PeaceBang

13 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

1. Brava.

   Comment by Lizard Eater — May 14, 2008 #

2. Hmm, interesting comment, but you stopped just as you were getting started - or I am totaly missing the point (which is very possible)

   - doesnt being around like-minded people help to do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with your God? Otherwise doesn’t one run the risk of spending too much time on semantics, paperwork, and general hash-it-outs before one gets to the big stuff?
   Or is that the point - that we should do this stuff with folks who aren’t in agreement?

   Comment by Steven R — May 14, 2008 #

3. I guess that it help when you understand that by being with people who dont always think like you do, that is when you need the ablity to be humble and except other people’s views of god and religion. love of god is not owned by one religion or another.

   Comment by jeremy — May 14, 2008 #

4. I’m trying to spot a faith that doesn’t foster the development of a community of like-minded people.

   Seriously.

   Even within a large tradition — say Catholicism — that’s exactly what happens. People find that they’re attending a parish that really doesn’t meet their needs, preach the faith they understand… but the one next door does and they go there (I’ve known a number of Catholics who did this–and the beef, often enough, was that they couldn’t find much justice-doing and mercy-loving where they were supposed to be going.)

   Note that the fellowship is still there, lo these many years later. That’s a lot more success than many starts claim, sadly (there’s one not too far from us that’s a few years old that’s been very supported by ministers and lay folk… and I and my minister aren’t feeling very hopeful for. Too attached already to the idea of a minister, too unable to do the small but growing on our own (mostly) fellowship thing).

   Yes, the place you’re pointing to has fallen short of its vision. And… that’s true of the vast majority of our congregations, no? Is yours living up to its ideals for growth and what it would be 10 years ago? Mine’s not–and yet it’s thriving. Just not as much or as well as hoped for.

   You’re nailing them for what they think they’re about–and yet that’s a core failing for the entire darn movement, in which few people (including ministers, too often) can really articulate what we’re about. Harsh, PB. Small means that the model is very, very different–it’s an extended family. That’s what works–and survives. In time it can (and does) grow into something that has to painfully metamorphose into something different. What I’m reading sounds like a hard condemnation of the family church.

   Ministers are not staff. True. Fact.

   And for a congregation that’s never called and had a minister for a long period of time… that’s not going to be well understood. It’s kinda subtle–after all, the parish employs the minister, no? What’s the difference? (Yes, I know. You know. But they don’t, and can’t, unless they’ve been “there” and they haven’t.)

   You write:

   I spent all evening and most of a Sunday morning with this small band of folks and never once heard them express interest in anything other than promoting the UU principles in their wider community

   Oh, for a community of UUs that evangelical. They’re too darned small to have a lot (or a need for a lot) of systems. Systems are efficient when things are big, and a screaming pain in the butt when you’re small. Our congregation ran well for 40+ years with minimal systems. It’s a screaming pain in the butt NOW, as we have to create the systems we NEED… now. But we didn’t need them in the past. Jet engines on a VW bus are a bad idea. Programs? WHO is going to set up and run those on an ongoing basis? FOR WHOM? They’re too small. That scale church is a very different beast.

   And yes, the transition from that size on up–unless you’re so lucky as to make it swiftly enough that the transition is without real plateaus where people get comfortable and feel that this is how it’s “always been” and how it’s supposed to be…–is damned hard, because you give up really meaningful, precious things to get… other really valuable and important things. Been there, and I’ve been midwifing (not alone, but a small group…) that very change for over three years for a congregation that has had time to be successful (building, land, money in the bank, called ministers for almost 20 years, growth for 10…). It’s hard, and people ARE being asked to give up things central to themselves in order to get… things that are promises.

   The smaller you are, the more you need and want to be “of like mind.” It works. And as you grow, you WILL be and become more diverse–and should aim to and should celebrate that and embrace it.

   Once again, I’m going to point out that the only meaningfully successful growth program we’ve had in generations was the fellowship movement. It could have been done better, and it would have benefited from more support. But it worked; nearly a third of our congregations NOW are or were those, and about the same number of UUs, too. The model works. With support and tolerance–and improvements–we could do it again. But what I keep hearing is this UUA and ministerial desire to plant substantial churches ab ovo, instead. Spending lots of money, too.

   They fail. They failed in the past. They hav failed recently. With plenty of money and support.

   The quirky, irascible… small… fellowships worked.

   Weeds.

   But you know what… weeds are insanely successful, biologically speaking. Are we obsessed with getting what we think we want in advance, or with success?

   Love ya, and I think you’re wrong, and barking up the wrong tree. You’re expecting things that aren’t really reasonable, plausible or growth-enhancing for a small congregation. Different evolutionary pressures.

   Here’s a de-caf from this marvelous place I found down the road. Free wi-fi, not $tarbuks, very green and responsible about the coffee, the cups, the whole thing.

   [Ogre, love ya too and I think I pushed a button here. I’m not feeling “harsh” about this at all, just musing aloud. The “like-minded people” thing is a failing of all mainline religious churches these days IMHO. We could be getting deeper and challenging ourselves on this key theological understanding of what our purpose is. I’m talking not reality but idealism. I’m spending 4-5 hours a day in an intensive course on spiritual discernment right now and it’s seeping into the way I see everything right now. - PB]

   Comment by ogre — May 14, 2008 #

5. (((becoming the beloved community, serving the congregation and the community in humility, welcoming the stranger, creating systems and programs that facilitate caring for each other, learning together, growing in faith together, worshiping together, seeking the will of the Holy together? )))

   I think, theoretically, the folks you talk to could do those things in any of the already-existing churches, synagoges, mosques, etc, in their town.

   To me, wanting to do those things with those who are theologically like-minded and believe in Free Religion like I do is a good reason to start a church.

   CC
   who is totally with you that ministers aren’t staff, but has had to explain the point to enough people that she sees Ogre’s point, too.

   Comment by Chalicechick — May 14, 2008 #

6. I’m with CC & Ogre on this one. Sometimes your keen mind overfocuses into harsh judgement, and I think this is one of those times.

   Comment by Heather — May 14, 2008 #

7. (Thanks, CC. That legal training is starting to show! )

   PB, could I suggest a post (I’d start one… but my blog’s a backwater… and I’m slammed for the next couple days at least, as well as solo parenting for the week…) about what a minister is, and what staff is and…

   Many, many would benefit.

   Comment by ogre — May 14, 2008 #

8. I am ignorant about the minister not being a staff person. I understand why they would be different from other staff persons, but am not familiar enough with the vernacular to know what category they fall under. Are they not staff because they cannot simply be “fired” and because they cannot simply “quit?” Is this theological or legal? [HS, the minister is called by a vote of the congregation after a lengthy process of discernment on behalf of both the congregation and the minister. It is one of the foundational practices of our tradition and yes, it’s theological and covenantal. Thanks for asking. -PB]

   Comment by h sofia — May 14, 2008 #

9. I wasn’t sure at first…I like my like-minded friends, and it brings me back to myself to be with people of shared values…but after thinking about your post, I have to say I agree with your points about growth. I recently attended a small church workshop with Rev. Jane Dwinell, who recommends that the most important ingredient for a small congregation to grow is to focus on a common mission. (NOT mission statement, but mission project that responds to the needs of the surrounding community…i.e. feeding the homeless, welcoming immigrants, helping children and the environment, etc.–pretty much all those things we are required to do, but focused on concrete examples.) Bringing her idea back to my small congregation, I have already seen a real shift in focus into a sense of what can we do for those around us, moving beyond ourselves…. Though I appreciate being with those who are like-minded, it is that sense of what we can do for our world by living out those common values that I appreciate most. And that is a contagious spirit that helps a church grow. If we want to grow our membership, we must first grow our spirit. Otherwise we’re a club, not a church.

   Comment by Terri — May 14, 2008 #

10. “Like-minded…” I see all kinds of psychological, sociological and political reasons for working with a faith community on the basis of like-mindedness. And I certainly know how much I can’t stand trying to get something done with people who aren’t like me.
    But as a Christian, I’m sort of stuck with the principle that our salvation depends on strangers. People who are the wrong tribe, the wrong faith, the wrong class or gender. Who mess up our ideas of clean/unclean; inside/outside; of like/different-mindedness. Who show us the unimaginable vastness of Creation.
    As we pray together at my church, every Sunday before we open the doors for worship:
    “Blessed be God the Word, who came to his own and his own received him not. For in this way God glorified the stranger. Show us your image in all who come here today, that we may welcome them, and you.”

    Comment by Sara Miles — May 14, 2008 #

11. Sara, BINGO. Thanks for saying it so well.

    The minister in the Unitarian Universalist tradition is not staff. They are not hired, they are called. Time does not permit my lengthy reflections on how the degeneration of this understanding in our movement has led to weaker ministry and weaker laity, but maybe another time.

    Comment by PeaceBang — May 15, 2008 #

12. At my huuge UU congregation, the entire “Management Team” is not considered staff. Not only the three ministers, but also the administrator and the music director are not staff. But, we only called and are in covenant with the three ministers.

    Comment by Elizabeth Barrett — May 20, 2008 #

13. Amen.

    That’s all I was going to say, but now that I’ve read the earlier comments, I’ll expand.

    There’s nothing wrong with being of like mind. For us Christians there’s even Scripture about it– notably 1 Corinthians (2:15-16), which focuses more broadly on the value of great differences in church participants. The problem is when that’s the goal, or a leading goal.

    Rather, I think that being of one mind comes about healthily through loving and working together as a community– and that it’s not likely to look much like what people might immediately think of.

    (This is a major reason for my love for Sara Miles’s Take This Bread, BTW.)

    So I’m with PeaceBang, and say again, Amen.

    Comment by Mary Ann — May 24, 2008 #

Leave a comment