Misinformation about the UUA CUC split
Robin Edgar
misleading article about the UUA CUC split. The headline attributed
the split to differences over gay rights. CUC Executive Director was
Mary Bennett was extensively quoted in the article so it seems that
much of the misinformation is due to her feeding the reporter a few
red herrings.
http://www.canada.com/search/site/story.asp?id=88566851-23F8-437B-A4EE-9E4F1C29D36D
In a letter to the editor seeking a correction Bill Van Iterson,
President of First Unitarian Congregation of Ottawa, said -
The big step now being taken flows almost inevitably from many years
of concern over the dominant U.S. perspective and viewpoint within the
UUA and from the steady growth of the CUC as an organization over the
past 20 years. Finally, in the last few years some complex financial
matters (including the weak loonie) have brought the issue to a head.
Those "complex financial matters" deserve a closer look. Here is my
letter to the editor which may or may not be published by the Ottawa
Citizen -
Letters to the Editor,
News Tips,
Bob Harvey,
Ottawa Citizen
I realize that this is rather long for a letter to the editor. Feel
free to edit it or even suggest changes. Feel free to consider running
it as an Op/Ed piece too. In any event please responsibly look into
what I am saying and run some kind of follow up piece soon that
corrects the misleading misinformation/propaganda provided to you by
CUC Executive Director and "spin doctor" Mary Bennett
re. - Canadian, U.S. Unitarians split over gay rights Americans not
ready to accommodate Canadian church's liberal principles, Saturday,
May 18, 2002
The Ottawa Citizen might do well to do some competent investigative
journalism about the split between the Canadian Unitarian Council and
the Unitarian Universalist Association rather than happily swallowing
the red herrings fed to it by CUC Executive Director Mary Bennett
hook, line, and sinker. (If I may mix metaphors...) This "divorce" is
not quite as "friendly" as Ms. Bennett would have the Canadian public
believe and it has little to do with gay rights or Canadian Unitarians
being more "liberal" than American ones. A free and responsible search
for the truth behind this Unitarian "divorce" will reveal that money,
and even the apparent "laundering" thereof, is very much at its root.
The poor exchange rate of the Canadian dollar was a major factor in
this "divorce" since it affected how much Canadian Unitarians paid the
UUA for various services; however, another form of "exchange" of money
is sadly even more telling. I refer those who might be interested in
the seeking truth behind this Unitarian "divorce" to Rev. Charles
Eddis' 'draft sermon' titled CANADIAN UNITARIAN INDEPENDENCE: LOSS,
RISK, AND OPPORTUNITY. It may be conveniently found on the web site of
the Ottawa Unitarian Congregation.
See - http://www.uuottawa.com/cuc_eddis0.htm
This "sermon" shamelessly reveals that the UUA employed the CUC to
divert funds from restricted trusts that were clearly meant to be used
for charitable purposes outside of the USA back to the coffers of the
UUA no doubt so that this money could be "put to better use".
The most pertinent passages from Rev. Charles Eddis' sermon are -
Then in 1983 another fund appeared, the Liberal Religious Charitable
Society. Because of restrictions in the bequest, the UUA could only
spend this money outside of the United States. Accord number four was
then worked out. The CUC agreed to pay all the money it raised, less
$4,000, to the UUA. The UUA, in return, would give the CUC the same
amount out of the restricted funds of the Liberal Religious Charitable
Society.
The net result, give or take $4,000, was that for every dollar the CUC
raised in Canada, the UUA got two,- and the CUC kept for its own use
all the money it raised. This was sufficient for the CUC to hire its
first executive director, a full-time position, to add to its
administrator, then Thelma Peters.
This double dipping, as Bert Christensen, one-time CUC President and
later UUA Board member called it, was, as Bob Hope's theme song went,
"swell while it lasted." In 1987 the party ended. The Veatch Fund
stopped giving annual matching grants. Instead, it gave the UUA U.S.
$20 million outright to complement its annual fund raising. In
addition, the UUA broke the trust of the Liberal Religious Charitable
Society, so that it could spend its income in the United States if it
wanted to. The UUA income outside its own fund raising remained as
before. The free ride in the UUA for the Canadian congregations,
however, was over. The UUA wanted CUC payment for services rendered to
Canadian congregations.
end quote
Had the UUA been unable to break this charitable trust via
questionable legal manouvres it is likely that the CUC would still be
"married" to the UUA today. As the title of Rev. Eddis' sermon
suggests, the much vaunted "independence" of the CUC from the UUA is
in reality more of an unwanted and un-asked-for "loss" and "risk" than
an actively sought after "opportunity". Rev. Charles Eddis' bold
assertions that UUism is an "ethical religion" (in CUC pamphlets) is
belied by his "sermon" which shamelessly reveals what a British
Unitarian justifiably refers to as, "A fairly extraordinary and
shameless example of manipulation of trusts there!" This apparent
manipulation of restricted UUA charitable trusts seems quite unethical
at best however I wonder if it might not even be illegal under
Canadian laws and/or US laws regulating charities and/or religions.
Yes, the Canadian Unitarian Council's collusive "party" of financial
"double dipping" that unethically diverted funds from restricted UUA t
rusts away from the foreign charitable purposes that they were
originally intended for back to the coffers of the UUA may have been
"swell while it lasted" but it was also remarkably shameful while it
lasted.
It is true that the Unitarian "church" has its roots in the Christian
tradition, but it has evidently betrayed its Christian roots. In fact
Unitarianism has largely betrayed its monotheistic roots. Many
Canadian Unitarians are agnostics and quite a few are even dogmatic
fundamentalist atheists. It is sad but true that rather too many
Canadian Unitarians, including some Unitarian clergy, are intolerant
and abusive anti-religious bigots who belittle and malign God
believing people in general and Christians in particular. Rev. Ray
Drennan of the Unitarian "Church" of Montreal even offensively
attacked the state funeral of former Canadian Prime Minister Pierre
Elliot Trudeau. In a highly opinionated editorial in the Montreal
Gazette appropriately titled 'Wrong Message' (October 9, 2000) Rev.
Drennan expressed his "uneasiness", his "irritation", and "even an
anger" that it was a Roman Catholic rite. He even went so far as to
label this Roman Catholic state funeral as a "sham" that "made a
mockery" of Pierre Trudeau's own ideals and implied that it was a
"meaningless" ritual. The Canadian Unitarian "church" is not only
divorced from the UUA it has effectively divorced itself from God.
This is a far greater loss, a far greater risk, and the farthest thing
from an opportunity.
Sincerely,
Robin Edgar
Alexander
Universalism would know that All human beings are shown with respect,
care, unity, equality, justice, compassion and acceptance. And a UU
knows that we affirm and promote respect for The Interdependent and
Interconnected Web of All Existence of which we are a part. I know, the
second one is part of my Pantheistic belief system. A Non-UU and or
Non-Panthiest and or Non-Naturalist would not know this.
Live Long And Prosper.---(Spock) Leonard Nimoy
Yours truly,
Alexander