WWUUD stream

๐Ÿ”’
โŒ About FreshRSS
There are new articles available, click to refresh the page.
Before yesterdayimported

Answering Violence

2 June 2009 at 14:48
Part of me really does understand, I confess, the mindset that leads to things like the murder of Dr. Tiller this weekend. If you passionately believe that abortion is murder, and you work yourself into a place where you're comparing him to Mengele in the holocaust, as was done by some, isn't it the right thing to do to kill him? By doing so, you're saving potentially thousands of lives. The argument of those who advocate for violence against abortion providers is essentially that they are living in an unjust state that condones murder. Going through the state process is unthinkable while people are being slaughtered. It must be stopped.

We glorify this sort of thinking all the time in our society. Our superheroes are the ones who take the law into their own hands and battle what they see as evil. Superman, Batman, and the rest of the superhero vigilantes usually pick targets that culturally we all agree on as evil (and usually in those stories, the law is trying to catch the same bad guys, as well). But we also glorify the rebel outsiders, like Hans Solo and Luke Skywalker and Princess Leia, fighting against the corrupt state. It's not a far stretch, and some people clearly make that stretch, to see our own government as the one that needs fighting against. I'm not blaming the media, mind, I am saying the media reflects our societal values.

I am not personally a pacifist. If I was, this would be easier to explain how it is wrong. I admire greatly the pacifists who can take the hard line that violence is always the wrong option. If you take that line, the argument against this sort of violence is clear. But I do believe there is a point one can come to where war is justified, and where rising against your own state is justified. I think there are many countries where revolutionaries have been justified in fighting for their own freedom. I think there are dictators, like Hitler, who needed to be stopped.

Given that, it is much harder to answer this violence and show it is wrong. It is not my line, that I would draw, where violence is justified. But it is theirs. And I personally think that it's quite possible that abortion is, after all, murder.

But just as I said that violence is sometimes necessary, that opens a door to say that there are times and ways and places where killing another person is justified. And that opens the door for abortion, as well.

And I have one value that trumps it all: freedom. I do firmly beleive that women must be allowed to control their own bodies. And that means we have the right to choose not to support another life growing inside of us. Whenever. Period.

The problem is that absolute thinking about ethics can lead one to extreme ends, like taking up arms and committing murder. Real life, however, is much more nuanced. Deontological ethics, an emphasis on hard and fast absolute rules, will lead to this absolute thinking.

Our faith, our ethics, are much more nuanced. As Unitarian Universalists, we live in a space of nuance and ambiguity. Rather than believing, for example, in a literalist understanding of the Bible which gives hard and fast rules with absolute consequences of Heaven and Hell for following or breaking those rules, we live in a place based on an ethic of care, or love. The ultimtae, God, for us is about ultimate caring, love. The rules we follow are based on an ethical system of relationship and caring as the ultimate goods.

My heart and soul cry out against this violence, but I struggle to put into words the ethics that would answer this logical ethical argument for violence. But the answer is, must be, always will be no, this violence is not justified. And it is terrorism.
ter⋅ror⋅ism  [ter-uh-riz-uhm] – noun 1.the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, esp. for political purposes.

Complaining About E-Mail

28 May 2009 at 16:30
This week, on the same day, California's Supreme Court upheld the constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, and President Obama announced who his pick for U.S. Supreme Court will be.

This led to a flurry of e-mails.

I think I got announcements about the California decision from Triangle, Michigan Equality, the Lansing Association for Human Rights (LAHR) (two or three e-mails), and the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), and the UUA. Fortunately, I did not get one from Jackson PFLAG, which sticks to monthly newsletters. I got announcements about Obama's decision from Planned Parenthood, the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (RCRC), MoveOn, and President Obama (twice). That's at least a dozen e-mails to tell me two pieces of information.

Now I admit it could be worse. There are a lot more agencies I could've gotten e-mails from that I do get e-mails from regularly, and there are a lot of agencies I don't get e-mails from that I could subscribe to. But the problem is that I do want to hear from these agencies--about their events, programs, etc. And if none of them had sent e-mails, I might not have heard... until I turned on NPR, or logged onto facebook where probably three dozen friends & colleagues posted status updates about it, myself included.

But I do wish there was a way to consolidate this information, or that people from state-level lgbt organizations, for example, could assume you'd hear national news from the national organization, and so would stick to sending state-level information. That would definitely help with the e-mail overload.

Michigan

21 May 2009 at 17:24
Michigan is having a hard time right now. No news there. My city, Jackson, Michigan, topped Forbes' list of the 10 Worst Small Cities for Jobs. Five other small Michigan cities made that top ten list as well. And of course we're well represented on the mid-sized and large-sized cities lists, as well, with Detroit coming in number one on the latter. Find any other gloomy list of worst places to be in this economy, Michigan cities are sure to be on it.

Michigan churches are having a hard time, too, of course. When times get hard, discretionary income goes down. And churches are, well, discretionary, particularly in the guilt-free UU version where tithing isn't a religious obligation in the same way that it is in some other faiths.

One measure of rough things are in Michigan might be to look at the level of ministerial transition. Sometimes these transitions are a result of ministerial tenures happening naturally, but sometimes they're because of a need to decrease the level of ministry due to budget. Even when the transitions are not budget related, the budget may pose problems for them finding a minister quickly, so the transition may last longer.

Michigan has 22 churches that are in our district (the U.P. churches are not). Of those, 20 have ministers right now. I count ten that next year will have interim ministers, consulting ministers, or no ministers of that twenty, unless either Muskegeon has called a minister (which is possible--I'm out of touch with their situation). That's half of our churches with ministers in transition in some way. And this is a year when transitions, overall, are down, because when things are stable, ministers are wanting to hang on to their positions right now. It's not a good time to try to sell a house or for a spouse to move jobs, so that promotes a lack of transition.

Even for those of us not in transition, of course, the difficulties in our communities translates into difficulties in our churches. Chip Roush writes in his blog that the UU church in Traverse is experiencing difficulties:
Our church budget (including and especially my compensation) has been slashed;
our four-year capital campaign has been terminated (I prefer "postponed," but
others insist it's now or never); and our Michigan economy continues to
decline--and these things open us to new possibilities.

We have yet to find out what the situation in our own church will look like, as we're still waiting on pledge data before building the budget, but I know that in the #1 worst small city for jobs, it's unlikely to be amazingly good. For those who still have jobs, rumors of more companies closing are circulating, which brings fear. If you're afraid you're going to be out of work soon, that often equates to not raising a pledge, even if that fear never manifests.

So with all that doom and gloom, here's an unlikely source for pride: Eminem.



I never thought I'd be posting him on this blog! But this video, reminiscent of Mitch Albom's "The Courage of Detroit" is well worth watching.

Next Up: Planned Parenthood

12 May 2009 at 14:25

Once again, Planned Parenthood is coming under attack in the community, this time from the Columbia School District, where a group of parents have lobbied the school board to get PP removed from the sexuality education curriculum. The school board meeting was last night, and a number of supporters turned out. I don't know yet when they'll make their decision. Here's the statement I made to the board:

Hello; good evening,

I’m the Rev. Cynthia Landrum, and I am the minister of the Universalist Unitarian Church of East Liberty, a church that has been in this area for 153 years, often with members who are not only taxpayers, but parents of children in this school district, and sometimes teachers, as well.

Our church is a proud supporter of Planned Parenthood, a decision we made by congregational vote about four years ago. We are also part of a denomination that believes strongly in the importance of comprehensive sexuality education. In 1994, we passed an “Resolution of Immediate Witness” in support of comprehensive sexuality education in public schools. It asks for us, as a member congregation to advocate for:

the availability of comprehensive, objective, unbiased, up-to-date, age-appropriate, sexuality education curricula in public schools, including information about:
· the reproductive system and its functions;
· the proper use of all forms of contraception, including the option of abstinence;
· sexually transmitted diseases, their prevention and treatment;
· sexual abuse, sexual assault, sexual harassment, rape (including date rape), and incest, as well as their prevention and treatment through counseling, information, and resources;
· pregnancy counseling and options including information about organizations such as Planned Parenthood and…
that sexuality education curricula be taught by teachers specifically
trained to educate youth on the topic of sexuality education…[1]
The Unitarian Universalists, together with the United Church of Christ, have a series of curricula, called Our Whole Lives, which provides us with a way to teach comprehensive sexuality education in our churches: “The curricula are based on the Guidelines for Comprehensive Sexuality Education produced by the National Guidelines Task Force, a group of leading health, education, and sexuality professionals assembled by the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States (SIECUS).”[2]

We do this important work in our churches, but we do this hoping that we are building upon the basic sexuality education provided in schools by adding to it sexuality education that includes our beliefs and values. Moral education may rest in our hands, but basic scientific education about reproductive health rests in yours. We recognize that some people may have objection to their children learning basic reproductive and scientific information, and we support the rights of those parents to remove their children from the classroom during those occasions. However, their religious beliefs should not govern the way our school is run, or deny other students the access to important information, which is scientific in nature, not religious, and which can literally be life-saving for them.

According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, there is a gap between what parents want and what schools teach when it comes to comprehensive sexuality education. Schools are often pressured by a vocal, and deeply committed group of parents and community members to drop sexuality education, but the truth is that most parents want this type of information provided in the schools. Many do not feel equipped to cover the information at home. The study states:
Parents look to sex education to provide their children with practical skills that students and teachers report are not consistently covered. More than eight in ten parents say how to use condoms (85%) and other forms of birth control (84%), as well as how to talk about them with partners (88%), should be taught. They also want schools to address real-life issues, such as pressure to have sex (94%) and the emotional consequences of becoming sexually active (94%). Three quarters say abortion (79%) and sexual orientation (76%) should be discussed; most (74%) further specify when issues such as these do come up in the classroom they should be presented in a “balanced” way that presents different views in society.[3]
I know that I, as a parent, am not yet equipped to talk about all of this with my own child, although I hope to become better informed as she grows older. I know of only one agency in Jackson County that consistently provides the type of excellent education on sexual and reproductive health that we need. That agency is Planned Parenthood. To what extent we have achieved success in lowering teen pregnancy rates and rates of sexually transmitted diseases, they can be credited; to what extent we have not, is a measure of how much we need the valuable tools that they have to share with the community.

[1] http://www.uua.org/socialjustice/socialjustice/statements/14260.shtml
[2] http://www.uua.org/religiouseducation/curricula/ourwhole/
[3] http://www.kff.org/youthhivstds/upload/National-Study-on-Sex-Education-Reveals-Gaps-Between-What-Parents-Want-and-Schools-Teach.pdf

Lobbying with HRC

6 May 2009 at 19:08
I'm back now from the whirlwind HRC Clergy Call. I want to tell you about the experience of lobbying itself. Amongst the 300+ clergy and other participants from all 50 states, there were only two of us from Michigan, myself and a very wonderful staff person, Heather Grace, from the Faith Action Network of the American Friends Service Committee. HRC provided a staff member to go with each state team, as well. We had Cristina Finch, who grew up in Michigan.

So the three of us together went to see Senator Levin and Senator Stabenow, and we met with their staff representatives (although not the senators themselves). Levin is already a co-sponsor of the Matthew Shepard Act, which is wonderful, and we're hoping for Stabenow's co-sponsorship, as well. The meetings were upbeat and very friendly to our message. We're hoping both of them will vote for the employee non-discrimination act when it is introduced. Since the AFSC doesn't have a position yet on the Matthew Shepard Act, I talked about that one and Heather Grace talked about ENDA, and Cristina Finch backed us up with numbers, dates, and other information.

Then our team of three divided up and Heather Grace and Cristina Finch went to visit with two Michigan Congressmen together, while I went to meet with Congressman Mark Schauer, who I got to see in person after talking for a while with his staff member. The Matthew Shepard Act already went through the House successfully, with Schauer voting for it, so part of the purpose was to simply thank him for his support and tell him how much it meant to us.

ENDA is a trickier sell in our district, with the high-profile firing for being transgender of Julie Nemecek from Spring Arbor University happening in this congressional district. In fact, I was told later, this case was brought up as an argument against supporting ENDA by an congressman that Heather Grace and Cristina Finch visited. Given the touchiness in this area around this case, it would be understandable if Schauer felt he couldn't vote for ENDA. However, after our visit, I have high hopes that he will be able to. I stressed with his staff member that it's important for people in our area to understand that there is a religious exemption to ENDA, because of separation of church and state. The truth is, as a religiously affiliated university, Spring Arbor University would still be free to fire someone for being transgender, even after ENDA passes. I'm sure they know and understand that. Of course, I wish they would change their hearts about how they treat lgbt employees, but that's truly a separate issue. And much as it enables people to take actions I personally disagree with, I believe strongly in the separation of church and state. And, as a religious professional, I believe we need to be able, as a church, to choose who we hire and to hire people in keeping with our religious beliefs. I wouldn't want to have to hire someone for religious education director who believes lgbt people are sinners and should be stoned to death right now, even if he or she was the most qualified applicant, after all!

Why This Is Important

5 May 2009 at 13:02
Today is the lobbying day with the HRC Clergy Call. We're spending the morning in lobbying training. As I sat down in the bench marked "Michigan," I introduced myself to a man standing in the aisle from South Carolina. He told me about his step-son, Sean William Kennedy. Sean was in his twenties when he was killed in an anti-gay hate crime. His murderer got a very short jail sentence, cut shorter because hr earned his GED.

Some people don't believe hate crime legislation is necessary, because it's already covered by other laws. I invite them to learn about Sean: http://www.seanslastwish.org. And another quick answer... This federal legislation kicks in when local law enforcement doesn't adequately prosecute, for example because of prejudice.

Why Do We Need the T?

4 May 2009 at 17:44
Why do we need the T in lgbt? That was the question we started with at the HRC clergy call today. And well we should examine this. One of the hard truths being told here is that HRC hasn't always been a strong advocate for transgender people. Another hard truth is that it's still not always easy to be transgender in Uu congregations, even "Welcoming" ones. This is still our cutting edge.

One answer is that transgender people help us to break out of the tired question about whether or not sexuality is a choice, and move us to a question about the societal construction of gender, breaking us out of binay paradigms.

One speaker pointed out how many places where sexual orientaion is becoming a protected status, where gender expression is not. Even repealing"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" will not protect a transgender person in the army. And in Jackson County, we know well how easy it is to fire someone for being transgender.m

HRC Clergy Call 2009

4 May 2009 at 13:51
My morning of the HRC Clergy Call began with waking up in the wonderful home of UU minister Ginger Luke, who was kindly hosting six ministers coming to clergy call. She kindly took us in groups to the Metro station. Cynthia Cain, from Lexington, KY, and I bravely started out, but our train broke down at Dupont Circle. Because of the crush trying to get in the already-full trains, we decided to go out (in thr rain) and try to hail a cab. Two unsuccessful blocks later, Cynthia went into the Peruvian embassey and asked for help. Thet pointed us to a hotel at the corner--The Beacon, if you can believe it! I looked over to the Beacon and atRTED LAUGHING. Right across the street was the HRC headquarters! We went in from the rain, and the friendly receptionist called a cab for us. We arrived at the beautiful Calvary Baptist Church just in time to hear the end of Bishop Gene Robinson's kmeynote address. It's so good to be here, in a room full of clergy of different faiths, who all celebrate diversity and support our lgbt brothers and sisters.

Yes, We Need a Giant Umbrella

22 April 2009 at 20:54
Thank goodness for parody. This video, for example (found at James Ishmael Ford's blog) from Funny or Die, does a nice job at poking fun at NAM's "Gathering Storm" commercial, which perpetuates just-plain-lies about same-sex marriage:


If you haven't seen the original ad that this parodies, go see it on youtube here. There's also a very nice parody by Stephen Colbert.

Meanwhile, if you're done watching videos I just want to say that I'm very excited about going to the HRC Clergy Call in a couple of weeks. I made the decision to go today, and am looking forward to meeting up with other UU ministers who attend, as well as my elected representatives. This is my first ever lobbying trip to DC (and I've never attended a march on the Mall, either), so it's pretty exciting in that regard.

A sad sign of the economy, related to this however: the UUA's continuing education fund for ministers has dried up for the year. *sigh*

After Easter

16 April 2009 at 17:40
The Religious Education Committee asked me last night to talk with the teen group on a Sunday I'm not preaching. The teen group has been studying Jesus this year, and their curriculum goes up through crucifixion and resurrection, but their question is: how did we get here (modern Christianity) from there (Easter morning)?

It's an excellent question, and one that many people in our society have never bothered to consider. The (mis)understanding that, I think, many fundamentalist Christians hold is that the disciples immediately sat down and wrote out the story and bound it together. The words they wrote were either dictated by God or somehow inspired, endorsed, or edited by God. That Bible was handed down through the generations (with each translation being similarly divinely edited), and we have it in exactly that form today.

Nothing, of course, could be further from what those who study the historical Jesus believe to be the truth. Of course, there are different schools of thought as to what was exactly the case, but those who search for the historical truth rather than looking to bend history to match a preassumptions, come to some very different conclusions.

Here's what I've come to understand: The gospels were not written by the disciples of Jesus. The canonical gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke & John) were only some gospels among many. They won out to be canonized (put in our Bible) because they were popular, and, particularly, favorites of those in power. Mark is the earliest gospel, and the others used Mark as a source, as well as a sayings gospel we call "Q" for "quelle" or "source." Mark was written around 70 CE (AD). The latest gospel of the four New Testament ones is John, which is not one of the synoptic gospels. John, therefore, I believe, is less reliable. The much of the material in John is not found elsewhere. John may be as late as 100 CE. The process of deciding which books went in the Bible was not divinely inspired. Rather, it was a political process. There's no reason to believe that these texts have particular divine inspiration or religious import more than any of the other early Christian writings.

All this leads me to believe that there is no reason, based on what we know of how the Bible was created and put together, to accept any sort of literal understanding of the Bible as the word of God and inerrant. Rather, they are particularly human writings which contain some spiritual insight, but which are also full of contradiction and error. However, unlike what some people I've encountered believe, I do believe that there is reasonable proof that Jesus lived and was crucified. There are a couple of texts which are not from the Bible which corroborate this.

So that's how I see it... at least in a very brief way. Now, all I have to do is figure out how to talk about all of this 2000 years of history to 6-12 graders in 45 minutes or less without being incredibly dull.

Vermont & Iowa

9 April 2009 at 15:18
Just wanted to give a brief shout of joy for the decisions to legalize same-sex marriage in Iowa and Vermont. I'm particularly thrilled about Iowa, as it's nice to finally have one state in the Midwest that promotes equality and love. We're not a complete wasteland here in the Midwest, despite what many of my New Englander friends seemed to think! :) And bravo to those UUs, clergy and lay, who worked tirelessly in both states, I am sure. Congratulations!

More on Church Growth--Finally

9 April 2009 at 14:28
My apologies for getting so behind on this. I promised you a post last week, and I didn't post at all last week. At long last, now, here it is, my further thoughts on church growth.

Red Sphynx said:

But I look around my metro area and see at least 4 UU congregations that are dying. Five years ago, all five had part time ministers. Now none of them do.

Do you recommend some readings or some wisdom for turning the tide in those congregations?
Red Sphynx, I'm not a growth consultant, and I hesitate to comment on any particular church's situation. And having read lots of growth literature and gone to dozens of workshops, I'm not sure that any of them really have helped me, personally, turn growth around in any congregation. So, no, sorry, I have no advice to give you, sadly. I'm somewhat familiar with some Texas congregations, having served in Houston for half a year, but that was already seven years ago. At that time, Jonalu Johnstone was the Growth Consultant for the district, and she was fabulous. I'm not sure from your district's webpage who is doing that work now, but I would suggest turning there for help. The district usually is the best place to turn for growth help, in my own experience.

Hugh asks about the city size of congregations in relationship to church growth and then asks:

How much does location affect the size of our congregation?
Good question, Hugh, and since I'm obviously more familiar with our congregation. Yes, obviously the local population size is a limiter, and I've never heard a good solid number of what percentage of a population we can expect to grow to. When our own church got numbers as part of an extension ministry training that a previous minister went to, the numbers suggested there were a lot of potential UUs in the area, and we could be thousands large potentially. However, no UU church in any geographic area has ever measured up to those numbers from that agency, as far as I know.

We have a number of limitations on our possible growth at our congregation:
  • Size of the local population (Jackson County: 158442)
  • Size of sanctuary (Full capacity, about 100)
  • Size of parking lot (Unknown number of spaces, but overflowing into cemeteries when sanctuary is packed)
  • Size of religious education space (already we're using the social hall)
  • Location (outside of the city, not on the main highway)
  • Natural Plateau Points (between 50 and 70 in worship is a natural plateau point between family and pastoral sized churches--see The In-Between Church)
  • Staff (to be staffed for growth we would probably need an administrative assistant, but I don't have the literature on that one to be sure)
To start with the one I've done the most analysis of, let's analyze sanctuary size. Now, conventional wisdom would say we have a lot of space to grow there. We're not packed in at all, right? However, our pew length is 118 inches, and we have 17 pews. According to Raising the Roof, seating area per person is 30-36 inches. If that pew were two inches longer, so let's round up, and going with 30 inches per person, that's four people per pew. And, in reality, some pews have more people sittting in them, and some fewer--people will sit closer to people they know, but further from ones they don't know or aren't family with. At any rate, that gives us capacity for 68 people to sit comfortably in the sanctuary--including the front row. (If you omit the first row on each side, which, let's face it, nobody sits in, our capacity is 60 right there.) Now, the literature, as I understand it, says a church will plateau at 80% of comfortable capacity. 80% of comfortable capacity for our sanctuary is 54.4 people. In 2006, which is when I did this analysis, our average weekly attendance, adults and children, was 54.14, or 79.6% of comfortable capacity. So are we at a plateau? You betcha. Has anything changed? Not really. Our average attendance fluctuates slightly, but it's still around that number.

So we do have a number of space-related growth hurdles to overcome. But then there's the bigger question of if we had the ideal space, and a willingness to grow, would Jackson sustain a larger church size? That's the answer I'm not sure on. We are a smaller city (seemingly getting smaller every day right now), and a fairly conservative one. How many potential UUs are in Jackson? I just don't know.

What I do know is this: there are more potential UUs out there in Jackson. We haven't reached the limit yet. And we have an important and timely message to share with our area and the world. More people than have been in decades are unchurched. The number of people in our country who don't describe themselves as Christian is growing. The number of people looking for something inclusive of racial and ethnic diversity, gay and straight identities, and multiple theologies, is growing. So I believe despite any and all obstacles, UUism can grow and ought to grow. Jackson needs us to grow. Now we just have to figure out how to make it happen.

Let Justice Roll Down Like Waters

21 March 2009 at 17:53
I missed my regular blog post last week, and I'm sort of cheating this week. Meanwhile, thank you readers, for some really excellent comments and questions on the subject of church growth. I'll return to that subject soon. Next week I'm on vacation and may not post, but if not, I'm committing to returning to the subject of church growth the following week. Meanwhile, this week I'm addressing the UUSC's "Justice Sunday" in worship, and thought this blog would be a good place to post this video on the subject.

Growth

5 March 2009 at 22:14
Like every small church, we spend a fair amount of time talking about growth, and have for years... and have not grown. We've gone to growth workshops, brought in growth consultants, sermonized and read on growth... and have not grown. We are not, at the moment, a breakthrough congregation. And yet... and yet...

There is still hope, there is still trying, there is still desire for growth.

We have our obstacles. We are at a natural plateau in size, where to grow we would have to move out of family style church and into the next size group: pastoral. We have a small sanctuary, small parking lot, and small religious education spaces, each of which is a limiting factor on growth. We're in a rural location in a community that may not have much potential for growth.

The Rev. Peter Morales, one of the candidates for president of the UUA, once said this:
Why does a movement that says it wants to grow and that has hundreds of thousands of people ready to join it stay so small?
What are the barriers between us and the future we say we want? What can we do to make that future of vital, welcoming, growing churches a reality?
The answer is religion. Really.
Religion. And more specifically, religious community. We have tried all kinds of things, mostly to little or no avail. Ironically, and tragically, we have never tried religion as a growth strategy.

Interesting perspective, yes?

When someone asks you what Unitarian Universalists believe, do you ever answer, "We don't believe anything. You can believe anything you want."? Have you ever described us as a place only of seekers, but not a place where what we seek is found?

We do have a religion. Maybe it's time to try it as a growth strategy. I do believe we have a message that our (yes, conservative, small) city is longing for. I do believe we have a saving message for the world. I wouldn't be devoting my life to this otherwise.

A board member told me recently that she used to feel compelled to share Unitarian Universalism with everyone, becuase it was so important, but now that the message is being spread in so many other ways in our society, it has become less urgent. This same member is responsible for more new members coming to our church than just about any other member.

I don't want her to lose that message. There is still something about Unitarian Universalism that is unique, that is special, that is important to be shared. Yes, our new president used inclusive religious language in his inauguration address; yes, many Christian churches are becoming welcoming; yes, there is a new excitement among political progressives and religious liberals.

But there is still something we have to give our community and the world.

Stay tuned. I'm not done talking about this yet.

Lent & Ash Wednesday

26 February 2009 at 22:14
Rev. Sean over at his "ministrare" blog had a very beautiful post about Ash Wednesday. As we enter Lent, I have to confess something: Lent has always mystified me.

I can remember as a child, that I had friends who observed Lent, and my response was always confusion then. I didn't know what it was, what it symbolized, what one did and why, what it meant. Even when children tried to explain it to me, I just reacted with a sort of deep confusion: why would anyone do that?

I know the answers to those things now, but some of the mystery still surrounds it. If I was asked to do an Ash Wednesday service now, my response would be as much confusion as I experienced during my hospital chaplaincy during seminary when I was asked to give communion to a Catholic. I don't know the words, the order, the ritual. I think any Ash Wednesday service I did would be hollow and fake. For me, perhaps, it would be cultural borrowing to attempt such a thing. One could say I have the credentials, being raised by Christians, being baptized a Christian, yet for me it is so much more foreign than a Passover seder, for example. I have never been to an Ash Wednesday service, for starters.

Coming to this church, several UUs told me that they observe Lent. It's worth noting that all of them are not Christian UUs, either. And I suppose I can understand the spiritual purpose of giving something up for a period, particularly something one considers a vice or an indulgence. However, I'm personally more likely to do it in some other format or at some other time than in conjunction with this holiday that I just feel I have absolutely no connection to.

For those of you observing Lent, my blessings with you on that spiritual journey. As for myself, my spiritual practice is likely to continue to take other forms.

Love in the Face of Hate Crimes

17 February 2009 at 21:00
Jim David Adkisson pleaded guilty last week for the crime of shooting and killing two people during the Sunday worship service at the Tennessee Valley UU Church last July. The letter/manifesto he wrote and left in his car prior to the shooting has been released by the press. Before you read it or read further here, be aware that it is has strong negative and prejudicial langugage, as well as profanity. It can be read in full here. On the first page, he talks about his inability to get a job, and his hatred of liberals. He says, "The worst problem America faces today is Liberalism. They have dumbed down education, they have defined deviancy down. Liberals have attacked every major institution that made America great. From the Boy Scouts to the military, from education to Religion."

On the second page, Adkisson attacks Unitarian Universalists in particular, under a heading "The Unitarian Universalist Church," saying:

It isn't a church, it's a cult. They don't even believe in God. They worship the God of secularism. These sick people aren't Liberals, they're Ultra-Liberals. This is a collection of sicko's, weirdo's, & homo's. The UU church is the Fountainhead, the veritable wellspring of anti-American organizations like Moveon.org, Code Pink, and
other anti-American groups. Those people are absolute Hypocrits. They embrace every pervert that comes down the pike, but if they find out your a conservative, they absolutely Hate you. I know, I experienced it.
Some of that language you may find offensive; what follows was even more so, so I am not reprinting it here. And then, on the third page is a section titled "Know This If Nothing Else" with three itemized items: I. This was a hate Crime, II. This was a Political Protest, and III. This was a symbolic killing. Each one is elaborated on. The fourth page has a "Conclusion," and is signed by Adkisson. In the conclusion, he says to tell the police officer who killed him a message, so it's clear that he didn't believe he'd live after this intended killing spree. As he talks about wanting to kill many more people than he did, it's clear that his intention was to kill more than he was able to, thanks to the quick-witted congregation members at TVUUC.

I'm not sure what I make of all of this, except that when I read it I experience profound sadness and confusion. Why does a message of love and inclusion anger and outrage some people so much?

Something in me was tempted to address this claim Adkisson made, that people in UU churches hated him for being a conservative. Sure, there are growing areas each UU church has in how to be more welcoming and tolerant, but I think, rather, that it is all that he knew and could understand at that point was hate. The message we need to take from this is not the message about how we respond to conservatism in our congregations. That's a message for another day.

What I can say is that I have great admiration for the way TVUUC has responded, and, in particular, the graceful public presence of Rev. Chris Buice. His Newsweek article, if you missed it, was excellent. In it, he concludes:
Members of my congregation have been hurt. But we have also been healed by the feeling that there is a love greater than our theological differences, a compassion that is not limited by the boundaries of any creed. I firmly believe, now more than ever, that love is stronger than death. Love is more powerful than hate.

Amen to that. Adkisson said we don't beleive in God. Yet, on our altar is written, "God is love." In the face of such hatred and violence, it would be easy to turn to hatred ourselves--to really hate conservatives as Adkisson alleges we do. But in times like these, more than any others, we must turn to the root of our faith and practice what we preach, "live our religion," as the closing song at our church goes. And our religion is love.

More on the "Recession"

10 February 2009 at 18:36
Here in Jackson, it hasn't looked good lately. Some February developments:

Melling Tool is laying off 28 employees.
From a recent CitPat article:
• Gerdau Mac Steel has laid off 300 of 380 workers indefinitely.
• Michigan Automotive Compressor Inc. has offered buyouts to nearly all of its 740
workers.
• TAC Inc. has offered buyouts to 70 of 590 employees and gone to a
four-day week.
• CertainTeed has temporarily laid off 80 of 250 workers.
• Jackson-based Sparton Corp. has cut its workforce of 1,000 by 60.
Michigan Automotive Compressor is also offering buyouts.
Multiple local restaurants have reduced busing staff.
Bullinger's Pub is closing.

That's what February in Jackson has looked like, so far.

The good news, if you can call it that, is that some area churches are showing increased attendance. We had a packed house on Sunday for our guest speaker on Darfur. This is a good time as a church organization to think about what our saving message is, what our role in the community is, and how each of us can minister in this community.

Signs of the Times

4 February 2009 at 20:09
Here in Michigan, we're about as hard-hit as it gets with this recession, and in our county here in Jackson, we're worse off than state average in terms of unemployment, despite our proximity to the employment star of the state, Ann Arbor. Unemployment in Jackson, Michigan, reached 11% in December. Meanwhile, our local community is buzzing over the news of a pay raise for Jackson Community College President Dan Phelan. It was probably a necessary move for the college, because, like with churches, the search process can be expensive and the pay is usually increased to move up to going rates for the new hire. It comes as a hard pill for the community to swallow, however, in the same week as the unemployment rate was announced and while faculty (and adjuncts like myself) have no contract. It makes the college board look out-of-touch with the living reality of its students, faculty, staff, and the community that surrounds and supports it. Personally, I think the board's decision was probably sound, but, unfortunately, really poor timing and unfortunate circumstances makes it look unseemly.

It's a good model to keep in mind for our churches and association, this balancing of sometimes necessary increases versus keeping in touch with our community. Our UUA board has voted to hold our dues steady for next year, rather than executing the planned increase. The Heartland District Board is predicted to do the same at their February meeting. Of course, they're also predicting revenue drops, as more and more churches fail to live up to their fair share dues. This means that they're going to have to make cuts in services, and possibly in jobs, in the long run. It's not what we want from our association and district, to have to cut what they can provide. However, a dues increase, even while planned, would be hard for our churches to manage, too. The association and denomination have chosen the harder route, but one which gives them their community's good will. Let's all try to remember that if our favorite thing is something to fall under the ax.

Individual churches will need to make the same choices. Can our members afford to pay more to cover the always increasing costs of doing business and giving small raises to cover our staff's increased cost of living, or will we also, like the UUA and Heartland District, be looking for ways to cut? One presumes it'll probably be the latter with many churches, particularly ones like ours in economically depressed regions.

Needless to say, there are some tough cuts being made out there at denominational, district, and individual church levels. No doubt we will have some hard decisions to make, as well. Over at Philocrites' blog, he writes about how one of the largest churches in our association, in a state with 9% unemployment is handling it: they're closing their doors for the month of July.

Hard times mean hard decisions. I only hope we can all be as open to thinking outside the box and coming up with creative, although difficult, decisions like Portland.

Small Churches

31 January 2009 at 19:30
I just returned from a minister's retreat. While we were there, we broke into small groups, and I met with a group of other ministers of small churches. This was an "appreciative inquiry" retreat, so we focused on what the positive things about being ministers of small churches are, and what skills and resources we bring to our larger group. We came up with a wonderful, appreciative list. I don't want to share it with you, because I'm not sure of the confidentiality rules around that, but I want to ask any readers out there to respond with the strengths, as they see them, of small churches. It's time to appreciate ourselves!

Small Churches

29 January 2009 at 15:36
At the Heartland UU Minister's Association meeting, a few of us met in a small group to talk about being ministers in small churches. We developed a list of what strengths we bring to the larger group of UU ministers. This same list could also be a list of the strengths that small UU churches bring to the UUA. As my memory serves, these are some things we mentioned:



  • We know how to work collaboratively, because we've had to.

  • We know about

  • We have a proportionally huge impact in our communities, for those small UU churches in small towns.

What You Didn't See

21 January 2009 at 03:21
Following the protests against Rev. Rick Warren delivering the invocation at Obama's inauguration, Bishop Gene Robinson, the openly gay Episcopal bishop, was asked to give an invocation at a pre-inauguration event. Well, unfortunately, it had much less coverage. First of all, the event was on HBO, which not everyone has access to. But worse than that, the invocation was cut from HBO's coverage, so no one got to see it then. HBO, by way of apology, played it the next day during the pre-inauguration time, and I think it was played on the screens on the mall in DC. But for the rest of us, we pretty much had to go hunting to actually see it. So, in case you haven't, here is his very worthy invocation.

Principles Proposal Final

10 January 2009 at 18:32
The Commission on Appraisal put forward a draft proposal for revision of the UU principles that I wrote about here and then here and here. Having heard all the feedback sent to them on this draft proposal, they've now issued their final proposal. A fine commentary on how the questions raised by the cultural misappropriation section are left unanswered is given by James Ford at Monkeymind here, and so I'll just say I agree with his analysis of this, and say that combined with the passage that states, "When we fall short of living up to this covenant, we will begin again in love, repair the relationship, and recommit to the promises we have made" under the C-23 "Principles" section, but which would seem to apply to the whole Article II "Covenant" section under which the sources fall as well, it seems to propose that there actually be a prescribed process for addressing "misuse of cultural and religious practices" that is troublesome given the lack of clarity around what constitutes "misuse" that I spoke about in my earlier posts.

I don't want to sound like an extremist, but I also want to draw attention to a passage in the proposed principles that concerns me, especially when added to the above concerns. There is a slight but significant change in our last prinicple. The new proposed wording is, "Reverence for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part. " The current priniple is, "Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part." One little word, "Respect" has been changed to "Reverence." What does this mean?

Respect: (first two definitions were not the one we're talking about)

3. esteem for or a sense of the worth or excellence of a person, a personal quality or ability, or something considered as a manifestation of a personal quality or ability: I have great respect for her judgment.
4. deference to a right, privilege, privileged position, or someone or something considered to have certain rights or privileges; proper acceptance or courtesy; acknowledgment: respect for a suspect's right to counsel; to show respect for the flag; respect for the elderly.
5. the condition of being esteemed or honored: to be held in respect.

Reverence: (again some definitions not useful are omitted)

1. (noun) a feeling or attitude of deep respect tinged with awe; veneration.
2. (noun) the outward manifestation of this feeling: to pay reverence.
3. (noun) a gesture indicative of deep respect; an obeisance, bow, or curtsy.
6. (verb) to regard or treat with reverence; venerate: One should reverence God and His laws.

My personal feeling about this word change is that it brings a creedal nature into the principles that was not there before. While I may personally believe in revereance for the interdependent web, I would oppose this bringing of veneration into our princples. If the meaning of reverence desired is "deep respect," I would go that far but change it to "deep respect" rather than "reverence." I know "reverence" is a particular point of interest for us, and that this clearly goes back to UUA President Bill Sinkford's call for a language of reverence, begun with his 2003 sermon "The Language of Faith" in which he specifically points to the principles as devoid of this language of reverence: "So I went and reread the Principles and Purposes. I know, I know…I'm supposed to know these by heart. But as I re-read them, I realized that we have in our Principles an affirmation of our faith which uses not one single piece of religious language. Not one. Not even one word that would be considered traditionally religious. And that is a wonderment to me; I wonder whether this kind of language can adequately capture who we are and what we're about."

Problem: lack of religious language in principles. Solution: add the word "reverence." Simple? No.

The principles are not meant to serve this kind of role. As Sinkford says, "They frame a broad ethic, but not a theology." Well, that's good. We don't want them to form a theology. They're designed to be an ethic. Making them into a theology makes them into just what people warn about who would like to see us get rid of them altogether: a creed. Yes, if we all "covenant" together to affirm and promote a particular theology, then, well, yes, it starts to become a creedal test for our non-creedal faith.

So, hmm... We've brought theology into the principles, covenanted to uphold them, and then imposed a punishment/correction for those who fail to live up to the principles? And this isn't a creedal religion?

Creed:

1. any system, doctrine, or formula of religious belief, as of a denomination.
2. any system or codification of belief or of opinion.
3. an authoritative, formulated statement of the chief articles of Christian belief, as the Apostles' Creed, the Nicene Creed, or the Athanasian Creed.

Yup. Check. This sounds like one to me.

Rick Warren/Obama Inaguration

19 December 2008 at 18:43
People are up in arms about Obama's choice for Rick Warren of Purpose Driven Life fame being picked to give the invocation at the inaguration. Seems Rick Warren has made some anti-gay statements. See his remarks for yourself on the controversial Proposition 8 revoking same-sex marriage in California:



I'm disappointed in Obama's choice. Let me say that first. But I'm not surprised. Obama has never come out in favor of same-sex marriage. Obama wants to cozy up to evangelicals still. Obama is still fighting rumors that he's not Christian. Really, given the options of who the famous evangelical pastors are, he probably picked the best of the bunch, and he has some history with Rick Warren. He picked a liberal, pro-same-sex marriage pastor for the benediction, and that will be the final word. One could argue that this is balanced, and that the country is really divided on the issue of same-sex marriage, and to use to pro-lgbt pastors would be too unbalanced for Obama.

What do I wish had been the case? That's a different story. I happen to disagree with that point of view that says this is necessary for balance. I don't believe in giving an equal amount of my own time to hate to balance out the time I give to love. And it's impossible through two religious speakers to represent all Americans, so the idea that this balances out this one particular view ignores all the other things that it presents out-of-balance.

But more than being disappointed at an anti-gay pick, I'm disappointed in the exclusively Christian picks of the religious professionals in the inaguration. Rick Warren not only believes that lgbt people shouldn't be allowed to marry in same-sex relationships, he also thinks Jesus is the only path to salvation, and the rest of us go to Hell. That doesn't represent all Americans, either. I would've loved to see one Christian and one from any other religion (or representing the non-religious--now there's an idea!). Now that would be balance I could get behind.

Singing Christmas Carols in Church

17 December 2008 at 19:12
A popular Christmas carol parody by Christopher Gist Raible goes like this:

Gods rest ye, Unitarians, let nothing you dismay;
Remember there's no evidence there was a Christmas Day;
When Christ was born is just not known, no matter what they say,
O, Tidings of reason and fact, reason and fact,
Glad tidings of reason and fact.

It's in good humor and it points to something very real about how we approach Christmas as a religion. For example, our UU hymnal changes a lot of words to Christmas carols. One example is "Joy to the World," which, in our hymnal, reads:

Joy to the world!
The word is come:
let earth with praises ring.

A far cry from:

Joy to the world!
The Lord is come:
let earth receive her King.

There are strong reasons for this change, obviously. Unitarians don't believe that Jesus was the Lord or King. That's point one. The second point is that our hymnal did away with a lot of heirarchical language in reference to God. We don't use the whole monarchy metaphor for God.

Yet, of course, were I to put the song in our service with just a hymnal number, the majority of people in our congregation would still sing right over those words: The Lord is come. Why?

The easy answer is tradition. At Christmas time, particularly, people seem opposed to changing traditional words in songs even for sound theological reasons. We'd rather be hypocrits to our beliefs than have our nostalgic Christmas interrupted by the jarring words of modernity. I say we, because I'm no exception. I'd rather sing "O Holy Night"
O holy night! The stars are brightly shining,
It is the night of our dear Saviour's birth.
Long lay the world in sin and error pining,
'Til He appear'd and the soul felt its worth.
A thrill of hope the weary world rejoices,
For yonder breaks a new and glorious morn.
Fall on your knees! O, hear the angels' voices!
O night divine, O night when Christ was born;
O night divine, O night, O night Divine.

with all its sin and Saviors and angels than sing some sanitized version that strips it of the very majesty that I'm theologically opposed to yet make this song what I love.

But this is a bit hypocritical of me to want the old words. All old words were one time new. And, after all, the words I know to "O Holy Night" are not the original words, either. The original words were in French, and every time songs are translated they lose some of their original meaning in order to fit the verse into the song.

And, of course, even in English songs, there are words that get changed. For example, Lydia Marie Child's song:

Over the river, and through the wood,
To Grandfather's house we go;
The horse knows the way to carry the sleigh
through the white and drifted snow.
I don't know about you, but we always sang it as Grandmother's house. That's apparently the more common version, but not the original. And I know at least one grandfather who feels slighted by the change.

I understand this longing for the old words. I feel it, too. And yet, if we never give the new words a chance, they will never catch hold. And with songs in our hymnal that aren't Christmas carols, I'm more familiar with the new words than the old. And I beleive this is consistent with hymnody. Words change, because those hymns aren't in there just because we love them; they're in there because they're consistent with our religious beliefs. And for the next generation, the UU words will be their traditional songs. For me, our UU words to "Abide with Me" are the only ones I know:

Abide with me, fast falls the eventide;
The darkness deepens; still with me abide.

Until I look up on Wikipedia that it was:

Abide with me; fast falls the eventide;
The darkness deepens; Lord with me abide.

And, ultimately, I think that's a good thing. Maybe this year I'll try singing "Joy to the world! The word is come."

If you haven't seen this...

9 December 2008 at 18:37
You absolutely must. Funniest video ever.

Prop 8: The Musical

Many of you have already seen it, I'm sure. But I got behind while celebrating "Chalica." Sorry I couldn't embed it, but it was coming out too large to be seen in the blogger format, so I'll have to conquer that one another day.

7 Principles in 7 Days: Part Seven

7 December 2008 at 05:44
In honor of the somewhat newly created, and not yet fully embraced, holiday "Chalica," I'm doing a series of posts on the Seven Principles this week. This is my post for Sunday.

Day Seven: Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.

Today's donation goes to the World Wildlife Fund, in honor of my brother-in-law, Cseh Peter.

It's been an interesting week, focusing on the principles. I've enjoyed it, the opportunity to spend a piece of each day reflecting on my faith and how to practice it. It was harder than I expected, too, to think about and write about each principle, and think about how to honor it best.

In the end, I think it's changed my relationship with Christmas and the rest of these December holidays, too. Finally I have taken my gift-giving and connected it to what I believe, in a way that is relevant for me, in this society, rather than honoring Jesus, a long-ago teacher. Although I believe he is still important and relevant, he is not my savior. I find "salvation by character," as 19th century Unitarian James Freeman Clark put it. This was an opportunity to better my character, in that search for living my religion. I'm glad I discovered Chalica.

7 Principles in 7 Days: Part Six

6 December 2008 at 19:49
In honor of the somewhat newly created, and not yet fully embraced, holiday "Chalica," I'm doing a series of posts on the Seven Principles this week. This is my post for Saturday.

Day Six: The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all.

This is one of the largest principles, with arms to cover the whole world. Peace is, after all, the ultimate goal. All the other things--justice, liberty, truth, equity, compassion, inherent worth and dignity, respect for the interdependent web, the democratic process--all these other elements of our principles are steps to peace or results of it. If we can have peace, I think we can have the whole lot of them. It's inconcievable that we might achieve true peace without justice, for example.

How do we get there? My thoughts turn first to Maya Angelou, whose poem "Amazing Peace" I have used at Christmas Eve for the last few years:

Maya Angelou recites her Christmas poem
Maya Angelou recites her Christmas poem


A brief excerpt:

We, Angels and Mortals, Believers and Nonbelievers,
Look heavenward and speak the word aloud.
Peace. We look at each other, then into ourselves,
And we say without shyness or apology or hesitation:

Peace, My Brother.

Peace, My Sister.

"Peace, My Soul.


Today's donation is in honor of my sister, Carrie Landrum, a tireless advocate for peace. It goes to the Peace Alliance.

7 Principles in 7 Days: Part Five

6 December 2008 at 03:24
In honor of the somewhat newly created, and not yet fully embraced, holiday "Chalica," I'm doing a series of posts on the Seven Principles this week. This is my post for Friday.

Day Five: The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large.

This year being such an exciting election year, I feel like I've already reflected and written extensively on the democratic process. That being the case, let me point you to some other great words on democracy and this past election that inspired me.

Jim Wallis - "My Personal 'Faith Priorities' for This Election"

Forrest Church - "Religion and the Body Politic"

Where we struggle with democracy is when the vote goes against what we wanted, of course, and the results of a vote can easily go against one of our other principles. However, we must remain true to the idea of democracy, even when we disagree with the results of it.

I'm not going to write more tonight on the principle, but I do want to say that I'm making a donation today to the ACLU in honor of my father, who has often boasted proudly of being a card-carrying member of the ACLU and taught me to love liberty and democracy.

7 Principles in 7 Days: Part Four

5 December 2008 at 04:50
In honor of the created holiday "Chalica," I'm doing a series of posts on the Seven Principles this week. This is my late night post for Thursday.

Day Four: A free and responsible search for truth and meaning.

Tonight we had our community forum/outreach committee meeting. This is the principle we hold before us on the committee the most as we plan our forums. It's also a principle near and dear to my heart. Right now, in particular, I'm trying to instill this principle in others through teaching at the community college.

I was raised with education as a primary value. I come from a long line of educators, with two parents with education degrees, and three out of four grandparents who worked in education. In my family, my husband and I both teach college, as well as my father. My mother and one sister work for the University of Michigan, and one brother-in-law for Michigan State University. My other sister teaches in Detroit public schools, and my other brother-in-law is a student at Wayne State University. You could say we're all in education in one way or another. Clearly this value goes deep in my family.

When I'm teaching, I'm aware that it's not just about conveying certain facts. It's also about conveying a love for knowledge.

In our religion, our search goes beyond the search for knowledge, although it includes that. It also includes this search for meaning. We take the facts and interpret, look for the deeper answers to the deeper questions. I'm proud to be part of a questioning, searching church.

In honor of my sister, Cathy Schrock, and her many years of promoting education in one of the most difficult of settings, todays donation is to National Head Start.

7 Principles in 7 Days: Part Three

4 December 2008 at 05:54
In honor of the created holiday "Chalica," I'm doing a series of posts on the Seven Principles this week. This is my post for Wednesday, although since it's after midnight it is actually Thursday. Late board meeting--what can I say?

Day Three: Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations.

One of the things that I love about our faith is that it doesn't stand still. We're always open to new revelation, always moving forward.

One of the most tragic and moving events of this year for Unitarian Universalists was the shooting at the Tennessee Valley UU Church in Knoxville. One of the things we saw in the aftermath of the event was the third principle in action. The church community responded with grace, dignity, and compassion. And churches all across the community there responded to them. And churches all across the nation responded.

At our church, one member said to me after our vigil how important it was that we had lit a candle not only for the victims, but for the shooter. This is a measure of our faith, that we continue to honor his worth and dignity even in the wake of a tragedy of his making.

Our churches need to be places where we can continue this spiritual growth, even during the hard times, especially during the hard times. Today my donation goes to the Unitarian Universalist Trauma Response Ministry, given in my husband's honor. He's someone I know who has endured a lot in life, and rather than close off his search in response to it, rather than grasp for easy answers, it sent him searching deeper, through Christianity and Paganism, until he found a home in Unitarian Universalism. And, of course, the search is never done.

7 Principles in 7 Days: Part Two

3 December 2008 at 02:43
In honor of the created holiday "Chalica," I'm doing a series of posts on the Seven Principles this week.

Day Two: Justice, equity, and compassion in human relations.

Yesterday I wrote about LBGT issues, and so I won't repeat that today, although there are a lot of justice and equity issues there. However, the agency I'm donating to today is the Human Rights Commission. This donation is in honor of my mother, who has been a consistent advocate for LGBT rights for many years, in church, educational, and workplace settings, and who is an inspiration to me.

But to talk some more about justice, equity, and compassion....

This has been a year when we've talked a lot about equity at our church, particularly about the lack of equity caused by racism. And racism has been a subject in the news a lot this year, too. Obama's winning the presidency is, admittedly, a huge triumph, and a large step towards equity in our society. People are talking about Obama as a "post-racial" figure and this as a post-racial society.

But we're not there yet. In gaining our first African American president, we lose our currently only African American senator. When McCain called him "that one," it almost sounded like there could only be one.

So yes, we're not there yet. And our community, in paricular, lags behind. It's one of the reasons that Jackson Justice Watch was formed here following our commUnity forUm on racism in Jackson. There was a definite sense at that forum that justice was not being given equally to black and white in this community. I don't know what the Jackson Justice Watch has found in that regard, but I do know that lack of equity exists in other areas. One only has to drive a few blocks from my house towards the east to watch how as the poverty level increases, so does the percentage of African Americans in the area. It's true everywhere across this nation.

Meanwhile, there was also incredible sexism in the campaign for the presidency. Hillary Clinton saw it. Sarah Palin saw it, too. And lest we think we're immune as UUs, there's talk about racism and sexism in the UUA presidential campaign season, too, in this blog post by Suzie at "Echidne of the Snakes" I found cited by the Interdendent Web. Suzie points, and rightly, I think, to the existence of acts of domestic violence against women among members of our congregations as evidence that "there are liberal men who have such twisted feelings about women that they brutalize them" and asks:
Shouldn’t we be taking “authentic steps of transformation” to stop domestic violence and other forms of abuse and discrimination among our members?
Following our second principle means doing just that. But how? Our congregation has voted to support the Aware Shelter. It's one of the agencies we routinely pick for our quarterly collection. Members have talked passionately about how important it is that we support them. But there's not much that we've done lately, other than talk and a once-a-year basket. It's time to reaffirm our connection to them and do something deeper. I once went to them and asked to volunteer on a regular basis, but found that they only had the training for new volunteers twice a year, and I had just missed it. Perhaps it's time to ask again.

To return to the principle, it's interesting to me that our principle combines justice, equity, and compassion. I think compassion is the key. Too often I hear a lack of compassion for others, a lack of empathy. We harden our hearts against injustice, against the lack of equity. We're in survival mode. It was true before the economy started heading south, even. Too often we act like scavengers in a scarcity model. It's why we don't have nationalized healthcare yet--too many people have been convinced that universal healthcare means that they'll have to wait too long for a necessary procedure, and that puts the fear of death behind the hoarding of resources. It's why our schools are suffering, too, if you ask me--hoarding of resources.

If we only have compassion first, we can move towards justice and equity.

7 Principles in 7 Days: Part One

2 December 2008 at 03:06
Someone on Facebook posted a link to a created holiday, "Chalica," and I decided to give it a go. In honor of "Chalica" in which we light a chalice and honor our principles for seven days in December, I'm going to try to write about what each principle means to me each day this week.

Day One: The inherent worth and dignity of every person

The suggestions for honoring this principle included writing a letter of apology or inviting someone to dinner that you disagreed with. That would take more preparation than I've given this, so I thought about the groups of people who have been most devalued in our society: religious minorities, particularly Muslims and Atheists, both of whom are reviled by many but in very different ways; gays and lesbians, bisexuals, and transgender people; homeless people; imprisoned people; people with mental disabilities; people with psychological disorders; people with physical disabilities; and many, many more who find themselves outside of what has been declared normative for our society in one way or another.

LGBT issues are of great importance to me, and to our congregation, in particular. And Jackson saw a lot of flurry of interest in transgender people back when a certain person was fired by a local university for living the gender that she beleives God made her. That's all "water under the bridge" now, and you seldom see it in the letters to the editor of the local paper anymore, lost in the flurry of election issues. But for the LGBT people in our community, their issues are not "water under the bridge." They live with the inequalities in our community and struggle with them and with prejudice on a regular basis.

The focus has been on California a lot lately, with its overturning of same-sex marriage. It's easy to forget that we banned same-sex marriage "or any similar union" a few years ago here in Michigan, as have lots of other states, in the post-election coverage of California's protests and legal follow-up cases. But we have written discrimination into our constitution in this state, and it's so far been upheld. And it's a disgrace to our state.

But for me to live the first principle means more than fighting for the people that our society has been legislating against, more than fighting for the downtrodden or oppressed. It means, first and foremost, that I must honor the inherent worth and dignity of those that I disagree with most. I have to uphold the universal love of God/universe/interdependent web for all people, even whomever I disagree with most.

The hard part of living this principle is finding a way to demonstrate that without validating an opinion or position that I find abhorent. After all, I don't want to donate money, for example, to a cause that I believe is making the world a worse place.

In high school, one of the movies we watched in my Holocaust literature course I took was a movie about the Neo-Nazis marching in Skokie, IL and the ACLU defending their right to march. It's a heart-wrenching situation, where it's difficult to know who to root for. I thought about supporting the ACLU on this day, because of this. They do stand up for the rights of people they disagree with, such as the right of a Neo-Nazi to hold a march.

However, I have a feeling that the ACLU is going to come back up in the next few days. Instead, I turn to another organization that focuses on stopping hatred and promoting tolerance: the Southern Poverty Law Center. Today I'm making a donation to the SPLC in honor of my brother-in-law Gary, whom I often disagree with, but who also is a force for good in this world.

Happy Thanksgiving

26 November 2008 at 20:23
For those that can't be there, this is the sermon I'm preaching at the Interfaith Thanksgiving Eve Service tonight, along with the scripture readings that were chosen by some of the participants to go with it.

Psalm 100

Make a joyful noise to the Lord, all the earth.
2Worship the Lord with gladness; come into his presence with singing.
3Know that the Lord is God. It is he that made us, and we are his; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture.
4Enter his gates with thanksgiving, and his courts with praise. Give thanks to him, bless his name.
5For the Lord is good; his steadfast love endures forever, and his faithfulness to all generations.

Colossians 3:15-17.

15And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which indeed you were called in the one body. And be thankful. 16Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly; teach and admonish one another in all wisdom; and with gratitude in your hearts sing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs to God. 17And whatever you do, in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him.

Qur’an 2:136-137

Say: “We believe in Allah (God Almighty) and that which is revealed to us; and what was revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob and their descendants, and that which was given to Moses, Jesus and other Prophets from their God. We do not discriminate any of them, and to HIM (God) we have surrendered ourselves. So, if they believe like you have believed, they shall be rightly guided; if they reject it, they will surely fall into dissension. Allah will be your sufficient defender against them, and HE hears and knows everything.


Sermon


Thank you, first of all, everyone for coming out this evening. In today’s busy society, there are always a million different things pulling for our time and attention. And at a holiday, in particular, there are competing demands. You might easily have chosen to stay at home and cleaned the house for company, or prepped some dishes for the meal. You might have chosen to get a head start on Christmas shopping. You might have chosen to be a number of other places tonight. And yet you chose to be here, spending your evening in worship and in prayer.

And, of course, we spend the evening thinking about the meaning of Thanksgiving. And the first thing we do, in my family, is go around the table and each say what we are thankful for. Usually we focus on personal blessings—our family, food before us, shelter over our heads, and so forth. We give thanks for new babies or new jobs, thanks for health and well-being.
But there’s another level of Thankfulness we share at this time, too, and that has to do with the Thankfulness we feel for being in this country.

There have been hard times in this country before. And there have been times that our blessings we not extended to everyone in this country. We tell a story about people coming together from different cultures, different religions, the Pilgrims and the Native Americans, and breaking bread together and giving thanks together, but our country has a hard heritage of slavery, of people brought to these shores in bondage and kept in bondage for generations. It’s a pain that goes deep in our country, a mark that cannot be erased. The horrible legacy of the buying and selling and enslavement and brutality left its trail of blood across this nation. And we have the hard heritage of the ensuing relationship after that Thanksgiving that we had with the Native Americans, where we pushed them off their land in some cases and killed them in others. We have the story of the Trail of Tears, where the Cherokee died by the thousands as they were forcibly marched from the warm lands of Georgia that they had known as home to the brutal winters of Oklahoma. This is the way we built this country, on the backs of one group of people even as we forcibly evicted another group of people.

I carry that heritage in me. My Great-Great-Great-Grandfather, Jeptha Landrum, was in the Jackson County Militia in Georgia in 1825-1826, and he was instrumental in driving out the Creek tribe of Native Americans from Fayette County, Georgia. He actually named his horse after the chief of the tribe that he had helped drive out, Black Hawk. And that same great-great-great grandfather, Jeptha Landrum, went on to found a plantation on the land given to him for his government service and own fifty slaves.

This is all part of the heritage we celebrate when we celebrate Thanksgiving in this country. So what is it that, today, we can be thankful for?

The answer is, for me, something that was also there in the founding of this country, along with the racism, along with brutality, along with the religious persecution: some wonderful, shining ideals. We had some beautiful thoughts in the founding of our country about what this country was capable of, what our goal was to become: a shining city on a hill, a beacon to the world of tolerance, understanding, freedom, democracy.

Now, I used to say that I wasn’t patriotic. I didn’t think I felt pride in this country. I was grateful, yes, for having been born here. It’s a good place to live. But I didn’t feel responsible for that greatness, so I didn’t feel pride. And I associated feeling patriotic with thinking that this country and all it had done and all it was doing was great. I thought of the words of Frederick Douglass, the famous writer, speaker, abolitionist and escaped slave, and, I have to say, a Unitarian, when he said:

What, to the American slave, is your 4th of July? I answer: a day that reveals to him, more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelly to which he is the constant victim. To him, your celebration is a sham; your boasted liberty, an unholy license; your national greatness, swelling vanity; your sounds of rejoicing are empty and heartless; your denunciations of tyrants, brass fronted impudence; your shouts of liberty and equality, hollow mockery; your prayers and hymns, your sermons and thanksgivings, with all your religious parade, and solemnity, are, to him, mere bombast, fraud, deception, impiety, and hypocrisy - a thin veil to cover up crimes which would disgrace a nation of savages. There is not a nation on the earth guilty of practices, more shocking and bloody, than are the people of these United States, at this very hour.

Harsh, harsh words from Frederick Douglass, but well warranted to a country that had yet to throw off slavery. He was speaking of Independence Day and people who were not free. Just as he asked, “What to a slave is the Fourth of July?” it might be asked, “What to a Native American, is Thanksgiving?”

So, no, I do not come here today to preach a glorious history full of peaceful meals between Pilgrims and Native Americans, not I, whose family participated in the stripping of the Native Americans from their land, in their forcible eviction.

But I do say that I had misunderstood patriotism when I focused on the past. And I would misunderstand Thanksgiving if I focused on the historical events of our nation. A recent article in Time magazine summed this up nicely, saying, “America is less a common culture than a set of ideals about democracy, equality and the rule of law. American history is a chronicle of the distance between those ideals and reality. And American patriotism is the struggle to narrow the gap. Thus, patriotism isn't about honoring and replicating the past; it's about surpassing it.”[1]
On Thanksgiving we must struggle between our ideals and our reality, and we must struggle to close the gap. On Thanksgiving, I don’t want us to honor and replicate what the Pilgrims did, I want us to surpass it.

Our myth about the Pilgrims and the Indians, that tells of brotherhood being forged there and belies the bloody history that follows, however, does give us an important lesson, that ideal, from which we grow our future. A central message of that story is the message of interfaith cooperation. We remember, on this day, that we are a land of immigrants and native peoples, a blending together of many cultures. We remember what it says on the Statue of Liberty, of the “Mother of Exiles,” who says:

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless,
tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!


So we celebrate Thanksgiving today, the coming to this land, and the blending of cultures that happened here, even from the first. In using bread from many cultures, we celebrate our diversity in this community. While my name, “Landrum” is Scottish, and I am descended from slave owners, our own reality is always more complex: my own ethnic heritage is German, Scottish, English, Swedish, Welsh, Irish, French, Native American, and probably a multitude of other things. In this room we represent many continents and many cultures, and we are grateful for that. We are grateful that we are a nation like a patchwork quilt. It links us to the past and to each other, but most of all, it links us to the diverse world and the interdependent web of which we are a part. One of the values of America that I’m proud of, and which I’m Thankful for, is this value of diversity, this value of welcoming in the immigrant.

Another American value I’m particularly proud of and grateful for is religious freedom. And we’re celebrating tonight, here at this interfaith service, that value of religious freedom and how it, together with the value of diversity, brings us to a modern version of Thanksgiving, to a time when we can worship together, across religious boundaries, knowing that while we have different cultures and different beliefs, we are one people, one nation. Sometimes people think of Thanksgiving as purely a Christian holiday. But it is, in fact, an interfaith holiday. The Pilgrims were there, but the Native Americans were, too. Thanksgiving, then, is a holiday which belongs to all of us. It is, if it is to remain true to its purpose, a time which brings differing people together across the table—the pilgrims and the Native Americans, or today, perhaps warring countries or event the most diametrically opposed of faiths. If we are to set our Thanksgiving table today, we must make room for Muslims, Jews, Christians, and people of Eastern and Native religions. Thanksgiving also includes atheists, agnostics, and Humanists. Our Thanksgiving table is the welcome table.

The scripture passages we read earlier show, too, how much we have in common. They speak of knowing God, of Thanking God, and of celebrating God. They speak of how we are to live together as people of different religions, yet all created by the same God, despite different scriptures and different passages. And so, tonight, as people of different faiths, we raise our voice together in Thanks, thanks for our creator, thanks for all the creation.

As people of faith, we come together this evening also, however, because we are part of one larger community, this Jackson community, and, as such, despite our different houses of worship, we have a common home in this community. And we know that this community is hurting right now. We have a national economy that is in shambles, a state that is particularly hurting and has been for a while, reliant on an industry that is going under. We have a community where we are high in unemployment, and low in economic security, high in foreclosures and low in economic growth. We have food pantries running low and shelters running full right now in this community. We are a community that is seeing harder days. The songwriter Irving Berlin, in a similarly depressed economy, said, “Got no check books, got no banks. Still I'd like to express my thanks - I got the sun in the morning and the moon at night.” Despite our troubles, and I know some of you have troubles of health, or shelter, or jobs, we come together to give thanks.

In the Christian scriptures, it tells a story about loaves and fishes. Jesus took five loaves of bread and two fish and managed to feed five thousand. Some see that as a story of a miracle—food that expanded to fit the need. I see it as a story of people’s matching generosity with their own, and managing to see abundance rather than scarcity. People of a loving God know that there is no limit to God’s love. People of a loving community know that there is no limit to our resources when we pull together. In my tradition, we often tell the old tale of “Stone Soup,” a folktale that’s been told in different ways in different cultures. The story is a person goes into a new community, and this traveler is told that there is no food for him. He says that this is okay, he was planning on making soup to share with everyone. He is loaned a pot, and he sets water to boil, and he puts his magic stone in the pot that will turn it into soup. As villagers ask how it’s going, he tells them one by one “Oh, it’s good, but it would be better with a carrot,” or an onion, or a potato, and so forth. The villagers supply the items and by the end, there is enough soup to feed everyone, including the traveler.

I’m thankful today to live in this community, not because of our history, but because of our possibility. Because we have ideals of freedom, of diversity, of interfaith cooperation, and of generosity. I’m thankful to live in this community not only because of the blessings that it provides to me, but also I’m thankful that it provides me with opportunities to become my best self, to live from a perspective of abundance, rather than scarcity, to practice generosity, rather than to horde my blessings. I’m thankful that we have this opportunity to come together, to live our values and our faith in this circle of diversity, in this sanctuary of open love and acceptance.

Happy Thanksgiving.

[1] Peter Beinart, “The War Over Patriotism,” Time Magazine, Thursday, June 26, 2008, http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1818195-2,00.html.

Proposition 8 - And It Gets Worse

23 November 2008 at 02:08
One of the ugliest aspects of the fallout around Proposition 8, which struck down same-sex marriage, is how quickly African Americans have become blamed by so many for its passage. For example, here's an article on the subject by Dan Savage, noted sex-advice columnist and himself a gay male. In it he says,

I’m not sure what to do with this. I’m thrilled that we’ve just elected our first African-American president. I wept last night. I wept reading the papers this morning. But I can’t help but feeling hurt that the love and support aren’t mutual.

I do know this, though: I’m done pretending that the handful of racist gay white men out there—and they’re out there, and I think they’re scum—are a bigger problem for African Americans, gay and straight, than the huge numbers of homophobic African Americans are for gay Americans, whatever their color.

Now, on one hand, Dan Savage is known for being inflammatory. On the other hand, we have had him speak in a workshop at the UU's General Assembly. And he's someone who, while extreme, is read by a lot of readers. So take that example with a grain of salt, but I could throw a lot of examples your way about this.

The numbers people have been looking at are based on an exit poll - see here - which says that 70% of African Americans voted yes on 8, while a bare majority of white Americans voted no.

Two things that can be said about this. Most problematically, is how people zeroed in on race, in an election where race was such a major issue. There are a lot of demographic groups that this exit poll could pin it on (Hispanics also voted yes on 8 in this exit poll, but not by as big a percentage). For example, you could blame lack of education--people with post graduate degrees voted 60% against, while people with a high school diploma only voted 57% for. Party affiliation is a big one, with 82% of Republicans voting for 8, and 85% of conservatives. Protestants and Catholics both voted overwhelmingly for 8, at 65% and 64% respectively, and white Evangelicals at a whopping 81% while the nonreligious voted against. Married people, voting 60% for, could also be blamed, and married with children more so at 68%. Another big break was by age. The older the demographic, the more likely they voted for 8. New, young voters age 18-24 voted against at 64%.

Yet with all these demographic groups to blame, people started quickly pointing the finger at African Americans. What's the problem with that? Plenty. For example, if the white vote had been 70% against, do you think we would hear, "It's white people who are to blame for this"? No, we wouldn't. We would break it down into the other demographics immediately--it'd be about white Republicans, or white evangelicals, or white married people with children. But with African Americans, we treat them as one monolithic group. Also, the African American vote is a small percentage of the vote. It took a whole lot of white people voting that way for their vote to be added to for this to pass. Numerically, rather than by percentages, there are way more white people who voted for 8 than African Americans.

It's significant that people pointed the finger at African Americans rather than the Hispanic vote, because Hispanic people vastly outnumber African Americans in California. So why are people focusing on African Americans? Barack Obama is African American, that's why. So the popular mythos has people saying, "Those black people showed up to vote for Obama, and if they hadn't done that, this wouldn't have passed."

But that's just not true, which leads to another major problem with all of this, which is how quickly people jumped to accept the poll's results, without question. If you want to read a good rebuttal of the CNN exit poll and the assumption that's being thrown about that African Americans made up enough of the electorate to turn the election against 8, look here.

Robert Cruickshank paints a more reasonable explanation:

“The other data that appears to be emerging (BUT yet to be totally verified) is that African-Americans who early voted (which was a huge number) voted YES while those on election day voted NO. Remember we did not do extensive campaigning in many of the African-American precincts until the final week or so which was long after tens of thousands had already voted. Our campaign was slow to use Obama's opposition to Proposition Eight which he gave the day after the initiative qualified five months before the election.”

That explanation makes much more sense than anything else I've seen. Early voters tend to be older and it would make sense if some of them in the African American community were strongly associated with Yes on 8 churches. Once the No on 8 campaign finally got its act somewhat together and did outreach to African Americans, we saw the rewards on Election Day.

Ultimately this reminds us how cheap, stupid, and misguided the scapegoating of African Americans over Prop 8 has been. Prop 8's passage revealed that the marriage equality movement has a lot of outreach to do in this state - to older voters, voters living in "red California," to some Latinos and African Americans but also to numerous white voters (if whites had voted strongly No, this discussion would be moot), to Asian and Pacific Islanders, to some religious groups, including LDS Californians.
The people doing the scapegoating and finger-pointing are quick to say, "It's so sad how this minority group doesn't stand up for another minority group." So true--stand up for the African Americans, folks. Proposition 8 is not their fault.

Standing on the Side of Love

17 November 2008 at 18:02
I've been struggling to put words together on how I feel about Proposal 8 in California in an eloquent enough way to post publicly. I feel like I'm just too emotionally torn between anger and sorrow to speak rationally, much less eloquently, on the subject. I'll try to do so soon.

Meanwhile, the UUA has produced this lovely video.

โŒ