd in the punch bowl.
Comment by Dan — May 3, 2008 #
No, a fresh block of ice in the punchbowl is probably a more apt analogy. The punch was starting to get warm.
Your comments about the difficulty of fundraising under any circumstances are well taken. However, I think what has made “Now is the Time” a flashpoint is that the otherwise predictable money sensitivities are compounded by parallel concerns over power and trust, as PeaceBang’s earlier thread suggests. Nerves are already raw over the IA and YRUU flaps, and additional moves by “25″ that further concentrate decision making in an unaccountable denominational oligarchy seem directly opposed to the stated denominational policy of building a stronger congregationalism. The apparent contradiction between word and deed leave an impression of insincerity, ineptitude, or both. The impression may not be justified, but it is nevertheless reinforced by the fact that nothing seems to be being done to dispel it.
Comment by fausto — May 5, 2008 #
Dan, a point of clarification: The UUA does indeed have an endowment. The 2007 Treasurer’s report says that 15% of the UUA’s income for general support comes from the UUA’s $100 million endowment fund.
Comment by Philocrites — May 5, 2008 #
Amen to Dan’s post!! I really can’t add more than that. But I will . . .
1. Everything that is wrong with UUism has its roots at “25.” Not!!! Come on, people, that’s what most of this sounds like!!
2. We can speak as people of faith openly and authoritatively on sex in a way that can make many people blush with shame, but God forbid we talk about money and financial stewardship (or God for that matter) as also important to the religious life. Why is that?
3. For those uninspired or in disagreement with the campaign’s goals, I can’t say anything in so far as what you say is personal opinion. But let’s be clear that this campaign’s goals did not arise out of whole cloth or entirely out of Sinkford’s mind. The UUA spent over two years meeting with almost every UU group imaginable (before the affiliate flap)in an effort to try to find out what UUs outside of “25″ considered pressing. This data helped to narrow the possible issues which lead to surveys to be answered by individuals. As a result, the UUA sent questionnaires to individual UUs and had computer kiosks open to all available at GA in Fort Worth through which to take the survey and tell staff and board what they considered most pressing for the UUA. In the end, as I understand it, more individuals and groups had the chance to weigh in with opinions, hopes and desires for UUism and the UUA than in any other time in the history of the combined traditions. This is all to say that the campaign’s goals were not some sort of misguided fantasy of the UUA staff and board. Did each (staff and board) have a role in interpreting the data and setting the goals? Sure. Was that interpretation perfect? Probably not, but every human endeavor is flawed.
Comment by RevJ — May 5, 2008 #
PS.
Um, Dan?? The UUA does have an endowment. There I have to disagree with you.
http://www.uua.org/documents/finance/071231_gif_summary.pdf
Sorry, don’t want this to take away from an otherwise thoughtful post.
Comment by RevJ — May 5, 2008 #