September 2007 Archives

I posted the paragraph below as a comment on a different blog, but it so concisely cut to the heart of my feelings regarding our recent local struggles over the target audience of our Unitarian Universalist institutions, I wanted to bring it back here. As far as my Church is concerned, there are no "outsiders":

I think we’re off the mark when we look at ANYONE and think, “outsider.” I don’t build church community so we can set ourselves apart from the people of the world, I build church community to help unite the people of the world.

Not this Sunday, but next Sunday, it's two PU events in one day, both co-sponsored by the Channing-Murray Foundation!

Sunday, October 7th, 2007

• 10:00 a.m. Mass
  The Church of St. Mary
  612 East Park Street, Champaign, IL
• 1:00 p.m. Open Mic Worship
  The Channing-Murray Foundation
  1209 West Oregon, Urbana, IL

Join us first at 10:00 a.m. as we branch out from Protestantism to explore my very own mothership, Roman Catholicism. I've seen such a variety of Masses within the Roman Catholic Church that I can't even begin to tell you what to expect. Will St. Mary's be all high liturgy, with bells and smells and as much Latin as they can get away with? Or will we be walking into a communion so casual that it makes the Channing-Murray seem ritzy? Come on by to find out! Though no sign-up is required, it helps to email me at minister@revjack.com to let us know you're coming, that way we can arrage rides and/or keep an eye out for you. As is usually the case when exploring a new church, simple but conservative clothing is recommended. Those who have not been initiated into the Roman Catholic faith may wish to refrain from taking the sacred bread and wine offered during the ritual, and otherwise observe rather than participate, though some churches are stricter about this than others (and some priests even delight in the rebellion of encouraging non-Catholics to join in fully--shh, don't tell the bishop!)

Following that, we'll be reconvening at 1:00 p.m. for Open Mic Worship, which may or may not involve Latin--it's up to you! Bring the ways you worship and pray to share, and experience the worship and prayer of others. All souls welcome!

Altogether an excellent weekend to continue to explore the diversity of ways in which humanity worships and prays. Hope to see you there!

Over at Philocrites there's an excellent quote decrying the fight over homosexuality in the Anglican church, and the ugly side of religion that it reveals. Below is my response, copied in whole here to foster discussion here as well there (not because I fear it will be deleted. ;-) )

I definitely recommend reading the quote at the link for context.

-><-

It's interesting how much his feelings towards the Anglicans reflect my own feelings towards the UUA, as much of what I've seen in Unitarian Universalism over the past four years has undermined my belief in the essential benignity of too many UUs.

There are a lot of angry people in our religion, intent on punishing the people they veiw as offending justice instead of learning to love people despite their flaws. Mess with them, and they can be as hostile as any conservative is towards gays. And since we believe in democracy, all it takes for them to control the resources of the church is quantity.

Yet I'm trying to make this moment of disillusionment a moment of acceptance that no religious institution is essentially benign, rather than yet another flight from religion. What am I supposed to do, leave the UUA in the hands of the angry judges and abandon religion institutions altogether?

It's really made me look back at the Roman Catholic church I grew up in and realize that sure, they believed I was born inherently sinful, but at least they also believed I was forgiven for it! And while I still shudder at the idea of submitting to the authority of a bishop, I definitely understand why a bishop would not submit to the authority of democracy, given the frequently angry and judgmental views of the masses.

I'm also starting to understand how those awesome, loving and very liberal priests and nuns I knew growing up Roman Catholic stomached working for a hierarchy that was so obviously corrupted by politics and greed. I used to think it was because they didn't have the guts to stand up to their superiors; now I think it may have been because they had the guts to forgive their superiors!

Instead of running away from religions that embody all the petty, hypocritical judgment of humanity, maybe it's time we think about forgiving them and serving them. I say this about myself and my relationship to the Unitarian Universalist Association, but I also say this about the UUA's relationship to other religions, and to the world.

Maybe "Unitarian Universalism" should be less about building a church where everyone's accepted, and more about accepting every church?

Avast, mateys! Happy International Talk Like A Pirate Day! Alas, for all that I like pirates, I suck at talking like one. Still, perhaps I can get some of my fellow pirates to Talk Like A Pirate at tonight's Channing-Murray Board Meeting, which otherwise promises to be a parade of political woes and denominational strife. God bless 'em, they're gonna need it.

Yarrr.

Well, I made it out to the Mennonite church and the Ganesha Pooja as I planned, but I missed the Baha'i talk due to time constraints.

There simply aren't enough words of praise for the Mennonite church. The welcome that Rev. Monkey and I received put our local UU congregation's claims of welcoming to shame; we were invited to speak during the service, we were overwhelmed with people to talk to following the service, and we were torn between several options for post-service socializing (we opted for an hour long class on the development of a Mennonite theology of atonement, focusing that day on the theological groundwork laid out by Anselm and Abelard...tasty stuff!) I had to physically restrain Rev. Monkey from converting right then and there, so enthused he was by what he found. We were generally recognized as envoys from the local Unitarian Universalists, but as such we found we didn't have many nice things to say about the UUs, especially in contrast to the vibrant spiritual community surrounding us. Our message as UU evangelists was, "Keep doing what y'all are doing. You guys rock."

There was one moment in particular that I want to mention, though it is difficult to write about without diminishing its impact on us both. There is a gentleman in the Mennonite congregation who has a terminal illness, with only weeks left to live, though in appearance he is a healthy husband and father around our own age. During the open mic portion of their service, he shared with the congregation his decision to die at home, and the spiritual peace he has found even as he faces death. After he shared, the minister invited the congregation to gather around him, lay hands and pray. Tears filled our eyes, in a moment that will not easily be forgotten.

To say that this moment offered us spiritual insight and connection in the face of our own mortality is true, but does not do it justice. This was not some example of faith in action, as might be offered up in an intellectually critical and emotionally disconnected manner at the UU church as part of a discussion of the merits of such. This was rather reality, undeniable, staring us cold in the face, but filled with a warmth of spirit and genuine love by all those gathered. Thus, I shudder to hold this man's imminent death and the Christlike manner in which he faces it as an example of how other churches achieve where our local UU institutions waver. And yet, the contrast was undeniable. While we kick back in our discussion groups and talk about this sort of thing, here is a community that's living it.

So, many thanks to the Mennonite church, for a wonderful and sincerely moving experience! As I reminded Rev. Monkey, there are many other churches out there for us to visit, we mustn't lose ourselves at the first stop in our journey, but God willing, we shall certainly make port there again.

The Ganesha Pooja was also quite enjoyable; though language barriers (both the sanskrit of the ritual and the native tongue of those gathered) made it more difficult for me to connect, I did feel the blessing of Ganesha as the ritual came to its peak. One thing that stood out to me was the purpose of the ritual, which appeared to be a sacrifice of fruits and nuts to Ganesha in order to secure knowledge and prosperity for those gathered. I don't think I've ever seen a Christian or UU ritual so to-the-point about seeking gain for the participants. Such purpose does show up occassionally in Western ritual, but it is buried beneath more abstract goals of showing charity for others and pleasing God as a purpose in and of itself. I don't say this critically, but just as a matter of observation; this was a way in which the ritual differed from what I have known, and I found that difference thought-provoking.

Plus, the homemade Indian food I was treated to afterwards was indeed seven times seventy kinds of yummy. So many thanks as well to the organizers of the Ganesha Pooja! May Lord Ganesha's blessings of knowledge and prosperity shower upon you throughout the year.

Busy Sunday coming up, mateys!

Sunday, September 16th, 2007

• 9:15 a.m. Sunday Worship
  First Mennonite Church of Champaign/Urbana
  902 West Springfield Avenue, Urbana, IL


• 1:00 p.m. Sunday Service: The Baha'i Faith
  The Channing-Murray Foundation
  1209 West Oregon, Urbana, IL


• 2:00 p.m. Samoohika Ganesha Pooja
  Urbana Civic Center
  108 W. Water Street, Urbana, IL
  Presented by The Hindu Temple and Cultural Society of Central Illinois

First off, Rev. T. Monkey and I will be visiting the First Mennonite Church of Champaign/Urbana for their 9:15 a.m. worship service. Awhile back, I suggested to Rev. Monkey that, as Pirates, we make a habit of visiting a new church each month, so that we might grow beyond the walls of our UU base of operations, learn about and forge relationships with the diversity of divine outposts in our quaint hometown of Urbana, and perhaps pillage some blessings while we're there (yarrr.) The Mennonite church was first on Monkey's list. I know little about the Mennonites, and I haven't gotten around to emailing them to let them know we're coming, but I've heard good things and their website advertises services that are open to all, so the plan is just to show up wearing the nicest clothes we can scrounge and see what unfolds.

Next up will be the Sunday Service at the Channing-Murray, presented by Rev. Monkey's good friend Bill Baker, who will share samples of Baha'i sacred scripture, explain the Baha'i Faith's teachings and history, and answer questions. This will be a very participatory program with ample time for questions/comments/reflections following the presentation. I'm told I simply must meet Bill, he's a very cool guy, so I'll at least be stopping by.

I'll probably be leaving that one rather early, though, as I head off to observe the Samoohika Ganesha Pooja at the Urbana Civic Center. Though I am still only learning the rudiments of Sanatana Dharma, I am told that the ritual to be performed is a celebration of the birth of the god Ganesha, (creator and) remover of obstacles. Through the years, Ganesha has caught my attention more than any other Hindu god, and I'm hoping this will help me get to know him better. I also look forward to spending time with the dear friend who brought this to my attention, and getting to know the local Indian community (and eating some yummy Indian food!)

If you'd like to join us or meet up with us at any of these events, please do! Drop me a line at minister@revjack.com if you want to coordinate ahead of time, or just show up and surprise us. And keep an eye out here for future Field Trip Sunday plans!

Over at The Lively Tradition, a U*U minister from Massachusetts has spent the past few months offering critical resistance to the idea that U*Us should support polyamorous relationships. Like most people who have been given power, he has bent over backwards to frame the debate such that the burden of proof lies on those who disagree with his own hesitance. "I believe that those who propose changing our collective position on two-person marriage bear the burden of proof that such a change is warranted, necessary, and socially responsible." He also claims a haughty level of authority on the subject for UUs, "And we do have some cultural authority on these matters of sexuality. We have shown to have a pretty good grasp of what is not only good for individuals, but also healthy for the society," going on to claim that the one exception to this was their advocacy of "open marriage" in the 60s-70s.

Stepping back from the nuances of a discussion of the legal expression of polyamory (which Alan at Philocrites rightfully points out is complicated even for the polyamorous), I'd like to focus instead on how LT and others in our community presume that it's within their authority and even their responsibility to judge polyamorous relationships. When people compare his judgment of the polyamorous to other people's judgment of gays, he flails to distinguish them logically, insisting that he is not prejudiced, and in turn misses the point of the comparison and the real hurt of prejudice.

It's the pretension of judgment that makes you a hypocrite, LT, kicking back at your blog to suss out a general ethic on polyamory, invoking the UU open-mindedness towards homosexuals as if it was the UU teaching that made being gay acceptable. But I'd like to tell you, it was rather the UU teaching on this issue that made being UU acceptable, for all those same-sex lovers and friends and family thereof who have found a comfortable home in UU churches. Because, as anyone who's come out of the closet knows, coming out isn't about waiting around for the approval of authority.

Quite the opposite, coming out is a process of flaunting authority, embracing oneself despite authority, and learning that it is better to be true to oneself than to try to hide just to keep those in authority comfortable. As homosexuals hit the street chanting, "We're here, we're queer, get used to it," their acceptance by U*Us such as LT certainly marked a success for the gay rights movement; but the point I wish to make is that had the UUs not accepted gay marriage, we'd have been hitting the streets without them, chanting at them rather than with them as we asserted our own identity and desire for freedom. LT shows all the hesitance of Martin Luther King Jr's white moderates, thinking that it's up to him to dictate the appropriate pace of liberation. But like those white moderates, all he'll find is that his small church gets left behind when those truly open-minded compassionate people start marching.

So the question is not, as LT presupposes, "Should Unitarian Universalism support and advocate for this far-reaching change in the cultural mores of the society who looks to us for guidance about these matters?" As if you are the arbiter of cultural mores! Rather, the question is, "Is Unitarian Universalism the kind of religion that will accept polyamorous people, encouraging them towards spiritual growth in their own free and responsible search for meaning?" So long as LT and other U*Us are trying to place themselves in a position of judgment over polyamorous people, the answer to that question will be No. Polyamorous people will move along to one of the many other growing religions out there that are accepting of their ways, and UU ministers will be left to preach to the choir of those who stick around, self-satisfied in their rejection of the polyamorous. And he wonders whence the comparison to conservative ministers rejecting homosexuals?

He's right that fighting for the legal and widespread cultural change that is necessary for acceptance of polyamorous needs to start with the polyamorous; they will gain nothing by staying in the closet out of fear of what others think. But in making himself one of those who need to be convinced, LT diminishes whatever message of Universalism he might be preaching, and instead places himself in the same camp as all the other condemners out there. No amount of logicial nitpicking will get him out of that bucket; only a Universalist sense of compassion and forgiveness in the face of disagreement will achieve that. Here's hoping he finds as much.

So it seems the Channing-Murray Foundation was recently denied its reapplication to be a UUA Independent Affiliate, as part of a massive purging of the UUA Independent Affiliate rosters. Because clearly, there's a problem with having too many affiliates in a "Universal" church.

In Rule 3.8.1.j, the people who made this decision ask their (former) Independant Affiliates to provide "a statement outlining how the organization supports the transformation of institutions and our world to be aligned with those values expressed in our Principles."

Yet I'm left to wonder how much this action itself supports those Principles. Rather than promoting a "a free and responsible search for truth and meaning" or "respect for the interdependent web of all existence," they rather seem to be sending the message, "You must conform to our rules and expectations, because we're in charge. You must earn our recognition, otherwise you're not one of us." It's a strange thing, coming from a denomination that prides itself on its lack of enforced creed, that its leadership core is filled with so many meddling people trying to reign in its members and affiliates under such tight institutional control.

Even stranger still is the claim, "By withholding Independent Affiliate status from many of the existing organizations, we don't intend to imply any criticism about the work they are doing. Instead, we are trying to encourage these organizations to play as productive a role as they can in our UU movement."

As if UU Independant Affiliate status (or any status within the UU church) were a great prize to be fought for! At least bishops and imams claim a bit of divine authority when attempting such control, offering a real reason for obedience among believers. These UU leaders only have the mandate of their democratic majority of non-believers, and if someone in the minority dissents, that minority isn't going to sit around and suck it up in the name of denominational unity; they're just gonna LEAVE! It's nice that these so-called leaders think that there's such heavy interest in the UUA that they can get very selective about affiliations, but I suspect the ministers and elected officials of the UUA will increasingly find themselves in charge of an empty house, wondering with all the belligerent childlike authoritarianism of Lucy Van Pelt why nobody will accept their rule.

I owe y'all a longer treatise on why democracy ain't no way to run a church, but for now I'll just conclude by saying this doesn't affect me all that much. I'm one of those who already left, taking the fruits of my religious work with me and saying, "You have no authority over me!" The folks this affects the most are the folks who drove me out of Channing-Murray, the ones who sought to control my work in the manner that the UUA now seeks to control Independent Affiliates, invoking rules and policies with a coldhearted disregard for the actual human relationships involved.

I'm especially interested to see how they end up getting around this bugaboo: unlike most UU congregations, Channing-Murray is not actually independent in the sense that it freely chooses to affiliate with the UUA, but it is rather required to affiliate with the UUA, lest it pass back into the ownership of the local UU church from whence it divorced itself a couple decades ago. And here we have the UUA rejecting that affiliation. C-M is trapped in a contradiction whose only resolution is abject deference to the UUA. "I told you so."

The whole situation makes a mockery of the UU Principles and purported ideals. Luckily, having resigned from that clusterfuck, it's the kind of mockery that leaves me filled with a delightful schadenfreude, laughing as I watch them reap what they have sown. It's good to be a Pirate.

Over the past 4-odd years of my ordained ministry, I've come to identify myself as a Discordian Universalist. The other night, as I was talking to Rev. T. Monkey, I came to realize that this is fairly synonymous with saying I'm Protestant Catholic.

In some sense, this gets back to something I've claimed for a long time now, that I believe in everything, unto contradiction. You'll see this symbol around my work a lot, and it is, among many other things, a mathematical sign for contradiction:

And yet, wheras many people look at these words and see contradiction, I see redundancy. It seems to me as if one might be Protestant without being Catholic, or Discordian without being Universalist, but one cannot be Catholic or Universalist without also being Discordian or Protestant. The One Universal Catholic Church encompasses the contradiction, embraces and perhaps even loves the contradiction. That's what makes it Universal and Catholic, and not just another sect.

So when I modify my "Universalism" with "Discordian" or my "Catholic" with "Protestant," it is not, as is usually the case, an attempt to distinguish myself from the other folks claiming those labels, as if I'm identifying with a subset of the wider universal church. Rather, it is an attempt to push out the boundaries of my religious identity, and point to that boundless center of my faith, that God, that Christ, that place where the two arrows meet, that singularity of transcendance and reconciliation where the walls between sects crumble and all live as one.

OPEN MIC WORSHIP
Sunday, September 9th, 1:00pm
@ the Channing-Murray Foundation, Urbana, IL

"Open Mic" Worship, as it has come to be called, is the practice of setting up an altar and a pulpit, and inviting any member of the congregation who so desires to stand before us and worship, preach and pray in their own fashion.

It was born of two parts commitment to the notion of a "free pulpit" from whence flows uncensored honest beliefs, and one part desire for a worship format that takes little preparation and may be repeated indefinitely. After months of working with worship leaders in the local UU community to come up with a ritual we could all agree on, only to find that the lowest common denominator left everyone slightly bored, one day I just upped and declared that everyone should show up on Sunday with their favorite readings, prayers, hymns, reflections, meditations and sermons, along with icons and decorations for the altar and whatever else inspires them. We sat and shared for an hour, and it was the most I've gotten out of a UU worship service, ever. We've repeated this several times since then, and it looks to be a monthly activity in the coming year.

The more we do it, the more I find this is the only style of worship that really moves me anymore (this side of Catholicism, at least.) It is as if the traditional "sermon sandwich" of most worship is a static website filled with the longwinded ramblings of someone who very much wants us to listen without listening in return. Whereas Open Mic is the youtube of worship, with many small snippets provided by a wide variety of people, giving everyone a chance to listen and a chance to share. This is worship to sate the short attention span and interactive expectations of the internet generation. This is worship for Pirates.

So, come on by the Channing-Murray this Sunday! Bring your own worship with you, experience the worship of others! We're even multimedia enabled, with a CD and DVD player. No holds are barred--if a track off the latest pop album is what turns you on to a higher power, then bring it by and share it. All religions and lack thereof welcome--whatever you want to preach, the pulpit is yours. Hope to see you Sunday!

Somebody asked me this weekend, "Why not Pirates of the Unitarian Universalists?"

To which I responded, "Because I'm a Universalist."

Links plundered via The Emerson Avenger:

• David Kling to Anti-Catholic UUs: Religious Fundamentalism is a problem in our world. But so many times it is easier to mirror this fundamentalist behavior with a slightly different emphasis. Liberalism taken too far can be just as oppressive as conservative fundamentalism. It is so easy to write "I must love my neighbor," but far more difficult to practice the love. Does it do any movement any good to talk about diversity, respect, and justice and then point fingers of scorn?
• Will from CRAPonSunday is a Republican: What's been bugging me, then, is that when sitting in the UU pew, I am often figuratively portrayed as a sinner not unlike those poor folks sitting in Edwards' pews. Preordained. Doomed. Judged not in this case by an angry God, but rather by the Angry Left whose definition of justice differs from my own and who dominate the UU denomination. The problem is that I generally don't think of myself a sinner. And feelings of guilt are not what I come to church to get. Instead I come for the hope of redemption. I seek communion with fellow religious liberals. I want the Universalist treatment! Take me for what I am, warts and all.
• And the sermon that sums it all up, presented (appropriately, I think) on All Fool's Day by Reverend Scott W. Alexander of River Road Unitarian Church: I was sure that morning that I could preach a powerful and poetic sermon about the pure living essence of Universalism from which I came theologically. As I walked my way up to the school from my apartment, my head was down as I silently went over and over in my head how I was going to inspire everyone eloquently with my understanding of and commitment to the Universalist ethic of human inclusion, connection, and care. As I approached Shattick Street, I happened to glance up, and there, sitting on a bench waiting for a bus was a very physically unattractive woman -- by my judgmental standards anyway. Before I could censor the unkind thought, I said to myself there on the street, "Oh, dear God, look at that ugly woman. She must work at being that unattractive ... and who could ever be attracted to that?" At that moment -- as if it were a message directed straight out of the heavens for me -- the skinny little guy sitting next to her on that bench leaned over, and bestowed upon her the gentlest kiss I have ever seen a human being bestow upon another. Right then ... right there ... in the middle of Shattick Street ... I heard a loud and holy voice that was as clear to me as any voice I have ever heard ... and the voice said to me:

  
  "HELLOOO, SCOTT. DON'T YOU GET IT? Here you are, on your petty little way, up to your petty little school, to preach your clever little sermon about the holy, living gospel of Universalism (which you claim to understand and love deep in your heart), and all you can do is sneer at another human being who you imagine is somehow less worthy and lovely than yourself! Don't you understand that she is as precious and beautiful and worthy as human beings get? Don't you understand that the love and grace which creation holds for you is held (in the same sacred vessel of essential human worth and beauty of being) in her? Don't you see that you and she are equally holy children of God? AND YOU CALL YOURSELF A UNIVERSALIST!"

  Now, let me assure you, I am not in the habit of regularly hearing voices on the street. But on that clear Berkeley day, I heard a Universalist voice (so clear and commanding ... and holy and haunting) that it still rings in my heart's ear to challenge and chide me toward a better, more loving and inclusive human place.

Rev. Scott's sermon also contains an excellent redux of Universalist history, including a mention of dear old Urbana and local church namesake John Murray. This land is in need of another Universalist revival, not so that we can "grow" our UU churches, but rather so that the idea might once again be found in every church. We need to do such a good job that, as Rev. Scott says, we "lose our market share."

It's sad that we capitalize and institutionalize these words that once pointed towards ideals of a boundless church, and seek to separate that which is Unitarian Universalist from that which is not. When we can look into the face of the others--the Roman Catholics, the Republicans, the solar eclipse cults and the just plain ugly people--and therein see ourselves, when their church home is our church home, then we will not fret about the size or name of our denomination, we will simply be unitarian universalists, with capital letters removed in favor of meaning restored.

I'd rather be unitarian universalist than Unitarian Universalist.