A Simple Gospel That All Are Welcome Is "Too Political"??

I wasn't surprised to hear that the latest United Church of Christ (UCC) TV ad would not be shown on several broadcast networks (CBS, NBC, ABC, Fox and WB) because these networks viewed their previous "Bouncer" ad as a controversial, issue-advocacy ad. The "Ejector Seat" ad and the "Bouncer" ad can be seen online here.

However, the latest UCC ad ("Ejector Seat") started this week and the UCC was told that the ad was inappropriate for use even on several cable networks owned by NBC and Viacom. These cable networks include MTV, VH1, Comedy Central, Bravo, lesbian/gay-oriented LOGO network, USA, and Telemundo.

The MTV Network's rejection of this ad cited the "political nature of its content."

Nick@Night and TV Land networks rejected this ad because they don't accept " ... religious advertisements that take a position on controversial issues or may be deemed as disparaging to another religion ... "

So for a large portion of the broadcast and cable TV spectrum, we are being told that the message that God welcomes everyone into church is too political, too controversial, and disparaging of other religions. Ironically, one cannot advertise a gay-friendly church on the gay-lesbian-bi-trans friendly LOGO network.

So much for having equal access to the marketplace of ideas.

[Thanks to Philocrites for pointing this news story out to all of us.]

When the Anti-Choice Choose -- "The Only Moral Abortion is My Abortion"

In mid-March 2006, Susie Bright posted a blog article titled "If These Wombs Could Talk ..." where she mentions cases where "pro-life" women using the services of abortion clinics and in many cases remaining "pro-life" after the procedure.

The article about "pro-life" women obtaining abortions is titled "The Only Moral Abortion is My Abortion" -- When the Anti-Choice Choose.

This online article is worth reading ... here are a few selections from it:

"I've had several cases over the years in which the anti-abortion patient had rationalized in one way or another that her case was the only exception, but the one that really made an impression was the college senior who was the president of her campus Right-to-Life organization, meaning that she had worked very hard in that organization for several years. As I was completing her procedure, I asked what she planned to do about her high office in the RTL organization. Her response was a wide-eyed, 'You're not going to tell them, are you!?' When assured that I was not, she breathed a sigh of relief, explaining how important that position was to her and how she wouldn't want this to interfere with it." (Physician, Texas)

"In 1973, after Roe v. Wade, abortion became legal but had to be performed in a hospital. That of course was changed later. For the first 'legal abortion day' I had scheduled five procedures. While scrubbing between cases, I was accosted by the Chief of the OB/Gyn service. He asked me, 'How many children are you going to kill today?' My response, out of anger, was a familiar vulgar retort. About three months later, this born-again Christian called me to explain that he was against abortion but his daughter was only a junior in high school and was too young to have a baby and he was also afraid that if she did have a baby she would not want to put it up for adoption. I told him he did not need to explain the situation to me. 'All I need to know', I said, 'is that SHE wants an abortion.' Two years later I performed a second abortion on her during her college break. She thanked me and pleaded, 'Please don't tell my dad, he is still anti-abortion.'" (Physician, Washington State)

"When a patient comes in with my 'favorite' sentiment: 'The only moral abortion is my abortion,' I try to expand her understanding that a few more of us have had and deserve a 'moral' abortion. When a woman expands her need for care beyond herself, you no longer have an 'anti'." (Clinic Administrator, Louisiana)

"I never dreamed, in my wildest nightmares, that there would ever be a situation where I personally would choose such an act. Of course, we would each like to think that our reasons for a termination are the exception to the rule. But the bottom line is that you people spend your lives, reputations, careers and energy fighting for, maintaining, and providing an option that I needed, while I spent my energy lambasting you. Yet you still allowed me to make use of your services even though I had been one of your enemies. You treated us as kindly and warmly as you did all of your patients and never once pointed an 'I told you so' finger in our direction. I got the impression that you cared equally about each woman in the facility and what each woman was going through, regardless of her reasons for choosing the procedure. I have never met a group of purely non-judgmental people like yourselves."

"I was born into a very Catholic family, and was politically pro-life during college. After dating my first real boyfriend for three years, we broke up, and the day my boyfriend moved out, I discovered I was pregnant. It was an agonizing decision, and something I never thought I would do, but I decided an abortion was the only realistic option. Thanks to Planned Parenthood counseling, I worked through some very tough conflicts within myself. I had to learn that my decision was a loving one. That 'my god' was actually a loving and supportive god. And that men don't have to make this decision, only women do. That it is a very personal, individual decision. I had to own it. I became much more compassionate towards myself and others as a result of my experience. Two years later I began medical school. When it came time to choose a practice, an abortion clinic opportunity came up. In working there, I began to feel that this was my calling. Having been in my patients' shoes, and coming from an unforgiving background, I could honestly say to patients, 'I know how you feel.' Deciding to have an abortion was THE hardest decision I've ever made in my life. Yet it has brought me the greatest transformation, fulfillment, and now joy. I am a more loving person because of it, and a better doctor for having experienced it. I love the work that I do, and the opportunity to support women seeking to end an unwanted pregnancy. My patients and my work are life's gifts to me, and I think my compassion and support are my gifts in return."

Agenda and Packet for April 2006 UUA Board Meeting

The meeting packet for the April 2006 Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA) Board of Trustees can be found online here:

http://www.uua.org/TRUS/apr06/

Some items of interest in this packet are the following reports and documents (all require Adobe Acrobat reader software):

Report of the Pathways Review Panel (contains "lessons learned" from Dallas - Ft. Worth large church project)

Lifespan Faith Development (contains info on the Our Whole Lives for Young Adults curriculum that will be field testing between September and December 2006).

Special Review Commission Report – Final Report (contains findings and recommendations from the events surrounding the closing ceremony incidents at the 2005 Ft. Worth UUA General Assembly)

Unitarian Universalist Youth Ministry Survey Results Now Online

Between January and February 2006, current and former Unitarian Universalist youth between the ages of 12 and 20 were asked to participate in a survey to find out how we can create diverse and robust youth ministry programs (plural - not singular) that serve all Unitarian Universalist youth.

A summary of the results tabulated from this survey can be found online (requires Adobe Acrobat PDF to read).

This survey is the first step in the "Consultation on Ministry to and with Youth."

This consultation is a two-year process to revision, renew and support our Association's ministry to and with youth. It will solicit the input and commitment of the widest possible spectrum of stakeholders in Unitarian Universalist youth ministry. Conversations within congregations, districts, and stakeholder organizations will focus on what they can do to support youth ministry at their level, and what the Association can do to support youth ministry as a whole.

Religious Education and Youth Ministry Resources -- What's Happening Next and What's Available Now?

On another blog, the following observation was made about available resources for religious education and youth ministry:

I'm not sure the UUA has much to offer any UU congregation right now in these last two areas. RE materials? -- UUA hasn't really published anything of value in over a decade, aside from Our Whole Lives (which was developed in cooperation with the UCC). Youth ministry? -- lots of congregations, of all theological persuasions, have been finding little of value in district and denominational youth programming.

I would like to have more curriculum resources available (who wouldn't?), but I wonder if folks are really aware of the Unitarian Universalist resources we currently have today in our districts and in our denomination for religious education and youth ministry.

During the 90s, I suspect that much of the denominational work in religious education curriculum development was directed towards the Our Whole Lives (OWL) lifespan series. Other than OWL Grades 7-9 [which served as an update and replacement for the 70s era About Your Sexuality (AYS) program], there really wasn't a good "state of the art" lifespan sexuality education series for use in liberal religious settings. And OWL is something that our faith community should be proud about. We didn't just develop a good curriculum for use in our congregations. We developed something that many secular community sexuality educators consider to be the best curriculum currently available (based on comments from SIECUS and Planned Parenthood folks I've met and worked with).

You're probably saying "well ... sex education is great but we need other resources in our congregations" for lifespan religious education resources and youth ministry resources. A large part of this is the new Tapestry of Faith series (link requires Adobe Acrobat reader).

"Embodying a faith development focus for our congregations, Tapestry of Faith is a series of programs and resources for all ages that nurture Unitarian Universalist identity, spiritual growth, a transforming faith, and vital communities of justice and love."

This Tapestry of Faith will include:

• age-appropriate programs for children, youth, and adults of all ages, including young adults
• resources for parents to support them in their role as the primary religious educators of their children
• resources for teachers to support them in their role as facilitators of faith development
• resources for religious professionals to support them in their role as nurturers of communities of lifespan religious growth and learning.

The really cool thing about this is many of the Tapestry resources will be published online for free download and use by congregations and other UU communities. Folks using these downloaded resources will be encouraged to provide feedback for further revision. In other words, the UUA is using a "spiral development" model with this new curriculum project. Spiral development is often used in software engineering and other technology projects. Here's a summary of what spiral development is:

"Because software engineers all too often designed and built large software programs with little ongoing consultation from customers, the resulting programs did not meet the end-user requirements or were delayed by unforeseen obstacles. Boehm stressed a cyclical approach in which customers evaluated early results and in-house engineers identified potential trouble spots at an early stage."

Between 2006 and 2011, we will start receiving Tapestry of Faith resources as online resources available for every Unitarian Universalist congregation who wants them.

The other resources that are currently provided by the Lifespan Faith Development Staff Group (current name for what was formerly called the "Religious Education Department") may not be curriculum-related but there is value here for UU congregations in that they support congregational religious education. Here's what you can find on their web page today:

Resources

• Resource Lists: Includes resources such as curricula, books, organizations, and websites for elected topics
• Children, Families and Current Events: Links to resources
• Families: Resources for spiritual development, education, social justice, and connection between congregation and home
• Loan Library: Loans curricula and other lifespan religious education resources for a two-week period
• Email Lists: E-mail discussion lists on a range of faith development topics

Teacher Development

• Teacher Development Survey: Reports generated from the Teacher Development Survey of religious educators conducted by the UUA in the fall of 2004
• Framing Teaching: Models of Teacher Development -- perspectives on how to frame teaching as spiritual development
• Understanding Learners: Materials to better understand children, youth and adults as evolving and developing individuals. Includes resources on human development and paths of faith and spiritual growth
• Sustaining Teachers: Practical resources developed in congregations that help sustain teaching
• Supporting Teachers: Resources, including covenants and behavior guidelines, which strengthen communities and support teaching
• Teaching as Social Justice Work: Resources on social justice and religious education -- "branches of the same tree" -- for and about teachers and learners
• Enriching Teaching: Resources for and about families, faith and worship that can enrich the experience of teaching in faith

Regarding the comment about finding little value in district and denominational youth programming, I can only speak from my experience in the Southwest District and your experiences with youth ministry may be different in your district.

The SW District YRUU Rallies ("rallies" are what our district calls "cons") and SWUUSI Youth Camp don't meet the needs of every UU youth in our district.

I don't think it's realistic to expect that any district or denominational program will meet the needs of every Unitarian Universalist youth. But a very large percentage of our youth in the SW District find YRUU and SWUUSI Youth Camp to be a religious experience that is very hard to duplicate in their home congregations. And this includes youth in my own congregation and youth in my household.

The various UUA Youth Office-sponsored trainings that I've attended in my district (Youth Advisor Training, Leadership Development Conference, Spirituality Development Conference) have all been worthwhile for youth advisor work at local and district events. If I had to take one and only one advisor training workshop, I would choose the Leadership Development Conference as it provides the best mix of resources and materials for the new advisor.

Finally, some of the best youth advisor training that I've had happens during SW District YRUU events. Out-of-town events allow inexperienced advisors to learn from experienced advisors and see an effective model of youth-adult partnership.

Now, folks may have different experiences with youth ministry in their own districts. If you're finding that your district's youth ministry and programs are not meeting your needs, you may want to check out the "JAHNNY DEPP" program (Joining And Helpfully Networking Neighboring YACs District Exchange Program Packet -- if nothing else, it's an impressive attempt at constructing an acronym). JAHNNY DEPP allows youth and advisors to visit other districts and see how they do things and bring these ideas back to their home districts.

It seems to me that it's "fashionable" for a lot of UU bloggers to gripe about how the UUA basically "sucks" -- however, I think a lot of this criticism overlooks the good work being done by volunteers working on behalf of the UUA and their districts, district staff, and UUA staff.

Unitarian Universalist Congregations and "Sundown Towns"

I've heard Unitarian Universalists comment on how little racial diversity we have in many Unitarian Universalist congregations. Two things I've recently read about this made me think about a potential connection between "sundown towns" and our current demographics.

Recently, Jess wrote the following words in a reply on Dan Harper's blog:

"Personally, I'd like to see us do more for our immediate neighbors than pontificate over why we don't have more persons of color in our pews in the rural Midwest."

And the Unitarian Universalist Association's Special Review Commission provided a lot of historical background in their report about the events impacting "the Unitarian Universalist community of color, especially youth," surrounding the 2005 General Assembly in Fort Worth, Texas. The following commentary is about the community where the host church for the Youth and Young Adult of Color Leadership Development Conference (LDC) that happened just before the 2005 GA:

"Adding to the tension of the LDC is the fact that the church is located in University Park in Dallas, originally a white-flight suburb now engulfed by the expanding city. The area is de facto segregated by class and there remains overt racism in the University Park Police Department. There are reports from the youth participants of harassment from law enforcement officers and residents in the area. Apparently the LDC leaders were not aware of the history of the area."

The reason that I'm seeing a potential connection between these quotes is from reading Sundown Towns: A Hidden Dimension of Racism in America by James Loewen.

Sundown towns have been very common in the Midwest and other regions outside the traditional South. For example, Loewen's book documents that Illinois (his home state and the state that he researched the most) had 424 sundown towns with populations greater than 1000 in 1970. Loewen also found that 231 Indiana towns were sundown towns as well. Loewen also talks about the sundown town history of University Park, Texas (the Dallas suburb mentioned in the 2005 GA Report).

Perhaps we should ask ourselves what impact does locating in a current or former sundown town or white-flight suburb has on Unitarian Universalist congregational demographics. We may discover that many of our congregations have moved to communities and neighborhoods that are not welcoming to people of color and that may be responsible in part for the current level of "diversity" in many of our congregations.

Top Ten Dick Cheney Excuses

Thanks for the Late Show with David Letterman for this response to the Cheney's recent shooting of Harry Whittington:

10. "Heart palpitation caused trigger finger to spasm"

9. "Wanted to get the Iraq mess off the front page"

8. "Not enough Jim Beam"

7. "Trying to stop the spread of bird flu"

6. "I love to shoot people"

5. "Guy was making cracks about my lesbian daughter"

4. "I thought the guy was trying to go 'gay cowboy' on me"

3. "Excuse? I hit him, didn't I?"

2. "Until Democrats approve medicare reform, we have to make some tough choices for the elderly"

1. "Made a bet with Gretzky's wife"

Curriculum for "Engaging Our Theological Diversity"

This info comes from the Unitarian Universalist Association's "Adult-RE" email discussion list (Thanks to Rev. Sarah Gibb, Adult Program Director, for providing this info on the Adult-RE email list):

A complete curriculum designed for "Engaging Our Theological Diversity" has been posted to the Commission's website:

http://www.uua.org/coa/TheoDiversity/index.html

This curriculum was created by Connie Dunn, Director of Lifespan Religious Education, and Patty Davis of the Greenville UU Fellowship. They have been kind enough to make it available to the whole world! It is designed for use in a multi-session adult RE class. Please take a look.

Dr. James Casebolt
Chair, UUA Commission on Appraisal
http://www.uua.org/coa/

The link for Connie's and Patty's curriculum is actually here (PDF file -- requires Adobe Acrobat). Thanks to Connie and Patty for providing this resource to the wider UU community.

The UUA Commission on Appraisal's report on Engaging Our Theological Diversity can be downloaded here for free (PDF file -- requires Adobe Acrobat). At this time, this report is not available from the UUA Bookstore in bound form.

Air Force softens rules on religious expression

The Stars and Stripes coverage provides a detailed look at this issue.

Speaking as a Unitarian Universalist who served in the Air Force for over 20 years, I don't think these new guidelines will protect non-Christian and non-religious airmen. As the article mentions, the problems in the past have been conservative and evangelical Christian coercion. It hasn't been a free expression of religion problem for military chaplains.

A brief excerpt is included below:

WASHINGTON - Air Force officials on Thursday released a second set of interim guidelines on religious expression after months of criticism from evangelical Christian leaders and members of Congress.

Those critics say the new changes don't go far enough, but civil libertarians say the document goes too far - shifting its focus from protecting airmen from religious persecution to protecting chaplains' rights.

The new interim rules - a one-page memo about a third the length of the first proposal, released in August - scale back specific instructions for commanders on ways to accommodate religious holidays, dietary needs and dress.

Also eliminated are specific warnings to chaplains to be sensitive to airmen of other faiths, in how they share their beliefs, and a reminder that their job includes care of airmen of all faiths.

But the new language is vague, and the Air Force would not provide authors of the guidelines for comment or clarification.

Instead, officials wrote a general warning not to chaplains but to "leaders at every level" to respect any faith or belief. New language affirming the rights of chaplains to "adhere to the tenets of their religious faiths" has also been added.

That line concerns Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, in particular because the guidelines were originally drafted in response to allegations of religious intimidation at the Air Force Academy.

"This new version acts like the problem was with how chaplains are treated," Lynn said. "The problem is having all airmen fully respect the diversity of religions in the Air Force."

Here are some of the Air Force's newly revised interim guidelines on the free exercise of religion:

• We will remain officially neutral regarding religious beliefs, neither officially endorsing nor disapproving any faith belief or absence of belief. We will accommodate free exercise of religion and other personal beliefs, as well as freedom of expression, except as must be limited by compelling military necessity ...
• We will respect the rights of chaplains to adhere to the tenets of their religious faiths and they will not be required to participate in religious activities, including public prayer, inconsistent with their faiths ...
• In official circumstances or when superior/subordinate relationships are involved, superiors need to be sensitive to the potential that personal expressions may appear to be official, or have undue influence on their subordinates. Subject to these sensitivities, superiors enjoy the same free exercise rights as all other airmen ...
• Public prayer should not imply government endorsement of religion and should not usually be a part of routine official business. Mutual respect and common sense should always be applied, including consideration of unusual circumstances and the needs of the command ...
• Nothing in this guidance should be understood to limit the substance of voluntary discussions of religion, or the exercise of free speech, where it is reasonably clear that the discussions are personal, not official, and they can be reasonably free of the potential for, or appearance of, coercion ...
• Nondenominational, inclusive prayer or a moment of silence may be appropriate for military ceremonies or events of special importance when its primary purpose is not the advancement of religious beliefs. Military chaplains are trained in these matters ...

Additional background info on this news story:

• Air Force releases revised religious guidelines
• Revised Interim Guidelines (PDF file)
• Revised Interim Guidelines Cover Memo (PDF file)
• Air Force Issues Troubling Guidelines on Religion (Americans United for Separation of Church and State)
• Report of Americans United for Separation of Church and State on Religious Coercion and Endorsement of Religion at the United States Air Force Academy (PDF file)
  

[Note: for those who like to track milestones, this is my 100th posting to my blog. Yippee!!]

UU Blog Awards

The 2006 UU Blog Awards voting has just been completed. Congratuations to the winners and everyone else out there who cares enough about our faith to write about it.

The vote tallies are here and the winners are announced here.

Since I didn't nominate my own blog, thanks for the anonymous person who nominated me for the "Best UU Themed Blog" category. And thanks for the two persons who voted for my blog.

If I had voted in this contest and had voted for my own blog, I would have increased my vote total by 50%.

Fixing Unitarian Universalism -- Implementation Tips, Part II

Instead of commenting on the relative merits of the various proposals on Chalicechick's blog about reforming the UUA, I'm going to look at how we would go about implementing the various suggestions. This is a hypothetical exercise to explore how one would make changes within Unitarian Universalism and the UUA.

These proposed reforms probably would not require amending the UUA bylaws:

• Come Up with a Mission Statement of Shared Values (assuming that we don't do this as a bylaws amendment in Article II or elsewhere in our bylaws).
  
• GA in Las Vegas every year.
• Lay off 1/3 of the UUA National Staff.
• Move UUA headquarters to St. Louis.
• American Sister Churches.
• Eliminate UU Hypocrisy.
• Found a UU monastery.
• Support Lay Ministry.
• Develop a UU Yoga.
• Celebrate World Day of Conscience during days on which a total solar eclipse takes place anywhere in the world.
• Streamline the UUA.
• Social Justice Activities should be placed in a religious context.
• Be Proactive in Best Practice Sharing.
• Less Emerson, More Parker.
• A Separate non-tax exempt political organization.
• UUs need to minister to recent immigrants.
• Inreach to the Unchurched.
• Abandon Our History.
• Real Outreach.
• Build an association of free faiths.
• Focus on the Freedom.
• Figure out what changes would make Unitarian Universalism "not Unitarian Universalism"

Given the obstacles involved with implementing change through bylaws amendments, any reform that does not involve bylaws changes will be easier to implement. As I wrote in an earlier blog post, "Reform through bylaws amendments isn't for the faint-hearted."

I've only got a few additional implementation tips for just a few of the proposed reform suggestions:

"Meta-Tips" for Any Proposed Reform Idea -- Be prepared to answer the following questions:

• "How does this proposed reform help Unitarian Universalist congregations?"
• "Is this proposed reform coming from a member congregation of the UUA or is it coming from an individual?"

These questions relate to our polity and you need to be prepared to address them if you're looking at obtaining UUA Board or UUA District Board support.

A few years ago, I witnessed my district's board rejection of an Eastern European UU heritage trip proposal for UU youth in our district. The stated reason for rejecting this proposal and not providing any district sponsorship, endorsement, etc was that it was proposed to the district board by individuals and not congregational representatives.

So ... if our reformers pay attention to polity concerns and address them in promoting their proposed reforms, their work will be easier and they may find their work easier by gaining of institutional allies.

Found a UU Monastery -- Setting up a full-time UU monastery that would provide a place for Unitarian Universalists (and others) to spend months or years in a calmer lifestyle with time to explore this unique faith would be very hard to start up from scratch.

Scott Wells recently mentioned an article by Guy Kawasaki on the problems of startup ventures ("Bootstrapping a church" is Scott's article ... Guy's article is "Let the Good Times Roll").

I would recommend that we should look at starting small with realistic expenses and cash flow for this venture.

Rather than focusing on creating a "24 hour a day, 7 day a week, 365.25 day a year" full-time UU monastery, I would suggest looking at creating short-term monastery opportunities. Single day workshops, weekend workshops, week-long workshops, and multi-week workshops would be one way to gauge interest.

Instead of building a permanent monastery facility at first, look into using existing Unitarian Universalist congregations and camps first. This could be done in cooperation with the Council of Unitarian Universalist Camps and Conferences. An additional advantage of this could be trying out various locations of North America for temporary monastery events before finding a permanent monastery location. This will help prevent locating a UU monastery in a region that has little interest in UU monastic practice.

Build an Association of Free Faiths -- This is a good idea that has been tried repeatedly in the past. Here are some historical timelines showing our previous attempts to create a free faith association:

• Timeline of Significant Events in the Merger of the Unitarian and Universalist Churches During the 1900s
• Timeline of Significant Events in the Merger of the Unitarian and Universalist Churches During the 1800s

And here's our past experience with trying to implement this idea in Unitarianism and Universalism:

• 1865: Resolution offered in the American Unitarian Association to establish a higher council consisting of denomination bodies and other members. Christians, Universalists, Methodists, and Congregationalists were approached. Nothing came of this effort.
• 1867: The Free Religious Association was formed, with at least six different religious groups represented; about half were Unitarian ministers. Very few Universalists affiliated. This association apparently lasted about 25 years. Its chief product was a liberalizing influence, principally on Unitarianism.
• In 1908 the National Federation of Religious Liberals was formed. Its membership included the Unitarians, Universalists, Religious Society of Friends, and the Central Conference of American Rabbis. The organization ceased its existence with the advent of the Free Church of America in the 1930s and was of minor significance in Unitarian-Universalist relations.
• In 1923 the Universalists received overtures from the National Convention of Congregational Churches. Each body established a Committee on Comity and Unity. In 1927, the Universalist Committee met with an interested group of Unitarians with the thought of establishing a Congregational-Universalist-Unitarian structure, but the whole move was defeated by Universalists, who felt that the best course would be Universalist-Unitarian.
• In 1931 a Joint Commission of the two churches was formed and began meeting, but this commission soon concluded that the time was not ripe for merger. Instead, in their May 1932 report, they recommended that an organization be formed that would include all liberal churches. This resulted in the formation of the Free Church of America, which was incorporated in Massachusetts in 1933. The Free Church movement did not attract as many liberal churches as hoped, and it held its last annual meeting in 1938.

Knowing why this reform has not worked in the past may give us some clues on what we should do differently if we try again in the future.

Develop a UU Yoga -- I'll admit that I'm not a yoga practicioner, but this idea would seem to complement the proposed UU monastery. It would make sense for the yoga reformers and the monastery reformers to look into cooperative ventures.

That is about all that I can say at this time. Good luck.

[Sunday evening, 5 February 2006 -- note: the spelling error that I didn't catch was corrected. Thanks, Scott, for mentioning this.]

One Room UU Sunday Schools -- One Possible Suggestion

Today, Scott Wells asked about this issue on his "Boys in the Bands" blog:

Do you know of any models, theories, or suggestions that could help the one-or-two child congregation? I'm guessing something that mobilizes parents ("as resident theologians" to recall one program) or incorporates the children organically into existing church functions like worship. Or perhaps a mentoring-based path. Whatever -- and from wherever. Please leave your ideas and suggestions in the comments, or trackback to this post if you blog and would like to write (have written) on the matter.

Our family's had some experience with this situation in two places we have lived.

One was a household RE program when we lived in a small Northern Michigan town that was 2 hours away from the nearest UU congregation (Wurtsmith AFB -- near Oscoda, Michigan) and the other was in a small fellowship (Black Hills UU Fellowship, Rapid City SD).

In the small fellowship, we routinely had RE classes where 50% or more of the kids shared the same last name (50% or more of the kids were our two kids).

In both cases, the best workable solution we could find was using Church of the Larger Fellowship Religious Education materials. CLF materials that are designed for a household setting with parents and kids also work well with RE groups of 2-6 kids who vary greatly in age.

This suggestion is based on working with kids ages 0 to 8. For older elementary, middle school, and high school age participants, I don't know how well the CLF stuff would work.

Fixing Unitarian Universalism -- Implementation Tips, Part I (Bylaws)

Instead of commenting on the relative merits of the various proposals on Chalicechick's blog about reforming the UUA, I'm going to look at how we would go about implementing the various suggestions. This is a hypothetical exercise to explore how one would make changes within Unitarian Universalism and the UUA.

Based on what we know about how we do business in the UUA at the various levels (congregational, district, denominational), the following reforms would probably require UUA bylaws amendments in order to happen:

• Congregational Ratification of GA Resolutions
• Hold GA Every Two Years
• Actions of Immediate Witness Require a Greater Supermajority that the Current 66% Requirement
• Moratorium on Condemning Things at GA
• Disassociate Unitarianism and Universalism
• Merge Unitarian Universalism with Another Liberal Faith
• Change the Name
• Rewrite the Principles and Purposes
• Dissolve the UUA and hold a new Constitutional Convention

First, it's worth looking at the current UUA bylaws in Article XV -- the section that deals with amending the bylaws. The rules here will give one a sense of what is possible and how long it will take to implement a particular reform.

Bylaws can only be amended by a 2/3 vote of General Assembly delegates only if the proposed amendment is placed on the Agenda. However, there are two special exceptions to this 2/3 vote requirement ("C bylaws" and "C bylaws" in Article II) that will be discussed later.

Any proposed amendments to the bylaws can only be submitted by the following parties:

1. The UUA Board of Trustees.
2. The General Assembly Planning Committee.
3. The Commission on Appraisal.
4. Not less than fifteen certified member congregations by action of their governing boards or their congregations.
5. A district by official action at a duly called district meeting at which a quorum is present.

So ... any proposed changes must go through one of these five "gatekeeper" bodies to be on the General Assembly agenda. And there's a timetable that congregations and districts must comply with (1 February submission of proposed change to the General Assembly Planning Committee for the typical June General Assembly). Getting a proposed amendment on the General Assembly agenda doesn't gurantee its approval. It's just the first step in this process.

This is how one starts the process to change a regular bylaw. However, there are certain bylaw sections where the section number is preceded by the letter "C." These are referred to as "C bylaws" and the process for changing them is slightly different.

For changing any "C bylaws" other than Article II "C bylaws," the process takes longer than it does for regular bylaw changes. It's also more complex, involving a two-step process. Amending, repealing, or adding a new "C bylaw" first requires getting the proposed amendment on the General Assembly agenda and must receive preliminary approval by a simple majority vote. Following this preliminary approval, the proposed "C bylaws" change will be on the next year's General Assembly agenda where it will then require a 2/3 vote for the final approval.

Article II "C bylaws" are a special case. Article II in the bylaws contains our Principles and Purposes, a denominational non-discrimination statement, and a freedom of belief clause that prohibits member congregations from imposing creedal tests. All four sections of Article II are "C bylaws."

Any attempt to amend, repeal, or add a new "C bylaws" in Article II first must be added to a regular General Assembly agenda. At this General Assembly, a simple majority vote means that the proposed change is referred to a commission appointed by the UUA Board of Trustees for review and study. This review must involve member congregations.

This study commission can take no longer than 3 years.

After the study commission has completed their work, they shall submit to the General Assembly Planning Committee for inclusion on the next General Assembly's agenda. This version of the proposal shall include the original amendment and any amendments to the proposed amendment recommended by the study commission.

However, this study commission process can be bypassed through a motion to dispense with the study and review process. This motion will require a 4/5 vote for passage.

All Article II "C bylaws" amendments must receive a 2/3 vote by the General Assembly delegates for final approval.

If the proposed Article II "C bylaws" change does not receive approval at this second General Assembly vote, this proposal (and anything that is substantially similar) cannot be placed on the General Assembly agenda for two years.

If no review of Article II has occurred for a period of 15 years, the UUA board will appoint a commission to review and study Article II. This commission will review Article II and will submit any appropriate revisions to the UUA Board. The UUA Board will review the proposed revisions and they may pass these recommendations to the General Assembly Planning Committee for inclusion on next year's General Assembly agenda. These proposals must go through a two-step approval process. Preliminary approval requires a simple majority vote at the first General Assembly and 2/3 vote at the second General Assembly.

Reform through bylaws amendments isn't for the faint-hearted.

It will require grass-roots networking, detailed preparation, and much patience. In an earlier blog post ["How To Implement UUA Reforms (Process Suggestion)"], I suggested that any proposed reforms that didn't involve bylaws changes would be easier to implement.

The proposed reforms that do not involve bylaws changes will be discussed in "Fixing Unitarian Universalism -- Implementation Tips, Part II."

Long-Term UUA Religious Education Growth Trends

These questions come from Larry Ladd's report to GA last summer. He's was the UUA Financial Advisor until last summer when he completed his term.

Here are the growth demographic questions that he threw out for discussion in 2002 and again in 2005. So far, there has been no serious discussion about these questions:

For four years in a row I have written in this report that the declines in religious education enrollments should be "a warning signal for our movement." In my report in 2002 I wrote: "We need to identify the causes of the slowing growth in religious education enrollments. Is it that our adult membership is aging? Is it that we are becoming less successful in attracting young families and single parents? Is it other factors? Most importantly, this indicator likely predicts a decline in adult membership in the near future." For the third year in a row, I regret to report that, to my knowledge, there has been no serious discussion within our movement about the implications of this regrettable development.

RE growth is stagnant and we don't know why.

In regard to why it's not being studied, I suspect that congregational RE leaders are too busy with day-to-day parish RE ministry. My partner is a DRE and her life is just too busy with the short-term for this pressing but long term problem.

Any other thoughts?

How To Implement UUA Reforms (Process Suggestion)

With the recent discussion on Chalicechick's blog and elsewhere about "Fixing the UUA," I wanted to point out a technical issue about how we do business.

Once this blog discussion has selected the top reforms, I would recommend dividing the reforms into ones that require UUA bylaws changes and those that don't require bylaws changes.

Any individual or group of individuals can come up with great ideas. The difficulty will be getting some of these ideas from the "brainstorm" phase to where we can vote on them.

Proposed changes to the UUA bylaws cannot be proposed by just anybody. There are only five possible pathways for getting these changes on a future General Assembly agenda:

1. UUA Board of Trustees
2. The General Assembly Planning Committee
3. The Commission on Appraisal
4. Not less than fifteen certified member congregations by action of their governing boards or their congregations
5. A UUA district by official action at a duly called district meeting at which a quorum is present

Now ... if one can't convince the participants in any of these five possible pathways to the General Assembly business agenda, the proposed reform is dead in the water.

The following ideas would not require amending the bylaws:

• Association of Free Faiths
• Real Outreach
• Abandon Our History
• Inreach to the "Unchurched"
• Ministry to Immigrant Groups
• A Separate Non-Tax Exempt Political Organization
• Less Talk About Emerson, More About Parker
• Being Proactive in Best Practices Sharing
• Social Justice Activities Should be Placed in a Religious Context
• Celebrate World Day of Conscience
• Develop a UU Yoga
• Found a UU Monestary
• Eliminate UU Hypocrisy
• American Sister Churches
• Move the UUA Headquarters
• Lay Off One Third of the National UUA Staff
• Hold GA in Las Vegas
• Moratorium on Condemning Things at GA

Surprisingly (or maybe not), something as simple as changing our name requires a bylaws change.

The non-bylaws changes may be easier to implement. Even if the most popular reform is one that involves a bylaws change, one should have a worthwhile non-bylaws alternative reform in mind as well.

I hope that this process suggestion is helpful to our reformers.

The Dangers of Overly Aggressive UUA Reform

I'm really surprised at the negative attitudes being expressed by some bloggers about the Unitarian Universalist Association (UUA) on Chalicechick's blog.

I do hope that someone will sift through the reasonable and constructive reforms that are embedded on this blog along with the extreme and potentially destructive reforms being offered.

This concentration of negative complaints about the UUA staff, General Assembly, UUA social justice work, UUA Washington Office, etc is something that I've only observed in online forums and blogs. I haven't seen that in live face-to-face settings with Unitarian Universalists. This appears to be an internet-only phenomenon that isn't sustainable in non-internet settings.

I suspect that we're seeing a group of like-minded Unitarian Universalists forming an "echo chamber" online.

Wikipedia has a good explanation for the "echo chamber" metaphor:

Metaphorically, the term echo chamber can refer to any situation in which information or ideas are amplified by transmission inside an enclosed space.

For example, observers of journalism in the mass media describe an echo chamber effect in media discourse. One purveyor of information will make a claim, which many like-minded people then repeat, overhear, and repeat again (often in an exaggerated or otherwise distorted form) until most people assume that some extreme variation of the story is true.

There's an object lesson about the dangers of overly aggressive reform for Unitarian Universalists in our denominational history. It can be found in the transition from Liberal Religious Youth (LRY) to Young Religious Unitarian Universalists (YRUU) in the 1970s and 1980s. This history example comes to us from Lela Sinha:

The life and death of LRY has a lot to teach. Obviously, the clearest lessons are to those of us in the denomination, but other organizations may face similar problems.

Situation: One of the most unfortunate side effects of the vilification of LRY by the UUA was that the new youth organization (YRUU) ended up reinventing the wheel a lot. When LRY was dismantled, most of the experience and materials produced over its 30 year tenure were lost or stored in unlabeled, unsorted file drawers. It was a tragic waste of time and experience. In addition, YRUU youth are rarely encouraged to seek guidance from LRY alumni in their congregations. Every time a new group has gotten started, the youth have had to find training from nearby groups, the UUA, or their own instincts.

Lesson: Any person or organization which is undergoing radical and painful change will probably be tempted to walk away and not look back. Some people say goodbye like that. For organizations, the transition time is a time of grave vulnerability, so the organization has a definite interest in keeping the transition as short as possible. Unfortunately, as in the case of LRY and the UUA, that kind of abrupt change can cause grief and hard feelings that will ultimately make the transition-incurred weakness last much longer.

That temptation to walk away can also lead one to repeat history and reinvent the wheel. A "clean" cut often leaves a mess behind: lack of materials, experience, and institutional memory. If there are existing program materials, for example, they need not be lost simply because the entity which produced them has fallen from grace. For LRY and YRUU this would have meant keeping the publications and experienced alumni available for incoming youth; for a church this may mean keeping old hymnals; for a school with a problem teacher it could mean firing the teacher but teaching some of her popular and creative teaching techniques to other teachers.

Bureaucratic or institutional memory is like plumbing, electricity, and other "infrastructures" that support organizations. The Unitarian Universalist Association is part of that infrastructure that many congregational leaders regularly use and depend on for congregational work. We expect it to be there ... something that we can always assume will be there. An overly aggressive restructuring of any organization can result in a fatal disruption of these resources.

And that is why I'm fearful about the overly aggressive UUA reform proposals.

Reform for the "Reformers"

Recently, Chalicechick has started a discussion on her blog about how we can "fix the UUA."

My suggestion for this "reformation" within the Unitarian Universalist Association is the addressed to the reformers who have provided suggestions for reform on Chalicechick's web site:

Anyone who wishes to reform the UUA needs to study the applicable bylaws, rules, and other procedural guidance relevant to the proposed reform first.

Previous reform traditions within the Protestant tradition that gave birth to Unitarianism, Universalism, and Unitarian Universalism involved scholarship and informed criticism. For example, Martin Luther was known as a scholar and educator within Catholicism before the Protestant Reformation. His criticisms were based on study and were not impulsive "shoot from the hip" suggestions.

For example, at least two suggestions for "reform" are already in place as current UUA procedures:

Actions of Immediate Witness should require a 66% vote

The UUA as a loose confederacy of churches

A quick glance at the UUA bylaws on the uua.org web site would have informed the reformer making the proposal that the "new reform" was existing procedure.

Additionally, during the comments to these discussions, various statements have popped up like "[General Assembly delegates'] power to set the agenda for everyone shouldn't be absolute."

In fact, the current business procedures for General Assembly resolutions currently require congregational inputs for setting the agenda. Anyone who wants to "reform" the current social justice business procedure should read "Social Witness Process Overview" on the UUA web site first along with the applicable bylaws that address this process. The power to set the General Assembly agenda is shared between local congregations working at home and the delegates that local congregations send to General Assembly to represent them.

So ... please do a bit of research before proposing reform ideas.

Thank you.

Interim Report of the Ft. Worth GA Special Review Commission

The Interim Report of the Ft. Worth GA Special Review Commission is now available online. This report will require Adobe Acrobat Reader Software for viewing.

This report is a last-minute addition to the UUA Board January 2006 meeting pre-packet. The entire pre-packet contents can be found online here.

Six Wise Blind Elephants

This joke is attributed to the prolific writer Anonymous. I found it while researching readings about Buddhism for a high school religious education class in my congregation:

Six wise, blind elephants were discussing what humans were like. Failing to agree, they decided to determine what humans were like by direct experience.

The first wise, blind elephant felt the human, and declared, "Humans are flat."

The other wise, blind elephants, after similarly feeling the human, agreed.

This joke parodies the Hindu parable about the six blind men and the elephant.

I'm thinking that there may a lesson from this joke that we can use when exploring world religions as Unitarian Universalists.

Like the blind elephants, we may accidentally transform and even distort another's religion into a form wildly different from the original through our exploration.

Sundown Towns - New Book by James Loewen

For those who are fans of the Unitarian Universalist Historian - Sociologist James Loewen and his books on US History (Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong and Lies Across America: What Our Historic Sites Get Wrong), he's got a new book out.

It's called Sundown Towns: a Hidden Dimension of Racism in America and here's the book summary from the author's web site:

From Maine to California, thousands of communities kept out African Americans (or sometimes Chinese Americans, Jewish Americans, etc.) by force, law, or custom. These communities are sometimes called "sundown towns" because some of them posted signs at their city limits reading, typically, "Nigger, Don't Let The Sun Go Down On You In ___." Some towns are still all white on purpose. Their chilling stories have been joined more recently by the many elite (and some not so elite) suburbs like Grosse Pointe, MI, or Edina, MN, that have excluded nonwhites by "kinder gentler means." When I began this research, I expected to find about 10 sundown towns in Illinois (my home state) and perhaps 50 across the country. Instead, I have found more than 440 in Illinois and thousands across the United States. This is their story; it is the first book ever written on the topic.

More on this topic can be found online in this Wikipedia article on Sundown Towns:

Sundown town
Sundown towns were towns and cities in the United States where non-whites were systematically excluded from living. They became common in America in the late 19th century. Sundown towns existed throughout the nation, but more often were located in the northern states that were not pre-Civil War slave states.

In some cases, signs were placed at the towns border with statements similar to the one posted in Hawthorne, California which read "Nigger, Don't Let The Sun Set On YOU In Hawthorne" in the 1930s.

In addition to the expulsion of African-Americans from many small towns, Chinese-Americans were driven out of towns where they lived. In one example, in 1870, Chinese made up one-third of the population of Idaho. Following a wave of violence and a 1886 anti-Chinese convention in Boise, almost none remained by 1910. The town of Gardnerville, Nevada blew a whistle at 6 PM daily alerting Native Americans to leave by sundown.

In addition, Jews were excluded from living in some sundown towns.

In some cases, the exclusion was official town policy. In others, the racist policy was enforced through intimidation. This intimidation could occur in a number of ways, including harassment by law enforcement officers.

Though no one knows the number of sundown towns in the United States, the largest attempt made to determine how common they were estimated that there are several thousand towns throughout the nation.

Sundown towns included (the below refer to historic sundown towns, not necessarily current ones. Also note that all Illinois towns below, unless specifically noted otherwise, have been confirmed as sundown towns by scholar James Loewen):

• Anna, Illinois
• Pana, Illinois
• Ashland, Illinois
• Casey, Illinois
• Virden, Illinois
• Pekin, Illinois
• Cicero, Illinois
• Vienna, Illinois
• Berwyn, Illinois
• Pinckneyville, Illinois
• West Frankfort, Illinois
• Edina, Minnesota
• Myakka City, Florida
• Kennewick, Washington
• Vidor, Texas
• Darien, Connecticut
• Cullman, Alabama
• Arab, Alabama

One of the more famous towns on this list is Darien, Connecticut which is prominently featured in the film Gentlemen's Agreement.