Attending church is a personal decision
BluueNikki
We have no higher authority, than the local church. And, actually
the "authority" rests with each of us to attend, or not attend.
>>>
Yah. Can agree with that. I think the highest authority when it
comes to churches is ourselves, not the local church. I think we,
ourselves are the highest authority on spiritual matters generally
speaking, but on organized religious matters, then they can either
leave that authority to the Church if they wish to or still leave
that to themselves. I guess it largely depends on the individual
and their tastes, needs and wants.
For some UUs, they only attend when the pulprit is gonna speak on
a topic they are keenly interested on, and not attend the rest of
the time. Around here, there is only 1 UU Church (FUUSM) in
Marietta, OH and another one a coupla hours from here. The one in
Marietta is somewhat theist-oreintated and while my BF J has a
minor problem with that (it is somewhat Christianized in his
eyes), I kind of like it, but don't attend for the moment.
For churches, friendships and community can make or break a church.
Nikki
________________________________________________________________
1st.net
--
soc.religion.unitarian-univ is a moderated newsgroup. Please mail messages to
u...@iecc.com, and see http://sruu.iecc.com for the FAQ and posting policy.
Wendy
> Dave### wrote:
> We have no higher authority, than the local church. And, actually
> the "authority" rests with each of us to attend, or not attend.
> >>>
I don't convey ANY authority to the church. I give it responsibility
for providing a worship environment and facilitation our spiritual
journey, but even that 'gift' of responsibility is a misnomer, since
we're committee led and anytime someone has a complaint they end up on
the committee!
> For churches, friendships and community can make or break a church.
Absolutely. Our church is cross-denominational UUA-UCC on paper, but
in reality it is home to people of MANY different faiths. We come
together because it is an environment supportive of us as spiritual
beings, not because everyone believes the same thing.
Last Sunday's sermon was given by a former Catholic priest. He got a
bit teary eyed when reading from the Book of John. I'm a
non-Christian and didn't feel particularly connected to the group at
that moment, but felt connections elsewhere through-out the service.
I wonder if ANYONE in our congregation was raised UU? The primary
background we seem to have in common is graduate degrees!
Wendy
Steven Botts
Wendy <wmar...@mtholyoke.edu> wrote in message
news:e70c49b7.02022...@posting.google.com...
> "BluueNikki" <bluue...@1st.net> wrote in message
news:<20020224174...@1st.net>...
> > Dave### wrote:
> > We have no higher authority, than the local church. And, actually
> > the "authority" rests with each of us to attend, or not attend.
> > >>>
>
> I don't convey ANY authority to the church. I give it responsibility
> for providing a worship environment and facilitation our spiritual
> journey, but even that 'gift' of responsibility is a misnomer, since
> we're committee led and anytime someone has a complaint they end up on
> the committee!
>
> > For churches, friendships and community can make or break a church.
>
> Absolutely. Our church is cross-denominational UUA-UCC on paper, but
> in reality it is home to people of MANY different faiths. We come
> together because it is an environment supportive of us as spiritual
> beings, not because everyone believes the same thing.
>
> Last Sunday's sermon was given by a former Catholic priest. He got a
> bit teary eyed when reading from the Book of John. I'm a
> non-Christian and didn't feel particularly connected to the group at
> that moment, but felt connections elsewhere through-out the service.
>
> I wonder if ANYONE in our congregation was raised UU? The primary
> background we seem to have in common is graduate degrees!
Where do you live? My observation is that the further south and west you go,
the fewer
lifelong UUs you find. My small lay-led church in San Antonio has between 30
and 40 active members,
only one of whom was brought up Unitarian.
Steve
Wendy
> > I wonder if ANYONE in our congregation was raised UU? The primary
> > background we seem to have in common is graduate degrees!
>
>
> Where do you live? My observation is that the further south and west you go,
> the fewer
> lifelong UUs you find. My small lay-led church in San Antonio has between 30
> and 40 active members,
> only one of whom was brought up Unitarian.
I live in Massachusetts! But it *is* western Massachusetts. :-)
Actually, our former co-ministers were brought up UU, but I don't know
personally that any of the other congregants were.
There are several UU churchs in the area. The one 1/4 mile from my
house (in which I was married) has a very political-action focus. I
was looking more for spiritual growth (i.e. fixing *me* rather than
the rest of the world) during my worship experience so I changed to
this one 10 minutes away that is decidedly more Christian but
supportive of us as being on a spiritual journey, not advocating any
particular doctrine.
Our former ministers of 14 years have left and we're in an interim
phase that seems to be given over 100% to the Christian wing of our
congregation. I'm starting to wonder if there is still room for the
non-Christian members of the congregation - and how to raise the issue
when we're so vastly outnumbered. (It *is* cross-denominational with
United Church of Christ.)
I'm also wondering if ALL the UU churches are more political action
than spiritual growth. Is that your experience?
Wendy
D. Barrington
: "Steven Botts" <STEVEN...@prodigy.net> wrote in message news:<63Ce8.16201$mC1.238...@newssvr15.news.prodigy.com>...
:> > I wonder if ANYONE in our congregation was raised UU? The primary
:> > background we seem to have in common is graduate degrees!
: I live in Massachusetts! But it *is* western Massachusetts. :-)
: Actually, our former co-ministers were brought up UU, but I don't know
: personally that any of the other congregants were.
Sounds like Deerfield. I'm at Northampton and Florence, which might
or might not be the one you mention below. We certainly have a lot
of politically active people in our congregation but I don't think
that's the focus of our Sunday services. We're currently searching for
a new minister (we have an interim now, John Nichols, who is well worth
hearing -- I don't know if he'd label himself as Christian but he certainly
refers to God and to the Bible more than previous people we've had).
The "theological" character of USNF will presumably adjust somewhat to
the new minister, but I'm sure we'll remain very eclectic as our most
active members include those identifying as Chrisitan, humanist, Jewish,
Buddhist, and pagan but all still UU enough to find common ground.
Look for me if you check us out -- I usually go to the 9:15 and am at
the coffee hour between that and the 11:00.
: There are several UU churchs in the area. The one 1/4 mile from my
: house (in which I was married) has a very political-action focus. I
: was looking more for spiritual growth (i.e. fixing *me* rather than
: the rest of the world) during my worship experience so I changed to
: this one 10 minutes away that is decidedly more Christian but
: supportive of us as being on a spiritual journey, not advocating any
: particular doctrine.
: [but this church seems to be going more Christian with minister
: transition]
David Mix Barrington
North Amherst, MA
Steven Botts
Not really. My church is more -or-less humanisticaly oriented, but is more
foccused on the membership than on political action. Our services, since we
are lay-led, are apt to show several different points of view.
As in yours, there are a lot of people in my church with graduate degrees,
so our services generally have an decidedly intellectual slant. Last
Sunday's service, for example, was on Herman Melville and was presented by
a professor of literature. As the holder of a bachelor's degree, I'm one of
the least educated people there. In fact, it occurs to me that if I were to
go back to being a Southern Baptist, I could raise the average educational
level of both denominations.
Steve
BluueNikki
Pleased to see you here. I like having different people come to
SRUU. :-)
Wendy asked:
>> I'm also wondering if ALL the UU churches are more political
action than spiritual growth. Is that your experience? >>
Some churches may be more "political" than others. First UU
Society of Marietta (FUUSM) in Ohio is a mixture of both political
and religious, though from the pulprit, it has more religious
and/or philosophical sermons. That is more to my liking! :-)
I don't attend, though, and it has been a long time since I did,
so it may have changed.
I am currently not attending any church at all, cuz right now, I
don't feel the need for one.
Nikki
________________________________________________________________
1st.net
Mark Jackson
> Our former ministers of 14 years have left and we're in an interim
> phase that seems to be given over 100% to the Christian wing of our
> congregation. I'm starting to wonder if there is still room for the
> non-Christian members of the congregation - and how to raise the issue
> when we're so vastly outnumbered.
The interim process *should* involve a series of polls, focus groups,
and/or other opportunities for members of the congregation to discuss
their hopes (and fears) for the future ministry. And the candidates
for election to the search committee *should* represent a good
cross-section in terms of goals and backgrounds. Your mileage may,
however, vary.
> I'm also wondering if ALL the UU churches are more political action
> than spiritual growth.
I would say not, but where along this axis a particular church seems to
be is to some extent a function of where you are standing. . . .
--
Mark Jackson - http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~mjackson
Back in the Sixties we didn't have video games and the
Internet. All we had was drugs and naked people.
- Scott Bateman
Peter A. Taylor
> I'm also wondering if ALL the UU churches are more political
> action
> than spiritual growth. Is that your experience?
No. Each church has its own personality.
Peter Taylor
Rick and Sue Deschene
<snip>
> I'm also wondering if ALL the UU churches are more political action than
> spiritual growth. Is that your experience?
>
In my experience, no. Our congregation is the First Unitarian
Congregation of Ottawa (Ontario, Canada). There is a great deal of
emphasis on social outreach and political concerns, but in the past few
years, I've seen a shift toward increasing our focus on spirituality.
The reason that happened is because the majority of the congregation
expressed a need in that area. So that's the direction in which we're
moving.
Sue
BraveNewWhirl
> years, I've seen a shift toward increasing our focus on spirituality.
> The reason that happened is because the majority of the congregation
> expressed a need in that area. So that's the direction in which we're
> moving.
>
> Sue
Are you sure it isn't because the UUA or your minister hasn't driven
you in that direction? But if it is a congregational drift and the
unitarians are "getting spiritual" maybe they outta go to a church
that deals with spirits.
Welch, L&J
BraveNewWhirl wrote:
> but in the past few
> > years, I've seen a shift toward increasing our focus on spirituality.
> > The reason that happened is because the majority of the congregation
> > expressed a need in that area. So that's the direction in which we're
> > moving.
> >
> > Sue
>
> Are you sure it isn't because the UUA or your minister hasn't driven
> you in that direction? But if it is a congregational drift and the
> unitarians are "getting spiritual" maybe they outta go to a church
> that deals with spirits.
Good question. Cause and effect are difficult to determine. I suspect that
about 20 years ago some poll/questionnaire indicated that UUs 'missed'
spirituality and the mood seeped down from above that our churches should be more
spiritual - and it has happened. I have heard the question, "What is
spirituality?" many times in the past year.
BluueNikki
In my experience, no. Our congregation is the First Unitarian
Congregation of Ottawa (Ontario, Canada). There is a great deal of
emphasis on social outreach and political concerns, but in the
past few years, I've seen a shift toward increasing our focus on
spirituality. The reason that happened is because the majority of
the congregation expressed a need in that area. So that's the
direction in which we're moving.
Sue,
I am getting the impression that you don't want this in your
congregation. If that is the case...may I ask a few questions?
The questions below can apply to anyone else who may be
experiencing similar....
* May I be so nosy to ask if your congregation is gonna
go "religious" and not have any outreaches, social activism etc?
I doubt that is the case, it being a UU church ;-) but....
* May I ask what are you unsure of what will happen next if your
congregation does get more spiritual? i.e., will you feel you
need to go find another UU church?
* Would you welcome that change if it meant your church will still
remain active in politics and social outreach concerns that it had
or still has currently?
* Do you think your congregation will still be welcome to those
who don't want an extra heaping of spirituality?
Nikki
________________________________________________________________
1st.net
Rick and Sue Deschene
> Hi Sue.
>
>
> In my experience, no. Our congregation is the First Unitarian
> Congregation of Ottawa (Ontario, Canada). There is a great deal of
> emphasis on social outreach and political concerns, but in the
> past few years, I've seen a shift toward increasing our focus on
> spirituality. The reason that happened is because the majority of
> the congregation expressed a need in that area. So that's the
> direction in which we're moving.
>
>
> Sue,
> I am getting the impression that you don't want this in your
> congregation.
Don't want *what* in my congregation?
If that is the case...may I ask a few questions?
> The questions below can apply to anyone else who may be
> experiencing similar....
>
> * May I be so nosy to ask if your congregation is gonna
> go "religious" and not have any outreaches, social activism etc?
> I doubt that is the case, it being a UU church ;-) but....
>
No, as far as I know, social outreach will continue. That's something I
and many people in my congregation want. But we also want an emphasis on
spirituality, too.
BTW, I think there is a tremendous difference between *spirituality* and
*religion*. I didn't mean to say that our congregation was going more
for an organized religion focus, and I don't think that's what's
happening. However, more and more people--including myself--favor a
focus on spirituality. It seems that as more and more young people join
the congregation, that's what they're seeking. My impression is that
some--certainly not all, but some--older members of the congregation
aren't entirely comfortable with that focus on spirituality because it's
not been a part of their experience. Their experience has been more
intellectual.
> * May I ask what are you unsure of what will happen next if your
> congregation does get more spiritual? i.e., will you feel you
> need to go find another UU church?
>
Oh. Maybe this is what you think I don't want. Spirituality. Quite the
opposite. I'm among those who prefer that there be more of an emphasis
on spiritual growth and interaction. Not sure where I gave the
impression I didn't want that, but if I did, I sure didn't mean to.
> * Would you welcome that change if it meant your church will still
> remain active in politics and social outreach concerns that it had
> or still has currently?
>
Absolutely. Again, that's what I prefer.
> * Do you think your congregation will still be welcome to those
> who don't want an extra heaping of spirituality?
>
I think that ultimately, a person stays with a congregation in which
s/he feels s/he has a place. Some people may not like the increased
emphasis on spirituality, so they may not feel comfortable within the
congregation. By the same token, others did not feel comfortable with
the congregation being focused almost exclusively on cerebral issues. So
I think the congregation is shifting and growing according to its own
needs. Some will stay, others will move away. I've only been with our
congregation for about five years now, so I certainly don't know a lot
of the history. But it seems to me that's how it's always been.
Sue
Rick and Sue Deschene
> but in the past few
>
>>years, I've seen a shift toward increasing our focus on spirituality.
>>The reason that happened is because the majority of the congregation
>>expressed a need in that area. So that's the direction in which we're
>>moving.
>>
>>Sue
>>
>
> Are you sure it isn't because the UUA or your minister hasn't driven
> you in that direction? But if it is a congregational drift and the
> unitarians are "getting spiritual" maybe they outta go to a church
> that deals with spirits.
I think that rather than "driving" the congregation in that direction,
the congregation has expressed that need, and our minister is shaping
services and offering other activities to fill that need. But Sunday
services are such a relatively small part of what the congregation does
in small groups. (We have a large congregation, so most of our personal
bonding within relationships comes about in small groups.) It's in those
small groups that I've really seen the interest in spirituality really
take off.
I figure if the majority of the congregation wants an increased emphasis
on spirituality, and it's something that can be incorporated within the
framework of our organization, then they shouldn't have to leave the
congregation to get it. After all, the congregation decides what we want
in our church.
Sue
Rick and Sue Deschene
my news server. So I'll try again.]
BluueNikki wrote:
> Hi Sue.
>
>
> In my experience, no. Our congregation is the First Unitarian
> Congregation of Ottawa (Ontario, Canada). There is a great deal of
> emphasis on social outreach and political concerns, but in the
> past few years, I've seen a shift toward increasing our focus on
> spirituality. The reason that happened is because the majority of
> the congregation expressed a need in that area. So that's the
> direction in which we're moving.
>
>
> Sue,
> I am getting the impression that you don't want this in your
> congregation.
Don't want *what* in my congregation?
If that is the case...may I ask a few questions?
> The questions below can apply to anyone else who may be
> experiencing similar....
>
> * May I be so nosy to ask if your congregation is gonna
> go "religious" and not have any outreaches, social activism etc?
> I doubt that is the case, it being a UU church ;-) but....
>
All indications are that our congregation will continue to have social
outreach and be politically active, because that's what the majority of
members want. However, they--myself included--are also seeking a
spiritual outlet to complement these other components.
> * May I ask what are you unsure of what will happen next if your
> congregation does get more spiritual? i.e., will you feel you
> need to go find another UU church?
>
Ah, maybe that's the thing you think I don't want. Spirituality. Not
sure how I gave that impression, but that's actually the opposite; I
*do* seek an increased focus on spirituality. So no, I won't be going
anywhere else. Not if I continue to find what I'm seeking in my own
congregation.
> * Would you welcome that change if it meant your church will still
> remain active in politics and social outreach concerns that it had
> or still has currently?
>
Absolutely. That's the kind of balance I want in my congregation.
> * Do you think your congregation will still be welcome to those
> who don't want an extra heaping of spirituality?
>
I think that ultimately, people stay where they feel their needs are
being met. I'm sure that there have been times in the past when people
left because they felt there wasn't enough emphasis on spirituality.
Now, people may leave because they feel we're not offering enough of the
intellectual pursuits they're more comfortable with. So coming and going
has always been a part of our congregation. If a person's needs are
being met, s/he'll stay. If those needs aren't being met, s/he'll
probably leave. I've only been with our congregation for about five
years, so I don't know the whole history. But it seems like that's been
a pattern for as long as the church has been around. And will continue
to be, as long as the congregation shapes its own future.
My sense is that as more and more new people come into the congregation,
they're bringing that need for spirituality in with them. So that tells
me the need exists out in the world. People who have grown up as UUs
tell me they're not comfortable with this spiritual emphasis; they seek
a more cerebral approach. So the key is trying to find a balance between
the two. Right now, spirituality is not all-pervasive. It's just
something that I see being added in, slowly and gently, on Sundays, and
also in various small groups according to what that group's members are
looking for. Because we are a large congregation, most of our
interaction takes place in these smaller groups. So the group dynamics
are not played out so much on Sundays, when we have the most people in
the building, but in these smaller groups. That allows us to have a lot
of flexibility, when it comes to meeting people's needs. So I think
we'll be able to find the right balance for most people, one way or
another. Not *all* people. We've never been able to manage that. But
it's interesting to watch people considering, stretching and adapting.
And listen to us talk about it. That, for me, is the joy of being a UU.
Sue
Rick and Sue Deschene
> I think that rather than "driving" the congregation in that direction,
> the congregation has expressed that need, and our minister is shaping
> services and offering other activities to fill that need. But Sunday
> services are such a relatively small part of what the congregation does
> in small groups.
<snip>
Well, I left something out of that last sentence, so it doesn't make
much sense. What I meant to say is that Sunday services are such a
relatively small part of what the congregation does, compared to what we
do in small groups. As I said later, we have a large congregation, so
most of our personal interaction and really getting to know one another
happens in these small groups. It's in some the smaller groups that I've
seen the interest in spirituality really take off. So that interest has
made its way into the larger congregation, and is expressed there, too.
Winter QQ
>about 20 years ago some poll/questionnaire indicated that UUs 'missed'
>spirituality and the mood seeped down from above that our churches should be
>more
>spiritual - and it has happened. I have heard the question, "What is
>spirituality?" many times in the past year.
No. I dont think so. It is simply the slow process whereby the Universalist
tradition was absorbed into the Unitarian tradition and then diluted to the
point where it is no longer recognized, remembered, valued, or tolerated by
those who "know" better.
Winter
BraveNewWhirl
> No. I dont think so. It is simply the slow process whereby the Universalist
> tradition was absorbed into the Unitarian tradition and then diluted to the
> point where it is no longer recognized, remembered, valued, or tolerated by
> those who "know" better.
>
> Winter
I'm with ya. A "church" that advocates/adheres to certain
beliefs/values/persuasions/attitudes/concepts/considerations/whatever
has gotta - at some point - say "that's what we are." UUism is
WeAreAllIsm. We take everybody. We're...."universal." Nah. We're just
undefined.
Peter A. Taylor
> has gotta - at some point - say "that's what we are." UUism is
> WeAreAllIsm. We take everybody. We're...."universal." Nah.
> We're just undefined.
We do not take everybody. There are reasons why boards have
to approve people's requests to become members. However, for
the most part, people whose beliefs are problematical don't want
to join us, so we don't need to think about who we are very
much. I wouldn't say we were undefined, but we are poorly
defined.
Peter Taylor
Rick and Sue Deschene
> Are you sure it isn't because the UUA or your minister hasn't driven
> you in that direction? But if it is a congregational drift and the
> unitarians are "getting spiritual" maybe they outta go to a church
> that deals with spirits.
BTW, in addition to my earlier replies and just as a point of
clarification, I should note that being a Canadian congregation, ours no
longer receives direction from the UUA. Our organizational body is now
the Canadian Unitarian Council.
Sue
Dave64052
<rdes...@recorder.ca> writes:
>BTW, in addition to my earlier replies and just as a point of
>clarification, I should note that being a Canadian congregation, ours no
>longer receives direction from the UUA. Our organizational body is now
>the Canadian Unitarian Council.
>
>Sue
Free at Last, thank God Almighty, free at last.
{sorry, just couldn't help that}
BTW, if you learn/do anything with this automony that works better, will you
let us know?
Sometimes being in Missouri, rather than either the East or West coasts seems
like being in Canada too, no disrespect meant.
BB,
Dave
"It may be necessary temporarily to accept a lesser evil, but one must never
label a necessary evil as good." -- Margaret Mead, anthropologist, 1901-1976
Rick and Sue Deschene
> In article <3C8CD602...@recorder.ca>, Rick and Sue Deschene
> <rdes...@recorder.ca> writes:
>
>
>>BTW, in addition to my earlier replies and just as a point of
>>clarification, I should note that being a Canadian congregation, ours no
>>longer receives direction from the UUA. Our organizational body is now
>>the Canadian Unitarian Council.
>>
>>Sue
>>
>
> Free at Last, thank God Almighty, free at last.
> {sorry, just couldn't help that}
> BTW, if you learn/do anything with this automony that works better, will you
> let us know?
> Sometimes being in Missouri, rather than either the East or West coasts seems
> like being in Canada too, no disrespect meant.
At this point, it's hard for me to tell if it's made any noticeable
difference. But, then again, I'm not as active with all aspects of our
congregation as I could be. My understanding is that this is just one of
those things that made sense, that CUC had come of age, and it just made
sense for Canadian congregations to organize under that umbrella, rather
than the U.S. one.
Here's something that's posted on our church's website:
CUC Coming of Age
http://www.uuottawa.com/cuc_eddis0.htm
Sue
Steve Caldwell
<rdes...@recorder.ca> wrote:
> At this point, it's hard for me to tell if it's made any noticeable
> difference. But, then again, I'm not as active with all aspects of our
> congregation as I could be. My understanding is that this is just one of
> those things that made sense, that CUC had come of age, and it just made
> sense for Canadian congregations to organize under that umbrella, rather
> than the U.S. one.
Sue,
From working with youth and young adult issues, there are some folks
who didn't want the CUC-UUA split. Canadian youth programming still falls
under the UUA Youth Office and YRUU. But Canadian youth in congregations
have no voice or input into UUA decisions if the congregations leave the
UUA to be exclusively CUC. There was a need for providing better services
to Canadian congregations and this may be the best possible answer. But
some folks are going to lose with this change.
Take care,
Steve
--
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Steve Caldwell
srca...@iamerica.net http://members.aol.com/uuwebman/
"Come to think of it, there are already a million monkeys on a million typewriters, and Usenet is NOTHING like Shakespeare."
--Blair Houghton
Robin Edgar
> Dave64052 wrote:
> > In article <3C8CD602...@recorder.ca>, Rick and Sue Deschene
> > <rdes...@recorder.ca> writes:
> >
> >
> >>BTW, in addition to my earlier replies and just as a point of
> >>clarification, I should note that being a Canadian congregation, ours no
> >>longer receives direction from the UUA. Our organizational body is now
> >>the Canadian Unitarian Council.
> >>
> >>Sue
> >>
> >
> > Free at Last, thank God Almighty, free at last.
> > {sorry, just couldn't help that}
> > BTW, if you learn/do anything with this automony that works better, will you
> > let us know?
> > Sometimes being in Missouri, rather than either the East or West coasts seems
> > like being in Canada too, no disrespect meant.
>
> At this point, it's hard for me to tell if it's made any noticeable
> difference. But, then again, I'm not as active with all aspects of our
> congregation as I could be. My understanding is that this is just one of
> those things that made sense, that CUC had come of age, and it just made
> sense for Canadian congregations to organize under that umbrella, rather
> than the U.S. one.
>
> Here's something that's posted on our church's website:
>
> CUC Coming of Age
> http://www.uuottawa.com/cuc_eddis0.htm
>
> Sue
Hi Sue,
My understanding is that the recent CUC "independence" from the UUA
results from the fact that UUA finally brushed off the CUC because it
no longer depended on the CUC to "launder" money from UUA trusts that
were clearly intended for charitable purposes outside of the USA by
redirecting these funds back to the coffers of the UUA for other
purposes... This understanding is based on a rational assessment of
the financial information that is quite shamelessly provided in Rev.
Charles Eddis' "working paper" CANADIAN UNITARIAN INDEPENDENCE: LOSS,
RISK, AND OPPORTUNITY that you have provided a link to.
Please note that the sub-heading of Rev. Charles Eddis' 'draft sermon'
begins with the words "LOSS" and "RISK" before proceeding to
"OPPORTUNITY"... This is a classic example of trying to making a silk
purse out of a sow's ear. The CUC was not really seeking its new found
"independence" from the UUA. The UUA simply decided to divest itself
of its financial ties to the Canadian Unitarian Council because it no
longer needed the CUC to unethically redirect funds from charitable
trusts back to its coffers since it had managed to "break" the
original terms of those trusts through questionable legal shenanigans.
This is abundantly clear from the not so subtle subtext of Rev.
Charles Eddis 'sermon'. I find it very disturbing that Charles Eddis
so shamelessly talks about how the Canadian Unitarian Council colluded
with the Unitarian Universalist Association to effectively "launder"
the money from these charitable trusts that had clear restrictions on
how the money was to be used so that the Unitarian Universalist
Association could use these laundered funds for other purposes.
The most pertinent passages from 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
As you can now probably see quite clearly the much vaunted new
"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". I'm afraid that it really does not say very much
about Rev. Charles Eddis' bold assertion that UUism is an "ethical
religion" in CUC pamphlets to see him so shamelessly talking about
what one outside observer quite justifiably refers to as, "A fairly
extraordinary and shameless example of manipulation of trusts there!"
This obvious manipulation of restricted UUA charitable trusts is
certainly quite unethical at best but I even wonder if it might not be
quite illegal under Canadian laws and/or US laws regulating charities
and/or religions. Yes, this CUC collusive "party" of financial "double
dipping" that unethically diverted funds from restricted UUA trusts
away from the charitable purposes that they were originally intended
for back to the UUA may have been "swell while it lasted" but it was
also remarkably shameful while it lasted in my opinion.
Regards,
Robin Edgar
David R. Throop
Steven Botts <STEVEN...@prodigy.net> wrote:
>Where do you live? My observation is that the further south and west
>you go, the fewer lifelong UUs you find.
Definitely. Unitarianism was spread throughout the 13 original
colonies, but strongest in New England. Unitarianism was strongly
identified with abolition. (I have read that Robert E Lee was born
and raised Unitarian but I haven't been able to confirm it.)
Therefore in the Confederate states, only four Unitarian churches
came through the Civil War. (At least two of those, in New Orleans
and Charleston, had pro-slavery ministers.) It has been a long slow
climb back in those states.
I understand that circa 1900 there were many rural Universalist
fellowships in the South, but most of them had died out well before
the merger. Here in Houston, I know a handful of life long UUs, but
very few, and they're the younger ones.
I was at a leadership module in Austin last weekend. Out of 27
participants, only one had attended either a Unitarian or Universalist
church as a kid.
David Throop