I grew up UU and worked for the UUA in the early 2000's for about 6 years. After seeing how the sauce is made, I walked away and never looked back on the religion. The UUA leadership, including the UUMA, and staff are the most self-aggrandizing, white savor complex, power hungry, narcissists you can possibly imagine.
I grew up UU and worked for the UUA in the early 2000's for about 6 years. After seeing how the sauce is made, I walked away and never looked back on the religion. The UUA leadership, including the UUMA, and staff are the most self-aggrandizing, white savor complex, power hungry, narcissists you can possibly imagine.
Most of the cancellation mentioned in the article was happening to dissenting voices even back then, but it was behind closed doors without wide spread recognition. Additionally they suffered from the same issues as any religious organization, e.g. financial misuse, moving problematic ministers to different congregations and covering up the allegations.
Wanted to add the UUA has always been a close minded organization, regardless of what they profess. From the first day there I was exposed to extreme anti Catholic bigotry. These people hated Catholics with the fire of a thousand suns.
They feel that they personally can save the world, but in reality it is a closed minded social club that is not tolerant to outsiders or new members (thus the historic declining membership), or dissenting voices.
I could go on for hours about the issues with that place.
A friend of my briefly went to a UU congregation on the East Coast back in the mid to late 2000's. She left it because the pastor married an Indian-American woman and every sermon he went on about how he worried about how America would treat his mixed-race son. My friend was of the opinion that someone who reduced their own son to his racial identity and constantly talked about it to his congregation was not a very good parent and certainly not a good pastor. And let's face it, that kid probably grew up fine: if one of your parents is a UU pastor, the other is probably a doctor, lawyer, scientist or engineer and you're going to do fine.
One thing I wonder about is how much of this has to do with so much of the clergy being female. I'm a woman and we are much more likely to give into social pressure, especially if it's framed in certain ways. For instance, if going against society is framed as selfish or hurting others, women seem more likely to go along with the social pressure. (I'm one of those women who does not give into that kind of pressure and people remark on it all the time, so I understand how tough it can be for women.) Women are also much more sensitive to being labeled racist.
Call-out culture occurs in various progressive movements, not just feminism. Women tend to dominate in a field when its prestige and power lessens. You can see this with teachers, secretaries, nurses, etc. Being a minister does not carry the same clout in communities as it once did. That may explain why some of the newer ministers try to shore up their power.
While I agree with some that you say, the UUA does not "move problematic ministers". That's because each minister is hired by a congregation without the "denominational fiat". Methodists, Catholics, and many other religions have the top-down hierarchy which has control over ministers. Not that way in UUism. Like the Baptists, each church is in charge of hiring its own clergy. We listen to the UUA in this process, and stuff may be concealed, true.
I am going to softly push back. What I mean when I said move ministers around is that the UUA investigated allegations of abuse and swept it under the rug, allowing the minister to move to other congregations, keeping them within the community. So yes, the UUA does not tell congregations who to hire, they do facilitate the hiring process, matching potential ministers with congregations through their office; and turn a blind eye (or did at the time) to issues that might arise.
OK, that's pretty close to the process. Yes, they do protect their own. And ministers sometimes have bad fits with congregations. In our previous church, a small cadre of influential members did not like a minister recently hired because they felt her pastoral manner was not friendly enough. She was a good minister, and left due to a lack of fit with the congregation. She is now dead, of a terrible cancer.
At the time, the way it worked was that the UUA had a pool of ministers looking for a congregation and congregations that need a new minister. The UUA provided the congregation with a curated list of ministers that might be interested and helped with the interviewing and hiring process. If the UUA has a problem with a minister or think that that the minister would not be a good fit for the congregation the minister would not be included in the list.
We are, in point of fact, NOT hostile to outsiders or new members. MOST people do not want a church that has no God, which is the case with UUs. We don't have a cross, or a dead Jesus, or anything like that up front. If we sold our "atheist non-belief", we would do better, I've always thought. But UUs are too chicken to do that.
True, but at what point does this whole thing become a social club rather than a "church"? And as you said most congregations are self contained so yours may have been open to new members but that does not mean all are. I have visited many congregations where the average age of the member was in the 60s. There was no representation or programs for young people and the members did not see any reason why they should bring in or cater to a younger generation. That is what I mean as not welcoming.
This is the issue with many of the mainline, officially Trinitarian churches I'm familiar with, too. What struck me about the sermon clip on today's episode was how much it sounded like both Twitter and the sermons you hear in the more social-clubby mainline churches.
My spouse and I visited many such churches of the mainline sort and gave up on them all, largely because there were no children present for our kids to hang out with, and partly because we worked in lefty professions and had plenty of liberals to hang out with at times other than Sunday morning. I in particular got crabby about hearing hot-take sermons that were like less nuanced versions of what I could read in the op-ed pages.
This is complicated. 1) Most churches are social clubs. How many "Christians" REALLY believe that Jesus died roughly 2000 years ago to save their souls? How many REALLY believe that Mary was a virgin, or any of the other nonsense that is part of religious beliefs?
2) Age of members - this is a problem we are having. Right now, we have a cadre of younger families, but this is new (for the last 4 months). Will it last? I have no idea. We try to offer programs that appeal to all, but let's face it - the UU appeal is narrow and selective.
Yep. Saying this as an ex-evangelical: That's exactly why the evangelical churches are mostly growing while their mainline counterparts are shrinking. Lyman Stone and Ryan Burge are really good on the demographic research.
Then, how, why, is it a "church"? Or have a "minister"? Who, I assume, graduated from a "seminary"? I'm so confused.
I hail from the Jewish Reformed/Reconstructionist/Renewal world, so I am not unfamiliar with congregants who are atheist or agnostic, but there's a few thousand years of cultural tradition which motivates their involvement. But I can't imagine a whole congregation of this mindset being sustainable.
It's a church because of its history, which others have covered somewhat down thread. The unitarian part is from Christians who rejected belief in the Trinity. The universalist part is from Christians who believe that, in the end, all will be saved.
And among the people who do fit ... without a society in which church-going is normative --almost mandatory in the workplace, in business -- it made a convenient camo. No awkward moments answering the “Where do you worship?” icebreaker at the new job’s cafeteria, plus the real benefits of having a 3rd-space cohort, without having to lie about your metaphysic to fit in. NOW, there’s no reason not to say, I can go experience the majesty of the Universe in the middle of a redwood forest, or floating down a river or counting birds. Heck it’s just cutting out the middleman.
I know a lot of people who are even iffy Christians/“spiritual” who believe in Jesus dying/suffering to help people out in a sort of nebulous way, let alone more religious folks. I do think there’s a lot of pressure in certain circles to not admit it/people of belief to leave those circles, so it seems a lot rarer from a certain perspective (I have strong polytheistic religious beliefs and the amount of people who know that and still make fun of believers in front of me/ say “oh but I don’t mean you” is pretty gross).
I think this is super dependent on the congregation, just like any faith or org. Some are more cliquey than others. My mother in particular had a really hard time fitting into the UU we attended for roughly ten years when I was growing up.
Our congregation was very into a sort of agnostic, all-religions-have-a-kernel-of-truth thing, but I was surprised to make a friend in college who grew up UU and said that her congregation talked a lot about Jesus (which, bar a yearly nativity play, ours really didn't).
Not to put too fine a point upon it, but the whole point of Christianity is that Jesus is not in fact "dead" but risen and alive. It's the Easter thing, empty tomb and that.
My mom and dad used to work in community action, non-profits, etc. They used to tell me that you will find petty little people everywhere, intent on lording the small amount of power they've gained over whomever they can. It doesn't matter how just the cause.
Check out naunitarians.org It is just getting started. It values the old-school liberal enlightenment values - freedom, reason and tolerance (with none of the "woke" bullshit.) It is off to a fast start.
I grew up UU and worked for the UUA in the early 2000's for about 6 years. After seeing how the sauce is made, I walked away and never looked back on the religion. The UUA leadership, including the UUMA, and staff are the most self-aggrandizing, white savor complex, power hungry, narcissists you can possibly imagine.
Most of the cancellation mentioned in the article was happening to dissenting voices even back then, but it was behind closed doors without wide spread recognition. Additionally they suffered from the same issues as any religious organization, e.g. financial misuse, moving problematic ministers to different congregations and covering up the allegations.
Wanted to add the UUA has always been a close minded organization, regardless of what they profess. From the first day there I was exposed to extreme anti Catholic bigotry. These people hated Catholics with the fire of a thousand suns.
They feel that they personally can save the world, but in reality it is a closed minded social club that is not tolerant to outsiders or new members (thus the historic declining membership), or dissenting voices.
I could go on for hours about the issues with that place.
A friend of my briefly went to a UU congregation on the East Coast back in the mid to late 2000's. She left it because the pastor married an Indian-American woman and every sermon he went on about how he worried about how America would treat his mixed-race son. My friend was of the opinion that someone who reduced their own son to his racial identity and constantly talked about it to his congregation was not a very good parent and certainly not a good pastor. And let's face it, that kid probably grew up fine: if one of your parents is a UU pastor, the other is probably a doctor, lawyer, scientist or engineer and you're going to do fine.
One thing I wonder about is how much of this has to do with so much of the clergy being female. I'm a woman and we are much more likely to give into social pressure, especially if it's framed in certain ways. For instance, if going against society is framed as selfish or hurting others, women seem more likely to go along with the social pressure. (I'm one of those women who does not give into that kind of pressure and people remark on it all the time, so I understand how tough it can be for women.) Women are also much more sensitive to being labeled racist.
I think that cancel culture originates in feminist call-out culture.
Call-out culture occurs in various progressive movements, not just feminism. Women tend to dominate in a field when its prestige and power lessens. You can see this with teachers, secretaries, nurses, etc. Being a minister does not carry the same clout in communities as it once did. That may explain why some of the newer ministers try to shore up their power.
While I agree with some that you say, the UUA does not "move problematic ministers". That's because each minister is hired by a congregation without the "denominational fiat". Methodists, Catholics, and many other religions have the top-down hierarchy which has control over ministers. Not that way in UUism. Like the Baptists, each church is in charge of hiring its own clergy. We listen to the UUA in this process, and stuff may be concealed, true.
I am going to softly push back. What I mean when I said move ministers around is that the UUA investigated allegations of abuse and swept it under the rug, allowing the minister to move to other congregations, keeping them within the community. So yes, the UUA does not tell congregations who to hire, they do facilitate the hiring process, matching potential ministers with congregations through their office; and turn a blind eye (or did at the time) to issues that might arise.
Notorious for not disciplining sexual misconduct --- especially if the minister was well connected.
OK, that's pretty close to the process. Yes, they do protect their own. And ministers sometimes have bad fits with congregations. In our previous church, a small cadre of influential members did not like a minister recently hired because they felt her pastoral manner was not friendly enough. She was a good minister, and left due to a lack of fit with the congregation. She is now dead, of a terrible cancer.
At the time, the way it worked was that the UUA had a pool of ministers looking for a congregation and congregations that need a new minister. The UUA provided the congregation with a curated list of ministers that might be interested and helped with the interviewing and hiring process. If the UUA has a problem with a minister or think that that the minister would not be a good fit for the congregation the minister would not be included in the list.
We are, in point of fact, NOT hostile to outsiders or new members. MOST people do not want a church that has no God, which is the case with UUs. We don't have a cross, or a dead Jesus, or anything like that up front. If we sold our "atheist non-belief", we would do better, I've always thought. But UUs are too chicken to do that.
True, but at what point does this whole thing become a social club rather than a "church"? And as you said most congregations are self contained so yours may have been open to new members but that does not mean all are. I have visited many congregations where the average age of the member was in the 60s. There was no representation or programs for young people and the members did not see any reason why they should bring in or cater to a younger generation. That is what I mean as not welcoming.
This is the issue with many of the mainline, officially Trinitarian churches I'm familiar with, too. What struck me about the sermon clip on today's episode was how much it sounded like both Twitter and the sermons you hear in the more social-clubby mainline churches.
My spouse and I visited many such churches of the mainline sort and gave up on them all, largely because there were no children present for our kids to hang out with, and partly because we worked in lefty professions and had plenty of liberals to hang out with at times other than Sunday morning. I in particular got crabby about hearing hot-take sermons that were like less nuanced versions of what I could read in the op-ed pages.
This is complicated. 1) Most churches are social clubs. How many "Christians" REALLY believe that Jesus died roughly 2000 years ago to save their souls? How many REALLY believe that Mary was a virgin, or any of the other nonsense that is part of religious beliefs?
2) Age of members - this is a problem we are having. Right now, we have a cadre of younger families, but this is new (for the last 4 months). Will it last? I have no idea. We try to offer programs that appeal to all, but let's face it - the UU appeal is narrow and selective.
I think that is why evangelical Christianity is thriving - members really believe. Denominations in which belief is not strong - that is shrinking
Evangelical Christianity is not growing, it's just shrinking more slowly than "Mainline denominations" and Catholicism.
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/christianity-declines-but-not-spirituality/
https://www.theamericanconservative.com/christianity-collapsing-in-america/
Yep. Saying this as an ex-evangelical: That's exactly why the evangelical churches are mostly growing while their mainline counterparts are shrinking. Lyman Stone and Ryan Burge are really good on the demographic research.
The still-practicing Catholics in my family *absolutely* believe that stuff. All of it.
Then, how, why, is it a "church"? Or have a "minister"? Who, I assume, graduated from a "seminary"? I'm so confused.
I hail from the Jewish Reformed/Reconstructionist/Renewal world, so I am not unfamiliar with congregants who are atheist or agnostic, but there's a few thousand years of cultural tradition which motivates their involvement. But I can't imagine a whole congregation of this mindset being sustainable.
It's a church because of its history, which others have covered somewhat down thread. The unitarian part is from Christians who rejected belief in the Trinity. The universalist part is from Christians who believe that, in the end, all will be saved.
Yeah, I got to one of those comments, so it evolved into what it is. That makes more sense.
Gosh, you are going to be completely confused when you learn about Buddhism.
I've got enough to grapple with for today, I think. ;)
And among the people who do fit ... without a society in which church-going is normative --almost mandatory in the workplace, in business -- it made a convenient camo. No awkward moments answering the “Where do you worship?” icebreaker at the new job’s cafeteria, plus the real benefits of having a 3rd-space cohort, without having to lie about your metaphysic to fit in. NOW, there’s no reason not to say, I can go experience the majesty of the Universe in the middle of a redwood forest, or floating down a river or counting birds. Heck it’s just cutting out the middleman.
I know a lot of people who are even iffy Christians/“spiritual” who believe in Jesus dying/suffering to help people out in a sort of nebulous way, let alone more religious folks. I do think there’s a lot of pressure in certain circles to not admit it/people of belief to leave those circles, so it seems a lot rarer from a certain perspective (I have strong polytheistic religious beliefs and the amount of people who know that and still make fun of believers in front of me/ say “oh but I don’t mean you” is pretty gross).
I think this is super dependent on the congregation, just like any faith or org. Some are more cliquey than others. My mother in particular had a really hard time fitting into the UU we attended for roughly ten years when I was growing up.
Our congregation was very into a sort of agnostic, all-religions-have-a-kernel-of-truth thing, but I was surprised to make a friend in college who grew up UU and said that her congregation talked a lot about Jesus (which, bar a yearly nativity play, ours really didn't).
Not to put too fine a point upon it, but the whole point of Christianity is that Jesus is not in fact "dead" but risen and alive. It's the Easter thing, empty tomb and that.
My mom and dad used to work in community action, non-profits, etc. They used to tell me that you will find petty little people everywhere, intent on lording the small amount of power they've gained over whomever they can. It doesn't matter how just the cause.
A lot of UU members are ex-Catholics who left the church for a myriad of good reasons but want to still have a church community.
The antidote to the Unitarian problem
Check out naunitarians.org It is just getting started. It values the old-school liberal enlightenment values - freedom, reason and tolerance (with none of the "woke" bullshit.) It is off to a fast start.