I am becoming less and less comfortable with the overt political partisanism I see in my church (and am supposing that my church is not an outlier here).

Just one example: I found the overturning of Roe shocking and tragic. I have always whole-heartedly supported a woman’s right to choose and find this new ultra-conservative attack on woman’s autonomy scarily regressive.

However, just because I (as well as many other people in our congregation) feel this way, doesn’t mean that I want our minister to make a public statement condemning this decision (I.e. taking an explicitly partisan stand). I don’t want a minister that says: “We need to yell louder.” I don’t want a minister that essentially declares our congregation a safe space for any person who wants an abortion. I don’t want my minister to simple echo whatever the political consensus of the congregation is (or seems to be).

Why? Well, I believe that first and foremost, churches should be models of ideal communities. And ideal communities should (in my view) be open to the “other” — to people who don’t necessarily think exactly like us and yet still agree with all our principles. It is perfectly possible to be pro-life and see oneself as living according to our principles. It is perfectly possible to want stricter immigration policy and still see oneself living according to our principles. It is perfectly possible to ask questions about various controversies swirling around transgenderism and still see oneself living according to our principles.

Our minister likes to go on about how our church is a sacred space. I am an atheist, so I definitely grin and bear it. But I was quite spiritual for a long time and have a sense of what a sacred space is. To me, a sacred space is a space that stands apart from and against the world and the failings thereof. It is a space in which to be our best selves along with other people who are trying to be their best selves.

However our minister openly suggest that our sacred space needs to be a political space. She actively promotes the use of sacred language as a political weapon. In fact, the sermon we heard last week was all about wielding sacred language to make political change. Is the answer to the Right‘s politicization of conservative Christianity to go ahead and build a politically left religion? Do two wrongs make a right? I don’t think so.

I feel so despairing about politics in this country, but don’t believe the “both sides“ thing. Sure, the left has its issues, but fortunately they have not gone off the deep end in the unbridled pursuit of power for power’s sake. I would love more than anything else for us to regain political sameness and balance. I don’t know how that can happen at the moment. But I sure as hell know it’s not going to happen by having UU’s wrap themselves in a ball of anger and yell louder.

If any change is going to come, it going to take many years of concerted strategic political effort. I suppose this could happen in UU congregations (just as Black churches were instrumental in the Civil Rights movement). But I don’t see any of this happening. I just see a lot of rage, political othering and using leftish politics as a church brand-building exercise, as a form of collective identity construction.

​

So, in short, I’d like to see one of two things either:

1. Having our “sacred space,” be informed by a broad, generous interpretation of our principles and hence be de-politicized.
2. Fully commit to one issue and actually make change (which would involve analysis, having a plan, organization, etc.) and not merely yelling, whining, getting upset then trying to calm ourselves, building a collective identity as “justice seekers,” etc., etc.,

One or the other.

Im curious to know what others think about this?