I read with concern some information about my UU community. Is this true? It can't be!
I assume that there is a variety of ways of doing things in UU congregations, but signing a delegate card for someone who had been in the congregation a few weeks. Bad Practice.
The congregation in which I was a lay person discussed everything that was to come before the UUA General Assembly including resolutions. When I went on to ministry, I assumed that was the way it was done, and tried to make it my practice after I was ordained. Two congregations resisted making it official, others were grateful that the church was taking their connections to the wider association seriously.
My home church elected the delegates in a competitive election and paid the registration fee and a small subsidy toward the expense. I have tried to likewise, and while I haven't convinced every church to be that strict, the delegates have been chosen by a announced open process. The delegates from congregations I have served have represented the congregation's discussions and ideas at GA with one exception (a youth who got his ideas from the YRUU.) No one should be a delegate to GA who isn't at least discussed by the board after being selected by the Association Affairs Committee. I prefer my delegates elected by the nominations committee and annual meeting, but I haven't been able to convince the lay leadership of that yet.
And I hear that preachers preach partisan politics! I can see UU ministers preaching peace, and against all sorts of injustice, but the idea that one party is good and the other bad isn't church for me. I ask my colleagues in chapter meetings and they agree; issues yes, Republican bashing no. But I hear it happens.
There are Republicans and Democrats in the congregation I serve, and a scattering of Libertarians. I have an affirmative action policy toward democratic socialists, but no takers yet. Fascists need not test my tolerance. I work to be inclusive, but I have my limits. Remember Channing said no one would be excommunicated, except for the death of goodness in their hearts. I would think that is a practical guideline when it comes to violent and coercive politics.
Is this a mild mannered rant? I suppose so.
I do find some of the complaints about the UUA interesting. Although they don't reflect my experience, I have always assumed where there is smoke there is fire. I suspect many complaints could be addressed by good practices at the congregational level. In fact some of the complaints and concerns like growth can only be handled by good practices at the congregational level. The UUA does not grow the congregations, the congregations grow the UUA.
Overcoming colonialism through faith and action.
I don't have any idea who the delegates are from my church - I think I need to ask. Although I am going to General Assembly this year, it would not be as a delegate. I'm not sure what the process is for selecting them at my home church, either. We have a very large congregation, however; I bet there is a committee that deals with it.
Also, I posted something a few days ago (or maybe yesterday) and it hasn't shown up yet; I don't know if the error is on my end or if you just haven't moderated it yet.
I am really, honestly, delighted to hear all that. If all churches paid more of the way of their GA delegates, the complaints that the people at GA are the people who can pay for it would be much less.
I avoid political sermons when I can, and I have never seen Republicans bashed from the pulpit of my current church, though I have attended a service at a different church in my area where the "sermon" was a play about the patriot act written by people who apparently didn't understand what it said and performed by members of the next congregation over.
And, as I mentioned on my blog, the fact that the UUAWO is now openly encouraging people to preach about judicial nominations does not strike me as an encouraging sign. (CAN a truly skilled minister preach a balanced sermon on judicial nominations? Yes. Will the average minister do so? To be honest, I doubt it because if they are passionate enough about the Anti-Alito subject to want to preach about it, then some of that passion will probably get in.)
While it doesn't happen often, it does happen. And every time it does happen, it opens the door to a feeling that UUism is just liberals talking to each other.
CC
I wonder how many of my colleagues heed memos on what to preach about? I plan my calendar at least six weeks ahead of the date of the service, I have April filled already....so last year when I got a notice that UUSC wanted to do services about a good issue...water.....I let a lay committee do it but it wasn't when the service committee wanted it.
I think if I were to preach about the Supreme Court I would start with John Adams and the idea of an independent court system....that seems to be division....does religious liberalism have a stake in the question of judicial review...do we really want to whatever political party happens to be in the majority this decade putting political hacks on the court.
Religious freedom and individual freedom seem to me to be questions for religious liberals to ponder.....
that is what I would preach...they may or may not discern that I think Bush is trying to put poltical hacks on the bench...but let those who have ears to hear hear.
Six weeks ahead would be just fine.
The statement with advice to preach on Alito is not dated, but talks about "December 12" as if it is in the future, so it was out at least six weeks ago, I just didn't notice it until last week.
Seems to me most UUA churches already do a service on water yearly.
I really don't think the UUAWO has any business advising y'all on what to preach about, and if they were going to do so, I find it really unacceptable that they didn't advise congregations that given that they want sermons criticizing Alito right before his confirmation hearings, a sermon very similar to the one they are asking for (As in one preached two days before the election criticizing Bush) has gotten it's church in trouble with the IRS.
Is the law clear on whether a church can preach about a supreme court nominee without facing consequences from the IRS? No.
But I know I don't want my church paying for the test case.
CC